CITY COMMISSION WORK SESSION

PRESENT: City Commission: Also Present: CALL TO ORDER DUNEDIN, FLORIDA MINUTES OF THE CITY COMMISSION WORK SESSION MARCH 18, 2025 CITY HALL, 737 LOUDEN AVENUE 9:00 A.M. Mayor Maureen "Moe " Freaney , Vice Mayor Jeff Gow , Comm iss ioners Tom Dugard , Steven Sandbergen , and Robert Walker City Manager Jennifer Bramley , City Attorney Jennifer Cowan , City Clerk Rebecca Schlichter , Deputy City Manage r Jorge Qu intas , Finance Director Les Tyler , Utilities Assistant Director/City Engineer Clayton Watkins , P.E., Community De velopment Director George Kinney , Utilities Director Janice Bennett, Purchasing Agent Tammy Winton-Spearman, Sustainability Program Manager Natalie Gass , Senior Public Works Designer Alejandro Gonzalez and approximately five people in the audience . Mayor Freaney called the March 18 , 2025 , Work Session to order at 9:00 a.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE City Attorney Cowan led the Pledge of Allegiance. 1. PRESENTATIONS - None CITIZEN INPUT Mayor Freaney adv ised now was the time for anyone in the audience who wished to speak on any topic that is not already on the agenda. Hearing and see ing no one wishing to speak , Mayor Freaney moved to the next agenda item. 2. CONSENT AGENDA 2.a. Approve the Minutes for the: A. 1/21 /2025 Work Session B. 1/23/2025 Regular Meeting C. 2/4/2025 Work Session D. 2/6/2025 Regular Meeting 2.b. Board and Committee Appointments A. Historic Preservation Advisory Committee -Reappo int Elly McCook to a regular term exp iring 2/1/2028 -Move Amy Connor from an alternate to regular term ending 2/1/2028 MOTION: Motion was made by Commissioner Walker and seconded by Vice Mayor Gow to approve the Consent Agenda . Public Input Mayor Freaney opened public input on any Consent item. Hearing and see ing no one wish ing to speak , Mayor Freaney closed the public input. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. 3. ACTION ITEMS 3.a Miscellaneous Consulting Services Contract Renewal & Name Change Amendments Staff Presentation Finance Director Tyler adv ised : 25-1

Work Session Minutes March 18, 2025 Dunedin City Commission This item is for the Renewa l and/or Assignment of Miscellaneous Consultant Continuing Contracts for Engineering , Architecture , Landscape Architecture , Survey , and Planning Services for two additional years. There are 27 contracts noted in the staffing today for different types of areas. In this amendment , the federal language has been added, which is in case the City has future storms or other federal contracts ; the federal terms are in the contracts moving forward. Purchasing Agent Winton-Spearman referred to and made comments on the PowerPoint presentation , Attachmen t B to the staffing memo. Solicitation Type - 1TB (Page 3) Invitation to Bid : • Formal solicitation containing detailed specifications for desired goods or services. Vendors respond with quoted un it price(s) on a bid sheet. The bids are tabulated and compared , and the award is recommended to the lowest responsive responsible bidder. • Unlike a Request for Proposal (RFP) , an 1TB does not allow the submitter to negotiate price. Once the bid sheet is submitted , the Ci ty may ask for additional relevant information, but neither party may change any of the quoted prices. Solicitation Type - RFP (Page 4) Request for Proposal: • Formal solicitation. The City includes a general scope of work to address a particular need. Vendors respond with a detailed proposal outlining how to best meet the City's needs, why the particular vendor should be selected, and the cost involved. • Unlike an Invitation to Bid (1TB), an RFP does not lock the submitter into a specific price or detailed scope of work. That is part of a negotiated process involving the selected vendor and the City . • The RFP committee scores each proposal based on criteria included in the original solicitation. The comm ittee subsequently reviews with the highest scoring proposer to finalize their price and scope of work . The proposer is then recommended for award. Solicitation Type - RFQ (Page 5) This is the type before the Commission today. Request for Qualifications : • Formal solicitation. The Consultant's Competitive Negotiation Act (CCNA), Section 287 .055 , Florida Statutes , sets forth requirements for procuring and contracting professional architectural, engineering, landscape architectural, or land surveying services . • Unlike an RFP solicitation, an RFQ cannot ask for cost at the point of the initial submission. • An evaluat ion committee scores each submission based on qualification criteria included in the original solicitat ion , such as: - Qualifications of the Project Team; - Firm and Project Teams experience working on projects/services similar to those anticipated by the City ; - Qualifications of their Sub-Consultants ; - Applicable Project References reflecting /demonstrating the firm 's competence in the services requested by the City ; - Applicable Governmental Entity Contract References reflecting /demonstrating the firm 's past performance on other local government contracts ; 25-2

Work Session Minutes March 18, 2025 - Location of the firm's office; and Dunedin City Commission - Quality of Submittal - the firm met all requirements requested under their response to the solicitation. RFQ 18-1096 : Miscellaneous Consulting Services Contract Renewal (Page 6) The Consulting Services Contracts are divided into seven (7) Divisions as follows: • Division 1 - Roadway , Drainage, General Civil Engineering Services • Division 2 - Water , Wastewater Engineering Services • Division 3 - Construction Engineering Inspection Services • Division 4 - Hydrogeological & Environmental Engineering Services • Division 5 - Architectural Services • Division 6 - Planning Services • Division 7 - Miscellaneous Services Within each division , there are various qualifications for what the City might be looking for. Assistant Utilities Director/City Engineer Watkins advised: In general , these contracts are used basically on a daily basis for various aspects of the projects , including inspections beyond the expertise of City staff. The GEC contracts allow for getting to a contract and task order quickly without the six-month process as long as the design costs meet the Consultants' Competitive Negotiation Act (CCNA) numbers . Community Development Director Kinney advised: The Community Development Department is always represented in the selection process with the Finance team. The primary use for their department is Division 6 - Planning Services. Mostly, those consultants are used for peer review , for example traffic impact statements that come in with Design Review. Also, they are used for Business Plan Initiatives , Budget Estimating , and Implementation if the City does not have the resources to accomplish the project in-house . Commission questions, comments, and concerns were addressed to include: The list is implemented to save time. Depending on the cost, there has to be approval from the Commission, which could take as much as two months to get a contract going; the entire solicitation process is approximately six months. In terms of the dollars being attached to the services , much of it has to do with the CCNA. When the City asks for consultants , it is based on qualifications and not costs; there is a separation between getting a contractor to do the work and a consultant to help with the work. Utilities Director Bennett explained it is Florida law that these specific services are not selected based on low bid , but on qualifications , and she noted the importance of quality design in relation to the construction . There have been some additional changes in terms of new contractors in the past couple of years since the list was done ; Deputy City Manager Quintas provided some details regarding those services; the individual contracts for each of the firms came before the Commission. Deputy City Manager Quintas clarified that nothing precludes going out to bid for a project with a specific RFP if staff thinks that is necessary. City Manager Bramley further clarified this does not mean the City has to use any one of the firms on the list and staff can choose to go out to bid at any time except for Division 5 - Architectural Services. Qualification criteria is determined by the Project Manager; the Department decides what they need and the qualifications are included in the original sol icitation. 25-3

Work Session Minutes March 18, 2025 Dunedin City Commission Additional firms will be brought for consideration in 2027 , as th is item is for two years. It is correct that if time is not of essence and an RFP is issued, any firm can submit for that RFP. It was noted the list is a good representation of the available firms ; there could be others , which prompts going back out to solicit within the next year for a new prequalification list. Finance Director Tyler expla ined in many cases , the City does go out to bid with a full RFQ or RFP or bid, so in that way staff thinks that is also testing the market. Concern was expressed for nine years between renewing the list; Deputy City Manager Quintas gave the example of doing a specialized solicitation in 2021 to bring in additional firms , and that can be done in specific cases; it is a cumbersome process that takes a lot of staff time, and the process for 2027 will begin in 2026. A rate li st is submitted by the firms being considered today; some submitted an updated rate list and some did not. Aside from the time involved , a benefit is negotiating. Ms . Bennett summarized the first step is getting the firm prequalified and putting them on the GEC list ; the next step , dictated by the CCNA, is to begin negotiation with a firm for the scope and cost of the work , and if successfully negotiated they initiate a contract; nothing says the City has to initiate a contract if they cannot get to a scope staff thinks appropriate; the City can move on to the next prequalified firm. Discussion ensued regarding the Consultants' Competitive Negotiation Act (CCNA) , which is Florida State law. City Attorney Cowan provided additional information . Public Input Mayor Freaney opened the item to public input. Hearing and seeing no one wishing to speak, Mayor Freaney closed the public input. MOTION: Motion was made by Commissioner Sandbergen and seconded by Commissioner Walker to approve the Renewal and/or Assignment of Miscellaneous Consultant Continuing Contracts for Engineering, Architecture , Landscape Architecture , Survey and Plann ing Services for two additional years. Commission Comments The Mayor and Commissioners expressed appreciation for the staffing work on this item , including some local firms on the list , and suggestions for shortening the time for review of the list ; consideration of the issues such as solar being added; and concern that it is not a barrier to other qualified firms from responding to RFPs from time to time. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously . 3.b Award of Bid #25-2503 - FY25 Mill & Overlay on Various Street locations to Gator Grading & Paving, LLC, of Palmetto, FL, in the amount of $1,281,850.15. Staff Presentation Assistant Director of Utilities /City Engineer Watkins advised: This item is for the paving of the 21 streets listed in the staffing memorandum. FY2025 Mill & Overlay Streets Map - Attachment F in the agenda package This project was competitively bid and seven (7) submittals were received , ranging in cost from $1 ,281 ,850.15 to $1 ,458,428 .05 . City staff reviewed all of the bids and determined that Gator Grading & Paving LLC , of Palmetto , FL , provided the most responsive and responsible , low-cost bid , in the amount of $1 ,281 ,850.15 . 25-4

Work Session Minutes March 18, 2025 Dunedin City Commission Commission questions. comments. and concerns were addressed to include : This list was based off the end of the list created in 2016/2017 based on the condition of the roads. The City has new software and cameras mounted to City vehicles that circle each street several times a month that will help with recognizing the information , and this is how staff proposes to perform this going forward. A request for the status of Edgewood Terrace that came from a resident. There are various elements included in the total price including traffic maintenance, mobility , and curbing. Mr. Watkins would have to provide a per linear foot cost at a later date. $1.5 Million is budgeted each year for repaving. The contractor will ensure a consistent 2% , the industry standard slope from the crown of the road in consideration of the question about drainage. Gator Grading & Paving is a contractor; the first presentation about GE Cs was for consultants to do Design work. There are still some private roads within Dunedin; for the City to take over the maintenance, they would have to go through the process of becoming public and meet all the requirements of a public right-of-way including the infrastructure. It would be a decision by the City Commission direction. Deputy City Manager Quintas provided technical information, some history, and information on the current process for determining streets for repaving as well as moving forward. In terms of the status of the repaving and if the City is spending enough to stay ahead of the work needed, he would like to see what the new software indicates; he thinks the program is at par due to some favorable pricing this year; it does ebb and flow with the cost of petroleum and the bids. Discussion ensued regarding the impacts to the roads, noting truck traffic is the only traffic numbers in the equation for wear and tear on the roads; passenger vehicles are not used. Weather would only have an impact depending on the base layer. Public Input Mayor Freaney opened the item to public input. Hearing and seeing no one wishing to speak, Mayor Freaney closed the public input. MOTION: Motion was made by Commissioner Walker and seconded by Vice Mayor Gow to award Bid #25-2503 - FY25 Mill & Overlay on Various Street locations to Gator Grading & Paving , LLC, of Palmetto, FL, in the amount of $1,281,850.15. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. 3.c. Approve Change Order #1 for an increase of $200,240, plus 45 additional contract days to the prior award of Bid #25-2503 - FY25 Mill & Overlay on Various Street locations to Gator Grading & Paving, LLC, of Palmetto, FL. Staff Presentation Assistant Director of Utilities/City Engineer Watkins advised: Upon review of the bid tabulation from the lowest bidder, City staff realized an opportunity to enhance the project and take advantage of a good cost for valley gutter and expand the replacement of the gutter along additional streets. The majority of the additional curb work will be completed on Jackmar Road, Summit Drive, Valley Drive , Meadow Lane, and Briar Circle. Staff recommends Commission approval of and authorization for the City Manager to execute Change Order #1. 25-5

Work Session Minutes March 18, 2025 Public Input Dunedin City Commission Mayor Freaney opened the item to public input. Hearing and seeing no one wishing to speak , Mayor Freaney closed the public input. MOTION: Motion was made by Commissioner Walker and seconded by Vice Mayor Gow to approve Authorization for the City Manager to execute Change Order #1, in the amount of $200 ,240 , plus 45 additional contract days to the previously awarded contract for Bid #25-2503 - FY25 Mill &Overlay on Various Street locations to Gator Grading &Paving, LLC , of Palmetto, FL , for an adjusted total contract amount of $1,482,090.15. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously . 3.d. Award the Construction of Bid #25-2507 - Ranchwood Drive South & Hitching Post Lane Water Main & Under Drain Replacement Project, to Evolution Contracting, Inc., of Clearwater, FL, in the amount of $614,675.55. Staff Presentation Senior Public Works Designer Gonzalez advised: The existing water main on Ranchwood Drive S. has experienced four (4) breaks in five (5) years . It is the original watermain from the development, most of which require emergency repairs, which can be quite costly and cumbersome to the community. The most recent repair occurred in 2023. This was a CIP project and has been on the docket for some time. Hitching Post Lane is one block north; it is also a 4" water main and requires upsizing for increased water flow , so both will be increased to the new standard 6". Doing so will improve infrastructure integrity, fire protection, and water quality in this area. The project also includes the installation of 926 linear feet of 6" underdrain on Ranchwood Drive South to improve drainage and reduce roadway base failure. Staff recommends award of Bid #25-2507 for the Ranchwood Drive South & Hitching Post Lane Water Main & Under Drain Replacement Project to Evolution Contracting , Inc. , of Clearwater, FL, in the amount of $614 ,675.55. Commiss ion questions, comments, and concerns were addressed to include: Age is usually the main contributing factor to water main failures. Lateral lines going to homes are typically 1". Increasing the pipe size does not decrease the water pressure in the home; it does affect the amount of water that can be delivered, primarily for fire protection. The pipe being replaced is cast-iron , which is a very brittle material and susceptible to temperature changes , causing breaking and cracking. The timeline for the project is estimated at 6-8 months. This project is completely in the public right-of- way; it will be in front of homes . However, everything will be restored to its previous condition or better, including new sidewalks , new sod, and many will get new driveways. The City is keeping pace with water main and underdrain replacement and is not deficient in keeping up with the potable water infrastructure. It was noted the work is in conjunction with a Public Services project , combining two projects into one . Public Input Mayor Freaney opened the item to public input. Hearing and seeing no one wishing to speak, Mayor Freaney closed the public input. 25-6

Work Session Minutes Dunedin City Commission March 18, 2025 MOTION: Motion was made by Commissioner Sandbergen and seconded by Commissioner Dugard to approve Bid #25-2507 - Ranchwood Drive South & Hitching Post Lane Water Main & Under Drain Replacement Project, to Evolution Contracting , Inc., of Clearwater, FL , in the amount of $614,675.55. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously . 3.e. The proposed agenda for the April 1, 2025, Work Session Mayor Freaney inquired if there were any changes to the April 1, 2025, Work Session agenda. MOTION: Motion was made by Commissioner Walker and seconded by Commissioner Dugard to approve the proposed agenda for the April 1, 2025, Work Session. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. BREAK 10:19 A.M. -10:23 A.M. 4. WORKSHOP ITEMS 4.a. Solar Feasibility Study Staff Presentation Sustainability Program Manager Natalie Gass referred to and made comments on the PowerPoint presentation titled Dunedin Municipal Solar Feasibility Study 2025, Attachment A to the staffing memo as follows. • Ready For 100% Clean Energy Background and Overview - Detailed - Page 4 THE READY FOR 100 (RF100) PROGRAM IS A SET OF CLEAN ENERGY GOALS THE CITY OF DUNEDIN HAS SET TO TRANSITION TO OPERATING ON 100% CLEAN, RENEWABLE ENERGY BY 2035 FOR MUNICIPAL OPERATIONS, AND EXPAND THAT COMMUNITY-WIDE BY 2050. Dunedin's Resilient Environmental Action Master Plan - Detailed Page 6 o All the information for the clean energy goals were wrapped into DREAM. o Written by the community for the community o Three action level groups: 1. City Operations (50 actions) 2. Community Collaboration (50 actions) 3. Citizen Engagement (50 actions) Ready For 100% Clean Energy Goals Roadmap (Page 7) Included in DREAM, looking at key dates and estimation of where the City should be at certain touchpoints throughout this period and moving toward the goals. o Municipal operations: 2035 o Community-wide: 2050 RF100 Progress - Detailed - Page 8 o 2035 Municipal Goal o 2050 Community-Wide Goal Solar United Neighbors partnership, a local charter which looks at consumer protection for solar installation and reduced rates through a group interested in installing solar Duke Energy Map 25-7

Work Session Minutes March 18, 2025 Photos of solar panels on City facilities : • Emergency Operations Center • Water Treatment Plant • City Hall Dunedin City Commission Energy Audits &Solar Feasibility Study through McKim &Creed (Pages 10 - 11 ) Brief review of the credentials of Sol Haroon, Director of Renewables , McKim & Creed Consulting - Project Manager McKim & Creed Consulting was on the GEC list of contractors . Scope : 16 Facilities Reviewed • Dunedin Public Library • Solid Waste + Covered Parking • Dunedin Community Center • Wastewater Admin • Hale Senior Activity Center • Water Admin • MLK Jr. Recreation Center • Fire Admin • Duned in Fine Art Center • Fire Station 60 (Virginia) • Parks Maintenance Facility (Solon) • Fire Station 61 (Michigan) • Public Services • Fire Station 62 (Belcher) • Fleet Services • Golf Club + Pro Shop Budget for Study Budgeted Item ____ Amount Original Budget for Study Duke Energy Building Audits McKim & Creed Solar Feasibility Total Savings $100,000 $0 $51,196 $51,196 $48,804 Building Energy Audits with Duke Energy- Details - Page 14 • Free on-site energy analysis with certified Duke Energy Business Energy Advisor • Duke Energy reviewed existing conditions and equipment • Duke Energy provided recommendations for upgrades and incentive programs The reports were sent to McKim & Creed for a deep dive analysis of the 16 facilities . Solar Feasibility Study with McKim & Creed - Details - Page 15 • Review Process for Each Facility Project Scope and Goals Complete an extensive study of 16 City-owned buildings for rooftop solar PV (photovoltaic) potential: Analyze : • Structural Viability • Electrical Connection • Financial Viability Provide guidance for moving forward on selected PV systems 25-8

Work Session Minutes March 18, 2025 Solar Feasibility Case Study: Library Dunedin City Commission There were 16 facilities reviewed in 460+ pages , a very thorough and comprehensive study. This presentation takes one building and details the process of how it was analyzed, as well as the recommendations. Mr. Haroon continued with this portion of the presentation (in attendance virtually). He gave brief introductory comments regarding the overall processes and consideration for the goals and needs of the City facilities and what the City is trying to achieve. The Library is sort of in the middle in terms of feasibility; it is certainly very feasible. It is not necessarily the best building; however , it is one of the largest and one of the largest consumers of electricity. It is a good representative. The report includes tables summarizing all 16 buildings, 17 meters , and so forth . Mr. Haroon thereafter reviewed the following processes, including some comments and explanations. • Process: Data Acquisition (Library) - Graphics/Table - Page 18 It should be kept in mind that solar only runs during the day when the sun is shining and consumption can be throughout the day ; throughout the night there is often a base consumption , and sometimes it can be increased in the evenings and certainly during the night there is a base consumption . In attempting to achieve net zero or offsetting the energy , it is really throughout the entire month and year. There are times when consumption might exceed what is being produced. There is no need to spend more money than necessary in terms of creating a solar system. • Process: Structural and Electrical (Library) - Graphics - Page 19 o Single line diagram that shows the electrical system to understand where solar is being connected. o Make sure the roof can sustain the solar array system and that electrically it can be fed back into the electrical system. Consideration is given for minimizing changes to the electrical system that will incur additional cost. • Process: Determining PV system size and design for Library- Rendering - Page 20 The rendering shows a rooftop assessment of putting the maximum amount of solar on the roof , in this case the Library. o Possible to design PV system to exceed total load consumption. o Not recommended as surplus will be fed back to grid with the City being compensated by the Utility at wholesale rate, which tends to be much lower than the tariff rate. o It's in the City 's interest to size a PV system with annual generation at 90% to 95% of total annual load consumption. This allows some variability and to keep connecting to the grid ; the State of Florida requires always being grid-connected ; therefore , this is not trying to disconnect from the grid , just working in harmony with the utility and making sure of being a good neighbor and cooperating with the utility by not generating more energy. Mr. Haroon provided information regarding a battery backup system, which was considered in terms of resiliency considerations and might be something the City would want to look into for the future . It would allow for gathering the additional energy being created and provide resiliency/renewable energy at times when the sun is not shining . • Process: "Right-sizing " PV system for Library - Renderings - Page 21 There is no need to spend more money than necessary in terms of creating a solar system making. Oversizing PV systems can reduce financial benefits . Systems must be "right-sized ." 25-9

Work Session Minutes March 18, 2025 Mr. Haroon explained the following o Design for Maximum PV System Size : 376 kW-de o Design for Actual PV System Size : 290 kW-de Dunedin City Commission This is a reduction that gives a 95% offset in this case, which is good. • Process : Solar Capacity (Library) - Rendering/Graph - Page 22 o MONTHLY ENERGY USE VS SOLAR GENERATION Solar generation is dependent on the amount of sunlight and temperature. Professional software was used to program in the climate conditions, weather patterns , and so forth. • Process : Single-Line Diagram (Library) - Diagram/Graphic - Page 23 o The diagram is representative of what it could look like; the full engineering was not done for this study. Mr. Haroon noted the analysis is not just about the best possible engineering system , but making it cost- effective as well , which is related to not having diminishing returns. • Process: Yearly Bill (Library) - Tables - Page 24 o Original Bills o Rate Schedule Option 1 o Rate Schedule Option 2 Annual Electricity Savings - $42 ,749 There is electricity escalation; bills are increasing, and that has been considered. Also , solar does degrade every year at about 0.3% per year. • Process: Performance Model (Library) - Graph - Page 25 Mr . Haroon explained this graph is based on a 24-hour time period as an example on a sunny day with a clear blue sky ; other scenarios are accounted for in the models. o Green is solar projection o Dark Blue is consumption in the case of no solar o When you put the solar array, that consumption is affected ; that is the demand curve and is shown in the Light Blue. • Process: Financial Summary (Library)- Graph/Table - Page 26 o Cumulative Energy Costs By Payment Option Blue indicates cumulative "Avoided Utility Cost " - savings Green represents the cost including for Operations & Maintenance Note: Increase in year 16 for inverter replacement Mr. Haroon explained : An important point is that at some time the green curve and the blue curve will intercept, which is called "simple payback "; at some point , the City will make enough money to offset the original deployment , the costs incurred at the very beginning, which becomes the "pay-back " period. Here it is shown as occurring around year 12. In some of the buildings, they found under 10-years payback , which is generally fairly good ; the worst case is around 17 - 18 years . There were a few buildings that were below 10 years. o Payment Options /Cash Purchase 25-10

Work Session Minutes March 18, 2025 Dunedin City Commission Mr. Haroon reviewed and explained the typical financial metrics shown in the table, pointing out the Internal Rate of Return ; Net Present Value; Levelized Cost of Electricity; and Payback Period. Installation Costs To compare PV quotes, the following function should be utilized : Dollars per installed Watt-de (W-dc) This is a turnkey all-in cost which includes: • All equipment hardware • Soft costs (parts + labor) Example: $2.00/W (de) Mr. Haroon explained that McKim & Creed does not do the installation; they are an engineering firm. However, they work in conjunction with many clients who want to do financial analysis. In the report, some of the breakdown is described. He emphasized this is for commercial and not residential, which is a completely different market. • Process: Financial Summary Tables (Library) - Table - Page 28 - 29 GSD-1 Tariff $2 .00/W (de) $2.00/W (de) $3 .50/W {de) $3 .50/W (de) Without Incentives With Incentives Without Incentives With Incentives IRR-Term 8.2% 11.5% 3.6% 6.2% LCOE PV Generat ion $0.044 $0 .031 $0.077 $0.054 Net Present Value $260, 119 $425,874 ($174,986) $115,084 Payback Per iod 11.8 years 8.6 years 20.2 years 14.0years Total Payments $580,140 $580, 140 $1,015,245 $1,015,245 Total Incen t iv es $0 $174 ,042 $0 $304,574 Net Payments $580,1 40 $406,098 $1 ,015 , 245 $710,672 Electric Bill Sav ings - Term $1,929,324 $1 ,929,324 $1 ,929 ,3 24 $1,929,324 Upfront Payment $580,140 $580,140 $1,015,245 $1,015,245 GSDT-1 Tariff $2.00/W {de) $2.00/W (de) $3 .50/W (de) $3.50/W (de) Without In cent iv es With Incentives Without Incent iv es With Inc ent iv es IRR-Term 7.8% 11.0% 3.3% 5.9% LCOE PV Generation $0.044 $0.031 $0 .077 $0 .054 Net Present Value $229,484 $395,239 ($205,621) $84,449 Payback Per iod 12.2 years 8.9 years 20.7 years 14.5 years Tota l Payments $580,140 $580 ,14 0 $1,015,245 $1,015,245 Total Incentives $0 $174,042 $0 $304,574 Net Payments $580,140 $406,098 $1,015,245 $710,672 Electric Bill Savings - Term $1,864,119 $1,864,119 $1,864,119 $1,864,119 Upfront Payment $580,140 $580,140 $1 ,015 , 245 $1 ,015,245 • Process: Estimated Cash Flow (Library) - Tables - Page 30 o Highlighted in the Tables Annual O&M costs, need to build reserve for equipment, and system replacement (similar to roof replacement) 12+ year payback Increase in Year 16 for inverter replacement costs 25-11

Work Session Minutes March 18, 2025 Dunedin City Commission Recommendations Analys is For All 16 Facil ities - Table - Page 32 Green - Recommended at $2/Wdc At the higher cost of $3 .50 Wdc without incent ives , only two buildings are recommended: The Golf Club Pro Shop and Fleet Meter A. With the incentives that are anticipated even at the higher cost , most of the buildings are recommended except for three buildings. The othe r portion of the table indicates the IRR from the highest percentage to the lowest and informa ti on on the items from the Finan ci al Summary Tables . Recommendations Summary • Sola r PV Systems must be "right-s ized ." • Sola r PV installation is financially feasible at $2/Wdc. • Once the price reaches the threshold of $3 .50/Wdc , it is no longer financially feasible for most unless incentives are received . System Cost Breakdown (Example) Cost breakdown for a 100kW-dc solar array system at $2 .00/W-dc !Expense Ti er 1 solar PV modul es Inverter(s) Rack ing and balance of system Installation and labor Sales and marketing Installer margin {profit and non .:. sales overheads) Permitting an d inspections Total *Cost b efore i ncentives Renderings of each of the 14 buildings - Pages 34 - 35 (Golf Club Pro Shop and Fleet Meter A at higher cost) !share as% 25% 10% 10% 25% 1 5% 10% 5% 100% A larger view of the all facilit ies and the overall recommendations. !share in$ * $50,000 $20,000 $20,000 $50,000 $30,000 $10,000 $5,000 $200, 000 The software accounts for shading , slope of the roof , north or south facing , weather patterns , and tempera ture variations . Next Steps Mr . Haroo n suggested the Commission review the report , see what they feel comfortable with , and look at the roof replacements and the categories 3, 4, and 5 of the various buildings . Then, they can determine the top three or four of the five candidates and divide up the RFPs for actual installation /i ntegration firms ; that process is described in the report . Then , they can see how it all aligns with the City 's goals as well. Ms. Gass no ted the follow ing : • The next set of solar PV installations is being planned for the following facilities with new roofs . Develop ing RFPs : o Li brary o Community Center o Hale Senior Act ivit y Center 25-12

Work Session Minutes March 18, 2025 • Utilize Duke Energy building audits for facility planning . Dunedin City Commission • Report clean energy production and status of goals through the Strategic Planning public dashboard . The solar plan is similar to the roof replacement plan in that it is not just a one-t ime project ; therefore , a part of this is creating a financial plan that allows for and puts money toward future projects and replacing solar , similar to how it is done with roofs . Commission questions, comments, and concerns were addressed to include: After completing solar on all the build ings , the City will not be at 100% reaching the 2035 Municipal Clean Energy Goals by installing solar only on its own buildings. This is the reason for working with Duke Energy on the Clean Energy Connection Program : striving for solar to receive credits for what the City cannot produce on-site. Discussion ensued regarding 100% and building on what the City has and making financ ially sound decisions on projects step by step , striving to meet the goal. The parking structure is addressed in the report as a future consideration. Duke Energy 's Clean Energy Connection Program will have a full year of energy data that will be provided in April to report to the Commission . The City 's rebate program runs out of money each year. The program generally ranges from $50 ,000 to $75 ,000 depending on the yearly budget. Since 2019 , it has run out every year . Since 2019 , there are 154+ residents who have received rebate incentives. The life expectancy for a solar panel is currently be ing seen at 30 years; the production guarantee is to be around 80% , between 25 to 30 years. There are rebates to submit to Duke Energy as equipment is switched out and upgrades are made ; there are ongoing programs. Mr. Haroon provided information and explanations regarding the pricing in reference to the Process; Yearly Bill (Library) - Page 34 and Process: Yearly Bill (Library)- Tables - Page 24 of the PowerPoint. He noted there is significant detail in the actual report , Solar Feasibility Study - McKim & Creed - Attachment B. The system degrades every year at a small percentage until closer to year 25. Modern modules are straightforward in materials with silicone, glass , and aluminum. They no longer have any exotic materials. There is recycling being set up in the U.S . for PV modules. Discussion ensued regarding the rate the City is paying for electricity in relation to net metering any excess and the need to research the element of batteries as an option, especially in consideration of the informat ion regarding the drop in cost of batteries. That could mean the less expensive sys tem is with batteries as opposed to one without allowing for the system to be free-standing. There is an assumption of a 5% rate increase for each year ; that is a 3% electricity rate increase with a 2% inflation rate increase included in the analysis. Ms. Gass will look into the rate increase due to storm damage . For the 2024 calendar year , the City is looking at about $17 ,200 in electricity savings at the new City Hall system . Analyses of past projects are being done internally and were not part of this overall study . The percentage of clean energy by Duke Energy is currently low . In terms of solar in relation to roof replacements , it depends on the situation as to installation with the replacement or after ; the projects with recently installed new roofs were based on the budget situation and the severity of the need for replacement and waiting to go out to bid/RFP for solar. Going forward , the roof replacement and solar will be happening at the same time , allowing for efficiencies . 25-13

Work Session Minutes March 18, 2025 Dunedin City Commission The Capital dollars to be used will depend on the structure; for example , the Library is from the General Fund. City Manager Bramley advised the plan is to receive consensus direction from the Commission today and then look at that as part of the FY2026 budget and to look at all the projects together. The rebate program for residents is up to $2 ,500 per resident. The funds are usually depleted a few months into the fiscal year . Discussion ensued regarding a bi-directional system . To clar ify regarding the City 's Ready for 100 Clean Energy goal, that is going to be met through a means of various ways of getting there . This solar feasibility study was looking solely at the City 's individual future projects for municipal buildings . This is not a complete Ready for 100 plan of getting to 100% of the goal ; it is a large portion of the plan , but does not touch on all the key components. Public Input Mayor Freaney opened the item to public input. Alan Brand representing the Sierra Club commented: The Sierra Club has three members with professional solar experience to draw upon as a resource. Regard ing the first three projects and the City not having any guidance, the City had a resource on the Committee for Environmental Quality (CEQ) with a lot of this knowledge that was largely ignored. He questioned the feasibility of $5.00 a watt or $7.00 a watt solar. He did not have the time to go into many of the elements that could be addressed ; however, the Sierra Club would like to follow up this meeting , for example on the right-sizing issue , which he would like to look at again. He thought it could be shown having a system sized for 100% and potentially having to get reimbursed; the wholesale rate is not the same situation as it was 10 years ago . Mary Schoonover of 35 Edgewater Drive commented: She noted she is a former member of the CEQ & Sustainability and would like to hear what Mr. Brand has to say and thought the Commission would as well, because it does not speak just to looking into the past; it speaks to looking into the present and the future . There is a lot of value added in the community with 37 boards and committees, and there is the opportunity for a person to be on boards and committees , and that talent in the City is needed. It is done for free as volunteers and they are very willing ; however, they need to be allowed at the table. She does think the City is on the right path with its own Sustainability Manager in the City Manager 's Office. It is very necessary to be looking at these issues proactively. She encouraged more in perhaps another workshop setting. She thinks this study has gone a long way to show that alternative power is something that is considered valuable and forward thinking , and it does make good financial feasibility. Hearing and seeing no one else wishing to speak, Mayor Freaney closed the public input. Response to Public Input Mayor Freaney verified with Mr. Brand his main issue is the right-sizing versus expanding in terms of the study overall. Commission Comments The Mayor and Commissioners voiced their thoughts on the presentation, commending staff and the consultant for their work on the study , as well as expressing their support and concerns . Commission Consensus: The Commission gave consensus direction to move forward with the elements of the Solar Feasibility Study, utilizing the recommendations 25-14

Work Session Minutes March 18, 2025 5. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS 5.a. Commission Discussion Commissioner Walker advised: Dunedin City Commission from the study to move forward with financially viable energy efficiency and solar PV system projects approaching the FY2026 Budget process. Honeymoon Island is open in a limited capacity of about 250 cars per day. Caladesi Island is thought to be able to open in a limited capacity by early May. That means the restrooms and facilities have been restored to allow visitors. His concern is the initial timeline provided was that Caladesi would not be open until the summer of 2026. When looking at the ripple effect of visitors not being able to visit two of the most visited parks in the state, it impacts the businesses and tourism. It is his feeling, after talking with a number of people, that basically it can be better. He believes with the right prioritization of getting the parks fully reopened, the damage could be minimized. Additionally, he has gotten the Chamber of Commerce on board with this as well as Visit St. Pete/Clearwater, and they have offered to sign his letter with the City Commission. This is a City of Dunedin Commission letter with the intent that it goes out on City of Dunedin letterhead and essentially be signed in whole by whatever the Commission decides today on this letter by the Mayor, President of the Chamber of Commerce, and the President of Visit St. Pete/Clearwater. Mayor Freaney noted she has read the letter and is in support. Commissioner Walker thought the letter would be mailed in advance of the visit to Tallahassee next week and the Commission would take copies. City Manager Bramley advised they would be joining with a delegation in Tallahassee and she thought some meetings were set up as a group ; she can forward to the Commission what has been planned so far, which was more in terms of joining the delegation from Pinellas. Commissioner Walker suggested there would be benefit to having additional time with Senator Hooper and other Representatives interested in this issue. The end goal would be to press the State in terms of accelerating the timeline through more expeditious funding and contracting. Vice Mayor Gow suggested also sending the letter to the Department of Environmental Protection and the Governor 's Office. He did not know if there was a correct way of signing the letters or if there should be three letters from each entity. Commissioner Walker explained he reached out to the Chamber and Visit St. Pete/Clearwater because he thought the letter was powerful coming from the City and the Commission, but even more when signed off by the economically impacted organizations. He thought the Vice Mayor's point was good and clarified he thought the one letter with the three signatures was best: one letter, one voice. Commissioner Dugard disclosed he is on the Friends of the Island Parks Board and has been watching this particular issue with disappointment for a long time. It does not feel there is a sense of urgency from the State on the restoration of Honeymoon and Caladesi, respectively. He thought this would be a good topic for the trip to Tallahassee and complimented Commissioner Walker for moving forward on it. He does wish to put a cautionary note in the air in that governments tend to react to things like this, and honestly, he has been confused about the best possible stimulus to get the best response; however, he will sign this document if the Commission agrees , if his signature will bring any weight. City Manager Bramley read the letter from Ms. Delfino: 25-15

Work Session Minutes March 18, 2025 Dunedin City Commission For next week 's trip to Tallahassee , we will work through the Suncoast League of Cities for group Legislator meetings and via our Lobbyist for Dunedin Legislative meetings. There may be a few instances where the City will interact with the delegation more than once and there is no need for you to set meetings ; we will take care of scheduling . City Manager Bramley adv ised she would reply that we would like to meet with Senator Hooper and Representatives Berfield and Anderson. Commiss ioner Walker disclosed he is also on the Board of Friends of the Island. He did think about having them sign the letter, and pending the decision of this discussion , he will send it to the Friends of the Island Board; there is a Board meeting tonight and he could give them copies , and they could use it where they thought there would be influence. Mayor Freaney commented it is a huge issue and the City wants the Legislators to have a sense of urgency . She was in support of sending the letter and having it in hand for the trip. 5.b. City Clerk's Update - None 5.c. City Manager's Update City Manager Bramley advised the City Manager's Update Report for March 2025 is attached to the agenda item. 5.d. City Attorney's Update - None 5.e. Commission Comments Commissioner Sandbergen advised he would be meeting with the Blue Jays about the Fourth of July Hometown USA event. Commissioner Dugard commented on his concerns regarding the workshop presentation in terms of the analysis addressing all the impacts on the environment and full cost analysis. There was continued discussion regarding the letter in support of the restoration of Honeymoon and Caladesi Island , with the Mayor and Commissioners giving additional thoughts on the reception and possible actions by the Leg isla tors . Mayor Freaney noted the successful St. Patrick 's Day Celebration with people of all ages attending the festivities . ADJOURN MEETING The Work Session adjourned at 12 :45 p.m. NOTE: The meeting was completely recorded and the recording is in the official file. Attest: ,r~ Maureen "Moe" Freaney Mayor ~ov~cS:~Rebecca C. Schl ichter ~ City Clerk 25-16

1. PRESENTATIONS 2. CONSENT AGENDA 2.a Approve the Minutes for the: A. 1/21/2025 Work Session B. 1/23/2025 Regular Meeting C. 2/4/2025 Work Session D. 2/6/2025 Regular Meeting 2.b Board and Committee Appointments 3. ACTION ITEMS 3.a Miscellaneous Consulting Services Contract Renewal & Name Change Amendments NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING CITY COMMISSION WORK SESSION DUNEDIN CITY HALL, 737 LOUDEN AVENUE MARCH 18, 2025 9:00 AM AGENDA CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE CITIZEN INPUT Staff recommends to approve the minutes for the meetings identified above. EXHIBIT: A. 01-21-25 WS Minutes.pdf EXHIBIT: B. 01-23-25 RM Minutes.pdf EXHIBIT: C. 02-04-25 WS Minutes.pdf EXHIBIT: D. 02-06-25 RM Minutes.pdf A. Historic Preservation Advisory Committee - Reeappoint Elly McCook to a regular term expiring 2/1/2028 - Move Amy Connor from an alternate to regular term ending 2/1/2028 EXHIBIT: A. HPAC Roster.pdf Staff recommends approval of the Renewal and/or Assignment of Miscellaneous Consultant Continuing Contracts for Engineering, Architecture, Landscape Architecture, Survey and Planning Services for two additional years. EXHIBIT: A. PA Memo- Miscellaneous Consulting services Contract Renewal- 2025 FINAL.pdf EXHIBIT: B. Commission Presentation (with JMQ edits).pdf 1

3.b Award of Bid #25-2503 - FY25 Mill & Overlay on Various Street locations to Gator Grading & Paving, LLC, of Palmetto, FL, in the amount of $1,281,850.15. 3.c Approve Change Order #1 for an increase of $200,240, plus 45 additional contract days to the prior award of Bid #25-2503 - FY25 Mill & Overlay on Various Street locations to Gator Grading & Paving, LLC, of Palmetto, FL. EXHIBIT: 1. A.D.A Engineering Inc. 2025.pdf EXHIBIT: 2. Arcadis U.S. Inc 2025.pdf EXHIBIT: 3. Ardurra Group. Inc. 2025.pdf EXHIBIT: 4. Ayres Associates Inc. 2025.pdf EXHIBIT: 5. Calvin, Giordano and Asso. Inc.pdf EXHIBIT: 6. C K Architects-Interiors, Inc. 2025.pdf EXHIBIT: 7. CPH Consulting LLC.pdf EXHIBIT: 8. Driggers Engineering Services, Inc. 2025.pdf EXHIBIT: 9. DRMP, Inc 2025.pdf EXHIBIT: 10. George F Young 2025.pdf EXHIBIT: 11. H2R Corp 2025.pdf EXHIBIT: 12. Harvard Jolly 2025.pdf EXHIBIT: 13. Jones Edmunds 2025.pdf EXHIBIT: 14. Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2025.pdf EXHIBIT: 15. Long & Associates Architects-Engineers, Inc 2025.pdf EXHIBIT: 16. MASON BLAU AND ASSOCIATES, LLC.pdf EXHIBIT: 17. MC2 Executed Contract 2025.pdf EXHIBIT: 18. McKim and CreedInc. 2025.pdf EXHIBIT: 19. NorthStar 2025.pdf EXHIBIT: 20. Pennoni Associates, Inc. 2025.pdf EXHIBIT: 21. Robert P. Resch 111 - Architect 2025.pdf EXHIBIT: 22. SDG Architecture 2025.pdf EXHIBIT: 23. Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. 2025.pdf EXHIBIT: 24. V A Consulting Engineers Inc. 2025.pdf EXHIBIT: 25. Verdantas LLC 2025.pdf EXHIBIT: 26. Wade Trim, Inc. 2025.pdf EXHIBIT: 27. Wannemacher Jensen Architects, Inc..pdf Commission Award of Bid #25-2503 - FY25 Mill & Overlay on Various Street locations to Gator Grading & Paving, LLC, of Palmetto, FL, in the amount of $1,281,850.15. EXHIBIT: A. Gator Grading & Paving LLC Agreement.pdf EXHIBIT: B. Anti Human Trafficking Affidavit.pdf EXHIBIT: C. Purchase Agent Memo - ITB 25-2503.pdf EXHIBIT: D. Bid Tabulation.pdf EXHIBIT: E. FY2025 Milling Pavement Management 12.3.2024 S&S.pdf EXHIBIT: F. FY2025 MILL & OVERLAY STREETS MAP.pdf Commission Approval of and Authorization for the City Manager to execute Change Order #1, in the amount of $200,240, plus 45 additional contract days to the previously awarded contract for Bid #25-2503 - FY25 Mill & Overlay on Various Street locations to Gator Grading & Paving, LLC, of Palmetto, FL, for an adjusted total contract amount of $1,482,090.15. EXHIBIT: A. Contract Change Order.pdf EXHIBIT: B. Change Order Attachment 1.pdf 2

3.d Award the construction of Bid #25-2507 - Ranchwood Drive South & Hitching Post Lane Water Main & Under Drain Replacement Project, to Evolution Contracting, Inc., of Clearwater, FL, in the amount of $614,675.55. 3.e The proposed agenda for the April 1, 2025, Commission Meeting. 4. WORKSHOP ITEMS 4.a Solar Feasibility Study 5. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS 5.a Commission Discussion 5.b City Clerk's Update 5.c City Manager's Update 5.d City Attorney's Update 5.e Commission Comments 6. DUNEDIN PUBLIC PARTICIPATION & DECORUM RULES EXHIBIT: C. FY25Milling Pavement Management- Additional curb locations 2.13.2025.pdf Award a construction contract for Bid #25-2507 - Ranchwood Drive South & Hitching Post Lane Water Main & Under Drain Replacement Project, to Evolution Contracting, Inc., of Clearwater, FL, in the amount of $614,675.55. EXHIBIT: A. Purchasing Agent Memo - ITB25-2507.pdf EXHIBIT: B. Bid Tabulation - #25-2507.pdf EXHIBIT: C. Bid Submittal - Evolution Contracting, Inc..pdf Staff recommends approving the proposed agenda for the April 1, 2025, Commission Meeting. EXHIBIT: A. April 1, 2025 proposed agenda.pdf Staff recommends the City Commission review the analysis and key findings from the Solar Feasibility Study to provide consensus direction on utilizing the recommendations from the study to move forward with financially viable energy efficiency and solar PV system projects. EXHIBIT: A. Solar Feasibility Study Presentation Slides.pdf EXHIBIT: B. Solar Feasibility Study - McKim & Creed.pdf The Commission share topics of concerns or future issues they wish to address. City Clerk's Update City Manager's Update EXHIBIT: A. City Manager's Update Report March 2025.pdf City Attorney's Update The Commission shares events attended, announcements, liaison updates, etc. ADJOURN MEETING 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. 3

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. Appeals: Per Florida Statute 286.0105 - 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.DUNEDINGOV.COM. 4

>> MAYOR >> MAYOR FREANEY: >> GOOD >> GOOD MORNING. >> GOOD MORNING. AND >> GOOD MORNING. AND WELCOME >> GOOD MORNING. AND WELCOME TO >> GOOD MORNING. AND WELCOME TO MARCH >> GOOD MORNING. AND WELCOME TO MARCH 18th, AND WELCOME TO MARCH 18th, 2025, CITY COMMISSION WORK 2025, CITY COMMISSION WORK SESSION. SESSION. LIKE TO CALL THE MEETING TO LIKE TO CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER. ORDER. WE'LL START WITH PLEDGE OF WE'LL START WITH PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. ALLEGIANCE. JEN, PLEASE LEAD US IN THE JEN, PLEASE LEAD US IN THE PLEDGE. PLEDGE. >> ABSOLUTELY. >> ABSOLUTELY. >> ABSOLUTELY. [PLEDGE >> ABSOLUTELY. [PLEDGE OF >> ABSOLUTELY. [PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE] [PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE] >> MAYOR FREANEY: OKAY, >> OKAY, >> OKAY, HOPEFULLY >> OKAY, HOPEFULLY EVERYBODY >> OKAY, HOPEFULLY EVERYBODY HAD >> OKAY, HOPEFULLY EVERYBODY HAD A >> OKAY, HOPEFULLY EVERYBODY HAD A GREAT HOPEFULLY EVERYBODY HAD A GREAT ST. PADDY'S DAY AND IS GOOD TO ST. PADDY'S DAY AND IS GOOD TO BE HERE. BE HERE. WE'RE GOOD. WE'RE GOOD. COME ON, IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A COME ON, IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A JOKE. JOKE. I GUESS -- OKAY. I GUESS -- OKAY. AND IT WAS A WALK OFF HOME RUN AND IT WAS A WALK OFF HOME RUN FOR TORONTO BLUE JAYS YESTERDAY FOR TORONTO BLUE JAYS YESTERDAY OVER THE YANKEES. OVER THE YANKEES. WE DON'T HAVE ANY PRESENTATIONS WE DON'T HAVE ANY PRESENTATIONS SO WE DON'T HAVE CITIZEN INPUT. SO WE DON'T HAVE CITIZEN INPUT. DOES ANYONE WISH TO -- SO WE ARE DOES ANYONE WISH TO -- SO WE ARE ONTO CITIZEN INPUT. ONTO CITIZEN INPUT. ANYBODY WISH TO TALK ON A TOPIC ANYBODY WISH TO TALK ON A TOPIC NOT ON THE AGENDA. NOT ON THE AGENDA. SEEING NONE, WE WILL CONTINUE. SEEING NONE, WE WILL CONTINUE. SO WE'RE GOING TO GO TO OUR SO WE'RE GOING TO GO TO OUR CONSENT AGENDA. CONSENT AGENDA. SO ON CONSENT AGENDA WE HAVE SO ON CONSENT AGENDA WE HAVE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR THE 1/20/2025 WORK SESSION, 1/20/2025 WORK SESSION, JANUARY 23rd, REGULAR MEETING, JANUARY 23rd, REGULAR MEETING, FEBRUARY 4th WORK SESSION, FEBRUARY 4th WORK SESSION, FEBRUARY 6th REGULAR MEETING. FEBRUARY 6th REGULAR MEETING. WE HAVE BOARD AND COMMITTEE WE HAVE BOARD AND COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS. APPOINTMENTS. FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION, LOOKS FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION, LOOKS LIKE THAT'S THE ONLY ONE TODAY. LIKE THAT'S THE ONLY ONE TODAY. SO ANYONE WISH TO PULL ANYTHING SO ANYONE WISH TO PULL ANYTHING FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA? FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA? SEEING NO ONE, I WILL TAKE A SEEING NO ONE, I WILL TAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE CONSENT MOTION TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA. AGENDA. >> SO MOVED. >> SO MOVED. >> SO MOVED. >> >> SO MOVED. >> SECOND. >> SECOND. >> SECOND. >> >> SECOND. >> MAYOR >> SECOND. >> MAYOR FREANEY: >> SECOND. >> MAYOR FREANEY: OKAY, >> SECOND. >> MAYOR FREANEY: OKAY, I >> SECOND. >> MAYOR FREANEY: OKAY, I HAVE >> SECOND. >> MAYOR FREANEY: OKAY, I HAVE A >> OKAY, I HAVE A >> OKAY, I HAVE A MOTION >> OKAY, I HAVE A MOTION AND >> OKAY, I HAVE A MOTION AND A >> OKAY, I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? ALL IN FAVOR? AND THAT MOTION PASSES AND THAT MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. UNANIMOUSLY. OKAY SO WE'RE GOING TO GO TO OKAY SO WE'RE GOING TO GO TO ACTION ITEMS. ACTION ITEMS. >> MAYOR, I'M SORRY, BUT DID YOU >> MAYOR, I'M SORRY, BUT DID YOU >> MAYOR, I'M SORRY, BUT DID YOU DO >> MAYOR, I'M SORRY, BUT DID YOU DO PUBLIC >> MAYOR, I'M SORRY, BUT DID YOU DO PUBLIC COMMENT >> MAYOR, I'M SORRY, BUT DID YOU DO PUBLIC COMMENT ON >> MAYOR, I'M SORRY, BUT DID YOU DO PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE >> MAYOR, I'M SORRY, BUT DID YOU DO PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE CONSENT DO PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEM? AGENDA ITEM? >> SORRY, DOES ANYONE WISH TO >> SORRY, DOES ANYONE WISH TO >> SORRY, DOES ANYONE WISH TO SPEAK >> SORRY, DOES ANYONE WISH TO SPEAK ON >> SORRY, DOES ANYONE WISH TO SPEAK ON THE >> SORRY, DOES ANYONE WISH TO SPEAK ON THE CONSENT >> SORRY, DOES ANYONE WISH TO SPEAK ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? SPEAK ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? AND IF YOU DO, YOU COME FORWARD AND IF YOU DO, YOU COME FORWARD NOW. NOW. SEEING NO ONE, WE'LL MOVE SEEING NO ONE, WE'LL MOVE FORWARD. FORWARD. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANKS FOR THE CATCH. THANKS FOR THE CATCH. OKAY WE'RE GOING TO OKAY WE'RE GOING TO MISCELLANEOUS CONSULTING MISCELLANEOUS CONSULTING SERVICES CONTRACTING RENEWAL AND SERVICES CONTRACTING RENEWAL AND NAME CHANGE AMENDMENTS. NAME CHANGE AMENDMENTS. I'M GOING TO GO TO STAFF I'M GOING TO GO TO STAFF PRESENTATION, GEORGE AND CLAY, PRESENTATION, GEORGE AND CLAY, ET CETERA. ET CETERA. THE WHOLE WORLD'S COMING UP. THE WHOLE WORLD'S COMING UP. OKAY. OKAY. WE GOT A WHOLE TEAM HERE TODAY. WE GOT A WHOLE TEAM HERE TODAY. >> GOOD MORNING, MAYOR, VICE >> GOOD MORNING, MAYOR, VICE >> GOOD MORNING, MAYOR, VICE MAYOR, >> GOOD MORNING, MAYOR, VICE MAYOR, COMMISSIONERS. MAYOR, COMMISSIONERS. LES TYLER, THE FINANCE DIRECTOR. LES TYLER, THE FINANCE DIRECTOR. WE'VE GOT A FEW OF US HERE THAT WE'VE GOT A FEW OF US HERE THAT ARE GOING TO BRIEFLY GO OVER ARE GOING TO BRIEFLY GO OVER THIS ITEM AND I'M GOING TO START THIS ITEM AND I'M GOING TO START BY MAKING A FEW COMMENTS. BY MAKING A FEW COMMENTS. I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO TAMMY SPEARMAN OUR PURCHASING TAMMY SPEARMAN OUR PURCHASING AGENT TO GO OVER A FEW ITEMS AGENT TO GO OVER A FEW ITEMS WITH YOUR COMMISSION. WITH YOUR COMMISSION. THIS ITEM IS A MISCELLANEOUS THIS ITEM IS A MISCELLANEOUS CONSULTING CONTRACT RENEWAL FOR CONSULTING CONTRACT RENEWAL FOR CONSULTING CONTRACTS FOR CONSULTING CONTRACTS FOR ENGINEERING ARCHITECTURE, ENGINEERING ARCHITECTURE, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE, SURVEY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE, SURVEY AND PLANNING SERVICES, AND WE'RE AND PLANNING SERVICES, AND WE'RE REQUESTING THAT -- AN ADDITIONAL REQUESTING THAT -- AN ADDITIONAL TWO-YEAR PERIOD FOR THESE TWO-YEAR PERIOD FOR THESE CONTRACTS. CONTRACTS. WE LIKE TO GO OVER SOME BRIEF WE LIKE TO GO OVER SOME BRIEF BACKGROUND TO, AND KIND OF BACKGROUND TO, AND KIND OF REMIND THE COMMISSION OF THE REMIND THE COMMISSION OF THE TYPES OF SOLICITATIONS THAT WE TYPES OF SOLICITATIONS THAT WE DO, AND WE'VE GOT A FIVE OR SIX DO, AND WE'VE GOT A FIVE OR SIX SLIDES TO GO THROUGH THAT. SLIDES TO GO THROUGH THAT. AND THAT WILL BASICALLY COVER AND THAT WILL BASICALLY COVER THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF LIFT THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF LIFT STATIONS WE CAN DO AND HOW THIS STATIONS WE CAN DO AND HOW THIS PARTICULAR CONTRACT FALLS UNDER PARTICULAR CONTRACT FALLS UNDER THOSE CATEGORIES. THOSE CATEGORIES. I'LL TURN IT OVER TO TAMMY I'LL TURN IT OVER TO TAMMY SPEARMAN OUR PURCHASING AGENT SPEARMAN OUR PURCHASING AGENT WHO'S BESIDE ME IN A FEW MINUTES WHO'S BESIDE ME IN A FEW MINUTES AND THEN AFTER THAT I WILL TURN AND THEN AFTER THAT I WILL TURN IT OVER TO CLAY WATKINS, IT OVER TO CLAY WATKINS, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF UTILITIES ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF UTILITIES AND ENGINEERING AND ALSO GEORGE AND ENGINEERING AND ALSO GEORGE KINNEY OUR DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY KINNEY OUR DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND THEY'LL MENTION DEVELOPMENT AND THEY'LL MENTION A FEW, A FEW AREAS WHERE THEY A FEW, A FEW AREAS WHERE THEY USE THESE CONTRACTS AND THE USE THESE CONTRACTS AND THE TYPES OF SERVICES THEY USE THESE TYPES OF SERVICES THEY USE THESE CONTRACTS ON. CONTRACTS ON. THERE'S 27 CONTRACTS IN THE THERE'S 27 CONTRACTS IN THE STAFFING TODAY. STAFFING TODAY. THEY ARE ALL FOR DIFFERENT TYPES THEY ARE ALL FOR DIFFERENT TYPES OF AREAS THAT TAMMY WILL TALK OF AREAS THAT TAMMY WILL TALK ABOUT AND ALSO WANT TO MENTION ABOUT AND ALSO WANT TO MENTION THAT IN THIS AMENDMENT WE HAVE THAT IN THIS AMENDMENT WE HAVE ADDED THE FEDERAL LANGUAGE TO ADDED THE FEDERAL LANGUAGE TO THESE CONTRACTS. THESE CONTRACTS. WHICH IS IN CASE WE HAVE FUTURE WHICH IS IN CASE WE HAVE FUTURE STORMS WITH FEMA OR OTHER STORMS WITH FEMA OR OTHER FEDERAL CONTRACTS WE'VE GOT THE FEDERAL CONTRACTS WE'VE GOT THE FEDERAL TERMS IN THESE CONTRACTS FEDERAL TERMS IN THESE CONTRACTS MOVING FORWARD. MOVING FORWARD. I'LL TURN IT OVER TO TAMMY NOW I'LL TURN IT OVER TO TAMMY NOW TO GO OVER SOME OF THE SLIDES TO GO OVER SOME OF THE SLIDES AND THE SOLICITATION AND THE SOLICITATION INFORMATION. INFORMATION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. >> GOOD MORNING, SO I'M GOING TO >> GOOD MORNING, SO I'M GOING TO >> GOOD MORNING, SO I'M GOING TO GO >> GOOD MORNING, SO I'M GOING TO GO OVER >> GOOD MORNING, SO I'M GOING TO GO OVER -- >> GOOD MORNING, SO I'M GOING TO GO OVER -- [OFF >> GOOD MORNING, SO I'M GOING TO GO OVER -- [OFF MIC] GO OVER -- [OFF MIC] >> TAMMY, COULD YOU MOVE THE MIC >> TAMMY, COULD YOU MOVE THE MIC >> TAMMY, COULD YOU MOVE THE MIC OVER >> TAMMY, COULD YOU MOVE THE MIC OVER AND >> TAMMY, COULD YOU MOVE THE MIC OVER AND MAKE >> TAMMY, COULD YOU MOVE THE MIC OVER AND MAKE SURE >> TAMMY, COULD YOU MOVE THE MIC OVER AND MAKE SURE IT'S >> TAMMY, COULD YOU MOVE THE MIC OVER AND MAKE SURE IT'S ON >> TAMMY, COULD YOU MOVE THE MIC OVER AND MAKE SURE IT'S ON SO >> TAMMY, COULD YOU MOVE THE MIC OVER AND MAKE SURE IT'S ON SO WE OVER AND MAKE SURE IT'S ON SO WE CAN HEAR YOU? CAN HEAR YOU? THANK YOU. THANK YOU. >> OKAY. >> OKAY. >> OKAY. SO >> OKAY. SO CAN >> OKAY. SO CAN YOU >> OKAY. SO CAN YOU HEAR >> OKAY. SO CAN YOU HEAR ME? SO CAN YOU HEAR ME? OKAY. OKAY. GOING TO THE FORMAL TYPES OF GOING TO THE FORMAL TYPES OF SOLICITATION THAT THE CITY HAS, SOLICITATION THAT THE CITY HAS, WE START WITH AN ITB, WHICH IS WE START WITH AN ITB, WHICH IS KNOWN AS AN INVITATION TO BID KNOWN AS AN INVITATION TO BID NOW THIS IS A FORMAL NOW THIS IS A FORMAL SLISESITATION CUTAINING -- SLISESITATION CUTAINING -- SOLICITATION CONTAINING SOLICITATION CONTAINING SPECIFICATIONS FOR ASKSIRED SPECIFICATIONS FOR ASKSIRED SERVICES -- DESIRED SERVICES THE SERVICES -- DESIRED SERVICES THE CITY IS SOLICITTING FOR. CITY IS SOLICITTING FOR. THE VENDORS WILL RESPOND WITH A THE VENDORS WILL RESPOND WITH A PRICE INCLUDED ON THE PRICE INCLUDED ON THE SOLICITATION DOCUMENT. SOLICITATION DOCUMENT. BIDS ARE THEN TABULATED BY BIDS ARE THEN TABULATED BY PURCHASING, AND COMPARED TO EACH PURCHASING, AND COMPARED TO EACH OTHER AND AWARD IS RECOMMENDED OTHER AND AWARD IS RECOMMENDED FOR THE LOWEST RESPONSIVE, FOR THE LOWEST RESPONSIVE, RESPONSIBLE BIDDER. RESPONSIBLE BIDDER. A BID IS RESPONDED TO SCOPE OF A BID IS RESPONDED TO SCOPE OF WORK, SCOPE OF SERVICE, SERVICES WORK, SCOPE OF SERVICE, SERVICES THAT WE SOLICITEDS FOR A THAT WE SOLICITEDS FOR A CONTRACT. CONTRACT. SO UNLIKE THE NEXT SOLICITATION SO UNLIKE THE NEXT SOLICITATION I'M GOING TO PRESENT, THE I'M GOING TO PRESENT, THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL, THERE IS REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL, THERE IS NO NEGOTIATION. NO NEGOTIATION. IT'S APPLES TO APPLES. IT'S APPLES TO APPLES. IT IS WHAT IT IS. IT IS WHAT IT IS. LOWEST RESPONSIBLE BIDDER. LOWEST RESPONSIBLE BIDDER. THAT'S WHO WE RECOMMEND FOR THAT'S WHO WE RECOMMEND FOR AWARD. AWARD. THE NEXT SOLICITATION TYPE IS AN THE NEXT SOLICITATION TYPE IS AN RFP WHICH IS THE REQUEST FOR RFP WHICH IS THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL. PROPOSAL. AND THIS IS ANOTHER FORM OF AND THIS IS ANOTHER FORM OF SOLICITATION THAT THE CITY SOLICITATION THAT THE CITY INCLUDES A GENERAL SCOPE OF WORK INCLUDES A GENERAL SCOPE OF WORK THAT ADDRESSES THE PARTICULAR THAT ADDRESSES THE PARTICULAR NEED THAT THE CITY HAS. NEED THAT THE CITY HAS. VENDORS WILL RESPOND WITH A VENDORS WILL RESPOND WITH A DETAILED PROPOSAL ON HOW THE, DETAILED PROPOSAL ON HOW THE, THEY WILL BEST MEET WHAT WE ARE THEY WILL BEST MEET WHAT WE ARE SOLICITING. SOLICITING. WHY THE CITY SHOULD CHOOSE THEM, WHY THE CITY SHOULD CHOOSE THEM, AND THE COST THAT WOULD BE AND THE COST THAT WOULD BE INVOLVED. INVOLVED. SO THEN AGAIN, THERE AGAIN SO THEN AGAIN, THERE AGAIN UNLIKE THE ITB, RFP DOES NOT UNLIKE THE ITB, RFP DOES NOT LOOK -- I MEAN, DOES NOT LOOK -- LOOK -- I MEAN, DOES NOT LOOK -- LOCK -- I'M SORRY LOCK THE LOCK -- I'M SORRY LOCK THE ISN'TER INTO A -- SUBMITTER ISN'TER INTO A -- SUBMITTER ENTOA SPECIFIC PRICE. ENTOA SPECIFIC PRICE. YOU CAN NEGOTIATE. YOU CAN NEGOTIATE. YOU CAN NEGOTIATE PRICE. YOU CAN NEGOTIATE PRICE. YOU CAN NEGOTIATE SCOPE. YOU CAN NEGOTIATE SCOPE. THE RFP COMMITTEE, A COMMITTEE THE RFP COMMITTEE, A COMMITTEE IS FORMED BEFORE WE'VE PUT THE IS FORMED BEFORE WE'VE PUT THE BID OUT ON THE STREET, THE RFP BID OUT ON THE STREET, THE RFP ON THE STREET. ON THE STREET. THEY WILL LOOK AT EACH PROPOSAL, THEY WILL LOOK AT EACH PROPOSAL, AND THEY WILL SCORE THE PROPOSAL AND THEY WILL SCORE THE PROPOSAL BASED ON CRITERIA THAT WAS IN BASED ON CRITERIA THAT WAS IN THE SOLICITATION. THE SOLICITATION. AND THEN THE HIGHEST SCORED AND THEN THE HIGHEST SCORED PROPOSAL WILL BE RECOMMENDED FOR PROPOSAL WILL BE RECOMMENDED FOR AWARD. AWARD. THE RFQ. THE RFQ. NOW, THE RFQ IS DIFFERENT THAN NOW, THE RFQ IS DIFFERENT THAN THE RFP, AND THE RFQ IS WHAT WE THE RFP, AND THE RFQ IS WHAT WE HAVE BEFORE YOU TODAY. HAVE BEFORE YOU TODAY. THIS IS A FORMAL SOLICITATION. THIS IS A FORMAL SOLICITATION. AN R FQ ADHERES TO THE FORMAL AN R FQ ADHERES TO THE FORMAL SOLICITATION ACT, COMMONLY KNOWN SOLICITATION ACT, COMMONLY KNOWN AS CCNA FOR FLORIDA STATE AS CCNA FOR FLORIDA STATE STATUTE 287055. STATUTE 287055. IT SETS FORTH DETAILED PROCEDURE IT SETS FORTH DETAILED PROCEDURE ON HOW TO CONDUCT THIS TYPE OF ON HOW TO CONDUCT THIS TYPE OF SOLICITATION. SOLICITATION. AND IT'S NORMALLY DONE FOR A AND IT'S NORMALLY DONE FOR A PROFESSIONAL ARCHITECTS, PROFESSIONAL ARCHITECTS, ENGINEERS, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS, ENGINEERS, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS, LAND SURVEYS. LAND SURVEYS. CONTRACTORS SUCH AS THAT. CONTRACTORS SUCH AS THAT. NOW UNLIKE THE RFP OR IPB, COST NOW UNLIKE THE RFP OR IPB, COST IS NOT INVOLVED IN THIS IS NOT INVOLVED IN THIS SOLICITATION UPFRONT. SOLICITATION UPFRONT. WHEN WE ORIGINALLY SOLICIT FOR A WHEN WE ORIGINALLY SOLICIT FOR A LIST OF QUALIFIED CONSULTANTS, LIST OF QUALIFIED CONSULTANTS, THEY DO NOT SUBMIT PRICE. THEY DO NOT SUBMIT PRICE. THIS IS SOLELY AWARDED OR THIS IS SOLELY AWARDED OR RECOMMEDED FOR AWARD BASED ON RECOMMEDED FOR AWARD BASED ON QUALIFICATIONS. QUALIFICATIONS. QUAL FXZS OF THE PROJECT TEAM -- QUAL FXZS OF THE PROJECT TEAM -- QUALIFICATIONS OF THE PROJECT QUALIFICATIONS OF THE PROJECT TEAM, THE FIRM, WORKING WITH TEAM, THE FIRM, WORKING WITH PROJECTS AND SERVICES CIVIL IN PROJECTS AND SERVICES CIVIL IN NATURE THAT MIGHT BE NEEDED BY NATURE THAT MIGHT BE NEEDED BY THE CITY, APPLICABLE PROJECT THE CITY, APPLICABLE PROJECT REFERENCES, REFERENCES FROM REFERENCES, REFERENCES FROM RENCES FROM OTHER RENCES FROM OTHER GOVERNMENTS, THE LOCATION OF THE GOVERNMENTS, THE LOCATION OF THE FIRM, AND THE QUALITY OF THE FIRM, AND THE QUALITY OF THE FIRM SUBMITTING. FIRM SUBMITTING. SO WHAT WE HAVE BEFORE YOU TODAY SO WHAT WE HAVE BEFORE YOU TODAY IS THE RFQ. IS THE RFQ. THAT WAS AWARDED BY COMMISSION THAT WAS AWARDED BY COMMISSION ON MARCH 18th, 2018. ON MARCH 18th, 2018. IT HAS SEVEN DISCIPLINES OR IT HAS SEVEN DISCIPLINES OR SEVEN DIVISIONS. SEVEN DIVISIONS. DIVISIONS OF SPECIALTY. DIVISIONS OF SPECIALTY. CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING SERVICES, HYDROGEOLOGICAL SERVICES, HYDROGEOLOGICAL SERVICES, I'M SORRY. SERVICES, I'M SORRY. ARCHITECT SERVICES, PLANNING ARCHITECT SERVICES, PLANNING SERVICES, AND JUST MISCELLANEOUS SERVICES, AND JUST MISCELLANEOUS SERVICES. SERVICES. THERE ARE QUALIFICATIONS OF WHAT THERE ARE QUALIFICATIONS OF WHAT THE CITY MIGHT BE LOOKING FOR, THE CITY MIGHT BE LOOKING FOR, LIKE IN DIVISION 1 FOR ROADWAY LIKE IN DIVISION 1 FOR ROADWAY DRAINAGE, THAT'S COULD BE DRAINAGE, THAT'S COULD BE ROADWAY DESIGN, STORMWATER ROADWAY DESIGN, STORMWATER DRAINAGE, BRIDGE AND STRUCTURAL DRAINAGE, BRIDGE AND STRUCTURAL INSPECTION AND DESIGN,. INSPECTION AND DESIGN,. >> I'LL TURN IT OVER TO CLAY AND >> I'LL TURN IT OVER TO CLAY AND >> I'LL TURN IT OVER TO CLAY AND GEORGE >> I'LL TURN IT OVER TO CLAY AND GEORGE TO >> I'LL TURN IT OVER TO CLAY AND GEORGE TO GO >> I'LL TURN IT OVER TO CLAY AND GEORGE TO GO OVER >> I'LL TURN IT OVER TO CLAY AND GEORGE TO GO OVER FOR >> I'LL TURN IT OVER TO CLAY AND GEORGE TO GO OVER FOR SOME GEORGE TO GO OVER FOR SOME EXAMPLES. EXAMPLES. >> JUST IN GENERAL, THE >> JUST IN GENERAL, THE >> JUST IN GENERAL, THE UTILITIES >> JUST IN GENERAL, THE UTILITIES -- >> JUST IN GENERAL, THE UTILITIES -- EXCUSE >> JUST IN GENERAL, THE UTILITIES -- EXCUSE ME, >> JUST IN GENERAL, THE UTILITIES -- EXCUSE ME, CLAY UTILITIES -- EXCUSE ME, CLAY WATKINS, CITY, CITY DIRECTOR OF WATKINS, CITY, CITY DIRECTOR OF UTILITIES AND CITY ENGINEER. UTILITIES AND CITY ENGINEER. IN GENERAL WE USE THESE IN GENERAL WE USE THESE CONTRACTS ON A DAILY BASIS FOR CONTRACTS ON A DAILY BASIS FOR WORK SUCH AS GEOENGINEERING, OUR WORK SUCH AS GEOENGINEERING, OUR DESIGNS FOR ANY PROJECTS AND DESIGNS FOR ANY PROJECTS AND IT'S A VERY LARGE PROJECT WE CAN IT'S A VERY LARGE PROJECT WE CAN ALSO USE THEM FOR INSPECTIONS OR ALSO USE THEM FOR INSPECTIONS OR STUFF THAT'S MAYBE OUTSIDE OF STUFF THAT'S MAYBE OUTSIDE OF OUR STAFF'S EXPERTISE SUCH AS OUR STAFF'S EXPERTISE SUCH AS MAYBE BRIDGE INSPECTIONS AND MAYBE BRIDGE INSPECTIONS AND WHATNOT. WHATNOT. THESE GEC CONTRACTS ALLOW US TO THESE GEC CONTRACTS ALLOW US TO GET TO A CONTRACT AND A TASK GET TO A CONTRACT AND A TASK ORDER QUICKLY. ORDER QUICKLY. WE DON'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE WE DON'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE ENTIRE SIX MONTH PROCESS AS LONG ENTIRE SIX MONTH PROCESS AS LONG AS THE DESIGN COST MEET THE CCNA AS THE DESIGN COST MEET THE CCNA NUMBERRISM GENERALLY SPEAKING NUMBERRISM GENERALLY SPEAKING WE'VE USED THIS. WE'VE USED THIS. WE'VE HAD THIS CONVERSATION A WE'VE HAD THIS CONVERSATION A LOT WHEN TALKED ABOUT PREVENTING LOT WHEN TALKED ABOUT PREVENTING TASK FOR THE MARINA AND GETTING TASK FOR THE MARINA AND GETTING THE SEA WALLS DONE, BUT IN THE SEA WALLS DONE, BUT IN GENERAL TASK WE USE THESE EVERY GENERAL TASK WE USE THESE EVERY DAY FOR AND UTILITIES WISE FOR DAY FOR AND UTILITIES WISE FOR GETTING DESIGNS FOR LIFT GETTING DESIGNS FOR LIFT STATIONS, WATER AND SEWER STATIONS, WATER AND SEWER PROJECTS, ANY OF THOSE TYPES OF PROJECTS, ANY OF THOSE TYPES OF TASKS THAT ARE ASKED OF US FOR TASKS THAT ARE ASKED OF US FOR DESIGN WORK IS WHAT WE USE THESE DESIGN WORK IS WHAT WE USE THESE FOR. FOR. >> GEORGE KINNEY, WE ALWAYS >> GEORGE KINNEY, WE ALWAYS >> GEORGE KINNEY, WE ALWAYS RECOMMEND >> GEORGE KINNEY, WE ALWAYS RECOMMEND SELECTION >> GEORGE KINNEY, WE ALWAYS RECOMMEND SELECTION PROCESS >> GEORGE KINNEY, WE ALWAYS RECOMMEND SELECTION PROCESS WITH RECOMMEND SELECTION PROCESS WITH THE TEAM. THE TEAM. AS YOU CAN MENTION THE AS YOU CAN MENTION THE COMMISSION THE PRIMARY USE FOR COMMISSION THE PRIMARY USE FOR US IS THE PLANNING SERVICES OR US IS THE PLANNING SERVICES OR DECISION 6. DECISION 6. WE MOSTLY USE THOSE CONSULTANTS WE MOSTLY USE THOSE CONSULTANTS EITHER FOR PEER REVIEW, FOR SUCH EITHER FOR PEER REVIEW, FOR SUCH THINGS AS FOR INSTANCE LIKE THINGS AS FOR INSTANCE LIKE TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENTS, TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENTS, COMING WITH DESIGN REVIEW. COMING WITH DESIGN REVIEW. IF WE WANT TO PEER REVIEW THAT IF WE WANT TO PEER REVIEW THAT WE'LL PULL A CONSULTANT FROM WE'LL PULL A CONSULTANT FROM THAT LIST. THAT LIST. WE ALWAYS USE THEM QUITE WE ALWAYS USE THEM QUITE EXTENSIVELY FOR BUSINESS PLAN EXTENSIVELY FOR BUSINESS PLAN INITIATIVES, BUDGET BOTH INITIATIVES, BUDGET BOTH ESTIMATING AND BOTH ESTIMATING AND BOTH IMPLEMENTATION -- AND IMPLEMENTATION -- AND IMPLEMENTATION AS WELL. IMPLEMENTATION AS WELL. IF WE DON'T HAVE THE PROJECT IN IF WE DON'T HAVE THE PROJECT IN HOUSE BECAUSE THAT IN A NUT HOUSE BECAUSE THAT IN A NUT SHELL IS HOW WE ARE INVOLVED SHELL IS HOW WE ARE INVOLVED WITH THE PROCESS AND THE WITH THE PROCESS AND THE CONSULTING LIST. CONSULTING LIST. >> MAYOR FREANEY: WE'LL GO TO >> WE'LL GO TO >> WE'LL GO TO THE >> WE'LL GO TO THE COMMISSIONERS, >> WE'LL GO TO THE COMMISSIONERS, START >> WE'LL GO TO THE COMMISSIONERS, START WITH THE COMMISSIONERS, START WITH VICE MAYOR. VICE MAYOR. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR. IT >> THANK YOU, MAYOR. IT MIGHT >> THANK YOU, MAYOR. IT MIGHT BE >> THANK YOU, MAYOR. IT MIGHT BE GEORGE >> THANK YOU, MAYOR. IT MIGHT BE GEORGE OR >> THANK YOU, MAYOR. IT MIGHT BE GEORGE OR MATT >> THANK YOU, MAYOR. IT MIGHT BE GEORGE OR MATT I IT MIGHT BE GEORGE OR MATT I GUESS. GUESS. WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THIS LIST AND JUST GOING OUT TO THIS LIST AND JUST GOING OUT TO BID ON A PROJECT. BID ON A PROJECT. WHY DO WE HAVE THIS LIST? WHY DO WE HAVE THIS LIST? WHY DO WE -- WHY DO WE -- >> TO SAVE TIME. >> TO SAVE TIME. >> TO SAVE TIME. DEPENDING >> TO SAVE TIME. DEPENDING ON >> TO SAVE TIME. DEPENDING ON THE >> TO SAVE TIME. DEPENDING ON THE COST. DEPENDING ON THE COST. IF IT'S ABOVE $50,000 WE HAVE TO IF IT'S ABOVE $50,000 WE HAVE TO GET THE APPROVAL FROM YOU -- GET THE APPROVAL FROM YOU -- FROM THE COMMISSION HERE. FROM THE COMMISSION HERE. SO YOU KNOW, IT COULD TAKE US SO YOU KNOW, IT COULD TAKE US ANYWHERE FROM MAYBE TWO MONTHS ANYWHERE FROM MAYBE TWO MONTHS AT THE LONG END TO GET A AT THE LONG END TO GET A CONTRACT GOING WHERE IF NOT, IF CONTRACT GOING WHERE IF NOT, IF WE HAVE THROUGH THIS WHOLE WE HAVE THROUGH THIS WHOLE SOLICITATION PROCESS, IT'S SOLICITATION PROCESS, IT'S APPROXIMATELY SIX MONTHS APPROXIMATELY SIX MONTHS PROCESS. PROCESS. >> AND IT WAS -- AND MIGHT'VE >> AND IT WAS -- AND MIGHT'VE >> AND IT WAS -- AND MIGHT'VE BEEN >> AND IT WAS -- AND MIGHT'VE BEEN SAID >> AND IT WAS -- AND MIGHT'VE BEEN SAID SOMEWHERE >> AND IT WAS -- AND MIGHT'VE BEEN SAID SOMEWHERE IN >> AND IT WAS -- AND MIGHT'VE BEEN SAID SOMEWHERE IN THE BEEN SAID SOMEWHERE IN THE PRESENTATION, TO GO BACK TO THE PRESENTATION, TO GO BACK TO THE ITB, WHERE THEY HAVE TO PUT DOWN ITB, WHERE THEY HAVE TO PUT DOWN SOME PRICES. SOME PRICES. BUT THEN LATER ON, THOSE PRICES BUT THEN LATER ON, THOSE PRICES ARE NEGOTIATE -- LIKE WHAT'S THE ARE NEGOTIATE -- LIKE WHAT'S THE PURPOSE OF THEM PUTTING DOLLARS PURPOSE OF THEM PUTTING DOLLARS TO THEIR SERVICES IF THAT CAN TO THEIR SERVICES IF THAT CAN BE -- BE -- >> SO A LOT OF IT ALSO GOES BACK >> SO A LOT OF IT ALSO GOES BACK >> SO A LOT OF IT ALSO GOES BACK TO >> SO A LOT OF IT ALSO GOES BACK TO THE >> SO A LOT OF IT ALSO GOES BACK TO THE PREVIOUSLY >> SO A LOT OF IT ALSO GOES BACK TO THE PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED TO THE PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED CCNA, THE CONSULTANT CCNA, THE CONSULTANT NEGOTIATIONS. NEGOTIATIONS. SO WHEN IT COMES TO -- A SO WHEN IT COMES TO -- A CONSULTANTS DOING WORK FOR US, CONSULTANTS DOING WORK FOR US, THAT'S WHEN WE DON'T -- SO WHEN THAT'S WHEN WE DON'T -- SO WHEN WE -- ANYTIME WE SOLICIT OR ASK WE -- ANYTIME WE SOLICIT OR ASK FOR CONSULTANT, WE PICK THEM FOR CONSULTANT, WE PICK THEM BASED ON QUALIFICATIONS NOT BASED ON QUALIFICATIONS NOT COST. COST. AND TAMMY, YOU CAN CORRECT ME IF AND TAMMY, YOU CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT THE ITB COST THAT I'M WRONG, BUT THE ITB COST THAT MORE RELATES TO CONSTRUCTION MORE RELATES TO CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT, OBTAINING CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT, OBTAINING CONSTRUCTION COST, AND BIDS, SO THERE IS A COST, AND BIDS, SO THERE IS A SEPARATION BETWEEN GETTING A SEPARATION BETWEEN GETTING A CONTRACTOR TO DO THE WORK AND CONTRACTOR TO DO THE WORK AND THE CONSULTANT TO HELP US DO THE THE CONSULTANT TO HELP US DO THE WORK. WORK. >> MAY I INTERJECT? >> MAY I INTERJECT? >> MAY I INTERJECT? >> >> MAY I INTERJECT? >> YES, >> MAY I INTERJECT? >> YES, GO >> MAY I INTERJECT? >> YES, GO AHEAD. >> YES, GO AHEAD. >> YES, GO AHEAD. >> >> YES, GO AHEAD. >> ANNE >> YES, GO AHEAD. >> ANNE BENNETT,ER >> YES, GO AHEAD. >> ANNE BENNETT,ER OF >> ANNE BENNETT,ER OF >> ANNE BENNETT,ER OF UTILITIES >> ANNE BENNETT,ER OF UTILITIES -- >> ANNE BENNETT,ER OF UTILITIES -- DIRECTOR >> ANNE BENNETT,ER OF UTILITIES -- DIRECTOR OF UTILITIES -- DIRECTOR OF UTILITIES AND ENGINEERING, IT'S UTILITIES AND ENGINEERING, IT'S UP TO JORGE AND I TALK ABOUT ALL UP TO JORGE AND I TALK ABOUT ALL THE OLD STUFF. THE OLD STUFF. WE'VE BEEN AROUND LONG TIME. WE'VE BEEN AROUND LONG TIME. SO BASICALLY IT IS FLORIDA LAW SO BASICALLY IT IS FLORIDA LAW THAT YOU DO NOT SELECT THESE THAT YOU DO