 Into the future, we are seeking professional services for engineering design. As you can see here, the project takes place throughout the entire treatment plant. We're replacing a number of electrical facilities. You can see that there's 5 load centers. There's a switch gear and 1 and 2 if I may. There's a substation right here. Where there's 2, 15 kilovolt overhead feeders that go up and around. And here, and 2, and those will be undergrounded as part of this design. I'll talk about a little bit more. It's also going through California tiger salamander habitat. I'll talk about that more as well. There's also a new switch gear part of the design in the upper right hand corner right here, which is 3. That will provide additional redundancy to the system. In the case of a power outage or work needs to be done in the plant, they can. Provides more opportunities to take certain sets of equipment offline. So they can do maintenance work or repair work as needed. It's also additional power supplied to the plant by the code generation facility. Microgrid batteries and emergency generators. All loads can be made operational and re-energized. By disconnecting the failed power source, closing the circuit breaker at the load centers. You can see this was taken from the again, a treatment plant. Electrical power master plan and the assets in red are identified as the highest probability of failure. Going down to a medium probability of failure in green and the yellow, all the assets we're going to replace as part of this project are in the red or the green. As you can see, all the load centers versus LC, East LC, the metal lane LC, North LC, South LC, West LC, all red. And look at M1 and M2, high and medium probability of failure. Okay, here we are again. There is another graphic of the slide we just looked at. There's a picture of the poles. They're leaning. They need to be replaced and have an overhead pole. They also need to be maintained by specialized crews. They need to be clean and so forth. It's their vulnerable to weather or natural hazards. So by placing the, by undergrounding the overhead feeder lines, that addresses those issues. Let's see what else in there. So yeah, so the California Tiger Salamander's presence in there, because we'll be doing ground-distributing activities that will trigger an initial study mitigated negative deck. So that's going to get going right away in parallel to the design so we can get going. Also, we anticipate what we know as part of the permitting process. When they, when we go, they're going to require salamander fencing around that perimeter. And what that does is the salam tiger salamanders, they live in and go for burrows and then the ground. And then under heavy rains, they come out and they seek, you know, drier areas. And they'll go along the fence and they will find a way to get out and it's a one-way gate. So it reduces in its incidental takes during constructions. It's required at least one rainy season, sometimes two. So this will also be done in conjunction towards the end of the design. So we don't have any, won't experience any delays during construction during the permitting. We'll already have this part of it taken care of. So like, what's a load center? I got lots of pictures. This is the west load center. There's a lot of electrical components inside that cabinetry. And you'll see on the next slide kind of what's inside. I'm not going to go into too depth in depth, but basically it's all electrical equipment needed to run the plan on a daily basis. It's very intricate. There's the north load center. Meadow Lane road, load center, south load center. This is a switch gear. We talked about M1 and M2 getting replaced. We're adding M3. This is an example of the switch gear. You've heard lots about potholing and so forth throughout your time here. So what we plan to do is a comprehensive pothole plan because unfortunately much of what's in the ground and we're doing a treatment plan, we just don't know. We discover during potholing. So that's not good enough. We don't want to run into delays during construction. So we're going to, we develop a comprehensive pothole plan and then carry out the potholing operation based on that plan and then 3D model it so that we can design the ducting. There's lots of new ducting going through there in places where we're less likely to encounter underground facilities because the potholes only as good as your pothole. But the more we have, we have, especially with a 3D model, that's the best chance we have to minimize conflicts during construction. Part of what we do when we, we submit a request for proposals is we ask, are there any additional items that you think might be useful to the project? Things that maybe something we didn't think about that we could add it to the benefit and there was 2 things that were added. One was a pump station, a standby power study to look at the capacity of the existing standby power and how it relates to the new equipment that we're putting in, especially that new switch gear and such to make sure that we have adequate backup power in the event of a power loss. Also, look at staffing needs to for maintenance for this upgraded system so it will last long into the future. Well, the March move to April, but that's okay. So I'll be, I'll be taking an item. Hopefully, if you guys didn't go as well today, we'll be going for approval of the contract to the board in April. And then as you can see, the environmental will start at the same as the design in parallel in the procurement. So, electrical equipment has very long lead times. I mean, we're finding out on a lot of our projects. Unfortunately, some of the items like transformers, these large strands transformers can take up to 3 years or more. Just the basic, it's about 500 days for basic controller cabinets and so forth. So, to help get this project going as fast as possible. We figured we'd start the procurement at the 75% design level. We had, we had enough information to solicit this. Start that process. Complete the design move forward with construction, which you see, we would, we would be going for consideration of award in March of 2026. And then start construction in April and in December, 2028. So you'll see the procurement starting in 2024 and constructions. We're going to start in 2026. So, the procurement is not going to be done until 2028, but we're starting in 2026. And that the plan is to do what we can now come up with an organized schedule that's that lays out the critical past the work so we can get started on some of those earlier items and save the long lead items like those large transformers, closer to December. 2028. So I detailed out Hazen and Sawyer's proposal. $2.3 million with the contingency 2.5 million. You can see it's all broken down there for you in individual costs. So what does that mean? Is that good? Is that bad? Is that high? Here's some metrics for you to consider. So when you're looking at the design as a percent of the construction costs. $24 million includes the procurement. That's based on 2026 construction costs. And it's important to know that the last two years we're seeing the industry seeing 15 to 20% inflation rates per year the last two years. So I'm hoping that that stops, but that's 2026. So if it goes beyond that, those numbers may change. So you can see it. It's right in line with the industry standards. It's what we would expect to see. So we decided to go with the PSA process because it also gets the MPSA consultants as well. But it's such a large project that we wanted to go out and reach out to everybody out there to try to get as many business as we can. So we advertised it to everybody includes MPSA, which has a lot of specific expertise. Do the familiarity working on our projects. So we released the proposal of the RFP in September of 2023. And we advertise it to everybody and I downloaded the information and it went to 552 vendors. We advertise for seven weeks, which is twice as long as we normally do three and a half. We gave seven weeks. And in the end, we received two proposals. There's our selection, our main selection criteria right there. Main thing is a detailed understanding of the project enough that we know that they understand what's needed to be done what's expected. That their costs are in line with what we expect and that they have qualified staff working on the project. So we had six reviewers. We had a pretty diverse deputy director to associates tech three, and I wanted some people from the plant they're going to be working on it so we got the supervising electrical technician and a wastewater main and super. They all scored Hazen and Sawyer as the top pick. And the reason is they they had strong qualifications detailed understanding of the project. They understood what needed to be done. They laid it all out. They broke all their costs down in a way that we can analyze it. And overall, is a very strong proposal. There was a not to exceed the 2.55 million dollars, which is consistent with what we were expecting. I was recommended by the public works department and Santa Rosa water that the contract review subcommittee recommend the board of public utilities. It approved a professional services agreement with Hazen and Sawyer to provide engineering design services in a treatment plant electrical infrastructure project. That concludes my. My PowerPoint and I'm here to answer any questions that you may have. Thank you presentation. I am. So small question. In the presentation you mentioned, one of the considerations is that because of the life cycle, the plants and the life cycle project. There was a lot of proprietary elements that were built in initially. As we look at a project of this size and the substantial is a priority when we look to new major production projects to try and reframe from integrating new proprietary pieces as much as possible. So that was one of the reasons why we were going with the procurement method is because we could make sure that the components would work well together that it's from a single supplier. If you go out into construction, we may may meet the specifications, but it could be that as far as compatibility and so forth. It's always better if you have it all the equipment that's integrated design that's specifically designed to work together. So we feel like there's no perfect solution but we feel like the procurement method just gives us the best chance of accomplishing that that goal. I like that there's a good amount of redundancy built in. I really really like the under the choice of to be undergrounding this part of the project. I think the CTS mitigation of the CTS. I'm curious about the contingency. It's just for my own education I see that in different projects, there's often a different percentage for contingency and some higher than on this one. So I just curious about why 10% and not 15% for example. Well, yeah, I kind of tossed it back and forth, but I figured you look at the overall value of the contract on a smaller project or some lower design costs. That leaves you less money. So the contingency is enough to keep the design going if we run into challenges where we need to reevaluate the designer for any other reasons with permitting and so forth. And we feel like the project funding needs to be increased and you know we'd rather come back to the board and explain that and then ask for that money and this this contingency will help us continue the project forward maybe maybe accomplish the goal and or at least get us going where we could keep the project going so you kind of yeah it has to do with a lot with the uncertainty and the overall price of the contract you know so there's there's a large design fee here. So we thought 10% was was enough. And then just finding they appreciate the efforts are made on the RFP process. I know that fewer bids have been an ongoing issue not only for the city of Santa Rosa but lots of jurisdictions were always curious about why, for example, do you get a sense of the reason for 30 something that maybe didn't respond. I think that the responses that that would response that you got and the contract proposal is in front of the city. I agree is a is a is a well thought out projects so it's not any comments on the front of the floor as but curious if you've got any sense to perhaps why those are very. I think there's such a large project and the amount of resources that the firm would have to dedicate to this and this time. The electrical firms I think are pretty busy. They're working on multiple projects so they would have to assign a pretty large staff to take on this challenge. And I just don't think there's that many big firms out there they want to assign resources for multiple years to one project. And I think that's my, that's my opinion. Appreciate the new diligence on believing the RFP window open for longer. And that being a priority for the department. So, that's all I got. Along the same line so there's the two responses, the second response significantly higher or was it an issue of their qualifications. It was significantly lower. It did not reflect a detailed understanding of the project it was pretty obvious and what was provided. So the second proposal we got was from Lee and row. And it was 1,017,000. So it was quite a bit lower. I have a long list of details if you'd like me to go in. I appreciate, you know, wanting to try and get the best bang for your buck, but if they're not qualified and it's not that they're not, it's not that they're not going to be sufficient to handle the problem. And then my other question just so I understand the tiger sound. So you're going to construct some sort of a fence that during the next couple of wet seasons will allow those tiger sound energy to get out of that particular area. Yes. So the goal is by the time you're ready to break ground, there's no evidence of tire salamanders in the area where we're going to be excited. No, that's not exactly so that we're trying to. It's a permit requirement and a best practice to try and mitigate against any incidental takes which are accidentally killing one of these salamanders so. You know, part of the mitigation process, we will mitigate for the take of the salamanders financially. But we want to make sure in the permitting ages want to make sure that we don't just go in there and okay we have mitigation now let's just go grade the whole thing. If there's an opportunity to save these salamanders by putting this fencing up in advance. It's also a permit requirement, then we can minimize the amount of take but we're not. We're not doesn't mean all the salamanders are going to go out through that sense. Okay, thank you that. Those are all the questions I have. So, I have to move the contract. You mentioned the board of facilities and free of professional services agreement with his and soaring to provide engineering design services for them. So we have a motion and a second this time a little bit of public comments on 3.1 during the room, please move to the microphone. I don't know what I'm going to call with this. 400 benefit chair government. And that houses unanimously before the last. Very good that concludes our meeting. Thank you all. Thank you very much.