COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY

Present: CRA Members: Also Present: CALL TO ORDER DUNEDIN, FLORIDA COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING THURSDAY, MAY 21, 2026 4:30 P.M. Cha ir Maureen "Moe " Freaney , Vice Chair Robert Walker , Members Tom Dugard , Jeff Gow , and Steven Sandbergen City Manager Jennifer Bramley , City Attorney Jennifer Cowan, City Clerk Michelle Wells , CRA/Economic Development Director Robert lronsmith , Economic Development Manager Matt Jackson , Special Projects Coordinator Trevor Davis , Economic Development Specialist Carolyn Homer , and Engineer Ill Martin Wade , P.E . Cha ir Freaney called the May 21 , 2026 , Community Redevelopment Agency Meeting to order at 4:30 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE City Attorney Cowan led the Pledge of Allegiance . CITIZEN INPUT Chair Freaney advised now was the time for anyone in the audience who wished to speak on a topic not on the agenda. Seeing and hear ing no one wishing to speak , Chair Freaney moved to the next agenda item. 1. BUSINESS 1.a. The Draft Minutes from the March 19, 2026 Community Redevelopment Agency Chair Freaney inquired if there were any corrections; hearing none, she asked for a mot ion. MOTION: Mot ion was made by Member Gow and seconded by Member Sandbergen to approve the March 19 , 2026 , Community Redevelopment Agency minutes. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously . 1.b. Community Redevelopment Agency Advisory Committee Chair Report CRAAC Minutes attached to the agenda item. CRAAC Chair Alan McHale was unable to attend today . Economic & Housing Development/CRA Director lronsmith noted this is the first time Chair McHale was unable to attend the CRA meet ing . The CRAAC meeting , similar to the agenda today , reviewed an update on Capital Projects and the Annual Report which has since been approved by the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA). 1.f. Community Redevelopment Agency Director's Report Economic & Housing Development/CRA Director lronsmith noted Engineer Ill Martin Wade , P.E. , Project Manager for several projects was present. Skinner Boulevard He and Mr . Wade met with Duke Energy ; they have relayed they are going to finish with the undergrounding over the next two to three months. 26-1

Regular Meeting Minutes May 21, 2026 Community Redevelopment Agency The landscaping aspect has been bid let by DOT ; they are anticipating to begin landscaping probably in the late fall or winter of this year. Regarding the undergrounding there was one property owner who has not yet complied with signing an easement. Staff is starting to get a little bit of an aud ience with him and will know a little more next week and hopefully make that work. An adjacent property owner seems to have some influence , and the thinking is that might be the best way forward. Public Input Chair Freaney opened the item for public input. Mike Short of 946 Highland Avenue inquired who is technically responsible now for the Skinner landscaping as it exists today, who will have that responsibility post the DOT work. He thinks definitely from his perspective as a homeowner who walks that area right now , there are serious weed problems that exist today. He is not sure who is responsible. If this was a residential yard situation, they already could potentially be getting violations for weeds probably 2 - 3 feet tall along Skinner today. Economic Development Manager Jackson responded and advised he has been working with the DOT. When the project is constructed it will be the responsibility of DOT for the landscaping and irrigation including maintenance of that , DOT and their contractor. There will be a 2-year establishment period ; once that is over and the project has been accepted by the FOOT as being complete then the City will be responsible for the maintenance of the landscaping and irrigation . Mr. lronsmith advised this information has been shared with Parks Director Mulkey. It is certainly something that will be in the budget ongoing . Mr. Short explained the weeds are in where the new sidewalk areas have been installed. Basically, minimal landscaping was put down and now you have a bunch of weed growth happening in that minimal landscaping, he would assume DOT put down . Mr. lronsmith responded that staff could walk over there; he understood and the City wants it to look good; a lot of money has been spent on this project. More construction is due to be done and some certain things in the area. He is aware Deputy City Manager Quintas brought up today there were some areas he was unhappy with that they needed to restore to the sidewalk , some street print and things like that. Mr. Short noted they understand there is going to be more construction, undergrounding and so forth and the sidewalk will be loose gravel for a time; it is more of the landscaping and weed issues. Hearing and seeing no one else wishing to speak, Chair Freaney closed the public input. Main Street Streetscape Project - Pinellas Trail to Broadway Mr . lronsmith advised plans have been finalized; because it took longer than expected the project was deferred to next late spring , April or May. Staff received some calls with concerns and did not want to impact the merchants during the prime winter season. Grand Oak Park Mr. lronsmith advised Grand Oak Park has been extended for a longer time period than expected. A significant variable has been the slab that was existing. The decision was made to keep that concrete slab because of impact to the tree and that has been difficult. Engineer Ill Wade, P.E. advised: 26-2

Regular Meeting Minutes May 21, 2026 Community Redevelopment Agency When Grand Oak Park started the City had to file for a building permit making it run a couple of weeks along with some design changes which were minor involving ADA items and step details. The contractor began demolition work and form and trench work for their seat walls , brick walls and had problems with foundation subgrade compaction. They had to pull out some work they had already put in the ground because their testing reports did not pass. They were asked to restart their work so, there was a time delay there. Underground conditions they have run into include the old City Hall/Library building has an air duct return vent under the slab. All the way around the perimeter of the building there is a 2-ft. by 1-ft void which they see a metal pan in it. There is a perimeter area where there are possible cracked slabs; they are working through that opportunity now to work on that fix. There was a little delay on the electrical subcontractor opportun ities on routing conduit based on the old slab trying to get back to where he has to eventually power his system at the new building location. This has all happened within two or three months . The last opportunities were possibly making Grant Street a two-way Street. Engineering has met with the contractor on site, Parks and Development to talk about how Grant Street will work and what impact there is possibly on the tree. That plan had to be redesigned to try to keep the sidewalk in on the east part of the old inside to not impact the tree. That took another week or two to reprice and redesign. They have worked through a lot of hurdles so far and right now they are back to installing underground conduit. They are coming back tomorrow to restart their rebar and the foundation on the restroom facility. Also , in the bid package there was a foundation design for the restroom . About a month and half into the project City staff asked a question of the structural designer on the restroom and got a revised drawing to change the foundation size. Now the City is paying the contractor to redo their forms and redo the foundation work for the restroom. The project is getting almost close to moving forward out of the tunnel of all the hurdles to get going . Commission Questions Chair Freaney inquired in terms of the restroom if there were things the City should have or could have known about and should have planned better. She questioned how the slab could be too big. Mr. Wade advised he was in conversation with the public restrooms company and with the superintendent of the construction site and he basically said, on our project , we tried to plan ahead and build the foundation with this general contractor, whose statement to him was normally they are 3 weeks prior to the building coming on site they are building the foundation and right now the public restroom company is designing this building for the City and that came up during their design. Mr. Wade did not know why it was changed , but for some reason he changed the width and depth of the foundation. Chair Freaney expressed concern that someone made a mistake and it is costing the City more money. 26-3

Regular Meeting Minutes May 21, 2026 Community Redevelopment Agency Vice Chair Walker stated his understanding the City was paying the contractor to redo the design due to their design specifications being changed at some point. Mr. Wade explained the restroom company is the designer; the City paid them prior to bidding the project. The City had a foundation drawing in their set to have the general contractor the City has under contract to build the foundation. During the interim while they are designing their building he must have found an error or he changed the design criteria. The restroom company reissued that drawing, so the City's general contractor has to revise the foundation work. Vice Chair Walker commented he did not see how the City would be responsible for that. Mr. Wade stated he could send that bill to the public restroom company; however ... Vice Chair Walker noted the CRA went through essentially the design review on this and approved it based on the dimensions and the specs that staff had at that particular time. Then because there was an error on their part or there was a change to drawing or whatever; he is not sure how this becomes the responsibility of the City. City Manager Bramley stated she thought City staff needed to dig deeper into that. The project is underway; it is not finished yet ; there is still a lot of work to do. The City needs to move forward with the project whatever happens, the foundation needs to happen and then staff will need to work with the contractor on the design of the restrooms to make sure the City is made whole as a result of this issue. Mr. Sandbergen referred to the pictures that were shown and asked if that is going to try to be saved or is it all coming out. That is going towards where the rebar is and going towards the blue wheelbarrow in the background. He asked if this is going to cost the City more money. Mr. Wade explained: The slab is staying in. The repair to make sure there are no voids under the slab; that slab is going to cost more money. In response to the question if at this point is it too far into it and too late and if it was a local contractor; the City asked for two pricing options , one to fill the voids with a flowable fill, lean concrete or to saw cut the slab and find the voids and fill it with sand and compact that. Mr . Sandbergen commented then the contractor was out there prior to this, he would assume and asked did they just miss this or was it the responsibility of the City to tell them. Mr. lronsmith recalled there was a contingency of about $15,000. Mr. Wade advised there is a contingency in the project; the City has $75,000 allowance in the budget on the project for contingencies. City Manager Bramley clarified when City staff bids the project they add in the contingency to the total amount of the project and that is a "just-in-case" for this type of thing. So, the total amount of the project will not increase. The contingency is used like a reserve built into every project. Mr . Sand bergen asked starting from this day when will it be known the additional financial damage, if that is a number the City can reach or obtain. Mr. Wade explained there were two quotes from the general contractor to fill it with cement mix that is approximately $5,500 or a quote to saw the slab open, put in fill and compact it and know all the voids are taken care of. With the flowable fill, staff is concerned that if 26-4

Regular Meeting Minutes May 21 , 2026 Community Redevelopment Agency there is a blockage somewhere that material is going to stop right there or they have to start cutting open the slab to find voids underneath it. Mr. Sandbergen asked what is the fastest this part could be done. Mr. lronsmith stated he thought they were moving forward with it right now. He thought the other considerat ion was the tree; obviously , when there is concrete or things are poured to stabilize. Pretty much there are the prices from Ali. He knows the Arbor ist has been out there . He thought there was clear direction at this point in ti me. As City Manager Bramley ment ioned , this is part of that unforeseen where the Ci ty has a contingency. There has already been a bid amount; it has already been approved by the Comm ission. Actually , the City is in decent shape other than it is taking longer than expected. Chair Freaney asked for clar ification if this was foreseeable on behalf of the contractor or the City prior to actually digging in there. Mr . lronsmith stated he did not believe so because it is underneath the slab and there was no way to do it. The slabs were not open during their site visit. Mr . Wade explained the contractor saw cut that edge off for the building foundation work and that is when it opened up. Staff had no idea there was an underground air duct. Mr. Gow noted it seemed the path forward was to cut the slab and fill it in . Mr. Wade advised the Arborist was there today and it seemed there were not any impacts on the tree right now . Mr. Gow stated his understanding the reason that slab was there at all is because they were afraid to take it out because of the damage it would do to the trees . He asked what does this now say about picking it all up or is there a concern that if you cut the slab , it could hurt the trees. Mr. lronsmith commented that is why the Arborist was there and he thought now that it is exposed, they can see the roots of the tree. It is his understanding the Arborist is comfortable with it being compacted or putting some concrete or material in there ; that is based on the visual the Arborist did not have before when the slab was totally there . These are small sections that would be taken out. Mr. lronsmith commented there has always been great concern; that is a beautiful Grand Oak Tree. Everyone agrees and wants to make sure that tree stays well. This went back and forth with staff quite a few times relative to take the slab , don 't take the slab . There was a judgement call at that point in time that the best way to go was to keep slab there . Of course, now finding things underneath the slab not known before, it is causing a little change in direction looking to take out some portions of the slab and fill it in to stabilize it. That is where it stands today . Mr . Gow asked the impact on the timeline for completion. Mr. Wade stated there was no estimate given on a time line for fill work ; it will probably be two weeks prior to do that work. The timeline on the project if moving forward with Grant Street , that will be a 3-month addition of ti me on the project. The time is dependent on Grant Street that is going to come before the Commission in June which is another possible change to the project. Mr . Gow noted Grant Street is currently one-way and making it two-way is what is going to come to the Comm ission . He asked how does that impact anything . 26-5

Regular Meeting Minutes May 21 , 2026 Community Redevelopment Agency Mr. Wade explained it is the same contractor and they have waited . There are two columns to be built on Grant Street, and the sidewalk tied to existing sidewalk out there. The Grant Street project will change the sidewalk along Grant to pavers. The contractor has sort of held off their demolition work to see if Grant Street will move forward. The columns were actually repositioned currently in anticipation that it will move forward. Mr. lronsmith added Grant Street being two-way will encroach a little in to Grand Oak Park several feet , nothing dramatic; that way the sidewalk and the columns also need to be looked at with the two -way movement on Grant Street in order to get the depth for the parking stalls. It is only a couple of feet; however , that does change things a little . When Mr. Gow noted that now Grant Street is a "project" not just painting new lines to make it two-way now and Mr . lronsmith explained there is a sidewalk area that needs to be considered with the two-way movement on Grant Street. Mr . Wade explained the problem there is the 90-degree parking , the two-way movement is not wide enough , so people back their trucks or vehicles into those stalls and there is no 22 feet of travel path. The proposal is for diagonal parking and moving the sidewalk about 4 feet. Mr. Dugard expressed his concern for the extra work. He thought his questions were covered for the most part except for the independent nature of the contractor providing the City the facilities to change the plans . He asked how that happened . Mr. Wade stated it was the restroom company that changed the plan; in terms of on what authority he thought the structural designer signed off on that. Their plans have to go through State review . He talked with the City's Building Department and they will issue something similar to a product like a trailer. For the modular building their review goes to the State. That structural engineer 's design has to meet the City's conditions, sign it and stamp it and be assured of his design for the State review. He acknowledged he did not know the reason for the change in the design. Mr. Dugard explained he wanted the City to be really sure of the source for the change, which it appeared was not known at this moment so , he would like to get that cleared before assigning any blame. If it is not their fault that the plans had to be changed; if it is someone else 's that is another matter . But if it is the contractor that is independently changing that. Mr. Dugard commented in looking at what the City could have done better on this one; what is the after action report on how the City could have done better. What did Mr. Wade wish the City had before getting started and asked if he could make a list. Mr. Wade stated it is a difficult site to fit everything wanted in that area and work ing next to an existing building where there were a lot of things left on that site once they started digging . A clean site would have been perfect. Mr. Dugard noted that was in the interest of the tree the site could not be clean with the tree being of such a value. Mr. Wade noted that was the previous demolition condition and Mr. Dugard noted he understood not having a clean site made it somewhat blind as to what was underneath . Mr. Dugard asked the numbers for just getting back to the place the City wants to be. Mr . lronsmith responded it was $12,000 to $15 ,000. Mr. Wade advised : 26-6

Regular Meeting Minutes May 21, 2026 Community Redevelopment Agency There is a Change Order that will go out for approximately $6,600 to change the restroom foundation work , that is separate . The second Change Order is to fix the vo ids underneath the bu ilding wi th two options which have not been decided , one is approximately $5 ,500 for the flowable fill and the other $12 ,600 for cutting the slab open and filling it with soil material and compacting. Hopefully , now all the voids underneath the slab would be corrected and that metal pan that spanned those voids underneath all those rotten , rusty metal pans is what is holding that concrete up . No one will ever say they are not going to drive a vehicle on the pavers ; however , we know there is going to be a pickup truck or a truck up there one day. That is what they are trying to prevent having a crack on the slab and have a fall in on that slab . Mr. Wade explained : What initiated all this was he asked questions about their drawings on the foundation work. It went back to the structural engineer and that is when he revised his draw ing. One side is the restroom that is the change in foundation size and depth and redoing all the formwork is $6 ,600. The other side is the voids underneath the existing concrete with two options to repair it. Either fill with a lean concrete mix or cut the existing slab open and fill it with soil material and compact it. Those two numbers are mid - $5 ,000's and middle $12 ,000 's. In response to Cha ir Freaney, Mr. lronsmith acknowledged there was a Landscape Architect that did the overall plan was correct and NPRC did the restroom aspect. In response to Chair Freaney's question it was clarified the restroom coming in a larger foundation is not what impacted the design itself. City Manager Bramley explained it did not have to be a larger foundation , and acknowledged everything else did not have to be moved around differently. Chair Freaney referred to the comment that part of the issue is hard to fit and asked if there is trouble fitting it and already taking some of the park for the parking, is the City really sure that Grant Street should be changed from a one-way street to a two-way street. City Manager Bram ley stated she thought the two-way street is much more efficient , actually during just normal activity in that area. There are people , as the CRA members have all seen , going both ways down that street. Chair Freaney noted that street has functioned very well for as long as she has lived in the city , 42 years . She understands that people kind of cheat sometimes ; howeve r. City Manager Bramley thought in the long term that the two-way on that street with the pavers for the sidewalk and also expanding subject to the Commission approval coming up the asphalt area up to the crosswalk at Grant and Highland to address the ADA issues on those two ramps as well. She thinks the project once complete the traffic is going to circulate better . The pavers on the sidewalk will certainly look better. A couple of parking spaces might be lost and looking to pick those up elsewhere as well , but she thinks it will be better for the project in the long term . Ultimately , that two-way is going to be up to the CRA/Commission; th is other work can cont inue. Chair Freaney noted her concern of not losing part of the park if that does not have to be done . 26-7

Regular Meeting Minutes May 21, 2026 Community Redevelopment Agency Chair Freaney referred to the timeline delayed for three months and it is because of adjustments to the two-way. Mr. Wade explained it won't be delayed; it is just they have more work to do, so it is stretching out, not being delayed. The Completion Date is stretched out three more months. What is causing that is the work to complete Grant Street. In response to Chair Freaney's concerns it was acknowledged there is no change to how the park is being done; there is no change in how the two-way street is because of the foundation or the slab. Mr. lronsmith noted as far as encroachment he recalled it was about 3 or 4 feet into the park. This is not a huge chunk of the park. Chair Freaney expressed she was still not convinced and thought the City could handle ADA standards even with Grant Street left one-way and change the park. Vice Chair Walker commented he thought none of them really understood the root cause here and how to get at the root of the matter; who pays for the cut. He recalled the slab discussion very well. It was his understanding at the time and he wanted to confirm, there was ground penetrating radar used to look at the thickness of the slab. Mr. Wade stated he did not know the answer to that. Vice Chair Walker thought the City did, because that is how the slab was found and the roots. The next question noting that ground penetrating radar should be able to measure the thickness of that slab and also identify voids underneath the slab. There is a significant contrast between, just based on density. He was having a difficult time with whether or not, how this was determined, because the ground penetrating radar was used those voids should have been found. The question is who is responsible for that survey. City Manager Bramley commented she thought Vice Chair Walker had a very good point; however, did not think staff knew the answer right now for who is responsible for reading that survey and what degree of ground penetrating radar was done, how wide it was and so forth and the determination to keep that portion of the slab and so forth. She thought staff needed to dig deeper into this if the Members would allow them to as staff to get to the origin of why this happened and report back. She would rather gather all these questions and be able to meet as staff and then report back . Vice Chair Walker noted he understood Mr. Wade was in a difficult situation being new to the City. Vice Chair Walker clarified with Mr. lronsmith the Grant Street modification cost is separate, a Change Order and it will come to the Commission as a Budget Amendment. When Vice Chair Walker inquired about the estimated cost, City Manager Bramley advised it was not complete and staff would report back on that cost. City Manager Bramley noted this is still subject to approval by the City Commission moving forward. Mr. Dugard inquired if his understanding was correct in that the City has tied together the Grant Street project with the park project because those are through the same contractor. Mr. Wade advised that was the staff goal; they have not tied anything together yet. He acknowledged it was correct that is affecting all of the timeline work as of right now. They are trying to move forward with the on-site contractor . 26-8

Regular Meeting Minutes May 21, 2026 Community Redevelopment Agency Mr. Dugard noted if that is the case and the Grant Street project has not been approved yet , nothing can really move forward on anything without that approval in June or July . Mr. Wade noted that was one of the variables ; they have sort of delayed some of the work on Grant Street because of trying to do a two-way street. City Manager Bramley added , that is on Grant Street; staff is still figuring out what to do on-site on the park . She clarified with Mr. Wade that can move forward regardless of what happens with Grant Street. Mr. Dugard commented it appears to him the ambitions to do a couple of th ings have led into a time trap and that is connecting these two projects . He is not sure when seeing projects com ing forward they see something being connected . If that is the case then those are problems because when making another decision in the future they might be affect ing more than one project. Chair Freaney thought staff did talk about the sidewalk or the two-way street when they presented it. She understood Mr. Dugard 's point and thought they are kind of tied because of the need for the extra parking space which would not be needed if the street did go to two-way . Mr. lronsmith acknowledged that was correct. City Manager Bramley explained the Grant Street project would be a Change Order to the existing contract that would come to the City Commission. The reason staff wanted to use the ex isting contractor is because the City would save money because they are already mobilized; they are already on site . If the Grant Street project were to be done as a separate project later on which it could or not at all. Then Grant Street as a separate project later on would be more expensive . If the decision is no then staff will go according to the original plan and move forward and it is done . Chair Freaney asked if City staff is happy with the current contractor ; are they on top of it. Mr. Wade stated they are gain ing speed . Chair Freaney asked the expected end date with all this going on , worst case scenario . Mr. Wade responded the restroom will probably be late November , early December on- site . Mr. lronsmith advised they were looking at the park completed independent sooner. Mr . Wade clarified the whole item is the park; electrical is fed through the restroom eventually. There will be a temporary power source possibly; however , really the whole site needs to be finished before letting people begin moving around in there . There will be an open foundation waiting for the restroom to set down on the slab and then come back and put bricks down in front. Chair Freaney noted her concerns for upcoming events , Wines the Blues and Chr istmas , clearly for Old Fashioned Chr istmas and so forth. City Manager Bramley advised : As part of a separate report , she thought it was important to do that on the dais in the public and not be a separate cover to all the Members in an email. Staff will put together that timeline and circle back with the contractor most certainly . Mr . Wade was being very diplomatic; she was not happy with the contractor. This is going too slow ; their references were checked and they have done work for the City before and did a great job. She does want to circle back with them and put together the full picture for all the Members as well as the revised schedule and the completion date 26-9

Regular Meeting Minutes May 21, 2026 Community Redevelopment Agency and report back on the dais. Obviously, the City is under contract and cannot dictate means and methods. They are so far behind schedule; the City would have to enter into liquidated damages first and that type of a thing. In response to the question of the penalty for being so far behind schedule City Manager Bramley explained it is a certain cost per day, which she thought that was not even close as yet with this project. Mr. Sandbergen asked if there is talk about those sheets of metal that could be seen protruding, underneath that. Mr. Wade explained the way it was built, they poured a 4-inch slab on the dirt, built block walls and spanned that metal air duct with that metal pan, and then they poured 4 inches on top of that. That 4 inches was the floor of City Hall. With that side open you have that void underneath there that is that old air duct below the pan. Mr. Gow asked if that the floor being seen now, there is 4 inches underneath that as well. Mr. Wade explained there is a 4-inch slab on the ground below. Mr. Sandbergen commented it looks like concrete, metal, then concrete. Chair Freaney determined at this time the agenda needed to move forward and noted City Manager Bramley and City staff were aware of what needed to be done in this situation. CRA Member Comments Vice Chair Walker noted the many red flags. In his experience with this type of situation in the Navy how they would handle it is stop work, hold a formal critique, assign root cause , identify the corrective action. In this particular case, throwing money against it is not the right answer, because he did not think the City is responsible for a lot of these costs. Mr. Sandbergen commented it was ironic that this week someone said to him "I finally see contractors working on the park." It goes along with the comments by City Manager Bramley which at the time he had no idea what they were talking about until today. Mr . Gow commented he was disappointed. Mr. Dugard commented it appears there were all good intents to try to combine several projects and try to save some money in doing so. This now has three pieces to it, the street, the foundation and the slab in the restroom; actually four . Because of these changes and discoveries it is getting close to going over the costs. He is very pleased regarding staff doing their best to stay under budget. Chair Freaney commented she had been given some indication for the lack of urgency from the contractor from some of the businesses across the street so, this is not a surprise. In her opinion there would be no way to go into business with the same company if they were not even doing this well. She noted City staff knows what needs to be done and would not reiterate her comments. She noted she did want to see a timeline that is going to not have this mess in the middle of the City's events. Mr. lronsmith continued with the remainder of the report : Downtown Parking Garage The Request for Proposal (RFP) is anticipated to be going out in the next couple of weeks to the three shortlisted qualified firms approved. Private Parking Garage That garage is anticipated to get started in the next several weeks. 26-10

Regular Meeting Minutes May 21 , 2026 Update of Master Plan Community Redevelopment Agency Staff is in the process of looking to update the Master Plan which was done back in 2012/2013 . That will be part of next fiscal year ; it will be seen in the approval process. Staff is looking to use Forward Pinellas that has been very accommodating in working with the City; that will save quite a bit of money. The City only has to do the Economic Development portion of the Downtown so , the City 's contribution will be quite a bit less than what the actual plan would cost. Upcoming at the Next CRA Meeting There will be some updated by-laws for the CRA that City Attorney Cowan has prepared. Renewal of the Bushnell lots at 15 Edgewater Park CRA Member Questions Chair Freaney requested an update on all the sidewalks in the downtown and how they are being inspected. She noted she is seeing some spots that cannot wait for the Streetscaping project. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 5:23 p.m . NOTE : The meeting was completely recorded and the recording is in the official file . ~ rr ~, ~ / Maureen "Moe " Freaney ~ CRA Chair Attest · 26-11

1. BUSINESS 1.a The Draft Minutes from the March 19, 2026 Community Redevelopment Agency 1.b Community Redevelopment Agency Advisory Committee Chair Report 1.c Community Redevelopment Agency Director's Report NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CITY HALL, 737 LOUDEN AVE. MAY 21, 2026 4:30 PM AGENDA AGENDA CALL TO ORDER CITIZEN INPUT Staff recommends approval of the Draft Minutes from the March 19, 2026 Community Redevelopment Agency. EXHIBIT: A. CRA Minutes 03-19-26.pdf Staff recommends receiving and discussing the Community Redevelopment Agency Advisory Committee Chair Report. EXHIBIT: A. CRA Advisory Committee Minutes March 2026.pdf Staff recommends receiving the Community Redevelopment Agency Director's Report. ADJOURN Note: Please put cell phones and pagers on silent or vibrate during the meeting. This meeting is televised; therefore, you may appear on TV at any time. Public Appearance: CITIZEN INPUT is for comments from members of the audience regarding items not listed on the agenda for this meeting (please give name and address and limit all comments to a maximum of three minutes). AS FOR ITEMS ON THE AGENDA individual speakers are limited to a maximum of three minutes. A representative of a group consisting of 5 individuals who are present during the meeting may speak on behalf of the group for up to 10 minutes at the Chair's discretion. To do so, the individuals must have waived their time to the representative by providing their name and address on the back of the comment card. Public Hearings: During public hearings the Chair will open the agenda item to the public for comment. If you wish to comment come to the microphone at the podium and give your name and address for the record. This meeting is for 1

agenda items only. Other issues should be presented to the City Manager or City Clerk for discussion at a future Commission meeting. Appeals: Per section 286.0105 of the Florida Statutes - If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the board, agency, or commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he or she will need a record of the proceedings, and that, for such purpose, he or she may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. Disability Provisions: It is the policy of the City of Dunedin not to discriminate against disabled persons in employment or the provisions of services. If you have a disability that requires accommodation, please notify the ADA Coordinator 48 hours prior to the scheduled meeting at (727) 298-3042. COPIES OF THIS AND ALL COMMISSION AGENDAS ARE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC AT THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK, 737 LOUDEN AVENUE, ON THE MONDAY PRIOR TO THE MEETING DATE. COPIES ARE ALSO AVAILABLE ON THE CITY’S WEBSITE AT WWW.DUNEDIN.GOV. 2