 Councilmember Clark. Councilmember Morgan. Councilmember Peterson. Vice Mayor Brooks and Mayor Brown. Please join us in the Pledge of Allegiance. All right. Do we have any additions or deletions to the agenda today? There's no changes to the agenda. Okay. Item 3, any additional materials? Staff did distribute additional materials related to tonight's agenda. Today, staff uploaded a updated staff report, updated attachments and presentation for the report. In addition, there were three emails received after publication of the agenda. All right. Thank you. Move on to item 4, oral communications by members of the public. This is the opportunity for members of the public to speak to the council on items that are not on today's agenda. Saying none, we'll bring it back to staff and city council comments. Any comments from staff? Council? No. Council? No. All right. We'll move on to the business of the day. General Government Public Hearings. Item 6A, update on the War for Resiliency and Public Access project. And I'll turn it over to Jessica. Good afternoon, Mayor and council members. The first few slides of the presentation are for a brief overview just for the benefit of anybody who may have tuned in over the past couple of meetings. So next slide, please. So the current War for Resiliency and Public Access project is accumulation of many years of planning and of fund seeking and funding awards to improve their resiliency in the future of the warf. Key project elements are widening the warf, fixing and pilings and deck replacement restroom addition to really ensure the warf's long-time resilience. This was publicly bid last summer and Christmas contracting won the award for this project and started construction in September of 2023. The remaining scope of the resiliency project currently the widening portion of the project has been completed and so has the installation of the restrooms at the base of the warf. Remaining to address is the buildings, their potential demolition, which we'll speak to at length this evening, repairs to the head of the warf, items for the Capitola Warf enhancement project, and then some other minor items related to the scope of the resiliency projects such as a pack replacement, installing of the security gate and improvements to the floating dock. Even with the work we're speaking about this evening, a project completion is still anticipated for fall of 2023. And then after the project's completed, there will be a future visioning for the warf and a full public process to look into the future and see what we want out on our facility. Next slide, please. Also, small recap of the building assessments. These were completed in January and February of this year when we had full access because the broken span had been repaired. The Warf House restaurant is obviously in the most dire situation. It is currently a significant hazard. It has severe structural deficiencies. It's missing that C word wall and myself and the building official and an outside source of all confirmed that this building should be torn down. Next slide. Similarly, the boat and bait shop also has severe structural deficiencies confirmed by an independent engineer and as we spoke about at the last meeting should also be out. Next slide, please. So as a recap, the building demolition process is not just the removal of the building. It starts with content removal. This past weekend, boat and bait was able to go out there and take the vast majority of the contents in that building. We were working with them to receive for them to receive the rest of their contents that they were not able to get this weekend. And then also content removal from the Warf House, which is a little more complicated given the fact that that building is stable, but we are also working with the proper business owner there as well. There has not challenges. There's specifically a bus asbestos and the Warf House building and then also some fuel issues associated with the boat and bait operations that all have to be taken care of in a special manner. Then there's the building demolition itself. A staff is in the process of getting emergency permits to do this work. We anticipate to have them next week. There's really the inability to use your typical heavy equipment just due to weight restrictions on the Warf. So while you would typically get a very large crane and one of those giant bulls that you see on TV to like knock down the building, you can't really do that on the Warf. You don't want things going into the ocean. It really just can't handle that weight. So it really will be reliance on manual labor versus mechanical labor to do the stimulation. And then also the debris management similarly needing to use small vehicles to transport the debris from the buildings back to the base of the Warf into dumpsters. And then those dumpsters being continually turned over because that is a small staging space there with also residences. Next slide please. I think this is the last recap slide. So preserving these buildings really aren't feasible. The extensive repair needed particularly to the Bay Shop would require lifting the building and rebuilding the foundation. It's unlikely that that building would survive that process. And then even if it did, you would need to address all of the non-compliance issues in the current building code. So that associated high cost really makes it financially impractical to rebuild these buildings as they are. Next slide please. So at your meeting last Thursday night, we discussed these items, we discussed the funding gap. We did get a report that the $500,000 in the state budget is coming to us. We have filled out all that paperwork. However, the budget is still in a deficit as we'll go into in following slides. Council directed staff to remove the Portland lieu, which was the small restroom facility to be between the buildings at the head of the Warf for cost savings. And then explore alternative bids. We had reported an estimated cost of about a million dollars for the demolition work demolition being that whole slew of items that we described in a previous slide. Next slide. So the recommended approach for demoing these buildings in tandem with our ongoing project is to obtain these emergency permits to initiate a change order with our onsite contractor who's already mobilized, has equipment and personnel out on the Warf, which is Christman, to execute the demolition of these buildings concurrently with the project so the project can continue moving on. We also do the repairs under the building once the buildings are demoed and the duration of this work to be added to the work that we already have going on is six to eight weeks. And again, yes, repairing the doing Warf repairs under the buildings and then a completion of that demolition, resuming the project and incomplete this fall. Next slide, please. This is the table that was included in your staff report. It's really quite detailed. I will go over this one line by line. Please feel free to ask questions. So there's many parts of this demolition cost that Cushman has to be involved with kind of regardless of who does the demolition work. So the staging and coordination as you know the staging area for the Warf project is really small. It's limited to that parking area that's adjacent to residences. And this would be a significant different operation to what's currently being done. A demo is very different than obviously building a Warf. So it's supporting a different type of construction mechanism. The next line creating access to the demolition operation is really getting all the equipment that you need from your staging area out to the site where the buildings are. So that area has not been completed yet with our warf resiliency project. The decking hasn't been replaced. The structure under it hasn't been addressed. So really, I'm sorry, that's preparation of the demo site. So really getting the site prepared immediately there so it is safe and able to hold the load of everything you need to do the demo is preparation. The building site creating access is also spreading load across the whole span of the warf. So to put out runners to get out to the site. So all of that would be something that Cushman would need to prepare. Under this quote, the Bateshop demolition would be completed by Cushman contracting. And then the hazard abatement so the asbestos in the Warf house and then the demolition of the Warf house would be done by a separate contractor. This allows both of the buildings to be addressed at one time and really reduces the amount of time that has to be extended to the end of this project. And then other costs associated with the demolition is coordination to continue the resiliency project. So obviously there are going to be a lot more people out there and more deliveries to schedule trash to schedule more coordination in general. Let's see what that last line says. And then mobile is the mobilization costs so basically getting that different equipment different labor different people to do that those different actions. The direct costs for Cushman to do the demo is approximately $660,000. Next slide please. That summarizes a little bit easier to see here. So it's really the categories or site preparation, building demolition project coordination because the warf project is still going on and then mobilization to do this additional work. Next slide please. In adding to the current contract with Cushman, they are entitled to markup costs. This is very clearly part of the contract and part of any contract that's under the Caltrans specifications, which this one is. So the 2015 and 15% there are under Caltrans specs under our current contract. Those are really non-negotiable figures. And then you have the increase of their bond and insurance because this is extra work that wasn't considered as part of their prime contract. So the total change order for the demo is $805,000, which is approximately $200,000 less than we had spoke about on Thursday. Next slide please. So the alternative approach we explored was having another contract do all of the demo versus Cushman doing one and the contractor doing one. So that would be Cushman still doing that preparation site work, but then Cushman would stop doing work while the demolition was going on. Cushman would be entitled to be paid for that holding time and the estimated duration of this based on the quote that we received from Coastwide Environmental is two to three months. Cushman would then after the demolition is complete and that contractor would demobilize, Cushman would come and do the repairs underneath the structure where the structures once were, and then after that resume the resiliency project. Next slide. So the direct cost for this, this was also in the staff report, it's the same first items or the same site prep that we had discussed before. Then you have the bait shop demolition hazard abatement in the wharf house demolition. And those are quotes from again Coastwide Environmental. And then the demobilization costs for Cushman, which are related to the work that they would be doing for total direct cost of about $480,000. Next slide please. So this is the site preparation summary, building demolition, mobilization. Next slide. And then there's the markup on the work that Cushman would do so it was not on the contractor work but on that prep work Cushman would do there's that same markup, same bond, same insurance. The real difference here are a significant difference here is the project delay cost based on the quote that we received and also just talking with Cushman contracting the project delay is estimated to 4060 working days, $680,000 represents a 40 working delay. And so the total there is $1.25 million to engage in a separate contractor. Next slide. Lastly, another alternative approach would be to defer demolition out of the buildings until the end of the resiliency project. That has multiple steps that were also included in the staff report. I'm also doing immediate safety measures because we cannot leave the wharf house the way it is right now. And then really what it comes down to is the resiliency project wouldn't be completed to its current scope because you just couldn't get close enough to the wharf house building to complete the project. Do you mind going back? Thank you. Cushman would complete their amended scope and then we'd have to come back with new engineer plans and permits, which would be a significant lift. We would have to reengage our engineers, we would have to start over with the regulatory agencies, and they all have different conditions of when work can be completed. So even if we were ready to turn this around for bid and say two to three months, we would have to wait till the regulatory agencies permitting windows. Then we would rebid the project and then obviously mobilize a new contractor to complete the project. Next slide. So really what this equates to is it would be approximately a year for this project to be finished. Obviously the cost with repermitting and engineering the project and with a new contractor. And then really a reduced economy is a scale because obviously right now Cushman is driving many piles or replacing all of the decking. This alternative project would be a much smaller project so cost per unit would increase. And then cost escalation just because anytime you push out a project it is always more. Next slide. So the proposed contract change order for Cushman contracting comes out to about $1.5 million. So that includes the building demolition, the work under the buildings, the repair to the head of the wharf from this most current storm damage. It includes the credit for the Portman loo, and then also includes some items for the capital or from improvement project construction, mostly furniture, ordering assembly storage and having this all be accumulate at the end of the project at one time. So that would be for total contract amount of about $9.8 million. The initial estimate for this whole project prior to any of the second storm damage is happening and prior to knowing that we have to take out these buildings was $8.9 million. So we're in about 10% of that initial estimate, which is really, it's amazing to be completely honest considering how much the scope is expanded to still be within 10% of the initial estimate. Next slide. The project budget includes a lot of funding from a lot of interested partners so from the state and from the federal government sponsored by Senator Laird and Congressman Panetta, measure F approved by the voters, insurance and FEMA is still pending and then of course the C-WAP fund raising. So if you consider all of our project funding of 8.9 and then our current contract with Cushman, including their previous change orders and this new change order, we have a project deficit of about $369,000. So this is just a side by side of the demolition options. I thought it might be a little easier to discuss when you have the numbers right next to each other. As you can see, the site preparation numbers are exactly the same. The building demolition numbers are the combined Cushman and a contractor versus just using a contractor. Obviously, there's no project coordination if the resiliency project isn't going on in the alternative one. Mobilization again is based off of Cushman's costs and then you have the markup, sponsor insurance and then for the second alternative where Cushman has ceased work, you have the project delay costs. Next slide, please. So next step, assuming that we demo these buildings, the anticipated project completion is in fall 2023 and then we start off a new process engaging the public on the visioning and interest to future development for the wharf as a whole. The public can receive information on that ongoing effort by sending up on our city website. If you go on the next slide, you go to our main page, scroll all the way to the end. There's a place for email subscriptions and you click on that, you get the next page and there is a specific line for capital wharf outreach. So that is our dedicated place to get on that mailing list. Next slide, please. Also, our clerk's team also does a very good job of putting all of this on our social media pages. So that is also somewhere to find that information as well. So with that, this is the recommendation included in the staff report and I am prepared to answer any questions we have. Thank you. Questions. We'll start at the send. Great job on getting those numbers down. That's awesome. I'm glad to see that. But I would like to go back to the Astrid you had on there about the 313,000 for Sea Whip with Cushman. So for I understand that the Planning Commission is still going to vote on that. Correct. So that is March 6 or 7, whatever that Thursday is, and they will be approving the final design for that project. Yes. So that is not to exceed that amount, but we don't have a bid or an estimate on that right now, do we? So this is an estimate on the project as will be presented to the Planning Commission. If they change it significantly, there is a potential that that number changes, yes. But this number as proposed is not to exceed. I think one time we saw that Sea Whip had done a calculation that was quite a bit lower than that. Anybody want to call that? So this number, and I'm sorry I don't have the breakdown for you, is the cost that we put when I believe it was our December meeting that you all allocated another $250,000 to that project and it had all the breakdown of all the different components. And so this is all the furniture components plus the estimated installation cost at that time. And that number is a summation of those numbers from December. That's all I have for now. Thank you. Well, piggybacking off on that. I think we had talked about last meeting, potentially not using Cushman for some of the installation, but do we decide that that like it would just be more work for us if we were going to do that like financially or. That is still staff's recommendation. There is definitely a potential to take that package it up and bid it with a different contractor. I will say that will make it more difficult to have it both of those projects and at the same time. Right. Okay. Right. I just want to clarify that. Thank you. I just want to be clear that the Sea Whip funding is has nothing to do with the funds that we're allocating for this. Additional project, right? Sea Whip has been allocated. There's fish up designs and lights and benches and all of that. So what we're seeing here has even though you're including the budgets just for presentation. We're not utilizing any of those funds for this additional change order. We're not using any of those dollars. They still get their $250,000 allocated and it is what it is, but it has nothing to do with. It's part of that project budget. Right. Yes. Okay. I just want to be clear about that. And so when I look at the $804,000 option one and then the $1.2 million option two option three alternative three is just an unknown of extreme extremely expensive option. We just couldn't put a number on it. Is that accurate to assume that it would be really difficult to give you a straight face number for that right now. But I can assure you that it will be significantly more expensive than completing the project now. Got it. And then can you just because I'm I don't know anything about markups and you you've mentioned briefly that it's a non-negotiable. Can you just give me a brief definition of what markups are and why we can't. I'm all about negotiations. So I like. Sure. Having some flexibility here. And if there's an opportunity or some begging and pleading that we can do to advocate for ourselves. Sure. So, Julie, if you could go to like slide 10, that would be helpful. So for each of these items, the price per item is made up of different pieces. So one would be labor cost one would be equipment cost and the other one is subcontractor cost. There's also at times materials cost, but that's not something that's being proposed here. So under the Caltrans 2018 standards section 8.105 you're allowed you're allowed and that is reference is part of our contract by reference. You're allowed to have markups for when you do additional work. And so the labor markup is. I'm sorry, 20% the materials is 15% materials and equipment is 15% and then the scope of contractors also 15%. And the reason that's in the code it is allows for profit basically for the contractor but that's something right that's in the contract by reference, not really negotiable at this point. And then I just want to confirm that we actually did receive a bid from Cushman 100% confirming that those markups are accurate and the $804,000 is on point. Is that true? Yeah, so we actually have the bid or the bid in place. Okay. And then my second question is just more looking forward because I know that's really important to the community. We know that these buildings need to be torn down. There's no such thing as a bandaid on either one of these buildings as an option. Moving forward, there was a couple sentences you had on there of involving the community in deciding what to be next. Are we anticipating that and you said fall of 2023 but I know you're talking about 2024 because that would be amazing that we had this earlier but are we anticipating starting those conversations earlier than the ribbon cutting ceremony of fall 2024 and kick starting that or are we going to wait until after. So we're going to be talking about the council's goals for this next year coming up I think it's in two weeks from today. That's kind of the opportunity for the council to weigh in on sort of what the priority is and where where that process will fit. I think we've been thinking that the project that the community development department would leave. So I think it's going to be kind of up to council discretion about sort of where that project is going to fit in the overall priorities for community development. And then just for clarity sake we're over budget by $300,000 or so on the project. Can you just tell me a little bit about the true impact of that on our overall city budget and, you know, was this something we I mean we had anticipated the project being more, but we did not anticipate to horrible storms. So can you just touch on that and, and I know we'll get into in the goals but I just know there's a lot of folks listening here about what this kind of how this impacts. Sure, overall budget. So as the council will recall, prior to last meeting we had about $2 million in fund balance that was great up of 500 K and sort of the buffer on balance buffer that we've used in the past, a little bit less than a million The council set aside for a future infrastructure project, and then I think some additional cash that was available for us. We adjusted the budget this last week and took needed to adjust the budget down by about 500 K. So it took our sort of fund balance position down to about $1.5 million. With this transfer, it's going to approximately take our fund balance position down to I think around $1.2 million. That's, that's fund balance, the city's reserves, both its emergency contingency reserves remain 100% funded. The fund balance is the available cash that we have to use on any individual basis for an individual project. It does. I think what would be extra helpful is to talk about how that 1.2 million fund balance is in reference to measure F. A lot of our, our community anticipated funds from the measure F to go to the wharf. Again, not anticipating two storms. We have our wonderful wharf project happening. This is above and beyond of beyond that scope originally. So does that 1.2 million fund balance include measure F dollars. Just, yeah, thanks. So no, the 1.2 million dollar fund balance does not include measure F all measure F has been allocated to projects like the jetty, the wharf. I think the beach loader, the flu. To all of the measure F revenue that we've received during the pandemic year we did allocate that year's revenue to public safety, but every other year the money has come in and gone directly into those projects. So the allocation that we're requesting this evening would be general fund dollars. Right. Okay. And I'm just trying to think of the right words when we originally started the wharf project we had. Like the work we're going to do in step one and then step two. And what did we call that? That was phase phases. So we were in phase one utilizing and we're currently in phase one of the wharf rebuild. And no, that's not accurate. Well, we kind of have been calling it phase one, but if you recall Steve brought forward a pre phase that we did before the storms remember we read the steel pilings at the end of the war back I think in winter 2019. Okay, so in 2019 and pre phase we were allocating measure F dollars in phase one, we've been allocating measure F dollars, and we obviously aren't into the next fiscal year yet to utilize new measure F dollars. But our budget meeting that's going to be happening in a few weeks to talk about that with a $1.2 million imbalance. Okay, those are all my questions. Thank you. Yeah, I just had a question about the FEMA reimbursements, like how much are we expecting or is there a timeline for that or any idea. Yeah, what we can expect. So FEMA is an ongoing process, I will say they balance it against, excuse me, your insurance payouts. So you don't, you don't double dip. I will also say that our past storms here in December of 2023 have a statewide emergency. So not a federal emergency but a statewide emergency associated with it and we have a applicants briefing for that at the end of next week so there's also potentially funding there for specific damages from this past winter. It takes a very long time to get money from FEMA. It takes a little less time to get money from the state from emergency purposes. So I wouldn't count on having money in hand from for that for probably at least another year. A rough estimate of how much we can expect in approximately year or two. We fully reimbursed our costs, which they may or may not. I would say a maximum of about $850,000 and probably at least 600. But that that's kind of based on still being in the middle of the process. So when FEMA comes in will actually be under budget by around 300. I think that that's positive. I mean, it's, it's possible. I mean, I don't know if you just saw the county just had to make an announcement that a lot of the COVID funding was denied from FEMA. So there can be twists and turns in the FEMA reimbursement process and this as Director Khan said, this most recent disaster in December wasn't declared a FEMA disaster. So there's a lot of different nuances to it, but we do have some great allies in FEMA who've been supporting the city. And, you know, I think if we can work well with them that there is definitely a chance for a significant reimbursement here. Thank you. Thank you. So I have just a couple questions. So first it's I am happy to see that between Thursday when our overall projected project deficit was $1.2 million and now it's 369,000 that's phenomenal. I know I'm seeing that the demolition cost themselves going from about a million to 805,000 I see that that 200,000 differences from our removal of the Portland glue. But the overall bid change went from 1.9 to 1.5 and that's a $400,000 difference. So where the other 200,000 did you just find some cost savings there or So the 200,000 is from the Portland blue referenced and then the placeholder for the demo at the last council meeting was a million dollars. We got a more refined bid and kind of a more refined scope. And so now that is projected 805. Great. Great. Okay. And then just to go to the question of council member Clark brought up so the $313,000 change order for the C web things that will go to the planning commission. And so if we if we approve that today and not to exceed 313,000 if it goes to the planning commission and they somehow find some cost savings. It's the answer won't be council already said we could spend 313 right and then if it somehow becomes more would need to come back to us. Okay. So this is more of an authorization of up to how much you can spend it's not an approval of the bid change itself right now. It's an approval. It's an authorization for you to make a bid change of up to 313,000. But the planning commission still needs to look at that first based on the outcomes of the planning commission meeting. Okay. So as long as it's 313 or under there's no difference between us approving this now and it going to the planning commission or going to the planning commission and then us approving it it's the same outcome. Okay. What does the next month look like so I know we're kind of looking at timelines and six to eight weeks for this and two to three months for that but just looking at a linear timeline from here to, let's say April 1, the next month. When are people going to start seeing buildings come down if we approve this today. So the intent would be to be out there on March 11. So the abatement of the wharf house would have to be short up and abated so that would be the first step of that and then if we go with the staff recommendation they would both be coming down at the same time so the first people would probably be the vote made. And that would be on March 11 or that would be if March 11 is the abatement how long does that take I'm just trying to get a sense of when we might want to warn people. It's going to be visually jarring, I think, and I'm just trying to get an idea of when we might want to let people know to expect that. And if we don't have that answer now that's fine but if at some point we could get some kind of timeline of when we can expect that people are actually going to start seeing buildings come down. So that would definitely parade that. Thank you. Okay yeah and then yeah when we can expect to see that start and then when we might expect to see it done. No more buildings there on the on the skyline. Okay I think those are my questions any additional questions from Council. Sounds off of that a little bit because you're absolutely point on or spot on about the the buildings coming down and are we going to have our story. Deborah, I was like looking I was pulling all of your thoughts there Deborah go out and take photos do we have anything ceremonial in place or something that we can get some historical footage on on that for museum and such. So we have incredibly good documentation right now the actual building interiors and the current current situation it's like we have. You can do Google view move through the building photos. I think we can tap into Deborah and probably during the demo process photo documentation is probably. And maybe something from the business owners if they want to donate anything to the city or if we can get some photos I know that they've been out there cleaning things up. I'm just thinking for documentation and I don't know if there's anything the city can do in terms of ceremonial kind of goodbye to the buildings it makes me really. But if there's anything by March 11 that we can all do to be there close by to be there with the community. So just food for thought and we can talk to the mayor about it offline. Golden crowbars. What you're thinking. Yeah, exactly. Yeah, something like that. Yeah, I'd love to be out there with with folks so. All right. With that we'll bring this item out to public comments. If anyone has any comments on this item please feel free to step up to the podium and state your name if you'd like it recorded in the minutes. Seeing none. All right, we will bring this back to council for discussion. Yeah, I have some comments but I'll save them for the end. Any comments. Yeah, I'd like to just say how good it was to see the community involvement. A lot of great ideas came with people in their emails. We talked about a lot of things but really it's just a community thing that we were able to bring it all together and hopefully we can get to that next point and then get the work built back better. And then hopefully we can get our buildings are the restaurants in the bait and boat. That's what I would love to see and I'm glad we're moving forward. Yeah, I think that in a way we've sort of entered a good position to be able to get underneath those buildings that we wouldn't necessarily have been dealing with to strengthen things up for the wharf. And after all this is what this project is about it's about the wharf and so I'm happy to see that we can do some steps and not lose a ton of time on the project. And that's important to a lot of people as well. So yeah, I definitely want to echo what Joe said. Thank you for the community. Thank you for public works for doing all this work that I know it's been weighing heavy on everybody so I look forward to what we can look forward to. Thanks. I just want to say thanks for taking the time to make sure that we, you know, did this process right with the assessment and the bids and unfortunate that these buildings have to come down but I'm looking forward to the visioning process and getting more businesses back on the wharf. And hopefully it will be a little more resilient to future storms. And I would just add that there's something special about what we see in the room this evening so I know folks can't see behind us but our entire staff is here who have worked endlessly and will have to continue to work really hard because this project is far from completion, not far. The light is at the end of the tunnel but so I just really want to say thank you and we don't get to see all of you late at night on a regular council meeting time so thank you for for being here and thank you for being part of this journey with our community. During these really really hard times so we thought January 20. What was that first storm 22. I'm getting my years mixed up that's how bad it is. This has been a rough or for all of us so I know it's hard for the community. And yeah, so. And thank you Jessica your expertise shines brightly through and your leadership really means a lot so thank you and thank you to our city manager. So the recommendation this afternoon, unless there's a record is to approach change order five to public works agreement with Cushman contracting for work project and an amount not to exceed a lot of money 1.5 million dollars and adopt a resolution amending the 2324 adopted budget to allocate an amount not to exceed 369 for additional project expenditures. Has anything changed since that since our conversation. So right. We're good with the C web stuff. Okay, so I'll go ahead and make a motion to adopt staff's recommendation this afternoon. Second. All right, we have a motion to second for the sake of discussion. Any further comments on this one. Okay, I just want to make a couple really quick comments. As mentioned, thank you all for the community involvement. I know our hearts all kind of have collectively sunk in hearing that we were going to be losing these buildings. And now we're we're going to move forward in a process together and what comes next. I want to thank you to our staff and to Jessica. We asked you for seconds of second opinions. You offered them. We asked you for additional bid. You provided them. We needed breakdowns and you gave an incredible amount of detail. And I think it's really been beneficial for me personally to have all of this information to work with. And I think it's also a testament to your experience and your professionalism that every step of the way. The second opinions confirmed what you provided to us. And so I'm just grateful for you going above and beyond to give us that information to make these kind of really tough decisions. I'm happy to see that the cost savings that we're looking at today has brought the change order down well below 15% to the kind of 10%. That is also I'm really glad to see that. I know that there's still some uneasiness about what comes next. The, you know, this is one of the first steps. I've been in conversations with the governor's administration about seeking funds for interim options and long-term process and procedure. We're hopeful that this will be of benefit to us as we move forward in this process. In the meantime, I think we have a motion and a second. All right. We have a motion and a second all in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed. Any abstentions. Motion carries unanimously. All right. Thank you everyone. That brings us to item seven, which is our adjournment. We'll adjourn to our next special city council meeting on March 6th at 6pm until then take care of yourselves. Take care of each other. Have a good one.