Feb 04, 2025 Fort Pierce Utilities Authority

[00:00:14]

>>> REGULAR MEETING SET FOR FEBRUARY 4TH, 2025. PLEASE STAND FOR THE PRAYER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, PLEASE PRAY WITH ME. LORD, WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR GRACE AND FAVOR EVER PRESENT ON THE CITY OF FOR PEERS. HER BLESSING TO BE UPON US IN YOUR HAND TO PROTECT US.

WE ASK YOU GRANT THE BOARD AND STAFF WITH WISDOM AND INSIGHTTO LEAD AND MANAGE TO BE THE MOST ECONOMICAL, RELIABLE AND FRIENDLY UTILITY IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA. WE ASK FOR FAVOR ON GRANT APPLICATIONS AND THE ABILITY TO NEGOTIATE THE LOWEST COST AND BEST VALUE FROM ALL CONTRACTORS. WE PRAY ALL OF THIS

IN JESUS' NAME. AMEN. >> I PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA -- PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

>>

[A. SET THE AGENDA]

PRESENT. >> ALL RIGHT, I HOPE EVERYONE HAS HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THE AGENDA. AND EVERYBODY IS SATISFIED WITH THE ORDER. PERMISSION TO APPROVE?

>> SO MOVED. >> I WILL SECOND.

>> PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. >> 30.

[B. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC]

>> ALL RIGHT WE ARE A PUBLIC COMMENT . ANYONE WISHES TO MOVE FORWARD AND MAKE A STATEMENT TO THE BOARD, YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES TO MAKE YOUR STATEMENT. SEEING NO -- OH, WE GOT ONE. YES, MA'AM . IF YOU DON'T MIND PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND WHERE YOU

RESIDE FOR THE RECORD. >> MY NAME IS -- MY ADDRESS IS 117 -- FORT PIERCE. HI, SORRY. I AM SORRY. I PURCHASED MY HOME IN FEBRUARY OF LAST YEAR, AND THERE ARE SOME THINGS I GREATLY APPRECIATE ABOUT HAVING A SMALL UTILITY COMPANY TO PROVIDE MY SERVICE BECAUSE YOU HAVE A MUCH SMALLER DEMAND. YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO FOCUS ON NEEDS BETTER OF THE COMMUNITY. I AM SORRY.

PUBLIC SPEAKING TERRIFIES ME. I FEEL THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT.

MY ONLY CONCERN IS FOR THE FACT THAT ABOUT ONE THIRD OF THE FORT PIERCE POPULATION LIVES BELOW THE POVERTY LINE. WHEN HE HEARD THAT I WANT YOU TO REALIZE THAT IS YOUR FULL-TIME GROCERY AND STORE EMPLOYEE, YOUR CBS WORKERS, THE ESSENTIAL PEOPLE THAT KEEP THE COMMUNITY AFLOAT. WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IMPLEMENTED WITH FORT PIERCE UTILITIES IS SOMETHING MORE FOR THOSE PEOPLE. THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I EVER OWNED. UNEXPECTED EXPENSES WERE DEVASTATING. WHEN I WENT TO FORT PIERCE UTILITIES I WAS SURPRISED TO FIND THERE IS NO GRACE IF YOU ARE IN OUR TIME.

IF I COULD JUST MAKE -- LET YOU KNOW FPL DOES WHAT IS CALLED BUDGET BILLING WHERE THEY WILL TAKE YOUR WHOLE 12 MONTHS, MEET THE AVERAGE -- MATH IS NOT MY THING, BUT THEY GIVE YOU AN AVERAGE BILL THROUGHOUT THE YEAR. YES, IN THE WINTERTIME, YOU MAY NOT SEE UNDER $200 BILL, BUT IN THE SUMMERTIME, YOU ARE NOT GETTING HIT WITH A FIVE TO $700 BILL. I ALSO TRIED TO SPEAK TO FORT PIERCE UTILITIES ABOUT A STRONGER INFRASTRUCTURE BECAUSE I DID HAVE POWER ISSUES WHERE I HAD POWER SURGES AND MY PERSONAL PROPERTY WAS DAMAGED WHEN I FIRST PURCHASED MY HOME. I WAS DISMISSED AT THE UTILITY COMPANY. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE -- HOWEVER YOU WOULD DO THIS . I BROUGHT A COUPLE OF

[00:05:03]

>> THANK YOU. SHE WILL CIRCULATE THEM TO THE BOARD MEMBERS. ANY MORE COMMENTS? I DO NOT SEE ANY MOVEMENT, SO WE WILL CLOSE THE

[C. APPROVAL OF MINUTES]

>> MOVE FOR APPROVAL. >> SECOND.

>> PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. >>

[D. CONSENT AGENDA]

>> ALL RIGHT, MOVING ON TO THE CONSENT AGENDA. DO WE NEED TO REMOVE ANY ITEMS FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA OR THE ORDER? EVERYONE IS SATISFIED WITH THAT LIST. CAN WE GET A MOTION TO APPROVE?

>> MOTION TO APPROVE. >> SECOND.

>> PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. >>

[E.1. Update on the St. Lucie County Water/Wastewater Agreement]

>> ALL RIGHT, MR. DIRECTOR, I BELIEVE IT'S TIME TO FOR YOU TO

SHINE. >> THE FIRST ITEM THIS AFTERNOON IS AN UPDATE ON THE BULK WATER WASTEWATER BETWEEN THE COUNTY.

PRESENTATION PROVIDE SOME IMPORTANT HISTORY . THE CURRENT STATUS AND THE POTENTIAL PATH FORWARD. WE ARE JOINED BY OUR RATE CONSULTANT . BO HUTCHINSON, DIRECTOR OF WASTEWATER SYSTEMS. AND RACHEL, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS AND SUSTAINABILITY WILL PRESENT THESE ITEMS WITH SUPPORT FROM MR. MARIA MR. HAMILTON. I JUST WANTED TO MENTION I AM APPRECIATIVE OF YOUR TIME TO REVIEW THIS ITEM IN MORE DETAIL IN OUR ONE-ON-ONE PRESENTATION MEETINGS. THIS PRESENTATION TODAY WILL CLOSE THE LOOP ON THE

COORDINATED EFFORT. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CISNEROS, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. THANK YOU FOR HAVING US FOR THIS PRESENTATION. THIS AFTERNOON WE WILL PROVIDE AN UPDATE ON THE STATUS OF OUR BULK WATER AND WASTEWATER AGREEMENT WITH ST.

LUCIE COUNTY. BEFORE WE BEGIN I WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE A QUICK PRIMER FOR CONTEXT. FIRST, FPUA HAS THREE MAJOR CATEGORIES.

RESIDENTIAL, DESIGNED FOR RESIDENTIAL USES. COMMERCIAL, DESIGN FOR COMMERCIAL USAGE , AND BULK RATE, WHICH IS A NEGOTIATED WHOLESALE RATE DESIGN FOR SERVING A NEIGHBORING OR CONTIGUOUS UTILITY. TYPICALLY AT A LOWER PER GALLON RATE. ST.

LUCIE COUNTY COUNTY IS FPUA'S LARGEST SINGLE CUSTOMER UNDER A NEGOTIATED BULK RATE. FOR CONTEXT, THAT WAS ABOUT 390 MILLION GALLONS OF POTABLE WATER IN FISCAL YEAR 2024, OR ABOUT $3 MILLION OF REVENUE IN THE SAME TIME PERIOD. ST. LUCIE COUNTY 'S CONTRACT EXPIRES IN 2028. THE REDUCED REVENUE SHOULD NOT REQUIRE RATE INCREASES BECAUSE WE HAVE PLANNED AHEAD. WE HAVE KNOWN THE 2028 DATE WAS COMING, BUT IT WILL REDUCE FPUA'S FISCAL POSITION FOR MAJOR INFRASTRUCTURE OR EXPANSION PROJECTS. THE REDUCTION IN REVENUE CAN JUST LIMIT THE SIZE OF BORROWING WE CAN DO FOR MAJOR INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS. THE CONTRACT CAN BE EXTENDED FOR AN ADDITIONAL FIVE YEARS, WITH 12 MONTHS NOTICE. AND EXTENSION OR RENEWAL IS HOPED-FOR BY FPUA STAFF, BUT NOT EXPECTED AT THIS TIME.

>> I DON'T INTIMATE -- MEAN TO INTERRUPT YOUR FLOW. HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. IN 2027, THE COUNTY WANTS TO EXTEND , THEY HAVE TO GIVE US NOTICE TO EXTEND?

>> 12 MONTHS NOTICE, YES. >> AND YOU MENTIONED IT WILL REDUCE OUR ABILITY TO CARRY ON OUR INFRASTRUCTURE EXPANSION PROJECTS. YOU KNOW HOW MUCH REDUCTION THAT IS GOING TO BE? WE ARE GOING TO BE DOWN BY 10%, 20%?

>> $3 MILLION IN REVENUE. TOTAL GENERATED REVENUE FOR THE COUNTY RIGHT NOW. THAT WOULD BE THE EFFECT IN TODAY'S DOLLARS

>> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. >> OKAY. WITH THAT CONTEXT IN MIND, WE WILL BEGIN PER -- TODAY'S PRESENTATION. FIRST WE ARE GOING TO REVIEW THE ORIGINS OF THE INTERLOCAL OR BULK AGREEMENT, WHICH WAS SIGNED IN 2004. THEN WE WILL DISCUSS THE CONTENTS OF THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT. FOLLOWED BY A QUICK

[00:10:03]

CITY OF FORT PIERCE VERSUS ST. LUCIE COUNTY. FORT PIERCE AND FPUA VERSUS ST. LUCIE COUNTY. THESE DISPUTES COVERED NUMEROUS TOPICS, INCLUDING ANNEXATION POLICIES , WHO SHOULD BE THE SOLE PROVIDER OF WATER AND WASTEWATER, AND WHETHER A GEOGRAPHIC APPROACH VIOLATED COUNTY MASTER PLANS. THE LANGUAGE IN THE ORIGINAL BULK AGREEMENT SPECIFICALLY SAYS THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THIS AGREEMENT IS TO RESOLVE MOST, BUT NOT ALL, OF THE CURRENT DISPUTES BETWEEN THE PARTIES AND TO FURTHER PROVIDE THE FRAMEWORK WITHIN WHICH SUCH DISPUTES AND CONCERNS MAY BE DISCUSSED AND POTENTIALLY RESOLVED. THE AGREEMENT WAS EXECUTED IN FEBRUARY, 2004, AND INCLUDED SETTING RATES AND FLOW PROCESSES FOR BULK WATER AND WASTEWATER SERVICE. IT DEFINED BOUNDARIES FOR WATER AND WASTEWATER SURFACE BETWEEN FPUA AND ST. LUCIE COUNTY. IT LIMITED THE SIZE OF THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE. IT BLOCKED FORT PIERCE'S ANNEXATION OF THE AIRPORT , AND IT REQUIRED A CUSTOMER SURVEY AND STATES TO DETERMINE WHETHER ST. LUCIE COUNTY OR FPUA WOULD BE THE WATER PROVIDER IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AFTER ABOUT 14 YEARS , UNDER THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT, BOTH FPUA AND ST.

LUCIE COUNTY SOUGHT MODIFIATIONS TO IMPROVE THE AGREEMENT , WHICH LED TO DISCUSSIONS AND AMENDMENT ONE, WHICH IS OUR CURRENT ACTIVE TWO AGREEMENT. MR. HUTCHINSON WILL NOW READ THE UPDATED BULK AGREEMENT.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. ROLLING THE CLOCK BACK TO 2018, THIS IS WHEN MR. GEORGE LANDRY WAS THIS UTILITY DIRECTOR. WE SAT DOWN AND STARTED LOOKING AT SOME OF THE ISSUES WITH AGREEMENTS. THIS HAPPENS FROM TIME TO TIME. WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT THAT GETS A DECADE OR SO OLD, SOME THINGS CHANGE. IT'S THE NATURE OF THE BEAST. THE MAIN ITEMS WE WANTED TO TALK ABOUT ARE THE CAPACITY CHARGES , OR WHAT WE CALL CAPITOL IMPROVEMENT CHARGES. AND CAPACITY CHARGES. LOOK AT THE METHODOLOGY OF THAT . WE ALSO WANT TO LOOK AT POSSIBILITY OF BEING PARTNERS IN THE NEW NWRF. THE NWRF WE ARE BUILDING NOW.

WILL WANT TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE NO LOSS NO GAIN RATE TO MAKE SURE WE ARE -- THE RATES ARE IN LINE ON BOTH SIDES OF THE FENCE AND ULTIMATELY WERE FAIR, I GUESS, IS THE RIGHT WAY IT WAS DISCUSSED. WE ALSO ESTABLISHED WRITTEN WATER QUALITY AND PRESSURE REQUIREMENTS AT METERS THAT HAD NOT BEEN MEMORIALIZED BEFORE. ALL OF THAT WAS IN THERE. OKAY, CAPACITY CHARGES.

THIS IS ONE OF THE BIG BONES OF CONTENTION BACK IN THAT PARTICULAR TIME. IF YOU ROLL BACK TO THE EARLY 2000'S WHEN WE HAD OUR BUILDING, ANY OF THE DEVELOPMENTS THAT WERE IN THE COUNTY SERVICE TERRITORY THAT REQUIRED CAPACITY AT THE TIME WOULD ALSO SIGN SUPPLY AGREEMENT WITH UTILITIES FOR THAT CAPACITY. THEY WOULD PAY THE CAPITOL IMPROVEMENT CHARGES FOR THAT AT THAT PARTICULAR TIME. SO THAT'S HAPPENING. 2008 ROLLS AROUND AND WE HAVE THIS CRASH , AND MOST OF THE DEVELOPMENTS DID NOT GET BUILT. PER THE AGREEMENTS, ALL THE CAPACITY EFFECTIVELY FALLS OFF THE TABLE AFTER FIVE YEARS. IF YOU THINK ABOUT IT, THAT MAKES SENSE. AT THE SAME TIME THERE WAS A LOT OF GROWTH IN THE COUNTY, WE HAD A LOT OF GROWTH IN OUR SYSTEM, AS WELL. IT WAS PUSHING US TO EXPAND OR MOVE THE WASTEWATER PLANT AT THAT PARTICULAR TIME, AS WELL. THAT CAPACITY WAS VERY VALUABLE AT THAT PARTICULAR TIME. THOSE AGREEMENTS, FAIRLY

[00:15:03]

LUCIE COUNTY'S POSITION THAT SINCE THOSE DEVELOPMENTS WERE IN THE COUNTY THAT THE COUNTY NOW OWNED THAT CAPACITY CREDIT WITH DISREGARD OF WHAT IT SAID IN THE AGREEMENTS. ST. LUCIE COUNTY HAS BEEN WITH US FOR A LONG TIME. THEY HAVE BEEN OUR CUSTOMER FOR A LONG TIME. CAPITOL IMPROVEMENT CHARGES AND OTHER RATES HAVE HELPED US EXPAND OUR PLANS, BUILD CAPACITY FOR THEM AS WELL AS CAPACITY FOR OURSELVES. THAT MAKES SENSE, AS WELL. WE SPLIT IT ON THAT ONE. WE CALCULATED UP WHAT KIND OF CREDIT THEY WOULD'VE HAD FROM THOSE DEVELOPMENTS AND WE CUT IT IN HALF AND THAT'S WHAT WE STARTED WITH. THE ADDITIONAL CREDIT THERE. MOVING FORWARD, AS OPPOSED TO PLAYING -- PAYING FPUA 'S CHARGES AND ST. LUCIE COUNTY, IT CAN BE COST PROHIBITIVE , YOU CAN IMAGINE. SLOW GROWTH. WE DECIDED TO SPLIT WHAT ST. LUCIE COUNTY CHARGES. IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, TODAY'S NUMBER, A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME IN ST. LUCIE COUNTY WITH WATER AND WASTEWATER CAPACITY CHARGES ARE A LITTLE LESS THAN $7200 FOR A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME. THAT'S ENOUGH. NUMBER TWO IS REALLY THE , I CALL IT, THE SWEET PART OF THIS AGREEMENT FOR THIS PARTICULAR TOPIC. DEFERRED PAYMENT PROCESS. WHAT THAT MEANS IS THAT A DEVELOPER THAT STARTS IN THE COUNTY AND PAYS THEIR CAPACITY CHARGES UP FRONT TO THE COUNTY , THEY DON'T HAVE TO PAY US THOSE CAPACITY CHARGES UNTIL WATER IS ACTUALLY SEEN AT THE METER. EVERY YEAR WE LOOK AT THE AVERAGE, AND IF IT'S GONE UP, THAT IS WHAT WE WOULD CHARGE CAPACITY CHARGES. THAT EFFECTIVELY GIVES THEM SEVERAL YEARS OF GRACE ON PAYING THAT OTHER HALF TO US. NOW WHY WOULD WE DO THAT? WHEN WE ARE SITTING DOWN AT THE TABLE, THE ULTIMATE GOAL THAT WAS DISCUSSED THERE WAS TO FULLY UTILIZE THE CAPACITY AT THE FPUA PLANS. THE ONE ST. LUCIE COUNTY CONTRIBUTED IN. AS OPPOSED TO TAKING MONEY OUT OF THOSE COFFERS EARLY , USE THAT MONEY TO GO BUILD PIPES AND BRING IN MORE WATER AND WASTEWATER. SERVE MORE OF THE COUNTY AS OPPOSED TO FOCUSING ON THE CONSTRUCTION . MOVING ON.

THE JOINT STUDY FOR THE NWRF. WE LOOKED AT THAT AS A COST TO SPLIT BASED ON THE FLOWS AND UTILIZATION PLANT. THAT PARTICULAR TIME WE WERE LOOKING AT AROUND HALF 1 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY FLOWS, AND ABOUT 4.5 MILLION OF FORT PIERCE UTILITY FLOWS. THESE ARE CONSISTENT TODAY, AS WELL.

FEASIBILITY STUDY WENT VERY WELL, AS YOU CAN IMAGINE. THE LARGER AREA YOU CAN CAPTURE IS WITH A PIECE OF INFRASTRUCTURE LIKE THIS. THE LOWER YOU CAN KEEP THE COST, THE PARTNERSHIP.

GOVERNANCE WAS THE MAIN POINT OF CONTENTION. AT THAT PARTICULAR TIME, ST. LUCIE COUNTY WANTED 50% CONTROL OF THE PLANT .

HONESTLY THEY PROBABLY WANTED A LITTLE MORE THAN 50% CONTROL.

THEY WOULD ONLY BE PAYING ABOUT 10% OF THE NEW PLAN. THAT WAS A BIT PROBLEMATIC WE WENT THROUGH SEVEN DIFFERENT MODELS OF THE STAFF LEVEL TO TRY TO FIND SOMETHING THAT WOULD WORK FOR BOTH GROUPS. ULTIMATELY KILLED THAT PARTNERSHIP. ALSO, WE FOUND OUT A LITTLE LATER ON WE WERE GOING THROUGH A LITTLE BIT OF A DEEPER DIVE INTO THE RATES AND THE PROCEEDS , AND SUCH. AT THE PHYSICAL -- FISCAL POSITION OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY UTILITIES WAS A LITTLE WEAK AT THAT PARTICULAR TIME. IT WOULD HAVE IMPACTED OUR BORROWING ABILITY. WE HAVE WORKED THROUGH THAT? ABSOLUTLY.

GOING INTO THIS AS PARTNERS WE WOULD HAVE FIGURED OUT A WAY TO MAKE THAT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. OKAY, THE LAST ONE WAS THE NO LOSS, WE SHOULD CALL IT THE NO LOSS, NO GAIN RATE. EFFECTIVELY TRYING TO FIND THE BREAKEVEN NUMBER FOR THE COST OF SERVING WATER AND WASTEWATER TO THIS PARTICULAR CUSTOMER. SINCE THE VERY BEGINNING OF THE BULK AGREEMENTS, WE HEARD IT FROM THE CITY COMMISSON AND THE BOARD, AS WELL, AT THAT PARTICULAR TIME. THE FPUA RATEPAYERS WERE SUBSIDIZING THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY RATEPAYERS. THEIR RATES WERE VERY LOW. IF YOU LOOK AT THIS THEY ACTUALLY WERE. WE HIRED PR MG, WHICH IS NOW -- TO TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT THOSE RATES SHOULD BE, WHAT THE NO LOSS RATE SHOULD BE COMPARED TO WHAT THEY ARE PAYING. THE BOTTOM LINE IS WE ARE IN THE RED ABOUT 570,000 PER YEAR ON BULK WATER, BUT WE WERE OVER COLLECTING ABOUT 82,000 ON WASTEWATER. THESE RATES WE CAME UP WITH THAT STUDY WERE THE RATES THAT WERE INCLUDED IN THE

[00:20:02]

>> THANK YOU. MR. CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, I SERVE AS RATE CONSULTANT FOR FPUA. I'VE BEEN IN THAT POSITION FOR A LITTLE OVER 20 YEARS. I CAN'T SAY I CALCULATED THE FIRST BULK RATE IN 2004, BUT NOT LONG AFTER THAT I'VE BEEN ALONG FOR THE RIDE THE MAJORITY OF THE TIME. AS MENTIONED THERE A SECOND AGO, THE AMENDED BULK AGREEMENT DOES SPELL OUT THE METHODOLOGY USED TO CALCULATE THE NO LOSS RATE, NO GAIN RATE. BASICALLY THE EQUITABLE SHARE OF SYSTEM COSTS APPLICABLE TO BOTH THOSE COSTS.

SERVE RETAIL, COMMERCIAL , AS WELL AS THE WHOLESALE CUSTOMER.

AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE SLIDE, SYSTEM COST REFLECTS THE INVESTMENTS MADE BY FPUA THAT BENEFIT ALL THE CUSTOMERS OF THE SYSTEM. RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL AND WHOLESALE. QUITE FRANKLY IT FOCUSES ON THE WATER SUPPLY TREATMENT AND THE TRANSMISSION TO DELIVER THOSE RESOURCES ON THE WASTEWATER SIDE. IT'S THE TRANSMISSION, THE LARGE COLLECTION SYSTEM TO THE WASTE TO THE WASTEWATER PLANT. TREATING THE WASTEWATER AND DISPOSING OF IT. THESE COSTS GENERALLY BENEFIT EVERYONE WITHIN OUR SYSTEM. THOSE AGAIN ARE THE SYSTEM COSTS. GOING THROUGH THE METHODOLOGY, SPECIFICALLY WE HAVE EXCLUDED EXPENDITURES THAT ONLY BENEFIT FPUA'S RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL ACCOUNTS. EXPENDITURES THAT BENEFIT THOSE CATEGORIES OF CUSTOMERS RELATE TO LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS.

SMALLER PIPES, DISTRIBUTION PIPES, COLLECTION PIPES GOING THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS AND THOSE KINDS OF THINGS. THE COUNTY DOESN'T PAY FOR THAT. THAT IS SPECIFICALLY RELATED TO RETAIL CUSTOMERS. METERING SERVICES. THE METERS AT THE POINT OF CONNECTION. THE SERVICE LINES. PUBLIC FIRE PROTECTION.

THE MAJORITY OF YOUR CUSTOMER SERVICE SUPPORT, THAT IS ALL CUSTOMER RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNT SUPPORTED. ASSIGNED TO RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMERS. THANKS. IN DEVELOPING -- AGAIN, DEVELOPING THE METHODOLOGY, WE WORKED IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE COUNTY BACK IN 2019. FPUA AND THE COUNTY. THE AMENDED AGREEMENT SPELLS OUT THAT OVERALL APPROACH. THE BULK RATES WERE COVER AGAIN, LIKE I SAID, THE SYSTEM COST, APPLICABLE TO THE WASTEWATER SERVICE. THE BULK RATES EXCLUDE THE WATER AND WASTEWATER EXPENDITURES THAT WILL BENEFIT FPUA 'S ACCOUNTS.

LASTLY THE TWO RATES SHOULD CONFIRM -- CONFORM PROVIDED IN THAT AGREEMENT. THERE'S A TIMEFRAME. YOU DO THE STUDY AT A CERTAIN POINT IN TIME, AND THE COUNTY ACTUALLY HAS NOT -- AND MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE DEVELOPED THOSE RATES CONSISTENT WITH THE AMENDED AGREEMENT. IN DEVELOPING THE PROPOSED RATE, WE BASICALLY SUMMARIZED ALL OF THE DIRECT AND INDIRECT COSTS OF THE WATER AND WASTEWATER SYSTEM. WE DO THIS ON A TEST YEAR BASIS. FOR THE PURPOSE OF UPDATING THIS ANALYSIS, THAT'S THE CURRENT BUDGET YEAR. IT'S A SAMPLE OF A FISCAL YEAR. LOOKING AT THE ANNUAL EXPENDITURES APPROVED BOTH WATER AND WASTEWATER SYSTEM, AND HOW THOSE COSTS NEED TO BE APPORTIONED. FOR THAT SPECIFIC TEST YEAR WE ALLOCATE THE COST. AGAIN, THOSE COSTS THAT BENEFIT THE BALL CUSTOMER, RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL ACCOUNTS ALIKE. AND THOSE COSTS THAT AGAIN BENEFIT ONLY THE RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL ACCOUNTS. THOSE ARE THE EXCLUDED EXPENDITURES. ON THE FOLLOWING SLIDE WE TRY TO PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE. IT DOESN'T CAPTURE EVERYTHING.

SALES DO CHANGE OVER TIME. COMING OUT OF COVID IN 2021, THE COUNTY HAD A PEAK SALES YEAR IN 2021. THIS ISN'T GOING TO TELL THE ENTIRE HISTORY, BUT WE HAVE A COUPLE OF YEARS OF HISTORICAL REVENUES OVER -- UNDER THE CURRENT RATES. THE RATES THAT WERE IMPLEMENTED, SUBSEQUENT IT , IN THE 2019 AGREEMENT, THEY DID INCREASE OVER TIME. THE AMENDED AGREEMENT SPEAKS TO THAT. AS THE RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL RATES HAVE TO RISE OVER TIME, SO DOES THE WHOLESALE COST. PERIODICALLY OVER A FIVE-YEAR PERIOD, I WILL CALL A TRUE UP, WHERE YOU GO IN AND UPDATE THE ALLOCATION FOR THE TEST YEAR, AND DETERMINED THAT NEW LOSS RATES. IN DOING SO, BACK IN FISCAL YEAR 2023, GOING

[00:25:05]

$6.04 PER 1000 ON THE WASTEWATER SIDE. THE CURRENT RATES TO THE COUNTY HAVE BEEN IN EFFECT SINCE OCTOBER 1ST OF 2022. A LITTLE MORE THAN TWO YEARS AT THE CURRENT RATE. HERE RECENTLY, FPUA REACHED OUT TO US AND ASKED US TO UP DATE THE YEAR. THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE DONE. TO THE FAR RIGHT OF THE SLIDE WE HAVE THE TEST YEAR RESULTS. THESE ARE ANNUALIZED. ANY ADJUSTMENT THAT WOULD TAKE PLACE IN THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR IS OBVIOUSLY GOING TO BE A MIDYEAR ADJUSTMENT. WE WANTED TO ADDRESS THIS ON AN ANNUALIZED BASIS. THE CURRENT REVENUES FROM THE RATES, 3.1 MILLION. FPUA IS CONSIDERING IN THE INDEX OF MARCH 1ST, APPROXIMATELY 3%. IF THE INDEX WENT INTO EFFECT WHICH WOULD APPLY TO THE WHOLESALE RATE, YOU CAN SEE THOSE REVENUES COULD BE APPROXIMATELY 3.2 MILLION. WE WERE ASKED TO UPDATE THE NO-LOSS RATE, WHICH IS WHAT WE DID. GOING THROUGH THAT APPORTIONMENT, AGREED TO BETWEEN THE PARTIES, THE WATER RATE WOULD ACTUALLY DECREASE TO FIVE DOLLAR .73 -- $5.73. NOT SURPRISINGLY. WE WENT THROUGH ISSUING THE BOND PROCEEDS TO HELP FUND THE WASTEWATER , THE MOVEMENT OF THE WASTEWATER PLANT, YOU KNOW, WE HAD SOME INCREASES THAT WERE ALLOCATED TO ALL THE SYSTEM REVENUES. LARGELY, MUCH OF THAT DEFICIENCY WAS WASTEWATER RELATED. I AM NOT SURPRISED BY THE OUTCOME. IF YOU LOOK AT THE NUMBERS THEMSELVES, THE ANSWERS AREN'T MATERIALLY DIFFERENT. RIGHT? MR. CHAIR, YOU ASKED A QUESTION BEFORE, AND MR. HUTCHINSON DID ANSWER IT. THE IMPACT OF WHETHER OR NOT WE SERVE THE COUNTY ENTIRELY, OR NOT, IS ABOUT $3.2 MILLION PER YEAR. IT'S APPROXIMATELY 6% OF YOUR CURRENT REVENUE. OKAY? I THINK WE ARE BRINGING THIS BACK, IS THAT RIGHT? I WILL REMAIN FOR

QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. HAMILTON. FOR THE REMAINDER OF THIS PRESENTATION WE WOULD LIKE TO TURN OUR ATTENTION TO THE CURRENT STATUS OF OF THIS BULK AGREEMENT. AS MENTIONED, THE AGREEMENT IS SCHEDULED TO EXPIRE IN 2028. AT THE SAME TIME, ST. LUCIE COUNTY IS OVERLY -- OPENLY PURSUING CONSTRUCTION OF THEIR OWN TREATMENT PLANTS, WHICH WILL REQUIRE MILLIONS IN GRANTS AND/OR COUNTY FUNDS. ST. LUCIE COUNTY STAFF ARE ALSO REQUESTING REDUCED WATER AND WASTEWATER RATES FOR POSSIBLE CONTINUATION OF THE BULK AGREEMENT. GIVEN BOTH OF THESE, STAFF ARE ACTIVELY REVIEWING THE RATE STRATEGY FROM THE 2019 BULK AGREEMENT AMENDMENT, AND THE CURRENT RATES, WHICH WE JUST REVIEWED WITH YOU. WE ARE REVIEWING COMPARATIVE RATE STUDIES, WHICH INCLUDES COMPARING OUR RATES AND OUR BULK RATES TO THOSE BULK RATES OF NEIGHBORING UTILITIES. WE WOULD ALSO LIKE TO DO COMPARATIVE RATE STUDIES THAT COMPARE OUR RATES WITH WHAT THE COST AND LIKELY PRICE OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY PROVIDING ITS OWN WATER AND WASTEWATER FOR ITS CUSTOMERS. TO ENSURE THOSE COMPONENTS STILL ENSURE A SUSTAINABLE PARTNERSHIP. WE HAVE HELD MANY COMMUNICATIONS WITH ST. LUCIE COUNTY LEADERSHIP AND STAFF TO HELP US GUIDE THESE NEGOTIATIONS , AND THESE CONVERSATIONS. THIS HAS BEEN A MAJOR EFFORT ON BEHALF OF FPUA STAFF. THIS SLIDE PROVIDES A LIST OF THE MEETINGS THAT FPUA, STAFF, AND THE LEADERSHIP HAVE HELD WITH ST. LUCIE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND ST. LUCIE COUNTY LEADERSHIP SINCE JUNE 2022. DURING THESE MEETINGS, WE DISCUSSED THE MAINLAND WATER RECLAMATION

[00:30:02]

REVIEW. >> DID YOU GET THAT INFORMATION?

>> WE DID NOT. >> HOW MANY TIMES DID YOU MAKE A REQUEST FOR INFORMATION? ALL OF THOSE TIMES YOU MADE A REQUEST FOR FINANCIAL INFORMATION AND THEY REMAIN SILENT ON IT?

>> YES, SIR. >> THAT DOESN'T SEEM TYPICAL FOR THE COUNTY. ANY REASON WHY THEY ARE BEING SILENT?

>> WE WOULD ONLY BE SPECULATING. >> THOSE CONVERSATIONS YIELDED TWO MAJOR TAKEAWAYS. ONE, ST. LOUIS -- ST. LUCIE COUNTY REQUIRES LOWER RATES, OR, IN OTHER WORDS, THE NO-LOSS RATE IS NO LONGER GOOD ENOUGH . TWO, ST. LUCIE COUNTY DESIRES A CONTROLLING REPRESENTATION OVER THE UTILITY. DURING OUR SECOND ROUND OF ANNUAL MEETINGS WITH THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS , WE DISCUSSED THE POSSIBILITY OF HAVING JOINT MEETINGS BETWEEN ST. LUCIE COUNTY COMMISSION AND THE FPUA BOARD. WE ALSO PROVIDED TWO PAGER HANDOUTS WITH LETTERS THAT HAD THESE KEY MESSAGES . FIRST, FPUA HAS BEEN BUILT TO ACCOMMODATE ST. LUCIE COUNTY GROWTH. WE REVIEWED THE CAPACITY OF OUR WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT, CURRENT AND THE PLANT UNDER CONSTRUCTION. WE ALSO REVIEWED THE CAPACITY OF OUR WATER PLANT . IN BOTH CASES THERE IS MORE EFFICIENT CAPACITY TO SUPPORT ST. LUCIE COUNTY AS IT IS GROWING. SECOND, WE DISCUSSED THE COUNTY EXPANSION PARTNERSHIP. WITH THE PARTNERSHIP, ST. LUCIE COUNTY CAN PLEASE ITS FUNDS IN EXPANDING PIPES TO REACH MORE COUNTY INDIVIDUALS WITH WATER AND WASTEWATER SERVICES THROUGH A BULK PARTNERSHIP . WITHOUT THE PARTNERSHIP, ST. LUCIE COUNTY WOULD USE THOSE FUNDS , WE ASSUME, TO BUILD TREATMENT PLANTS , AND ALSO TO HIRE STAFF TO BE ABLE TO MANAGE THE TECHNICAL COMPONENTS OF MANAGING THE KINDS OF TREATMENT PLANTS THAT FPUA IS ALREADY MANAGING.

WE REQUESTED A BULK RATE AND VALUE ADDED REVIEW , AND SPECIFICALLY, THE LANGUAGE SAYS -- AND WE SAID -- IN RESPONSE TO FEEDBACK THAT ST. LUCIE COUNTY'S BULK RATE IS TOO HIGH, WE WOULD GLADLY REVIEW THESE RATES TOGETHER AGAIN TO ENSURE THAT YOU, YOUR RESIDENTS, AND OUR CUSTOMERS ARE RECEIVING THE RIGHT VALUE FOR THE SERVICES PROVIDED. WE ALSO REQUESTED IN THE WRITINGS, AND AGAIN VERBALLY, THE FINANCIAL INFORMATION. IN THE INTEREST OF DEMONSTRATING OUR WILLINGNESS TO KEEP PUTTING IN THE WORK TO MAKE SURE YOU HAVE THE BEST OPTIONS AVAILABLE, WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST A SIDE-BY-SIDE FINANCIAL COMPARISON OF THE COST OF BUILDING THEIR TREATMENT PLANTS COMPARED TO THE BULK RATES WE ARE OFFERING WATER AND WASTEWATER SERVICE. TODAY WE ARE HERE TO SEEK YOUR FEEDBACK ON A POSSIBLE PATH FORWARD, WHICH MR. HUTCHINSON WILL DESCRIBE .

BEFORE HE OPENS IT UP FOR FURTHER COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS.

>> OKAY, THERE IS A CONCEPT CALLED MARGINALIZATION OF YOUR RATES. WHAT THAT IS IS WHEN YOU HAVE A FULL CUSTOMER, A LARGE CUSTOMER LIKE THIS, YOU CAN DISTRIBUTE SOME OF THOSE COSTS THAT ARE DIRECTLY APPLICABLE TO THAT CUSTOMER AMONG THE REST OF YOUR TYPICAL COMMERCIAL AND ALL OF THE RETAIL CUSTOMERS INSIDE OUR AREA. IT IS SOMETHING THAT HAPPENS. IF THAT WAS SOMETHING THE BOARD IS INTERESTED IN PURSUING, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE IT MINIMIZES THE IMPACT ON OUR CUSTOMERS. ALSO, THIS HAS BEEN ON A LOT OF THE DISCUSSIONS WE'VE HAD WITH ST. LUCIE COUNTY. HEY, CAN WE HAVE YOUR FINANCIAL SO WE CAN SEE HOW MUCH YOU'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO PRODUCE WATER FOR? LET'S SEE HOW THAT COMPARES TO OUR NO-LOSS RATE. MAYBE WE CAN PROPOSE -- PUT A PROPOSAL TOGETHER TO GO TO OUR BOARD WITH. THEY HAVE ASKED FOR , REPUTEDLY, JUST GIVE US A NUMBER. JUST GIVE US A NUMBER.

WE CAN'T DO THAT. WE CAN'T JUST COME AND MAKE UP A NUMBER AND COME TO THE BOARD AND SAY, HEY, WE WANT TO GIVE THEM A 30%

[00:35:04]

POTENTIALLY ON THE DOLLARS. A COUPLE OTHER NOTES THERE TO MAKE IS THAT WE MENTIONED A COUPLE TIMES ALREADY THIS WOULD NOT CAUSE A RATE INCREASE IF ST. LUCIE COUNTY GOES AWAY. THAT'S LARGELY IN PART TO A BOND THAT WILL BE PAID OFF ABOUT THE SAME TIME THE COUNTY WOULD POTENTIALLY GO AWAY AROUND 2028.

IT'S A BIT OF A WASH THERE. THAT HELPS QUITE A BIT. WHEN WE LOOK AT THIS CHART, UP THERE AT THE VERY TOP IS IF WE WERE TO USE A NO-LOSS RATE, NOT OUR RATES, BUT AS MR. HAMILTON SAID, IT'S A WASH RIGHT NOW. THAT IS ASSUMING THE MARGIN THE FPUA RATEPAYERS ARE PAYING ON BEHALF OF THE COUNTY ZERO DOLLARS. THAT IS WHAT IT IS EFFECTIVELY RIGHT NOW. IF YOU WANT ALL THE WAY OVER TO THE RIGHT, THAT'S LEAVING ABOUT SEVEN DOLLARS AND 42 -- $7.42 IN THE RATEPAYERS COFFERS TO HANDLE EXPENSES, LIKE, THE ROADWAY WORK ASSOCIATED WITH THE SALES TAX.

ALL THOSE UTILITIES HAVE TO BE PAID FOR IN ADDITION TO THAT.

THAT'S ONE OF MANY EXAMPLES FOR WHAT THAT FUNDING IS USED FOR.

LOOK MAY BE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE CHART THERE, IT IS AT THE MARGINALIZED 7% RATE. THAT'S A WATER RATE OF ABOUT FOUR DOLLARS. IN THAT PARTICULAR CASE, IT CAN STILL LEAVE $4.82 IN THE RATEPAYERS COFFERS, BUT IT WOULD BE DISTRIBUTING ABOUT $2.68 AMONG THE FPUA RATEPAYERS. IS THERE A BUSINESS CASE THAT COULD BE MADE THERE? ABSOLUTELY. THIS IS THE -- THIS HAS BEEN DISCUSSED MANY TIMES WITH THEM. WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO GET MR. HAMILTON INVOLVED TO PUT A CHART LIKE THIS TOGETHER, ASSEMBLE TO UNDERSTAND CHART. WE HAVE DISCUSSED MARGINALIZED WITH THEM, POTENTIALLY BASED ON WHAT THEY ARE ABLE TO THEMSELVES .

THAT'S NOT JUST THE PRODUCTION OF WATER. IF THEY HAVE TO GO BORROW $50 MILLION PER PLANT AND MAY HAVE INTEREST THEY HAVE TO PAY ON THAT, EVEN IF THEY WERE ABLE TO DO IT IN CASH, THERE IS STILL A VALUE TO THAT MONEY THAT WAS LOST BUT NEEDS TO BE CAPTURED AND WHAT THAT WATER RATE IS. LET'S SEE WHAT IT IS AND WE CAN OPEN UP THE CONVERSATION. THAT IS THE END OF THE PRESENTATION. ESTHER HAMILTON IS STILL HERE AND WOULD BE HAPPY TO ENTERTAIN ANY QUESTIONS , OR HELP FACILITATE A

CONVERSATION. >> ANY QUESTION OF THE BOARD

MEMBERS? >> SO DISAPPOINTING, GOSH. I HATE TO HEAR THIS KIND OF THING. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT $150 MILLION, HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS WORTH OF INFRASTRUCTURE THEY ARE GOING TO BUILD THAT'S GOING TO BE THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE COUNTY.

WE ARE TALKING ST. LUCIE COUNTY, WHICH WOULD BE FORT PIERCE AND ST. LUCIE CITY. WE WOULD BE PAYING FOR THAT. PRETTY DISAPPOINTING HERE CONSIDERING OUR TAXES AND PROPERTY ARE PRETTY HIGH ALREADY. A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT COME TO MIND HERE, CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO US HOW IT WORKS WITH THE MAINTENANCE PART? WE PROVIDE THE BULK WATER, AND IT GOES TO A TWO METER, CORRECT? FROM THAT VOLTMETER TO THE HOUSE METER, WHATEVER , THE COUNTY IS SUPPOSED TO MAINTAIN THAT PORTION IN THAT AREA. HAS THERE BEEN SOME COLLABORATION OR DISCUSSION? HOW IS THAT WORKED WITH US IN THE PAST? HAVE WE PROVIDED ANY ASSISTANCE IN THAT

ARENA? >> ABSOLUTELY. ON THE UP DURATIONAL SITE, I CANNOT SAY I'VE BEEN BAD PARTNERS WITH US.

SOMETIMES THERE WILL BE A MAIN BREAK. THE PIPE, WE WILL CALL THEM, THEY WILL CALL US. WE WILL SWAP INFORMATION BACK AND FORTH.

LET'S SEE. ANOTHER PERFECT EXAMPLE, BACK AROUND THE 2018 RANGE, THEY WERE HAVING A LOT OF PROBLEMS KEEPING THEIR WATER FRESH. THEIR FLUSHING PROGRAM WAS THEY WOULD WAIT UNTIL THE WATER WAS PRETTY MUCH BAD AND THEY CAN FLUSH, FLUSH, FLUSH.

THAT'S A LOT OF WATER THAT GOES ON THE GROUND, THAT IS JUST WASTED. WE ARE WASTING OUR ASSETS. WE HELPED GET SEVERAL SET UP. WE HELPED -- THEY WERE FLUSHING LIKE CRAZY UP THERE FOR

[00:40:03]

COLLABORATION BACK AND FORTH. >> PARTNERS WITH US, WE ARE IN THEIR COUNTY, VICE VERSA, THAT'S HOW IT SHOULD WORK. IN 2019, WHEN WE REVAMPED THIS, THAT WAS RIGHT BEFORE I STARTED ON THE BOARD. I GUESS I STARTED IN 2020. WHEN THAT DISCUSSION HAPPENED, WAS THERE SOME INFORMATION FROM THE COUNTY THAT THEY WERE LOOKING TO BUILD THIS FACILITY? OR WAS THAT NOT A

TOPIC THAT WAS DISCUSSED? >> THAT PARTICULAR TIME, THE ONLY FACILITY THAT WAS DISCUSSED WAS THE WATER PLANT AT THE AIRPORT. THE PACKAGE PLANT AT THE AIRPORT. THAT'S BEEN IN THE DISCUSSION FOR A LONG TIME. AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE ORIGINAL BOCA AGREEMENT, THE ANNEXATION OF THE AIRPORT WAS A MAJOR ISSUE FOR ST. LOUIS -- ST. LUCIE COUNTY. THE BOCA AGREEMENT WAS EFFECTIVELY HAD BLOCKED THE ANNEXATION. IF THEY WERE THE ONLY BULK WATER CUSTOMER, NOT OUR WASTEWATER. IF THEY CAN BUILD THE WATER THERE THEY COULD USE THAT TOOL AT THE AIRPORT, AS

WELL. >> IN DOING SOME RESEARCH IN THIS, I HEARD SEVERAL TIMES A COMMENT THAT THE COUNTY IS LOSING MONEY ON THIS. IN REVIEWING SOME OF WHAT THEY ARE CHARGING, THEIR WATER CUSTOMERS, IT LOOKS, LIKE, THEY HAVE GOT -- IT IS HIGHER THAN WHAT WE'VE CHARGED THEM, OBVIOUSLY, WHICH YOU SHOULD BE. THERE'S A FAIRLY LARGE ADMIN FEE ON TOP OF IT.

NOT THAT WE SHOULD BE IN CHARGE OF THEIR FINANCIALS, BY ANY MEANS, DO WE HAVE SOME IDEA OF HOW OR WHY THEY THINK THEY ARE LOSING MONEY? DO WE KNOW WHAT THAT GAP WOULD BE THAT THEY WOULD NEED TO GET TO IN ORDER FOR IT TO MAKE SENSE? I AM JUST,

YOU KNOW -- >> I THOROUGHLY DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE COMMENTS MADE ABOUT LOSING MONEY. THEY SAID THEY WERE -- FPUA WAS CHARGING THEM TWICE WHAT THEY WERE SELLING IT TO THEIR CUSTOMERS. THAT'S COMPLETELY INACCURATE.

YOU CAN SEE ON THE CHAIR, ALL OF THE UTILITIES. LOOK AT ST. LUCIE COUNTY THERE, THIS WOULD BE AN AVERAGE SIX GALLON WATER BILL.

$66.02 . >> THAT'S WHAT THEY ARE

CHARGING THEIR CUSTOMERS? >> YES, MA'AM. OF THAT, RIGHT AT $36, CORRECT ME IF I GET THESE NUMBERS WRONG, RIGHT AT $36 OF THAT IS WHAT THE WATER ACTUALLY COSTS THE COUNTY. THEIR BASE CHARGES ON TOP OF THAT ARE RIGHT AT $30, JUST A HAIR UNDER $30. THAT IS NOTHING WE SEE. WE SELL WATER. JUST RATE WATER.

THERE'S NO BASE CHARGES ON ANY OF OUR BULK METERS. WATER IS

WHAT THEY PAY. >> THAT'S NOT OUR JOB TO FIND OUT, BUT I FEEL THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS REVIEWED. JUST ANOTHER COUPLE FEW COMMENTS THAT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE BRING UP , I KNOW, POTENTIALLY, THIS COULD CAUSE SOME SORT OF DISCOURAGEMENT FOR US TO BE ABLE TO GET MORE GRANT MONEY. BUT I AM CURIOUS, I CANNOT IMAGINE THE DEP WOULD BE HAPPY TO HAVE MORE THAN -- A TON OF OTHER SMALL WASTEWATER PLANTS AROUND THE COUNTY TO TRY TO MAINTAIN AND TO BE ABLE TO TEST AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF. I WOULD BE CURIOUS IF THERE WAS ANY COMMENTS FROM THE DEP IN THAT REGARD, KNOWING WE HAVE A PRETTY GOOD RELATIONSHIP WITH THEM AT THIS POINT. ANOTHER THING I WANTED TO ASK, WE PAY THE CITY A TRANSFER FEE, DO WE PAY ANY TRANSFER TO THE COUNTY? IS THERE ANYTHING LIKE THAT IN OUR WAGE

STRUCTURE? >> NOT FOR WATER AND WASTEWATER.

>> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I AM SURE THAT'S IT FOR RIGHT NOW. I AM

SURE I WILL COME UP FOR MORE. >> THE $10 MILLION THEY APPROVED AT A RECENT MEETING , THAT IS FOR FACILITY , WATER FACILITY.

WHAT IS CAPACITY FOR THAT FACILITY?

>> 2 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY. >> WHAT IS THAT COMPARED TO -- WHAT PERCENTAGE IS THAT ? AND WHERE IS IT GOING TO BE?

[00:45:06]

>> IT IS THERE ON THE AIRPORT PROPERTY. ON ST. LUCIE BOULEVARD . I KNOW IT'S RIGHT THERE ON THE AIRPORT PROPERTY. CURRENT CAPACITIES OF THE WATER PLANTS, WE HAVE A 23 MILLION GALLON PER DAY . WE ARE PROVIDING RIGHT AT 10 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY, INCLUDING ABOUT 1 MILLION PER DAY FOR THE COUNTY. RIGHT NOW WE HAVE A SURPLUS OF 13 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY AT THE PLANT.

THE WASTEWATER PLANT, THE NEW WASTEWATER PLANT -- IT'S GETTING VERY CLOSE TO COMPLETION . THERE IS 2 MILLION GALLONS.

ALREADY EARMARKED FOR ST. LOUIS COUNTY -- ST. LUCIE COUNTY

COUNTY AS OF RIGHT NOW. >> I AM ASSUMING THE ONE AT THE AIRPORT IS GOING TO BE SERVING THE NORTH PART OF THE COUNTY?

>> YES, MA'AM. THE COUNTY'S WATER SYSTEM IS AFFECTED. WE'VE BROKEN IT INTO A NORTHERN PART AND THE SOUTHERN PART. AROUND OKEECHOBEE ROAD IN THAT AREA. AND THEN UP IN THAT AREA. THEY HAVE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT UP THERE.

>> I KNOW PEOPLE IN LAKEWOOD PARK COMPLAIN ABOUT THEIR WATER, THE QUALITY OF THE WATER. THEY WANT FPUA WATER SYSTEM, AND THEY WANT BETTER WATER. I KNOW THEY COMPLAIN ABOUT AT LAKEWOOD PARK ABOUT THE PRICE BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT YOU ARE EFFECTIVELY CAM -- TELLING ME. CHARGES DOUBLE WHAT THEY PAY US FOR.

>> THEY DO. THAT IS TYPICAL TO HAVE A BASE CHARGE ON TOP. YOU CAN LOOK AT THE PROPOSED RATES. THE EXACT SAME CUSTOMER , IF THE COUNTY DIDN'T EXIST AND WE WERE SERVING THEM DIRECTLY, WOULD BE $51 -- $51.18 FOR THE SAME SERVICE.

>> RIGHT. >> WHAT DATE WAS THAT LETTER?

HOW MANY YEARS AGO WAS THAT? >> 2010. 2008, 2010.

>> IT WAS SOMEWHERE IN THAT RANGE. I APOLOGIZE FOR NOT

HAVING THAT. >> THAT'S ALL RIGHT. I JUST KNOW THAT -- AND AT THAT TIME, THAT'S WHEN WE STARTED SAYING, OKAY, WE WANT TO KEEP THEM AS A BULK RATE CUSTOMER BUT WE KNOW WE HAVE TO DIG ADJUSTMENTS BECAUSE WE MIGHT NOT HAVE THEM.

WE GOT THIS LETTER NOW . THEY HAVE BEEN THINKING ABOUT CREATING A UTILITY FOR A LONG TIME, I THINK. I THINK. WE KNOW YOU AND OTHER STAFF MEMBERS HAVE PUT IN A LOT OF STAFF TIME TO MAKE SOMETHING WORK SO WE CAN SERVE THE COUNTY. COUNTIES ARE RURAL, AND CITIES ARE URBAN, THAT'S A LITTLE TRITE. YOU CHOOSE TO LIVE IN THE COUNTY AND YOU KNOW IN THE COUNTY YOU ARE NOT GOING TO HAVE WATER AND WASTEWATER SERVICES. YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A SEPTIC TANK. THAT'S WHAT IT'S TRADITIONALLY HAS BEEN. THE NEW FLORIDA, IT MIGHT BE DIFFERENT. THIS COUNTY HAS SEEMED TO WANT, FOR A WHILE, TO HAVE THEIR OWN UTILITY SYSTEM, WATER AND WASTEWATER UTILITIES SYSTEM. WE HAVE BEEN TRYING FOR A WHILE TO WORK WITH THEM BECAUSE WE HAVE ALREADY ESTABLISHED A SYSTEM. WE ALREADY HAVE IT. ANOTHER THING THAT WAS IN THAT AGREEMENT IS, TERRITORIES. IF THE AGREEMENT GOES AWAY, THE TERRITORIES GO AWAY, CORRECT?

>> THAT WOULD BE CORRECT. >> THE ONE CAVEAT I WILL ADD TO THAT, YOU CAN'T CROSS ANYBODY ELSE'S PIE. FOR EXAMPLE, ST.

LUCIE COUNTY WANTED TO SERVE SOMETHING IN OUR SPECIFIC AREA , WHATEVER IT HAPPENED TO BE, YOU CAN'T CROSS PIPES. THERE'S A

LINE IN THE SAND. >> RIGHT. THE COUNTY IS PUTTING OUT $10 MILLION , AND I AM A COUNTY TAXPAYER. WE ARE ALL COUNTY TAXPAYERS. WHAT THEY ARE DOING IS , IN EFFECT, CREATING THEIR SYSTEM ON THE BACKS OF THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY TAXPAYER. WELL,

YEAH. HOPEFULLY VOTERS. >> I WOULDN'T SAY ON THE BACKS OF THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY TAXPAYER. IT'S ON US. WE ARE SUBSIDIZING. THEY HAVE COME TO US. WE HAVE GIVEN THEM A BREAKEVEN COST. DO YOU MIND PUTTING THE CHART , THE SLIDE BEFOREHAND. I AM LOOKING AT THIS WATER RATE , AND ST. LUCIE

[00:50:03]

WE ARE AT $49, ROUGHLY 51 . I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW THEY ARE NOT ABLE TO PRODUCE A SAME PRODUCT WITH OUR BULK SALES TO THEM, AND NOT AT LEAST MAKE THEIR PRICE COMPETITIVE TO US.

THIS SEEMS TO BE A GREAT DISSERVICE HERE. IT IS UNUSUAL , AND IT DEFIES COMMON SENSE . YOU ARE GOING TO BUILD A PLAN FOR $10 MILLION THAT MOVES 2.5 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY. WE'VE GOT, WHAT, 11 MILLION IN SURPLUS ESSENTIALLY ? OKAY. NOW YOU THINK YOU GET THE TAXPAYER , ST. LUCIE COUNTY TAXPAYERS, FORT PIERCE TAXPAYERS , AND YOU ARE GOING TO BUILD THIS PLANT. WHEN YOU KNOW YOU HAVE IT CHEAP SOURCE TO GET WATER RIGHT NOW WITH EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE. THAT DEFIES COMMON SENSE. YOU ARE BUILDING SOMETHING YOU DON'T NEED TO HAVE FOR AT LEAST ANOTHER 20 OR 30 YEARS. I CAN SEE LOCKING AND PROPERTY FOR WHAT DOES OCCUR, BUT RIGHT NOW, THINK ABOUT THE MONEY YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE TO DO. BUT THE PLANT IN, INFRASTRUCTURE, TRAIN PERSONNEL ON TOP OF THAT. THAT NO LONGER'S IS 66. YOU'RE GOING TO HIRE AT THE MARKET FOR THE RATES. TAKING A PLAY OUT OF OUR PLAYBOOK AND BORROW WHEN IT'S LOW. IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. THEY ARE COMING TO US FOR -- ASKING FOR US TO MAKE IT CHEAPER SO THEY CAN SAVE MONEY TO BUILD THE PLANT. WE GET THAT.

BUT IF WE DO GIVE IT CHEAPER TO THEM , ARE THEY GOING TO PASS THAT ALONG TO THEIR CUSTOMERS, AT LEAST? ARE THEY ALWAYS GOING TO MAKE IT CHEAPER FOR THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY WHO HAPPEN TO BE PAYING AT THE TOP OF THE AREA CHART IN WATER? I MEAN THAT'S WHAT I WOULD BE CONCERNED ABOUT. I'M CONCERNED ABOUT A LOT OF THINGS, BUT IF WE ARE GOING TO FURTHER SUBSIDIZE, AT LEAST DO SOMETHING GOOD FOR THEIR RATEPAYER. AT LEAST PASS DOWN THE SAVINGS. TWO WE HAVE ANY INFORMATION ON THAT AT ALL?

>> I WOULD NOT WANT TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THEM, BUT MR. HUTCHINSON AND I ARE MEETING WITH THEIR LEADERSHIP TEAM ON FRIDAY TO CONTINUE SOME OF THIS DISCUSSION. IT WOULD DEPEND GREATLY ON WHAT THE APPETITE FOR THE DISCUSSIONS TO BE.

>> I DON'T THINK, IN GOOD CONSCIOUS, I COULD VOTE TO FURTHER DISCOUNT TO THEM IF THEY ARE NOT GOING TO PASS IT ON. THE WHOLE IDEA OF HAVING A UTILITY AUTHORITY. TO TRY TO SAVE YOUR RESIDENTS A LITTLE MONEY. GRANTED IT IS EXPENSIVE, BUT YOU TRY TO GIVE IT TO THEM AT THE BEST PRICE. HERE I AM LOOKING AT IT -- HOW MANY EMPLOYEES DO THEY HAVE COMPARED TO US?

>> UNFORTUNATELY, I DO NOT KNOW THE EXACT NUMBER. I THINK IT IS

30-ISH EMPLOYEES. >> HOW MANY DO WE HAVE?

>> ON THE WATER AND WASTEWATER SIDE ALL IN, WE ARE 96 IT --

>> THREE TIMES AS LARGE TOP-HEAVY WITH EMPLOYEES, BUT STILL THE PRICES ARE THAT MUCH HIGHER. IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.

A LITTLE BIT OF AGGRESSION , BUT US. IT SEEMS THEY CAN DO BETTER FOR THE CITIZENS AND I BELIEVE THE CITIZENS DESERVE IT, ESPECIALLY LOOKING AT THESE PRICES. I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN GIVE A FURTHER DISCOUNT. I THINK THEY SENT THEIR MESSAGE TO US.

WE DON'T WANT TO DO BUSINESS TO YOU, -- WITH YOU, IT'S TOO EXPENSIVE. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT LOOKING HERE THEY ARE NOT EVEN COMPETITIVE. THAT SEEMED TO BE A PROBLEM ON THE COUNTY SIDE, NOT OUR SIDE. WE ARE NOT MAKING ANY MONEY ON IT. I THINK THE FIRST SLIDE YOU SHOWED ME, WE ARE AT A DEFICIT OF ABOUT 500,000 PER

YEAR. >> BACK IN 2019.

>> 2019, WHAT IS THE DEFICIT NOW? MORE?

>> ADJUSTED WITH THE AGREEMENT.

>> WE ADJUSTED IT THEN. THOSE ARE THE RATES WE SET AT 2019.

THE METHODOLOGY HAS WORKED . WE ARE RIGHT ONLINE WITH THE

NO-LOSS RATES. >> IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THAT. THE MYTHOLOGY WAS CALIBRATED TOGETHER BETWEEN FPUA AND ST.

LUCIE COUNTY. >> FOR ME, I AM JUST THINKING OUT LOUD. IF WE ARE GOING TO GIVE A FURTHER DISCOUNT, ONE, THEY HAVE TO STOP ON THE PLANT, OR TWO, THEY NEED TO REDO THE AREA. MORE AREA TO SERVE. ONE AND TWO, PASS ON THE SAVINGS TO

[00:55:02]

>> I THINK IT BREAKS DOWN TO A BUSINESS DECISION THAT MAKES SENSE NOW FOR WHERE WE ARE. THE OTHER SIDE OF THIS WE ARE TALKING ABOUT RATES ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY. THERE'S ANOTHER SIDE OF IT WITH THE CAPITOL IMPROVEMENT CHARGES. THAT METHODOLOGY CAN BE LOOKED AT AGAIN. IF IT'S RATES THAT ARE MAIN THING, MAYBE WE COULD ADJUST THE METHODOLOGY ON THE CAPITOL IMPROVEMENT CHARGES. IF THEY'RE ABLE TO PRODUCE THE WATER A LITTLE BIT LESS EXPENSIVE, LEGITIMATELY, WE CAN POTENTIALLY LOOK AT WHAT THOSE NUMBERS LOOK LIKE. IT MR. HAMILTON BACK INVOLVED AND DIG INTO THE NUMBERS AND SEE WHAT WE CAN DO FOR THE BEST BUSINESS CASE.

>> RIGHT NOW THEY ARE NOT EVEN SHARING THE NUMBERS.

>> THAT HAVEN'T. THAT'S BEEN A BIT FRUSTRATING TO OUR STAFF.

>> I CANNOT AGREE TO GO TO THEM AND JUST PULL A NUMBER OUT OF THE AIR. THAT'S NOT A SERVICE TO OUR RESIDENTS AT ALL. WE'VE BEEN THERE FOR A WHILE. GOT A LOT OF INFRASTRUCTURE, A LOT OF PLANS IN THE WORKS. JUST TO PULL OUT A NUMBER TWO -- I DUNNO, TO PLACATE A 6% LOSS, THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME , ESPECIALLY IF THEY ARE GOING TO GO IN WITH THEIR OWN PLAN AND BE OUT OF OUR SERVICE AND TERRITORIAL TOGETHER. I DON'T KNOW HOW THE

REST OF THE BOARD FEELS. >> I WATCHED THEIR JANUARY 7TH MEETING , AND ACCORDING TO THAT, IT APPEARS THAT THEY HAVE ALREADY INVESTED QUITE A BIT OF MONEY IN PREPARATION FOR THEIR INTENTIONS . WHEN THE DISCUSSION LED TO THE PROBABILITY OF DEFERRING DECISIONS OR FURTHER ACTIONS FOR ANOTHER FOUR WEEKS, FOUR MONTHS , TO ALLOW FURTHER ASSESSMENTS TO BE MADE, THERE WAS THE APPEARANCE THAT BECAUSE OF THE INVESTMENT THEY HAVE MADE TO DATE, IT WOULD PUT THEM IN A BAD POSITION . I HEARD VARIOUS NUMBERS. ONE NUMBER I HEARD WAS $50,000 FROM ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS SAYING THEY INVESTED UP TO THAT POINT , AND SHOULD THEY CHANGE THEIR DIRECTION , THEY WOULD HAVE TO UNDO A COMMITMENT THEY MADE WITH THE CONTRACTOR.

>> THERE WERE A LOT OF NUMBERS THROWN AROUND . I DON'T KNOW.

CAN YOU FURTHER ENLIGHTEN US? >> I BELIEVE IT WAS 50 MILLION.

>> A LITTLE BIT OF DIFFERENCE. >> BIG DIFFERENCE.

>> I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO GET WHATEVER -- THEY TALK ABOUT A LOT OF NUMBERS THAT DAY. I DON'T KNOW . WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING IN WRITING TO DEFINE WHAT THAT NUMBER REALLY IS. LIKE MR. HUTCHINSON MENTIONED, WE REALLY NEED TO GET A NUMBER FROM THEM, SOMETHING THEY HAVE DONE WITH THE RATE EFFICIENCY, SOME KIND OF RATE STUDY THAT TELLS US WHAT THAT NUMBER WOULD BE. WE CAN COMPARE NUMBERS. ALL THAT OTHER DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW THAT MONEY WAS SPENT, I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE I CAN EXPLAIN IT.

IT'S THEIR MONEY, THEIR BUSINESS. I THINK THERE MAY HAVE BEEN SOME MIXTURE OF PROJECTS IN THERE, I DON'T KNOW.

>> RIGHT NOT HAVE BEEN ALL OF THE WATER.

>> OKAY. YEAH, PART OF MY CONCERN WAS, I THINK THEY WERE -- BY A WAY OF LINE OF CREDIT. UTILIZED $50 MILLION OF THE LINE

OF CREDIT . >> I BELIEVE THAT MIGHT THEY TALKED ABOUT A $20 MILLION LINE OF CREDIT. THEY DID HAVE SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT A LINE OF CREDIT THAT THEY ARE USING IN ORDER TO DO SOME OF THESE PROJECT EXPANSIONS FOR THEIR WATER, WASTEWATER SYSTEMS. I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY HOW THAT'S BEEN USED. I WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO EXPLAIN. I WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO GET INTO DETAILS BECAUSE IT IS NOT SOMETHING WE'VE BEEN

INVOLVED IN. >> IT WOULD DIRECTLY AFFECT THEIR GENERAL FUNDS. I DIDN'T HEAR ANYTHING ABOUT ANY GRANTS

OR ANYTHING. >> IF I MAY , I CANNOT SPEAK TO THEIR FUNDS THEY HAVE SPENT TO DATE, OR ANYTHING, BUT I CAN JUST REITERATE THAT WE HAVE BEEN MEETING WITH THEM ONE-ON-ONE

[01:00:04]

ABOUT FOR THIS PARTNERSHIP. >> MR. CHAIR? DIDN'T WE ASK TO HAVE A MEETING WITH THE BOARD ? OUR BOARD, THEY ARE BORED, SO WE CAN SIT AROUND. I THINK THAT WAS IN 2021.

>> 2024. OUR SECOND ROUND OF MEETINGS WITH THE COMMISSIONERS WE ASKED ALL THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS , HEY, LET'S SIT DOWN. LET'S HAVE A JOINT MEETING WITH OUR BOARD . ALL OF THE COMMISSIONERS AT THE TIME WERE ON BOARD WITH IT, IT WAS ONE THAT EVEN ASKED FOR IT. THE CHAIR AT THE TIME FLAT SAID NO.

I AM NOT MEETING WITH THEM. >> I WANT TO SAY, I THOUGHT WE ASKED TO MEET WITH THEM AGAIN, SHORTLY AFTER. NOT THAT, I MEAN , IT COULD'VE BEEN JOHN SENDING THAT. WHO KNOWS IF -- NOT THAT WE HAVE HIM TO ASK RIGHT NOW. I FEEL WE HAVE ASKED A FEW TIMES.

>> IF THE BONDS ARE COMING OUT OF THEIR GENERAL FUND, THE COST AND THE EXPENSE WOULD GO TO THE RATEPAYERS, RIGHT?

>> MY UNDERSTANDING, IF IT COMES FROM THE GENERAL FUND, I BELIEVE THEY PLAN ON PAYING IS THE UTILITY PAYING BACK THE GENERAL FUND. IN THE MEANTIME THE GENERAL FUND COMES FROM ALL

TAXPAYERS IN ST. LUCIE COUNTY. >> ALL TAXPAYERS IN ST. LUCIE COUNTY, NOT JUST -- OKAY, THEREFORE, IF WE GIVE THEM A DISCOUNT , THAT IS MORE MONEY THEY ARE GETTING ON TOP OF WHAT THEY ARE CHARGING FOR -- CHARGING THE RATEPAYERS. HOW CAN

THEY JUSTIFY THAT? >> I THINK THAT IS WHAT THE POINT IS. WHY WOULD WE CONTINUE ?

>> ALSO, I AM THINKING ABOUT OUR OWN RATEPAYERS IN THE CITY OF

FORT PIERCE. >> THAT THE DOUBLE DIP . YES.

>> I DON'T WANT THEM -- IN A PERFECT WORLD THEY SHOULD NOT SUBSIDIZE THE COUNTY RATEPAYERS. I KNOW YOU SAID SOMETIMES CUSTOMERS DO THAT. SOMETIMES THAT'S DONE. THAT'S UNACCEPTABLE -- AN ACCEPTABLE BUSINESS PRACTICE. I WOULD BE WILLING TO DISCUSS IT, BUT MY KNEE-JERK REACTION IS I DON'T WANT OUR RATEPAYERS TO BE SUBSIDIZING THE COUNTY RATEPAYERS. I DON'T THINK THAT IS APPROPRIATE FOR OUR OWN

CUSTOMERS. >> I MIGHT BE MORE FLEXIBLE MINDED ON IT IF I KNEW THEY WERE GOING TO PASS THE DISCOUNT ON. I HAVE FRIENDS AND FAMILY THAT LIVE IN THE COUNTY. IF I CAN DO SOMETHING TO HELP, THAT'S GREAT. NOT AT THE EXPENSE OF OUR -- BY ANY MEANS. WHEN WE GIVE THESE DISCOUNTS, WE HAVE AN EXPECTATION WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO GROW AND THE REASONABLE RATES.

WE ARE STRUGGLING. PART OF THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE NEEDS TO ANNEX . I FEEL THEY ARE TRYING TO USE THEIR UTILITY AS A WAY OF

STOPPING OUR GROWTH. >> I WOULD LIKE TO ALSO ADD WE JUST REAFFIRMED THAT WE ARE NOT GOING TO ANNEX THE AIRPORT.

THEY'VE ALWAYS BEEN VERY CONCERNED THAT WE WERE GOING TO ANNEX THE AIRPORT. THAT IS SOMETHING THAT HAS JUST BEEN -- THAT THEY DIDN'T WANT TO HAPPEN. IN AN AGREEMENT WE JUST HAD, WE ARE ANNEXING OUT ALONG KINGS HIGHWAY AND INSTEAD WE ARE NOT GOING TO ANNEX THE AIRPORT. THAT DOESN'T MEAN WE ARE NOT GOING TO ANNEX PROPERTY AROUND THE AIRPORT. WE JUST REAFFIRMED.

IN A PERFECT WORLD THEY SHOULD NOT BE WORRIED ABOUT THAT.

>> MR. CHAIRMAN, I THINK WE HAVE -- I BELIEVE WE'VE GOTTEN ENOUGH FEEDBACK FROM THE BOARD DISCUSSION TODAY TO PROVIDE DIRECTION FOR STAFF. WE ARE GOING TO BE MEETING WITH THEIR LEADERSHIP TEAM LATER IN THE WEEK. I THINK WE HAVE PROBABLY ENOUGH MARCHING ORDERS TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION WITH THEM AND ENGAGE IN THAT DISCUSSION AROUND THE FEEDBACK FROM TODAY.

>> ONE LAST QUESTION. CAN YOU GET THE INFORMATION YOU ARE SEEKING THROUGH A FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST FROM THE

COUNTY? >> WE CAN, YES, SIR. IT IS JUST

[01:05:06]

>> IT IS POOR FORM, BUT OBVIOUSLY YOU GET WHAT YOU GIVE.

IT'S PRETTY POOR FORM TO NOT RESPOND TO US . SEVERAL TIMES WE ARE ASKING TO GET THAT INFORMATION, SO WE CAN TRY TO SEE IF WE CAN DO SOMETHING BETTER FOR YOU. THEY DON'T WANT TO SHARE, SO PERHAPS WE NEED TO GO THE LONG WAY AND DO THE ANALYSIS OURSELVES AND GIVE THEM A NUMBER. IF THEY SAY NO IT'S A

NO. >> DO WE WANT TO DO THAT? IF THEY DON'T WANT TO BE PARTNERS WITH US, DO WE WANT THEM -- DO WE WANT TO BE PARTNERS WITH THEM?

>> MY GUT FEELING TO THE ANSWER OF THAT IS NO. I DON'T WANT TO MISS AN OPPORTUNITY. I AT LEAST WANT TO GO IN EYES WIDE OPEN AND SEE WHAT THE SITUATION IS. IF WE CAN DO SOMETHING, PERHAPS WE CAN DO IT, LIKE I SAID. I THINK THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE TO GIVE SOMETHING IN RETURN, OR PASS THE SAVINGS ALONG TO THEIR RESIDENTS IN ST. LUCIE COUNTY. IF I WAS A RESIDENT IN THE COUNTY AREA AND I LOOKED AT THE CHART AND SAW THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE IS CHEAPER WATER THAN WHAT IS IN THE COUNTY , I WOULD HAVE QUESTIONS. HOW IS THAT POSSIBLE GIVEN OUR SIZE COMPARED TO THEM? WE ARE MUCH BIGGER , WE HAVE MUCH OLDER INFRASTRUCTURE. AND YET WE ARE REPLACING AND MAKING IMPROVEMENTS AND WE ARE STILL DOING IT AT A RATE THAT IS PROBABLY THE BEST WE CAN WITHOUT TAKING ADVANTAGE BECAUSE WE ARE NOT THE PROPERTY OWNER. BUT THERE'S IS DOUBLE. BASICALLY THEY TAKE THE BULK RATE, THE COST AND THEY HAVE $30 ON TOP. HOW DO YOU JUSTIFY THAT ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSE? FRANKLY, IF I WAS LIVING IN THE COUNTY I MIGHT WANT TO LOOK INTO THAT. AGAIN, IF WE WANT TO TRY TO MAKE SOMETHING HAPPEN, I THINK IT LOOKS LIKE WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO DO THE POOR FORM WAY AND DO THE INFORMATION REQUEST TO DO IT. MAYBE WE'LL LOOK AT THE SPENDING AND THEY WILL DECIDE TO GIVE US THE INFORMATION. OR THEY MAY SAY NO WE DON'T WANT TO BE PARTNERS WITH YOU AT ALL. IF THAT IS THE CASE, LET'S RIP OFF THE BAND-AID AND START MAKING OUR OWN -- YEAH. LET'S CLOSE THE DOOR ON IT AND START MAKING OUR OWN EXPANSION PLANS FOR OUT

IN THE WEST AND DO WHAT WE DO. >> CHAIRMAN, IF I CAN MAKE ONE

-- SORRY. >> MY ONLY CONCERN IS , WHO IS GOING TO PUT IN THE HOURS TO GET THIS INFORMATION? THE MANPOWER .

>> THE COUNTY DOES. >> THEY DO, OKAY.

>> WE PUT THE REQUEST IN, THEY GET THE MATERIAL. UNFORTUNATELY WE WOULD HAVE TO GO IT -- OR ANALYZING. I DON'T WANT TO PUT THE WORK -- I MEAN, YOU DO IT IF YOU THINK -- IF YOU THINK WE CAN DO SOMETHING, THEN BY ALL MEANS MANAGERS DO IT. IF YOU THINK IT'S NOT GOING TO LEAD ANYWHERE PRODUCTIVE, I WILL LEAVE THAT IN

YOUR JUDGMENT. >> I THINK I CAN SPEAK ON THAT.

THIS IS A CONVERSATION WE'VE HAD. WE ARE VERY BUSY, AS YOU KNOW. WE HAVE INITIATIVE ON TOP OF INITIATIVE. WE ARE DOING GREAT THINGS FOR OUR PEOPLE. HOWEVER, I FEEL, LIKE, WE FEEL FROM OUR DISCUSSIONS, THAT EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT NECESSARILY OUR SERVICE TERRITORY, I MEAN, DON'T WE OR SOMEONE HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO LOOK AT THEIR NUMBERS TO SEE WHAT THEY ARE DOING TO AT LEAST BRING IT OUT INTO THE SUNSHINE?

>> I FEEL, LIKE, WE DO. >> I'M NOT SOME ALTRUISTIC PERSON HERE , BUT I FEEL SOMEONE NEEDS TO LOOK INTO IT.

>> CERTAINLY DOES NOT -- I HAVE THE HAIR ON THE BACK OF MY NECK GROWING, THINKING, YOU ARE BUILDING A PLANT WITH A VERY SMALL CAPACITY COMPARED TO US. WE ARE GIVING YOU WATER AT A BELOW MINIMUM COST, AND WE HAVE SURPLUS. WHY WOULD YOU EVEN GO THAT ROUTE? WHY WOULD YOU BURDEN YOUR TAXPAYERS WITH THAT EXPENSE? THAT MONEY CAN BE USED TO IMPROVE THE ROADS WE DRIVE ON DAILY. WE CAN SERVICE THEM BASED ON THAT SURPLUS YOU HAVE , FOR,

WHAT, 20 YEARS, AT LEAST? >> FOR A LONG TIME. WE HAVE PLENTY CAPACITY FOR FPUA'S EXPANSION. SOMETHING WE TALKED ABOUT, AS WELL, THE COUNTY, THERE'S PLENTY OF OPPORTUNITY FOR GROWTH OUT THERE. AT SOME POINT OUR CAPACITY WILL BE PICKED OUT. THEY WILL HAVE TO DO SOMETHING. RIGHT NOW, THERE'S

PLENTY OF CAPACITY FOR BOTH. >> IT DOESN'T SEEM TO BE A SOUND INVESTMENT. YEAH , LOOKING AT THE NUMBERS, TRYING TO FIGURE OUT MAKING SOME SENSE OF IT. PROABLY WOULD HELP EVERYBODY.

>> WHAT IS THE RELEVANCE OF THE FRIDAY? YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE O-

[01:10:03]

>> PART OF THE FEEDBACK FROM TODAY WOULD BE WHETHER WE WOULD CONSIDER MARGINALIZING THE RATE, OR IF WE CONTINUE WITH OUR CURRENT AGREEMENT, WHICH HAS BEEN VETTED BY ST. LUCIE COUNTY AND FPUA TO BE A FAIR AGREEMENT. THAT WOULD BE THE NO-LOSS , NO-GAIN FORMULA, WHICH APPEARS TO BE AGAIN VERY FAIR TO BOTH PARTIES. IT SOUNDS, LIKE, THE APPETITE FOR MARGINALIZATION IS NOT NECESSARILY THEIR, AND OUR CONVERSATIONS WITH THE STAFF WOULD BE ALONG THE CURRENT AGREEMENT , SEE IF THEY -- SEE WHAT THEIR POTENTIAL FUTURE WOULD BE WITH THE CURRENT AGREEMENT, OR MODIFIED VERSION OF THE AGREEMENT.

>> OUT OF CURIOSITY, WHO'S THE SECOND LARGEST CUSTOMER?

>> IT WOULD BE FP AND L. THEY ARE JUST A REGULAR CUSTOMER. IT

WOULD BE FP N.L. >> WE HAVE ONLY ONE CUSTOMER,

RIGHT? >> WHAT WOULD BE THE DIFFERENCE , HYPOTHETICALLY, BILL WISE? WE WOULD GIVE TO THE COUNTY AND FP

AND ? >> CORRECT ME ON THESE NUMBERS, BUT THE BULK RATE FOR WATER IS RIGHT AT 62% OF WHAT OUR RETAIL RATE IS FOR WATER. HOPEFULLY I'M GETTING THE HEAD NODS.

>> THE FULL FREIGHT FOR THE WATER. THE BULL CUSTOMERS WOULD

BE BUYING IT AT ABOUT 62%. >> BASICALLY ALSO A 42% DISCOUNT

RIGHT NOW. >> I WOULDN'T WANT TO USE THE WORD DISCOUNT ON THAT. MARGINALIZATION WOULD BE MORE.

>> THE MARGINALIZATION WOULD BE A DISCOUNT. A TRUE DISCOUNT.

>> YES, SIR. >> IN ORDER TO ADDRESS ANY FORM OF MARGINALIZATION YOU WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK TO THE BOARD TO ENGAGE IN THOSE TYPE OF NEGOTIATIONS?

>> YES, MA'AM, ABSOLUTELY. >> SUBSEQUENT TO THIS MEETING.

ALL WE ARE REALLY DOING IS GIVING YOU SOFT FEEDBACK.

>> YES, MA'AM. >> MR. CHAIRMAN, WHAT I THINK I AM ALSO HEARING, CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG, IS WE WOULD LIKE TO STAY IN BUSINESS. WE WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE DOING THIS. WE WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE DOING THIS. AND WHAT THEY SAID AT THAT MEETING WAS SOMETHING, LIKE, THEY WON'T GIVE US A NUMBER, WE KEPT ASKING FOR A NUMBER, THEY WON'T GIVE US A NUMBER. I THINK WHAT WE ARE SAYING IS, THE NUMBER IS THE NUMBER WHERE OUR CUSTOMERS DON'T HAVE TO SUBSIDIZE ST. LUCIE COUNTY . IS THAT CORRECT?

IS THAT WHAT WE ARE SAYING? >> YES, UNLESS YOU CAN DEMONSTRATE SOME SORT OF COMPELLING REASON.

>> YES, IF YOU CAN CONVINCE ME THERE'S A COMPELLING REASON.

>> THE ONLY WAY WE CAN DO THAT IS LOOK AT THE FINANCIALS, OR HAVE SOME SORT OF STATEMENT FROM THEM. THIS IS WHAT OUR CHALLENGE IS. IS THERE ANYTHING YOU CAN DO TO IMPROVE? YES, MAYBE WE CAN HELP. BUT IF YOU LOOK SAYING WE DON'T HAVE ANY ECONOMIC CHALLENGES AT THIS POINT, STILL WANT A DISCOUNT FROM YOU, ARE YOU GOING TO PASS THAT ON TO YOUR CUSTOMERS? I THINK, ETHICALLY, THAT'S THE WAY THINGS SHOULD WORK . IT SHOULD BE PASSED ON TO CUSTOMERS. THEY COME OUT AND SAY NO, WE ARE GOING TO KEEP IT. I THINK SOME OF THE CUSTOMERS AND ST. LUCIE COUNTY SHOULD SCRATCH THE BACK OF THEIR HEAD AND GO TALK TO SOME OF THESE. THAT DOESN'T SEEM FAIR.

>> MR. CHAIR, AND IF THEY SAY, WELL, WHEN YOU GO TO THE MEETING AND THEY SAY, WELL, YES, WE WILL DO IT. OKAY, LET US GET THAT IN WRITING THIS IS GOING TO TAKE PLACE . THEY CAN SAY YES TODAY AND NO TOMORROW BECAUSE OF WHAT THEY SEE THE FINANCES COME IN AFTERWARDS. HEY, AND ASK THEM ONE MORE TIME, WILL YOU GIVE US THOSE FINANCIALS . WHEN YOU ARE AT THE MEETING WITH THEM, TO

MAKE IT PLAIN AND SIMPLE. >> SOUNDS LIKE WE ARE GOING ABOVE AND BEYOND. WE WANT TO STAY A GOOD PARTNER WITH THEM.

THEY HAVE BEEN GOOD PARTNERS. WE'VE HAD GOOD RELATIONS, FOR THE MOST PART, IN THE PAST. AND I THINK WE WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE. BUT THERE IS ONLY SO FAR WE CAN GO. ALSO, THERE IS ONLY SO MUCH TIME THAT NEEDS TO BE -- AT SOME POINT YOU HAVE TO RECOGNIZE, LIKE YOU SAY, IF THEY DON'T WANT TO DO IT , FOR WHATEVER NUMBER YOU THROW OUT, WHATEVER REASON, THEN WHY WASTE

THE TIME? >> 6% IS A GOOD HAIRCUT. I THINK SOMETHING WITH MANAGEMENT YOU CAN WORK AROUND.

>> IT HAS BEEN PLANNED FOR IN OUR FINANCIALS.

>> BASED ON THE PRESENTATION IT APPEARS WE HAVE AN OFFSET FROM THE PAYOFF OF A BOND. THAT WOULD OFFSET THE LOSS BY CUTTING BACK

[01:15:13]

>> IT'S GOING TO KEEP US FROM DOING THINGS WE MIGHT HAVE DONE, LIKE YOU SAID, IT EXPANSION AND INFRASTRUCTURE. BUT WE PLAN FOR IT. PLAY THE HAND WE ARE DEALT, RIGHT?

>> MR. CHAIRMAN, AGAIN WE HEAR YOUR FEEDBACK AND WE APPRECIATE YOUR FEEDBACK. WE WILL KEEP YOU POSTED ON HOW THAT DISCUSSION -- HOW THE CONVERSATION OF NEGOTIATIONS GO BETWEEN

LEADERSHIP TEAMS. >> THANK YOU, GUYS, THANK YOU

FOR THE PRESENTATIONS. >> WE CAN INCLUDE PART OF THE

[E.2. Update on the Use of Fluoride to Treat FPUA Water]

>> THANK YOU. NEXT UP. >> AN UPDATE ON THE USE OF FLUORIDE IN FPUA DRINKING WATER. THIS ITEM IS BEFORE YOU BECAUSE THERE HAVE BEEN SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE POTENTIAL HEALTH RISK.

PART OF THIS PRESENTATION WE ARE ASKING TO CONTINUE THE PAUSE UNTIL WE HAVE A FEDERAL DIRECTIVE THAT CAN BE ISSUED ON MORE DIRECTION ON FLUORIDE. KEITH STEVENS, THE WATER -- WILL

PRESENT THIS ITEM. >> THANK YOU, MR. CISNEROS. MR. CHAIRMAN, BOARD MEMBERS. HAPPY TO BE HERE TODAY TO GIVE YOU A FLUORIDE UPDATE WITH ALL THE DISCUSSION EVERYBODY HAS BEEN HEARING IN THE NEWS. WHAT WE ARE GOING TO GO OVER, AS MR. TRAN LETS US CISNEROS SAID, WE ARE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE HISTORY A BIT. THE AUTHORITY, WHEN WE STARTED PUTTING IT IN THERE. THE RECENT AUTHORITY, SOME OF THE CHANGES, THE CURRENT ASSESSMENT OF FPUA. THE CURRENT STATUS OF OUR SYSTEM AND FPUA RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE HAVE. TWO START WITH WE ARE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE HISTORY. WE DID SOME RESEARCH, AND WHEN YOU GET BACK INTO 1959, SOME OF THE RECORDS, THEY ARE A LITTLE BLURRED . AS YOU MIGHT KNOW, MR. FEE --

>> THEY GET A LITTLE FADED. >> THEY GET A LITTLE FADED. WHAT WE FOUND IS IN 1959, THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE PASSED IN OR THROUGH -- ORDINANCE FOR THE ADDITIONAL FOUR TO THE DRINKING WATER SUPPLY. AS SOON AS THEY DID THAT THERE WERE PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY THAT DID NOT LIKE THAT. FROM 1960 TO 1963 THERE WERE MULTIPLE APPEALS BACK AND FORTH TO PROHIBIT THE ADDITION OF FLUORIDE. AFTER SEVERAL APPEALS BACK AND FORTH IT WAS DECIDED BY A JUDGE, I BELIEVE, SPECIFICALLY, THAT THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE HAD THE RIGHT TO ADD FLUORIDE TO THE DRINKING WATER SUPPLY. IN 1963, THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE STARTED ADDING FLUORIDE TO THE DRINKING WATER. AS YOU MAY OR MAY NOT KNOW, WE DID NOT BECOME A SEPARATE UTILITY UNTIL 1972. THEY DID THIS AT THE OLD PLANT, SAVANNAH ROAD. THAT'S WHEN THEY STARTED DOING THAT. I SAID THAT FOR THE MAYOR, SHE KNEW ABOUT THAT ONE.

>> I KNOW ABOUT THE OLD PLANT. >> YES, MA'AM. THE AUTHORITY OPINION ON FLUORIDE, IN 1962, THE CENTER FOR DISEASE CONTROL RECOMMENDED ADDING FLUORIDE AT A CONCENTRATION OF .7 MILLIGRAMS PER LITER, OR TWO 1.2 MILLIGRAMS PER MILLILITER. WE USE THE TERMS PARTS PER MILLION. SAME THING. SAME TERMINOLOGY. WHAT THAT MEANT WAS PEOPLE THAT ADDED FLUORIDE COULD USE ANYWHERE IN THAT RANGE. THEY CAN BE AS HIGH AS 1.2, AS LOIS .7. IN 2003, AN AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE, WHICH IS STILL IN EFFECT TODAY, STATES THE STATE OF FLORIDA RECOMMENDS THE OPTIMAL CONCENTRATION IS .8 MILLIGRAMS PER LITER. IT FURTHER STATES THE RECOMMENDED FLUORIDE CONTROL RANGES .72 1.3. AS YOU CAN SEE, THE NUMBERS ARE ABOUT THE SAME, BUT THEY ARE MOVING AROUND. TALKING TO MY OPERATIONS SUPERVISOR, HE SAID THE PLANT HE WORKED IN ON THE WEST COAST, BACK IN THE DAY -- YOU KNOW HE'S BEEN OPERATING FOR MANY YEARS, HE SAID .85 WAS THEIR NUMBER THEY PUT IN. IN 2015, CDC CAME DOWN WITH BETTER GUIDANCE AND ADVICE COMMUNITY WATER SYSTEMS TO ADOPT A UNIFORM CONCENTRATION OF .7 MILLIGRAMS PER LITER OF FLUORIDE AS THE OPTIMUM LEVEL. MEANING THAT IS OUR TARGET. WE DON'T WANT TO GO TO ONE .2. OUR TARGET WAS TO GO OUT AND WHEN WE TESTED IT EVERY DAY TO BE AS CLOSE 2.7 AS WE COULD BE. THERE HAVE BEEN SOME RECENT CHANGES IN THE AUTHORITY OPINION . AS EVERYONE, I AM SURE, KNOWS , THE FLORIDA STATE SURGEON GENERAL RECOMMENDS AGAINST COMMUNITY WATER FLUORIDATION DUE TO THE NEUROPSYCHIATRIC RISK TO BABIES AND YOUNG CHILDREN ASKED POSED

[01:20:04]

AFTER THE RECOMMENDATION CAME OUT. FPUA'S A CURRENT ASSESSMENT IS THE ONLY CHEMICAL ADDED TO THE DRINKING WATER THAT IS NOT NEEDED FOR WATER TREATMENT. IT DOES NOTHING TO THE WATER. IT IS AN ADDED ELEMENT WE HAD TO THE WATER TO MAKE IT SAFE TO DRINK. IT DOES NOT -- IT IS NOT NEEDED FOR WATER TREATMENT. IT DOES NATURALLY OCCUR IN THE AQUIFERS, AND THE CURRENT LEVEL IS APPROXIMATELY .08 MILLIGRAMS PER LITER, WHICH IS THE CURRENT BLEND OF -- AND LIMESOFTENED WATER. LOOK AT THAT NUMBER. .08. NOT .7 , THAT IS NATURALLY OCCURRING IN THESE OFFICIAL AQUIFER ENDED WITH OUR -- WE ARE NOT ADDING AT THIS TIME. THAT IS WHAT IS GOING OUT IN THE WATER.

THERE'S AN EXTRA DECIMAL POINT THERE. I WANT TO MAKE THAT CLEAR TO EVERYONE. THAT'S HOW LOW IT IS GOING OUT RIGHT NOW, BUT THERE STILL IS NATURAL FLUORIDE IN THE WATER. NOW THE DEBATE IS BETWEEN HISTORICAL BENEFITS VERSUS NEW INFORMATION INDICATING BABIES BRAIN DEVELOPMENT MAY BE IMPAIRED BY FLUORIDE AND DRINKING WATER. CURRENT STATUS OF FLUORIDE IN FPUA. THE SYSTEM JUST HAPPENS TO BE CURRENTLY DOWN FOR REPAIR.

BEFORE THIS CAME OUT WE WERE ACTUALLY SLOW DRAINING THE TANK, TRYING TO GET ALL WE COULD OUT OF THE TANK. WE NEEDED TO DO SOME WORK ON THE BULK TANK. WE HAD PARTS ORDERED. THEY SHOULD ARRIVE IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS TO A MONTH. WE ARE GOING TO DO SOME REPAIRS IN THE TANK AND PUT IT BACK IN SERVICE.

THERE HAVE BEEN TIMES IN THE HISTORY OF FLUORIDE AT FORT PIERCE WHERE THIS HAS HAPPENED. WHEN IT'S OUT FOR MAINTENANCE.

ALL WE DO IS LET DEP KNOW THE FLUORIDE IS NOT FEEDING AT THIS TIME AND THEY KNOW RIGHT NOW WE ARE NOT FEEDING. ALSO, STAFF IS TRACKING THE LATEST INFORMATION FROM EPA AND THE OTHER AGENCIES.

IN THE MEANTIME WE ARE CURRENTLY NOT ADDING OR PLANNING TO ADD FLUORIDE TO THE DRINKING WATER, AS YOU KNOW. HERE IS OUR RECOMMENDATION FROM STAFF. WE CONTINUE TO NOT UNTIL NEW OFFICIAL GUIDELINES ARE PUBLISHED, AND DUE TO THE POTENTIAL HEALTH RISKS THAT MAY OUTWEIGH THE HISTORICAL DENTAL BENEFITS. THE REASON WE STARTED PUTTING FLUORIDE IN IS THE SAME REASON THAT RIGHT NOW WE DO NOT WANT TO PUT FLUORIDE IN. THAT IS THE SAFETY OF OUR CUSTOMERS AND THE PEOPLE WE PROVIDE DRINKING WATER TOO. ONCE WE GET MORE OFFICIAL GUIDELINES, WE WILL BRING THIS ITEM BACK TO YOU WHEN EVERYBODY IS AVAILABLE FROM THE BOARD TO MAKE A DECISION. I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND TAKE ANY COMMENTS.

>> ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? >> I WILL GO AFTER YOU.

>> ALL RIGHT. HI, THANK YOU FOR THAT. YOU ANSWERED ONE OF MY QUESTIONS ALREADY. IT IS NATURALLY OCCURRING. WHAT CREATES FLUORIDE? HOW DOES IT OCCUR? IS IT JUST AN ELEMENT?

>> IT IS AN ELEMENT. THE THING ABOUT FLUORIDE IS, WE DO NOT -- THERE ARE PARTS OF THE COUNTRY THAT THE FLUORIDE IS WEIHAI , AND THEY ACTUALLY HAD TO REMOVE IT TO GET IT DOWN TO ACCEPTABLE LEVELS TO EVEN PUT IN THE WATER FROM WHERE THEY GET THEIR GROUNDWATER BECAUSE IT IS SO HIGH. YOU'VE HEARD OF THE MODELING OF THE TEETH, THE FLUOROSIS THAT HAPPENS . AT SUCH HIGH LEVELS IT IS DANGEROUS FOR CONSUMPTION. THERE ARE PARTS, ESPECIALLY ON THE WEST, -- WE ARE LUCKY WE DON'T HAVE THAT PROBLEM HERE AT HIGH LEVELS. IT COMES FROM THE GROUND. THERE IS ELEMENTAL FLUORIDE. WE DON'T CURRENTLY PUT ELEMENTAL FLUORIDE IN THE WATER. WE GET OURS FROM A BYPRODUCT OF PHOSPHATE MINING.

WE GET OUR FLUORIDE FROM WYOMING.

>> INTERESTING. >> WITH THAT THEN, HOW MANY -- THAT IS GOING TO -- ALL OF OUR TABLES SHOULD BE FAIRLY SIMILAR IN FLORIDA, RIGHT? MOST OF THEM ARE GOING TO BE FAIRLY LOWER

NONE? IS THAT -- >> IN OUR AQUIFERS, MA'AM?

>> YES. >> WE HAVE TWO AQUIFERS WE GET OUR WATER FROM. FOR THE LIME SULFUR PLAN WE GET OUR WATER FROM -- FIRST 150 FEET. NATURAL OCCURRING FLUORIDE IN THAT WATER IS ABOUT .3, .4. NATURALLY OCCURRING. ACTUALLY, THE OTHER ONE IS THE RO WORD THAT IS YOUR DEEP WELLS. FLOOR WELLS,

[01:25:07]

MILLION. >> WHAT IS BRINGING IT DOWN IS

THE RO WATER. >> RO REMOVES IT FROM THE PROCESS, YES MA'AM. WHEN THE RO BLENDS, AS WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IN THE PAST, SEVERAL YEARS, YOU KNOW, WE RAISED OUR ELLIPSE WAS WE PUT MORE RO WATER THAN LIME WATER IN FOR OUR LAND RIGHT NOW.

THE NATURALLY OCCURRING WITH THE BLEND IS THE .08. THAT WAS A REAL NUMBER . I DOUBLE CHECKED IT. THAT WAS OUR AVERAGE LAST MONTH GOING OUT. WAITING ON THOSE PARTS, YES, MA'AM.

>> YOU MENTIONED ABOUT THE DEP, WE HAVE TO LET THEM KNOW WE ARE NOT ADDING FLUORIDE. WHAT IS THEIR ROLE IN THAT AND WHAT IS

THEIR STAND? >> THEY DON'T HAVE A STAND.

YEARS AGO IN 2016, I DON'T THINK ANYBODY WAS HERE ON THE BOARD, EXCEPT THE MAYOR. I CAME TO THE BOARD AND DID A PRESENTATION ABOUT FLUORIDE. I DID IT ABOUT ALL THE CHEMICALS.

WE WERE ABOUT TO REDO THE BALL CHEMICAL. ONE OF THE THINGS I FOUND OUT IS THEY DON'T HAVE A STANCE. ALL THEY NEED TO KNOW, IF WE MAKE ANY CHANGES TO THE WAY WE OPERATE THE PLANT WERE WHAT WE PUT IN THE WATER, THAT'S WHAT THEY KNOW. THEY REALLY DON'T HAVE A STANCE. MOST OF THE DIRECTION AND AUTHORITY COMES FROM THE EPA, THE CDC, THE A.D.A. -- AMERICAN DENTAL ASSOCIATION. THAT'S WHERE IT MAINLY COMES FROM, AS FAR AS PROPONENTS FOR FLUORIDE. FOR EVERY PERSON YOU FIND THAT WILL STAND UP ON THIS DESK AND YELL PUT FLUORIDE IN, YOU WILL FIND THE OTHER SIDE SAYING GET RID OF IT. BUT I WILL SAY THIS, OVER THE YEARS, AND THIS CAME FROM MY OPERATION SUPERVISOR, ONE OF THE THINGS HE TOLD ME. SOMETHING HE'S NOTICED. HE'S BEEN AN OPERATOR FOR , PROBABLY, ALMOST 30 YEARS. 25 TO 30 YEARS.

HE TOLD ME HE NOTICED THE NUMBERS KEEP COMING DOWN. ON WHAT THEY REQUIRE. AS YOU CAN SEE, SOME OF THOSE NUMBERS -- SO THEY HAVE FOUND SOME THINGS. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT IS. LIKE I SAID, I AM NOT MEDICAL SO I WOULDN'T KNOW WHAT THEY HAVE TRIED. INSTEAD OF GIVING YOU THE BIG RANGE UP TO 1.2 THEY REALLY

WANT YOU TO STAY AROUND .7. >> INTERESTING. THEY HAVE BEEN SLOWLY DECREASING THE AMOUNT THAT IS ALLOWABLE.

>> .85. WE CAN GO AS HIGH AS 1.2 AND NO ONE WOULD SAY A WORD TO YOU. THAT IS WHAT THE POWERPOINT IS, YES, MA'AM.

>> AS FAR AS GENERAL BUSINESS RIGHT NOW, HOW MANY OTHER MUNICIPAL WATER PLACES IN FLORIDA ARE STOPPING PUTTING IT IN THEIR? CURIOUS ABOUT SAINT LUCIE HANDLING IT , HOW IS ST.

LUCIE COUNTY HANDLING IT? >> AS YOU MAY KNOW, ST. LUCIE COUNTY JUST PASSED REMOVE FLUORIDE FROM --

>> THEY REPEALED THE ORDINANCE.

>> THEY REPEALED IT. THEY REPEALED A 1989 ORDINANCE. I THINK THE MAIN REASON THEY PUT THE ORDINANCE WAS PSL. PSL STOPPED USING IT. I KNOW THE CITY OF STEWART STOPPED USING IT. OVER THE YEARS, SINCE I HAVE BEEN AT THE WATER PLANT, I WILL TELL YOU THERE ARE MANY UTILITIES THAT HAVE STOPPED USING FLUORIDE. SOME WENT BACK, SOME HAVEN'T. IT'S BEEN BACK AND FORTH THROUGHOUT THE YEARS. DIFFERENT UTILITIES ACROSS THE STATE. I WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO VENTURE A GUESS OF HOW MANY ARE DOING AWAY WITH IT NOW. I JUST KNOW THOSE LOCALLY.

>> THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH ACTUALLY TRACKS THE SYSTEMS CONTINUING TO ADD FLUORIDE TO THEIR WATER, IT'S

BROKEN DOWN BY COUNTY. >> DO YOU KNOW WHAT THOSE ARE?

HAVE THEY CHANGED WHATEVER. >> WE CAN UP -- I CAN TELL WE UPDATED HOURS RECENTLY. NEITHER ST. LUCIE COUNTY IS FOR EDITING THEIR WATER. I WOULD BE HAPPY TO SHARE THE LINK WITH YOU .

>> THAT WOULD BE GREAT. GREAT, THANK YOU.

>> MR. CHAIR? >> I REMEMBER WHEN THIS WAS A WONDERFUL THING FOR FLUORIDE TO BECOME IN THE WATER BECAUSE IT WOULD PREVENT CAVITIES, ESPECIALLY IN CHILDREN. IT WAS THOUGHT TO BE -- IT WAS NOT, QUITE, THE POLIO VACCINE, BUT , YOU KNOW, SOMETHING BECAUSE ALL CHILDREN DREAD GOING TO THE DENTIST, RIGHT? SOME ADULTS DO, I THINK. IT'S A HARD THING TO GET USED TO THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT -- AND I

[01:30:04]

DOES THE A.D.A. SAY THEY ARE PROOF OF FLUORIDE COMING OUT OF

THE WATER? >> I HAVEN'T CHECKED RECENTLY.

I KNOW THAT WAS THERE STANCE, MA'AM. I CAN TELL YOU THAT DURING MY RESEARCH , THE FIRST PRESENTATION IN 2016, I WANTED TO GIVE YOU ALL INFORMATION, BUT YOU ALL STEPPED ON ME LIKE A BUG AND SAID, NO, WE ARE GOING TO KEEP FLUORIDE IN. I JUST STAYED HERE AND SAT DOWN. BUT WHAT I FOUND OUT IS, I THINK A LOT OF PROBLEMS IS, ONE OF THE THINGS I WAS ABLE TO RESEARCH AND SEE -- REMEMBER I AM NOT A MEDICAL DOCTOR. YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. THE BENEFITS ARE MAINLY TO ADOLESCENTS. ONCE WE GET OUR ADULT TEETH, THE AMOUNT O■F BENEFIT GOES DOWN TREMENDOUSLY.

I THINK YOU KNOW THIS ALREADY. >> YEAH.

>> THAT'S THE BIG THING. I THINK IT'S THE WAY WE ARE GETTING THE FLUORIDE OUT. MASS MEDICATING. THAT'S THE BIGGEST

-- >> IT GOES TO EVERYBODY.

>> MAYBE THEY DON'T NEED IT. YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT, WHAT

YOU ARE SAYING. >> IT'S HARD TO UNLEARN SOMETHING THAT YOU CONSIDERED WAS -- AND I AM WILLING TO UNLEARN IT, AND I THINK WE AS A SOCIETY SHOULD BE WILLING. AT THE SAME TIME, I THINK WE ARE -- ARE WE CALLING THIS PAUSED? ARE

WE CALLING THIS A CEASE? >> MADAM CHAIR, WE ARE CALLING IT A PAUSE . AGAIN I WANT TO CIRCLE BACK TO WHAT KEITH MENTIONED IN HIS PRESENTATION. THERE IS STILL NATURALLY OCCURRING FLUORIDE IN THE WATER. WHAT WE ARE PAUSING IS ADDING IT

TO THE .7 LEVEL. >> RIGHT.

>> I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG IT'S GOING TO TAKE BEFORE THIS MEDICAL ADVICE COMES OUT FROM FEDERAL LEVEL. I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG THAT WOULD TAKE. WE WOULD CONTINUE TO KEEP YOU POSTED ON WHAT THE STATUS OF THAT WOULD BE AND HOW IT IMPACTS THE UTILITY

-- >> I HAVEN'T LOOKED AT THE RESEARCH, BUT IS THERE A CASE THAT CAN BE MADE THAT FLUORIDE DID PREVENT CAVITIES IN CHILDREN? DID IT? IS THERE A STUDY? IS THERE A CASE TO BE MADE THAT IT DOES HARM CHILDREN? THE RISK IS SUPPOSED TO BE HARMFUL TO THEIR BRAIN DEVELOPMENT, IS THAT CORRECT? ARE WE DOING THIS BECAUSE OF THE SURGEON GENERAL'S DIRECTIVE? IS THIS WHY WE ARE DOING THIS NOW?

>> THE REASON WE INITIALLY DID IT IS BECAUSE WE WERE REPAIRING THE TANK. HE REALLY DID -- IT WAS IRONIC. WE WERE COMING DOWN WHEN IT HAPPENED. IT WAS ALMOST, LIKE, THE TIMING. YES, I BELIEVE WE ARE DOING IT BECAUSE OF THE FLORIDA STATE SURGEON GENERA'S RECOMMENDATION AT THIS TIME. THE COUNTY RESCINDING THEIR -- THEY WERE PART OF IT. PSL STOPPED DOING -- USING IT , CITY OF STEWART STOPPED USING IT. AT LEAST POSITIVE. I THINK WE ARE ALL PAUSING IT FOR THAT REASON. AS MR. CISNEROS SAYS, WE ARE PAUSING THE ADDITIONAL. IF SOMEDAY WE ARE RUNNING LESS RO THERE'S GOING TO BE MORE IN THERE. DEFINITELY LOWER AMOUNTS NATURALLY OCCURRING IN THE WATER.

>> THANK YOU. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ARE WE LOOKING FOR A VOTE TODAY? OR JUST INFORMATION?

>> IT WOULD BE A VOTE. GENERAL CANCER -- COUNCIL, DO WE NEED A

VOTE TODAY? >> I DON'T THINK WE WERE ASKING FOR A VOTE. IF THERE'S TEMPERATURE FOR MOTION --

>> I DON'T THINK WE NEED A VOTE. IF IT WERE PROMINENT I

WOULD PREFER. >> I WAS CONFUSED. WE NEED TO

VOTE TO POSITIVE NOT. >> I THINK THE TEMPERATURE IS WE WILL BRING THIS ITEM BACK TO YOU, AT WHICH TIME YOU WILL MAKE

A DECISION. >> WE ARE NATURALLY PAUSED ANYWAY BECAUSE THE EQUIPMENT IS OUT OF ORDER. I GUESS THAT

ANSWERS THE QUESTION. >> YOU CAN PROCEED TO PAUSE.

[01:35:06]

>> WE JUST WANTED TO BE -- WE WANTED TO BRING IT TO THE BOARD BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN A TOPIC OF DISCUSSION RECENTLY AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL. OBVIOUSLY THE OTHER LOCAL UTILITIES HAVE

RESPONDED TO THAT. >> OUT OF CURIOSITY, HOW MUCH FLUORIDE IS IN A BOTTLE OF WATER? OR IS ANY?

>> WE SHOULDN'T BE DRINKING BOTTLED WATER.

>> YOU REALLY DON'T WANT ME TO START TALKING ABOUT BOTTLED

WATER, MR. CHAIRMAN. >> UNLESS YOU FILLED IT UP IN

THE WATER FOUNTAIN OUTSIDE. >> GETS PURIFIED.

>> I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT. YES. I DON'T KNOW. SOME DO, SOME DON'T, TO BE TRUTHFUL.

>> MOST BOTTLED WATER IS BOTTLED FROM A MUNICIPAL UTILITY.

>> THAT IS CORRECT. >> HOW MUCH FROM THE TOP ANYWAY?

>> BOTTLED WATER IS NOT REGULATED ANYWAYS.

>> WE HAVE GREAT WATER AT THE FPUA.

>> BEST TAKING -- TASTING DRINKING WATER, THAT'S RIGHT.

[E.3. Resolutions UA 2025-01 Electric Rates; UA 2025-02 Natural Gas Rates; UA 2025-03 Water Rates; and UA 2025-04 Wastewater Rates]

>> OUR BACKUP ENGINE STILL WORKS, TOO.

>> GOOD. >> WE HAVE SOME RESOLUTIONS.

>> YES, SIR, MR. CHAIRMAN. THE LAST ITEM IS A REQUEST TO ADOPT THE INFLATION INDEX FOR ELECTRIC WATER AND GAS SYSTEMS. THERE ARE FOUR SEPARATE RESOLUTIONS. THIS PRESENTATION COVERS ALL RESOLUTIONS BEFORE YOU THIS AFTERNOON. REQUEST THE PRESENTATION BE INCLUDED IN THE RECORD FOR EACH RESOLUTION.

THESE INDEXED ARE ISSUED BY THE FLORIDA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION. USED TO KEEP UP WITH INFLATION EACH AND EVERY YEAR.

CONSISTENT ADOPTION TO AVOID GREAT SHOT, AS WE HAVE EXPERIENCED IN THE PAST. ELECTRIC AND GAS ONLY REQUIRE ONE READING . TODAY WE ARE ASKING FOR APPROVAL OF THE ELECTRIC AND GAS RESOLUTION, WHICH WOULD BE TAKING EFFECT MARCH 1ST. WATER AND WASTEWATER DO REQUIRE TWO READINGS. TODAY WILL WILL BE ASKING FOR APPROVAL FOR A SECOND READING. OUR CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER WILL PRESENT THIS ITEM.

>> THANK YOU, MR. CISNEROS. CHAIRMAN, BOARD MEMBERS, MAYOR, THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME HERE. I AM HERE TO PRESENT THE PROPOSED PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION INDEX RATE ADJUSTMENTS. AS MR. CISNEROS SAID, THROUGH FOUR SEPARATE RESOLUTIONS, ALL WITH THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF MARCH 1ST , 2025. THIS WOULD BE THE FIRST READING FOR ALL FOR RESOLUTIONS , WITH RECOMMENDATIONS BEING MADE AT THE END OF THE PRESENTATION. FIRST WE ARE GOING TO TALK ABOUT WHAT WE ARE DOING. OBVIOUSLY AN ADJUSTMENT TO OUR RATES. THE BASENESS -- BASIS FOR THE ADJUSTMENT IS THE INDEX. AN INDEX ESTABLISHED IN 1993 . IF THE CALCULATION BASED UPON THE GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT OF THE PREVIOUS FISCAL YEAR. FOR 2024 THAT WOULD BE SEPTEMBER OF 2023. IT ESTABLISHES THE INDEX TO INCLUDE THE MAJOR CATEGORY OF UTILITY OPERATING EXPENSES. IT INCORPORATES THAT INTO THE INFLATIONARY FACTOR OF THE GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT. IT IS PUBLISHED ANNUALLY IN DECEMBER, AS A PRELIMINARY MEMBER -- NUMBER. WITH NO PROTESTS OCCURRING, PUBLISHED AS A FILE NUMBER IN MARCH OF THE SUBSEQUENT YEAR. THE RATE WE ARE LOOKING AT NOW WAS FINALIZED IN MARCH OF 2024. WHY ARE WE DOING THIS? BASICALLY IT IS BECAUSE OF -- TO MAINTAIN OUR PACE WITH INFLATION . THE RISING COSTS OF MATERIALS , OUR INCREASE OF OPERATIONAL COSTS , AND THE REASON WE ARE DOING THIS. STORM HARDENING , BACKING UP AND SUPPORTING OUR GRID AND INFRASTRUCTURE. THE CURRENT RATE FOR 2024 WAS 3.24% , THAT WAS PUBLISHED LAST YEAR. HOW DO WE CALCULATE IT? 3.24% IS NOT FLAT OUT CALCULATION. WHEN YOU ARE LOOKING AT THE ELECTRIC AND GAS ADJUSTMENTS, THEY BOTH FOLLOW THE SAME PATTERN IN THAT WE HAVE A BASE POWER COST. YOU TALKED -- HEARD ME TALK ABOUT THE BASE POWER COST. THAT IN ADDITION TO OUR OPERATING COST. THE COST THAT MAKES UP OUR RATE. WE DO NOT APPLY THE INCREASE TO THAT BASE POWER AMOUNT. FOR ELECTRIC IT IS PER KILOWATT HOURS. .09752. THE 7952 WE TALK ABOUT.

[01:40:04]

THE SAME PRINCIPLE APPLIES. WE EXCLUDE THAT BASE COST FOR GAS WHICH IS $.50 , AND WE ONLY APPLY THE ADJUSTMENT TO THE BALANCE, WHICH IS THE COST FOR OPERATIONS. THE DIFFERENCE THERE IS FOUR CENTS . THAT BEING SAID ON THE WATER AND WASTEWATER SIDE, MORE LOOKING LIKE THE FULL BECAUSE IT'S BASED ON THE VOLUME CHARGES. THAT'S DEPENDENT ON THE METER SIZE. THE METER SIZE OF THE WATER IS FLOWING THROUGH THE DIFFERENT RATES FOR THE BIGGER METERS HAVE DIFFERENT RATES. IT'S THE TRUTH 3.24% FOR THE WATER AND WASTEWATER SIDE. IN THE PROCESS OF EVALUATING WHAT THE RATES ARE GOING TO BE, WE PUT OUR REQUIRED ANNOUNCEMENTS. WE ADVERTISE TO OUR CUSTOMERS THROUGH BILL INSERTS. WE PUT IT ONLINE IN OUR ONLINE PLATFORM. ADD IN THE LOCAL PAPER, WHICH REQUIRED ADVANCED NOTICE BEFORE THIS MEETING OCCURRED TODAY. WE HAVE ALSO THE TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS TODAY BEING THE FIRST ONE FOR THE FIRST READING . WE ARE GOING TO BE REQUESTING THE SECOND READING AT THE NEXT MEETING ON THE 18TH. THOSE ARE OUR EFFORTS ON MAKING THE PUBLIC AWARE OF THIS ADJUSTMENT WE PLAN PUTTING IN PLACE. THIS TABLE IS WHAT THE MONTHLY RESIDENTIAL BILL WILL LOOK LIKE. THE CURRENT BILL BEING THE FEBRUARY RATES , AND THE PROPOSED WOULD BE THE IMPACT WITH THESE ADJUSTMENTS IF THEY ARE IMPROVED -- APPROVED FOR MARCH 1ST. YOU CAN SEE THE ADJUSTMENT AMOUNTS, THE TOTAL AMOUNT ON AN AVERAGE BILL WITH A 1000 KILOWATT HOURS. 6000 GALLONS , AND SO FORTH, THAT WE TYPICALLY USE IS $6.41. THAT INCLUDES ALL OF THE APPLICABLE TAXES ON THE BILL. THIS IS BILL CALCULATION. IF YOU LOOK AT THE FINAL COLUMN ON THE RIGHT , THE PERCENTAGE CHANGE, YOU WILL NOTICE THE WATER AND WASTEWATER IS THE 3.24 , WHEREAS THE ACTUAL PERCENTAGE CHANGE FOR THE ELECTRIC AND GAS IS SOMEWHAT LESS. WE DON'T APPLY IT TO THE FULL AMOUNT OF THE RATE. OUR RECOMMENDATIONS TODAY, WE WILL HAVE THE FIRST READING FOR ALL FOR RESOLUTIONS , WITH THE INFORMATION PRESENTED . OUR FIRST RECOMMENDATION IS THE APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION 20 2501 FOR THE ELECTRIC RATES , AND 20 2502 FOR THE NATURAL GAS RATES. I BELIEVE MS. CORTEZ WILL READ THOSE RESOLUTIONS. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS WE WILL BE HAPPY

TO ANSWER THEM. >> ANY QUESTIONS?

>> I HAVE ONE RECOMMENDATION, AND THAT IS TO ALSO -- A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE LOOKING AT OUR FACEBOOK PAGE NOW. THAT WILL BE SOMETHING YOU ALL CAN ADD TO A FACEBOOK PAGE AS WELL.

>> I WILL REVIEW THAT WITH THE TENANT AND SEE WHAT WE CAN DO

ABOUT THAT. >> MR. CHAIRMAN , I THINK THAT SAINT LUCIE DOES THAT AS A STANDARD , DON'T PAY INCREASE?

>> I'M GOING TO LEAN TO SOMEONE MORE FAMILIAR.

>> I'VE HEARD THAT, BUT I DON'T KNOW IT'S TRUE.

>> PORT ST. LUCIE -- ADOPTED BY ORDINANCE, ESSENTIALLY. THAT REQUIRES THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND THERE'S PROCEEDING PER 181 36.

>> DON'T THEY DO A STANDARD -- THE STANDARD RATE?

>> NO, IT'S NOT BASED ON THE PSC. IT'S BASED ON A PRESENTATION EARLIER IN THE YEAR THAT DIRECTOR GIVES TO THE BOARD AND GIVES DIRECTION FROM THE BOARD ON HOW THEY WOULD LIKE TO PURSUE AN INCREASE, DECREASE, AND ADJUSTMENT.

>> HAVE THEY EVER DECREASED? I AM KIDDING . I AM JUST KIDDING.

WHAT I AM SAYING IS, LOOK AT THEIR RATES, AND MOST USUALLY

THEY HAVE AN INCREASE. >> OVER THE PAST 10 OR SO YEARS

[01:45:01]

IT WAS NOT ONE-SIZE-FITS-ALL. >> OKAY, YET. THANK YOU.

>> I REALLY APPRECIATE STEPHANIE ANSWERING.

>> THAT'S GOOD, YEAH. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE

BOARD? >> I JUST HAVE A QUESTION. IS

THIS THE NOTICE? >> YES, MA'AM. THERE WAS A COUPLE OF THINGS -- I'M SORRY, GO AHEAD, ASK YOUR QUESTION, I

APOLOGIZE. >> YOU ARE PROBABLY ABOUT TO ANSWER MY QUESTION ABOUT THE TIMES.

>> THOSE NOTICES WERE ORIGINALLY DEVELOPED IN DECEMBER. WE DID CATCH THE ERROR IN JANUARY. WE DID UPDATE THE WEBSITE. WE UPDATED THE NEWSPAPER . WHEN THE NEWSPAPER ARTICLE WAS ISSUED FOR THE READINGS THAT WAS CORRECTLY ANNOUNCED. WE UPDATED OUR FACEBOOK PAGE. WE DID GO BACK AND ADJUST THOSE. THE TIMES WERE SWITCHED TO THE 2:00 AND 4:00. THE DATES WERE CORRECT BUT THE TIMES WERE INACCURATE. WE DID CORRECT THAT AS SOON AS WE

IDENTIFIED THE TIME SLOTS. >> THE SECOND READING IN FEBRUARY WILL BE AT 2:00 VERSUS THE FOUR CAULK .

>> YES, MA'AM. IT'S BECAUSE IT'S AFTER HOLIDAY. WE MOVE UP OUR MEETING . THE CITY COMMISSION WILL HAVE THEIR

MEETING AT FIVE ON THAT NIGHT. >> OKAY.

>> YES, MA'AM. >> MY QUESTION WAS ANSWERED BECAUSE YOU SAID YOU UPDATED ON FACEBOOK.

>> YES, MA'AM, WE DID. THE MEETING TIMES ARE UPDATED ON

FACEBOOK >> OH, JUST A MEETING TIMES.

>> THE WEBPAGE AND THE NEWSPAPER, THE REQUIREMENTS WE

HAVE FOR OUR CHARTER. >> READING OF THE RESOLUTIONS?

>> RESOLUTION NUMBER UA 2025-01. A RESOLUTION AMENDING, SUPERSEDING, AND RESCINDING THE SCHEDULE OF RATES FOR ELECTRIC SERVICES FURNISHED BY FORT PIERCE UTILITY'S AUTHORITY, FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA, AND RESOLUTION NUMBER YOU A 23 -08, AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ARTICLE 12 OF THE CHARTER OF THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA, ADOPTING THE ELECTRIC TARIFF SHEETS ATTACHED HERE TO AS EXHIBIT A, REFLECTING A 3.24% INCREASE IN THE CUSTOMER AND USAGE CHARGES, BASED ON THE 2024 FLORIDA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION ANNUAL PRICE INDEX.

VETTING FOR ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION, ANNUAL INDEXING PROVISION, SEVERABILITY ON AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

>> OPEN THIS UP FOR A PUBLIC HEARING IN CASE ANYONE WANTS TO

COMMENT ON THIS ITEM. >> YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES TO MAKE YOUR STATEMENT. I AM NOT SEEING ANY MOVEMENT. TWO WE HAVE A

MOTION TO APPROVE? >> MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> SECOND. >> PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

>>

>> A RESOLUTION AMENDING, SUPERSEDING, AND RESCINDING THE SCHEDULE OF RATES AND CHARGES FOR WATER SERVICES FURNISHED BY FOUR PIERCED UTILITIES AUTHORITY , FORT PIERCE FLORIDA IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CHARTER OF THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA, ARTICLE 12, AND ADOPTING A REVISED RATE SCHEDULE PROVIDING FOR A 3.24% INCREASE IN THE CUSTOMER AND CHARGES BASED ON THE 2024 FLORIDA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION ANNUAL PRICE INDEX, AND PROVIDING FOR ANNUAL INDEXING PROVISION, ADMINISTRATION -- ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION, REPEAL, SEVERABILITY ON

AN EFFECTIVE DATE. >> ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO COME UP AND MAKE COMMENTS OR CONCERNS ME -- REGARDING THIS RESOLUTION? I SEE NO MOVEMENT. DO WE HAVE A MOTION?

>> MOVE FOR APPROVAL . >> SECOND.

>> PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. >>

>> THE NEXT ITEMS AGAIN, JUST WANT TO REITERATE , WE ARE ASKING FOR -- THIS IS THE FIRST READING, WE ARE ASKING TO MOVE TO A SECOND READING. THE FINAL VOTE WILL COME AT THE SECOND READING, FOR THE NEXT TWO ITEMS WHICH ARE WATER AND WASTEWATER

RATES. >> PLEASE READ THE RESOLUTIONS.

>> RESOLUTION NUMBER 2025-03 . A RESOLUTION AMENDING, SUPERSEDING, AND RECEDING THE SCHEDULED RATES AND CHARGES FOR WATER SERVICES FURNISHED BY FOUR PIERCED UTILITIES AUTHORITY , RESOLUTION NUMBER U A 20 -- 2023-10, AND IN ACCORDACE WITH

[01:50:03]

>> THE FLOORS OPEN FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. DOES ANYONE WISH TO COMMENT? NO ONE IS HERE TO COMMENT ON THE RESOLUTION. I BELIEVE WE DO NOT HAVE TO HAVE A VOTE .

>> WE DO HAVE A VOTE TO MOVE IT TO A SECOND READING. WE HAVE TO

VOTE FOR A SECOND READING. >> WE NEED A MOTION FOR THAT?

>> YES, SIR. >> MOVE APPROVAL FOR SECOND

MEETING. >> SECOND.

>> PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. >>

>> ALL RIGHT. COMMENTS FROM THE DIRECTOR .

>> WE HAVE ONE MORE READING. >> THAT WAS JUST WATER.

>> RESOLUTION UA 2025-04, RESOLUTION AMENDING, SUPERSEDING AND RESCINDING THE SCHEDULED RATES AND CHARGES FOR WASTEWATER SERVICES FURNISHED BY FORT PIERCE UTILITY'S AUTHORITY, FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA, VIA RESOLUTION NUMBER YOU A 2023-11, AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 12 OF THE CHARTER OF THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE FOR THE, ADOPTING THE RATES AND CHARGES FOR WASTEWATER SERVICES FURNISHED BY FOUR PIERCED UTILITIES AUTHORITY, PROVIDING FOR A 3.24% INCREASE IN THE CUSTOMER AND USAGE CHARGES BASED ON THE 2024 PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION ANNUAL PRICE INDEX, AND PROVIDING FOR ANNUAL INDEXING PROVISION, ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION, ERRORS, REPEAL, SEVERABILITY ON AN

EFFECTIVE DATE. >> ONE LAST TIME, THE FLOORS OPEN FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. CONSISTENT WITH ALL THE OTHER TIMES THERE IS NO MOVEMENT. LET'S HAVE A MOTION.

>> SECOND. >> PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

>>

[F. DIRECTOR COMMENTS]

>> NOW WE HAVE COMMENTS FROM THE DIRECTOR.

>> JUST TO COMMENTS. THE NEXT BOARD MEETING, AS WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER WILL BE ON FEBRUARY 18TH AT 2:00 IN THE CHAMBERS BECAUSE MONDAY IS A HOLIDAY. THE CITY COMMISSION MOVES THE MEETING TO THE FOLLOWING DAY. THERE START TIME IS 5:05. THE LAST THING IS, SINCE THE TURN OF THE NEW YEAR, WE HAVE BEEN OPERATING AT RECORD SPEED ON QUITE A FEW INITIATIVES. I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE A MOMENT TO THANK STAFF.

THE STAFF HAS BEEN ABSOLUTELY FANTASTIC OBVIOUSLY FOR THE PAST YEAR, BUT THE LAST MONTH WE HAVE BEEN OPERATING ON ALL CYLINDERS.

I CERTAINLY APPRECIATE THAT . I WANTED TO TELL THE STAFF THINK

YOU VERY MUCH. >> ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE DIRECTOR? I HAVE ONE QUESTION. AT THE VERY BEGINNING WHEN WE HAD PUBLIC COMMENTS, WE HAD A RESIDENT, BUT MAKE SOME STATEMENTS. DO WE HAVE A SIMILAR PLAN TO FP AND L WHERE THEY ARE

ABLE TO ANNUALIZE THE BILLS? >> WE DO HAVE BUDGET BILLING. IF YOU RECALL, I DON'T REMEMBE, IT WAS LATE LAST YEAR, WE ALSO CHANGED OUR ABILITY TO DO PAYMENT OPTIONS. INSTEAD OF TWICE A MONTH WE ARE DOING IT EVERY MONTH. I NOTICED HE WENT

OUT TO TALK TO THE LADY. >> I WAS ABOUT TO SAY, THAT WE

HAD PLENTY. >> WE DO.

>> I WAS JUST CURIOUS, MAYBE A CUSTOMER SERVICE REP.

>> I THINK IT IS PROBABLY A GAP IN TIME WHEN THE NEW POLICY WAS APPROVED. BUDGET BILLING WE'VE HAD FOR QUITE SOME TIME. IT MAY HAVE JUST BEEN A GAP THERE. WE FILLED THAT GAP. I FEEL PRETTY CONFIDENT HE'S BEEN ABLE TO ADDRESS IT BEFORE SHE LEFT.

>> ALL RIGHT. ATTORNEY COMMENTS. >> NOTHING HERE, SIR.

[H. BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS]

>> EXCELLENT. ANY COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD?

>> THAT MEANS GOOD NEWS. >> IT IS GOOD NEWS. WE ARE NOT BEING SUED, AND WE ARE NOT SUING ANYONE. THAT'S GREAT.

>> I WOULD JUST LIKE TO COMMENT, IN THE PACKET, THERE WAS A LIST OF VARIOUS ACTIVITIES THAT THEY ARE INVOLVING THEMSELVES WITH SPONSORING OR BEING IN ATTENDANCE. IT MAKES ME VERY PROUD, ESPECIALLY WHEN I SEE YOU THIS WEEKEND THERE IS GOING TO BE A FREE PROM FOR THOSE WHO, YOU KNOW, WILL BE QUALIFIED TO

[01:55:03]

>> VERY GOOD TO KNOW. I READ IT, TOO. I WAS VERY PLEASED.

>> CALL IT A NIGHT TO SHINE, AS I THINK IT IS.

>> NIGHT TO SHINE. >> I AM VERY HAPPY YOU ARE PARTICIPATING AND SUPPORTING THAT EFFORT. ANY OTHER COMMENTS

FROM THE BOARD? >> I HAVE SOMETHING REALLY QUICK. I SIGNED UP FOR FIBER. I HEARD I AM NOT THE ONLY ONE, THOUGH. SOUNDS LIKE SOME OF YOU GUYS MIGHT ALREADY HAVE FIBER.

HOPEFULLY FRIDAY WE WILL BE LIVE. I WILL TELL YOU ALL ABOUT IT. YEAH, I AM EXCITED. RIGHT HERE IN DOWNTOWN. WE WILL HAVE

ALL OF THE UTILITIES. >> IT IS THE BEST THING TO

HAPPEN TO OUR CHURCH. >> NICE, EXCELLENT. WE ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO IT. WE ARE ALSO SWITCHING OVER TO VOICE PHONES. I AM EXCITED TO TRY IT OUT. AND GIVE, YOU KNOW, FPUA

MORE SUPPORT. >> TERRIFIC.

>> ALL RIGHT. I AM GOING TO ENDED THE MEETING.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.