Sweet, man. >> I was there. I was there a week and a half ago. >> Nice. Cool. Are you ready? >> Ready. Ash. >> Let's call Fort Richie City Council meeting Tuesday, July 14th, 2026. I'd like to invite servant leader Fields for
the invocation. Remain standing for the pledge. So we just want to thank you God and we trust in you for the city for the city council meeting stuff that's on the agenda and also the CRA. So we just thank you that
through you you give us wisdom and uh that we could get a lot of stuff done in the community for development, redevelopment and the stuff the equipment that the fire department needs and everything. this just going to continue to be done. And uh we thank you
for the team that is working together and the events they done and doing and will do and they get the businesses and the the community behind them for everything that they've done. And we thank you for the wisdom and guidance that you're using them in to make this a
great place to not only live but work and to be able to have events in and to uh see that our waterfront park is being developed for the community in Jesus name. Amen. >> Amen.
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. [snorts]
>> Cler, please. >> Mayor John Eric Hoover >> here. >> Vice Mayor Chris Mayer >> here. >> Councilman Robert Huard >> here. Councilwoman Lisa Burke >> here. >> Councilwoman Christine Sullivan >> here. [clears throat] >> City Attorney Nancy Meyer
>> here. >> Interim City Manager Salicary >> here. >> Thank you. Uh so no man tonight. So first up we've got comments from general public. I do got one sign up. Danny Fields. Welcome. >> Okay. 8114 Leo Kid. Danny Fields. Again
I just want to thank you guys for everything you do. We know that uh Light of the World is going to be having a backpack stuffing party. And so that's going to be there at 8114 Leo Kid. That's coming up on the 22nd at noon time. And so we'll have pizza. And if
there's any flyers for any events that you guys have, upcoming stuff, this would be a good time that we could put that in that backpack uh stuff with all the supplies that are free that we're going to be doing at the park. and then uh we get advertised and then that shows
that uh the city is part of pouring into the community. So if you do have anything like that as we have events coming up, you let me know. I'll make sure that stuff like that get in there and uh and so you could come and >> stuffing it.
>> Yeah. Yeah. It's going to be the backpacks with all school supplies in it for the kids. That's the 22nd, July the 22nd at noon time at Light of the World Tabernacle on Little Kid Road. >> Yep. >> There. And uh then we'll end up at the
Waterfront Park to give them away. Uh and everything's free there. Uh the food uh and and this event on the 25th is where we'll have uh the police, the fire department if they could be there and to help be part of passing stuff out. Uh
and then we'll just make it a great event for our community. And we always represent uh the local businesses, the church, and the city and the police and the fire department. So, it's a great public relationship. So, we continue to do things like that. And then Jerry's
also uh having another event coming up and I know we have a lot of events and you guys schedule events and so uh that would be coming up on in Waterfront Park again and that will be on uh a
Sunday August the 7th at 4 to 7 and it's a free event and there's going to be live music, there's going to be prizes, there's going to be food trucks and vendors. So basically he's handling that. I usually partner with them and handle the stuff that we schedule a
light of the world and somebody cares. But this is more of his event. So if you want to advertise that and be a part of it, come out and promote it and have your families and and people there. Uh there will be uh music there. They will
have uh vendors. They'll have games. They'll have giveaways uh prizes and more. [clears throat] So this is sponsored by somebody cares and good news and light the world and the community. And so any part that we could
continue to lift up the community and our businesses would be great. And so that stuff's already been scheduled. Uh they'll work it out. Uh and I've already got my permit in and they've got their permits and checks. So we'll just uh go from there. I don't want to take up a
lot of time because I know we got a lot of stuff on the agenda, but I I'm grateful and we get good feedback from everybody. So, I know you guys have events. So, as much as I could help you and advertise as well, this is what I want to be hands-on with you guys and we
could even bring other people in to try to maybe sponsor and stuff like that. I was talking about with the meeting I had today with some other places. So, thank you. >> Thanks, Danny. That's all signups I have. By show of hands, anybody else like to speak? Okay, now I close public comment. [clears throat] And moving on
to comments from city manager. Pass it over to Mr. Claring for his comments. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Staff and I met with Mike Moore of the Southern Group to assist with the LMS HMGP roof retrofit grant for city hall PD and the fire department. Per FDM, it
was recommended that we see if our lobbyists can assist in moving this project forward. Information has been sent to m Mr. Morphers review. Uh we've been working on this grant for two two and a half years. Um trying to get this done. It's basically re- roofing the
building here which is part of city hall the police department um the fire department and um we're just we're at a stalemate now. So even Fem has said you know see if the lobbyist himself can get us some assistance in moving this
forward. staff and I met with Black Mountain Software, uh, BMS, our primary accounting and utility billing software, to discuss implementing online payments directly through BMS. Currently, the city uses a third party processor for credit card payments, and those payments must be manually entered into the BMS
program. The switchover will apply payments directly to a customer account in real time. So, basically, right now, we receive these payment payment statements from the third party processor. So then our staff has to go ahead and enter them into you know into Black Mountain into the utility account
and then you know obviously has to get reconciled to the bank. This will eliminate a lot of manual data of entry and you know hopefully free up staff to work on other projects. Is this something they they just now started offering or something or >> Well, [clears throat] they've on their
own. Yes, on their own. They this entire time the third party has been integrated with the Black Mountain. >> Um, you know, as part of just being the portal people would pay, but the problem is is that it's being a third party, we'd still have to manually enter payments. >> Now, it'll be completely streamlined.
>> Good. >> And um this has been a long time coming. the the last city manager to approved the third party was Tom O'Neal. So, it's been several several years. So, it's good. This is a great upgrade uh for the same software that we've had for a long
time. Public works and storm water departments are finalizing the landscaping portion of the storm water wall replacement project um at Richie Drive and Wilin Street. The work completed at this corner has revitalized aging infrastructure in the area of the city. Um, I want to commend uh Daryl uh
Daryl Rose and his team. Um, pretty much all the guys are all basically working on this project. Um, along with SC Signature who finalized the construction of the wall. Um, I've been by there several times. It's, you know, it it was an eyes sore for a very long time, plus
a major safety concern. Um, I I think it's a this is a a great corner now for the city and hopefully we can do more projects like this. Construction of the Chick-fil-A restaurant is still progressing. The demolition of the site is tenatively scheduled for August with construction to follow. Staff will keep
the city council apprised as we learn more. Staff met with McKim and McCree on Thursday, June 9th to meet with the architect and finalize specific design items such as fixtures and hardware, flooring, painting, things like that. A council presentation for the final
product will be presented in an August meeting. Uh the meeting went very well. We've kind of pretty much did all the final touches. Um, all the final brush strokes. Um, I George, our IT manager was with us. Um, he finalized he's in
the process of finalizing his touches as well. So, we're going to have a finalized water plant project for you. Three of the four lift station generators part as part of the HMGB grant project have been set at the lift station locations and are awaiting [clears throat] final connections. City
Council will be presented with a property purchase for the Oler Street generator placement at tonight's CRA meeting. So, three three of the four are in place. We're just waiting for the final switches and connections to be made and then we'll be discussing street. The fire department will conduct medical director training this week and
the fire chief attended the Florida Fire Chief's Conference. The fire department also performed two water rescues on Friday the 10th. Both rescues were successful and no major injuries and both boat both boats were utilized for the rescues. Um once again I want to commend the fire department for the work
they did. Um it was really hazardous conditions out there. Um but they they managed to get both rescues taken care of. Uh police department in coordination with several agencies across five southeastern states kicked off the southern slowdown traffic initiative to
reduce speed related crashes, injuries, and fatalities. This is a week-long campaign that occurs annually in the summertime. Obviously, because of traveling and everything like that, all these departments coordinate for this type of initiative. [clears throat] I want to introduce our new human
resources specialist, Carrie Rano, if you'd like to stand, please. [applause] Uh she started with the city on Monday, June, uh July 6th. Uh Carrie comes from the private sector with 70 years of experience in human resources and staff looks forward to her expertise to
amplify this field. Um I just say in such a short amount of time she's integrated with multiple all department heads um myself you know several staff members and she's already bringing a lot of you know good things HR related to the table. So I'm really looking forward
to working with her and everyone else. >> Welcome. our upcoming meetings. Um, we have a 72026 events committee [clears throat] meeting. That's this following Monday. Um, we have a 72126 PBA negotiated meeting. Um, we have a 728 planning and
zoning meeting that'll be at 1:30 in the afternoon, followed by our regular scheduled council meeting and CRA meetings on 28th. Um, this Friday, I'll be out of the office, but will be available by phone and email. I have um I have doctor's appointments that I'm going to be
attending to and then um I'm going to attempt to take a short vacation [laughter] from July 29th to Saturday, August 1st. Um I am currently discussing with staff on who will fill in fill in for me during that time and I will have that update for council soon.
Um on my final note, the city the city clerk has created a calendar for the city council to review and decide upon setting our workshops and um confirming our budget hearings. Um, we will get this calendar to the to both Councilman Huard and uh, Councilwoman
Burke to to view and confirm, but I kind of wanted to talk about this so we can lock in this. Um, I [clears throat] technically right now I have uh, I have listed three workshops that I would like to start start with and then of course going into our um, uh, into our hearings
which are going to be in September. So, our first workshop is going to be on the 30th, Thursday, July 30th. Um, I wanted to see if council was amendable to schedule that. >> Yes.
>> Yeah. Should be good. >> What time? >> Six. I assume I assume the same time with six. Would that work with your schedule? >> Okay, that works great. >> Lisa 6 o'clock on 30th for the workshop. That go with you? >> What are we talking about?
I'm looking at my calendar now. >> It'll be our first budget workshop and CI, you know, mainly CIP [clears throat] items. >> 6 p.m. >> Yep. >> Yep. Okay. >> Good.
>> Yeah, 6 p.m. That's not a problem. >> Okay. Okay. Do that one. >> Okay. Um, our our next possible workshop is that we have Tuesday the 4th of August. >> I will be out of town on that week.
>> Okay. Uh, would that be the entire week you're out? >> The entire week. >> All right. We can do it the 13th of Thursday. >> League of Cities. >> That's on the 13th. >> Yeah, that's that following week. Yeah. >> Okay. >> Both us be out that week.
>> I'll build the next week. We do have one scheduled on the 18th, which I was going to confirm. Um, I'd like to I'd like to squeeze in three if possible. Um, I mean, worst case, we could do
we can do the 27th, [snorts] Thursday the 27th >> for the for the third >> the third workshop. >> What time? >> 6 o'clock. >> Okay, I can do that. That one's iffy for me, but probably.
But I But I have appointment that day if I get out in time. >> And then what? The second second one be on the the 18th. >> Yeah. And then our second one will be on the 18th. And then we'll do the one on the 27th. >> So we're moving the 4th to the 27th.
>> Yes. >> At 6. >> At 6. And the 18th. Is 6 o'clock. Okay. For the 18th? >> Yeah. And that's a budget meeting? [clears throat and cough] >> Yeah. That'll be a budget workshop. >> The only thing with that third one on the 27th that puts you a week out from the actual first hearing. Is that cause
an issue with staff? >> I think I think by that third [clears throat] workshop, we should pretty much have this kind of locked up. I'm you know uh if if we're having issues come our second workshop, we'll we'll see what we can do uh for the 20th. So, if anything, if we want to
tenatively just keep the 20th in mind in case we have to move this up. >> Yeah, let's just tentatively. Are the are the hearings uh hard set? Do they got to be the 3rd and the 17th? Can we push those the 10th and 24th if we need to?
>> To the opposite of the school board. >> So, yeah. So, those have to be where they're at. Okay. Yeah, because she confirms that with the school board when they are. So, >> so at this point here, we're the 18th and 27th of August, right? >> Yes. >> Yes. So 30 July, 18th, and 27th
>> with um with the 20th being a backup on August 20th, just in case. >> Yeah. >> All depending on where we get on the 18th, which I'm I'm feeling [clears throat] we'll be moving along fine because we also have, you know, don't forget we have council meetings in between.
>> So, uh if we need to move a specific budget discussion or a specific item, I will move that to a to one of our regular meetings and make that an item to discuss. So, I'm trying to coordinate with staff what particular items we're going to be talking about via the
workshops and the regular scheduled meetings. So, and then I think that's good. Um, yeah. So, our hearings are going to have to be on the 3rd and the 17th of September. Um, so while we're talking about schedule and that that week that city
council meeting on the 11th, both me and Chris will be out. Um, no, no, we'll be here for that. We leave at night. That's right. >> Right. >> Yeah. So, we're good. Never mind. Okay. Okay. And that's all I have.
>> So, the 18th is a workshop and the 27th is a workshop. >> Yep. And July 30th. >> And July 30th. Yep. >> July 30th is not a problem. I've got that. I just was You said 30th or 31st? >> 30th. Thursday.
>> Thursday. July 30th. Okay. Um, yeah, 27. Uh, see, the 27th is not a problem. The 18th shouldn't be a problem. So, I'll put it down. We'll see how that
goes. I guess you said, right? >> Yeah. And we got the 20th as a backup, too, if we need [clears throat] >> Okay. 20th would probably be better for me, but we'll see how it goes. >> If I may ask, your budget hearings on
the September 3rd and September 17th, are they starting at 6? >> I think after 5:30, right? >> Yeah, to be 5:30. >> I'm sure they're the timing. I don't [clears throat] have a conflict on the 3rd because every town obviously is doing this about the same time. So, I will talk with my colleagues and we'll
figure it out. I'll let you know. Okay. So I will be remote on the 17th >> of September. >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. >> Do you want me to do you want me to notate on the final calendar a tenative date for August 20th?
>> Okay. >> Yes. If you see it >> block it. Yeah. >> That's it. >> All right. Thanks. Uh, next up, comments from the city attorney. Pass it to uh >> I have I have no comments. The um legal
matter [laughter] tracker is attached. It's updated as of whenever I I this to Ashley for the deadline to get it to you. So, it might be some things that are that are uh updated a little bit. Um but if you have any specific questions, of course, I'm happy to answer them.
>> As of last Monday. Thank you. >> Yeah. Where's that at? It's if you click on comments from city attorney >> right after that. >> No, there he is. Did anybody have anything to >> ask about on this?
I will let you know that we um [clears throat] S and Veronica and I met today to talk about the special magistrate abatement issue and we will be bringing that forward and now that we have all your um budget dates down, we'll try it that works for us and send that to you guys
to find a date for a workshop. >> The um the nonprofit um funding uh where is that on here? See the policy. >> Yeah, >> it should call the donation policy. That
one on the bottom. >> There it is. Okay. Yeah. Donation policy. So, uh when when we expect to have that >> that would be the question for that gentleman next to you ready to go on an
agenda. >> Can it be on next agenda? >> I Yeah, I have a place I I think we have a placeholder. We have a placeholder for it already. So we can move forward next meeting. Okay. Perfect. Think I got anything else?
Um Oh, well I see. So I was going to mention my comments, but uh on the interim city manager contract, [clears throat] uh Sal and I met met today and I think we've got everything worked out. So we should have that ready by next meeting as well. So, give you guys an update on
that. Well, kind of have you. [laughter] >> It sounded promising. Anyway, >> there's light at the end of the tunnel. >> I was trying to negotiate a [laughter] parking spot. >> Actually, I would love an awning. Yeah, we're going to really We're
talking about that >> bubble for his >> a bubble. That would work. >> Yeah, >> we might be able to work that out. [laughter] You did mention that earlier, but uh >> have to get a bill approved as a building official. >> That's right. Yeah, that's tough. That's a tough one there. >> If it's on the table.
>> Okay. Um Okay, [snorts] that's all you had. >> Yeah. Okay. Move on. Comments from boards committees. Any boards committee comments? Did CC meet or anybody? >> We coming just general stuff first. Um so the events committee um we met last
night uh we meet every Monday night um seems like um so we finalized the sponsorship levels for the mayor's ball come up on September 11th um which obviously we need to have that uh policy in place because of tunnel towers um
support um the sponsorship level I'll go share those with you [clears throat] and I I kudos to to Kim Larry Sal's wife uh she always is very creative on her on her name so the the presenting sponsor is the big apple at 10,000. Um that that sponsorship level will get only going to
do one um at that level and they'll get a table of 10 at the at the ball um and they'll get a full page ad in the program. Uh then the next level is the Times Square table sponsor. That's at $5,000 level. Um they'll get a table of
eight included in that and it's a table sponsor and um they'll have a 25%. So basically you have a full page and you have four per page. So one of those 25% quadrants in there um would would be for the table sponsors. Then the next level is the Lady Liberty at 2500. They uh get
four tickets to the event. Uh and of course all these get recognition as well but uh I'm just kind of going over the the tickets I guess four tickets at the event and they'll get uh there'll be eight per page of those. So they'll get 12 and a half% ad on on a page. And then
the lights and sirens sponsor which is 1250. Um and those are will have basically 12 for page. So 33 three3 they'll get a small portion of that for their ad and they also get two tickets to the event. And then the final two levels are the Broadway business booster
at $500. No tickets are involved in that and the yellow cab sponsor at 250. Um we talked about the Broadway business booster. They would have their name in the program with their logo and then the yellow cab sponsor at 250. They would just have the business name. That's kind of how that sponsorship will lay out.
Um, that package is being finalized and should be ready sometime this week to go out. Um, the ticket prices we set at $125 individual and a table of eight. If you want to buy a full table of eight, uh, they give you 10% off, so it' be
$900 instead of a,000. So, and that's kind of where we're at on the ball stuff. So, we're um obviously looking at uh the DJ options, the um uh the decorations and stuff. So, we're kind of kneedeep in that stuff, but that we did
finalize the sponsorship packet and the ticket prices. So, look for those to come out soon. Um any other boards committees in general? Okay. Uh so, we have two appointments. So, first up, item one, appointment of members to board committee, citizens advisory committee, citizens advisory committee.
I'll pass it to Mr. Carrie for introduction. >> Actually, I was going to hand this to city clerk. Actually, [laughter] my catch me off guard. Thank you for that. Okay. So, this is the appointment of Vanessa Phillips to the citizens
advisory committee. She had submitted an application through the CAC process. Um, and she did come to attend a CAC meeting, but unfortunately that meeting was cancelled. They didn't have forms. She did show to to speak about her
interest. Um, but she didn't get to to speak to anybody. So, um, she I believe she is here this evening. I don't know. I can't put a face to a name, but she's not here. Um, Vanessa Phillips was interested in joining the CAC committee, so it's up for your discussion and
direction. >> If I may, thank you. Um, if I may, I will remind you that the resolution for the CAC said that your appointments shall be based on, not that you shall appoint, but your appointment shall be based on a CAC recommendation. So, she's interested. I think that needs to that
first part still needs to happen. >> Okay. >> Because that's what your resolution requires. CAC needs to make the recommendation. >> Okay. Okay. So, I guess we'd kick that back to the CAC to to action first. >> Okay. And which the next CAC's would be I
guess August first week. August >> first Thursday August. >> August 6. >> Okay. Uh next up is item number two, appointment of members to boards, committees, historical preservation committee. Pass it over to Ashley for introduction. Um, so the next one is for
Miss Caroline Gonzalez. Um, she did let me know that she was not able to attend tonight's meeting. Um, there is no special direction for historical preservation committee, but she is interested in joining the committee. >> Okay. Um, so we'll open up the floor to motion and our discussion on uh,
>> make a motion we approve Caroline Gonzalez of the Historical Preservation Committee. >> Okay. >> Hold on a second. Um, isn't it full? >> Oh, that's a good question. >> Open position. Oh, okay. How many >> a second? How many we have on there?
>> Uh, four and it's five or >> did someone resign? >> Yes, someone resigned. >> Okay. >> Who who resigned? >> Look at it again. I'll have to go. >> Wasn't that the lady from town? >> I don't know. I didn't know anybody resigned.
>> We had a lady from town that I got to look. Should we double check before we actually open position have open? Okay. All right. So, get a motion to second. Any further discussion? Any public comment? See put vote on favor say five saying I. I
>> I >> I opposed. Motion carries. Okay. Next up is consent agenda. So, look for a motion to approve the July 14th, 2026 consent agenda. >> I've got a question about the consent agenda.
>> Okay. Um, under the fence outlet, Olner Park says our original budget was a million dollars. That's what trying to understand. >> That's the budget line item that it came out of. >> Okay. That's where the money came. >> That's where the money came out. It's
coming out. >> Motion to approve the consent agenda as presented. >> Second. >> Okay. Motion second. Any further discussion? Any public comment? See, put the vote on favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion carries.
Okay. Next up, we have Oh, so next up is public hearing. That public hearing was uh was stayed for now. Um the building department and uh the the appellent, they uh had a discussion they were going
to grant additional 60 days to um work some things out. So, we're going to put that on hold for now. Um, next up is council business. Item number five, approval of phase two of dredging project which includes 60% design drawings FDP and USACE permit
applications by Stantech Inc. Pass it to Mr. Lair for introduction. [cough] [clears throat] >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um as per our workshop that we had on on you know for the dredging Stantech has completed phase one services for the city of Port Richie which involved evaluating
selected residential navigable canals waterways and a pond west of US 19 in Pasco County. Phase one included the hydro hydrographic and parametric surveys, volume analysis and submerged resources survey, geotechnical
investigations, regulatory agency pre-application meetings with FA FD and the USACE and a feasibility memo with dredging recommendations and and proposed next steps. Phase two, as proposed, will focus on advancing the project by preparing 60% drawings,
submitting FD and USC permit applications, and responding to agency requests for additional information. The scope also includes further hydrographic and seaggrass surveys for additional dredge areas designated by the city council at our June 18th dredging workshop.
In the future, phase three services may include final design documents, bidding assistance, contractor procurement, and construction inspection. Details and scope of phase three will be discussed with the city following the completion of phase two. So basically um with the
changes that we discussed at the dredging workshop on June 18th um looking for looking for a motion to approve the phase 2 scope of services from Stantech for $149,610. and just to provide some additional um
information. Obviously, we were at about 105 [clears throat] something and then there was some additional um places they looked into and that's what's driving it up to the another 50 basically and those are in these those photos. Um looks like page
72 coming off Harbor Point that additional I guess the red hatching, right? That's the addition that they're going to do studies on. Yeah. >> And then um basically the the next page on 73 that would be the the red hatching
there to the west of Waterfront Park as well as along the business um district down there down to the uh the ramp area. All that additional area and that's I think that's all the additions, right? >> Uh Councilman Humber did send a he he
did send a map which is included in this packet. Um, I've conferred with Matthew Matthew Start and this um this pretty much covers any all the scope that he indicated on his map. Is is Matthew with us tonight? No, he's not on. Okay, >> that's fine.
>> Yeah. Is this I guess this is the map here that you talking about? >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So, the >> in front of Waterfront Park >> and Yep. Covers all his his areas that he was highlighting. So, >> um Hey, Bob, could you talk a little bit about these additional areas? Uh,
I get the um the one there by Harbor Point and I also get the one uh there in front of the business district. Um, but I'm not sure about the the waterfront park right there to the west of that. Well, the Harper Point area, I went out
there before I left and um I was concerned about some rocks, but uh with the drawing that they have, and I'm sure they they checked that out, the channel there is very wide. It's deep all the way up through there. So, what they have drawn would will initially will work.
Um, after when I looked at it, um, I thought they were going to go all the way to the channel, which was a lot farther than the west side of that channel where it was just around that dock you'd be in in. So, so anyway, that will work. We just need to put post there when it's done, which is not a big
deal. I'll get with uh, >> operations director and we can get that done once dredge. As far as the area in front of us, >> I need to understand that. >> So So did you are you saying that we don't need the additional red hatching that is in there? >> I I don't think so. No.
>> Okay. Okay. So that out too. >> All I submitted was the part in front of Whiskey Joe's and Harbor or Waterfront Park. >> Okay. >> Um because I went I looked at that and and I feel I mean I think they they discovered something else. I think it's
fine because the channel's very wide and it's deep all the way up to that point where they had their line. >> Okay. >> And that and you just have to post it so that the people that live there know where the channel is because there's rocks on either side of socially. >> I appreciate you going out and and and
kind of looking at that area because I was I was wondering if there was anything that needed to be done between there and the channel. That was a good call out. So So based on your analysis, we can we can eliminate that portion. Correct. >> Yeah, it it would be it would be fine. Yes. Even at low tide, I think for the vessels that get in there, there's
plenty of clearance. Initially, I thought it would be better to to run it all the way from the west side out around that dock. But with the width of the channel and how deep it is in there, that probably would be more efficient, and I think once we mark it, I think the owners would be happy and satisfactory
with with the dredging there. >> Okay. [clears throat] As far as Whiskey Joe's, that's a pile of sand that's been piled up all around where the casino boat went in and out all the time and and people run around there at low tide all the time. >> Mhm.
>> And it is a concern that little area there. Um the rest of it is kind of maintained by traffic. it it's kind of shallow in there, but uh unless we do something drastic with big boats, I don't think there's any any need to do
any more dredging except for that in that area. Waterfront Park. >> I need to be clear about what that area means. Does it mean the whole thing? >> So, he's he's So, if you look at the very southern part as you get close to Whiskey Joe's, right, like the first from the bottom, the first three hatches,
>> right? Excuse me. >> And and and I agree there there is a a very low spot there that uh probably would be good to be addressed. Um >> can you can you bring up my screen? >> But you're saying all the other all the other spots over there in front of the
where the shrimp boats are that that doesn't need to be reg. >> So well so what he's saying is is that's okay. Um obviously it's so you got to hug along that shoreline. >> You do. >> Uh that's and like I said the shrimp boats and stuff go out there. So that
stays pretty much deep because there there's a lot of traffic going through there. Um so I don't know that we necessarily have to do anything there cuz they've actually got extended out. I mean normally you wouldn't go across that area. You would come down and then go out to uh kind of in the center of that
>> share screen. >> Go ahead. Can you see your screen, Bob? >> Yeah. Let me uh click on share and uh I'll bring up So I have a circle in yellow. Oh, you just sharing your map. I could
probably do that for you if you want. >> Yeah, I have uh the areas that I concerned that I I >> If you want, I can share that. I got in the packet. Let me share it. >> Okay. Yeah, just that just it's a small area, but it's it's it's you can stand there at low tide. It's that's really bad.
All right. Fair. >> [clears throat] >> Yes. So, you're talking about this little yellow circle here. >> Yep. >> Which is like I said, those first three red hatches that they had in there. And then above that is is along the where the you know, long as you cut this,
you're good. >> I was going to ask Matthew if he was here. I don't know how wide this channel is going to be up there coming out of uh Miller's Bayou. said the first four hatches there. If you're going to hit where that what a white boat is there on the right, you know, the top of that there, you'd have
to get into four hatches to really reach that, not three. >> Let's see. >> I don't know. I don't know what you're looking at there. >> I'm looking at the map on page 73. >> I'm going back to about >> That's a city dock, isn't it? Not a boat.
>> Yeah. Well, that's >> to capture that thing. B was talking about you almost have to capture the the the >> majority of it's kind of in in the first three, but yeah, I guess it goes a little bit past the the third hatch. There's a little inlet there [cough and clears throat] by Whiskey Joe's,
but that third hatch would capture all that. So, I don't I don't know if you need to go any further really. No, it's it's deep all it's pretty deep up through there and and there's not really >> a casino boat sits there or we used to anyway >> and it's not going to be any any real
traffic in there that I that I know of. But even if there is there's there's there's the water is not bad up in through there. Uh it's actually shallow in front of our dock at the at the city dock in front of Nicks, but it's deep enough for boats to get in and out of there. So, [sighs]
with traffic, it'll it'll maintain. As long as the casino boat's not back in there, we wouldn't have any problem with it, I don't believe. But that's a pile of sand in front of Whiskey Joe's. And it's very, very shallow. People run around every day in there. So, Bob, if we were just to add, does Can you see my
screen? >> Uh, hang on a minute. >> Yes, I see it. >> Okay. So, if we was just to do these this first three hashes right there, >> actually, you can see right where
Billy's house is in the dock at Whiskey Joe's. Go straight out there. Move your marker straight left. No, come down a little bit. Right. Just to the left a little bit. Go to the left. Go west. Right there. And go down just a in front
of Whiskey Joe's. Right. That's good. That Yep. That's it. A little bit right there. That's it. You can see it. You can see where it's shallow right there. It's like an egg shape. >> Yeah. >> That's it. >> So, are you are you saying we just need to have them
do that area, not all this to the >> right? They were This is something I initially drew up was all of this area. And that's He said that's just that's a lot of lines. It's a lot of money. So I said, "No need to do all that." Then
this is this is a very concerning area right here in front of Whiskey Joe's. These areas the the shrimp boats get in and out of there all the time. As long as the people from Miller Bar can get to that, they'll be fine as well. Now, if you guys want to make this
channel wide down there in front of Hooters and uh that area there, that would be good. But, you know, one more line. I just don't see a need to dredge it all out. >> I think as long as we have a a viable path along here like we have.
>> I agree. >> And then and we and if we're going to have them come out and just do this line here, I mean, this this whole sandbar area right here, probably wouldn't hurt to go ahead and [clears throat] given all the traffic that's coming in there for the marina and whatnot. Um, like I
said, if if you if you mark it well, um, to make sure you keep people, you know, to the west of that area, [clears throat] you're probably good. >> It's still two vessels wide at least, right, Bob? >> We're uh
>> Well, if if they take out that sandbar in front of Whiskey Joe's or dredge right there, it's still with that done, it's going to still be wide enough for two vessels to pass opposite directions. Correct. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> We We probably just need to make sure
that this is marked that don't go any further east. >> Well, it kind of that kind of denies Whiskey Joe's boat traffic kind of. They have to go all the way around that when the tide's down. Um
>> Oh, yeah. Because they got docks right here, don't they? Yeah, that's right. >> Yes, >> they have a lot Yeah, they got a lot of docks getting into there anyway. So, the only way they could get in is they'd have to pass all that then come back into it, right? >> They'd have to come down by Port Richie Marina or go over [clears throat] by uh
up by the boat ramp. >> I mean, we could we could do that whole area right there. I mean, our water is just sand. And I'm telling you, all that is is sand, too. Not there's no shells, no rocks, nothing. Just sand. >> I think we probably just include that like the first three hatches there to
kind of clear all that sandb bar. >> Right. You can see it. Just just just break that down and then you're going if as as the city builds you got more boat traffic that won't be an issue because if you don't it will be an issue. >> Yeah. And this along here you know that
could be a little wider. >> Just as wide as they can make it would be great if they wanted to do that. That's not on their chart to do though. They have it coming down and coming in this way. So realistically, if they come
out and go north and get in the channel, they can come out that way, too. So, uh, it's it's it's not a big concern for me. U, I've had my boat up through there many of times. >> Yeah. >> Without without a lot only low tide. But if they dredge this out, uh, even at low
tide, any boats through there will still be able to get out. Mhm. >> And so the other >> the other area is just in front of waterfront park. Obviously no there now. I guess that was your idea for for docks maybe possibly in the future which
>> possibly and all I was all I all we really need to do there is if is the channel the miller by make it three channels wide. This is 200 feet up from if you want to put a dock from where
Cancun Beach is up towards Waterfront Park. Be nice to have that deep if someone wants to put docks over there in the future. >> I want Do we not I thought we had restrictions on docks going in there.
>> That's I'm talking about state waters. I'm not talking about anything near Waterfront Park. You got restrictions on you got restrictions on this uh channel between Waterfront Park and the district too. That's a storm drain. And in the in
the FTC, it's strictly forbids any dredging in that channel in that storm drain. That's strictly for storm drain and they don't want any dredging in there at all. So you go to pull a permit that'll probably get denied. However, it is a storm drain. It does need to be
cleaned. Uh it is shallower on the west end of that than the east end. So, the water flow is not proper, especially at low tide. And I think it should be cleaned out just a couple feet. And that way you can still get boats up in there. And uh and if you want to put a bridge over it, you're not going to get big
boats in there anyway. >> So, this area here is your biggest concern, correct? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Yep. That's Yeah. If you make it just a little bit wider there, uh north of uh >> I would agree with that.
Well, then I'm not I'm talking 400 feet 200 two two 200 foot channels just to make that that uh a little bit wider there coming out of Miller's body >> ground going through there pretty easily. >> You got you you have to make sure you're on course for sure.
>> Low tide wake you up real quick. >> Well, so and and they haven't even addressed that in this. Did they address that in the original? I'm thinking they probably did. Was that on the original? >> They they they addressed Miller's Bayou and they had a line coming down um and
right at the where it comes right into the channel there uh just a little west of the shrimp boats. >> Do we have the original scope in here? >> Yeah, I I put on both. You're talking about the first one for the >> what they for the that they already have
done. >> Oh, no. I don't have that in this packet. Um, what meeting was that on? >> Our workshop was the 18th of June.
>> 18th of June. >> I'm trying to get Matthew Star on. Has Has he >> He hasn't replied now. >> Okay. Why is our calendar go backwards? Um, how do you see it's under
pass? There we go. >> What was the date again? June 18th. June 18th. City Council No out here. Hold up. Can we not just have the city manager add if we didn't get on the first one through there?
>> Well, I just want to see what they I mean, yeah, but I want to see what we actually >> just widen it up a little bit. Maybe twice as wide as what it shows in the black. Well, they may have already studied that enough. See, they Yeah, they >> they Yeah, they know what's in there.
>> Yeah. So, they've already done the work that they need to do there. >> Yeah. But that is that is that what he's talking about? >> Yeah. Right here. That's it. That's that spot right there. That's a whole map now. >> Okay. Good. >> Um, so the only thing additional would be this right down here by Whiskey Joe's. Those >> Yeah.
>> Initial three. We're good over at Harbor Point >> and we're good over here. So, we just need that little bit there by Whiskey Joe's added. So, it' be 105 plus whatever that little piece is. >> All right. So, we got to modify he's got to modify that quote. Um I know we were had an issue with time constraint, but I
will talk to him first thing tomorrow morning and see what our timeline looks looks like. See if I can >> Matthew H Matthew has all this information. Sent it to him, right, S? >> Yes. Yeah. >> Yep. So, he's he's aware of all the Whiskey Joe's area and Waterfront Park
area. So we are not doing anything in front of waterfront park. >> Yeah, he's aware of it. He's he's got that information. I guess he does. >> I don't think we're saying another. So do we need to do that by waterfront park? I'm thinking not. Right. As long
as that as long as you got that channel going between Miller's Bayou and the and the river, we're good. Right. Well, like I said, if you want to if you if somebody wants to put docks along there, u then you have to do this whole process just for that area or or you
wouldn't be able to do it in the future. >> Well, we say somebody I mean, nobody would be doing that other than us or the state or somebody, right? >> I I don't know who might want to do it, but we may want to put city docs up there. Who knows? in the future, maybe five years from
now. >> I just don't know. Like I said, it's only there's two 200 foot runs. >> Yeah. Do you >> Same with as the as the channel that comes through there. >> Do do you think that at that point if we were thinking about
doing that that we could always commission them to go out and do the study at that point in time and take care of it then as opposed to get in now or you think? >> Well, I don't know. I think Matthew Star needs to have all this information um in order to declare everything. But
no, that's up to you guys. I'm just presenting what I think we should do now while we're doing it. Get it done while we're doing it because it's it's not that much more cost to do this right now than it would be later in the future. I don't want to kick ourselves in the butt down the road saying, "Man, we only
would have done that. That would have been nice." >> Well, so we we we're at 100 and this takes us to 150. So, it's a 50% increase. >> So, those two channels cost $50,000 to what? Study or permit or what? >> Well, that so they would basically they
have to do the same thing that they did that we paid the what $400 and some thousand dollars for for the whole area. That 50,000 is covering those additional areas to get them up to the same level and then moving forward. >> So, it's probably 20 20 and then 10 for Harbor. So that's probably there's
probably $20,000 increments there in front of >> Yeah. We're not doing Harbor Point. >> Yeah. Right. >> And we're not doing all that area. >> Yeah. >> All that area that he had marked on the west side of Waterfront Park. We're not doing that either. And we're not doing that whole area. >> I'm not against cleaning up in front of
Waterfront Park there just because it is sandy and during low tides it's real shallow, you know. Um and to study it now is 20,000. What's going to cost study later? I mean, when when we go to get the dredging done in a year or so, whenever that happens, and
we talk to the dredgers, can you just make that wide for us and see what happens if you want to do that? But I don't think that's not $50,000 for those two runs in front of Waterfront Park. >> No, it's not. >> It's probably 10,000 maybe at the most. >> It's 50 for the whole thing we dropped
>> because they they've studied that already. They they you mean it's all the same. All that area there is just sand and small rocks. >> I mean the the way I think about it is obviously we need to take care of the um around the
residential and all that we have now who who utilize the the waterways. There's there's nothing right now going on by Waterfront Park. Um, and obviously once we once we move forward, we've got to actually spend the money to do the work
to dredge those out. So to me, that's a that's a nice to have. >> It's just the testing having it in place right now being able to extend that testing. >> Well, I don't even know that as far down the road that would be in a in a project if we did anything that it would even be
viable. >> I feel like living on Miller's Bay for over 10 years, that's a dumping zone for sand. comes right down the river and it blows up in there. That just goes like this and coming through there is it's tight. It's really tight through there. You got to hug that whole wall where the
shrimp boats are, you know. >> Well, you're still going to have to do that though. The only thing that with the waterfront park is you get closer to Waterfront Park, >> right? Which we've got some thoughts and dreams about we're going to do a waterfront park, too. What about people rolling in there and throwing their
anchor rod listening to you know some music whatever you know that kind of thing or it's not >> that's that's a staging area for parades too a lot of those group sit in there for the parades >> I think I'm okay with spending the money
on on getting the skirt stud there so at least know what's going on >> did did s talk to Matthew about that just the cost on those that when it so on the cost on what specifically, Bob?
>> What I sent you the two the two lines at Waterfront Park in that little area. >> Yeah, I talked to him about that. He said that that was already incorporated in in his updated scope. >> Okay. Well, that's already done then. Okay. >> But I mean, if we're taking we're taking the section of Harbor Point out because
which was included in his scope, then it's going to be less than the one than the proposed the proposal he has now. We we decided that that the increase was 50,000 for what we're looking at here in red. Right? So, if you break down the space between what's in front of uh the
boat ramp and what's in front of Waterfront Park and Harbor Point, you're you know, you're easily 50,000 brief one of these sections here in front of the boat ramp in front of Harbor Point. I'm sorry, 20,000 brief and then 10 for Harbor Point. Har Point's much smaller
piece. I mean to be honest with you, you you see that if you look at the middle where the the canal goes along the uh back side of Gild Dogs there, that would be better served to survey
than alongside Waterfront Park, probably. >> Well, that all depends whether you live in Miller Valley or not. >> Well, yeah, by you're going to be coming out that that is your track coming out. >> I I know. I mean, you you've also got that big sand mound there to the west
that you see, too. >> I agree. >> So, again, you're providing a path for boats to go in and out of there. You're going to have shallow areas. I mean, you're not going to abate all the shallow areas around. >> What do you want to do? Just can the whole thing, not do anything? >> No. Three hash marks.
>> We we could we can spin full 150 and do what's on here. >> Can you can you uh bring up my screen? Yeah, the same one. >> Yeah. Well, I think I want to spend 20 and clean in
front of >> We can do that. >> That's what I think >> if that's what it is. I mean, >> I think it's 20 >> probably roughly this one here. >> One second. Look, I got it up. >> That Bob's drawing. >> That's Bob's drawing. Yeah. >> Can Can you see it?
>> Yeah. Two red lines. >> Yep. I just got two red lines next to the Miller's by you and then I've got the little yellow part there and that's it. This is not a big concern, but I agree. Uh if we just have the dredgers just Well, they're going to come down here
and they're gonna come across here. Uh, if they want to make that as wide as possible would be great. I mean, it's all sand. It's not a big deal. They may feel the same thing about this. They got the the main channel from Miller Valley comes right through here. All they're doing is making it wider. And if that's
possible, that'd be great. That's it. I don't see where that's $50,000 at all. A matter of fact, with Matt Matthew was here, you >> Well, because they're not This is not your red lines there. What is is what's translated to their diagram is basically all this area
uh around that basically entire lowlying area. It's not I mean if you're just talking about widening up here by the point coming down here that's that's already been studied. They probably get that in what they've already done. >> The picture that they show here and I might look at the screen and tell what's on my screen here shows Sanger through
there. >> Yeah. There he is. >> So the point see >> Yep. He he mentioned all of that as sand, >> right? And I was just concerned if if this is how wide this channel coming down Miller's body was going to be. If
it's 20 foot, then we might want to do this. If it's 50 or 60 feet wide, then we may just need to just make one line, make it a little bit wider. But I don't know how wide he's considering these channels to be. And I know he can't tell us exactly, but I'm assuming that
they're probably going to be around 40 feet. Well, this to me we would be potentially digging out the entire west side bank of Waterfront Park, which is not there from coming down from coming down.
>> This is all waterfront park. All this out here, this is this is it here. So, you got the state line right here. >> I'm just talking about this this area right here. >> For the record, one person. That was Bob. By the way, Bob, I'm sorry. >> Can I throw something at one of you
soon? Ashley hasn't asked me one time to turn my microphone on yet. I'm a little worried about Ashley. >> Go ahead, Bob. >> No, it's just it's just an extra lane next to what they're dredging depending on how wide that channel's going to be.
I didn't get any specifics or any even >> Do do you see the the black uh area? That's >> Yeah, this here. >> Can you see my screen? Well, they their line comes here and then there. >> The So the black outline is is what
they've already studied. >> Yeah. Correct. >> Okay. And so you had red lines about where it says varies on down in here. If I if I roll back to yours, you have two red lines, >> right?
>> Let me here. I'll draw them on there. >> Well, it's it's >> you get something about like this. The red line under varies is where it is. It's not varies. It's It's below the red line. It's It's not even all the way over. Did you
put up my screen? Cuz this isn't where I >> Here it is. >> Yeah. That's not what I proposed. >> Yeah. >> Right there. About halfway up Waterfront Park down to the point which is what I recreated pretty much on the on there on top of their map
right there. That's a little bit longer what I had. It's below the berries, but yeah. And I don't know how wide the channel is going to be. That was what I wanted. >> Okay. The channel is here where the black area is, >> right? >> Could we just >> That's not an exact.
>> Is that how wide is that? >> Well, I I I don't know. Is it Is there scale on that? >> Uh yeah. Um one inch is 300 foot. So,
I don't know if I have a tool on here. >> I don't I don't have Sam. Are we able to renew these seaggrass studies over and over and over again as long as you renew them? >> They don't expire as long as you keep renewing, right?
Um well they have a certain timeline where you have to just until you have to do a new study. Um I think that was what his concern was last time is getting this done before the current seaggrass study um expires. So
um like I said I've been trying to text him and and and see if I can get him on this call um so he can clarify a couple things. But yeah, the the most important part is is that just remember it's it doesn't hurt to
try and do as much areas as you want. It all depends on what we plan on dredging in, you know, actually removing later on. So, I I would I would consider covering as much bases as as we can. Um, if we're 100% on Harbor Point, that's
fine. But here, if we're just talking about, you know, >> $20,000 more, right? >> To me, when you're talking about a multi-million dollar project, $20,000 is not a lot of money. >> And and and for me, this waterfront park
shouldn't be six inches of water. It should be a waterfront park. like you know you got >> well you have a good point when you brought that up because let's say let's say you want to have events and you know similar to like Hooters and everyone else where people can pull up their boats and come out anchor and we put out
we put out a dock out there and do a you know elongated dock a lot more in the water with and breaking their neck you know >> right so there there are you the future can hold many different things and you guys can have different projects that you want to do but >> 20 grand invested let's get the
seaggrass study done right there So we or somebody in the future can make a decision what to do there with that information. >> The west side of the red line all the way down and then leaving the east side of the red line all the way down. That would broaden the channel quite a bit.
My concern is spending the money over here by Waterfront Park on the east side of the red line when all of those regulations around that park. We don't truly know what we can and
can't do yet. Um I don't believe that that's ever been finalized. That report's ever been finalized. And I'm not sure that we can actually be building docks. And >> like Bob said, once you get into the water, it's no longer the park's decision. It's states. Well, you got >> No, that's the case.
>> That's not the case. That is That park is so highly restricted and it has so many different >> restricts on it. Um >> we've had a pier there in the past. >> I was I was staying away from >> Since the pier is gone, I don't know
that we have the ability to put the pier back. had we maintained the pier the entire time from the way I read it. Um then we then we had the right to keep the pier. But since we let the pier go, I think we might have a problem as far as building it again. And until we know
that kind of stuff, I'd just say that it's not >> a reasonable idea to uh spend all this money right along the park side because the way I read all of those um restrictions, I just I don't see that we have a lot of leeway to build there. Whereas if we take the money and cut it
in half possibly by doing the west side of the red line, you have a broad channel all the way through that area. If we wind up dredging it, which I'd say, you know, why do it if we aren't going to dredge it, but look at all of that sand that
that clears out and how wide that is. >> I'm thinking of kids with fishing rods out on the bank. They're throwing their rod out there and dragging it through six inches of stuff. You know what I mean? versus having some water out there where they can actually fish. I right now we're we're going to spend 10 or 20. What's an extra $10,000 on a
multi-million dollar project? >> I'm sure we can dredge it. >> You You got vegetation all along that bank. So, you got a couple openings there that you could probably have somebody go down there. >> I've driven my boat over the property many times. I've never seen vegetation there. I've hit plenty of oyster beds. >> I'm talking about in a park. >> Yeah. I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about the red spots,
>> right? But you're talking about kids fishing off the bank, right? >> Yeah. Okay. Okay. Well, they're not going to be fishing across those vegetation areas. There's a couple little openings there. Outside of that, there's there's no real access over there. And And again, having a pier there is different from digging it all out, too.
>> What do you want to do, Eric? >> It's not up to me. I'm just I'm just saying >> say it's up to you. I just told you I want to do and you're shooting me down. So, I'm asking you, what do you want to do? >> I I don't I don't think we need to to mess with any of that. But I'm not I'm not opposed if you want to widen it up like Christina is saying to widen that
up there and maybe do the west side of that center red line coming down there if you want to have them come out because they're going to be out studying something anyway. But to do all that, I don't I don't know that we're ever going to do anything with that. >> I don't know that we can do anything with it. We could get the studies done and then find out that we really can't
do anything. It's very heavily restricted. >> It is convoluted as well. >> Yeah. Go ahead. And I would stay away from the east side of the of the main red line, vertical line, >> right? >> That's all. Yes. But if you come to the west side of that line, I would go up
>> uh you know, like I said, a couple hundred feet >> and make that Miller Bayou channel just wider. That's all. If you can make it 100 150 foot or 100 foot wide or 80 foot wide, >> you got a big plus something you got to work with. Then
>> how about we do what Christine says. take the wet the west side of that red line and and dread not check. We scan that. >> That's going to be that's going there that's going to be a lot of money to do that. >> At least I would say at least up to the varies section or the section right
above that which would dump you out into Miller's Bayou nicely with a wide opening in the will Miller's by >> if you do all the way up to the one right above varies. >> Now I will I will add this too because Matt said that
they've where they've studied along the black lines here. They probably have a little more than that from a width perspective. We may not have to do anything. They may able to expand that based on the the data they already have from going through there. >> They went they went all through overall
if we wind up dredging that rather than it getting narrow again over time. If you go broad it'll probably last longer and I'd just say go broad right there. >> Yeah, >> it is really narrow right there. I'm cool with that. >> West of the red line. Let's ride. >> I I can't imagine that when they did
that study along through there. That isn't that isn't wide enough to >> Are you okay with west of the red line? >> I don't know. We've I don't even do that. I think what they've got in here that they've studied. I think we just use the data they've had. We really really need Matt to to let us know on that because like I said, he said that they bled over.
>> But if we agree today, we agree then they could talk to Matt. So right now we can't get Matt on the phone. >> He's out of country. So there he tried to he's he's been trying to zoom in but he's out of country. I don't think he's getting >> well here's what we here's what we tell him to do I think is make sure and give
us give us an actual number. What's the width of this channel area there? I mean >> that's my that's my question too. How wide is it? Cuz I don't we don't need we don't need a 100 foot wide channel. >> No. Exactly. Right. So you want to know the width of the the existing black channel there. That's >> right. Exactly. What what is he studied
for in here? And if if in his study numbers if he has a little more width on both sides cuz he said he had >> obviously yeah you can see that >> I don't think you need to go over to the red line. I >> not not necessarily >> I can tell you the one inch on this map is 300 foot
from the black line to the red line that's probably inch and a half two inches. Keep keep in mind Miller's Bayou encompasses 90% of the waterfront we have in the city of Fort Richie. >> Well, I'm just wondering how long until
that sediment comes back. So, if we went very wide through there as the sediment returns, we're not in the same position as soon. So, since we have the per since we have the permit, go a little bit wider. >> Well, that's and this is the point I
want to try and make. Keep in mind this is just the permit to perform your surveys. >> This is nothing to do with how wide you want to make anything. >> Okay? >> This is just covering your basis. You may you may go to construction and just do within the black and then be like,
"Well, hold on. That's not wide enough. We've navigated. We've done it. We want to make it wider." >> If you go back to try and make it wider and you don't have it in the permit, you cannot do it. >> Yeah. So this is why it I I I I just we're talking about how wide we want it and deep and we got to take that out
take that part of the equation out right now. Right now we just want to focus how much of this area do we want to study and have that locked into the permit. You may not even do it at all but at least you have it on the permit. That's that's and and you still have that you could decide not to have it in the
permit but that's why I just want to clarify right now. This is nothing to do with construction. This is just basically covering all the bases that in case today five years from now because we're g the whole process is to keep renewing this same permit and not having
to rebuild it again. So when we all discussed this in, you know, in our few workshops, we want to cover as many bases as possible. >> That information was very helpful. Thank you. >> This does that. this covers all your bases and and like I said in in and and
Councilman Hubard, I I just want to clarify, especially even the Harbor Point area. We went back and forth and we talked about it a couple times. If you're 100% confident on that, I have no problem telling Matt to leave that out. But once again, this is just about what
we want in the permit, what what we want to submit for. And if a few years from now, 5 years from now, it seems like, okay, the Harbor Point area is okay right now, but sentiment may build in that, we may want to do something. And then if it's not in a permit, we're not
doing it. So, I just I just want to make sure council understands where we're at right now. Based on that, I'd say western red line all the way down because if you look at the sediment or the sand bars all the way down in front of catches all the way up past the
varies if we took care of allowing them to survey what >> well they've already been in >> west of the red line that should cut it down >> quite >> when they were in uh Moon Bayou they did
behind my house they did all over the bay They didn't just do where they were dredging. They poked holes all over the place. They did the same thing over there. And if S remembers, I was trying to get this place dredged 10 years ago and and we looked, there's been this big concern of mine. When I went out to
Harbor View before I left, I went through that whole area with my side view sonar on my boat at uh at medium tide to look to see how would what they drew up and what I was suggesting will work. And what they drew up will work. There's no need to really do anything
else in there because what they have is is in between rocks which just need to be marked and that'll work fine for for Harbor View Point. This area is you don't know what's going to happen in five years in this district. And like
Sal said, we have the opportunity to get this dredged right and the wider it is the longer it'll last also and the best value you're going to get. Uh, I mean, I had drawn up dredging out this whole area down here in front of Hooters and
and where Gild Dogs was, and that's just that's just a little bit too much money. So, I went through there also. I came through there. I've been through my boat many times. And what they're suggesting to do there will work fine also for traffic in the future. But if you want to if we want to put a walkway, you want
to do any docks or you want to have parades or anything, Miller Bayou is where everybody hangs out, where everybody pulls in and out on the parades. And if you just make that channel wider, like you were talking where the line is at Miller's Bayou,
just maybe 80 foot, 90 foot wide, just down to where the the the ditch is there at Waterfront Park by Gild Dogs. you're going to have a whole lot area that you'll be able to work with and you won't have any problem because people run around in there all the time now and as it as it grows you're going to have
just a bigger problem and you're going to wish you had done it. I'm just telling you in five six years you're going to wish you had dredged that out. I think you don't need to be near Waterfront Park though. Stay away from Waterfront Park because Christine's right. It's heavily secured. You can't you can't get in
there uh the dredge right up by waterfront. go stay on the west side of the red line, but uh you I would come down to where the ditch is. Um and I would just stay under the various part. I don't think you need to go north of the various part. >> So Bob, to be clear, you're okay with
dredging everything on the west side of the red line in front of Waterfront Park. Yes or no? >> Yes, >> I am too. >> You're okay with that? >> Yes. >> That's three of us. >> Spend money. >> Yep. We are money. >> We just spent it. We outvoted you. I think we should do [laughter]
>> I think you make a blind decision like >> I don't think it's blind at all. I don't know. >> How wide is that channel? >> And how does Stop. >> We just had three of them say that we want >> We're going to we're going to have budget workshops. We're going to lose $300,000 potentially this year, $500,000 next year. >> This is not $300,000. This is
>> You're not You're missing my point. Keep in mind that we're getting ready to go through budget cycle. >> Can you listen to me? >> Yeah. >> Okay. So, we know if if the amendment passes in in November, we're taking a $300,000 hit to our budget year one,
$500,000 year two. Okay, that's without anything else on place. That's just the reality of it. Okay, CRA's winding down. So, there's there's there's uh you know, it's easy to talk about it's just another 50,000 now. >> It's not 50,000. We just cut it. We just
cut that down 25,000,000 going all the way down in front of the >> Yeah, we're talking about just if we if it's if it's a need, >> we should spend it. >> There's Well, I you know, I I don't know if I agree with that, but
and and again, I I don't have I don't have the expert here to ask the question. I don't know what the width is here. I know that one inch is 300 feet, and that's probably 100 foot. 100 foot wide channel is not big enough that we need to we need another 300 foot
on site them. So 500 foot channel there. Imagine imagine being down in DC looking out on the water and about 25 to 30 ft out you got 6 in of water. This is not supposed to be deeper. >> Understand? And keep in mind you're looking at one isolated area along the park where there's there's no houses.
We've got an entire city that we've also got a we've got an entire city that after this is done and permitted you have to dig out. over the seaggrass study. Eric, >> this is not a seagrass study. This is this is a topography and the whole thing. It's seaggrass. >> Will you show me what it is you think we're talking about so I can see why you're so upset?
>> I'm not upset. I'm just I'm just I want you to make a informed decision. >> I I am making an informed decision. Everything on the west side I went to a seagrass study on west. >> We just cut this project down from all of this red to that and a small section >> at the bottom. We cut everything else
out. So, we just saved a lot of money of that $50,000 and now we're >> $15,000 out of 50 right now. >> Yeah. So, I don't >> and I don't want to get all Ben out of shape with you on this. That's $15,000 of us being responsible to clean up the m that's been going down there forever.
>> I think there's I think there's there's other places that are better served than that. >> And there always is until until it comes to election cycle and people want to know what are you doing about my canals? Okay. >> Nobody voting right along the edge here. I can tell you that. >> Well, I can tell you what. I've run my boat up muck there quite quite a few
times. >> And and again, what you're you're missing the point is is they're they're they're taking care of all that already. >> That's not what I'm talking about. But you go right along those boats there next to the shrimp. >> If you think that we we we spent half a million dollars to map out the canals and they went out here and they they
intentionally didn't make them wide enough, I think that's probably >> Eric, if you're telling me. >> Can we make a motion? I'm ready to make a motion. I make a motion that we cl we get seaggrass study on everything on the west side of the red road. >> It's not a seaggrass study. The seagrass study's passed.
>> What is it s you just got? >> It had to be done by September. >> The specifics for phase two is to Hold on. Give me one moment. Phase two, this basically includes 60% of design drawings, um, FD and USA CE
permits, applications or responses to agency and additional information. Um, also the additional monies was to add all the areas that we that he had high highlighted. So that's what made that $50,000 difference. Now, taking out
Harper Point and reducing this is probably going to drop it dramatically, but I don't know what that's going to be. So, regardless, I think >> we need to take it back. >> We need to take it back to him to get you guys a hard number, right? And decide from there. But I before I do that, I do want positive direction or at least majority direction on what areas
are we talking about. >> Since we have to take it back to him anyway, >> okay, can we not get some clarification on what exactly this is and so we can, you know, I'm not opposed to doing that if we need to do it. I just I can't make that decision because I'm not I'm not an expert on what what this [snorts] uh is
is telling me. >> I just like to make a consensus. >> We just had three of us say that we want to do this >> and there's three of us that say we want to do it. You you want to outru three of us. You can do that if you want. >> Well, if three people want to jump off the cliff, I'm not >> jumping off a cliff, sir. >> Everything. She's [snorts] called the
question. >> I'd like the motion. >> Consensus. a consensus that we take it back for that yellow circled area, the the area beneath where Bob pointed out, the section over by Harbor Point and [snorts] come back with a price for what
that is. And that's how I'd like to move forward. >> Well, and and and I I I like the yellow area, but I think that if we keep it from the berries in south, >> you're going to save a lot of money. >> Yeah. Okay. I'll do it a little bit
better. explain how you'd like to reduce that area, Bob, >> about agree with you, Bob. Yeah. From varies down >> from the varies to the south >> is is is what I was concerned about. >> It's it's still shallow to the north,
but you don't have this much traffic up there. I don't think you're going to have >> I can worry about later. >> I live over there, Bob, and I'm going to tell you that that all through there are shallow. If you're going to dredge it up to varies and all of a sudden you're going to hit a brick wall, that's not going to be good for anybody. Well, I I agree with you. I agree 100%.
>> I think we need to I'm still there's a motion on the table. >> Bob, they're not s Can you ask him about that? You know, if we do it here or if we do the whole thing, the west side of line, find out what the cost difference is.
>> Okay. So, basically where we have this outlined in yellow, find out what that's going to be as compared to going all the way up on the west side. >> Yes, sir. >> Prices. Yes. >> The additional pricing is >> and then dropping dropping the Harbor Point area. >> Y
>> correct. >> And we're still keeping the >> the blue the blue stripes. Right. >> Right. >> Yeah. >> But just just Yeah, just that little area. >> Yeah, that they know where it is. They got it mapped out. >> Yeah, they got it mapped out. You can see it.
>> Yep. [clears throat] >> I I'll take this map and I'll give to you afterwards. That's fine. >> So, is there a consensus for that or do we need to have a motion? I'm okay with consensus. I'm okay with >> consensus. If you have a consensus, that's good. But if you're if there's still a I'm consensus is fine. >> I just didn't want to get stuck on
stupid and not move forward. >> Okay. We've got a lot to do tonight. >> Yeah. I'll I'll schedule the break to try and get this back on the next agenda. >> Thank you. >> Oh, yeah. Any public comment? >> Sure.
Yeah, [laughter] >> you're a voter, so >> it might open the conversation right back up again. >> No, no, no, no. I was gonna give my opinion. Patrick for Patrick Nerinsky, 4,800 Epide Lane. >> Um, yeah, I like I like hearing about it. It sounds really good and stuff, but
um I mean I I know Mr. Hubard spent a lot of time driving out here, you know, riding on his boat and inspect it. And I've been up and down the channels obviously, you know, I got a boat business and, you know, I have a lot of customers. I go up and down the channel as well and I hear all these things and over the years probably last 15 years
I've been down in the was it Miller's Bayou in there you know doing my water test when I used to build motors and stuff and personally I mean I know he has a preference about the park me I don't think it's important I think it's more important where the businesses are to kind of dredge out right through there because this town's growing um I
mean I don't think have you guys reached out to like some of the marina owners you know they're they're uh adding more spaces you know like American Marina's probably going to have another 150 spaces. So, there's more boat traffic right there that's going to be coming down. Sunset's going to be growing,
adding more spaces. I mean, there's going to be a lot of more a lot more local traffic coming through just from our local marinas. And then we have catches. They have their own marina. Like, I think we should like focus in those areas where the restaurants are and all that kind of stuff. And the boat ramp police, you know, they have their problem with their boat probably coming
down that low tide. I mean, it just kind of I get it like we want the park to grow and people can park their boats and stuff to watch m you know, whatever goes on, music and stuff like that, but I mean tax dollars are coming down down at the other end right there. So, I I'd rather see us focus down on that section right there from catches up a little bit
and where it's kind of narrow when you make your left to go west up the channel. I mean, it's there's a narrow spot right there. I mean, I think those are the more important parts. I see that Hoverard had them marked. That's just my opinion. I'm going to leave it at that. >> Yeah. All right. >> Thank you. No.
Okay. Close public comment for that one and we will move along. All right. Next up, item number six, approval of water rates analysis by Stamp Inc. Pass to Mr. Carry for production. City council consideration. Due to
inquiries about the current irrigation rates, city staff has approached Stantech Incorporated to conduct a benchmark analysis of the city's water utility rates by comparing them with those up to 10 similar municipalities. This project's objective is to provide the city with clear, actionable insights
into how to service charges compare with those as of peer communities. The findings will be presented in a concise and easily sharable format. Uh the total fixed fee for the study is 13 $13,90 with billing based on a percentage of
task completion. Um long story short, uh I know we've discussed this in the past um about looking at the irrigation rates of our current um water study, our water ordinance. And the thing is is that uh I think it'd be best to approach Stantech
to provide us a comparison with other municipalities to see if changes need to be made. Um, and that's why I kind of put this together. Um, but I stand by council direction on which way you would like me to go with this. [snorts] >> Okay. Open up.
>> S. We just trying to find out whether we're being competitive with our water rates right now. >> Yeah. This is what that would do. Yes. >> I mean, one thing that I was a little bit eye open to is the fact that we charge more for our irrigation than we
do for our drink and water. >> Yes. uh when that was created, it's basically when when the ordinance was first done and the and the water study was done, it's basically the irrigation is a hybrid of of water and sewer charges. Um
we used to have it where we would just charge at a straight water rate and the city was losing money. Um this rate this water rate study was basically done to the best way to to prevent someone from
overwatering is to affect them in the pocket. It's it's the first concern that they have. Um a lot of our a lot of our irrigation compuh customers were overwatering because the water rates were so dramatically lower. Um so then
this water rate study was done and then this is where that irrigation rate was created uh basically as a conservation tactic as well as a you know as as a as a billing aspect. Um other places do charge irrigation rates. That's why they
were going to, you know, do a comparison to show where we fall with everyone else. Um, and like I said, this has just been an ongoing topic um that I know council has talked about in the past and I want to see what direction you'd want me to go forward with. >> I'll give you an example at Harbor Point
where I'm at. My average water bill out there to water the grass was $400 a month. And I'm like, I'm not paying that anymore. I just shut it off. You know, now I got brown spots and stuff, you know, coming out all over the place. But it it just seemed so exorbitant. I was
like, you know, I I it doesn't it doesn't even encourage people to do it. The average person doesn't want to spend that kind of money to water their lawn. Um anyway, I'm not trying to I don't want us to break I don't want us to break the bank. I just I don't know whether because we're not using any sewer at all. So, if we're under if
we're under charge of sewer, that's not coming from that. It's coming from the fact we're under charge of sewer. Um anyway, when when I originally brought this up, I had a problem with you with city
manager, but um the one we just recently had a water race study done two, three years ago. >> Yeah. It's not that old actually. Yes. >> Yeah. So I I don't I can't imagine a new one would be that much different. It
might I don't think it would be too much different. But um and and the big thing is is the irrigation rates. And what what I what I can't reconcile is kind of what Chris says is that for the first 3,000 or him what the tiers are. I wish I had that information in front of me,
but you actually pay more for irrigation water than you pay for water out of your house with sewer. Um which doesn't make any sense to me. So, I think what we really probably need to do is rather than have a whole study um is just take
a look at what we're charging for irrigation compared to what we charge for drinking water uh and just shore up those differences in the lower tiers. I think as you um I think as you use more irrigation water obviously I think you
want to discourage people from using a lot of that but you shouldn't you shouldn't um overcharge them for the first few thousand gallons to to water and I think that's really what it boils down to. I don't think we need a massive rate overhaul. I just think we need to adjust that first level or two of
irrigation. >> Is is the reason for this study because we plan to raise rates if it comes back that our neighboring cities or comparable cities are charging more than
we would raise rates for the residents in >> rates are lower. I mean it's >> no I mean uh currently our ordinance allows us a um a 3% increase on water and a 4% increase on sewer every year. >> Um this would just show us uh overall
where we fall with 10 other municipalities. Um an analysis like this basically just tells us as a city that okay this is where we are. This is you know our rates are comparable with with other entities. There's really no no need to move move
forward. If it comes in dramatically high, then we can consider, you know, not increasing the rates or doing a percentage uh decrease. Um, but if we just want to look at changing the irrigation rates on our own
without a study or whatnot, that's council's council's perview. You can do that. um we would actually we would have to basically open that ordinance up and uh decide what we're actually changing and then that way we can just do two new readings and pass that ordinance uh that
updated ordinance. >> Did the report from the last time we had this done did it list the cities that >> Yes. >> Is there not a way is that we can call them and just get their updated rates? 10 cities calling I mean I'm so
>> $13,000. I'm so frugal. I would be like picking up the phone and doing that that one afternoon and finding out how to, [laughter] >> you know, what their rates are currently. Is there a reason why we have to spend 13 grand to get a actual report versus updating ourselves?
>> Optically, it's you you're having it done by a firm that, you know, basically does this for a living as opposed to just imposing staff to pick up a phone and make, you know, make phone calls to municipalities and get their water rates. Um, >> and nobody believes staff. >> No, I'm just That's the point though.
>> I'm just saying optically it's just, you know, when you >> Anywhere are our rates published? >> We have them Well, we have them by ordinance and stuff. They are I I don't know if they're published on the website, but we have access to >> So, if they're published, why can't we go to each of those cities?
>> If they have them, sure. I mean, if we >> I'll [laughter] do it. I mean, >> I'll take it on. We'd have to, you know, like I said, we'd have to find 10 municipalities, you know, call them. >> The ones that we used last time in the report, [snorts] those municipalities, go to their website, see if their rates
were published, and >> just I mean, you could save a lot of money. It's $13,000 versus one staff member's after. >> I make a motion we extend this to the next meeting till we find out what Christine comes up with. >> I'll do it. I really will. I don't care.
Well, there's there's more to the study, too, than >> But I mean, we could start with that. And >> why don't could we pull the old study out and give that to council so they take a look at it and see what they're >> the original the original couple years ago. >> Sure. >> And that way you guys can see what that
$13,000 would entail. >> Sure. >> Let me table this. >> Interesting. See if she wants to do it for less or not. [snorts] >> She'll have been done before tomorrow. Watch >> for the small sum of what I already know. I will say just >> [laughter] >> uh as we go back that when we did that
study our rates were very very low based on other areas of clean county and when we raised those um we still were relatively low we but we we were kind of about where the county was I think but it when we when it did say it's very
very low we were like the lowest >> I mean who who knows how long it had been before that since we had the last study done right >> yeah and and now I mean barrels making all kind of money over there. Right. >> Right. I mean, if that's enough information, >> saving us all kind of >> I don't know what all the report entails, but maybe what
>> it'd be good to look at for you anyway. >> We might have enough info to make any adjustments. >> I we're not lowering rates. >> And just so I'm clear, s is the reason that this is on here based on the the ask about the irrigation rates or is
this that we the utilities have noticed that they ain't making enough money and so we need to look at rates? This was based on the irrigation rate discussion. >> Bring it down. [snorts] Right. >> I got a question for S. >> Go ahead. >> That may help me out. I know some of the problem with irrigation is that we have
a moratorum on irrigation wells in the city. The county and other places allow people to drill wells just for irrigation. It saves saves mun a lot of a lot of water and it's it'solated just to the homeowner. He has to pay the
electric bill for the pump. I don't what what was the purpose of the moratorum on irrigation wells for residents? Do you remember? S >> Darl, would you mind adding to that? >> Is there a moratorium? Our ordinance says we're not allowed to drill anything over 50 >> and and I would like to know if we could
lift that and maybe allow maybe a dozen residential wells uh to be to to be drilled. I know there's a there's a gentleman that spent a lot of money on irrigation and >> with allowing him to drill wells. Um, you guys see the guy at the corner of
Channel in Wateride >> or the Broadway? >> Yeah. With the rust coming out of the ground, >> you'll have that all over the city. >> Be spraying red rust everywhere. >> Does he have well? Is that what the deal is? >> Yeah. Okay. >> I did some research on wells here and
>> what I found was that the water is not it's not very useful. Like it could actually harm your grass more than Yeah. >> Um, it could just like the well was we have it's going to be high in iron content which usually cost that rust color >> and then you know
>> plus we'd have to check with FD and um Army Corps to see if you know how many if we were to lift that are we allowed to do it um because people did put irrigation wells years ago but those regulations could have changed
dramatically today so we'd have to definitely look into all that [snorts] so at the end of the day based on the reason this is before us. Um, nobody's going to complain about lowering the irrigation rates for the first couple tiers of where they where I see a
problem. I don't think we need to engage an engineer to to to study that. I think we can look at that objectively and see do we do anything >> takes to get that leveled out a little bit. >> Yeah. Yeah. you by consensus or a motion. >> There was a motion. No second. So kind
of in the >> What was the motion? >> Chris motion to table the item for next meeting. >> Oh yeah. Withdraw motion. >> You withdraw. Okay. Yeah. Withdrawal. Sorry about that. >> You may want to consider you know a finance analysis because you are going
to be cutting the tiers and cutting the amount. So you know what what as far as what is our what do we collect as of now and then with the with the modification what are you going to be collecting at that point that definitely has to be looked into. Yeah, I think and and for the most part make that decision. People
aren't using the irrigation, right? >> I just quit altogether. I said >> do I think we could we could probably see month by month how much irrigation water's being used >> uh and what what tiers are being used. We we have that data and we can look at it and see >> a lot makes sense. Now obviously if you
make it if you lower it then it's going to encourage people to to use it. >> We still we he can queue in as well. We we do run reports that show how much we pump, you know, for irrigation and what we charge. And it's still quite a bit. There are quite a bit of people out there. >> We uh we pump more between the hours of
11 p.m. and 4:00 a.m. than we do throughout the rest of the day. >> We can barely keep up at night at sometimes. So, everybody's irrigating more than they should because all I got to do is pull the report and see how much actually you irrigate. I mean, we
still are in a a water restriction, so it's still once a week. >> This is actually the next step. >> Sam Pebble was the biggest one until I talked to them about it. They were at times 300 and some gallons a minute. They got broken stuff all over there. I've been over there before. The thing
was shooting straight up the air like Yeah, >> that's one of the problems. >> Water towers, they're all broken. >> People watering and setting their timers at that time of night. They're not standing out there and watching their irrigation. >> They're not spraying. They're shooting. >> Well, that's the thing. they're not they're not watching the sprinkler heads that are broken or when the when the
lawnmowers go over them. And the thing is is that that's why it's we're pumping so much is because in our entire system there's break broken heads everywhere. So until once again till they're affected in the pockets when they like oh I got to look into this. >> So my thing is this is my opinion. I
don't think it's a rate thing. I think it's an overwatering thing. >> Overwatering or not repairing your heads right? >> A mixture of both. We get a lot of complaints about high water bills. They think they do credit and stuff like that. We look at their their trends on
census because it can be pulled up. I can go do it down to the minute of when they use it. Um and it just shows it's mainly at night irrigating every other day every day. There's some people that use 15,600 gallons a day.
So, I mean, if we get the restrictions down, then really won't have people with high bills. >> What's you off top of your head, you know, is it first 3,000 and 7,000 in irrigation? What's the tiers? >> It's some I don't have it in front of me, but it's something like that. like
your average home. Say you have a 10,000 square foot lot and you have a 2500 foot house on your irrigating actually 7500 feet. You only should be irrigating if it's if you go in
>> 7,000 gallons a month is what you should be actually watering. If you're on a >> starting one day >> restriction a week, you know, >> and our water table's not low. So, well, it probably is now, but during the wetter seasons, >> it's usually right under the sod. So, we
our ground holds a lot of a lot of water, a lot of retention. So, >> on page 107, it has the >> Yeah. So, yeah, I'm pulling up the actual >> Do we have um records from when the rates were decided in Port Richie as to why they were um like who
who made the decisions and what the analysis was? >> Yeah, we have that kind of record. We can go back like well this one this particular is only this was done in 2024. This isn't that >> yeah we can we can pull up the agenda and the minutes for that particular discussion.
>> Um we have that this is not that old. Um >> it'll tell us why and we kind of need to know the why. It may not be ideal to pay more for irrigation, but if there was an actual reason for it that made sense,
then we won't be reinventing the wheel by just deciding upon this ourselves. Um, we'd understand the history of why those decisions were made. >> And uh, Christine, when you look up at the other municipalities, a lot of them have caps on their sewer, >> right?
>> So, they don't allow irrigation meters. Um, so they'll cap it on, let's say, 5,000 gallons or whatever, but so just when you when you if you do go ahead and start looking at that, you got to keep that in mind. >> Okay, we'll do. Yeah, if I could get a
copy of the report, I'll try to >> and the decision making process, the factors went into making the decision. Page >> 107, number five. Okay. So you want to seven >> number five. >> Yeah. Okay. Here we go. Number five.
Portable irrigation. Right. So on a 3/4 zero to so first 12,000. I thought there was a tier below that. But so 0 to 12,000 on 3/4 inch line. You're paying 1178
a gallon, right? >> Yes. >> Okay. compared to the >> Huh? Is it >> a gallon or per thousand? >> Per thousand. >> Per thousand gallons, right? 1178 per,000 gallons. >> Um that's for the first 12,000. >> Compare that to like it's $3 or
something for the first 4,000 on >> 106. Go page 106. >> 106. >> I'm sorry. >> Yes. >> Yeah. 106. >> 106. >> So 0 to 4,000 you're paying $3.64. So, and you got sewer on top of that, which
is >> uh you got to add that in. >> Yep. Well, there's a B. Yeah, there's the there's a there's a water rate charge, then there's the base charge for water, then there's the base charge for sewer, and then the sewer bill. Um
I was sewer like six bucks or something. I I want to say it's around nine bucks or whatever and you're paying basically $2 more every thousand gallons for your irrigation than you would be if you just >> yeah the hose >> you get a base bill up to your first thousand once it rolls over is that when
you're not you should be paying less because it's not going into the sewer. But but remember it's when we we used to have the irrigation rates at the same potable level and people were using 100,000 gallons a
month just to water their lawns because it only cost them 100 you know 75 bucks 50 bucks and they were watering constantly. Um and like I said we'll bring you the data of how many people are still irrigating today. Oh yeah, it the rates don't aren't phasing quite a
bit of people because they're still they're still doing it. They're still watering with no, you know, >> and some people are doing are complaining about it. >> A lot of commercial businesses are are are irrigating, you know, um constantly. I mean, uh you know, large, you know, large homes. Um
>> in fact, Pasco County requires that you have an irrigation system if you get one of their commercial landscaping grants. They require in order to get that grant that you install the irrigation system and run it and sign a five-year maintenance contract. >> I remember when I moved into Bluepoint,
there was no irrigation and I had the brownest, most disgusted yard on the planet and I had to actually bring in grass to do it and water it wouldn't stay alive. >> Yeah. And I'm not I don't advocate that we would put the irrigation rates at the
$3 and something. That'd be ludicrous because people would abuse that. What I'm say, all I'm saying is that we should probably get it down to it's a little bit less than if you if it was $9 of sewer in your first thousand that irrigation is like eight or something. >> It's 1301 per thousand on the uh
>> how do you make up that >> on the sewer for the rate alone and then you have the base charge? >> If uh the city brings in far less revenue and irrigation rates, how do we make up that? We'd have to look at what the impact would be or whatever, but um the I mean you still making money on the
water. >> I understand it will decrease if you plan on just across the board. >> The amount of money you make >> limit would potentially decrease but people would probably use a some people would probably use more too to a degree. So it' probably
be a wash. I I don't know. I'd have to look the numbers. I think I think what we need to do is we do need to table this because between providing the original rate study um information from when council passed this in 2324
um getting the total water usage uh we could do a spreadsheet that would show the irrigation usage uh for like a six-month spread um how much we're actually collecting as far as revenue uh for that and then and then we can start deciding
>> one after budget winner, why don't we do like a water workshop or something? We >> There was a costbenefit analysis back then that went into how the rates were determined. That would be a good thing to have as well. >> See that work was already done and kind of refresh it.
>> That was done in the study which I'll provide. They did a cost analysis. They also did, like I said, >> they also leaned towards conservation for the fact that, you know, that's why the irrigation was set and then also compared to others. Um many years ago we
tried to get reclaimed water in here. Um when uh Tom O'Neal was city manager, I was a big advocate for that. Um I that was something I really wanted to bring to the city, but unfortunately the council at that time didn't move forward with that. That would have dramatically changed the uh the cost for irrigation
because reclaimed water is much less. >> S you want to table it again? >> It's up to council, but I mean just you know just by the fact that we need more information. I I agree with the with the mayor that we should probably do continue this but as a workshop and then
bring in all the data for everyone to look at and then if we sit there during that workshop and come up with a with an hybrid idea of what to set the irrigation rate then we can approach the city attorney and just have her draw the ordinance up. Do we need a motion there? >> No. Like I said so everybody [snorts]
any objections to tableing this to a workshop later date? >> Okay. public comment. >> Are you wanting to wait until after budget season? I know. >> Yeah, we got enough workshops. Yeah. Budget >> for my >> Yeah.
>> Yeah. That's not pressing. >> Okay. Next up, item number seven, Parag Green Technologies Agreement. Pass it to Mr. McCary for introduction. >> And I'm passing this to the chief. [laughter] >> He's been so quiet over there, you know, just watching everyone
>> catching up on stuff. We're charity so be careful. >> Yeah. So the paragrine um data sharing is a nationwide thing that law enforcement agencies do with each other to we enter into this agreement. We allow other agencies to see our information so we can see their
information also. So if we're investigating a crime and maybe somebody lives in California, we can go into that agency's database in California and look and see what they did over there to use it as our investigative crime. There's auditing requirements on this to where we audit everybody. If somebody's found
to be using it improperly, then we can pull their access to the system and also discipline for them. And we can also limit the data that we want other agencies to see, such as if we're doing a sensitive investigation on something in our city that we don't want other agencies to be able to, we can actually
block that from them. Legals reviewed it all and said it was good to go as is right now. And um that's >> so this this the two things opens our data up to outside agencies and allows us access to theirs as well. >> Yes. Nationwide. It's almost like our
NCIC where we can actually run it for warrants and we see warrants all over the the country. But if they don't have a warrant, we can still see what they did in different states or different departments across the country. [clears throat] >> Very good investigative tool.
>> Is there a motion? >> Second. >> Okay. Motion second. Any further discussion? Public comment. Seeing none to put a vote on favor 65 by saying I. >> I. >> I. >> I. >> I. Opposed. Motion carries. Was that Ash?
>> The motion. Second. Very quiet. >> Hello. >> There. We're out. [laughter] >> Eric's beat us down. Whatever. Right. >> Item number eight, mutual aid agreement, USFD. I pass it to Mr. Per for introduction.
And I'm passing this back to Chief since he did such a great job in the first half. [laughter] You're getting good at that stuff. I like more of a role. Great job. So, so this is basically um building relationships with other departments. USF PD, if you haven't noticed, is now building a football stadium on their
campus. So, they have um come to us and asked us for assistance on certain game days. And uh they've been doing that with several different PDs because Tampa was doing it for a long time with them. And now Tampa can't pick up the whole entire load. Um, so they asked this to start. Um, there's it's very early in
the talks because the football stadium won't be open till next year, but allow our officers to go down there and work football games for them. And if everything works out good, then eventually graduations, concerts, and things like that. It's a good way for our officers to make some offduty money because we don't really have a lot of
offduty details in our city. Um, and the pay is is really good down there for what they're doing with these events. So, I I think it's a it's a great idea for our guys and they get to go out and and work with other agencies and build those relationships and also being at USF can also recruit people that are
coming out of USF with degrees in the criminal justice program rather than us having to go down there and do special things when they're talking to people um during casual conversation in these events. And again, legals approved this also or reviewed it and made some adjustments and we changed them and it's valve and approved.
>> And it's a really good game. Can council do a ride along on those days? >> Sure. >> But unfortunately, usually [laughter] the >> the outside agencies get the traffic post outside, but there there are inside post, but every there's training involved with everything depending on where you work in the stadium, too. They're not going to just take our guys
and stick them in a student section, expect them to be able to know how to deal with, right? >> Yeah. [laughter] So, that's where it usually starts. But then, you know, when agencies show that they are a professional and can do the good job, then they start moving them interior and it's a good deal.
>> Is there a no recruitment clause that they can't recruit our uh stellar employees over to their team? >> Yeah, [laughter] you know that. No, but you know, that's that's up to me to create a good culture and an atmosphere here to where they
don't want to go anywhere else. >> Well, on our way to that, I think so. There a motion >> motion to approve as drafted. >> Second motion a second virtually a discussion
>> public comment see vote in favor 65 saying I >> I >> oppose. Motion carries. Next up item number nine phone communication system voyant vendor contract renewal. Pass that to Mr. Lairi I guess for introduction. >> I will take that. You >> take that one. All right. Good. Wasn't
it nice though when he talked, you know, it's like >> give me the paperwork. I'll take this. [laughter] >> I'm considering restarting negotiations to be honest with you. But >> hey, [laughter] >> no problem. >> For city council consideration is renewal of the phone communications contract with our current vendor,
Voyant. Starting at a rate of $1,79842 per month, our IT manager has been able to negotiate a cost savings of $1,37549 per month. That's a $5,7816 in annual savings. Staff believes that
this is the best direction to take and is seeking city council approval to receive. I would like to thank our IT manager, Joel Brick, for all the due diligence he did. um he was on the phone with Voyant several times and also he did reach out to other vendors in case you're asking um there but staying with
this current vendor especially at a cost to savings especially with what we have to discuss in our bud you know our new budget year uh this is a big step in the right direction >> yeah and this will cover the overtime cost he has for Chris's password problems too so way [laughter]
way to watch that >> so we've recently in the last couple years. We're originally with the company, thank you for originally with the company, an IP company who did our IP phone system and we were paying these
crazy rates and we brought it down like $1,500 down to $500 and got the same services, switched companies, um, and all that. I'm not saying this is not good. You've already investigated it, George. You've been all over this. Um, I mean, I don't know what our our
horsepower is here either. that may be a different model than what we have there. Um, but I know that stuff's coming down constantly. You know, >> we kept this as a three-year contract, so you know, renewal, so it's it's it's short. So, we can continue looking into other options.
>> George, what did you come up with on rates on the other companies when they gave you a quote for our system? >> So, George 623. [laughter] >> Yeah. Um the big thing is um if we were to change vendors,
we have to ship all our phones off. There's deporting of all Yeah. Because these all of our phones are part of the equipment from the company. So then we would have to go and acquire phones to replace it or get phones from the the new vendor which we did [snorts]
investigate comparable numbers. But the big thing was there's no training, there's no porting of numbers. Um, everybody's familiar with the system that's currently as it exists and we're getting a price reduction. Um, and as Sal said,
you know, it's for three years and then we can go down this road again because again, it would probably be lower in uh >> How old are our phones, George? Um, our phones are um the current model that
it's on the table um isn't manufactured anymore. Um, but if we need a phone, we can get another phone or replace or we get replacement phones from and we use I think there are four 411s or 410s. Um,
Polycom, great phone. Um, we haven't had any real issues with the phones. I would say that they're probably four or five years old. >> Oh, no. The total is 5,000 year. That's the new bill. That would be the new
bill. >> That's the bill. And then that's the new bill. >> So, yes, they did. And again, I basically told the vendor, I said, "Look, you guys are are are killing us. So, we need to [clears throat] make something happen here or we're going to we'll be forced to move just because you
guys have gotten to be really expensive. So, they did a pretty good job and I think on the on the um quotes that there they actually showed the discount on each line item that they're giving us as well. But yes, we could get something less.
But again, it's the taking all the phones, shipping them back, getting new phones, all the numbers that have to be ported into I had a call from a constituent, one of our residents today. They said they called, and this is not throwing anybody
under the bus. They said they called up here and they called S. I don't know who they called. I don't know what number they went to. I have no idea. But there was no auto answer. There was no auto direct. I'm wondering if we have a system that's not really doing this now, do we need to fix that?
>> Our auto attendant, if you if you call our 1900 and you'll get an option to if you need to talk to this person or if you need to talk to this or you need a emergency services, it's all it's all of course our auto attendant is five
minutes long because of so many things that it's covering. So if they get impatient or kind of blow through it, >> you've actually sat and listened through it and everything. >> Actually, if you listen to it, it's Veronica. >> Okay. >> She has it in Spanish as well. >> Yeah.
>> Yes. And in Spanish as well. >> Okay. >> Thank you, George. Thanks, George. Sure. Okay. Motion discussion. [clears throat] Motion to approve uh the updated three-year phone communications agreement renewal with Buoyant.
>> Second that. >> Okay. Motion to second. Any further discussion? Any public comment? See vote. All in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. >> Could. >> Could I have comment? >> Opposed? Motion carries. Go ahead. Could
we prior to three years from now, like maybe two years from now, have it on the calendar agenda to go shopping for a new and updated phone system because all the technology changes really quick and and and it's not as hard to program as it used to be, you know,
>> and that's yes, that we're kind of doing this as just as a stop gap carry us through and yes, we would >> I was thinking two years from now we could be way ahead of the game and we can come up with the latest and greatest technology and done.
>> In a in a lot of cases with renewals like for phone systems or copers and whatnot, that company will absorb >> pick up the slack. >> They'll they'll pick up the slack or the current contract that you have. So that that's not that's nothing new. So yes, we'll definitely investigate that. >> Yeah. Well, they're getting 17 or $1,800
a month, but they're not going to do anything to keep going. You know, you know, as long as we're still paying it. I just I know with us we had to kill the contract with our previous company and go with a new company and these Polycon phones that you're talking about phones are online. You can get really good phones online. They're just really cheap
now. Not not what they used to be. >> What What is the the breaking the contract cost? >> Not seen those contracts. >> Oh, I haven't. >> Nope. >> Have you seen the contract? >> I have not. >> I think that he was saying get prepared for when the third year comes around, weren't you, Chris? You weren't saying
break the contract at the same time. We're going to we we just agreed on the contract, but I before we get to three years again and we're like, "Oh, what do we do now?" You know, at two years we're like popping and >> Well, I just be curious like you said, three contracts, great. Um, but if it's
if you got to pay to use it or not, something in a year comes up this great deal. We need to know what we need what's going to cost to break the contract. If it's we're stuck with three years or whatever, most contracts are pretty. It doesn't seem to address it quickly [cough and clears throat]
looking at it. There's not much in here at all >> about termination and that kind of thing. >> I can look into that and provide details to council >> just says the length is three years. >> Okay. Well, so I mean it's passed. So, >> you know, that's something I wanted to bring up.
It has become very unfriendly to sign these long-term contracts with anybody, right? It's like they want your business. If you're going to give us what we're worth, why do you want a three-year deal? You know, I mean, that kind of thing. So, why do we have to sign a three-year contract on this one?
>> Well, we go back and say council said >> probably >> we're not going to sign a three-year contract. We'll sign a one-year contract, and $1398 is okay with us for right now, but we're going to sign a one-year contract. >> Well, that that probably contingent on a three-year deal, that pricing, right? >> That's what Yes.
always go back. As a business person, I hate contracts. Whenever they say, "Oh, we're going to tie you in for three to five years." I'm like, "Okay, next." We go on to the next one. Because I'm not If your product is that good, I don't have to worry about being tied in for three years. >> Well, we we could pull that back and say we're going to do a one year and have him go back and see. >> We can table and move it forward.
>> I'm I would remove my motion and say, "George, go ahead." >> It's passed. So, so now we have to have another motion to um we retract that >> motion to amend. We've never really done that, have we? >> Yeah, this was this is >> um
>> Nancy, this is what we have here. >> I would move to withdraw the Yeah, >> she's got this my second one of the night. >> Make a new motion the new the motion explaining that you're you're >> amending the previous decision. You're Yeah. You want to address a previous motion that has passed that you now are
moving that um to do whatever they >> I move to amend the previous motion that has passed to go back to the phone vendor and tell them that we're willing to sign a one-year deal at 1375 >> at those rates. >> At those rates and >> and see what they come back with
>> and see what they come back with. fourth I may add or can you give them the option of allowing us to put language in the contract that you can terminate have the three years but that's >> ter threeear notice >> but have a notice notice 30-day notice >> 30-day notice >> yeah because there's nothing in here
about termination >> yeah that'd be great >> so yeah we there you go yeah George I'll rephrase my motion so we'll call the vendor back and tell them that we'll give them a three-year but we want a 30-day out okay um And that's where we
want to go, right? Is there anything else you want me to add to that? Miss, >> I don't think we need to go this far. Let's all back up. So, you already sound [laughter] hard. You're you're okay with the three years if you can get the 30-day cancellation termination. So, I think
what we need to do is your your motion can stand as it originally was, but you are also authorizing the county attorney, city, sorry, city attorney, and >> acting city manager to finalize the contract. That's where I come in and I say, "Here's new language we want." You're not approving the contract.
You're approving us to finalize the contract. See the difference? Does that make too much? Too many words. >> I I I don't know how much legal business I want to jump into this because we can spend three grand on legal. Mostly when you guys No, mostly when you guys do a
contract, what it says here is you guys authorize the city attorney and the city manager to negotiate and finalize and city manager sign the contract. Here just went to approval of contract. We do it the way we normally would do it. I would review this and give my comments, which would be you want a termination
pause. They agree to it, we're done. It's signed. It's over. They don't agree to it, it comes back to you guys. I was going to include the city attorney, but anyway, >> well, no, I but on this particular issue, it was a renewal with the with a vendor that we already have a
relationship with. I didn't see any reason to include this, especially at a cost savings. But if we're amending this motion to do that and go forward with that, I'm more than welcome to include that. But just, you know, it's, you
know, once again, now we're we are going to put in for her time plus the fact that we're going to be continuing to paying the same rate until a until a contract is negotiated. So, >> just just for my knowledge, what does it take to negotiate a phone contract, Nancy? How much time does it take?
>> I've never done a particular phone contract with Voyant. So, it depends on them. We've done we just did one with is it FDOT or FD that took no time at all and they agreed to our our request. Others it takes a lot of time and they give us nothing. So it just depends on
contract. I mean >> I was trying to avoid you doing a new motion trying to push this forward. >> Well here here's procedure. Let's do this. Here's procedure I had to do. I need somebody who voted yes which all of us besides myself because I can't do it. Make a motion to reconsider
and I need to second that. And then we need to vote on it and then we can go back and it basically resets it. >> I have a question first. >> Go ahead, >> Nancy. If a contract is silent on termination, >> it's completely silent. Yes. >> Yeah. So silent on termination. So do they have a cause of action if we
terminate terminate early anyway? >> The argument could be that it doesn't um that they that it doesn't give them a cause of action, but they're going to argue that there is because there's nothing that says we can't terminate. So it would be an argument in court and you'd probably have to litigate it and see where it goes. That's why it's
better to address those things up front. >> So, in the past motion to accept the contract, >> I'm just trying to think through this a little further without just dumping this on NY's lap. Um, because it was it was not on NY's lap before we started. Now, it is on NY's lap and I I want to make sure that I'm not creating more stuff
for Nancy to do because your list is about this long right now. I don't want to keep dumping things. >> I appreciate that, but I am here for that purpose. Um, so if you want to keep it off my plate, your original suggestion for George to act as your motion to reconsider would be to have
George do what you want George to do as >> 30 out. >> 30-day out or a year only, whatever you prefer. That would be >> my consensus. Are we okay with the 30-day out with George? >> Yes, with George. >> Okay. Well, before we do anything, you
have to I need a motion to reconsider the vote on the prior >> I make a motion to reconsider the vote on the prior buoyant uh approach. >> Okay. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Okay. Have a motion to second.
Any further discussion? >> Any public comment? [snorts] Seeing none, put the vote on fif by saying I. >> I >> opposed. Okay. Motion is reconsidered. Now it's it's back to where it was. Now you can make a new motion. >> So it's still the same motion or make a new motion,
>> whatever you want. Now it's open. >> So I make a motion for George to go back to the boy the vendor buoyant and tell them that we will we will sign a three-year deal, but we want a 30-day out >> or do you want to do the the the year?
>> You can do a threeear a three do a 100red-year deal if you get a 30-day out. It doesn't matter. >> Well, I I probably was going to have the conversation. I probably go ahead and say we'll do it. We'll do a one year without the 30 days or we'll do a three year with 30-day out. >> That's how I do it. >> And that way he
>> Can we please clarify? Are we doing one year or three? That's what we're be any any term you ever have in a contract, whether it's a year or three years, you want a termination clause. What if tomorrow they become the worst vendor ever, they're not providing what they should provide? You always want a termination. >> So, we're going to sign a three-year
deal with a 30 out. And that's my motion. >> Okay. Right. And then I'll give us time s after we get through our budget to be able to figure out whether we can get a better deal or something else. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> All right. Motion second. Any further discussion?
>> Public comment. Say put a vote on favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion carries. Next up, item number 10, wildland firefighting gear purchase. Pass that to Kevin. For introduction or you >> Oh, absolutely. Captain [laughter] Quinn
will be taking this one. >> I do like the fact you made him wait till the very end to get his money like that. >> Um so on September 15th re received notification um from the um the division of state fire marshals that we received
a grant uh for the purchase of 15 sets of wildland firefighting gear. Um we went through some stuff back and forth with them to get a waiver from the state of Florida to be able to get this approved. Here we are today um to where they're awarding us the grant. Um the
city will be required to pay $2,000 80 of the grant uh for a total purchase of 30,6580. Um let's stand for any questions. >> Motion to approve. >> Second Bob with a second. Y any further
discussion? Any public comment? Seeing none, put the vote. All in favor 65 saying I. >> I. >> I opposed. Motion carries. Hey, just uh what's exactly Wildland? Is it is that like it's a brand, right? >> Uh no, it's um so structural
firefighting gear has three layers in it. Thick is bulky. It's hot. Um this is one layer of gear that allows the firefighters to, you know, be able to work in Florida's heat. Um and this gear also does not only wobbling, but um car accidents, technical rescue stuff on
that side. So, we're limiting the exposure that the firefighter has to their bunker here with the carcinogens and all that other stuff inside of it. Um, and we're also extending the life of the bunker gear because now the firefighter is not going through the woods in a $6,000 set of bunker gear ripping it up where this is, as you can
see, it's like $900 for the pants, $900 for the jacket, pumping rips. We just replace that. [laughter] I was curious. >> And I believe if you get called out like to another county to help them fight a fire, you're you're required to have your own gear. You can't they won't give
you that, right? >> Yeah. Correct. And also we use this one um you guys see regularly. We help assist the [clears throat] state park on their control burns. So, this will be a lot. >> I'm glad you guys are getting that. >> Okay. Next up is old business. Is there any old business discuss?
>> Does anybody want to discuss the dredging project? >> Sure. [laughter] It's on there. >> Yeah. Fine. >> Sure. Christie, >> I make a motion to adjurnn. [laughter] >> What's that, Bob? We'll make a motion to
adjurnn. Hold on. Hold on. Second. Hold on. [laughter] Comments. We got >> Hey, you started it. I So, any old business? >> No. >> Okay, moving on. [snorts] Comments from mayor, city council. I'll start with uh Councilman Hubard.
Any old business? I mean, any uh comments? >> Not tonight. >> Okay. Councilwoman Burke. >> No. Councilwoman Sullivan? >> No. >> Vice Mayor. I I did some comments just a little bit short comments. I wanted to say that
after being in the city for 10 years >> and having multiple interactions with S, I'm very thankful S you're here to help us where you are today. Thank you. >> Thank you. [applause] >> We need to remember that [laughter] >> as we talk. Just keep that in mind.
>> Did I just keep that in mind? >> So I did not stroke your ego enough today is what you're saying. >> No, just keep that in mind. It's all right. >> [laughter] >> You got the ocean contract, didn't you? >> You do got to you do got to consider the sore. So, so [laughter] [snorts] okay, I'll take that motion now. Oh, I don't I don't have anything
else. So, go ahead. Jump in there. >> That's it. >> I need motion. >> Oh, motion to adjurnn. >> I made a motion. >> I made a motion. >> That was old. A motion second. All in favor signify saying I. I.
>> Wait, wait, wait, wait. clarify who made the motion and the second because the first one was not real. >> Yeah, Chris made the motion and then Bob seconded. >> Okay, thank you. >> Right. >> Right, Bob, you second that, right? >> Yes. >> Okay. All in favor say I. I >> I
>> unless