##VIDEO ID:MvQz2nN-PDE## some of you all again all right uh look at our CRA agenda are there any questions um in regards to the uh the new the minutes or new business um regarding cited to see another sidewalk yeah nothing else on that um moving on to our agenda for our meeting on Tuesday right uh on the consent agenda any questions about the consent agenda yeah I had a question about the roadway M management technology contract so we're wanting to extend another year so if you recall last January when you approved it was for a 4-year term y um and there was some kind of hesitation um about the contract in in general just because we didn't know how good it would work what information it would provide um and we did the update a month or two back and and showed you guys the um the information it was collecting um and the initial car said we would bring it back just as an update um you know to make sure that it was good information and we wanted to move forward uh with keeping it for the next 3 years and we do it's it's gathered some great information and allows us to look at our road scores and and show what they actually are so um so we don't want to just one year data is not enough I take it we want to so it continues to update so as roads like for example we just finished the paving project so those roads that that were paved they actually show a red in the software right now once the Project's done we will turn those to green and then we will be able to track over years of how those roads degrade over time how long it degrades for example Kentucky had a lot of traffic off of 390 for the construction so it would wear out a lot faster and we could track that and keep up with it and this will also help some trying correct this is information we can submit for appropriation request or Grant request and actually has the data to back it up okay is it cheaper to do a three-year contractus no ma'am it's it's $34,000 per year um and we have this in the street department budget um already so it's just a $34,000 annual charge um for the next 3 years um I noticed there were some additional like for placing um on on the breakdown there were some additional charges for like placing the instruments on the cars or the trucks so that is all completed um we paid for that last year when we first went with the service and then the hardware stays on the vehicles and basically after 4 years if we do this the whole four years we own the equipment and then can just keep it on after that and I think there was something else to training yes ma'am so they have a um a call we have a call every other month where they show us any updates or if we have any issues like um there's five vehicles that have a camera on it um so take pictures we had an issue with one of the cameras so they go over that and how to update the camera uh they have came by twice since then to fix any issues we've had um so it's that kind kind of stuff so the service has been good yes ma'am all right any other questions um regarding the uh pavement technology contract or analysis anything else on the cons agenda um um on the declaring the assets for as Surplus and this there were couple of trash Vehicles yes ma'am so we're um actually getting rid of two knuckle booms um we purchased two new knuckle booms this fiscal year they have been delivered and placed into the service and then we leased one new um side loader garbage truck so we'll be getting selling one of our um spare garbage trucks the old rear loader um it's just been our spare for several years and still a good truck we'll still make some good money on it Surplus it um but it's just not one that we use anymore and one of our side loaders that we have currently will be become the spare in place of 23 and the lawnmowers are just anymore those lawnmowers um I don't remember what year they purchased their own that asset form they've been around a long time um they need new mower decks the mower decks are $8,500 to to put on there um the cabota they're great engines but it's just not worth us fixing it and it would be better just to Surplus them and get them out of ours okay anything else on the cons agenda all right moving on to number 14 this is the petition for contraction any further discussion on that any upd from staff for the conversation we met with him and uh went over all of his options we even tried to be very creative with some options but basically he does want to um dnex and it's it's real best for him financially there's not like any huge negative impact for us I'm doing it right so no um there's no negative impact for us we met met with um we met with Mr Gregory um he explained everything he wanted to do if he was to keep the parcel as is it would actually have to be um turned to Industrial if he brought that to you know to the commission if the planning department brought that to you all there's no way that it would industrial would fit in this area so he would not be able to continue with the use that he currently has on it um there's no loss to us as far as you know future uh projects or anything of course he will contract from the city so we lose that parcel as a tax base but overall it's not much of of what he what we lose just he wants to continue as construction asite and that does not fit within it's in it's in his best interest as well asites for him to contract and he's also got a parcel right next to it I think he wanted to build four homes on um so I mean he he will be bringing other things into the city as well just a good move between the city and the the owner okay uh any other questions on that any other concerns about that one all right moving on to uh new business revising the city's code of ordinances for the uh cross Connection in Black back flow prevention any question questions to Mr lfit I think it's really just uh upda per state regulation so it's a little bit housekeeping as well you did have backflow Provisions in a couple of places in the chapter of your code which I don't think was intentional so we're just doing a little housekeeping as well uh one just one little suggestion on that one I think it's on page um 64 it says um by it needs to be updated by annually it's my suggestion that we change that to say the number of times per year every other year because the term by annual technically could mean twice a year or once every two years so we can clear up some confusion by just changing that to specifically what we want which I think is what once every two years right or is it for residential once every two years right what about commercial commercials every year every year and is there commercial backflow on each individual unit each unit right so just change that to different any other input on uh on that one all right number 16 discussion of possible approval to authorize City Manager for pass pending engineering for the abine parkway stormwood Improvement projects questions on that one that's been in the long range plans to to work on that area yes that was actually in the uh the storm water master plan from 2019 as well as an hmgp project was submitted but it was denied because of the um cost of the benefit cost uh ratio um so we have budgeted for that project this year just for the design so we'll get it designed get a construction cost estimate and then come back to you all hopefully next budget be to be able to construct it and I I did did I read it properly to say that this was already in it's already in the budget the $85,000 is in the budget yes all right any other questions on that all right discussion and possible approv to install an additional census Anna base station questions on that all right this is so that you can monitor the new um water meters right so electronically currently we have one antenna it was at the utilities office we recently had it relocated to Kane Griffin so it has a better um per prop study that that was a better location now that we are adding tons of meters to it we're you know around 3,300 meters today on the radio read system as our plan is to hit 5,000 by the end of this budget year and you have to have a redundant antenna in case this one goes down if it goes down we have no way of reading the anten or the meter so the second antenna ensures that as well as has the the the right location for the prop study to hit the entire city as well so how many total meters there if if we have around 11,000 just under 12,000 I believe um currently like I said 3200 on this radio read our plan is to hit 5,000 this fiscal year and then the City of Panama City Beach actually just entered into a contract with cor main to install um Mass install of their radio read meters if that all goes according to plan we hope to bring that to you all next fiscal year to piggy back off of and complete our project and just let me add we are ahead of the 2500 we had set a goal of 2500 for the next five years we're ahead of that number um 30 at 3,300 3300 um so we're doing really well he assigned um m p he was Employee on quarter to to all these and they are going well Chris has two meter so if you want to go on and um show um the Commissioners and give them an update on that he did this at tall um with some residents and they were very very um interested and interesting to them so this is one of the old um sr2 meters that have been installed probably since I don't know the early 2000s I would assume and this is the new eyl which is the the um digital meter so this is what we're install replacing those with and then this is the current touch read system where the meter readers go out they touch it with their wands it backs up into a handheld and then Stephanie and her department they upload the information to create your utility bill this transmitter is being replaced with an antenna it looks like a hockey puck and that's what sends it to the uh to the base station which then Stephanie can upload and generate the utility bill off of so a lot of the meters that you know are the stuck meters it's because these have broken and they're not collecting water or collecting data like they should so we've had a lot of calls of course as you can imagine especially after P City put their deal out um you know hey I've been paying a $58 water bill for the past four years and now my water bill is $17 and that's because their meter's been stuck they're not working and now it is um so we cannot go back and back charge those people no we can only collect the information moving forward and do it so it's not we're back charging them for all the water that went through their unmetered we're just moving forward that's what their bill should be we do not estimate from previous history so do we have a lot of meters that have that problem so we have about 800 meters currently that are considered stuck um there's also some of those meters that are empty houses um people that have irrigation that aren't using their irrigation system but we probably have about 800 M total that are broken and they're only paying the base rate out of almost 12,000 and that 800 that is includes the irrigation meters yes that's not just home right and you could have you know a domestic meter and an irrigation meter and your domestic meter for your home is working properly but then your irrigation meter may be stuck so you're just getting charge the base rate and a lot of times that's when the higher bills happen because they've been watering and just being charged the base rate and then it goes up to the their actual consumption right and sometimes people turn off their irrigation leers because they don't want to C occur any uh expenses during the summer because it is expensive to water your G and so uh some people do that as well so that's one of the reasons why it's so important that they go out check every single one of these meters which takes time um to be able to do so have a um a plan as far as out of the 800 M to see which ones are problem yes sir so they have the uh it's called the zero consumption list which is generated from uh Stephanie through customer service that is what then our utility department generates work orders on to go out and replace the meters so there's like 154 work orders in the system today of where they go and start replacing uh meters and as they get those done they add work orders from the zero consumption l to keep it going so we have an idea when the all of them well I don't think you ever be 100% it's close to as 100% so we plan like I said to hit the 5,000 on the radio and as we change these stuck leaners they're going to the radio read so our plan is to hit 5,000 this year which should not be an issue from what we statistically have changed out and then we anticipate to bring you all in our fiscal year 26 budget the funding to replace the rest of the meters Piggy off of the cor and main contract through the city of Panama City Beach so by the end of fiscal year 26 we plan to be 100% on what what do you think the total cost anything is total cost of replacing these meters yeah like you're coming to us with some now and then talk about more piggyback and off what's the ball part I would anticipate probably $2 to4 million to complete the whole project that's one of the reasons we broken it up every year you've seen it in the budget there's a certain amount of money that we put in there every year for CH out meters we know our budget can't handle that much at one time so there that was a that 5year plan and that that project also FES for itself because you've got about a million dollars of lost Revenue because of meter so as you start getting meters up David you're bringing in more revenue and you're paying for the meter over time it'll pay for absolutely how much does that little Contraption cost um a Contraption I believe this is $286 um off but I can go back and and pull up our last quote and I can um send it to to miss Vicki who can send it out to all of you the price of the meter the transmitter and everything with what it cost I was just curious so go ahead so we hope that if the beach gets a contract and we can piggy back off of it that that will lower the price so correct when we do the mass install for the remaining 6 or 7,000 meters we will get a much better price purchasing all of those meters and transmitters at one time versus purchasing you know a th000 at the time 500 at the time like we do today okay so just some quick math since we're worried about the money so let's say there's 400 meters that are home meters that we're not getting money on and then if you do that over an entire year of not getting money that's like $192,000 that the city's not getting so once those 400 are replaced that's a lot of Revenue coming in so and and keep in mind too the sewer consumption bill is based off the meter uses so our Sewer Department you know it helps the revenue and Sewer Department help the revenue in the water department so these meters are key to ensure that we're collecting the proper amount Revenue do we concentrate on the regular water meters first before the aration meters yes we do and now if we get to a home where there's both meters are stuck and we do that but we do focus on the domestic meters first because you get water and your sewer charge out of that right I I what are we replacing those with now these yes sir and that's going to be compatible with what you're saying correct this and those are compatible with the antenna as well you see the little the black top right here the wires been cut off of it but that's the transmitter right and so this is the current touch read this is being replaced with the radio and right something about it though you see a big old piece of brass and you know I mean the top plastic part is the breakable part you know and we're going to we're going to pay money to bring in this new technology every time it seems like new technology needs to be upgraded more it's there's going to be an ongoing cost involved with it but I know we're saving money you're calculating out the savings but it seems like ongoing technology there will always be upgrading I mean so this is an ey pearl of course they're developing the ey Pearl plus that's so of course the technology will always change but we just have we're so far behind now for handling because everything's done in the cloud and all that cuz pretty soon there'll be a Plus+ and then a plus plus plus plus it's like your iPhone I think they're on 27 now and I think I've got the 10 we project how long but they have a 20-year warranty on the meter so like I said those meters have been on the ground since the early 2000s um so the the manufacturer projects 20 to 25 year lifespan on me sound system Fe hand you pay hundreds of dollars a month they do upgrades and mes up your stuff you got to pay more more um number 18 uh discussion of possible approval for the uh RFP data Communications pH system replacement any questions for Mr Samuel yeah I do um I just want to know what the biggest difference between the the goto and the granite because the scores were real pretty similar but the um the other one the cheaper options not the one that we're going with for this I believe uh we had some follow-up uh exploratory calls with both the two top uh contenders on that one uh the system we currently have is uh really Antiquated it is a hybrid Voiceover IP it requires a lot of infrastructure server wise here and uh we had uh just losing a lot of reliability out of that and when this come up for Renewal Miss Vicki and I sat down and uh discussed you know some of the main points that we needed out of the newer system and uh when we post those exploratory calls we did have uh we uh went with uh Granite I believe that uh they have a lot more experience in Niche uh environment with the uh like municipalities they also work with a lot of the Fortune 500 companies cocacola Walmart um there were a company I wasn't too familiar with but uh after the additional interviews with them we solidified uh that is our decision on there yes sir and so price is not everything with an RFP um these these um scores in terms of price are calculation everybody gets a calculation so if these are scored within um us we have a formula that we do so that's just part of it so that would be the score that they would get for the price side and then the scores will go through and score the rest um in terms of how their services they would give to the city which and that's how they come up with their final score well when we built this building didn't we know we were going to have to enter into some kind of contract with technology you know phones and whatnot yes going to voice over IP is an excellent idea it's all cloud-based uh we literally don't have to buy any more infrastructure inh housee and all of this is uh we're not actually purchasing the phones so if we have problems with them we actually swap those out with uh them they're all covered underneath warranty so okay that's sir M so the the $224,000 is for the equipment I believe it was and then the 19,000 is the yearly fee Miss installation fees is around 4500 and then 19 per year but then down at the bottom says physical impact 24,1949 19,000 yeah so so in the first year you're going to add the implementation fee that's a onetime fee for the equipment yeah for everything there and then after that it's the and the configuration uh like we have to Port our current phone numbers over uh to the new provider and things of that nature so it's a one-time implementation fee yes ma'am I know phone systems are expensive they are Vari just remind you the last time we bid it out a phone was in 2017 when the previous city manager was there um and so it was surely time to do that uh we've had a lot of issues with our phones as you probably see sometimes we put on Facebook you our phones are not working our phones are down uh and um I know that's frustrating to Residents as well when they're trying to get in touch with us we should have done it once what the building was when I was thinking yeah but we still would have had to build bid it up and I don't believe our contract contract up so we would have yeah yeah so we definitely had contract they they were working out of the Portables the contract that we had yes sir you did okay any other questions I just went through that thank you how fun is it all right moving on number 19 um we we discuss the continuance in extension of the finance Review Committee any input on that so just in a nutshell it's basically just taking what's already in place and then adding the responsibility of specifically looking at the annual budget so when you look at 113 actually what we voted on and passed uh I think a couple years ago there's no changes to this this is the amend these are the amended changes that we made a few years ago okay and essentially what we initially adopted the community to do was be a debt Review Committee to make some recommendations and then uh then we voted to [Music] uh I would say I guess transform a committee from the debt Review Committee to a finance Review Committee to look at the annual budget and also to establish or you know work with these staff with regards to making recommendations for utility rates and assessment fees um so for example the finance Review Committee that's the committee that um gave recommendations on what to do with I think a million dollars should we build the library or should we not build the library so um you know the different utility rates and such um I would I would say that I think we need to clean up the language a little bit um if we're going to continue with this committee um that we need to come up the language for it um for example um when we say you know to establish as a primary goal a balanced budget you cannot in the State of Florida per state statute not have a balanced budget I mean so I think I don't think that has to be there I don't think we have to say that the committee responsibility is to make sure staff has a balanced budget because State Statute says you have to have a balanced budget so it's not as if they're looking over the budget to make sure that it's balanced um now can they give some input you know sure but um but in regards having a balanced budget I don't think that has to be a primary goal because that's a state statute that we have to have a balanced budget then of course as the budget moves on then staff brings it back to us and we make adjustments to the budget um but it has to be a balanced budget so I recommend you know looking at that language to uh to amend it or either to remove it because that's not something I have to do and being in regards to the utility rates and assessment fees I would if we ask them to continue to do that I would say as needed so for example they've already presented to us a 5-year plan so I'm not saying it's going to be another 5 years before they have to look at it but they've already looked at the rates gave us a 5year plan as to what that should be I think was it was it a 5year plan that the finance Review Committee gave us for utility rate like a fiveyear yes Rie right so essentially they've already done that part and that's for us to review it so we've adopted that to review it annually versus them actually going back to utility rates again and so um so I would say either omit that or either just put as needed because it's not something that has to be done on a a regular basis or an annual basis since they've already they've already done that particular thing um so that's that's one of my recommendations for that as well and I guess we would need to look at you know how does if we're talking about them meeting with staff and budget stuff just how does that work with it would it be you know more advantageous for them just to be a part of our budget discussion and we discuss it as a city commission or um you know having their their budget aspect of it as well so um so yeah those are those are some of my thoughts I think it's a I mean it's a committee certainly that we can uh you know we've been able to bounce some ideas off of we have some great financial Minds that are on on the committee any feedback from staff in regards to the committee um just a couple of things that they do have like their own budget Workshop as well they actually have the same budget Workshop as you all would have U some of them meet individually with staff um with Kiki and myself to go over additional questions to understand the budget um and so they're well informed about the budget um itself they meet November the 19th I think I think at 8:00 or 8:30 I can't remember which one um but um you know they are they do what you all request for direct them to look at they than thank you um why is there not a commissioner on these important committees I'm just wondering why isn't there a commission representative on various committees so we have I have discussed with city manager about providing um appointments I think I discussed with Miss Jennifer as well maybe a while back about giving appointments that certain Commissioners do with certain committees so for example I do I would be the representative for the finance committee um so I talk with you again you know as available meet with the finance committee um so that is something that we we can do um I don't just sure is why why but it just historically just hasn't been done because like for example if Jamie was on the finance committee when we met on Fridays he could give us a a detail of you know what went on at the finance committee and typically the staff person has been the to give the update so for example you have a staff person that regulates that or not regulates it for that the staff is the one that represents the commission on the committee in regards to that question so then the staff is the one that gives the update as to what the committee actually meant about from that perspective but it's not the staff that approves the budget it's the commission correct and um I would just assume in the I would also assumed in the past that for example if I were to go to the planning board and I would have input about what the planning board does then I'm also ining their decision for something I'm going to vote on later as well not that it violates Sunshine but it can because committees also have Sunshine rules as well I do would you mind if you just added to that when you originally set up these committees your intent was that they be citizen driven said that last part again your intent was that they were citizen driven Comm when you yes yeah I think that would be that would be something to yeah I think that' be good for us to to have that input cuz that's the the purpose of the committee is that we don't have input and that we we let the citizens Drive what the committee does so I think that's that it is citizen driven you can require that the chair present a report to the commission to sort of have that feedback if you if you would like you can certainly make that a Duty so that they had that expectation when they're the chair they need to come either quarterly or twice a year or as requested um but you can certainly built that in so that you don't have to rely entirely on staff it's not that I distress the staff at all it was just that we make decisions based on what you y'all tell us and if we could hear what the citizens were saying or that group that's just I was just wondering but we do give you guys minutes so that that that we give you minutes and documentation for that so that you know it's just not our interpretation is actually what happened there and um I know with the finance review the chair would come and give updates and that's something that any chair can still do uh if you request that and if that's going to be in your your your ordance your resolution and I I know when we do have hot button issues for example like there are members from the planning board that are here that have spoken when we've asked hey what is it that the I and Amanda does a great job of really explaining hey here's is a report is what they said but there are members that are here often times that can give input if we want to hear a reflection from the committee um itself so again I want to State it's not that I distrust any of stff I just think that that is one of our areas of great importance and for this commission I will say the times that I have attended certain committees then you do get Kickback from citizens in regards to why were you there really yeah distressed because your presence can change the Dynamics of a meeting so w if the mayor shows up for a meeting or if commissioner shows up for a meeting your Dynamics can shift what that meeting does um so that's one of reasons why like some some meetings I have attended but then some meetings I just stay away from I follow the city manager or I'll just call the chairperson so the finance I've just called the chairperson and say hey here are my thoughts on this or I'll call one of the committee members and say hey what are your thoughts on XYZ yeah and and they've done it that way it's a shame that we're perceived that way well it I don't think it's necessarily the word I'm looking for scared or anything it just because I've been to a few planning boards and and watched them and yeah it just all right got a commissioner here you know what should we say what shouldn't we say you know it just I think he's right I think it does change the Dynamics of it a little bit um I mean when I showed up for the gree Pro thing it probably didn't make any difference cuz there was a lot of people in there at that one but I think when we attend those we can only attend them as Citizens We're not we're not considered or perceived Commissioners right like I've been to planning board meetings but I I don't say a word or or right participate in any way sit in the back upside in the back of the room and you're not you're you're nothing more than a citizen attending a meeting you can't be so but that's that's the perception right and when we go but you're still looked at you're still a commissioner but they you know they they nod at you or say something about you being there but you know but but honestly that's S I like uh I think one of the benefits some of these committees like the planning one I I know we have to have I that state statute says we have to have that but like with the finance committee having certain Specialties in there because none of us are all experts on every single area we're all different right and so like with the finance committee we've had accountants and bank people and things like that that I feel bring have a lot to bring to the table you know um I think one of the things they brought up was the leasing of the garbage truck and I thought that was really good you know stuff like that y so yep all right uh any other recommendations or concerns about this week we can discuss it again on Tuesday of course you I have a question is it the intention of the commission that this be a a permanent citizen committee or just every year you'll evaluate whether or not year okay yeah yeah so every every year we discuss it and then this this reappointment any other question all right moving on to commissioner work the discussion about speeding and mode Highlands um yeah I mean me pretty much what I said at the last commission meeting I I just want to make sure that we're following the policy and procedures we have in place and I just I'd like to have this presented to us like it's coming to us the first time we discuss it and vote on it because we are supposed to be the final Authority on it according to the traffic safety policy procedes well as far as I know we it was brought to our attention here that we yeah that there was a problem and then at the pre meeting you stated what you were going to do and then the traffic committee out inv Bol and then it was agreed upon that the speed bumps were going in or whatever went in but now this the people who live there are not content with what's there supposedly I'm from the emails I'm getting from residence it's like we don't like the bumps I mean somebody emailed last night that you know it's it's a affecting certain people with artificial hips and and U medical issues feeding tubes or whatever the bumps are real really hard on them somebody else said you know there there's another option is the humps and of several the emails I've gotten there they rather see the humps than the bumps but from all your studies from the city you say there's a there's a speeding problem yes sir there's a speeding problem thus there's got to be something in place so why don't we just listen to the residents and go and change from the bumps to the hump how hard is that to do we have temporary humps yes sir we do so why don't we get the bumps out of there and put the humps in there and that's why I want see how the reaction of the residents are from that but I thought one was permanent there's there's there's temporary humps as well right we can do the construction on those um there are the temporary hunt we actually had a resident bring in the you know the paperwork um that they found off the website there are temporary humps um that are just like the bumps that are down that that bolt down more grad right the the bumps are high the humps are wider and spread right and they're more expensive Conn they are more expensive Connecticut Avenue has the the permanent asphalt speed humps um bbby and I were talking about the other day when they put those in years ago with they're permanent but they do make the the bolt down style humps those are humps on Colorado they feel like bumps in my golf trying to make a those those are constru I'm going 25 yes yeah that's going to feel like a bump for it feels like I go airor I'm looking for clubs behind me and commissioner w u was concerned that we I did not follow um the process and if I should have brought it to the commission I am truly sorry that I did not bring it to the commission for you guys to approve it um my thought was you know this is the way it's been done since I have been city manager the only time things have been brought to the commission is when you wanted to go against your policy and put in um stop signs we would bring those there because that's really not to help calm traffic um and so um but I I did as you said in one of our pre- meetings here um I I said the traffic committee had met and speed um fums would go in next week and I also said stop signs don't work they they were misaligned in that particular area and could not work there but uh should have taken it a step forward and allowed the commission to vote on it and for that I'm truly s we all agreed on it no we well we were form they were installing but we never really no one yeah yeah but my my my big focus of bringing stood and nodded we didn't we didn't go through a formal process of right so we all looked and said you're doing something yes right yes I mean my feeling was okay you're doing something you know okay so now we know we get the reaction the people that live there are saying they don't like the bumps they want they would be okay with the humps from what I'm saying is because everybody I've email I said we're going to talk about it there's a solution that's emminent we we got we got to do something else let's get the bumps out of there and put them put in humps if there's still a speeding issue yes so I mean and and if there's a cost let's vote on the cost that's what we vote on it's how we spend our money I do know currently the residents are doing sort of a a poll so that they can have a consensus on what they would actually prefer because again there only two or three that's emailing us cuz some don't want the bumps or the humps there's some that won't don't want anything they just then then we can inform them as a that's the city that we've done everything we can and then and then speeding is on is on them an accident a death or whatever and then see what they say then because I we're we're trying to be on the on the side of safety so that's exact so so go ahead and let them do their study and then come back and say okay take everything out and you know an act ENT causing harm or anything is on your HOA after that City's done everything they can so then you don't have to spend any more money or get or just go away from it let them handle it it is an HOA over there right no no no that's the other problem or one of the the other challenges they act like an MH um so I guess commissioner War so the the concern for this I guess is the order in which things were done done yeah just the process and procedures process and procedures okay so with that um I guess the one thing so I guess Here's a thought even if city manager presents information today not since she shouldn't present information today the intention is in regards to speed bumps and there is no regulation or no direction in the tra traffic committee manual on how to deal with speed bumps there is speed humps and I think that's where the the contention has come in is that there is no direction for Speed bumps you know specific protocols for that so today or for this upcoming meeting would we want to hear the data or would we want to analyze or review the actual Traffic Safety man publ in7 we want to review that and then come back and hear the data because we got to get the manual straight before we can actually didn't we you hear the data when you were talking about the speeds the high speeds yeah we reviewed the data when they when they talked about it because I remember talking about what were the top speeds in the area and they were pretty damn high they were like in the 50s right in 60s yeah I think 58 and 56 so we reviewed the data yeah I think the I think I think the key here is the manual because there's just kind of confusion on what the requirements were we can straighten that out but but in the eyes of the residents over there you know it's it's what what do you want there's bumps there now they don't do they want them not want them do they want humps so what who who do we need to there's no HOA what's the entity that we have to solve to make make people happy over there so here's what we've done we did have the uh I mean those humps went in on Colorado nobody said anything right so we did have a community town hall with the residents of of M Highlands you guys live there that's right right yeah so about 40 people came to that I would say about about 40 people came and the consensus was that the citizens would go out a group of citizens will go out and actually do a survey you know do a survey um or sort of hold the the neighborhood and they would provide different options do you prefer bumps do you prefer humps do you prefer nothing do you prefer flashing lights um whatever those different options do you prefer if we take everything out and we get twice the speeding limit on the ticket or twice the charge for a speeding ticket you know what are the different things that you would prefer um knowing that still the Commission in the city has the final say in what's going to happen but to get a because we don't have a HOA to get a better input um from the citizens themselves so that is what they're working through right now so I think in the afternoons different groups are going around door too getting when are we going to know what they how they feel you got to know how people feel these days once they once they finish that so I did get a call from uh Brett last night and apparently he had sent out an email and I was like I don't know what you're talking about I can get it and remember this happened once before we someone said they sent an email and it went to spam while this one went to spam so if you look in your spam email there is an email about what you're talking about there I I think you just last with results of uh the surve all the results cuz nobody knocked on my door they're going 40 by my house I I live in mood High nobody knocked on my door so so that's the problem are we just going to nobody knock my door I'm just telling you they send email I'll look at it and I'm just saying nobody knocking my door I can ask my neighbors if anybody has them there's somebody at my house 247 yeah that time I didn't don't you all have a Facebook page or something yeah we do we do but maybe maybe they should they they did did you see the data that he sent we should you should we should uh take the live update of this and send it to the Facebook page so they know we're talking about it and that we want to hear from them yeah they've been putting on there that we're having conversation well let's let's let's appeal to them publicly and say hey you know we got to hear something so they if their Facebook page is prominent enough I haven't received anything only ones I received people want now too they just want them up they don't want them there okay that's that's what I've heard from the ones that contacted me and we do have to remember I've got several emails to say they'd rather have humps humps humps humps he wasn't it was in Spanish j j or jum whatever so like I said last commiss mean I this is the way I would like to have it done is it presented to us like it's the very first time we discuss all the data and then uh with the process it says we either accept it or reject it so here's what I'm seeing that he has is is not what they said they were going to do which is fine and that is basically so I think whether you're for or against the speed bumps I think right but there's another group with Carrie that's working on one of the options so that realiz krie Lewis k e r i Lewis that's who's been contacting me and other staff members who's creating the so that's the issue not having a HOA because now we have his information I'm not saying it's wrong but his information on something that we said okay we he going to talk about the options right says 335 against six supporting yeah but you have 500 3 to 500 homes in m Highland so there's more than 34 41 signatures and I think it's about 4 450 homes in there but that's more than 50% well with 450 homes there's five people in my home you see what I'm saying you give that you give them a voice all the time see he's more generous than me me too so um so let me say that isn't what we discussed as a group when we left we discussed what the options would be getting a senses of what the options would be so I don't really know what they're doing mhm at this point I'm just focusing on the policy procedure I'm not focus whether I'm for or against the speed bumps just the policy and procedures all right and um it's I take responsibility for not knowing exactly what that policy was okay but does it say a vote by the commission or a decision by the commission the issue is is that speed bumps are not in the policy so it's at in the past it has been at the discretion of the city but his point is that it was the recommendation by the Safety Committee and that we were supposed to vote on it but it's not in the speed bumps and not in the policy that that's the that's my that's I think but any action as recommended by the Safety Committee should be builted on right right yeah so in the introduction at the very end of it it says after committee R review of the information the city manager will make a determination write a recommendation be considered by the commission the commission has the AC authority to accept the city manager recommendation to reject it that's what it says way I I mean because we discussed it here and I you know I was kind of I know how formal it was but mean by our that's what the committee thinks I don't know how formal it had to be and yeah the first time I was sent out us first time I was sent out to us was back in April and I should have I should have looked at it more in detail back then and I did yeah so that's bad on me no so is your interpretation that we have to vote on it that's the way I interpret it I don't know if the City attorney has a different opin I just know I've been here since 2017 and putting any speed humps or bumps down has not been brought to this commission only thing I know has been stop signs Bobby you can correct me if I'm wrong about the stop signs and those were usually brought by the former mayor or mentioned by one particular um resident the mayor would say traffic committee go out and look at this bring it back see if it deserves a stop sign the traffic commit by Statue you're not supposed to use exactly right that's one of the reasons we brought that back that's why it came in front of the commission that's exactly right so in in your years how many times have has this happened where you laid down uh about three times most time they end up coming in they do the biggest complaint is when you put it in front of somebody's house it's the noise right all night long bump bum bump bum and they just get them out I will how long have they been there uh two months three and if we put them in in July somewhere there usually a temporary thing would would would we pull them and then do a study again well we can we can we intentionally put the temporary ones one for the and see if can pull them to DET right well when I spoke with the city manager the they said that they would do a new study in January to see if speeding had been if if if that actually changed the behavior CU that's the purpose of is to change the behavior of the drivers and so when we we met back about it is that with bumps or without without without so they're going to come out probably before January yes around January we were going to take them out yes so that was their initial plan was to take them out around which m Highland is aware of okay so they've been that has been communicated via Facebook via Town Hall that the plan even this last time they he the plan is to take these out in January to see if our speeding Behavior has changed um now the feedback from Old Hollands is for example like this guy that sent us the email is that hey it's the UPS drivers and the door Dash guys that are doing all the speeding so that that's been that that's what was stated yeah you know that that it's ups and door Dash but I'm saying there's 7,000 trips in a week I think a UPS trip can go 15 you know and so that has been some of the the contention has been who's doing the speeding you know where's the speeding being done but that was the initial plan as I remember it was putting down the temporary ones to change Behavior if they see that behavior is changed by another study then those can be removed um once that that behavior is changed that you know people aren't aren't speeding um but I guess back to the the the concern with the thank you Bob um back to the conern protocol so I'm s where are we right now so so here so here's here's here's where we are right now is on agenda agenda item number 20 so um with that I guess the question is would we like for the Traffic Safety Committee or city manager to bring us back the actual manual in December I she go through make some updates to that bring that back to us in December so we can review that the full manual with the insert of all the speed bump information so that we can review the manual or review the Traffic Safety Committee policy manual that we would like to review that in December um you know take this month to make the changes that are needed to various updates based on the conversation we're having regarding speed bumps Etc and then review that in December is that okay with the commission my my whole idea was to be presented just like the way it's written right now presented to the commission we discuss it we vote on it but there so here's the thing there is nothing in there about speed more stuff like in the when you look at the policy there's nothing in there about speed M so and what I'm saying is if we're if we're wanted to be strict about following the guidelines then there's nothing about the installation there's nothing about where they should be installed how to be installed unlike the speed humps which does have regulations on how these things are done so if we're saying that our previous discussions are sort of void because we have an official um vote on it and I think we need to take the full Monte and say okay let's look at this from a policy perspect if we're looking at a policy not just the opening paragraph because we have the opening paragraph but then we have nothing to follow on in the rest of the manual besides the speed humps the stop signs ex the speed humps the stop signs Etc so that that's that would be my recommendation would be let's let staff update the manual bring it back to us in December so we can review it in December to know what what we should be doing at that point and hopefully by that time we'll have the information back from M Highlands as to what their preference might be Etc and you did say in January they're going to be removed regardless right to do the study through the study if if driving behavior has changed that the the idea was to put down tempor as I talked to the city management committee was to put down temporary speed bumps to change behavior and hopefully within 6 months after people get tired of going over them they will slow down and then remove those so that um so that behavior has changed now in my observations I see people just hit them head on some people slow down some people don't um and so uh but that was the purpose of so that hey hopefully by January these can be removed and that people's you know from the data the average person was driving at least over the average is over the speed limit yeah you know so we're 30 35 mph is the is the average um high speed I think on d d which is the entrance was 56 on 24th Street which also has a speed bump was 68 miles per hour that's a 3035 and somebody's going 68 like it's a drag strip you know yeah the highest one was 68 miles per an hour yeah and that's on 24 Street 68 so that's a that's a 30 mph somebody's going 68 that's the high spe so and you do have that's the that's literally where a lot of so not only do you have people walking there but that's where the crossing is to get to the rails and trails m is is right there as well um but yes so so the idea was not for it to be permanent you know it was it was to be something temporary to help change the behavior to come back and try to to okay so are we going to discuss this at the meeting or we going to I don't know I think we got a difference of opinion here I'm of the opinion it should be presented to us just like the manual says that's my opinion so so here's the thing they present it to us but then what direction do they have for the installation of it once we say yes or no because there's nothing in the manual that says how to do it it's all retrofit it's already been done yeah and it's already it's already there so there's there's nothing in the mangual that says this is how you install the speed bumps whereas there's directions on speed humps that say 90% for this engineering for this thought we were just talking about what we were going to do to help the people over there with their opinions and whatnot I didn't know we were I think the mayor's position is this policy doesn't apply because it doesn't address a procedure for speeds but when you read the introduction it says here you know these are all your different traffic Comm but they're not addressed they are but in here it says it has to come to the commitment for Speed hops it does right here it says has has the authority to subsidy manager's recommendation or reject yes it does but but there's that's where I'm at so but there's nothing in the policy on speed humps though so me bumps speed bumps on speed bumps yeah so how do we other than uh what the US Department of Transportation manual says to establish locations for Traffic cing devices that would be your default in the absence of this policy saying anything so again if this stays on the agenda what are we hoping to accomplish what are we voting voting on whatever the initial recommendation would have been that's that was my whole idea so what was the initial recommendation speed bumps that already there I guess nobody said anything so it it it happened we were all here when they said they were going to put speed bumps in yeah we kind of okay we're all like so what what didn't we what what did we do wrong oh well I didn't by by the letter to that it was brought to us we have the authority we didn't say we didn't say no so by by by our silence it was a yes they told us what they were going to do so I think this I think this is what happened we were informed that we're getting installed right okay and we just we were just like okay yeah that's fine and what we should have done as all of us that include my myself and that mix is when we originally got the email back in April April this year we all probably should have read that and I didn't read it till later well you have the authority to accept or reject I feel like if you disagreed with her you should have availed yourself of your authority to reject hers and take a formal vote to change her direction to St does it say Vote or discussion it doesn't say either it just says has the authority we did it it happened the deal went down so it was presented to us we didn't say no and it is is there so again what do you hope to accomplish even by the letter of that if this stays on the agenda are we what are we voting on we vote the Beed it would be accepting the recommendation of the city manager is what yeah you vote to accept it or you vote to reject it is that what the agenda needs to say then in my opinion yes Amy yeah that that's the question before you so we can word it like that and make it agend at them and have a vote on a specific thing that's already been there for three months but what are we taking into consideration what the people are saying and trying to give them a solution or remedy to it well I think think we're worried about stuff that people are talking to us and let's let's do let's do what we're supposed to do man cuz right now I mean you're splitting hairs on something that we already did you know I mean that's the whole intent of the policy is I get it I get it when you're looking at books and reading to the letter and holding it down but we we're we're we're reading emails we're talking to people they got an issue with speed bumps do we want to put in speed humps do we want to take it all out and do the study a little early give them a Christmas present say we're pulling the bumps and then we'll come back you know you know what I mean cuz cuz the CH cuz to Pat's Point although Brent has given us if you remove the speed bumps there still a speeding issue and then the community you were here you see Facebook the community is still divided on what is it that should be used to mitigate I agree with that speeding so I'm not concentrating I'm concentrating just on the policy and yeah so I I get it so if we look at the data there's a speeding issue there so what are we going to do responsibly as Commissioners right now to mitigate the speeding issue well you don't have to have it all in one like you don't have to have it all in one vote you could a vote you could retroactively vote that we accept the recommendation then we have a second agenda item to remove the speed BS you know like or you can do it all on one motion and what are we going to do or you can amend the motion or whatever so but I'm asking as they're there not saying I can't do move they're there according to the data there's a speeding issue why don't we just vote to remove them and do the study again because it's already there it's already done we've already said she brought it to our attention we we we we nodded our heads so that's that's an agreement of some kind satisfies that and then and then if there needs to be wording changed at another another time or in the the same thing let's make a motion to change the wording but let's let's let's let's make it a sensible motion to where hey we've been talking to people at the mow Highlands let's go ahead and remove the speed bumps and do the study to see how it is now and see if we resolve the issue let's just vote on that and that's going along the letter of the law on that get the damn speed bumps out of there let people have the reaction to it and then okay by the way this is messed up let's let's let's let's let's go ahead and make another motion to do what we got to do to the paperwork but so does that sound good can we word that into a in into an agenda item so that way we're we're giving an action back to the people to fix it we're not working on a damn piece of paper and then and then not addressing their issue you know what I mean I I think you can by following the policy and procedur you can do all that well you there's a problem with the policy and procedure you you're saying and you guys are going back and forth about okay there's also a problem with with how it was handled or whatever and and we already know the citizens reaction they don't like the speed bumps guys we're already hearing that and and the the next leg of the study is to pull the speed bumps and do so let's let's move that along at least okay and see what and see what happens if there's still a speeding issue then we could bring it up by the new procedure how to put a spe need hump in there okay cuz we'll already know by history they don't like the bumps so we'll go to the humps but let's let's let's let's have a let's let's have an action to a problem you know and then and then a reaction to um the logistics or however you want to word it out so what do you think about that commissioner we got people out there that are telling us what's wrong let's let's fix it yeah and we can do that by just following the policy and procedures I'm telling you you she presents it we discuss it and then we can Pro she already did that but he's talking about it in an open meeting right Let's do let's let's do it but let's do it about removing the speed B and and that conversation could turn into that so commissioner work is saying is let's just review the data and then based on the data if we think the speed should be removed remove those so we're going we're going off where it is now down the road we're not going back to the beginning then if we're reviewing the data Commission if I commitment from oh we're going back to the beginning on the DAT right commissioner Ward when he made this recommendation for us to put this on the agenda was for us to go back to the beginning as if we've never heard this as if it's never been presented to us which is why I say if we're doing that which is fine then then it goes back to if we're following the policy okay we hear this then when we get to vote on it there is no policy that gives us guidelines on how to vote on it therefore we need to look at the policy itself but let's just understand something let's just make the Assumption here let's make the Assumption let's say it gets rejected right we can reject it with hey with with a caveat to it but if we're going back to the beginning and she's saying that okay they're speeding they're doing this they're doing that okay The Next Step would be to vote on speed bumps they're already there so we're we're not particularly voting on speed bumps we' be voting to remove the speed bumps eventually yeah eventually like in the in the moments of the meeting because all right so you're proposing that we go ahead and we're the before we do the current what's wrong with the CFT yeah so we would have to deny her recommendation well we may not deny it I'm just saying if we going to you still you could accept knowing what you know what would you what would you what would you say I would say you would say I think we're over complicating it I just present it to us we discuss it we make a motion and the motion doesn't have to be a simple accept or reject it could be accept with these caveat or reject with these caveat and and that be done dude that's it so let's say hypothetically it comes up before us someone can make the motion we accept the recommendation with a caveat that based on recommendations from the citizens would speed bumps but then that's a that's conflicting because you're accepting recommendation the recommendation put down speed bumps right but the speed bus are already there so based on the data the data that was given to us we accept no no no you're not accepting the data the recommendation was to put down speed right right that's the whole conversation to say I accept the recommendation but then we enter the caveat to follow the recommendation of the citizens you're not accepting her recommendation accepting her recommendation would be to leave them down until well that would be if happened in real time but it didn't you know we're retroactively voting on something so yeah yep correct exactly but to you to accept the recommendation to put down speed bumps to go back and say caveat parenthesis we still going to do with this you know based on how many other signatures we got for those to be removed but you you guys both attended the meeting at M house yeah I hosted it you can you can do a nron the the retroactive we we're voting now as if we did back then the concern I have um is that I know it's true for land use applications I don't know if it's true in the traffic manual but um sometimes there once you vote to put the speed bump in it's got to stay there for at least a year before you can undo it and then is it I don't know if that screws up anything I know your manual specifically with regard to speed humps you can't petition for their removal until they've been there for a year so because we're operating in a gap um with regard to these speed bumps I don't know the answer but I I do want to just C you when you take your affirmative vote if that triggers something either in the policy the the dot manual or your own that you may not be able to undo that if we want if we want to take them out the the the vote would be no you wouldn't be able to do that for year you may but if you bring it to the beginning and we vote no then it has to come out unauthorized act don't we need to know then before we do any voting what if we just vot take we vote to take them out because there's no formal yes V to put them in I would agree with that I mean you are operating in a gap right now so I feel like the question before the commission is you know you have the authority to accept City mayor's recommendation as a group did you it feels like a majority you feel like you did that even without a vote you accepted it it doesn't say you have the obligation to vote it doesn't give you the duty um to accept you have the authority it if you wave to formal vote that happens in local government you so how does this commission want to proceed every time it has the authority to do something is the question procedurally I I am curious according to you your interpretation is that our Authority was essentially exercised when we did not we acknowledged the AC we acknowledged we just yeah we didn't accept or reject it we just acknowledged it Without Really realizing consensus that AC what she said local government works sometimes so that that's satisfactory to me you have the authority to accept the city manager's recommendation she brought it to you you had the opportunity you certainly had the opportunity to object and the authority to take a vote to formally reject it the fact it was done informally here does not legally bother so we can do that now yeah we could do it now and say hey let's take them out let's take out the speed bumps what how do you guys feel about taking out the speed bumps and then and then follow the study do why don't we just do that now and talk about so here's one of the questions I have you mind if I get that sorry as I was revie why not work on this is this is part of the reason why I'm confused about the whole speed bumps when you look read about speed humps okay it classifies it as two different criteria there's a minor and then there's class one which is minor excessive speed and volume and then there's a class two which is excessive speed and or volume did you want a today I did okay thank you when when you look at the minor excessive speed and volume it says measured 85th percentile speed less than 10 mil hour above the speed limit and when you read the data the 85th percentile dunde is less than 10 10 m hour than the speed limit because the speed limit is 25 M hour and I think it's 34 something miles an hour and then the volume and this is the part I'm not entirely sure on it says peak hour volume equal or less than 12% of the average daily traffic or equal or less than 10 daily trips per household assessed I believe that's true but I'm not sure because there's a lot involved in that if it is then why would we put in something more excessive than this because this says remedial action none nothing but if it's excessive speed it has to be over 10 m hour or greater and this one doesn't even meet that criteria what was the average speed on so you're saying the average it says 85th percentile okay and what what did you say the 85th percentile it like 34.4 something and and the speed limit is 25 right I get it and I'm just that's why I'm kind of confused of why we went with the speed bumps as opposed to the because they're temporary they they're temporary and and um that was something that could be retractable and taken up at any time three and they're less expensive I was surely looking to try to be fiscally responsible with that as well so well thank you for looking out for our community and our citizens we had people that complained about speeding we did a study speeding the city followed through and what they're supposed to do in regards to um ensuring the safety of the citizens the the I get it you know I mean so they they did that they brought it to us city manager brought it to us so hey this is what we're going to do at that time by consensus of not um rejecting her recommendation we all you know whether you disagreed or not you know there was no verbal outspoken disagreement we were doing the right thing so I mean I did at the time yeah so so let's undo it let's pick them out okay good with that and by the read this read all the read all the words it doesn't say anything about bumps in here except for the introduction that's why it needs to be maybe readdressed that policy we do all agree that we want update the manual right so that that can be an agenda item that we work on but for right now can we take them out so all in so are we saying that we would like to take the speed bumps out and then by taking the speed bumps out to conduct a commission complete the study another study to see what what the traffic is now well that that that was the course of action right so I just just say pull them a month early it's okay with me we're already hearing from the I think it needs to be noted though that's what the agenda the agenda item should be we're talking about the agenda the agenda item should be update the manual but right here now according to what what's there now in the manual if you make the if if if if we're talking about the recommendations and whatnot from what we're hearing in our emails and the citizens I think we should continue the study by taking the speed bumps out and then seeing what the impact is on the traffic now that fair that's I'm sure and listening to the recommendations of M Highlands on what they would like to see we don't have that yet yes I know yeah but in the future we'll get it after you takeing speed bumps out hey um Amy is there stipulation that we can do that you can do it certainly you can direct her to do we well not anything not jump off a building or anything like are there going to be any repercussions for taking them out early or I don't think so again you're op policy-wise you're operating in a gap here and ACC according to Bobby that's that's how they do it they go in for a few months and then you take them out sorry to keep this going but are we taking those out today are we waiting till Tuesday for vote what is okay yeah we haven't voted yet we Haden come to a consensus yet all right so uh I'll get with CD manager on rewarding number 19 or number 20 so we I'll get with her on rewarding that her and whoever rewarding that for number 20 let's move on to number 21 because we still have a storm water Workshop purpose of today's meeting is to talk about storm water uh not necessarily agenda so we still got storm water after this all right um so excuse me man can't city manager say right now that she'd like to take them out and we we all agree on it here here's here's the thing I don't want us to come back to this point where we say we didn't have an official vote so we're we're not so it's going to have to be an official because of the nature of this public doesn't have an opportunity yet got to act so will we need two agenda items on this then no just that one just one yeah okay yeah so no I totally agree with you so I'm not in disagreement that we can't by consensus take action but because our initial consensus got us to this action here then let's just follow through on officially um going on record for it I'm interested to see how that agenda item is going to be worded then I guess so um all right number 21 um last meeting I told y'all uh to please consider this possibility and that you would be getting some information discuss it with whoever you discuss things with and give it some thought since then um Ryan sent y'all some information uh it's very specific very guidelines are are very specific it's not just an open freefor all um alcohol and it's not in public or public events no Len Haven events it's only for private with guidelines so I guess my question is where are these events being hosted where would they be hosted correct it could be hosted on a street over there on Florida Avenue so it's still that's if you have to get permission from the city to use whatever there whether it's the Garden Club or Street or Pavilion okay the city has to still give permission so you still go through the formal process of getting the per oh yeah so this is for I guess I'm trying to say this is for City cuz I've read through this city property city property okay all right now I guess my question would be in regards to alcohol consumption on city property does the city have to have those permits for the state in order for there to be alcohol owners property that's something we would have to buy because no no I'm saying unless that person has a mobile a mobile permit like from the alcohol board who's going to have to who's going to have to have a permit with the state in order for that person to be able to have alcohol you're talking about the liquor or the what if the person already has the liquor license so they we have a mobile liquor license I assume well I I actually have a little bit of experience with this um so I was a quartermaster with the VFW Post and there were times like I remember I think it was down at St Andrews they had the big uh Marty Gro Festival we did that for a couple years and it worked out really well for us because you were the 5013c could pull the license right so you can actually go to where you have your license and actually you don't even have to get it with the one that you have there and the beer company is actually run running it right the beer company sets up a truck and right they do all that stuff but as far as all the uh the license go well as far as the license goes you can apply for a special permit that's not even at the VFW right right only 5013 SE do that so many times a year so normally they would team up with a nonprofit or someone teams up a nonprofit does it um but you can only do it so many times a year you only have so many 513c only gets so many of those right and that's and that's the way you do these outdoor events unless the city itself has a has a license no we don't and then as far as like the the the bonding and the legal liability and that there are companies that special and that you go on there and apply for insurance just for that event right it's it's a gram shop insurance for the for the event itself and the city would have to require to be hold named hold harmless and hold and have to have the requirements of how much insurance is required to do that on on you know said said location whether it be a park or street corner or what so who would be responsible for enforcing like uh Hey only beverage is with an ABV of 6% or less or permitted so who's going to go and who's going to be responsible for testing whether or not they're 6% in there or less well they uh they would be they would have to put down some money you know as a uh no no I'm saying it's a guarantee if I have a bottle of wine and my bottle of wine say 6% or less I can pour that wine out or 12% or more in there how are you going to know that I've done that I well there something I learned a long time ago if somebody wants to be bad they'll be bad well doing that's already illegal I get that but I'm asking how are we going to if we permit this how do we regulate who's in the end the city's going to be here responsible for regulation so it's not just giving them the permit there question how do we regulate this it's not just say okay hey go to our Garden Club and have this event how do we regulate this particular event the same way we do we have we regulate our special events by saying okay hey you got an event in the park how so how do how do we enforce the regulations of this that's that's my question well we have an attorney here that can tell us whether or not uh I I have some concerns that not every piece of this proposal is enforceable to answer your question however you can uh the two places where I feel like the city has the most stability in terms of what is your insurance coverage um whether the amount speciic coverage is required for an alcohol um and the extent to which you require security to be there whether it's your own or the provision of you know two per people whatever to sort of keep an eye on things I feel like that those are the two things you can certainly control whether someone is drinking only one drink per hour with a maximum of 3 I don't know how the city possibly we so other than that we can't regulate anything El in here I I think you have the ability to put some teeth in it is if you do allow alcohol at an event they comply with your you your coverages and your your insurance requirements and your security requirements and there's still um An Occurrence something something bad that happen there's a an Emergency there is a drun driving incident that can be traced specifically to those I think you have the ability to deny future permits or um for either for that event to that promoter um but that's where I think your biggest controls are in terms of regulating the conduct that happens at the event I don't feel like you have a lot of true enforcement opportunities there so from those I've talked to their concern has been the regulation of the conduct not so much our liability you know liability has been part of it but based on was here their concerns have been how do we regulate the conduct how do we determine that if I give you two tickets but you don't take your two tickets like happen at all events when I go to the chamber event you get two tickets you give it to somebody else or that person that had two has four and the bartender isn't keeping up with how many people how many times that person has been up there with their tickets they just you gave a ticket they ped you a drink you got your drink and that was fine well why don't we require the vendor to pay pay the police officer to be out there private events do that all the time police officer isn't going to be out there to count how many tickets and drinks you're getting though they to provide security not a check point for how many drinks you get wouldn't that be automatic overtime too like you would be charging them because you you schedule your people already so every event will be automatically overtime police uh paid but they they still can't enforce some of the stuff that's said that will be happen so the idea in terms of Mr Gray was that they would have a uh ticket or or scan that they would have to come up to get there be it would be tied to that particular person in terms of how many drinks they would get um at that event I mean that that was his thought process but remember we have a lot of events that we do not attend that PD do does not attend like at the Garden Club they have weddings they have showers that we can't be at all of those events and once you open this up that means that they'll be able to to to to you know have champagne wine that we will not be able to um in any way control we we just won't that would mean that our that's all our officers and staff will be doing um Garden Club is filled with events all the time uh uh we we turn down a whole bunch of events just because they're asking can they serve alcohol uh and so those are some of our concerns is goes back to to Mayor how do you control this uh because the it's going to fall on the city uh and the behavior is going to fall on the city as well uh when it comes to things of that nature so those are our concern what the commission can also do too if you're going to go down this road and you have some resource true resource issues um is to maybe limit you the number of alcohol large alcohol events or medium alcohol events that are happening at one time um if you don't already Define what a small medium and large event is you'll need to do that we have that in our special events so that's part of the special events application you have a small medium and large event right now anything under 50 is a small event anything over from 50 I think to 200 is medium and then over 200 is a very large event where they have to umay pay an application fee for that event on top of that you will have to charge them some type of fee for serving alcohol I mean a high you know $500 because we've got to if this is something commission insurance requir insurance as well I mean I know this came up before the commission many years ago about serving alcohol or allowing alcohol to be served at events or in parks and of course you know that they did not pass it um this is one of these areas that there surely has to be a lot of control with this I would I would agree with that but then Amy is telling us that we can't have any control I mean based on and I'm saying the control of okay I get my two tickets you got your two tickets go get your drinks for me some some of these spe these specific proposals I don't think are enforce are there other things that I think you absolutely can can you require that the area where alcohol is being consumed being secured in very specific ways yes I think you can do that you can verify that um that's required unless unless you are already on sort of a digital system to receive some revenues for the event I don't know that there's a way to sync your software to track how many drinks right or drink tickets are being purchased I I just I don't just trying to think of I'm looking at all these things that you'd be required to do right normally if someone's going to do an event like this why are they doing it normally you do it to make money right right and I just I'm just looking at this going how many people are actually going to do this I just I don't see like abundance all of a sudden you're going to get like a mass amount of applications of hey we want to do this type this is going to be someone wants to do a breakfast brunch event or something could we wedding yeah it's it's limited the alcohol is limit to so you could take I'm just saying if I had four tickets of 8 O of champagne I'm not going to go drive my car into something like but that's that's you saying that's that's you without medication yeah but I like to think that on average humans are good people and it's we're not going to that the chance of a wedding event is we're just going to throw something out because there's this small possibility that someone is going to circumvent this boot hole to drink four drinks instead of two there's a large amount of Revenue can be brought from this but the revenue isn't coming to the city if we talking about Revenue that's for the business person we're not making any Revenue you have we have other event venues you have the country club you have the southernland center so there's other places where events can be hosted if you want to have alcohol that doesn't have to be in the Garden Club on one of the streets that we shut down um in order to hosted if we if we're going from that aspect yeah I just don't want it to get to the point to where we're like Hey we're the city of Lin Haven with all these great Parks but only if the city hosts St that's what we've always been so the city the city's hosted stuff before and had and had vent had a vendor they had the I think they had the block party they had BL and then the commission passed not to have you know alcohol so we do not the city when we put on our events we do not allow alcohol at our V we don't allow smoking in our Parks when if people do that and staff is working we'll just come up and we just past last week gu sitting out there with a open beer bottle drinking at um um one of the concert series and a uh police went up to him and said sir there is no drinking they're smoking he had a beer bottle and smoking and he didn't like it but he did get up and leave and so um that is a challenge just with that alone uh I'm just saying that the city these are private events the city is is one that would would not host that because there's just no way we can contain it with all of the large events we have we we just can't all right so we'll continue discussion on this all right thank you storm order Workshop to order at 11:15 a.m thank you all for uh coming to the storm with Workshop today yes ma'am can I just make one statement about the end of the agenda about the alcohol sure a citizen came to me with and wanted me to present this to the commission to possibly be placed on the agenda corre presented me with the information and as I would do to any citizen um present it to the commission right MH so I just just wanted to know you to know my position that right and this same citizen asked me and I just said no yeah so yeah I got I got asked the same question had an hour conversation about yes sir it was worth a discussion if the commission doesn't want to know the agenda all they have to do is say something so I guess that would be the question is do we want to do we want to have a discussion on agenda item number 21 might as well it's already there no no no it's not might as well it's already there do we want to discuss it yes okay uh yes yes all right right so we discuss it I mean if we don't want it we'll vote it down so what are we voting on there's a there's a difference between discuss discussion right doesn't say impossible vote okay so that's I was wondering what we vote okay we were voting on discussing all right so um all right storm water all right so um today we got two objectives one is to get um a little more detail on the storm water uh proposal or sort of uh storm water procedure that um Sam has worked and then also getting some feedback from Stant Tech through um City city manager and Chris in regards to some of the things we've been asking so just trying to get a hit of the game in regards to storm water no official decisions are being made today it's just a workshop informational purposes and then we can follow back up later on um in regards to different questions all right Mr pees all right so first I just want to uh talk about the purpose of why I wanted to bring this up and also to say that I really only want to focus on about the single family homes as far as uh vacant property and all that not going to be talking about that I I'm just looking at the scope of single family homes only here um but let me ask does your plan include bid property or just a single family just adjusting the single family homes y uh so the way I see it is that it's a tier system there's three tiers currently and the idea is the reason you have those tiers is try to make it as Fair as possible um the math just simply doesn't line up that way it's it's it's not a method change it's just a math change the way the current situation that we currently have it right now is that tier one is at 0.54 erus at $91 tier 2 is 1.0 and or $169 and tier three is 1.5 what that means is the average eru would be a one CU it's tier two so that means tier one is 46% below tier 2 and tier three is 50% higher than tier two if there this would work if there were an even number of property types per tier the math would work out but that's just simply not the case there's a lot more tier one homes than anything else um so what this means is because of that logically if you to take every home it's eru value it should be somewhere around one if you took every single home put it together and average them all together you want it to be as close to one as possible because that's what would make it fair as of right now it's not annually um the average home is actually pay $148 instead of $1 169 which is a 12.5% variance statistically that's pretty massive is it 12 half% less or more um they at 12% less so we're losing out on 12 a half% revenue all right explain to me how you got to average again so I took every single home averaged it by their eru so like any any tier one home is a 5.4 eru any tier three is a 1.5 if you add average all the properties together it should be somewhere around one because that would be that would mean the average home is paying tier two yeah and I think it's been a while since I've looked at this but I think when we they originally was presented to the commission even before I got in the commission and after I got in the commission I think the way they determined it was the number of houses I if you remember that that graph they're like based on the number of houses this is the median right here but it wasn't based on square footage based on number of houses that might be why it's yeah because if you so and this is based on imperious now it was still the initial tiers were still based on impervious for square footage but there was only two tiers initially then after we had you know had the first year or second year then you know the commiss direction we went back we added the third tier and then like what commissioner people was saying if you add some more tiers you kind of spread it out more to bring that average up but it's always been the tear with the impervious squirt footage I think he was a meaning based out yeah you need to listen back there yeah no what I was saying I could be wrong but I think the way to determine the the 1.0 what the that considered I forget oh you me yes based on the number of houses many it was a bell curve they were using a bell curve rather than just an average that's right that's exactly right I knew I have a teacher tell me I need to that one day bell curve yeah but when you only have three data points it's hard to do a true bell curve because it's a triangle yeah you know what I mean so um you want to go to the next one sure Jimmy you go to the next one please so last year or this this current year that we gathered money from storm water with $148 on the average single family home we brought in 1 million approximately a little over $1 million if we were to make so did you leave out the commercial and the yes this is only single only single this is only single family not commercial okay if you were to if we were to make the average home closer to what tier 2 is which is $169 that would bring in an extra $132,000 this is again just the if rather than the average home paying $148 it would be $169 which is what tier 2 is paying um and that would be as Fair as possible because we're trying to get everyone to pay the average based on their impervious property um all right next slide so these are some options I'm kind of I was considering to change it up a little bit I gave three or four options I'm not a big fan of saying do this or that you can have multiple options here the option um this by doing these options you could raise it to where the average eru or the average cost would be around what tier 2 is paying um this would create a better Baseline moving forward so that when the increases happen it'll be more Baseline across the way you could just option one would be you just only mess with tier one and raise it a little bit to make up the difference so that would mean you'd have to raise tier one up to 778 eru instead of 5.4 um that so but that would raise the cost to the equivalent of $131 51 on this year's versus what they paid which was 91 so that's kind of a massive increase that's a larger number that's a big number yeah so you're going to affect you're going to like almost you know double you know you talk about percentages that's way more than 12% going up you know for a lot more houses right so not a huge fan of that option just one of them all right next all right another option would be need to go to a four tier system rather than a three tier and then you these I broke them down into four different tiers so so tier one would only raise to6 instead of 774 that would be $101 791 but a lot of tier one would be trading up into tier two right well they'd stay within tier one oh yeah yeah I see what you're saying Y and then you change and then you'd have a tier two which would be from 1,600 to 2999 with a085 Ru and that'd be $143 and then tier three would be what tier 2 is now with the 169 and then tier four would be higher than 4,000 that again creates four tiers and would bring it up to where the average home is paying $169 based on the property size the homes we have now all right and then uh next option next slide five tier system option three if we it up into five tiers you would still have a tier one which is n the equivalent of $91 and then you'd add another tier to where it' be 1,600 to 3,000 essentially up to 85 which would be $143.6 and then you have a tier three which is the equivalent of what we have now which is the tier two that's the 169 you'd add another tier in between three and five you'd add a what would be now between three two and three but now that's a tier four be 4,000 to 5999 and that'd be what our tier three is now which is 1.5 and you essentially just add a fifth tier at the end for the really large houses that would be because as it as it stands right now anything over anything in tier three our current tier three is 254 if we had a fifth tier of the really large houses um which are not many I think there's only like 16 of them but uh that would be over 6,000 square feet that a 1.72 eru that 290 instead of the 254 doing it this way we're able to keep the really small houses cheap and the really large houses to pull more of the weight too so it's evening out the weight on more of a bell curve to make it more even to where you don't have wa this way it's more this way the average home will be $169 it's getting closer to you're paying by square but it's just more even across the board and it'll bring in more money this way cuz now on average the city will be bringing in $169 per home instead of 148 or whatever it was while also spreading the tears out more so you don't have the the smaller homes or the larger homes carrying more of the weight it's way it's more even one tier four is your number span so much larger than the other tiers it's just because it's 50% more than tier three because I think he's trying to figure out I'm trying to keep it this a structure of the three tier system we already have which is 0. 541 and 150 and just adding two more tiers in there to spread it out so the point the tier one the tier one that's up there right now is the current tier one we have now the tier three is the current it's not homes it's impervious square footage right yeah but yeah but I'm basing it off of the impervious right um how many four and fives do we he said there's only 165s I mean I would have to go back and look but I mean understand what I'm asking no yes so I think what she's asking Sam is when you look at tier three there's a dip of 990 there's a span of 999 Square ft right 3,39 T 4 $4,599 that's a span of 19999 foot I think that's the question you're asking there's a bigger span there wonder why so instead of it being 4 4,999 it's 5,999 I'm just curious I don't know mathematically I just point out what looks odd to me yeah the the reason for that is I was trying to keep the three original tiers we already have already you take an IQ test and then you and then I was just adding more teers in there I mean we can adjust them this is just an option but I imagine when you're looking at this I'm en Vision you're probably doing your Excel sheet and you're like if I change it to this this is how much one of these bring in and that's probably how you got that span I would imagine I'm just making an assumption yeah I was trying to calculate systematically I see what she's saying yeah has to fall in line and it has to be a p a pattern that he's absolutely right that's we just were got off call with santech and that was one of the things they surely Chris and I going a call with stantech about we sent them your recommendation absolutely can add tears umem it it just just what he said it has to be systematically put in place the methodology has to be clear and um and so that may mean there may be some adjustment up here in these first two or three tiers uh simply because it has to line up with every tier that's the first thing and um and then they have to give an account for those vacant properties as well uh they have to calculate that and you tell me if I'm saying anything wrong um and uh commercial property so all of that plays in into how these tear will line up but they they absolutely we all agree we can add additional tear to that they uh want to start um start on this uh but they just need some direction if we we want to stay with the tears or we want to go with any improved value which that's not really their game I think the tiers work for us um and we just need to tell them how many when we brought this to the commission oh gosh and Pat was here Dan um the first time I think the first tier was like $231 or something it was very very high yeah and uh the commission did not want to approve that for the aage resident so we took it back and they said you know you're just going to have to take it down to where it just maintains in our conversation with Stant Tech um it kind of piggybacking off what you said and and um what we've talked about is that I said to them here's what I would like to see with these five tiers couple of things first of all these five tiers what does revenue look like and if it's systematically put in place and then secondly the city is going to supply them with all of their needs and capital for the next five years to also have in place some type of reserves for storm water what does that look like if we were to do that as well because you hear Kiki keep talking about there's not some emergency there's not reserved we need to look at that that particular methodology of what those rates would look like if we did all or nothing and and let you see that as well um and then um I think the um the fourth thing is they would have to look um at vacant land and figure out a way to to incorporate that without taking any Revenue away because currently this year with the the method they have in place we're going to bring in about $1.7 million somewhere wrong along in there yeah five I five yeah have to look at yeah how much is it going to cost us for us to do all of that yes and so that's what I wanted to talk to you about they did send us a proposal and um I like the commission's um approval to move forward on this or to do this is that um if we did any of this we switched to any of these tiers that means that we have to go back out when it's time we have to send letters because now you're doing some different just like when we did just like you did before you have you're doing different rates normally that will cost us a little bit over about $10,000 that's not something that stanch um goes to stanch that goes to mailing and so their proposal for them to do all of this work and to have you some options by January is 31,000 and then adding the 10,000 would be like $441,000 okay so to even to what aren't we in bed with Stant right now yes yes sir what do what do what do we pay in yeah it's when we it's however we put the task order together so what what what I'm hearing is if we're going to pay $41,000 just for them to give us something to reconsider we know prepar they come back to Year anyway you know I I understand that I'm saying to the commission we're going to pay $40,000 31 31 with $31,000 for them just to systematize something for us for us to reconsider that's what I'm saying right and when they come it's there's you can compare cost it's 41,000 and Kiki just said it4 ,000 we're going to pay whether you do this or not we're going to pay him 24 24,000 we're going to pay 24,000 regardless so 24,000 we're already in bed with them that's what we pay for them to come to us every year so we're going to pay an additional additional 3 and Florida dictates you have to use would be an additional 17 1 no not necessarily um but there are different Consultants who do the assessment work but we have to you have to use somebody we can't do it ourselves right can but it has to stand up in court your method has to be you got to run it by somebody it's good so we could do this in house they have the resources so here's what happens if we do it in house and then one of our citizens sues us then does our methodology stand up more money but if St Tech does it and because methodology is proven so St can go back and say these are 10 other cases that proen this work when weal with Mark Lawson that's what he kept repeating was that this a stand up in court this a stand up Lawson he does the alternative methodology where impr he did it by proper guys and do we really want to take on this no because of the fact that you have experts that do it um and you know people dire and when youer and and and you know people already don't trust the government that much so I think independently of the city is a good thing to do so Kiki said you know we're going to pay them $224,000 regardless for them to do these additional things because you need to know what it's going to take to run storm water and to have some reserves we've not done that there for them to do all of these things $24,000 Plus plus another $7,000 is $31,000 is what we would pay them now okay so we had a $7,000 differences yes sir yes that's so if we added tiers we're just adding $7,000 no no we're adding $7,000 just for them to give us 7,000 for that not only that they're running the other methodologies for you as well you keep asking a question I know commissioner wargas what would it take to get reserves or what would it take uh for us to have um these Capital items for the next five years um all of these things here K Kiki's been saying we don't have that answer I guess I guess here's our question and I guess here's the clarity um is so here so clear this for me then we're going to and I'm not saying not to do it I'm just trying to get clarity so we're going to pay them $7,000 do what Sam just did which is bring us this right bring us a the tier system I'm not saying not to do that just follow me okay we pay $1,000 for that like we normally do we don't agree with it we send it back and say can you readjust or we're going to be charged for that I'm going to go back and readjust it to your no once they give us their task order that's part of it okay yeah they their task yes you're exactly right remember you they've come to you before and you haven't liked something and then they come back and they'll change something but we weren't sure if they were getting paid again or yeah or what was being well here's my thought on it so we're paying paying them $7,000 to do that additional cuz we're already required to pay 31,000 total so everybody's clear but it's 20 24 regardless right so we're paying an extra $7,000 we are going to pay when when just but that's with the mail app mail app so potentially an extra 177,000 uh with the mail app correct but if we raise just looking at single family homes we leave the methodology exactly how it is and all we do is adjust the single family homes to a five-tier system we're going to bring in over $100,000 in Revenue but that's with your methodology not with theirs I'm I understand that right no no I'm not arguing I'm saying your method I'm not saying you're wrong your methodology brings us in 100,000 their method is not different there's a we're both talking about the same method we just need to tell them make sure that you get the the cost as close to one eru as possible if if they do that we're bringing in 100,000 can I interject some information here when this started all these years ago the city gave them information about projects that we wanted to complete that is an ancient list that's right that list is no good anymore so if for no other reason I would support the idea of doing this with a new list yes so that we can get a better handle on what storm water department actually needs stay rolling forward not what it was five years ago rolling forward yeah I don't think we're saying we're not going to do it I think we're just trying to understand what the expectations are from once we do that $7,000 gives you the opportunity or it expands the scope of services so that stch has the opportunity to run different numbers and different tiers and and different methodologies and whether or not you're going to have reserves here's how much it would take for you for for these different tiers for you to have some type of reserves here here's how much just going the take not just to have maintenance we talked about this that right now Chris's Department with storm water is just maintenance it's not projects it's it's it's all of those things but we want to be able to see what are some of those capital projects yes and segueing off both what Kiki and and Vicki said so when we started this 5 years ago we presented the list to stch of capital Improvement projects it included the hmgp projects the grants everything the storm waterer master plan as it was approved in 2019 they presented to the commission a 5-year plan to raise the rates first implement it then raise the rates complete those projects and start building a Reserve at year five was the first year that we would be in the dep positive that's right and we would be able to start funding a reserve the commission and with all due respect to everyone the commission did not follow that plan there was the second year we did not have an increase the third year we did not have the proper increase and the fourth year we did not have the proper increase so we are still very much behind so today the storm water fund is in the hole $869,000 today so if we continue to every year come back and have a Stant Tech proposal or a tetr proposal or a mod to whoever we decide to do it we've probably spent two $100,000 so far with stch that may be a bit much maybe $150,000 over 5 years to do this and we still are not sticking to the plan so we work for her she works for you all we're running in circles until we get a plan that we stay with and you all have to approve this plan every year and we have to get there to build the reserve we just had a $31,000 expense Monday at the mer entrance for a storm waterer Crossing where the pipe caved in mer has one entrance it cost us $31,000 to repair that now that's a that could be a year repair it could be a 10 year repair eventually we're going to have to budget to replace that whole Crossing it's going to be a half a million dollar project at least we do not have the money to do that I'm sorry is that near an outfall no sir it's a that Canal Crossing um but we can do this every year and still not fund our reserves or we can get a plan and we we have no opinion on whether it's teers whether it's Improvement value we like the tear absolutely and I do agree with commissioner peoples I like the these more tiers and how it spreads it out but we've got to get a plan and stay with it and either you all approve it for the next 5 years it it increases x amount of dollars or x amount of percent per their recommendation or every year we bring it back to you but we are absolutely running in circles during budget season we can't planed anything accordingly and we can't build a reserve I'm sorry now are we having toic if we approve a 5year plan would we still didn't have to have a relationship with Stan Tech during that time period only if you all change something I mean they would not have to come if you all approve a 5year plan and say hey and and Amy can interject if I say this wrong but if you approve a resolution that every October 1st it increases x amount percent per tier right then we would not have to go with standex now would we still keep our relationship open with st absolutely yeah we would have we would have to because they have to prepare we have to pay $24,000 every year will because the impervious method requires them to look at the aerial maps every year to see where the impervious where the new improv has come and where new vacant and the new partials that have anex so they were updated so each year they were still updated but I do understand your point cuz we've been here since it's been started that yeah each year we come back one year we didn't improve know one year we didn't increase anything versus just having a fiveyear plan this is year five we're still in the hole and we still don't have a reserve you can't you can't lock the commission you can't lock in future commissions uh by adopting a fiveyear plan uh you can say this is our intent that we want to get to a place where we're saving reserves in year five and it takes a lot of political will every year to have that conversation and stick to that plan and then you also take into consideration any unforeseen circumstance so if we have another catastrophic event God forbid we could uh put that information into the new calculations I guess if we can't lock in future Commission on a 5-year plan why do we I understand why we discuss fiveyear plans well then why discuss a fiveyear plan instead of just saying well because they need to base the study and so and to show that this is what we're asking you to do your rate increase year every year so that this commission can see for at least the term of your service that this is palatable and it's not going to mean a 20% Rite um right before my reelection or you know a year or two or at the very end of it to make it right I agree that getting to reserves is the long-term goal and I agree to it and I commit to it um but each year we have to come back and vote whether or not we want to make that increase same L with taxes same thing yeah every year but it's in place it's in place that's and that's based on a 5 plan so but it's up to you to execute on that every year and to sort of reestablish your commitment to that 5 and so I think we change this plan every year though I mean and that's my frustration we do we keep changing the plan every year year we don't we don't really have a fiveyear plan because each year we and I'm not against you saying but we change the plan so when you adjust downwards yes um you can no longer honor that plan that's exactly right that's exactly right my plan You' make more money right and we understand but we just saying each year like when I I think what the mayor is saying whatever plan we go we need stick absolutely CU each year we do come back we change the I'm yes agree like like we're say utility rates they get they brought us a fiveyear plan we're saying okay hey this is what we're going to do when it comes back up we I we sort of agree saying hey yeah we we accept this 5year plan but we we do Chang okay and and who knows when when we this comes back I'm saying stantech there may be additional Revenue we don't know until they do the study they implement the capital Improvement side of it and you can see daylight for the the residents in five years or even two years or what have you so we don't sit down in budget time and have to pick and choose what's most important in the city that's our challenge right now this is a non adorian you're correct you're correct so now I guess ever go away yeah you can you can choose not to adopt it but then you have to pay for any storm water obligations out of your general fund right so as a non-or assessment it is dedicated to only the swim water capital projects and operations comes off property t uh but it's restricted yeah see that's there's predictability and accountability in that that's the thing that drives me nuts with this whole thing is I'd like to to add laurum for the storm water but you can't like I would want to say whatever our storm water rate is such and such that all goes to storm water and then we go and we decide do we want to raise it by you know so many Mill Point so many mill points just that make it a lot easier dog you can't dog Mill but you can't do that and that's what drives me nuts is it's I think it would lot of red tape but now you that if we took away the assessment that basically we have to pay out of the general fund which would then go back to what you just said yeah so that could if we if we had to do again all of the political forces have to work together um and I don't know if you have any obligations that require the restricted use so if you have any debt obligations or current obligations that require your now notal War assess that those restricted FS I would be careful I would so we couldn't every year when we look at the millage rate can't look at the millage rate and go all right 0.5 of the mill and I have I'm just throwing numbers out there I have no idea but point we can't sit there and go 0 five goes specifically to storm water you can't the danger is is that when something shiny comes up a shiny opportunity comes up it's real easy to say I'm going to take this money we' put aside for storm water and use it for this sh but we can't vote on and say that you can't use that money for anything else but storm water you can't we can't do that can we I guess almost like creating a fun the it it it it's your budget you can set it up however you want to the nature legally if you have a non assessment take the dollar am backed into the mill while it feels like extra taxes it a restricted use fund that can only be used for that singular purpose so it frees up having a non-or assessment in my mind frees up the general fund to do other things and what happens and I do see commissioner W's point I see point when we talk about political Capital what happens is that I open up my my thing I got the other day and I see okay I got to pay this amount of money to LY Haven and then I got I think I'm in tier I don't know which tier I'm in but um then I got to pay let me see that's that's not the one I'm paying right now so so then I got then I see a separate none assessment then I'm so people are coming upset they're not coming upset over the at valorum they're coming set over the $200 they're paying MH MH and so if that $200 somehow could be masked as part of you know the the the Ator easier way to accomplish what I think you're trying to do would be to instruct us to move money from the general fund into the storm water fund Enterprise fund correct I caution against that I don't like that methodology but it would accomplish what I think you're trying to do it's because it masks really what the storm water department costs to run and my ultimate goal is to report to you what does the storm water department cost to run and if we start throwing general fund money into there it gets murky and it's much more difficult for me to report those numbers to you and every year good idea where we have built in our Capital that also means you have to raise your avitable loan yeah and you're going to you're you're going to raise it I will tell you raising your out alarms better than seeing a separate non out alarm there everybody gets pissed off if you do away with your storm water assessment fee people get mad You' have to raise the app oh absolutely yeah oh yeah absolutely got to ra I I don't think we're saying I think we're just having a discussion on not not that we're saying not to raise the atal but then right now we keep coming back to this every year so what commissioner work is proposing is that instead of five tiers or Stant Tech then we just be able to say because that would they would probably just cut out stanch all together yeah so they would cut out the 24,000 we're having to pay stanch by just saying Chris says it's a million $2 million whatever it is whatever y'all come up with we go into whatever that's going to take for that to increase to generate another million dollar based on that and then that fund goes into that um uh say you've got it the hard political fight to actually establish a non-ad assessment you've already and and so while there is likely push back and complaints you've already done the really hard part and so keeping that Revenue stream would be my strong recommendation how how you adopt it and it went right completely up to you we're always going to be fiddling around so while legally you can do away with it it it's my strong recommendation that you can municipalities are almost all going to a storm water non-ad warum throughout the state throughout the country it's a problem all communities have to solve and having that non- adalum gives some comfort impr predictability to your community that you were paying attention to it we got toang Sor I didn't mean to mix the pot I just that's why we got the workshop so we can discuss it I was I I would much rather see it in one in one bundle when you're looking at your property tax and see it there and then there you know what I mean County right they counts got high well it's not that it bothers you but what happens different we're you so you know um so just but you know nonetheless um and also it would just and not the way have to consider it you wouldn't have to worry about again the tier system trying to figure out how many people is this or that and it will basically just go back to what if you talking about equal opportunity was essential that the property tax you know will basically determine what that would be so but uh so the question is do we want to we've we see the different options that Sam has given um four tier system five tier system um which one of these would we like for Stan tick to run the numbers on or would we want to see four tier system and a five tier system they could do all of that I just need some direction to say yes go on and do that so I can sign the task order that's all they need today because I want them at least by Tuesday I want them to start on this so they can bring you something in January remember you guys wanted it early and in order to get it early we got to do these things now they will they will present the different options they'll say they'll do all those option there's five tiers this is what you would generate this is what the tiers look like there's four tiers that's doing this way that's for your reserves in here this is what look commercial too so the the commercial falls into these here Sam just set it up for for to show only on res well they still volunte he just did it for his presentation almost commercial commercial then go to tier five almost automatically commercial doesn't go it's it's it's now yeah it's valued differently this is completely it's not tied to Anu I I know this probably won't add any value to the conversation but with strug with strug I think the reason why we struggle with this so much it's not like water and sewer where you can go and say you use this much water and sewer and this is what you pay with storm water it's hard to quantify what your usage is there's no 100% fa way of do well and there's not just one way to to do well just for curiosity what does 0.5 on our adval bring to the city 05 that was $72,000 raised it to 72,000 in change that was Point open all right so the is that what your question was yeah yes okay so the method that we're using now generates $1 million that's just single just the single single family you're still getting like it's like 1.7 it it was 1.7 this it was 1.7 this year it ra she has better memory than I do yeah okay so we'd have to raise it one whole point for ad the to make what we make now that's yeah pretty much 1.4 million I don't know that that's math I can do in my head also you when it's non adal people that are tax to pay non whereas if it's if it's the people that are tax that is very true sounds right so we have a lot of veterans here that yeah that are exempt yeah on then on so you we presented to the commission I think it was three years ago I think we were still in the senior center I remember that and there were only 11 I believe that had would qualify for this and at that time the commission voted not to extend this that exemption for nons yeah yeah my point is that like right if you're running the math on how much you'd have to raise the military to compensate you'd probably have to raise it more than you think oh absolutely yes have to raise it more than one oh absolutely oh yeah there's a lot of exemptions just say you need $2 million a year that's pretty substantial increase of the mill I just but I guess as a citizen it doesn't matter because I'm still paying it either way well but if it went to Mill if it went to uh abor you'd actually have to pay more because you have to compensate for the people that are paying non-ac that would not have to pay that Al it also makes mortgage go up so you can pay that off and your mortgage is still the same and let's keep in mind we just passed that Amendment uh cre oh my God yes oh that's true exemption churches are exempt they still have to pay the non-ad the disabled veterans still have to pay the non Ador so we all agree that the adalum is not the way to go right I would agree that I'm just throwing it out there yeah it's a high political cost yes it is it is but I just wanted to get started on this early we have them on the contract only thing I need to do is sign the T you need to know what you need from us is if we're open to any of these options and if they are which on you need to present this not that we're open to these options just we're open to St St they've already seen this and St Tech presenting options such as this to to the commission for they've already seen this they're looking at it they there were some things they like not only are they going to present this they may do us a four they may do with everything that it would take to totally fun storm water and have reserves left over so there are going to be several options that bring let me ask this because you know I've said this multiple times I always like to have three different options of pick from can we do that with us we'll give you five different options we'll give you option there's always one option of do nothing so you we can absolutely do that now are we taking is St taking in consideration because I think what we're getting with these options though is trying to get to an average number of what a person pays and our previous options that we have with st Tech that's not what is that that wasn't the goal per they're not changing their methodology they would be changing the propos rate system and their study to get you whatever right now we're at a three tier right yes so they could do a three four and a five tier but I'm saying the five still if if if we're saying the five tier option are we saying the five tier option with trying to get to this average number of what everybody's paying that's that's my that's what his if I'm I'm sorry I don't think it's so much that Sam is saying hey this is five tiers it's this is what gets us to right he's trying to spread you're trying to spread it out the five tier system is the easiest way to get to the average single family home be playing one eru without causing tier one to pay a crap ton of money to get there so I think if that's what we're wanting to do so it's not just saying hey let them look at five tiers it's five tiers with what are we trying to get them to do getting into that r that that's what I'm and with new correct because we have to remember we we've got to include our capital projects in that as well that's a variable that the 2019 plan you know included the hmgp projects that we have on funding right they we're waiting state to approve the the construction dollars we will not include that in our number that we need out of pocket because the state will take care of that however the aine design when the construction dollars are not accounted for we have to pay for that the wests side outfall that we hope to bring to you all in DEC that's not accounting for is that on Vermont that is um from Maine to Maryland 19th to 14 that is not on the that's not accounting for so I mean there are millions of dollars of projects that we have to account for over the years but ultimately a reserve to to get us out of a bind in case something happens I do agree with commissioner Ward that you need more than one option to look at I'm just going to I'm going to throw something else in the mix it's going to just mess it all up make that man make that the the vacant Lots you know we talked about that to bring that up know but it's it's a tough one man cuz it's when you look at and I I know Cory Langford loves to bring this up but I have to agree with them it it doesn't make sense with the vacant Lots well I think the vacant lot I mean that lot is probably is it's depending on what the property tax is probably value lot though and and one of the things we did talk about commissioner war was vacant Lots looking at whether or not there's just one set amount for them you know you know what I mean just looking at that and seeing if there's just one set amount but when you do that also you got to take in an account it may drop up your residential we just get the op that's what I'm getting yes you're exactly I I don't want to raise the vacant Lots I my opinion just my opinion I don't want to raise the vacant Lots any more than they already are I mean if we can increase it that would be awesome but we know that's that would be a tough sell but that's what I'm looking at okay and and every consultant that we've talked to about has said the vacant Parcels are the most difficult to do with storm water just because they are how how it is yeah well particularly if you're using an imperious based me yes yes so and and he's right there you know you might have a property you know it might be tier two in your with your vacing lot you might be paying more and it's if you knocked down my house that be pay your vacant your vacant Parcels if this parcel perks very well and storm water just hits it and perks under the ground this storm this paral does not how how can you justify the cost difference too I mean they it goes back problemi to this methodology the Improvement based methodology right there you go solves solves that is there is there a a blend of the two methodologies I'm not aware of it it could be out there doesn't do it and Mark Lawson doesn't do it they certainly have their own if there is a hybrid I'm not aware of it but there could be someone El for for vacant Lots can you do this and then do you know the tier system but if you say yes today I just want to make clear you're making you're saying yes to Stant Tech and your current methodology right I think we're staying with yeah we we've already looked at the impervious with Mark Lawson and we didn't like that yeah yeah I mean I didn't I like his method ology it just was there was too much put on the residential side right I we could have changed it where put more well in theory though a a tier five home is going to have a higher Improvement value than a tier one and and I shouldn't have said home a tier five parcel is going to have a higher Improvement value than a tier one parcel because I'm not going to have a 6,000 foot home that's worth $50,000 and you're going to have a th000 foot home that's worth $700,000 I mean that would so theoretically it it works right so with the tears driveways give some Direction all right so so we're asking stanch to give us multiple options yes cuz right now we have three tiers um Sam presented four and five so we want to look at tier three four and five that'll satisfy three options um tier three four and five and then that based on what you're saying you need to do the capital Improvement projects once that'll be one I guess presentation in the next presentation would be three tiers for Capital Improvement Plus whatever the reserves would be M yes and the vacant Lots with the consideration of configuring vacant Lots yes and we did chat about that okay so be both options both presentations is that is that it's probably going to be just one all together well I'm saying one presentation is going to be or one is going to be hey this is three tiers without reserves the second is going to be three tiers with reserves or the three okay with reserves not not different presentation not that they're going to come at two different times so he's looking for six different proposals with and without reserves is that what you're saying no looking for two tier three tier four tier five right with Reserve options that's okay that's three right so you have six different proposals and then that without without because I'm just going what y'all said y said hey we want to see it with and without that's that's get our $77,000 I agree with you yes with the vacant property um consideration of your and all yes and just remembering if you change the tears you do have to send out letters again new public hearing so so you're saying if we change the tiers and it cost 10 so it's going to cost we do have the if you change the status quo in terms of your rates and methodologies if you add a new tier that is an adjustment that triggers a public hearing and individual notice so that's where the 17,000 or the extra 10 comes in and that's just mailing that has nothing to do with stch they're just taking $7,000 surrend new numbers then you'll make a decision what to do and if that decision means you're going to add a new tier means Sam that's when you'll incur that $10,000 cost but it'll come back in more R and you know I wouldn't fret about it too much I remember the first time we did it it didn't drive too many people out we that no problem Oh you hear about we also got like 27 in of rain the week of yeah pretty quick you have to and it's gotten better since you got you made it better when we get Chang oh absolutely that be after the so I asked them to have something ready and they said that they could if you all told told me to go ahead and sign the to um by January I think about the middle of January somewhere in there and that would be actually a workshop I mean people would come out and see that then is this something that we need to put on the agenda it's up to y'all it's up to y'all you want to D her to sign this task order understanding to you you want to take an official vote it's up to you they that quicker she signs it the quicker they get started that's exactly right I think they let the residents know important oh absolutely yeah yes so then it so you say put it on the agenda I think so what do you guys think sure if we don't it makees it look like we you I I think you already have a standing several year agreement and this is just a task order that sets the scope of services for this year that's all it is is this in the budget already no no we had you had some additional money and Chris is going to have to utilize some of his money in storm water to do that we're utilizing storm water money that's already $800,000 $869,000 in the home that makes sense let me ask you this got for if I walked up to you and said hey if you give me $7 I'll give give you $100 back would you do that cuz that's what's happening yeah I'd have to think about it to P my wall am I signing the task order to send to stand today we had voted them but you got you got a note today or you you said Tuesday at the lat latest something sooner the better yeah I'm just trying to to give them some I mean I think I think we have an idea what's going to happen so all right Sam are you good for her signing today you good I'm very good good good all right let's sign today especially since Chris is paying for Chris gets a lot of better and yeah let's sign today and I would encourage us as I do each year that when this comes back back let's try to stick to a plan and just uh just follow through I mean I understand we do want to you know make the adjustments and things like that so is this going to be discussed at the meeting just as a point of information does it need to be if you want I can tell during my commissioner's report hey we had a discussion on this you can go back and listen to it on YouTube at this URL you know cuz then I mean we' just be repeating the same stuff just I don't want to the citizens right and you not even do it and so I that's the only caution I would give yeah cuz people do get excited about storm water stuff so you know um and like Amy said it it did cost us a lot of people get excited about their bills going up from the radio the whole reason I get out of bed every morning yeah so you know that they made a big news article about that Panama City about some people's build went up a lot yeah change speaking of uh speaking of that I think we radio I think the city manager has already given everyone Clarity on the whole uh Reserve comment that was made by the news station and then promoted by um uh certain social media profilers and all that stuff so one um we never said that we don't know what's in reserves right right we we never said that so um one I was never asked that question so no one ever you know no one ever asked me that they specifically said ly H oh yeah oh yeah oh yeah they did a they did a they got scared and did a big follow I I'm glad you did that made me that made me angry when I saw man so yeah so they they did say oh L Haven is the only one didn't respond when we asked the mayor he said he didn't know no response from the city and that that never happened yeah that was do that was after the Greece Pro meeting um was the Greece Pro meeting but when gree Pro was the highlight of the meeting so they ran that story the next day and it was supposed to be a Panama City story and then they ran it on on us are included us as well as some other municipalities so just want to be clear that no one those things were never stated two our reserves are doing very well with what we we have in our in our bank account so we're not broke oh we can't we came out looking good we did yeah we came out looking good when they stated our actual res uh yeah also number 18 um is anyone against removing that to the consent agenda number 18 is about the Telecommunications um just renewing that option or the not renewing that option but the telecommunication 78,000 that we talked to Samuel about we have anyone against moving that to agenda oh moving it to so you right you ended it I thought we were going okay yeah you guys you all understand that that that that uh that $3 million that we committed to M McDonald is to do the study on the U on the on the design and planning design and planning for the Wastewater but if we move the Wastewater we're we we're in negotiation so I mean they're they're they they're study that would go from the headworks project to how we're going to move everything correct keep in mind too we're still awaiting our consent order from De for the and once we receive that that will open up more doors open up more doors it will because we we'll be having a solution that might and they like that solution yeah well they like that solution already talked to M or and she does like that solution and I will tell you county is more than um helpful and I think that either way if we don't have no money we can do work out something um the county has a a firm that does this that's that's I think that's a big deal man instead of you know yeah so we are moving forward it's an environmental thing it's probably a great move to save money for us so let them so they would just be let letting them handle all the waste water then they would they would hand all the waste we would handle all the retail yeah we' give them 20,000 customers we would help keep the rate low but we would handle the retail so we we get ourselves paid for handling the retail we pay them for managing the plant and yeah we we don't have to plan anymore we then we go after then we go after grants to take that decommission plant and turn it into an Amphitheater or something cool for the for for the Park yeah and people don't have smell in their neighbor you have good ideas every now and then I got to this is really great idea only when only when it rains and we pump it back into the bay so that's that's where we are B