On the agenda

1. 4

   Swearing In of New Firefighter Cole Kingsbury

   Deputy Chief Adam Darling introduced new firefighter Cole Kingsbury, who started part-time in June and became full-time in September after previously working for Pasco County Fire Rescue. The City Clerk administered the oath of office and his mother Sherry performed the badge pinning.

   🏢New Port Richey Fire Department🏢Pasco County Fire Rescue🏢Sickles High School🏢Tampa Fire Academy👤Adam Darling👤Cole Kingsbury👤Sherry Kingsbury

   ▶ Jump to 0:10 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Broadcast caption · reformatted for readability

   Of a new firefighter, Cole Kingsbury. Kingsbury. Could I have deputy chief Adam Darling up front to introduce the new firefighter? And mister kingsbury? Evening, mayor. Council, city manager and staff. Thank you for the opportunity to introduce and swear in our newest member of the fire department. Cole started with us as a part time firefighter back in june and has jumped from part time to full time in september. Cole was born in pensacola, Florida, and graduated from Sickles High School. After graduating, he pursued his career in the fire service by attending Tampa Fire Academy and completed his firefighter emt training. Prior to joining our department, cole worked for Pasco County Fire Rescue. This is when we got to cole and I had numerous of my guys come to me and try to get us to steal him away from Pasco, which obviously we were successful at doing so he values the challenges and responsibilities of this department and what comes with this profession, and he is grateful for the opportunity to make a meaningful difference in our community. Outside of work, cole's enjoys spending time quality with his friends and family, which are here tonight. Thank you all for joining us. And his hobbies include everything Florida, golfing, fishing, spending opportunities outside whenever possible. At this time, we would like to ask city clerk to come in to administer the oath of office, and then we'll be followed by his mother, sherry, with the spinning of his badge. Right there. Get close to the microphone here. That's going to be your oath. All right. If you'll raise your right hand and repeat after me, I. And state your name. I, Cole Kingsbury, a citizen of the state of Florida and of the united states of america, a citizen of the state of Florida and of the united states of america, and being employed by or an officer of the city of new port richey, and being employed, or by an officer of the city of new port richey, and a recipient of public funds as such employee or officer, and a recipient of public funds as such, employee or officer do hereby solemnly swear or affirm. Do hereby solemnly swear or affirm that I will support the constitution of the united states and of the state of Florida, that I will support the constitution of the united states and the state of Florida, and that I will honestly, faithfully and impartially discharge, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge the duties of my trust as firefighter New Port Richey Fire Department. The duties of my trust as firefighter New Port Richey Fire Department in and for said city of new port richey and in. For. Said city of new port richey. According to the law, and to the best of my knowledge and ability, according to the law, and the best of my knowledge and ability, so help me god, so help me god. Congratulations. Thank you. I'm proud of you. Deputy chief. And then family as well, please. Add to. Very shortly. Thank you. Thanks. For that. Appreciate it.

   Original caption was ALL CAPS; this page lowercases and capitalizes sentence starts. Names from the meeting’s entity index are restored. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

2. 5

   Swearing In of New Police Sergeant Jose Berrios

   Sergeant Jose Berrios was sworn in and promoted to the rank of Sergeant in the New Port Richey Police Department. Chief Coachman presented Berrios's background, including his U.S. Army 82nd Airborne service, prior law enforcement experience with Port Richey PD and Pinellas County Sheriff's Office, and his service with NPRPD since December 2021.

   🏢New Port Richey Police Department🏢Pasco County Unified SWAT Team🏢Pinellas County Sheriff's Office🏢Port Richey Police Department🏢United States Army 82nd Airborne Division👤Chief Coachman👤Deputy Chief Latona👤Jose Berrios#CAT Team#Combat Cross#Field Training Coordinator#Officer of the Year#Promotion to Sergeant

   ▶ Jump to 0:10 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Broadcast caption · reformatted for readability

   [00:05:22] Any of the new police sergeant joe barrows. Yes. I'd like to invite Chief Coachman who is well prepared for this moment. I see, and also newly appointed sergeant berrios up front. It's a pleasure to have them both before us this evening. One of the most important things we do, and I'm sure the chief will affirm, is cast the right people in the right place in the organization. And this certainly is an opportunity to do so. And we're both very pleased and proud to be able to advance our sergeant berrios to this new role in the police department, because he's earned it, truly. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Council members. So I always say you got to hire smart. You got to promote smart. Jose is a strategic investment in the future of our department. He's an awesome individual, possesses character, and he earned every bit of this promotion. So let me give you a little bit about his background. Starting off with. He began his law enforcement career in 2006 following his service in the united states army's 82nd airborne division that is an elite airborne unit of the us army. Thank you for your service. You're welcome. He previously served with the Port Richey Police Department and the Pinellas County Sheriff's Office, where he was awarded the combat cross for acts of valor during a critical incident. Since joining New Port Richey Police Department in december of 2021, jose has been named officer of the year, promoted to corporal in 2020 for. His assignments have included training corporal, field training coordinator, cat team, Pasco County Unified SWAT Team. Through these roles, he has helped develop fellow officers and strengthen the department's training program. Jose is absolutely a testament to professionalism and everything that we look for at that level. And again, I always I always kind of talk about that first line level of supervisor kind of being like the piston of the engine. They were the rubber hits the road. So they carry out the vision of our police department. So this is a crucial level of supervision. So jose, we are so glad to have you in that. Jose is also a devoted husband and proud father of son and two daughters. Today, October 2026, we recognize his dedicated service and leadership and proudly promote him to the rank of sergeant. Well done. Oh oh! Oh! You're taking pictures. You can come on down. Jose, do you want to say anything? Just thank you guys so much for the opportunity, ma'am. Again, everybody on the council chief. It's a huge honor. Obviously the goal in my career to make it to this anything more would be great. But again, this was the ultimate goal. I don't get here without all them. So just understand that all these accolades, everything like that are fantastic. But without them, I'm just I'm just a regular person. So thank kudos to all you guys, man, for making all my my job much easier. But yeah, no, thank you guys so much for the opportunity. Turn around and get some pictures of you and your family. Do you guys want to come down real quick? Chief, with you and the family. And then we'll have the men join you. And Deputy Chief Latona. You want to look this way? There you go. Come here buddy. Hey, guys. Look, look, look at the camera. Right. Come here. Come my parents. Come down, baby. Mom, she. Breathe in, breathe in. Act like we like one another. I know, I know, you can get a little bit more closer, chief, I don't bite. I got more squeezing in. Yeah. Dad. See where I get it from? Dating cats. Okay. All right. Thank you, thank you. [00:10:14] Thank you. Stick around. He's not going anywhere. Swearing in two new police officers. Chief.

   Original caption was ALL CAPS; this page lowercases and capitalizes sentence starts. Names from the meeting’s entity index are restored. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

3. 6

   Swearing In of Two New Police Officers - Jillian Rudin and Joseph Crump

   Two new police officers, Jillian (Jill) Rudin and Joseph Crump, were sworn in to the New Port Richey Police Department. The Police Chief presented their backgrounds and the City Clerk administered the oath of office.

   🏢Kansas City Police Department🏢New Port Richey Police Department🏢Pasco County Fire Rescue🏢Pasco High School🏢Pasco Sheriff's Office🏢Pasco-Hernando College🏢Turner High School🏢United States Marine Corps👤Jillian Rudin👤Joseph Crump👤Judy#Oath of Office#Swearing-in ceremony

   ▶ Jump to 10:14 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Broadcast caption · reformatted for readability

   Thank you, Mr. Mayor and council members, again, we have a good lineup here tonight. So we hired two new officers. And like I said, with the sergeant, hiring smart is critical. Future of our department. Bringing in good talent to serve our community is the key. If you don't hire smart, then you're really not doing a good job as chief or as command staff or as an agency. So we have two new officers tonight. They're going to get sworn in if they come down, please. Julianne rudin and Joseph Crump are their names. Judy, who you have up first? Does it matter? I'm going to do them together. Okay. Together. Okay. All right. So let me just talk a little bit about their background. So also, Jillian Rudin, known as jill, is a lifelong Pasco County resident. She attended Pasco County schools and graduated from Pasco High School in 2016 and 2019. She established her own business, which she continues to operate. She began the police academy training at Pasco-Hernando College in 2023 and graduating in 2025. She started her law enforcement career with the Pasco Sheriff's Office before joining New Port Richey Police Department. She is currently pursuing a degree in criminal justice to further her education and professional development. Gratulations on that. Jill. Outside her career as a wife and proud mother of two children, she looks forward to serving with the city of new port richey. Welcome. All right, you're up. Yes, sir. All right, officer Joseph Crump. Joseph Crump was born and raised in kansas city, kansas. He graduated from Turner High School a semester early to enlist in the United States Marine Corps, where he served as an infantry squad leader with baker company first battalion. Thank you for your service. He completed deployments to kuwait and afghanistan and concluded his military service at the rank of sergeant. Again, thank you for your service. Thank you sir. Following his military service, joseph served with the Kansas City Police Department for two and a half years. He then relocated to Florida, where he worked as a firefighter. Emt chief fitch is not here, so I won't say anything with Pasco County Fire Rescue. Welcome to the police side. In September 2026, joseph joined the New Port Richey Police Department, continuing his commitment to public service. He is honored to serve the residents of new port richey and brings experience in military leadership, law enforcement and firefighting. Again, both of you, welcome aboard. You work for an awesome police department, and your service to this community will be invaluable. So if madam clerk would come down and do the honors of swearing, you. You can't mess this up. Here's your first task. Thank you, thank you. Oh, it's color coordinated. Perfect. Closer to the microphone there. Okay. All right. And if you both will raise your right hand and then repeat after me, I and state your name. I, joseph, a citizen of the state of Florida and of the united states of america, a citizen of the state of Florida in the united states of america, and being employed by or an officer of the city of new port richey, and being employed by, or an officer of the city of new port richey, and a recipient of public funds as such employee or officer, and a recipient of public funds as such, employee or officer do hereby solemnly swear or affirm. Do hereby solemnly swear or affirm that I will support the constitution of the united states and of the state of Florida. That I will support the constitution of the united states and of the state of Florida, and that I will support, protect, and defend, and that I will support, protect and defend the constitution and government of the united states and of the state of Florida, the constitution and government of the united states and the state of Florida against all enemies, domestic or foreign, against all enemies, domestic or foreign. That I will bear true faith, loyalty, and allegiance to the same. That I will bear true faith, loyalty, and allegiance to the same. That I will uphold the ordinances of the city of new port richey, Florida. That I will uphold the ordinances of the city of new port richey, Florida, and that I will faithfully perform all the duties of police officer of said city, and that I will faithfully perform all the duties of police officer of said city. So help me god, so help me god. Congratulations. [00:15:03] Thank you. Do you. Have you got family here to come on up? Yep. Family first. Shuffling, shuffling. I'm just gonna do it all at once. There's too many people. You guys are in the spotlight tonight. Yes, sir. You gotta have to sort people up front. That's right. Challenge. Yeah, a little bit. All right. Okay. Okay. Congratulations. Thank you. Congratulations. Thank you sir. Congratulations. Thank you, thank you sir. Appreciate you. Your turn. To. Do the proclamations of john hook for

   Original caption was ALL CAPS; this page lowercases and capitalizes sentence starts. Names from the meeting’s entity index are restored. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

4. 7.a

   Joan Hook for Years of Service to the Library Advisory Board

   approved

   Mayor Chopper Davis read a proclamation recognizing Joan Hook for 12 years of dedicated service on the New Port Richey Library Advisory Board, commending her contributions to literacy, lifelong learning, and the public library.

   🏢New Port Richey Public Library👤Chopper Davis👤Joan Hook#Library Advisory Board#Proclamation - 12 Years of Service

   ▶ Jump to 15:03 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Broadcast caption · reformatted for readability

   Years of service. The library advisory board. We were down there. Here for someone else. I know you're keeping an eye on me. Oh. What's going on? Come on. We. This is a proclamation of the office of the mayor of the city of new port richey. Whereas john hook has faithfully and honorably served the city of new port richey as a member of the library advisory board for 12 years. And whereas, throughout her 12 years of service, joan has generously shared her time, knowledge, experience and dedication in support of the mission and continued success of the New Port Richey Public Library. And whereas joan has demonstrated an unwavering commitment to public service literacy, lifelong learning, and ensuring that the library remains a welcoming, accessible and valued resource for residents of all ages. And whereas, through her thoughtful participation, guidance, and steadfast dedication, joan has contributed to the advancement of library programs and services and has helped strengthen the important role the library plays in our community. And whereas joan's 12 years of volunteer service reflect her deep commitment to the city of new port richey and its residents, and her contributions have left a lasting and meaningful impact on the library advisory board, the public library, and the community it serves. And whereas the mayor and city council, library advisory board, library staff and the residents of new port richey wish to express their sincere appreciation and gratitude to Joan Hook for her exceptional service and dedication. Now, therefore, I. Chopper Davis, mayor of the city of new port richey, do hereby recognize and commend Joan Hook for 12 years of dedicated and exemplary service to the New Port Richey Library Advisory Board and extend our sincere appreciation for her commitment, leadership and many contributions to our community. It says. 12 years of the library, but she's been keeping an eye on me for 40 years. I've been doing a good job. Oh, I don't know. I have to talk to the police officers about that. Well, and there are plenty of them here. Thank you everybody. Thank you. Andy, your superior. Thank you, thank you, thank you very. There's another proclamation. Another

   Original caption was ALL CAPS; this page lowercases and capitalizes sentence starts. Names from the meeting’s entity index are restored. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

5. 7.b

   Epilepsy Awareness Month (By Title Only)

   approved

   The council acknowledged a proclamation for Epilepsy Awareness Month, read by title only, to be delivered to the recipients outside the meeting.

   #Epilepsy Awareness Month

   ▶ Jump to 15:03 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Broadcast caption · reformatted for readability

   [00:20:07] Proclamation. It's epilepsy awareness month and the best by title only. We'll go ahead and get that to those people. To be. Way to be. That is happening. That is true. Well, the minutes

   Original caption was ALL CAPS; this page lowercases and capitalizes sentence starts. Names from the meeting’s entity index are restored. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

6. 8Approval of Minutes▶ 20:07
7. 9Vox Pop for Items Not Listed on the Agenda or Listed on Consent Agenda▶ 20:07
8. 10

   City Council Response to Vox Pop Speakers

   discussed

   A councilmember thanked Vox Pop speakers for sentiments toward the arts and discussed the Bank and Main Street building project, noting difficulty comparing rehab-to-code costs across five differing proposals (some involving demolition or reconfiguration). The City Manager reported that a report on current building deficiencies of the Bank and Main building will be disseminated to council on Monday.

   • direction:City staff will disseminate a report on current building deficiencies of the Bank and Main building to council on Monday. (none)

   📍Bank and Main building#Bank and Main Street project#Vox Pop speakers

   ▶ Jump to 30:04 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Broadcast caption · reformatted for readability

   Comment? Other other than to say thank you for the sentiments of the arts and that I brought up. This is mostly a questions thing, remember? One second. Let me pull up the page. Council city council responses to vox pop speakers. That's where we're at. Yep. Okay. I did bring up during our meeting, the city staff did extend an opportunity to meet. Additionally, about the brainstorm or excuse me, the bank and main street projects. And I had mentioned if we had done some sort of independent analysis on the, the nature of that building and getting it up to code, I think one of the complications is that some of the different projects are moving bathrooms, moving things around. One of the projects wants to demo it, so there's no way to really, in my mind, create a fair comparison of what it would be to bring it up to code. If you have different, if you have different pitches and proposals. So we have to just take those five proposals and, and figure out if those five are feasible for what they're worth. So they laid out what they think they need in rehab or demo. But other than that, just to say thanks for the sentiments towards the arts. Anybody else know you? Anybody? Anything else? I'm good. I can report to you that a report is being prepared and will be disseminated to you on Monday. Of all of the current building deficiencies of the main Bank and Main building, so that you at least have the opportunity to know what the current condition of the building is. Yeah, I went in it the other day. The consent agenda to approve. I'll second. All those in favor signify by I. I. Okay.

   Original caption was ALL CAPS; this page lowercases and capitalizes sentence starts. Names from the meeting’s entity index are restored. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

9. 11Consent Agenda▶ 30:04
10. 12.a

    First Reading Ordinance 2026-2380:  Amendments to Police Pension Ordinance

    approved

    First reading of Ordinance 2026-2380 amending the Police Pension Ordinance to unify the calculation of average final compensation and unfreeze the November 2017 benefit freeze for actively employed members, pursuant to contract negotiations with the West Central Florida PBA. The one-time additional cost of approximately $39,170 has been accounted for in the FY 2026-2027 budget. Council approved the first reading.

    • motion:Motion to approve first reading of Ordinance 2026-2380 amending the Police Pension Ordinance. (passed)

    🏢West Central Florida Police Benevolent Association👤Councilman Butler👤Mr. Wetzel👤Ms. Manske#Article Four Police Officers Retirement System#Chapter 17 Pensions and Retirement#DROP Program#FY 2026-2027 Budget#Ordinance 2026-2380#Section 17-51#Section 17-51.1

    ▶ Jump to 30:04 in the video

    ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

    Broadcast caption · reformatted for readability

    First reading ordinance number 2026 2380. Amendments to the police pension ordinance. This is ordinance number 2026 2380. An ordinance of the city of new port richey, Florida, amending. Chapter 17 pensions and retirement. Article four police officers retirement system of the code of ordinances of the city of new port richey. Amending section 17-51 definitions. Amending section 17-51.1 plan freeze new benefit structure providing for severability of provisions, providing for codification, repealing all ordinances and conflict herewith, and providing an effective date. As I'm sure you'll all recall, this is an item that came up during contract negotiations with the west central police benevolent association, and Mr. Wetzel will present the agenda item in detail to you. Thank you, miss manske. Good evening mayor. Good evening. City council, as was described here with the ordinance change, you know, the request tonight is for you to approve this first reading of ordinance 2026 2380. As miss manns mentioned during contract negotiations, the city and the pba, the west central Florida benevolent association agreed to clarify and amend the pension and retirement plan definition, calculation of average final cap compensation. The current definition, as written within the plan, created two different pension calculations for any union member that was actively employed as a police officer with the city prior to November 8th, 2017, and still remains actively employed as a police officer by the city. To date, the city and the pba agreed to amend the definition, as mentioned, of the average final compensation to provide one unified calculation effective final adoption. Adoption of this ordinance after the second reading. The definition of final average compensation will mean. Again, little technical will mean 1/12 of the average annual salary of the three best of the last five years as credited. Service for all periods of service for members who are actively employed, including members of the drop program as of the date of final adoption. By amending the definition of final average compensation and section 17-51.1, the plan freeze also needs to be amended to allow the appropriate benefit structure for actively employed members. Effective final adoption of the ordinance. The November 2017 benefit freeze shall be unfrozen for actively employed members, including members of the drop plan, with one average final compensation being used to calculate the retirement benefit for all periods of credited service. So the recommendation of staff is that city council conduct this first reading of ordinance [00:35:01] 2026-2380, requesting to amend the definition of final average compensation and the plan freeze benefit structure as presented with regard to the financial impact associated with this agenda item was actually determined by the pension plans, actuaries and consultants. The additional cost associated with the change is approximately $39,170, and has been accounted for by the city in the fy 2026 2027 budget. Future funding for the pension plan contributions, including the proposed change, will be accounted for and included in future budgets. So if there's any questions, I'll be glad to to address any public comment. Seeing no one come forward and bring it back for discussion and vote. I'll move to approve second maker. I know, let's just, you know, get the pension plan cleaned up a second. The $39,170 is a one time for this year, and it represents a total not per each member. Correct. That is correct. Councilman Butler again, it's it's the total from that standpoint for the again, to to fund this change into the entire retirement plan for all for all the active members and members that are in drop. Yes. Yes, sir. Thank you. Yes. Just the actuarial changes are made to smooth out the payments so that the city doesn't get hit hard in a particular year. If the economy has a drop in the investments and clearly the pension plans invest in stocks and bonds and other things that the city is unable to invest in. So they do generate and expect a higher rate of return. Those obligations by the city remain, however. So any kind of prediction as to how much it's going to cost us in the future, or the potential for unfunded liabilities to be posted on our financial statements, is a much more complicated issue. So I support the the action. And, you know, we we pray the economy continues to grow the way it has. All those in favor signify by I, I, those opposed. What did you vote? I vote yes. Oh, I'm sorry for nothing. Moving on to second reading of

    Original caption was ALL CAPS; this page lowercases and capitalizes sentence starts. Names from the meeting’s entity index are restored. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

11. 12.b

    Second Reading, Ordinance No. 2026-2374 FLUM: Amendment for 6506 Meadowbrook Lane, Lot 110 of the Meadows Subdivision, from LMDR-10 to LDR-5

    approved

    Second reading of Ordinance 2026-2374, a small-scale Future Land Use Map amendment changing 6506 Meadowbrook Lane (Lot 110, Meadows Subdivision) from LMDR-10 to LDR-5. The change allows property owner Michael Mackles (acquired adjacent parcel via adverse possession) to unify two parcels under one land use category. Council discussed stormwater easements, shoreline stabilization, and Meadows Pond maintenance before approving.

    • motion:Motion to approve second reading of Ordinance 2026-2374, FLUM amendment from LMDR-10 to LDR-5 for 6506 Meadowbrook Lane. (passed)

    📍6506 Meadowbrook Lane, Lot 110 of the Meadows Subdivision👤Michael Mackles👤Mr. Hall👤Ms. Manson👤Ms. Mueller#Cecilia Avenue#Cotee River#DRB#DRC#LDR-5#LMDR-10#Meadows Pond#Meadows Subdivision#Ordinance 2026-2374

    ▶ Jump to 35:01 in the video

    ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

    Broadcast caption · reformatted for readability

    Ordinance number 2026 2374fl amendment to the 6506 meadow brook lane. This is ordinance number 2026 2374 an ordinance of the city of new port richey, Florida, providing for a small scale amendment of the future land use map of the city's adopted comprehensive plan, providing for a change in the future land use designation for approximately 0.12 acres of property generally located on the south side of meadow brook lane, approximately 220ft west of sherry lane, as shown on the map attached hereto as exhibit a and legally described herein. Providing for the amendment of future land use designation for said property from low medium density residential. Ten lmdr ten to low density residential 5ldr5 providing for severability and effective date. This agenda item was discussed in detail at your first reading, and as you'll recall, there was an extensive discussion related to meadows pond. In that respect, I did send out a communication to you on Friday, which addressed some matters related to meadows pond. It provided a history of some of the interaction the city had related to the matter, and talked in some detail about the potential of expanding the use of that pond, and I hoped that it would at least address some concerns related to this agenda item, and we're prepared to respond to questions if there are any. And Mr. Hall will present the agenda item to you as a reminder of what's involved. Thank you, miss manson. Item 12 b and 12 c are related because they're adjacent parcels and they will be tied together in this powerpoint presentation. I will be brief as possible on this because this is a second reading of this. And we talked about it at the last at the last meeting in september. This is a land use amendment for two parcels of land. And this isn't working. This parcel is owned by michael mccall. And what it entails is the the property [00:40:12] Owner acquired adjacent property through adverse possession and wants to unify the two parcels of land into one parcel. They are currently separate part or separate land use categories and to unify the property, they need to be the the same land use categories. Next. As we show on this map, this is the best map for this. There's two separate parcels and they're going to be combined. They are also two separate land use categories. The important thing to note is that they will end up being the the same category. So they can be unified. This is frustrating and I apologize for this. Let's go to the next one. Thank you. The future land use map is an important one. It shows the blue is conservation and the yellow is lmd. It shows that they're separate future land use categories. We're going to put them all into the request to put them all in the same category, which is ldr5. In doing so, it's important to note that the zoning of this will not change. The zoning is going to stay residential. Two R2. It is consistent with the comprehensive plan. And last but not least, the drc had recommended approval of this. The drb had recommended approval of this future land use map revision and then the city council at the first reading in september recommended approval. I'd be more than happy to go into detail on any of those questions if you have them. Any public comment, seeing no one come forward, bring it back for discussion and vote. I'll move to approve. The second. I'll second, for the sake of discussion to make her no. I mean, I think it's the right thing to do for the homeowner. He has been maintaining that property since he acquired it through adverse possession. Yeah. I have a couple questions. You good? Sorry. Yes. Okay. I have a couple questions for staff. The maintenance. Thank you. First off, thanks to the city manager and miss mueller and the public works department for preparing some additional details related to that area. I have two questions in regards to that. The the stormwater maintenance history could could we have that map back up? I just want to understand with with the changes that are proposed here for moving from. I'm just going to speak to all three issues, essentially with the rezoning in general, how does that impact future stormwater maintenance or public works being able to go out there? Mr. Yeah. So to answer that, it really wouldn't affect any of our maintenance going forward. We've spoken with Mr. Mackles pretty much in depth about that item, and that anywhere where we have our easement and any of our actual infrastructure, which would right be it would be right there at the kind of between the two properties as it outfalls into where it connects to the river, going further to the north there. We've had that discussion with Mr. Mackles, and he understands that if at any point in time we need to replace or do any maintenance on that drainage infrastructure that we can do so and access it. And so my question is, yeah, thank you. But, you know, this property owner sells the property, new property owner. My question is, do we with this rezoning and him potentially building something on that property offense, store line infrastructure to prevent erosion, is that going to impact what we have there or what the work that's done there? Our easement would still be in place in order to conduct any kind of maintenance that we would be that would be necessary. Okay. And then my second question is related to the private shoreline stabilization. It says property owners requested that the city provide. Property owners had made a request along the shoreline, which we have currently zoned for conservation. Is this does this at all impact other not not this applicant tonight, but other private properties along this? Does this give any adverse advantage to these [00:45:02] Properties to do shoreline stabilization as opposed to the other properties you see along this, this whatever water, body of water you want to call it. Hopefully I answer this correctly and I'm understanding you here. What does occur within the rest of these other properties is they do have seawalls in place and they, they conduct their own private level shoreline stabilization. And if Mr. Mackles would choose to do so somewhere out there on that property, he would be more than welcome to. It's his property as far as the city would perceive it. It wouldn't be any different than the utilization or the shoreline stabilization that would be conducted by the other private property owners within that development. Okay. Thank you for answer the questions. Based on the the additional information that the city provided in relationship to the history of the properties, the history of that area, and the intent behind the conservation. I think the city has made a compelling argument when it comes to the potential of the potential for moving this from lm ten to ldr5. And then just to keep my comments succinct so I don't have to do this three times. And then from conservation, the l d, r five and the second readings of the other two ordinances, I think, yeah, you know, my extensive comments last time are already embedded in everyone's memory, I think. But the bottom line is that that square, that rectangular lake in the middle, there was some discussion about ownership of that time. So I believe it's been confirmed, if I'm not mistaken, that each of those properties somehow all come together at a point in the center of that. And sort of I've seen a map and I don't know if it's recorded or not, but effectively that the lake itself is an extension of property as a result of the failure of hoa to live forward. And so the idea that somehow they were able to the owner was able to contact the former, you know, president of the hoa or whatever happened in order to gain the right to do the sort of new title. If I'm not saying it right effectively. It sort of begs the question that that whole community on that lake ties into a larger, you know, storm water sort of maintenance program. So having the easement agreed to, I would only ask that at the time it comes that we get the legal right versus and maybe we have an easement and it's recorded, but making sure that we have recorded easements on both the north side of the rectangular lake and the south side, I'm guessing because it does tie in and go underneath cecilia avenue and goes beyond. So I believe those are all connected water bodies that are probably tidally affected as a result of. That's the reason for all of the erosion. So there's a whole bunch of laws that are well beyond me and how all of that would be affected and what we would do. I only wanted to bring attention to it, because I think it may be an ultimate resiliency project, maybe of the county's or in the long run, also to the north of that road. I guess we'll also learn of the connection that goes to the cody river. So I just wanted to make sure that we preserved our easement rights and to the description of the owner who said he was going to invest a whole lot of money into seawalls and improvements to the degree that those improvements benefit our stormwater process. Personally, I think it's a shame if it all lands on one man's responsibility to do it. And and I believe that my angst at the meeting was, over the years, learning of the fact that since it wasn't ours, we weren't we weren't going to be involved. So the public and private benefit has seawall. Whether he wants to do to shore up his property. I understand your point. I agree with it. The part of that that relates to any stormwater expansion of the a weir or any kind of connectivity or anything else that we would do, I would assume would become a stormwater project if it ever happened in conjunction with county or city or. So I agree and I appreciate, again, the, the long effort that we're that was taking place to get us to this point. I don't want us to walk away from our responsibility to stormwater. All of those residents in their pay, their stormwater fee. And I think it is a part of a collector system or a distribution system of sorts. So that's my comments. Thank [00:50:01] You. All those in favor signify by I, I it's for nothing. Second reading amendment number

    Original caption was ALL CAPS; this page lowercases and capitalizes sentence starts. Names from the meeting’s entity index are restored. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

12. 12.c

    Second Reading, Ordinance No. 2026-2375 FLUM: Amendment for a portion of the Meadows Subdivision adjacent to 6506 Meadowbrook Lane, from CON to LDR-5

    approved

    Second reading of Ordinance 2026-2375, a small-scale Future Land Use Map amendment changing approximately 0.13 acres of the Meadows Subdivision adjacent to 6506 Meadowbrook Lane from Conservation to Low Density Residential 5 (LDR-5). Staff noted DRC review and recommendation for approval; no public comment; a motion to approve was made and seconded.

    • motion:Motion to approve Ordinance No. 2026-2375 on second reading, amending the FLUM for a portion of the Meadows Subdivision from Conservation to LDR-5. (passed)

    📍6506 Meadowbrook Lane👤Mr. Hall#Conservation to LDR-5#DRC review#FLUM amendment#Meadows Subdivision#Ordinance No. 2026-2375

    ▶ Jump to 50:01 in the video

    ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

    Broadcast caption · reformatted for readability

    2026 2375. This is ordinance number 2026 2375. An ordinance of the city of new port richey, Florida, providing for a small scale amendment of the future land use map of the city's adopted comprehensive plan, providing for a change in the future land use designation for approximately 0.13 acres of property generally located on the south side of meadow brook lane, approximately 280ft west of sherry lane, as shown on the map attached hereto as exhibit a and legally described herein. Providing for the amendment of the future land use designation for said property from conservation to low density residential five ldr five providing for severability and effective date as indicated by Mr. Hall, this is a companion ordinance to your. Your most previous agenda item and is indicated by the city attorney. It is amendment for a portion of the meadows subdivision from. From a conservation to a ldr five designation for low density residential. For the property located at 6506 meadow brook lane. And. Mr. Hall is prepared to respond to questions or. Yeah, if I may add, miss, please do this. It's this parcel of land, this gray parcel right here that will be added into this. The key elements are. It is compatible with. The request is compatible with the comprehensive plan. It was reviewed by the drc and recommended for approval and the ldr being recommended for approval. So it's here before you this evening as a second reading, and I can answer further questions if you need any public comment. Seeing no one come forward, bring it back for discussion and vote. I'll move to approve. Second. Anybody else want to speak? No, I said, all those in favor

    Original caption was ALL CAPS; this page lowercases and capitalizes sentence starts. Names from the meeting’s entity index are restored. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

13. 12.d

    Second Reading, Ordinance No. 2026-2376: FLUM Amendment for 6446 Meadowbrook Lane, Lot 27 of the Meadows Subdivision, from LMDR-10 to LDR-5

    approved

    Second reading and adoption of Ordinance 2026-2376, a small-scale Future Land Use Map amendment for a 0.12-acre parcel at 6446 Meadowbrook Lane (Lot 27, Meadows Subdivision), changing the FLUM designation from LMDR-10 to LDR-5. No public comment; motion passed by voice vote.

    • motion:Motion to approve second reading of Ordinance 2026-2376, amending the FLUM for the subject parcel from LMDR-10 to LDR-5. (passed)

    📍6446 Meadowbrook Lane, Lot 27 of the Meadows Subdivision👤Hall👤Pete#Future Land Use Map amendment#LDR-5#LMDR-10#Meadows Subdivision#Ordinance No. 2026-2376

    ▶ Jump to 50:01 in the video

    ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

    Broadcast caption · reformatted for readability

    Signify by I, I that's for nothing. Second reading of ordinance number 2026 2376. This ordinance number 2026 2376, an ordinance of the city of new port richey, Florida, providing for a small scale amendment of the future land use map of the city's adopted comprehensive plan providing for a change in the future land use designation designation for approximately 0.12 acres of property generally located on the south side of meadow brook lane, approximately 360ft west of sherry lane, as shown on the map attached hereto as exhibit a and legally described herein. Providing for the amendment of future land use designation for said property from low medium density residential ldr ten to low density residential five ldr five providing for severability and effective date. Mr. Hall okay, due to the technical difficulties, I won't go through the entire powerpoint, but what I'll do is show you it's the same request, almost a mirror image. And what we have is it's actually this parcel of land right there. This reading is for the yellow parcel here. Again, the zoning will not be changed. It is asking for an ldr, future land use change amendment and the next element or the next item that we'll hear is actually for this parcel also. So I can go into more details if you wish, but that's a great summary of what we have before you mirror to the other one any public comment. Seeing no one come forward, bring it back for discussion and vote. And I'll move to approve. Second to the maker. No I'm good. Second pete, same as before, sir. All those in favor signify by I I I it's for nothing. Second reading of

    Original caption was ALL CAPS; this page lowercases and capitalizes sentence starts. Names from the meeting’s entity index are restored. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

14. 12.e

    Second Reading, Ordinance No. 2026-2377: FLUM Amendment for a portion of the Meadows Subdivision adjacent to 6446 Meadowbrook Lane, from CON to LDR-5

    approved

    Second reading of Ordinance 2026-2377, a small-scale Future Land Use Map amendment changing approximately 0.11 acres on the south side of Meadowbrook Lane (adjacent to 6446 Meadowbrook Lane, part of the Meadows Subdivision) from Conservation to Low Density Residential 5 (LDR-5). No public comment was offered; council moved, seconded, and approved the ordinance.

    • motion:Motion to approve Ordinance 2026-2377 on second reading, changing the FLUM designation from Conservation to LDR-5. (passed)

    📍6446 Meadowbrook Lane📍South side of Meadowbrook Lane, approximately 320 ft west of Sherry Lane👤Hall#Conservation to LDR-5#FLUM Amendment#Meadows Subdivision#Ordinance No. 2026-2377

    ▶ Jump to 50:01 in the video

    ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

    Broadcast caption · reformatted for readability

    Ordinance number 2026 2377. This ordinance number 2026 2377. An ordinance of the city of new port richey, Florida, providing for a small scale amendment of the future land use map of the city's adopted comprehensive plan providing for a change in the future land use designation for approximately 0.11 acres of property generally located on the south side of meadow brook lane, approximately 320ft west of sherry lane, as shown on the map attached hereto as exhibit a and legally described herein. Providing for the amendment the future land use designation for said property from conservation to low density residential 5ldr5 providing for conflict, severability and an effective date. Mr. Hall, as I had said previously, this is for the parcel of land that's in gray on this side. All the other items mentioned previously go coincide with this request. Also, your other public comment seeing no one come forward, bring it back for discussion and vote. Move to approve. I get I'm good. Thank you. Second, sir pete, all those in favor signify by I. Firefighters pension board. The request

    Original caption was ALL CAPS; this page lowercases and capitalizes sentence starts. Names from the meeting’s entity index are restored. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

15. 13.a

    Board Appointment: Jerry Dodd, Firefighters' Pension Board

    approved

    Council appointed Jerry Dodd to the Firefighters' Pension Board, with the term expiring June 3, 2029. Staff confirmed he meets the ordinance requirements and recommended approval.

    • motion:Motion to appoint Jerry Dodd to the Firefighters' Pension Board for a term expiring June 3, 2029. (passed)

    👤Jerry Dodd#Firefighters' Pension Board

    ▶ Jump to 50:01 in the video

    ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

    Broadcast caption · reformatted for readability

    [00:55:01] Before you is to appoint Mr. Jerry Dodd to the firefighter pension board. The current term is due to what? I'm sorry. The current term on the board was due to expire on June 3rd to 2029, and the board. Position is. Up for renewal and the renewal would be on June 3rd of 2029. If you determine that, Mr. Dodd, it will be appointed and he does meet the requirements set forth in the ordinance. And we're recommending that you do place him on the board. Jerry, you want to talk? Anybody else like to speak in favor of jerry? That is, I think he's a good guy. I'm glad he had to stay all the way to 7:00. And. Okay. Gotta gotta move to approve maker. Thank you, Mr. Dodd. Second. Oh, sir, thank you for volunteering. I appreciate it. Thank you. All those in favor signify by I, I for nothing for

    Original caption was ALL CAPS; this page lowercases and capitalizes sentence starts. Names from the meeting’s entity index are restored. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

16. 13.b

    Board Appointment: Rosalyn Fenton, Library Advisory Board

    approved

    Council appointed Rosalyn Fenton to the Library Advisory Board for a three-year term ending October 20, 2029. The Library Advisory Board chairman spoke in support, noting her role as President of the Pasco County Friends of the Library. Motion passed 4-0.

    • motion:Motion to appoint Rosalyn Fenton to the Library Advisory Board for a three-year term ending October 20, 2029. (passed)4–0

    🏢New Port Richey Library Advisory Board🏢Pasco County Friends of the Library🏢Pasco County Library Advisory Board👤Nick👤Rosalyn Fenton#Library Advisory Board three-year term ending October 20, 2029

    ▶ Jump to 55:01 in the video

    ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

    Broadcast caption · reformatted for readability

    Appointment of rosalind fenton to the library advisory board. Yes. I applied for membership on the library advisory board back in september, and she has complied with the requirements associated with serving on the board. The current seat, which she has applied to fill, is for a three year term. If you determine it's appropriate for her to fill that seat, she would serve until October 20th of 2029, and we are recommending that you appoint her to the board. Any public comment? Come on now. Well, hello city council again. My name is nick. I'm the chairman of the library advisory board. And I also recommend ross fenton to join our board. Ross is currently sits as the president of the Pasco County Friends of the Library, where she always includes new port richey. Although we are not part of their co-op and to all of their events and making sure we are promoted just as much as that friends system. She also sits in all the board meetings for the Pasco County Library Advisory Board, so she is always in the ear of the director of the Pasco County libraries, which is a good thing for me, someone who is not afraid to speak her mind, and I probably saved you some time by her being a little ill this evening. So the library advisory board and the friends of the library both recommend ross. Highly. Thank you guys. Anybody else seeing no one else, come back for discussion and vote? I'll move to approve. Second to maker. I just want to thank her. I mean she is very well suited for this position and I think just her her county work is going to help our local library immensely. So thank you for the recommendation. Second, thank you, miss benton. Just to our libraries were here first, and we've been paying for all those county libraries on our taxes as well. And our residents have paid for our own library. So we are much, very much a donor city when it comes to libraries. And I'm really happy that we've won awards over the years and that we continue to, as with the recreation department, be, you know, the standard bearer for quality in the county. So very much proud of our library and proud of the support of your board. I just appreciate the the time and commitment that she has both in the city and the county. All those in favor signify by I, I, I. That's four nothing appointment of thomas.

    Original caption was ALL CAPS; this page lowercases and capitalizes sentence starts. Names from the meeting’s entity index are restored. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

17. 13.c

    Board Appointment: Thomas Kuss, Environmental Committee

    approved

    Council appointed Thomas Kuss to the Environmental Committee, waiving the requirement that applicants attend a couple of committee meetings before appointment due to a number of open positions. His two-year term runs through October 20, 2028.

    • motion:Motion to appoint Thomas Kuss to the Environmental Committee and waive the meeting-attendance requirement, with a term through October 20, 2028. (passed)3–0

    👤Thomas Kuss#Environmental Committee

    ▶ Jump to 55:01 in the video

    ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

    Broadcast caption · reformatted for readability

    Can I say that word out loud? Because environmental committee. Okay. Related to this appointment typically, typically when we make an appointment, there is a requirement that the applicant attend a couple meetings of the committee before they're appointed. In this case, we're recommending that you waive the requirement. There is a number of open positions currently on the environmental committee, and that's why I'm asking you to waive that requirement, the term of office on the environmental committee is two years. Mr. Cost from his application, appears to be eager and very qualified to [01:00:08] Serve. And if you appoint him, his term of office would span through October 20th of 2028. Have any public comment? Seeing no one come forward, bring it back for discussion and vote move approval. I'll second. No. It's our environment is our most precious asset in our city, and I'm happy to have a new member look forward to it. A second, I appreciate thomas volunteering, so thank you. Thank you, Mr. Kessler. All those in favor signify by. Yes, I, I it's three nothing board reappointment of kennedy bus breath fager and susie sachs to

    Original caption was ALL CAPS; this page lowercases and capitalizes sentence starts. Names from the meeting’s entity index are restored. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

18. 13.d

    ↳You arrived here from a search for “Kimberly Brust” — transcript expanded below

    Board Re-Appointments: Kimberly Brust, Beth Fregger and Susie Saxe, Cultural Affairs Committee

    approved

    Council unanimously reappointed Kimberly Brust, Beth Fregger, and Susie Saxe to the Cultural Affairs Committee for two-year terms through November 6, 2026. A citizen briefly spoke in favor and councilmembers thanked the appointees for their service.

    • motion:Motion to approve reappointment of Kimberly Brust, Beth Fregger, and Susie Saxe to the Cultural Affairs Committee for two-year terms. (passed)

    👤Beth Fregger👤Kimberly Brust👤Rich Mountain👤Susie Saxe#Cultural Affairs Committee

    ▶ Jump to 1:00:08 in the video

    ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

    Broadcast caption · reformatted for readability

    The cultural affairs committee. What did I do wrong? Two. Three three. Nothing. Oh. For nothing. Okay. Thank you. I'm sorry. I haven't left yet, but myself. I only heard three yeses. Good work. Good. Loaded agenda item. We have three women on the agenda to be reappointed to the cultural affairs committee, and they have all expressed interest in continuing to serve. The terms of office are for two years, and we are recommending reappointment and their term of office, if you reappoint them, would be through November 6th of 2026. Any public comment? Rich Mountain, they're going to you're going to renew them anyway because they're the best we can get. Anybody else. See no one else. Very glad to have them on the board. And we'll bring it back for discussion. Vote. I'll move to approve. Second, no, I just want to thank the three of them for their service. You know, I, I do a lot of events and and I just wonder why they're not here tonight because they're typically here. So next time I see them, I'm going to ask them why they weren't here for their reappointments. Second. Yeah. On a similar note, I'm, I'm used to them being here actually speaking in favor and positive positively for the other committee members that are getting appointed. So I guess they're being humble by staying home. Pete. All those in favor signify by I, I that's [13.e) 2027 Cotee River Bike Fest Alcoholic Beverage Special Event Application] For nothing. 2027 cody river bike fest alcoholic beverage special event application. The applicant for this agenda item is not present this evening, but as you know, the cody river bike fest, which was due to be conducted earlier this month, was canceled for weather and they are now asking to reschedule the event. They would like to conduct the event on the weekend of January 15th through the 17th of 2027. They are requesting, in that respect, an alcoholic beverage special event permit, and they would like to have that permit for alcohol sales. I don't there's an error in this memo on Friday. Through Saturday and Sunday. Let me look this up because it's yeah, yeah, I know the dates, but the times aren't right. On 4 to 11 Friday. Yeah. 4 to 11 and and then till five I think on Sunday. Yes. I have to double check because the memo isn't right. A 1 to 5 on Sunday. And till 11, 4 to 11 on Friday and noon to 11 on Saturday. So thank you. And with that we're recommending [01:05:01] That you approve their alcoholic. Special event permit for beer and wine to be sold in sims park, and also a wet zone map proposed for the bike fest in the downtown area in accordance with a map, which is an attachment to your agenda item. Any public comment seeing no one come forward, bring it back for discussion and vote. I'll move to approve. A second. Yes, you have to bring it back. We don't have a second. I'll second it. For purposes of discussion. Baker. No, I mean, this is an unfortunate situation where whether, you know, push this event out. So I understand her looking for the next available date for her entertainment. So I'm assuming this was her best available date. So just looking to get her, her, her event going. Second. Yeah, I think the event map raises a little bit of a question. Two questions that I would have, first of all, which is that railroad square has not allowed for vehicles or motorized vehicles. So I'm assuming that the railroad square will be without any motorcycles in it. That's correct. So then the, the, the other issue is that we have had communication about some of the downtown restaurants concerning about some of their best time of the year activities and the effect that it could have on their regular sales. I guess. Now that's a common question, but I do want to suggest that we had a work session earlier today that folks did not attend. And, and, but at that work session, we discussed the importance of coming up with some strategies that would make sure that we transport people, whether it's to the theater or to restaurants or to the shops or activities. And I think I would just like to say that in the course of this motion, I'd like some acknowledgment that we would not want to wait too long to try to come up with some of those solutions, whatever they might be, whether they're temporary, before we come with a permanent solution. But we certainly need to have routes to and from those businesses that. That can also benefit from the event. Where are we in this have a motion and a second. Yeah. Oh, I, I yeah, good point, miss altman. The other thing is I would just, you know, out of respect for the special events process that every event applicant has to go through, that the applicant for this event would work with the city on the dates and wait to advertise them until we've had a chance to discuss it up here. And to that end, you know, we're receiving feedback that that event applicant might not be receiving. And so for them to be here, I think that's also important. I mean, we're considering their application and having a chance to have a dialog. I think that's equally as important. You know, bike fest is a is a great charity event. It should continue to happen. Mr. Jonas, Mr. Jonas point earlier in the workshop that the problems we're having with parking and, you know, a downtown that's trying to serve multiple groups of people point to the success, you know, it's a good problem to have. And the special events process is one way that we keep that process fair and that we have a chance to address all stakeholders. So it is a little disappointing that the dates were released before we've had a chance as council to consider them, and simultaneously, that there is not a representative from that event here to be able to discuss with. But I'm not going to take that away from the 20 year history of the event, but that there are a couple of things that this event needs to clearly work on. But other than that, I look forward to to it in january. If I could rebut to that, if you don't mind. So what I think maybe we should do is maybe ask them to maybe include some options of our previous workshop discussion of some uber, lyft pick up drop off locations. Since this is [01:10:02] Going to be next year. And we just discussed this today, I think this might be the best event to move it forward. And I think being that there are some downtown businesses that are a little upset about the date, I think maybe us working with the event, the event, working with them, maybe that will prevail. Some cooler heads and maybe everybody could work together. So maybe we could add that in that on their, on their event map that they show some locations outside their wet zone of some pick up drop off points for uber or lyft. If you want to make that part of the motion, it'll be up to the second to agree to it. I'm satisfied with the adding to the motion the importance of. Alternative transportation options for the businesses. I want to. Talk a little bit about a couple of the businesses having problems, not only with the date, just having problems with the the bike fest in itself. And I just want to remind the businesses that these people have a 20,000 to 100,000 plus toy, and that means they may look like a biker, but they've got a lot of money in their pocket. And, and I, if I can look back when I owned jilly's and chasco fiesta, you know, I modified what I did at my place and to attract people to come to my place. It may not be what I regularly do at my business, but I think if these two businesses that have been talking the most about it would come and talk to me or be interested in talking to me, that I would give him some suggestions that would help them out. There was another business that I've been helping for the last two years, and he's really happy with what kind of businesses he's doing, you know, during bike fest. But I can just say that I went from chasco one year, a couple years, probably 3 or 4. I did a months business in a day because I modified my program and went on. So I think with a couple modifications in these two businesses that are complaining that they could draw people to their place, and it would more than be happy with what they would do with their business. So it's up to them whether they want to reach out or not. All those, I've reached out to one of them and he kind of blew me off anyhow. All those in favor signify by I, I, I that's for nothing. Renewal of the

    Original caption was ALL CAPS; this page lowercases and capitalizes sentence starts. Names from the meeting’s entity index are restored. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

19. 13.f

    Renewal of Microsoft Enterprise Agreement w/CDW Government, LLC

    approved

    Council approved a three-year Microsoft Enterprise Agreement through vendor CDW Government LLC via their Sourcewell contract, running November 1, 2026 to October 31, 2029, with year one not to exceed $75,754.34. Staff optimization produced approximately $21,000 in annual savings compared to the prior year.

    • motion:Motion to approve the City Manager or her designee to enter into a three-year Microsoft Enterprise Agreement with CDW Government LLC, year one not to exceed $75,754.34. (passed)

    🏢CDW Government LLC🏢Microsoft🏢Sourcewell👤Mahadeo#Microsoft Copilot (AI capabilities inquiry)#Microsoft Enterprise Agreement renewal#Sourcewell contract#Technology Solutions FY2026-2027 budget

    ▶ Jump to 1:10:02 in the video

    ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

    Broadcast caption · reformatted for readability

    Microsoft enterprise agreement, CDW Government LLC. This is a three year enterprise agreement with microsoft through cwc, d w government LLC for a period beginning November 1st, 2026 and expiring October 31st, 2029 and miss mahadeo will present the agenda item to you. Good evening, mayor and city council. Can you hear me? So the city of new port richey entered into an enterprise agreement with microsoft in 2023. The current agreement will expire on October 31st of 2026. The city relies on microsoft licensing for critical business functions, including email office suite products, windows operating system, server operating systems, and various cloud based products, and some other microsoft services to ensure the city receives the best possible value. Staff conducted a thorough review and optimization of our licensing requirements. This diligent effort resulted in an improvement, improved mix of licenses that enhanced features while delivering substantial cost savings. At the time the agenda was initially prepared, the city had achieved $13,000 in annual savings. Through further analysis and adjustments, we are now realizing annual savings of $21,000 compared to the previous year. After meeting with several vendors and reviewing various license structures, CDW Government LLC submitted the lowest pricing for the required licenses through their sourcewell contract. The cost per license will remain fixed for the duration of the three year agreement. Should we add additional license because of, you know, staffing increases or other requirements, the per license rate will remain the same. However, the total annual cost could change each year. So the budget impact this item has been included in the technology solutions 2026 2027 budget and our software licensing category. We are requesting that city council approve the city manager or her designee to enter into a three year enterprise agreement with microsoft through vendor CDW Government LLC beginning [01:15:04] November 1st, 2026 and ending October 31st, 2029. The total for year one is not to exceed $75,754.34, and that change is reflected on the updated quote I believe, that was distributed. I can answer any questions that you have, any public comment. Seeing no one come down, bring it back for discussion and vote move for approval. I'll second maker. Well, kind of only one game in town when it comes to, you know, getting yourself all of the licenses that are required for, for, you know, operating the city as a connected city. So I'm happy to approve it and see us have the necessary tools we have. We need it. It's a necessary evil for our protection. So thank you. Well, I know on, on the on the, the motion though, but just curious to see at some future time, maybe in a memo what type of ai capabilities we're using with that. I know microsoft has that their platform copilot or whatever it is. I don't know if that's directly related to this, but just curious what you guys are planning for that. All those in favor signify by ai. That's for nothing. Itb 26005wwtp

    Original caption was ALL CAPS; this page lowercases and capitalizes sentence starts. Names from the meeting’s entity index are restored. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

20. 13.g

    ITB26-005 WWTP Clarifier No. 3 Gearbox Replacement Project Close Out

    approved

    Council approved a $5,000 deductive change order and final payment not to exceed $149,000 to Vivo USA, LLC for the WWTP Clarifier No. 3 Gearbox Replacement Project closeout. The replaced gearbox had exceeded its 30-year useful life; the new unit is expected to serve 20-30 years. Funding comes from the Water Pollution Control budget with Pasco County contributing per local agreement.

    • motion:Approve the $5,000 deductive change order and final pay request not to exceed $149,000 to Vivo USA, LLC for the Clarifier No. 3 Gearbox Replacement project closeout. (passed)

    🏢Pasco County🏢Vivo USA, LLC👤Mueller👤Vance#ITB26-005#WWTP Clarifier No. 3 Gearbox Replacement Project#Water Pollution Control budget

    ▶ Jump to 1:15:04 in the video

    ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

    Broadcast caption · reformatted for readability

    Clarifier number three gearbox replacement project closeout. Yes, this is a project closeout. Attached to it is a deductive change order in the amount of $5,000, and it is a final payment cost and the amount not to exceed $149,000. And Mr. Mueller is prepared to present the agenda item to you this evening. Thank you, miss vance. Good evening. As stated, staff is requesting that council approve the $5,000 deductive change order and the final pay request not to exceed $149,000. This is by Vivo USA, LLC. This was for the replacement of the clarifier number three gearbox project. The existing gearbox had been in service for more than 30 years, had exceeded its useful life, and the replacement was identified as a priority during the budget presentations last year. The gearbox, as you know, is a critical component for the wastewater treatment facility. It powering the rotating rings, rakes and scraper arms that help collect the settled solids, as well as the skimmers that remove the floating scum from the clarifier tanks. The new unit is expected to provide approximately 20 to 30 years of service, and will help support the continued operations of the wastewater treatment facility. The $5,000 deductive change order and final pay request of up to $149,000 will allow the city to finalize this project and close it out effectively, and funding is available through the water pollution control budget, with Pasco County contributing a portion of that expenditure in accordance with our local agreement, staff recommends the city council approve the deductive change order and the final pay request at this time, and I'm here for any questions you may have. Have any public comment? Seeing everybody rushed out? Bring it back for discussion and vote. I'll move to approve. Second. Necessary evil. Second. Necessary. Good. Necessary. All those in favor signify by I. I must be getting late in the meeting. Acceptance of the 2026 comprehensive and

    Original caption was ALL CAPS; this page lowercases and capitalizes sentence starts. Names from the meeting’s entity index are restored. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

21. 13.h

    Acceptance of the 2026 Compensation and Classification Study Results and Recommendations for General Employees

    approved

    Staff presented the 2026 Compensation and Classification Study for general employees conducted by Evergreen, finding the city was lagging market pay. Council approved the study results with a 2% COLA for all employees, a 10% cap on increases in year one (except where needed to reach pay range minimum), and a two-year phased implementation retroactive to October 1, 2026, with year one costing $693,265.90 and year two $37,258, totaling approximately $730,000 (coming in under the $733,000 budgeted).

    • motion:Motion to approve the 2026 Compensation and Classification Study results and recommendations with two-year phased implementation retroactive to October 1, 2026. (passed)

    🏢Evergreen👤Mr. Watson👤Mr. Wetzel👤Mr. Williamson👤Ms. Barnes👤Ms. Mince#10% cap first-year increase#2% COLA#2026 Compensation and Classification Study#60th percentile market target#Pay grade 101#Pay grade 102#Two-year phased implementation

    ▶ Jump to 1:15:04 in the video

    ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

    Broadcast caption · reformatted for readability

    Classification study results. Reclassifying for general employees. Recommendations for general employees. Excuse me. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. As you're aware, Mr. Watson and Mr. Williamson have been working for some time now on the 2026 compensation and classification study for the general employees of the city, which is our largest labor group, and the. They've been doing so, as you know, because we evaluate one group of the city every three years, and we do so to stay consistent with our recruitment and retention strategy. And that is consistent with the compensation philosophy of the city that you've established, because we want to recruit and retain talent. And the results of the study indicated that we were below market in a good number of classifications. But I'm not going to get into that detail because it's Mr. Williamson that will be presenting the agenda item to you this evening, but I'm proud of the work that they did on [01:20:05] The study, and I'm going to turn it over to Mr. Williamson to allow him to present it. Thank you, miss mince. Mayor, council, we have a brief powerpoint presentation for you this evening. So the overall study process would be familiar. It's the same process that evergreen has conducted in the past. It begins with a kickoff call and then moves into an initial assessment of current conditions, a review of the current pay plan, pay ranges, job classifications. See what has changed since the last study in 2023, and then approval of targets and benchmarks. Benchmarks would be those job classifications that we wanted to take to market. We had 80 in this study that were taken to market, and the target market peers were the same ones that we had used in previous studies. The study is conducted, the results are reviewed, and then we move to recommendations and how we're going to move those employees into their new market competitive pay ranges. And then ultimately, we need to make sure that that's fiscally responsible and that it complies with the budget that this council has approved and the direction that you provided of that 60th percentile target. And we find ourselves this evening here with a presentation to council. So this is kind of looking back at a 30,000 foot view nationally and locally on where are we with factors that could influence the labor market, amended this today because the latest inflation number came in a little hotter than expected. And it's getting sticky, meaning we were hoping that since 2023, we've had a steady diet of fed cuts and that that would get us closest to or closer to the fed target of 2%. That has not happened. And we can think of all the reasons why. But even if you extract out food and energy costs, it's still just below 3%. Is the increases. Why is this important to you as a policy maker? Well, it means that if we want to stay competitive, especially in a market where you can see that private sector wage growth is being beaten out by public sector wage growth, public sector wages are increasing faster than private sector wages, which tells you that the market is becoming more competitive for the talent that we need to provide the services that you and the electorate demand. And so what is the most important part of this? It's that retention element. I had been told many years ago that if you want to have a premier city with premier services, that requires premier talent. And so that retention piece, if you look around the room tonight, you can see that premier talent. And so the retention piece is very important. And that inflation number is going to be something you want to be mindful of as we continue to move forward. The 3.4% number again that's that wage growth outpacing the private sector. Those market peers that I referenced, you know, this is something that when we get three years removed and you're looking to conduct another study, you know, things continue to evolve in the market and some of the names that are on this list. Now, you may choose to have different names on the list because of population growth, because of proximity, because of things changing in the way of compensation priorities that you may direct staff to take a look at and unpack further. But these are the same peers that we've had for the last two market studies. You may recall these from when we did the city manager position review. We did have a very robust data set. You're looking at all 16 of the peers returned data, and we were looking at right between 9.6 and 9.8 was the average count. What that means is that we average 9.8 responses from peers. For every one of our benchmarks that we surveyed. What this shows is miss barnes was talking about is that we are lagging the market. Keep in mind this is an average. We're comparing our pay ranges to the market pay ranges. When you're looking at all of the job classifications that we have, and we're putting them in one bucket and evaluating that against the city as a whole, embedded within this, you may have some that are not as far behind market. You may have others that are farther behind market, and that shows up in where we did the placement. So what you're looking at here is kind of a flow chart of, okay, once we get the study results, what do we do with that to make recommendations and move toward your target of the 60th percentile placement? First thing is we want to make sure the structure of the pay plan, our current pay ranges, the number that we have, what's the progression within those pay ranges? What's the earning potential of an employee within the pay ranges? How does that align with market. And then we want to assign each job classification that you have into its new market competitive pay range. And then we take the employees that occupy those jobs and we move them into that [01:25:04] New pay range. And we do that with a blend of factors. We started from a standpoint of everyone would receive a minimum of a 2% cost of living adjustment. I can tell you that the market here locally, now that the budgets have been approved, landed at about 3% in your market, some as low as two, some as high as four or more. But we were within the lower end of the range on the cola. Then. Non-cola factors to bring employees closer to the target market might be tenure considered performance, their current range placement, and then the relationship of internal equity. How does a similar position compare to another position and making sure that the pay range that's recommended is appropriate? Your current pay plan don't really need to go through all of this, but I did provide this in the backup. If you wanted to see the introductory rate is at $15 an hour, that did comply with the state's requirement. That is now pay grade 101 is a little over $16 an hour, but really your effective rate is pay grade 102 because you have very limited number of employees placed into pay grade 101. So you could argue that our starting salary now from an hourly rate is really upwards of $17 per hour. Currently. This is the cost. I probably should have led with this, but the 733 budget number, that was the base salary only set aside, that was put in the budget for council to include with the budget process. So we could basically set aside funds. Ultimately, after employees were placed into their new market competitive pay ranges, we landed at 730,000. So we actually came in slightly under budget. So there is no budget amendment before you this evening. There's no additional cost. The budget that you approved includes these placements. We do recommend a two year implementation. Obviously, if it was the will of council that they wanted to move forward with a total thing in one year, that's up to you. But year one would be the 693, 265 90 and year two would be the 37258. How it is proposed from a cost standpoint and a placement standpoint, as I said, everyone gets a 2% cola. Then we implemented a 10% cap in the first year, meaning no one would get more than a 10% increase unless it required them to get more than 10% just to get to the minimum of their pay range. We got to get them into the plan. So if we had to bring them to minimum and that took 12%, then they would get 12% to be moved into their range. Anyone that was over 10%, that didn't require getting to the minimum of their pay range, those folks would be made whole in year number two, to try to do this in a fiscally responsible way and not blow up the budget, that the increase in year one represents a 6.9% payroll total 7.3 for all employees. The recommendation before council tonight would be to approve the compensation study results and the implementation provided, and that this would go into effect October 1st, 2026, with the budget, and that you would approve the two year phased approach. I just want to ask one question. Haven't we already approved this with the budget? You approved the total funding in the budget, but you haven't approved the specific compensation plan. Any public comment? Seeing no one come forward, bring it back for discussion and vote. I'll move to approve. Second, I appreciate the presentation, very thorough, and I think this is a crucial item that we need to consider within this city because, you know, we don't want to just hire good people. We want to keep good people. So I think this is just adding to that tool. And I appreciate us forward thinking on this. So thank you, staff, for putting this together. Second. Yeah, if you if you if you don't mind. Mr. Mr. Rob, if you could just walk through an employee. So what are the employees are capped out at 10% this year. They're looking at a 12% increase because of the 2% cola and the 10% cap that was provided as a hypothetical, so that when I said 12%, all the employees get a 2% cost of living adjustment, the cap of 10% means that no employee is going to receive an increase of more than 10% in the first year, unless it required more than 10% to bring them into the plan [01:30:07] To establish them at their grade, their minimum. So what is the what is the average percentage increase for an employee this year? 2%. When you look at 7.3% is what the cost is for the base salary overall is what was set aside. I think 7.5% was what was set aside, and it came in below that. So your overall cost all in is right at 7.3%, but the individual adjustments for an employee could vary, councilman. Because of tenure or performance or range placement, all those different factors. And then next year we would decide a different cola. It would be a whole different conversation because you want to do a two year with this. So then next year would be a separate conversation on cola. Next year they would have we would be asking you for a cola adjustment for the general employees. Yes, but there would be a $37,000 that would delta that we would put forward for the general employees that didn't fully get paid out their grade change for this year. Yeah. It's exciting. I'd like a chance to potentially meet with the city manager and just see a couple examples of employee, like the specific roles and see the impact. Maybe a couple individual positions in there where they fall in that pay grade and see the, the tangible impact. But other than that, the average is relatively higher and than years past. And I think that's partially because, like you said, we've been lagging behind the 60th percentile for the market rate, but also understanding that outside of a cola, this is the first this is the per three year increase that an employee would receive. So when you when you divide it over the course of three years without the cola, it doesn't look you know, it's I'm glad we're doing this. Let me start with the positive and that the 60% percentile is a, is an honorable fee. And if this is what that does, then then great. But I'll meet with the city manager. Just because I might pull a couple rolls out to learn more about the the numbers. I think the question I have is really operational. You indicated that it would be effective October 1st for already nearly through october. You also indicated that there would be adjustments and decisions made as a result of this approval. I'm sure you've anticipated, and you probably already know what you would like to do, but if a pay check has already been issued, and if, for example, someone who is working to get up to the minimum because what isn't always factored into these budgets is the change of personnel. So if someone leaves the city employment and you go to hire someone else, you may find that you have to find someone qualified at a higher level. So even though you've budgeted for the existing group, and I agree fully with the retention strategy that you've outlined, I would suggest that, you know, automatically the 2% already happened. And I'm assuming that if it hasn't happened, I don't know that we needed to approve that, but it should have happened. Your first payroll has already been issued. There's a lot of adjustments that have to go into the payroll system mechanically. You know, I'm not trying to cut anybody short, but it would seem to me that when you say effective October 1st, it's problematic from a calculation standpoint, unless you've already started it and we're just approving it. So. It could go into effect on November 1st or December 1st. The other thing I'd like to say is that January 1st we have to publish a list of every employee by name, by salary, for public record purposes, according to that new senate bill or that new bill that has passed. So all of all of any sense of privacy that we used to have in government, which is don't tell somebody what your your colleague is making is kind of out the window. So everybody's going to know what everybody makes. And I firmly agree, if you can do it and you proceed forward with it, that's fine. But I think that every position isn't filled every year. So there's also holes in the budget. So it's a living thing. I guess I'm just saying we can't we can't expect that it would be applied in a way in which it will come out perfect, because employees change and circumstances do as well. So [01:35:04] That all being said, it's way too complicated for me to go any further other than to say, yeah, I'm, I'm for it. I think it needs to be in. If you're asking us to decide when it goes into effect, I think it really belongs to administration to be able to put it in effect when it does. And I'm not sure we want to do what happens a lot with police negotiations, where you'll you'll calculate it back and it becomes an extra paycheck. Or if that's your intentions are you're going to do it. Our recommendation is that we make it retroactive to October 1st. And the the reason that I'm prompted to say that is because the consultant on the project was a little late getting the results back to us. And in the course of time, with Mr. Wetzel and Mr. Williamson and I working on the final document, it took just a little bit more time than I had hoped for us to tie it up. And employees did ask about it, and I may have over spoke myself, but I did make a commitment to them that I thought the council most likely would make it retroactive till the beginning of the fiscal year. So you've already kind of evaluated everyone know where they're going to fit. You're ready to pay the payroll? Yes. Okay. Thank you, thank you. I got one more thing, if you don't mind, on the on the cost of living, the 2%, you kind of touched on it briefly, but you're you're saying this is coming in under, I think the the difference was 33,000 under the proposed budget. Walk me through that 2% figure again for cost of living. Because if if inflation is 3.1%, gas is up where. Why did we fall lower than the 4% and 3% of some of our peers? I think the initial projection for the budget was to set aside a 2% cost of living adjustment, and I feel like this is one of the things that new port richey gets right. And a lot of clients, when I was traveling around the country got wrong. They would do a one size fits all approach where it didn't matter what your tenure or performance or your range placement was, everybody would get the same amount. And so what I thought was really well done here is you have everyone gets 2% regardless of tenure or placement. That's that cost of living adjustment to preserve your position and your range. And then outside of that would be any other adjustment that would have those blend of factors associated with it. You are correct, councilman, that, you know, it was probably unexpected that the inflation number would be as hot as it was. And it looks like it's going to continue to go up. So that's going to be a factor as we approach next year's budget cycle, what you'd want to do and what we can afford. But 2% is on the low end of the range in the region. And along with the other adjustments that are recommended as part of the budget you approved, I feel like it will move folks much closer to your target market position. And 2% is a very small part of the increase. And I get that my, my, I get that and all the other factors is what makes it a little bit more difficult to comprehend what the what the individual gets, since the average is 7.3% and understanding that that's making up for three years. So it effectively becomes, you know, 2% per year in addition to whatever cost of living we did. My, my question is, you're saying we're 33 something. I think I calculated 33,000 below the budgeted amount. So what is the what is the prerogative there? If we if this council budgeted a certain amount and we're coming in below that, is there not room for more cola or we're not even getting to cost of inflation? Right. I think one clarification would be the three years. What I was talking about three years is historically that the city has done is a compensation study every three years, but you have provided cost of living adjustments annually, just cost of living. Well, there's there's been adjustments provided annually. And so I definitely don't want you to think that, you know, there's going to be an increase this year. And then, you know, it would be static for three years. You know, that's not historically what's happened. Right. And so what I'm getting at is, you know, yes, you know, amendment three, whatever the case may be. If we if we're if we're under budgeting by 30,000 this year, but we're given 2% on cola, god forbid, next year, there's not an opportunity to do something if there's a gap in the budget by 33,000. What does that represent? Where is that? It was really only 2700 bucks this year. We were at 733 was what the base salary reserves were for potential [01:40:02] Employee increases. And we came in right about 730. That 37,000 number that you're referring to, that would be the balance of what employees would receive that were capped out at 10%. That's what would be left over for year two. Okay. I thought I saw a number up there that said 689,000 this year. That's year one, 37,000 next year. Correct. And the total of that, when you compare it to what's budgeted, was 33,000 less, or was that not what that second number together where your $730,000 number. And then we budgeted, we budgeted 37, 31, 733. You ended up $2,700 away from the budgeted number. Again, as I mentioned in the presentation, if it was, you are squeezing it to the okay, I misunderstood, I thought you guys had 30,000 that were just sitting there. Okay. All those in favor signify by I, I, I

    Original caption was ALL CAPS; this page lowercases and capitalizes sentence starts. Names from the meeting’s entity index are restored. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

22. 14Communications▶ 1:40:02
23. 1Call to Order – Roll Call