workshop04282026.pdf?t=202605080806050

TAYLOR COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PERRY, FLORIDA TUESDAY, APRIL 28, 2026 6:00 PM 201 E. GREEN STREET TAYLOR COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLEX THE CHAIR CALLED THE WORKSHOP MEETING TO ORDER AT 6:00 P.M. THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD ATTENDED THE MEETING AS FOLLOWS: DISTRICT OFFICE NAME HOW ATTENDED PORTION ATTENDED 1 CHAIR JAMIE ENGLISH IN PERSON ALL 2 JIM MOODY IN PERSON ARRIVED AT 6:19 P.M. 3 MICHAEL NEWMAN IN PERSON ALL 4 PAM FEAGLE IN PERSON ALL 5 V-CHAIR THOMAS DEMPS IN PERSON ALL A FULL BOARD BEING PRESENT. COUNTY STAFF ATTENDED THE MEETING AS FOLLOWS: POSITION NAME HOW ATTENDED PORTION ATTENDED CO ADMINISTRATOR LAWANDA PEMBERTON IN PERSON ALL ASST CO ADMIN PATRICIA SADLER IN PERSON ALL COUNTY ATTORNEY GRANTS WRITER CO. FINANCE DIRECTOR CONRAD BISHOP MELODY COX DANNIELLE WELCH IN PERSON IN PERSON IN PERSON ALL ALL ALL COUNTY CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS ATTENDED THE MEETING AS FOLLOWS: POSITION NAME HOW ATTENDED PORTION ATTENDED CLERK OF COURT GARY KNOWLES IN PERSON ALL DEPUTY CLERK SALINA GRUBBS IN PERSON ALL AGENDA 1. PRAYER COMMISSIONER DEMPS LED THE BOARD IN PRAYER, FOLLOWED BY THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG. BUSINESS WAS TRANSACTED AS FOLLOWS: 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. THE BOARD TO DISCUSS GROUP HEALTH INSURANCE PLAN. CLERK KNOWLES- ITS TO EARLY FOR RENEWAL, BUT WE WANTED TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE NUMBERS. DANIEL TILLMAN AND CASSIDY WAGNER, ACENTRIA TEAM PRESENTED A PRESENTATION OF INSURANCE PLAN OPTIONS FOR THE UPCOMING RENEWAL. DOWN 4% IN EMPLOYEES. RECOMMEND A DUAL OPTION PLAN. COMMISSIONER FEAGLE NOT IN FAVOR OF A HRA HEALTH PLAN (HEALTH REIMBURSEMENT ARRANGEMENT). BOARD TO CONTINUE TO REVIEW THE RENEWAL. ATTACHMENT: PRESENTATION 4. THE BOARD TO DISCUSS THE GP/FOLEY DRAFT PERMIT. CHET THOMPSON (CALL IN) PROVIDED A DRAFT PERMIT LETTER FOR FDEP. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR WILL SUBMIT THE LETTER ON 04/29/26. ATTACHMENT: DRAFT LETTER 5. THE BOARD TO DISCUSS HODGES PARK. COMMISSIONER FEAGLE DISCUSSED THE TIMELINE OF HODGES PARK AND THE DELAYED PROGRESS OF COMPLETION. CHAIRMAN ENGLISH- DO WE HAVE A PROJECTED START DATE? MELODY COX- CURRENTLY WORKING ON BID DOCUMENTS. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR- SHOULD HAVE A PLAY GROUND BY AUGUST. ATTACHMENT: HODGES PARK TIMELINE 2017-2026 6. THE BOARD TO DISCUSS BUDGET PRIORITIES. COMMISSIONER MOODY- NEED TO WORK IN THE DIRECTION ON GIVING OUR EMPLOYEES A RAISE. COMMISSIONER FEAGLE- DON'T WANT TO INCREASE INSURANCE COST. WOULD LIKE TO SEE WHAT T HE FIGURES WOULD BE FOR AN EMPLOYEE WAGE INCREASE . CHAIRMAN ENGLISH - THE REQUIRED MINIMUM WAGE REQUIREMENT WILL BE THIS YEAR . COMMISSIONER NEWMAN WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE DIF FERENCE IN COST BETWEEN AN ON STAFF ENG I NEER VS HIRING AN OUTSIDE FIRM. COUNTY ADMIN ISTRATOR - SOME OF THESE PROJECTS SHOULD GO TO AN OUTS I DE ENG I NEER I NG FIRM TO HELP MANAGE PROJECTS. BUDGET WORKSHOP WI LL START IN JULY . ADJOURN THE HOUR BE I NG APPROX I MATE LY 7:47 P. M. , AND THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSI NESS , THE WORKSHOP MEET IN G WAS AD JOURN . BOARD OF COUNTY COMM ISSIONE RS COUNTY , FLOR I DA BY : ATTEST: ~ BY : 5a C ~INAGRBS,DCfor GARY KNOWLES, Clerk 1\centraa,..~ PUBLIC RISK - u -AF(U,QU0NIIISIIMIUO$~ Taylor County BOCC Board Meeting April 28 th , 2026 ■ Acentria Team ■ Claims Reporting ■ 2025 Plan Renewal ■ Plan Options and Savings ■ Recommended Dual-Option Plan ■ Health Reimbursement Arrangement (HRA) ■ Alternate Renewal Strategies Michael Watkins Daniel Tillman VP - Benefits Consultant VP - Benefits Consultant 3 Cassidy Wagner Account Manager Robin Riley SVP - Client Services l \centria~~ PUBLIC RISK -- n -- Afo.tCWQtllSIIP!llmCISW/INff Pr emium vs Claims Incurred Incl uding IBNR - Basic Fiii 1 1 .. Capitation Managed claims toPr emium Medic.al Ph am1acy Total Payments Premium Ratio. Payments Payments Payments 2024-01 $283,071 I $700.67 $89 , 243 $10,609 $80,809 $180,661 63.8% 2024-02 406 $284,872 $701.65 $191 ,911 $10,662 $7:?,162 $274,735 96.4% 2024-03 410 $286,612 $699.05 $119,738 $10,767 $73,750 $204,254 71.3% 2024 -04 415 $290,101 $ 699 .04 $20 5,581 $10,898 $58,256 $274,73 5 94.7% 2024-05 425 $293,709 $691.08 $130,434 $11,161 $96,953 $238,548 81.2% ~ 415 $287,762 $ 693.40 $46, 913 $10,898 $64,929 $122,740 42. 7% 2024-07 413 $285,265 $69 1.68 $81, 056 $10,845 $96,499 $188,401 66.0% ----2024-08 413 $283,682 $686 . 88 $131,908 $10,845 $75,007 $217,759 76.8% 2024-09 408 $280,800 $ 688 .24 $1 22 ,18~ $10,714 $90,193 $223,089 79.4% :!024- 10 $278,734- $ 662 .08 $111 , 60 7 $11,055 $ 103,541 $226,203 81. 2% ...lli.il!_ $273,691 19 57 .91 $8 5, 565 $10,924 $64,187 $160,6 76 58.7% , o i~ -12 !-~~.7~6 i66F3 F41~8§ m 1li~8 m 4 .~~~ ! 199,703 7 M ~ 2025-01 $278,778 $663.76 $102,533 $11,554 $80,505 $194,592 69.8% 2025-02 $279,398 $666. 82 $256,733 $11,_527 $81,271 $349,53 0 125. 1% 2025-03 412 I 197 J $276,056 $670.04 $188, 266 $11,334 $66,564 $266, 164 96. 4% 2025-04 405 194 $271,473 $670.30 $87, 170 $11,142 $91,974 $190,285 70.1% .. --- $277, 53 92025-05 416 196 $667. 16 $76 , 074 $11,444 $84,287 $171,804 61.9%... 195 $277,4 :io°' $666. 90 $9 2, 598 $11,444 $78,337 $182,379 65 .7%2025-06 416 2025-07 415 ~ $276,189 $665.52 $148, 268 $11,4 17 $128,600 $288,285 104.4% 2025-08 407 189 $269,811 $662-93 $100,769 $11,197 $58,808 $170,773 63 .3% ~ ... 183 $264,432 $661.08 $146,474 $11,004 $80,272 $237,750 89.9 %2025-09 + 2025-10 399 181 $260,012 $ 651.66 $128 ,338 $10,976 $133,321 $272 ,635 104.9% 2025-11 401 183 $260,872 $650.55 $333, 004 $11,032 $67,447 $4 11 ,482 157.7% I 2025-12 I 395 182 $2 58 ,540 $654.53 $1 39,872 $10 ,866 $98,244 $248,982 96.3% Total bv Experien ce Period Current Penod 4 ,905 2,291 $3,250,531 $1, 800 , 098 $134,937 Sl ,04 9 ,628 $2, 984 ,662 91.8 % Pnor Period 4, 969 2,383 $3,4 09,455 $1 ,3 90,426 $130,486 $990,592 $2,511,504 73.7% % Chanf}e 4 Cu r rent Penod vs (1.3% ) (3.9% ) (3 . 4%) 31.2% 4 .8% 7. 3% ~0 .4% Prior Period ) \cent ri aPU8UC RISK ~ -..._,-;;;;;- Claim Expenses by Size of Payment Latest Report 1111. Payments Total 407___, 100.0 % $ 2, 7 61,496 . 96 1 00 .0% <$ . 01 1 0 . 2% $0 . 00 0.0% $.01 - $49 14 3.4% $363.65 0 .0% $50 - $99 2 1 5. 2% $1,504.39 0. 1% $ 1 00 - $249 45 11.1 % $7, 168 . 09 0 .3% $i50-$499 55 ~. 5% $2 0, 2 34.7 9 0.7% $500-$999 59 14 .5 0/o $ 4 2, 845 . 89 1.6 % $1,000 - $2 , 499 71 1 7.4% $ 115 , 168 . 83 4 .2% -$2,500 - $4,999 41 10 .1% $ 1 44, 9 47.32 5. 2% $5,000-$9,999 38 9 .3% $2 84 ,427. 75 10.3% $10, 000 - $14,999 18 4 .4% $223 , 19 1.32 8 .1% $15,000 - i19,999 15 3.7% $2 58 ,693 .8 1 9 .4% $20,000 - $24,999 5 1 . 2% $ 109 ,598 . 66 4 .0 o/o 29,999 4 1.0 % $ 112, 4 36.24 4 .1% 39,99 9 6 1.5 % $2 03,,!! 57 . 20 7.4 % 49,999 4 1 .0% $ 176J 583.91 6 .4% 74,999 3 0 .7% $ 165 , 439 . 59 6.0 % -$99,999 0 .2% $9 2, 056 . 95 3. 3% $ 1 00 000 - $124 , 999 :! 0 .5% $2 11 , 594 . 91 7 .7% $125,000 - $149,999 3 0.7% $431,260.87 15 . 6% $150 , 000-$174 , 999 1 0 .2% $160,122.79 5.8% Previous 3 Quarters .$125,000-$149,999 2 0 . 5% $270,550.25 10.9% $150,000 - $174,999 1 0 .2% $157,246.90 6.4 % 5 $125,000 - $149,999 3 -.$125,000- $149,999 2 0 .7% $409,476.9 4 16.8% 0 . 5% $255,903.22 10 . 5% P\centriaPUBLIC RISK -:=. ._-;;;;;;;- 1\centria, ~ Pl.8UC RISK -.-.-.~~ JaylOf c.ounty Board of County CommKSlonef'S Enrollment 92 30 35 42 6 Unltl!d H«althall! DU6fMOO Choice+ LflOCV PPO $1 ,000 $2, 000 2011 $5,000 $10,000 Cowrl!dlnFYII $20 $35 $0 $35 $70 $2000/4000 5011 $16000/32000 Medical Unitl!d Hnlthcaro EKRVMOO Cholce♦ L,pcy PPO $1,000 $2,000 2011 $5,000 $10,000 Cov,rl!d in Full $20 $35 $0 $75 2011 after Ooductiblt COven!d Nl Ful l $150DOP 2011 alttr Dtductlblt 2011 alttr Oeductlblt $10 $35 $70 $2000/4000 5011 $16000/32000 $774.86 $1,898.41 Sl.441.24 $2,33234 5276,641 533~, 033 -25,020 -0 .N 1\centria, ~ PUBUC RISK ~-----;;;;- Based on Current Enrollment Plan Benefit Summary TOTAL PREMIUM CQUf:ffi CQSI CQUtHY SA~lt!IGS ESI SA~lt!IGS Cw:atn1 $1,000 Ded, 80%, $5,000 OOP Max $3,240,746.40 $2,947,788.84 N/A N/A Choice Plus Plans $2,000 Ded, 80%, $6,000 PPO Max $3,189,853.68 $2,901,410. 89 $46,377.95 -1.57% $2,500 Ded, 80%, $6,000 OOP Max $3,168,062.52 $2,881,590. 21 $66,198.63 -2.25% $1,500 Ded, 80%, $6,500 OOP Max $3,065,958.24 $2,788,719.13 $159,069.71 -5.40% HSA - $1,650 Ded, 80%, $8,050 OOP Max $2,765,546.40 $2,515,471 .79 $432,317.05 -14.67% t!ll:IP- t!leitbbochood l:laallb Plan In - Network Only- OON Emergency Only $1,000 Ded, 80%, $5,000 OOP Max $2,505,948.36 $2,279,347.86 $668,440. 98 -22.68% $1,500 Ded, 80%, $6,500 OOP Max $2,479,391.40 $2,255, 192.26 $692,596.58 -23.50% $2,500 Dec, 80%, $7,500 OOP Max $2,393,401.20 $2,176,977.79 $770,811.05 -26.15% $2,500 Ded, 80%, $5,500 OOP Max $2,360,655.12 $2,147,192 .77 $800,596.07 -27.16% ( ER and Major Diagnostics Ded & Coins) l:IBA Plan - Exampla $2,000 Ded, 80%, $7,500 OOP Max 2,780,116.20 7 2,528,721 . 14 $419,067.70 -14.22% Based on Current Enrollment Plan Benefit Summary Current $1,000 Ded, 80%, $5,000 OOP Max NHP - Neighborhood Health Plan In-Network Only- OON Emergency Only $1,500 Ded, 80%, $6,500 OOP Max (ER and Major Diagnostics Ded & Coins) HRA Plan - Example $2,000 Ded, 80%, $7,500 OOP Max TOTAL PREMIUM COUNTY COST COUNTY SAVINGS EST. SAVINGS $3,240,746.40 $2,947,788.84 N/A N/A $2,479,391.40 $2,255,192.26 $692,596.58 -23.50% 2,780,116.20 s 2,528,721.14 $419,067.70 -14.22% Health Reimbursement Arrangement (HRA) What Is an HRA (Health Reimbursement Arrangement)? • Employer-funded plan that helps offset employee out - of-pocket medical expenses • Can reduce health i nsurance premiums without increas i ng employee costs How the HRA Works • Employees pay medical expenses first ; employer reimburses eligible costs • Reimbursements apply only after a set out-of - pocket threshold i s met • Covers qualified out-of-pocket expenses only (no direct provider payments) • Employees remain responsible for all copays Example Plan : $2 , 000 Deductible , 80% coinsurance , $7,500 Out-of-Pocket Maximum Current Plan : $1 , 000 Deductible , 80% coinsurance , $5 , 000 Out-of-Pocket Maximum HRA Reimbursement for SINGLE COVERAGE Deductible Coinsurance Employee Pays Out-of-Pocket up to $5,000 $2,000 20% Taylor BOCC Reimburses Out-of-Pocket up to $2,500 Accumulated Maximum Out of Pocket $5,000 $7,500 Once the $8,700 individual maximum out of pocket has been met , the HRA reimbursement stops, and the carrier pays 100 % 9 ■ Dual-Option Plan Design ■ HDHP - HRA/HSA Compatible Plan ■ Medical Expense Reimbursement Plan {MERP) ■ Level-Funded ■ Captives & Partially Self-Funded Medical Plan 10 1\centria,..~ PIJBUC RISK --:;;:;.:<r~ ~\centria,-~ PUBLIC RISK - n -,.FO.KW~ .....nvtSCQW#ff Questions? Thank you! 11 • JAMIE ENGLISH District 1 JIM MOODY Distri ct2 MICHAEL NEWMAN Distrlct3 PAM FEAGLE District4 THOMAS DEMPS District 5 TAYLOR COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS GARY KNOWLES, Clerk of Court Post Office Box 620 Perry, Florida 32348 (850) 838-3506 Phone (850) 838-3549 Fax April 29, 2026 Ms . Shannon Gore LAWANDA PEMBERTON, County Admi,.is1,m., 201 Easl Green Slreet Perry, Florida 32347 (850) 838-3500, extension 7 Phone (850) 838-3501 Fax Florida Department of Environmental Protection , Northeast District 8800 Baymeadows Way West, Suite 100 Jacksonville, Florida 32256-7590 RE : Foley Cellulose LLC , Draft Permit FL0000876-09-IWIS, Taylor County Wr itten Comments on the Department's March 17, 2026, Notice of Draft CONRAD C. BISHOP, JR , County Attorney Post Office Box 167 Perry, Florida 32348 (850) 584-6113 Phone (850) 584-2433 Fax The Taylor County, Florida Board of County Commissioners (Board) is providing additional written comments to those previously provided on February 20, 2026. The Board acknowledges and thanks the Department for scheduling the Public Meeting on April 23, 2026. The Department and Georgia-Pacific staff resources were professional and informative. The Board specifically requested the public meeting to discuss how the proposed discharge at D-001 will be controlled. Mr. Justin Bates of Georgia-Pacific shared that Foley Cellulose plans to use the seconda ry clarifier influent pump station , linked to the upstream Fenholloway River gauge, to ensure discharge occurs only when the gauge water level exceeds 2.7 feet and that no more than 12 milli on gallons are discharged in a single day. Removing Cell No. 1 of Lagoon 2 from flow-through service will be required , along with keeping water levels low in all Lagoon 2 cells and returning any accumulated stormwater to Lagoon 1 for treatment. As this involves modifications to the current treatment system , we ask that the application wastewater process diagram and the permit wastewater treatment description be updated to reflect this plan . The Board further requests, as this is a new control process, that a startup plan be required in the Schedule-Improvement Actions section of the permit to ensure that no accumulated waste materials in the Lagoon 2 flume system are discharged to the Fenholloway during startup. As Cells 2- 11 of Lagoon 2 have been bypassed from flow-through service, and with the planned bypass of Cell No. 1, Lagoon 2, the Board proposes that a wastewater system closure plan be required within 180 days of permit issuance for the bypassed treatment components. Implementing closure for these cells will reduce the amount of stormwater requiring treatment, thereby reducing the required discharge to surface waters. In addition to the Lagoon 2 Cells, the Board understands that the primary clarifier skimm ing pond and solid settling basins are no longer required as components of the wastewater treatment system . Closing these unnecessary cells will significantly reduce the volume of contaminated stormwater to be treated. The implementation of the closure plan for these cells should be included in the Schedule-Improvement Actions section of the permit. The Board understands that Foley Cellulose concluded , and the Department concurs, that the Production Well No. 2 operati on is not needed to maintain a groundwater capture zone within the permit-specified zone of discharge. This makes the control and treatment of accumulated stormwater the primary purpose of the wastewater treatment system. From discussions with Georgia-Pacific staff at the public meeting, we understand that temporary pumps and generators will be set up at the wastewater treatment system for hurricane season . The Board commends Foley Cellulose for being proactive. The Board recommends that Foley Cellulose be required to submit a stormwater management plan that includes the hurricane season and to provide an annual plan briefing to the Taylor County Division of Emergency Management. The Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) document concerning Georgia-Pacific's Former Foley Mill Site Draft Industrial Waste Permit provided to the public by the Department indicates " ... the remaining discharge is temporary and associated with closure and decommissioning activities, which are expected to take approximately three to five years. Permitting and constructing alternative disposal systems would likely take longer than the remaining closure work, delaying potential sale or redevelopment of the site ." If the Department proceeds with permitting Foley Cellulose to discharge at D-001 , the Board requests that a comprehensive closure plan for the site, solid waste management, and wastewater treatment be submitted within 180 days of permit issuance. The plan should include an implementation schedule and require a quarterly progress report. This comprehensive closure plan requirement should be included in the Schedule-Improvement Actions section of the permit. The apparent basis for proposing the use of D- 001 is that it will speed the closure process. With that basis, a closure plan and schedule must be required to ensure the closure is temporary and completed as quickly as practicable. The D- 001 discharge alternative is the least desirable option . If a discharge is permitted at D-001 , the Board seeks to make it as temporary as possible. If the Industrial Wastewater Permit is to be renewed in five years, the Board believes this permit is not in the Taylor County Public Interest. For the Taylor County Board of Commissioners , Jamie English Chairperson CC : Honorable Corey Simon , Florida Senate Honorable Jason Shoaf, Florida House USEPA R4 Administrator FDEP Secretary HODGES PARK TIM ELI NE 2017-2026 Land and water conservation Fund (LWCF) .oJ ·-;; w-k:i~~i~l-~ I- 3~ • 2017-202_Q'The county would have needef.l to wait for the LWCF funding cycle. Question: When was the funding requested? 8/20/20 (3 yrs Later)_ LWCF Grant Award Notice. Question: Why didn't we go ahead at this point and start the process? Answer: CO. Ad min, I am o.ot sure why the engineer did not begin the bid documents. - 1/21/2021 (5 mos Later) LWCF notice of delay due to fed gov closure. We were not sure if the grant would still be awarded after this shutdown. In addition, after grant submission LWCF results normally take a year to know if the county is being awarded the grant. Also, a grant stRPli~atiop GeOUJJln.Q.1....b.e_s_u.bmill~d until a concepmal.plan was provided by the engin.e~u to the grants depl.. ~ T-4 L.tr7l~ ~ ~1"(\ --- ~ {,~ ~ 0/'-'wJfd/, ~ ,~ ~ .,.5/18/2021 (4 mos Later after the delay notice and 9 mos after the notice of award) LWCF Grant Agreement,,4_wa.rded. ~w 11 ,1 , j a_,,,_ . -ibok 1"'1 R5 -tD :[,]) tt r(,N'~ rvl 7/31/2023 (2 years after the grant was awarded~ _LW_CJ:.Ame_ndment #1 Grant Extension Question: Why was the grant extended after 2 years of doing nothing? Answer: The county engineer did not \ prepare the bid documents. Due to engineer workload it was determined the project would be changed from construction only to design/build. 8/20/2024 (1 year later after Amendment #1 Extension was requested and 3 years after the grant was awarded and 7 years since 2017 when this project was started and 1 year from the time it was decided to change from construction only to design/build). LWCF Amendment #2 grant extension. Question: Why was it extended again after amendment #1? Answer: The project still had not been prepared for bid. At this time it was determined that the county would submit a budget amendment Kreque~ to the Gulf Consortium to obtain additional tundj ng for outside engineering and project management assistance. - ~ 1 , ~tJ lA 1U A ~ ::ID CA. ~ ~. 7_/4{) -:y-rooi\ ~ -rr;~· \ ~ 2 y~ .5 ) + -foo k- -l-o :i:)) ~ ~ ' 4/21/2026 (2 years after grant extension #2 and 3 years after grant extension #1 and 9 years a endment #3_grant e*nsion Question: Why the delay? Aosw..e.c & ½:: Administration said this extension was delayed due to gov closure. Question: Why was this extended? Answer: The county was waiting for approval from the Gulf Consortium/restore Council and the Treasury Dept for approval to increase the project budget for engineering and project management services. NOIE.;_If:llS WAITING "[!AS. FOR 2 YE~ Question: When and how long was the gov closure to cause a 3 year delay?-'-<H rS. ~ ~ 5- A,-e'4Jli 4 M :~.? Note: Currently waiting on Amendment #3 that was just requested 4/21/2026 ~I::,}t""' • RES[ORE ACT P0t 3 FUNDING 10/2020 SEP Amendment to Gulf Consortium. Question: What was this amendment for? Answer: Required due to BOCC wanting to use Restore funds for canal dredging and land acquisition. /t' ~ t y~ Mk~ q_ AJO dtfq_~,-~ yd. 112021 (3 mos Later from 1012020) SEP Amendment approved ( on to Treasury Dept) 4/2021 (3 mos tater from 1012020) Grant appUcation to Balmoral 6/2021 (2 mos later from 4/2021) Grant AppUcation approved by Gulf ConsortiumA 6/2022 (1 year later from 1/2021 grant approval by Gulf Consortium) Grant approval by Treasury Dept for $1,075, 161. Treasury Dept requirement of topo survey and need to go through formal pro~~rr.'ent process for surye~ng. Need to execute formal bid process lo l]leet Treasury Dept requirements. ~ M .:.-f- ~ I~ y-,w--- -A,~ a_/opb~ vJ1f// ~, 9/6/2022 (3 mos later from grant approval by Treasury) Approval by aocc to advertise for toposurvey 10/18/2022_ RFQwasadvertlsed -4-~ --ropo $'<rf~(Rppllo,Je,,d 11/h 10/18/2022 SOQ's rcvd for surveying services 11/11/2022 CHW provided proposal 12/13/2022 Balmoral a~proved CHW proposat-,--rA:~ h11,~d/e.d ru kJy'> • 12/2022 Rcvd "~ar to proceed" from Batmoral 12/20/2022 Task order issued to CHW for topo survey 2/2024 (>2 years later) Topo survey completed. Questio : Why did it take 26 mos to complete? ANSWER: THE CO ENGINEER WAS WORKING WITH CHW. NOTE : PLEASE EXPLAIN \..C!'o~"1~ "'-'l-f" Cf/W 6o{ .2."11<;. ~/16/2024 AMENDMENT1 EXTENSION APPROVED. QUESTION: WHATAMENDMENTWASTHIS? ANSWER: For design/build engineering services. This was requested on 8/2024. 1/22/2025 (9 mos later from when Amendment 1 was approved and 3 years from when 1 st bud~et increase was requested) Submitted to Balmoral for budget increase from $1,075, 161 to $1,765,495. Question: Why did it take 9 mos? Answer: Wa iting on approval from Gulf Consortium and Treasury Dept. Question: _V\(hy did we wait 3 years from receiving additional funding in 2022 to request more funding in 2025? -12/2 2 1/05/2026 Amendment #2 Extend1zd cgntract tg 1/3112028 Question: Why another amendment? Answer: Was to increase the budget and allow for the county to ~;s -etpl,r~~" BUT TREASURY APPROVED THE B.U.OG__EJREQUESI0N 12/2025 FOR ENGINEE ING AND PRO ECT MANAGEMENT. WHY DID WE REQUEST AGAIN ON 1 /05/21l26 when funding was apP-roved just 1 mo P-rior??