Task Order No. 4-26 – Black & Veatch Corporation – Land O'Lakes Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) Expansion Project: GMP Review and Negotiations (UTD26-0296)
Approved minutesApproved as part of the Public Hearing Consent Agenda.
218 in the published record, 4 in the recordings
218 items
Published agendas and the dispositions the approved minutes recorded. Twelve years, whether or not a camera was running.
Approved minutesApproved as part of the Public Hearing Consent Agenda.
Approved minutesApproved the Consent Agenda
Approved minutesApproved the Consent Agenda
Approved minutesApproved the Consent Agenda
Approved minutesApproved the Consent Agenda
Approved minutesApproved the Consent Agenda
Approved minutesApproved as part of the Public Hearing Consent Agenda.
Approved minutesApproved the Consent Agenda
Approved minutesApproved as part of the Public Hearing Consent Agenda.
Approved minutesApproved as part of the Public Hearing Consent Agenda.
Approved minutesApproved of the Consent Agenda
4 moments
Machine transcription of 283 recorded meetings — 9% of decided items have one. Speaker names are inferred from voice and can be wrong.
Girardi to expand the capacity of a wastewater treatment plant is not only figuring out how you're going to treat the water, but then how you're going to dispose of that water. That's probably the bigger or more difficult challenge. the nature of my question is just So that now that we kind of know, hey, wait a minute. as we sit here and approve units and approve units and approve units and approve units, it doesn't go without affecting this department. And we should probably hopefully there's somebody keeping a tally of the number of units that are being approved in total.
Girardi 'Cause I think my understanding is that that Some of these are in fact like drainage Solid waste, wastewater, potable water, that some of these are in fact concurrency standards If that's true, are we no is there any harm to actually labeling them as concurrency standards like we did for schools?
Girardi So Denise, I have a question that you probably can't answer, or probably need Mr. Richard to answer. I'm fine with the change to add reclaimed underwater. But my question is Are you intending to make that prospective only or are you want to spend funds you've already collected For wastewater on water. Yes. So
Girardi I've got a couple of questions. Um I I guess first off I'm I'm a little confused if you can just clarify. I don't Well is there an actual fee adoption going through with this? Because when I look at the revised ordinance, there's no all the fees are struck out.