STARTING WITH OUR CHAIRMAN, WILLIAM CAPOTE.
[00:00:02]
MOST OF THEM ARE IN THE HOUSE TONIGHT.[*This meeting was joined in progress.*]
COMMISSIONERS PHIL MOORE, KAMARAJ, JEFF MCCLEOD, GORDON CHANDLER, DAVID MYERS, RANDALL OLSZEWSKI, DAVID JONES AND KENDALL GORDON.[CALL TO ORDER]
I ALSO WANT TO REMIND THE PUBLIC THAT CITY COUNCIL WILL DECIDE ON WHETHER THESE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS GET PUT ON THE BALLOT.IT'S NOT CHANGING THE CITY CHARTER AT THIS POINT.
COMPENSATION. WE WE PROPOSE INCREASING THE COMPENSATION FOR THE MAYOR FROM $0.20 PER CAPITA, WHICH IS WHAT IT IS RIGHT NOW TO $0.25 PER CAPITA.
AND THE SALARY FOR THE OFFICE OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM $0.10 PER CAPITA TO $0.20 PER CAPITA.
A REASON FOR THIS WAS THAT WE LOOKED AT A LOT OF OTHER CITIES, MOSTLY CITIES OF SIMILAR SIZE, AND FOUND THAT THAT OUR COUNCIL ESSENTIALLY WAS UNDERPAID. WE ALSO FELT THAT WE KNOW THAT THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT YOU HAVE TO DEVOTE TO THIS WORK, IT'S NOT A PART TIME JOB.
ON THE OTHER HAND, YOU KNOW, WE CAN'T PAY YOU LIKE IT'S A FULL TIME JOB, BUT WE UNDERSTAND THAT YOU HAVE TO TAKE SO MUCH TIME AWAY FROM YOUR REGULAR JOBS THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO MAY OTHERWISE BE HIGHLY QUALIFIED WOULD BE WILLING TO SERVE ON CITY COUNCIL, SIMPLY CAN'T AFFORD TO.
SO THAT WAS THE REASONING BEHIND THIS.
CURRENTLY, THESE THE SECTION S.E.
SAYS NO FORMER ELECTED CITY OFFICIAL NOR ANY RELATIVE SHALL HOLD ANY COMPENSATED APPOINT OF OFFICE.
AND ITEM B REFERS TO THE SAME THING AT DESCRIBING THE TERM RELATIVE.
WE ADDED, INSTEAD OF FORMER ELECTED CITY OFFICIALS, WE ADDED CURRENT TO BOTH THOSE DEFINITIONS.
NUMBER THREE, AGAIN, ARTICLE THREE, LEGISLATIVE SECTION 3.06 VACANCIES.
WE LOOKED AT AGAIN A NUMBER OF OTHER CITIES AND WE CAME UP WITH THE WE ELIMINATED THE IT'S ONE OF VACANCY OCCURS ON CITY COUNCIL AS A RESULT OF DEATH, RESIGNATION, ILLNESS, DISABILITY, WRITTEN COURT ORDER OR FORFEITURE OF OFFICE OR OTHER LAWFUL WRITTEN ORDER OR ACTIONS.
THE PRIOR THE PRIOR TERM WAS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROCEDURES DESCRIBED BY ORDINANCE WE ADDED BY APPOINTMENT OF THE MAJORITY OF THE REMAINING MEMBERS WITHIN 60 DAYS.
A SPECIAL ELECTION TO FILL THE VACANCY SHALL BE CALLED.
ALSO ARTICLE THREE, LEGISLATIVE SECTION 3.8 PROCEDURES.
AND WE ADDED BEGINNING IN JANUARY 2023, THE COUNCIL SHALL HAVE REGULAR COUNCIL MEETINGS AT LEAST TWICE EACH MONTH EXCEPT FOR THE MONTH OF JUNE. WE ADDED THIS IN TO BE TO TO TO COORDINATE WITH WHAT THE COUNTY COMMISSION DOES.
THE COUNTY COMMISSION DOES GIVE ONE MONTH SABBATICAL FOR COUNTY COMMISSION MEETINGS, AND THE REASONING FOR IT IS TO ALLOW YOU GUYS TO GO ON VACATION FOR YOUR FAMILY AND ALSO TO GIVE CITY STAFF A BREAK FROM HAVING TO PREPARE FOR AT LEAST TWO CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS A MONTH.
THEY CAN DO THEIR WORK BETTER.
YOU CAN GO ON VACATIONS WITH YOUR FAMILY, COME BACK REFRESHED AND TAKE THAT ONE MONTH SABBATICAL.
[00:05:03]
ARE A NUMBER OF FIVE ARTICLE THREE LEGISLATIVE SESSION 3.09 PETITIONS TO AMEND THE CITY CHARTER OR TO ADOPT OR REPEAL ORDINANCES.THEN IT WENT ON TO SAY THAT PETITIONS TO PROPOSE OR REPEAL ORDINANCES MUST BE SIGNED BY AT LEAST 5%.
WE ADDED HIS OR HER TO REFLECT OUR CURRENT AND POSSIBLY FUTURE SITUATION.
ARTICLE FIVE QUALIFICATIONS AND ELECTIONS SECTION 504 ELECTIONS.
IN THE EVENT OF A TIE VOTE, IN A SPECIAL REGULAR ELECTION IN WHICH TWO OR MORE CANDIDATES ARE SEEKING THE SAME DESIGNATED SEAT ON THE COUNCIL OR RUNOFF ELECTION WILL ONLY BE HELD.
IF BREAKING THE TIE WOULD DETERMINE SUCCESSFUL CANDIDATE.
WE REMOVED THE IF BREAKING THE THE TIE WOULD DETERMINE THE SUCCESSFUL CANDIDATE TO SIMPLY THE RUNOFF ELECTION WILL BE HELD TO DETERMINE THE SUCCESSFUL CANDIDATE.
ESSENTIALLY, IT SAYS THAT A LOT FEWER WORDS AND MAKES A LITTLE CLEARER.
AND NUMBER EIGHT, THE FINAL PROPOSAL IS UNDER ARTICLE SIX, TAXES AND FEES, SECTION 601 TAXES.
WE REMOVED ITEMS B, C, D AND E, WHICH REFERS TO THE 3% CAP LIMITATION ON THE BUDGET.
WE HAD A PRESENTATION FROM STANTEC, OUR OUTSIDE CONSULTANTS AS WELL AS OUR OUR BUDGET ADMINISTRATOR, ANGELICA COLLINS, WHO MADE A GREAT PRESENTATION.
AND THEY THEY DEMONSTRATED THE EFFECT THAT THE 3% CAP HAS ON OUR BUDGET AND PARTICULARLY ALSO ON OUR, OUR, OUR, YOU KNOW, SET ASIDES FOR, FOR EMERGENCIES, THIS TYPE OF THING.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT, FRANKLY, VERY FEW MUNICIPALITIES HAVE.
AGAIN, WE JUST DIDN'T FEEL THAT IT WOULD MAKE SENSE TO PUT A LIMITATION ON ON THE CITY.
AND YOU HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO THE VOTERS ANYWAY.
IT'S CALLED THE SAVE OUR HOMES, AND IT LIMITS IT TO 3%.
THAT IS THE EIGHT PROPOSED AMENDMENTS.
I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE ABOUT ANY SPECIFIC CHANGES.
AND I'D LIKE TO INCLUDE THE CHAIRMAN, WILLIAM CAPOTE, AND YOURSELF, SINCE YOU YOU GAVE THE PRESENTATION COUNCIL, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THE PRESENTATION? I MEAN ONE. THANK YOU, SIR.
JUST IN CLOSING, I JUST I JUST WANT TO ADD THAT THERE'S ALREADY BEEN A LOT OF TALK ON SOCIAL MEDIA, WHICH I REFER TO OFTEN AS ANTI SOCIAL MEDIA FOR OBVIOUS REASONS ABOUT THESE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS.
YOU HAVE TO DECIDE WHETHER TO PUT THEM ON THE BALLOT AND THE VOTERS WILL DECIDE.
[00:10:01]
THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY. THANK YOU.THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU AGAIN FOR ALL YOUR EFFORTS.
SO. ALSO WHAT? WHAT I LIKE TO DO IS GO EACH AND EVERY ITEM AND HAVE FOLKS COME AND SPEAK ON THOSE ITEMS. SO LET'S TAKE ITEM NUMBER 1/1.
[1. Presentation by Philip Weinberg, Vice-Chair of the Charter Review Commission; consideration of the Charter Review Commission's recommended revisions to the City Charter.]
RIGHT. AND WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ITEM NUMBER ONE REGARDING THE ARTICLE OF.COMPENSATION. PLEASE STEP FORWARD.
MEMBERS OF COUNCIL, HAPPY FLAG DAY AND HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO ALL OF THE ARMY VETERANS IN THE AUDIENCE.
ALL THE SOLDIERS IN THE AUDIENCE.
ALL THE SOLDIERS. UM, ITEM NUMBER ONE FOR COMPENSATION.
WELL, FIRST, LET ME START OFF BY SAYING THAT NO MATTER WHAT YOU DO, THE CITY STAFF AND COUNCIL CANNOT ADVOCATE FOR OR AGAINST ANY OF THESE PROPOSED CHANGES.
ON THIS PARTICULAR EVERYTHING I'M GOING TO SPEAK ON TONIGHT IS FAIRLY NEW, AS IN THE LAST SIX YEARS.
PRIOR TO 2016, CITY COUNCIL GOT PAID $3,000 IN.
PRIOR TO THAT, THIS WAS COMMUNITY SERVICE.
AND ALL OF YOU HAVE SAID YOU WANT TO SERVE THE COMMUNITY.
SO IN 2016, IT CHANGED TO THE PER CAPITA FORMULA AND TRIPLED THE PAY FOR CITY COUNCIL.
AND MORE THAN DOUBLED THE PAY FOR THE MAYOR.
YOU'RE ASKING THE CITIZENS FOR MORE.
AND I JUST THINK IF YOU DO, IT'S TONE DEAF.
ANYONE ELSE WISH TO COME AND SPEAK REGARDING ITEM NUMBER ONE, PLEASE STEP FORWARD.
BILL BATTEN, 586 OCEAN SPRAY STREET SOUTHWEST.
I AGREE 2016 CITIZENS DID APPROVE THE CHARTER CHANGE THAT ALLOWED PER CAPITA OF $0.20 AND $0.10 RESPECTIVELY BETWEEN THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL.
BUT ALONG WITH THAT, THEY WERE ALSO GRANTED THE AUTHORITY TO ANNUALLY INCREASE THEIR PAY PROPORTIONATELY WITH THE PAY RAISE THAT WAS COMING TO THE REST OF THEIR EMPLOYEES OR THE CITY EMPLOYEES.
SO CITY COUNCIL HAS BEEN RECEIVING A PAY RAISE EVERY YEAR IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE 2016 INITIAL PROPOSAL OF $0.20 FOR THE MAYOR AND $0.10 FOR THE REMAINING COUNCIL MEMBERS.
NOW YOU'RE PROPOSING 2022 TO HAVE ANOTHER CHANGE, WHICH IN SOME CASES DOUBLED THAT.
BUT THE OTHER QUESTION THAT COMES INTO MIND FROM BILL BRATTON ASPECT IS WHY ARE WE NOT USING THE GOVERNMENT CENSUS THAT WAS JUST TAKEN FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT THAT GAVE US OUR POPULATION VERSUS OR VICE USING A UNIVERSITY IN FLORIDA AS A NUMBERS ON HOW TO CALCULATE.
WHAT THE PAY AMOUNT SHOULD BE WAS THAT SOMEBODY CAN ANSWER WHY YOU'RE GOING WITH THE UNIVERSITY INSTEAD OF THE FEDERAL CENSUS, WHICH IS MANDATED AND WE SPEND OUR TAX DOLLARS FOR.
ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK FOR ITEM ONE.
STEP FORWARD. KEN DELGADO 154 ANGELO ROAD, SOUTHEAST PALM BAY.
FIRST AND FOREMOST, AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SERVE OUR CITY.
AND CERTAINLY THANK YOU, PHILLIP, FOR A GREAT PRESENTATION.
JUST A QUALIFICATION OR JUST A LITTLE.
IT WASN'T SO MUCH. WE AS HE MENTIONED, THIS IS A DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC.
AND SO THERE WAS A DISSENTING VIEWPOINT IN REFERENCE TO SOME OF THESE THINGS.
AND SO WE MEAN MEANING THAT THEY VOTED ON IT AND THEN THE MAJORITY GOT GOT THE THE OKAY TO MOVE FORWARD JUST FOR THE REALITY OF APPEARANCE.
I KNOW THIS IS THE GREATEST CITY IN ALL OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IN THIS TIME WHEN INFLATION IS NOW IN DOUBLE DIGITS OR MY POSITION OR THE DISSENTING VIEW WAS THIS IN THIS TIME OF DOUBLE DIGIT INFLATION, WHERE GASOLINE PRICES ARE GOING TO OR HAVE HAVE
[00:15:01]
ALMOST DOUBLED AND MAY CONTINUE TO GO FORWARD, THE REALITY IS, IS THAT TO TO PRESENT THIS TO THE VOTERS AT THIS TIME MAY LOOK AT.IT'S SELF PROMOTION AT THIS POINT AND THIS INJUNCTION IN WHAT'S HAPPENING AROUND US.
AND SO WE HAD LIVELY DEBATES, AND I CERTAINLY WAS VERY ADAMANT IN THE POINT THAT THAT DOUBLING.
THE SALARY IS NOT A GOOD TIME TO BE CONSIDERING THAT.
AND ON A SIDE NOTE, EVEN THOUGH IT IS WHAT IT IS TODAY, I WOULD LIKE TO ADD WE HAVE HAD EXCELLENT REPRESENTATION AT THE CURRENT RATE TOO, AND IT'S NOT A HINDRANCE TO GETTING QUALITY PEOPLE BECAUSE THE PEOPLE WHO COME WILL BE PEOPLE WHO REALLY WANT TO DO SOMETHING GOOD FOR THE COMMUNITY AND NOT LOOK AT JUST ANOTHER PAY RAISE IN WHATEVER THEY'RE DOING IN THE FIRST PLACE.
AND SO DISSENTING VOTE ON ON THIS PROPOSAL AS IT STANDS AND I REPRESENT A FAIR AMOUNT OF VOTERS.
THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK ON ITEM ONE, PLEASE STEP FORWARD.
I THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SERVE.
I LIVE WITH 729 VOTES AND AVENUE.
WHAT YOU JUST HEARD ARE THE EXACT REASONS WHY THE COUNCIL NEEDS MORE.
WHY NOT THE COUNCIL'S REMUNERATION? IT IS VERY IMPORTANT FOR THE PEOPLE OF PALM BAY TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE COST OF GOVERNMENT GOES UP.
THE PEOPLE OF PALM BAY ARE MAKING MORE DEMANDS ON THE COUNCIL.
THEY'RE MAKING MORE DEMANDS ON THE CITY EMPLOYEES.
WHY IS IT EVERYONE WANTS TO NOT WIN? NOT EVERYONE. A FEW WANT TO NOT COMPENSATE THEM ADEQUATELY, ESPECIALLY SINCE THEIR DUTIES HAVE INCREASED. COUNCIL MEMBERS DON'T SIT AT HOME.
EVERYWHERE I GO, I SEE THE MAYOR.
I SEE THE DEPUTY MAYOR THERE WORKING AFTER HOURS ON OUR BEHALF.
AND WHAT IS BEING RECOMMENDED IS FAIR.
IT IS CONSISTENT WITH WHAT OTHER CITIES, PERIOD COUNCILORS AND I THINK IS SOMETHING THAT THE COUNCIL SHOULD STRONGLY CONSIDER ACCEPTING. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE, MR. MACLEOD. ANYONE ELSE WISH TO COME AND SPEAK ON ITEM ONE? MR. CAPOTE, WELCOME.
THANK YOU. WILLIAM CAPOTE, 1452 GLENDALE AVENUE, PALM BAY BEST CITY IN THE UNITED STATES.
I COME FROM A POSITION OF BEING ONE OF THE OLD GUARDS IN A SENSE OF SALARY TO JUST CORRECT.
IT WAS 4000 FOR COUNSEL AND 8000 FOR THE MAYOR.
AND YOU NEED TO HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING OF THE WORK THAT YOU DO.
SEE, WHEN I WAS SITTING THERE, I COULDN'T TALK.
PASSIONATE ABOUT WHY THIS NEEDS TO CHANGE AND WHY THE RESIDENTS AS I WENT THROUGH THE CITY AND THEY WOULD ASK ME SO AND THE KIDS IN SCHOOL WOULD ASK ME, SO HOW MUCH SALARY WHERE'S YOUR WHERE'S YOUR LIMO? AND DIFFERENT THINGS THAT KIDS SAY.
BUT FROM THE ADULT ADULT PERSPECTIVE, YOU HAD THE WHAT? YOU MAKE $8,000 A YEAR.
HOW CAN YOU YOU KNOW, THE STRESS LEVEL THAT YOU'RE UNDER AND YOU'RE ONLY WORKING FOR $8,000.
I SAID, YEAH, IT NEEDS TO BE CORRECTED.
THERE'S SOME CITIZENS THAT OPPOSE IT AND SOME SENTENCES THAT ARE FOR IT.
THERE'S ALWAYS GOING TO BE THAT DEBATE.
THERE'S ALWAYS GOING TO BE A DEBATE ABOUT SALARY.
BUT UNDERSTAND, AS YOU MOVE FORWARD, IF YOU REALLY WANT TO BE A CITY THAT MOVES FORWARD AND DOES THE RIGHT THING AND YOU GET MORE QUALITY PEOPLE BEYOND YOURSELVES BECAUSE REMEMBER, IT'S BEYOND YOURSELVES.
SO BY THE TIME THAT THE SALARY DID COME IN AT 23, I WAS ALMOST OUT.
[00:20:04]
SO UNDERSTAND IT'S NOT ABOUT SELF SERVING.IT'S UNDERSTANDING WHAT THE FUTURE, THE PLAN OF THE FUTURE.
YOU NEED TO PLAN FOR THE FUTURE.
YOU NEED TO PLAN FOR FUTURE COUNCILMAN YOU HAVE TO PLAN FOR THE MILLENNIALS.
YOU HAVE TO PLAN FOR GENERATION Z.
IT'S NOT THE GREATEST GENERATION.
YES, THE GREATEST GENERATION THAT THE BOOMERS BELIEVED IN VOLUNTEERISM.
BUT THAT THAT'S NOT WHAT COMES FORTH IN THE NEXT GENERATION.
THE NEXT GENERATION WANTS TO BE PAID WHAT THEY'RE WORTH.
SO THAT'S BASICALLY WHAT I WANT TO SAY.
AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT'S AN UP AND DOWN.
MAKE SURE JUST PUT IT OUT TO THE VOTERS AND SEE WHAT THE VOTERS SAY.
ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK ON ITEM ONE? PLEASE STEP FORWARD.
HEY, MARY, HOW ARE YOU? TIM BLAND 1992 WIND BROOK DRIVE SOUTHEAST.
SO I JUST WANT TO SAY, YEARS AGO I WAS A MAYOR OF A SMALL TOWN IN MINNESOTA.
I MADE $15 PER MEETING AND THERE WAS ONE MEETING PER MONTH.
WHAT DO YOU DO IN A CITY OF, I THINK, 120,000? YOU KNOW, I DON'T SEE THIS AS A BAD THING.
YOU GUYS PUT A LOT OF TIME AND EFFORT INTO WHAT YOU DO FOR THIS CITY, AND WE ALL APPRECIATE IT.
YOU GOVERN IT, YOU MANAGE IT, AND YOU TRY AND MAKE IT RUN SMOOTHLY.
SECOND POINT I HAVE IS, AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR ALL THAT YOU ALL DO.
BELIEVE ME, I HAD PEOPLE COME TO MY HOUSE ON EASTER SUNDAY COMPLAINING SOMETHING ABOUT IN A TOWN OF 336 IN RURAL MINNESOTA.
SO I KIND OF HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF FEELING IN WHAT YOU'RE GOING ON.
THE SECOND POINT I WANT TO MAKE IS I DON'T KNOW IF YOU ALL ARE AWARE AND THIS MAY NOT BE PROPER, BUT JOY LLC IS SHUTTING DOWN THE GOLF COURSE ON SUNDAY NIGHT, WHICH I THINK IS A TRAVESTY.
SO THERE'LL BE A LOT OF OPPOSITION TO IT.
AND YOU CAN HEAR FROM US MORE ON IT AS TIME GOES ON.
THANK YOU. NATHAN WHITE, 1301 SEABREEZE STREET, SOUTHWEST CANDIDATE FOR PALM BAY CITY COUNCIL.
YES. LET'S PLAN FOR THE FUTURE.
IT IS VERY TRUE, ENTIRELY TRUE THAT THIS IS A MATTER OF THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS, THAT THIS WOULD GO BEFORE VOTERS, IF IT'S APPROVED TONIGHT, THAT THIS IS NOT THE FINAL STEP, THE FINAL STAGE IN THE PROCESS.
SO THE QUESTION I WOULD POSE TO COUNSEL.
IS IF YOU'RE GOING TO WALK INTO YOUR BOSS'S OFFICE.
I WOULD LIKE TO I WOULD ASSUME THAT THAT WOULD BE BECAUSE YOU FEEL THAT YOU'VE EARNED IT.
THAT YOU FEEL THAT YOUR WORK IS DEMONSTRATING TO THE BOSS AND TO ANYONE ELSE INVOLVED.
THAT YOU DESERVE A LITTLE BIT MORE.
AT THE WORK YOU'RE PUTTING FORWARD, BOTH IN QUALITY AND QUANTITY, IS DESERVING OF THAT RAISE.
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU WALK INTO THE BOSS'S OFFICE AND ASK FOR A RAISE? ABSENT THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES.
I WOULD CONSIDER THAT BEFORE MAKING THE DECISION TO PUT THIS ON THE BALLOT.
BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO LIVE IN A CITY WHERE THE MAYOR HAS A LIMOUSINE.
UH. I DON'T THINK YOU, MR. MAYOR, WANT TO HAVE A LIMOUSINE. HONESTLY, YOU'RE A MAN OF HONOR, INTEGRITY, RESPECT.
AND I DON'T BELIEVE YOU'D BE IN IT IF YOU HAD ONE.
BUT. EVEN IF ARRAYS WERE IN ORDER VIA THE EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE WORLD WE'RE IN TODAY.
IN THE TYPE OF SHAPE WHERE A 100% RAISE FOR COUNCILMEN IS WARRANTED.
AND ASKING FOR A 100% RAISE WALKING INTO.
[00:25:05]
BOSS'S OFFICE.I BELIEVE WOULD BE ILL ADVISED.
THOSE OF YOU THAT JUST CAME, WE'RE HANDLING THIS ITEM BY ITEM.
ANYONE WISHES TO SPEAK ON ITEM ONE, PLEASE LET ME KNOW.
HOW ARE YOU DOING? DAVID JONES 1107 MERRICK AVENUE.
AND AGAIN, I APPRECIATE HAVING THE OPPORTUNITY TO SERVE ON A CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE, MR. MAYOR. YOU KNOW, YOU GOT TO DO WHAT YOU GOT TO DO TO TRY TO KEEP US THE GREATEST CITY.
I THOUGHT WE WERE THE GREATEST CITY IN THE WORLD.
I KEEP HEARING GREATEST CITY IN AMERICA.
DID WE CHANGE? LIKE WHAT'S HAPPENING? NO. YOU KNOW, THIS THIS THIS ITEM WAS INTERESTING TO ME.
YOU KNOW, I'M NOT AFRAID TO SAY I'M A MODERATE, PRETTY FISCAL CONSERVATIVE AND MANY THINGS IN LIFE.
AND IF I WORKED IN A CORPORATE OR BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT.
SO I UNDERSTAND THE IMPORTANCE OF BEING FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE.
I THINK IT JUST MEANS UNDERSTANDING HOW AND WHEN TO INVEST PROPERLY.
IT'S LIKE WE UNDERSTAND THAT WE DO HAVE TO PAY MORE.
WE HAVE TO INVEST IN OUR PEOPLE BECAUSE YOU SEE THE GREAT.
I FORGET WHAT THEY'RE CALLING IT, BUT RIGHT NOW, JUST PEOPLE ARE LEAVING THEIR JOBS BECAUSE QUITE FRANKLY, IT JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO WORK IN A PLACE THAT CAN'T PAY YOU ENOUGH TO LIVE. AND WHEN I SEE THE WORK THAT ALL OF YOU DO, MAYOR, YOU KNOW, I SEE YOU OFTEN AT TIMES AT THE SAME EVENTS.
AND I'M JUST THINKING I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE THIS GUY DOES.
I'M LIKE, MAN, FROM A BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE.
AND THEN YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THE FACT THAT OTHER CITIES THAT ARE COMPARABLE TO HOW WE'RE DESIGNED FROM A HOW OUR COUNCIL RUNS THE MAKE UP OF THE AMOUNT OF INDIVIDUALS THAT LIVE IN THAT CITY WHERE WE'RE UNDERPAYING INDIVIDUALS.
YOU HAVE TO INVEST PROPERLY IF YOU WANT TO BE THE BEST.
AND I GENUINELY BELIEVE WE HAVE A PHENOMENAL COUNCIL AND I THINK THAT WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO HIGHLIGHT THAT BY SAYING WE UNDERSTAND THAT WE ARE UNDERPAYING AND JUST LIKE AND I DON'T THINK I APOLOGIZE AND I DON'T THINK THAT WE SHOULD EVER BE A CITY OR ANY ORGANIZATION SHOULD RUN IN A SPACE WHERE YOU HAVE TO WALK IN AND ASK FOR A RAISE.
I THINK THAT THE PEOPLE OF THE BOSSES SHOULD BE ABLE TO SAY NO.
IT IS UP TO US TO SAY, YOU DESERVE, YOU'VE EARNED THIS.
AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT THIS PROPOSAL IS.
I JUST WANTED TO BRING UP TWO QUICK POINTS.
I DIDN'T LOOK AT ANY INFORMATION FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA.
AND I ALSO LOOKED AT KPIS OF DIFFERENT AREAS, TOO.
SO I DIDN'T JUST LOOK AT A CITY THAT HAD THE SAME SIZE AS PALM BAY.
AND THEN, OF COURSE, MAYBE YOU LOOK AT THE INCOME LEVEL OF THAT CITY.
I LOOKED AT SOMETHING THAT HAS A SIMILAR CPI.
AND THE SECOND THING I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT HASN'T BEEN MENTIONED IS THAT WHEN I LOOKED AT THIS INFORMATION AND LOOKED AT WHAT WE WERE PROPOSING, THIS STILL BRINGS US TO A BARE MINIMUM OF WHAT OTHER CITIES COMPARABLY PAY.
THEIR CITY COUNCILMAN'S ARE MAYORS.
SO EVEN WITH THIS INCREASE, WE'RE STILL SITTING AT PAYING YOUR US CITY COUNCILMAN THE BARE MINIMUM OF WHAT WE WOULD PAY OTHER CITY COUNCILMAN OF SAME SIZE AND COMPARABLE CPI. I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT.
AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE.
MR. MOORE, PLEASE STEP FORWARD.
VARELA LAFAVE 1211 GERALD THE CIRCLE.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE A COUPLE OF POINTS.
[00:30:01]
FIRST, I WANT TO THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR SERVICE.I THINK YOU YOU ALL DO A GREAT JOB.
SO WHAT I'M GOING TO SAY HAS NO BEARING ON THAT.
IS THAT WRONG? YOU DON'T HAVE OTHER SUPPLEMENTS.
YES, MA'AM. I BELIEVE WE'RE ALL FULL TIME EMPLOYEES AT SOMETHING ELSE.
OKAY. SO I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT FOR BUSINESS OWNERS.
RIGHT. SO YOU'RE NOT DEPENDENT ON THIS FOR YOUR FOR YOUR YOUR WHOLE HOUSEHOLD.
YOU HAVE OTHER THINGS THAT YOU DO TO GENERATE INCOME.
SO I THINK SOME PEOPLE MIGHT THINK THAT YOU ARE JUST USING THIS INCOME TO LIVE ON.
AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT'S NOT TRUE.
OK. SO WITH THAT IN MIND, I MEAN, IT IS PUBLIC SERVICE.
SO ON ONE HAND, YOU DON'T TAKE THIS JOB BECAUSE YOU'RE LOOKING TO MAKE A DECENT PAY RATE.
SO I JUST WANT PEOPLE TO THINK ABOUT THOSE THINGS.
I MEAN. IT'S A WAY TO KEEP FROM.
GETTING PEOPLE THAT ARE JUST WANTING TO COME ON THE BOARD AND.
SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THOSE COMMENTS.
THANK YOU, MA'AM. WE'RE ON ITEM ONE.
ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK ON ITEM ONE? NO ONE ELSE. COUNCILMAN FOSTER, I'M GOING TO OPEN UP THE FLOOR TO YOU AS WE DISCUSS ITEM ONE.
OKAY. SO, YOU KNOW, I JUST WANT TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE COMMENTS.
I FIND IT AMAZING, PECULIAR THIS COUNCIL, JOB COUNCIL, CITY COUNCIL MEMBER JOB IS.
ONCE YOU'RE IN IT, YOU'RE NOT A VOLUNTEER.
TO OBTAIN CITY EMPLOYEES WORKING FOR LESS THAN MINIMUM WAGE.
OKAY. SO YOU WANT TO ATTRACT THE BEST COUNCIL PERSON.
YOU HAVE TO INCREASE THE PACE.
YOU HAVE TO INCREASE THE PAY AND THAT LEADS INTO ANOTHER ITEM.
WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT A FULL TIME INCOME.
UM. I HAVE A REALLY NICE INCOME.
AN INCREASE OF COUNCIL PAY WOULD JUST PUT ME IN A MORE BIGGER TAX BRACKET.
OKAY. BUT I'M WILLING TO PAY MY TAXES AND AND DO IT BECAUSE I LOVE THE CITY OF PALM BAY.
BECAUSE EVERY TIME I SIT ON THAT DIAS OR EVERY TIME I GO TO A FUNCTION THAT THE PUBLIC DON'T SEE.
OR I GO ON A CONFERENCE THAT THE PUBLIC DON'T SEE FOR THE CITY OF PALM BAY.
EVERY TIME I STEP IN THE GROCERY STORE, I'M ON DUTY.
OKAY. WE HAVE A CELL PHONE THAT PEOPLE COULD GET IN CONTACT WITH CITY MANAGERS.
DO I GET COMPENSATED FOR THAT? EVERY TIME I SIT ON THAT DIET, I LOSE MONEY.
I LOSE MONEY. I LOSE A LOT OF MONEY.
SO. IT'S HARD TO TRY TO BALANCE YOUR BUSINESS AND DO CITY COUNCIL WORK.
YOU KNOW WHAT TAKES PRIORITY ONCE YOU BECOME A CITY COUNCIL MEMBER? THE CITY OF PALM BAY TAKES PRIORITY BECAUSE HE WAS ELECTED TO DO A JOB.
YOU WANT SOMEONE? IT'S NOT ABOUT THE RACE.
NOT FOR ME. THAT'S MY POINT I'M TRYING TO MAKE.
THE RACE IS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE WHO'S NOT WILLING, WHO EDUCATED, QUALIFIED, INTELLIGENT TO DO AN OUTSTANDING JOB TO COME AND DO THIS JOB AND COULD TAKE THE HIT IN THE INCOME BRACKET.
[00:35:01]
INFLATION. INFLATION IS 8%.IT COULD BE UP TOMORROW AND DOWN THE NEXT YEAR.
BUT THE CITY OF PALM BAY DON'T CONTROL AND FACE INFLATION.
BUT WE HAVE TO LIVE WITHIN OUR MEANS, AND I THINK WE CAN HANDLE THAT.
AND WE NEED TO GO TO OUR BOSS AND AND ASK FOR A RAISE.
THAT'S WHAT THIS IS ALL ABOUT.
THE VOTERS WILL DETERMINE IF IT'S WORTH RAISING THE CITY COUNCIL PAY FOR THE FUTURE.
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT ARE COMING.
EVERYBODY ON THAT DIET DON'T NEED A RAISE.
OKAY. SO THIS RAISE IS NOT FOR THE PEOPLE ON THE DIET.
TWO TRACK FEATURED PEOPLE COMING TO THE SITE.
MR. CAPOTE IS THAT HE'S GOT 12 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE GETTING PAID VERY LITTLE THAT HE WORKED VERY HARD DURING HIS 12 YEARS.
WHEN WE GO TO THE CITY CONFERENCE, PALM BAY IS AT THE BOTTOM AS FAR AS COUNCIL TAKES.
IN THIS PAY RATE IS STILL BE AT THE BOTTOM IS SITTING WITH LESS PEOPLE.
OR LET'S MAKE IT MORE IN OUR MAYOR.
COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE MAKING MORE THAN OUR MAYOR SALARY AND THE CITY POPULATION IS 50 40,000.
I ACTUALLY ASKED THE COUNCIL OF PEOPLE HOW MUCH THEY MAKE.
I'M GOING TO GET OFF MY SOAPBOX.
I'M JUST IN SUPPORT OF INCREASING THIS PAY FOR COUNCIL.
GOING FOR IT. THANK YOU, MA'AM.
THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO START ON MY ON THE OTHER END WITH COUNCILMAN FILIBERTO ON ITEM NUMBER ONE.
SPEAK ON ITEM NUMBER ONE IN GENERAL.
NOTE NO COMMENTS REGARDING PROTESTS FOR THIS GOING TO THE BALLOT.
A FEW THINGS THAT MUST BE SAID.
COMMENTS MADE ABOUT COUNCIL LOOKING TO EARN A DECENT, DECENT PAY.
HOW DO YOU DEFINE THAT? WHAT'S A DECENT PAY? I CAN TELL YOU WITH THIS, IF THIS EVER MOVED FORWARD, THAT'S STILL KEEP US WAY UNDER THE POVERTY LEVEL POVERTY LINE.
THAT'S WAY UNDER THE POVERTY LINE.
ONE HAND COUNSEL DOING AN EXCELLENT JOB.
ON THE OTHER HAND, WE DIDN'T EARN ON PAY.
IT SHOULD NOT COST US TO SERVE.
WE'VE DONE IT BECAUSE WE LOVE THIS CITY.
I'M VERY INVESTED IN THE CITY.
GOD DOESN'T CALL ME FOR A GREATER, GREATER PURPOSE.
I'D LIKE TO SEE MY KIDS AND GRANDKIDS GROW IN THIS CITY.
CALL OF DUTY. I WANT TO SERVE.
THIS DIDN'T MAKE MUCH SENSE TO ME.
NUMBER THREE, AGAIN, YOU KNOW, IT SHOULD NOT COST US TO SERVE.
SOME OF US WERE OVER AT THE KENNEDY SPACE CENTER CENTER.
THE PRICE OF GAS BEING OVER $5.
I DRIVE A TRUCK THAT THAT COST ME ABOUT $100 TO FILL.
CITY DIDN'T PAY MY WAY OUT THERE TO REPRESENT THE CITY OF PALM BAY.
WE'RE ALL OVER THE COUNTY REPRESENTING ON A MONTHLY ON A WEEKLY BASIS IN SOME CASES.
IS IT FAIR IT COST US MONEY TO SERVE? I MEAN, AS MUCH AS WE LOVE TO SERVE AND WE DON'T DO IT FOR THE MONEY, OBVIOUSLY, BUT I THINK JUST JUST THIS EXAMPLE ALONE.
NOW I HAVE TO FILL MY TRUCK JUST ABOUT TWICE A WEEK.
IS TO SERVE THE GREAT CITY OF PALMYRA.
I'D LOVE TO SERVE THE PEOPLE OF PALM BAY.
I BELIEVE THAT DOESN'T DESERVE ANYTHING LESS THAN WHAT I'M GIVING THEM.
I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS, DEPUTY MAYOR.
[00:40:02]
THANK YOU, MAYOR. AND I'M GOING TO SAVE TIME BECAUSE I'M GOING TO SAY THE SAME THING.IF YOU ASK ME, I'M GOING SAY THE SAME THING FOR THE OTHER SEVEN AMENDMENTS I'M GOING TO GIVE.
I HAVE NO PROBLEM GIVING IT TO THE VOTERS, OUR BOSSES, AND LETTING THEM DECIDE.
THAT'S JUST HOW I FEEL ON EVERY ITEM.
THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION PROPOSED IT TO US.
NOW LET'S GIVE IT TO THE 80,000 VOTERS.
IF THEY FEEL WE'VE DONE A GOOD ENOUGH JOB, SO BE IT.
EITHER WAY, WE'RE GOING TO SERVE.
SO I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH MOVING FORWARD WITH ANY ONE OF THESE ITEMS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, DEPUTY MAYOR.
I DO BELIEVE THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE IN OUR FUTURE.
AS MR. CAPOTE SO ELOQUENTLY PUT IT, I ALSO BELIEVE THAT IF YOU'RE GIVING COUNCIL A TEN CENT RAISE, THEN THE MAYOR SHOULD THE MAYOR'S OFFICE SHOULD RECEIVE A RAISE. BUT I'LL GO ON RECORD TO SAY THAT I BELIEVE THIS SHOULD NOT AFFECT THOSE OF US THAT ARE ON COUNCIL TODAY.
YES, THERE'S COST THERE IS A COST OF SERVE.
BUT THAT SHOULD NOT BE AFFECTED TODAY.
SO I WOULD I WOULD IMPLORE THAT THIS COUNCIL MAKE TAKE THOSE SUGGESTIONS AND AND IMPLEMENT THOSE, BECAUSE IF YOU'RE GIVEN COUNCIL A CERTAIN PERCENT RAISE, THEN I THINK THE THE THE RESPECT TO THE MAYOR'S OFFICE, NOT ME IN PARTICULAR, BUT THE SET OFFICE SHOULD BE APPLIED ACCORDINGLY AND THEN LET IT APPLY TO THOSE THAT ARE COMING AFTER US.
SO THAT WOULD BE MY MY COMMENTS AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE COUNCIL TO MOVE IN THAT DIRECTION.
MY QUESTION ARE WE ARE REVOLTING EACH AND EACH ITEM WE'RE VOTING FOR.
SECOND. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COUNCILMAN FOSTER, YOU'RE ON THE LINE.
SO I THINK WE SHOULD GO WITH WHAT THEY RECOMMEND.
SO I'VE GOT A MOTION BY DEPUTY MAYOR JOHNSON FOR ITEM ONE AND SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN FELIX.
ALL IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING I ALL ALL OPPOSE NAY.
CAN I HAVE A ROLL CALL? DID YOU SAY I OVER THE PHONE? COUNCILMAN FOSTER? YES, AS YOU WERE.
ANYONE WISH TO SPEAK ON ITEM? PROBABLY FORGOT. PARDON ME.
I MIGHT HAVE FORGOT. ANY ONE STEP.
PLEASE STEP FORWARD. JOHN MAGEE.
THORNWOOD DRIVE. BAYSIDE LAKES.
I DON'T KNOW WHO CAME UP WITH THIS IDEA, BUT THIS COMMISSION OBVIOUSLY HAD SOME SENSE OF INTEGRITY.
I WISH ONLY THAT WE COULD COPY THIS LEGISLATION OR PROPOSE LEGISLATION AND SEND IT TO EACH ONE OF OUR CONGRESSMEN AND SENATORS IN WASHINGTON, DC, SO THAT THEY WOULD ABIDE BY THIS KIND OF CODE OF CONDUCT AND NOT HAVE THEIR FAMILIES ALL WORKING FOR THEM AT THE GOVERNMENT PAYROLL.
BUT I DO BELIEVE THIS IS A GOOD WAY TO CONTROL NEPOTISM WITHIN THE CITY.
AND AT THE SAME TIME, BE ABLE TO ATTRACT QUALITY EMPLOYEES AND PEOPLE WHO WORK FOR THIS CITY.
BUT I DO THIS IS A GOOD STEP, AND I WOULD SUPPORT THIS KIND OF AN AMENDMENT BEING PUT TO THE VOTERS.
THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK ON ITEM NUMBER TWO? A OR B. THE INDIAN COUNCIL.
THERE. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AMENDMENT TWO TO THE BALLOT.
SO I GOT A MOTION AND A SECOND.
I WANT TO GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK.
ARE YOU DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS, SIR? YES, I DO. YOU KNOW, I HAVE LITTLE EXPERIENCE IN THAT NEPOTISM.
[00:45:06]
YOU KNOW, I WAS A VICTIM OF IT IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.I'M ALL FOR NEPOTISM IN GOVERNMENT.
BUT YOU'VE GOT TO THINK ABOUT THIS.
AND I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU A HYPOTHETICAL.
AND THIS COULD THIS COULD HAPPEN IN THE NEXT ELECTION.
YOU HAVE A A SON THAT GETS HIRED AS A POLICE OFFICER.
AND I SAY I'M NOT I'M NOT ELECTED.
MY SON DID A HIRE AS A POLICE OFFICER.
AND THEN I RUN FOR CITY COUNCIL.
A WIN. AND MY SON BE THROWN OFF THE CITY.
ACCORDING TO THIS CHARTER, HE MOVES HIS JOB.
IT'S. WOULD HE BE VIOLATING THIS CHARTER AMENDMENT? WELL, I THINK IT SAYS THIS PROVISION SHALL NOT APPLY TO RELATIVES OF ANY CURRENT.
OKAY. SO HOW DOES IT APPLY THEN.
WHAT ABOUT THE FEATURE WON'T APPLY TO CURRENTLY.
THAT'S WHAT THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
SOMEBODY COULD EXPLAIN THIS TO ME, PLEASE.
COUNCILMAN. FOSTER IT'S TO ENSURE.
FOR EXAMPLE, I GET ELECTED, BUT I'M TRYING TO GET MY MOM A JOB.
YOU KNOW, AS A I DON'T KNOW, SECRETARY OR A POLICE OFFICER, I DON'T KNOW.
SHE'LL BE SHE'LL BE GOOD TO GO.
SHE'LL BE ABLE TO CONTINUE ON AND SO ON AND SO FORTH.
SO THIS IS JUST TO NO ONE CLEAN UP THE CITY AND PREVENT ANY ANY ISSUES GOING FORWARD BUT THIS.
BUT PEOPLE WHO ARE ALREADY WORKING WITH THE CITY OR LOOKING TO GET EMPLOYED ARE FINE.
WHAT WHAT WHAT YOU STILL HAVE IS STILL NEPOTISM STILL CAN OCCUR IF SOMEONE FAMILY MEMBERS GET HIGH WITH THE CITY OF PALM BAY AND THEN, YOU KNOW, SIX MONTHS LATER, THAT UNCLE OR THAT FATHER OR THE MOTHER GET HIRED AS A COUNCILMAN AND NEPOTISM OCCURS THEN THAT IN THAT TIME? I THINK SO. SO.
YEAH. SO I DON'T THINK WE CAN ELIMINATE NEPOTISM.
SO LET ME UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
IF, LIKE, RIGHT NOW YOU'RE SITTING ON COUNCIL AND YOUR SON HAS A LAW ENFORCEMENT CERTIFICATION TO WORK IN IN THE STATE, HE CAN'T WORK FOR THE CITY OF PALM BAY.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO CONVEY? YEAH. THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING OF THIS AMENDMENT.
YES, SIR. FROM WHAT I'M READING, I BELIEVE YOU'RE.
IS THAT CORRECT? I'LL ASK THE CITY ATTORNEY.
I PROBABLY JUST I WAS DISCUSSING A SEPARATE ISSUE WITH THE CITY MANAGER, AND I DID MISS PART OF IT.
SO ACCORDING TO TO ITEM NUMBER TWO, IF COUNCILMAN FOSTER IS ON THE DAIS CURRENTLY AND HE HAS A SON THAT WISHES TO SERVE AS A PALM BAY POLICE OFFICER, THAT IS A CERTIFIED LAW ENFORCEMENT ACCREDITED CERTIFIED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, HE CANNOT WORK FOR THE CITY OF BAY.
IS THAT CORRECT? YES, THAT'S CORRECT.
YES. SO I GET WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, SIR.
WE'LL PUT IT AT THAT OR ANY TYPE OF POINT.
EXACTLY. THAT'S THE WAY I READ IT.
AND HE WON'T BE ABLE TO SERVE AS A FIREFIGHTER.
HE WON'T BE ABLE TO SERVE IN THE ACCOUNTING DEPARTMENT, THE UTILITY PUBLIC WORKS.
I JUST. I THINK IT'S ANTI-WORKER.
COUNCILMAN FOSTER. ANYONE ELSE? I HAVE A MOTION BY.
I HAVE A MOTION BY DEPUTY MAYOR JOHNSON, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN FELIX.
ANYONE ELSE WISH TO DISCUSS THIS ITEM? AND I SEE.
YOU KNOW WHAT I'M CALLING THE QUESTION.
AYE, AYE. AND HE OPPOSE NAY OK PASSES 4 TO 1 MEDINA YEA.
[00:50:04]
ANYONE REGARDING LEGISLATIVE VACANCIES.WE'RE ON ITEM NUMBER THREE LEGISLATIVE VACANCIES.
I THINK HE SENSED I WAS GETTING READY TO TALK ABOUT HIM AND LEFT THE ROOM.
SO MY MY ARGUMENT ON THIS IS THAT.
THIS YEAR. BACK IN MARCH, THE VOTERS SPOKE.
BUT COUNCILMAN FILIBERTO ON THE DAIS.
THERE WERE A LOT OF DISCUSSION BEFORE THAT.
BUT I FEEL FAIRLY CONFIDENT IN SAYING.
THAT. IF THIS HAD BEEN AN APPOINTED POSITION INSTEAD OF AN ELECTED POSITION, AND MR. FILIBERTO PROBABLY WOULDN'T BE SITTING UP THERE TONIGHT.
THEY PROBABLY WOULDN'T HAVE CHOSEN THE PERSON THAT THE PEOPLE CHOSE.
SO I'M HOPING THAT YOU DON'T PUT THIS BEFORE THE VOTERS.
ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK REGARDING OUR FILLING OF VACANCIES? I SEE A GENTLEMAN BACK THERE FIRST.
YES, SIR. AND THEN MASTER CHIEF.
ALL I CAN SAY IS HERE WE GO AGAIN.
WITH MR. BAILEY'S RESIGNATION AND LEAVING THE CITY COUNCIL.
MANY OF US PACKED THIS ROOM AND SPOKE TO THIS COUNCIL FOR HOURS ABOUT THE ATTEMPT BY MEMBERS OF THIS COUNCIL TO GO BEHIND OUR BACKS, BASICALLY, AND APPOINT SOMEBODY THAT WAS NOT ELECTED TO THIS COUNCIL.
MR. JOHNSON, TO HIS CREDIT, WITHDREW HIS PROPOSAL AND ALLOWED A SPECIAL ELECTION TO OCCUR.
SO THAT THE VOTERS COULD SPEAK.
SADLY, ONLY 14% OF THE PEOPLE REGISTERED VOTERS VOTED.
BUT MR. LOBATO WOULD NOT BE SITTING ON THIS COUNCIL HAD THIS COUNCIL HAD HIS OWN WAY.
AND IF YOU WANT TO TRUST US AS VOTERS, YOU GOT TO TRUST US.
YOU WANT TO APPOINT SOMEBODY WITHIN 60 DAYS AT YOUR OWN CHOOSING.
BUT YOU'RE NOT GIVING US THE RIGHT TO ELECT WHO WE CHOOSE.
YOU WORK FOR US. WE DON'T WORK FOR YOU.
SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS CODIFIED IN A DIFFERENT WAY THAT SAYS ANY VACANCY ON THIS COUNCIL WOULD BE PUT INTO THE CHARTER AS A SPECIAL ELECTION WITHIN 60, MAYBE 90 DAYS, HOWEVER LONG IT TAKES FOR THE VOTER ELECTION BOARD TO CREATE THAT VACANCY.
ELECTION. I DON'T WANT TO GO THROUGH THIS.
EVERY TIME WE HAVE A VACANCY ON THE COUNCIL WHERE SOMEBODY TRIES TO GO BEHIND OUR BACK AND PUT SOMEBODY ON THE COUNCIL THAT THEY WANT TO HAVE IS ONE OF THEIR PALS OR SOMEBODY WHO THINKS THE WAY THEY DO.
THERE'S 60 SOME THOUSAND REGISTERED VOTERS IN PALM BAY.
I THOUGHT WE MADE OURSELVES VERY CLEAR THE LAST TIME, BUT OBVIOUSLY WE HAVEN'T.
THIS THIS COMMISSION HAS OBVIOUSLY NOT LISTENED TO US.
AND IF YOU DON'T LISTEN TO US, THEN WE HAVE WAYS OF CORRECTING THAT AT THE BALLOT BOX.
SO I ASK YOU, PLEASE LET US VOTE.
THANK YOU. BILL BATTEN, 586 OCEAN SPRAY STREET SOUTHWEST.
I THINK IT'S VOTERS HAVE THE RIGHT TO VOTE FOR THEIR ELECTED OFFICIALS.
SECOND TOPIC ON THIS ONE WAS HOW DO YOU DETERMINE WHO WILL BE ELIGIBLE? BECAUSE IT DOESN'T COVER ANY OF THAT.
WHO WOULD BE ELIGIBLE FOR YOUR APPOINTMENT? YOU DIDN'T SAY ANY OF THAT.
WHY WOULD WE APPROVE SOMETHING? WE DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THE PROCESS WOULD BE.
ITEM NUMBER THREE ON THIS, IF IT WAS APPROVED AS IT'S WRITTEN NOW.
AND BY CHANCE, ITEM NUMBER FOUR GOT APPROVED.
JUST SUPPOSE ON MAY 31ST SOMEBODY RESIGNED ON THAT FROM THAT CHAIR.
[00:55:06]
THAT WOULD ONLY LEAVE YOU 29 DAYS TO APPOINT SOMEBODY.AND WE DON'T EVEN KNOW HOW THEIR APPOINTMENT IS APPOINTING THEM BECAUSE YOU'LL ALL BE ON VACATION.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU.
ANYONE ELSE? AH, MA'AM, YOU WERE COMING UP.
SIR. WE ARE ON FILLING OF VACANCIES.
KENDALL GOT ONE FIVE FOR ANGELO ROAD SOUTHEAST.
JUST TO RECAP, YOU ARE WORTHY OF YOUR WORK.
BUT HERE ON SECTION THREE, AGAIN, WE'RE GOING TO DEAL WITH WITH PERCEPTION AS WELL AS REALITY.
IT WAS SUCH A HOT BUTTON THIS LAST GO AROUND.
AND AS ONE WHO WAS A DISSENTER ON THIS WHEN WHEN IT CAME UP FOR A VOTE, I STILL STAND ON WHAT HAS BEEN ALREADY SAID.
AND IF YOU'LL NOTICE, THE UPROAR FOR THIS.
AND YOU HEAR THAT ALL OVER NATIONWIDE.
AND IF YOU WERE TO TO PASS THIS ON THROUGH, THE VIEW OF THE PEOPLE IS IS THAT YOU GUYS WANT THAT TO HAPPEN WHETHER YOU SAY, WELL, IT'S THE VOTERS THEY'RE GOING TO DECIDE OR IT'S THE CHARTER THAT JUST PROPOSED IT AND WE'RE JUST LETTING THE CHARTER DO IT.
AND SO THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS GOING TO BE A REFLECTION ON ON YOUR POSITION.
IF YOU IF YOU PASS THIS AND THE REFLECTION WILL BE SIMPLY THIS, YOU BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD NOT VOTE FOR THOSE PEOPLE WHO ARE STANDING HERE TO REPRESENT US.
AND SO I ALSO STAND ON A NO ON THIS ON THIS ISSUE.
YOUR NEXT. WELL, NOT NEGATIVE, SIR.
I WAS LIKE, OH, MAN, DID I BECOME THAT PRETTY? I APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU.
NO. DAVID JONES, 1107 MERRICK AVENUE.
I AM VERY MUCH SO ANTI VOTER SUPPRESSION.
AND I SAW IT UTILIZED DURING THIS PROCESS A LOT.
IT WAS VERY INTERESTING ON HOW IT'S BEING USED.
I DIDN'T NECESSARILY SEE THIS AS A VOTER SUPPRESSION.
AND THIS WAS A DECISION THAT I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE SIMPLE FOR US TO TRUST THAT YOU WOULD MAKE, AND HOPEFULLY WITH THE TRANSPARENCY OF WHY YOU WOULD MAKE THAT DECISION NOT TO PUT A FRIEND OR A PAL.
AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT WOULD HAVE BEEN.
PETER, I'M HAPPY YOU'RE THERE, BUT I DON'T KNOW BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, PETER IS INVOLVED.
PETER COULD HAVE MADE THE BEST CASE AND WOULD HAVE BEEN THE BEST DECISION, BUT WE DON'T KNOW THAT.
WHAT I DO KNOW IS, IS PERCEPTION IS REALITY.
AND. AS NONPARTIZAN AS THESE SEATS ARE.
IS THAT REALLY THE REALITY OF WHAT THIS IS ABOUT? BECAUSE I WATCHED WEST MELBOURNE JUST GO THROUGH A APPOINTMENT THAT WAS VERY CLEAN.
HOWEVER, THAT NOBODY HAD GENUINELY AN ISSUE WITH IT IN THAT AREA.
AGAIN, GREATEST CITY ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH, MAN.
COME ON. WE'VE GOT TO BE BIGGER THAN AMERICA.
I DON'T WANT US TO BE LOOKED DOWN UPON, IS WHAT NOT TO DO.
THERE WAS A LOT OF MONEY, TAXPAYER DOLLARS, THAT WAS SPENT ON A VERY SIGNIFICANTLY LOW TURNOUT.
AND WE KNEW THAT WAS GOING TO BE THE CASE.
AND SO FISCALLY, THERE'S THAT GUY.
I MEAN, AGAIN, WHERE I'M JUST LIKE, IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE.
AND APPOINTMENTS ARE WHAT TAKE PLACE RIGHT NOW.
OUR GOVERNOR HAS THE ABILITY TO APPOINT A COUNTY COMMISSIONER SEAT.
IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, THAT IS VACANT.
BUT I DON'T SEE ANYBODY SAYING WE DON'T WANT WE WANT TO STRIP THAT POWER AWAY FROM THEM.
[01:00:09]
A PARTIZAN PERSPECTIVE, AND THAT TO ME IS A PROBLEM BECAUSE THEN THESE SEATS SHOULD BE NONPARTISAN AND WE SHOULD OPERATE NONPARTISAN.SO WE SHOULD HOLD YOU ACCOUNTABLE IN A NONPARTISAN WAY, NOT IN A PARTIZAN WAY.
AGAIN. WE'RE ON THE VACANCIES.
LEGISLATIVE FILLING OF VACANCIES.
I ALSO SIT ON THE CHARTER REVIEW AND FOR YOUR SERVICE.
THANK YOU SO MUCH. AND YOU KNOW, THIS BEING THE I JUST WANT TO, I GUESS, ECHO A LITTLE BIT OF WHAT WE JUST HEARD FROM DAVID, BECAUSE WHEN WE LOOK AT THIS COUNCIL AND WE KNOW WHO WE ELECTED TO REPRESENT THE PEOPLE OF PALM BAY, WE ANTICIPATE THAT THEY ARE GOING TO PICK THE RIGHT PEOPLE FOR THE JOB.
AND WHEN I HEAR VOTER SUPPRESSION, WHAT IT SAYS TO ME IS THAT WE DON'T TOO SURE WHAT IT MEANS OR HOW IT IS PERCEIVED OUTSIDE OF THE CITY OF PALM BAY.
HE MENTIONED WEST MELBOURNE WHO JUST DID THE SAME THING.
WHY CAN'T WE DO THAT? WHY CAN'T WE DO THAT? IN PALM BAY? THIS IS NOW AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO BE CLEAR, FOR US TO REALLY KNOW WHAT THE VOTERS THINK, PUT IT ON THE BALLOT, LET THE VOTERS CHOOSE AGAIN. IT IS SIMPLY CLEAR YOU WANT DON'T WANT VOTER SUPPRESSION.
PUT IT ON THE BALLOT. LET'S SEE WHAT OUR VOTERS CHOOSE AND THEN WE'LL BE CLEAR.
NO MORE AMBIGUITY, NO MORE WONDERING WHAT OR THE VOCAL MAJORITY WANTS.
WE WANT TO SEE WHAT THE TRUE MAJORITY WANTS.
SO I THINK IT ONLY MAKES SENSE TO PUT IT ON THE BALLOT AND LET THE PEOPLE OF PALM BAY CHOOSE.
HI. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS JANE JACKSON.
AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT DIDN'T WE JUST VOTE ON THIS IN 2019? ABOUT SPECIAL ELECTIONS.
AND THAT WE TOOK THE CHOICE AWAY FROM COUNCIL AND GAVE IT BACK TO THE PEOPLE.
AND THAT'S WHERE I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE.
NOW, I VOTED FOR MOST OF US, NOT ALL OF YOU.
SORRY, BUT I DON'T TRUST YOU TO VOTE FOR ME, YOU KNOW? I MEAN, THAT'S NOT YOUR JOB.
SO IF YOU WANT TO PUT IT ON THE BALLOT.
SO BE IT. BUT IT'S NOT GOING TO PASS.
ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK? YES, MA'AM. PLEASE STEP FORWARD.
VERY SELDOM DO I COME UP HERE.
I AM THE OTHER HALF OF THAT WONDERFUL MAN, KENNETH DELGADO.
THAT. WE DON'T DO THINGS OR WE DIDN'T LET OUR CHILDREN.
DO THINGS BECAUSE EVERYBODY ELSE DID IT.
AND WHEN THEY WOULD COME AND THEY SAY, WELL, SO-AND-SO IS DOING THIS, WE WOULD LOOK AT THEM IN THE EYES AND WE SAY, OKAY, WHAT IS YOUR LAST NAME? IS YOUR LAST NAME? SALGADO IS THEIR LAST NAME.
SALGADO. SO JUST BECAUSE SOMEBODY ELSE IS DOING WHATEVER THEY LET THEIR CHILDREN DO, THAT DOESN'T DOESN'T MEAN THAT OUR HOUSEHOLD IS GOING TO FOLLOW IS GOING TO FOLLOW THE SAME SAME THING.
SO I'VE HEARD MANY TIMES WHERE WEST MELBOURNE DID THIS.
I APPRECIATE SO MUCH DAVID AND THE YOUNG LADY THAT CAME.
APPRECIATE THEM COMING AND SPEAKING.
PALM BAY IS NOT MELBOURNE, PALM BAY IS NOT WEST MELBOURNE.
AND SO WE GO WITH WITH WHAT PALM BAY VALUES ARE.
THE VALUES AND THE CORE VALUES OF PALM BAY WILL BE LIFTED UP BY THE BY THE VOTERS.
AND SO JUST BECAUSE IT WAS A SEAMLESS THING THAT THEY DID DOES NOT THAT IS IRRELEVANT.
ABSOLUTELY. HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH US HERE IN PALM BAY.
[01:05:04]
BUT WE DIDN'T HAVE THE PROBLEM OF DRUGS AND WE DIDN'T HAVE THE PROBLEMS AS THEY WERE GOING GROWING UP IN IN IN THEIR MATURE AGE.AND SO I SAY TO THE COUNCIL, WE NEED TO SEEK WHAT IS IMPORTANT FOR PALM BAY.
WHAT ARE THE VOTERS SAYING? WHAT IS THE PEOPLE SAYING? WHAT ARE THEY LOOKING FORWARD TO? AND SO DON'T DON'T DON'T GO AROUND LOOKING AT WHAT EVERYBODY ELSE IS DOING.
NO, WHAT ARE WE DOING? THAT IS WHAT WILL SEPARATE US.
AND THAT IS WHAT WILL MAKE THIS THE GREATEST CITY ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH.
BECAUSE WE'RE NOT COPYCATS, CATS.
WE'RE NOT COPYING WHAT EVERYBODY ELSE IS DOING.
MR. HARRIS, CAN YOU CAN YOU READ FOR US WHAT THAT THE ORDINANCE READS TODAY? IT'S IF IF SOMEONE RESIGNS OR ILLNESS AS OF A YEAR.
AS FAR AS A PERMANENT VACANCY, IT STATES WHEN THERE IS ONE YEAR OR LESS REMAINING IN THE TERM OF SAID OFFICE, THE COUNCIL SHALL, BY A MAJORITY VOTE, CHOOSE A QUALIFIED SUCCESSOR TO SERVE THE REMAINDER OF THE TERM.
WHEN THERE'S WHEN THERE'S MORE THAN ONE YEAR LEFT REMAINING IN THE TERM OF SAID OFFICE AND NO GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION IS SCHEDULED WITHIN ONE YEAR, A SPECIAL ELECTION SHALL BE SCHEDULED TO BE HELD NO SOONER THAN 90 DAYS OR MORE THAN 180 DAYS FOLLOWING THE DATE OF THE VACANCY.
EVEN THE INDIVIDUAL ELECTED SHALL SERVE THE REMAINDER OF THE UNEXPIRED TERM.
SO IF IT'S OVER IN A YEAR, WE HAVE A SPECIAL ELECTION.
ANYTHING UNDER A YEAR ALSO MAKES THE APPOINTMENT.
ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM? JUST A SECOND, SIR.
LET HIM SPEAK, AND THEN YOU'RE NEXT.
HE WAS COMING UP WHEN YOUR HANDS.
NATHAN WHITE, 1301 SEABURY STREET SOUTHWEST.
UM, I CAN'T DISAGREE ENOUGH WITH THE STATEMENT MADE THAT IT WAS AN INSIGNIFICANT TURNOUT THAT ELECTED COUNCILMAN PETER FILIBERTO.
WITH ABOUT 84TH ROUNDING WITH ABOUT 84,000 REGISTERED VOTERS IN PALM BAY.
12,546 TURNED OUT TO VOTE IN THAT SPECIAL ELECTION.
IT'S 14.9% OF REGISTERED VOTERS.
BUT DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY TURNED OUT TO VOTE IN THE PRIMARY OF YOUR ELECTION, MR. MAYOR? BECAUSE IT WAS 22,146.
29%. THIS WAS NOT INSIGNIFICANT.
THE VOICE OF OVER 12,000 RESIDENTS IS NOT INSIGNIFICANT, AND IT IS ALSO ABSOLUTELY WORTH THE MONEY.
AND CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT TWO SITTING COUNCILMEN ACTIVELY CAMPAIGNED FOR A DIFFERENT CANDIDATE, I THINK IT IS SAFE TO SAY THAT IF THE COUNCIL HAD APPOINTED, WE WOULD NOT HAVE COUNCILMAN FILIBERTO.
I DON'T CARE WHAT WEST MELBOURNE DOES.
I LIKE WEST MELBOURNE BUT I DON'T CARE WHAT THEY DO.
AS HAS BEEN STATED MANY TIMES, WE ARE PALM BAY.
WE ARE THE GREATEST CITY ON THE FACE OF THIS EARTH.
SO I HEAR. SO LET'S LEAD THE WAY AND LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE WHO GOVERNS.
PHIL WEINBERG ONCE AGAIN, I DON'T DISAGREE WITH SOME OF THESE COMMENTS.
WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, MR. DELGADO, AGAIN, YOU DON'T CARE WHAT WATTS MILBOURNE DOES.
BUT YOU SAY, WELL, WE'RE PALM BAY WE DON'T HAVE TO DO WHAT THEY DO.
LET'S PALM BAY DO WHAT PALM BAY SHOULD DO.
BUT THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
LET THE VOTERS OF PALM BAY DECIDE.
IF HE HAD, DON'T PUT THIS ON THE BALLOT.
GUESS WHAT, FOLKS? THAT'S VOTER SUPPRESSION.
YOU'RE NOT ALLOWING THE VOTERS TO VOTE ON THIS.
ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK ON ITEM NUMBER THREE? SO MORE PALM BAY, FLORIDA.
I'M JUST GOING TO BRING UP ONE POINT OF ONE OF THE REASONS WHY THIS PROPOSAL WAS BROUGHT FORTH IS WE WERE TRYING TO PROVIDE SOME CONTINUITY TO WHEN WHEN WE'RE HOLDING THESE ELECTIONS.
I THINK THE SPECIAL ELECTION DIDN'T HAVE A GREAT VOTER TURNOUT.
[01:10:07]
AND IN FACT, ACTUALLY INCREASE THE VOTER TURNOUT.WE WOULD SEE PEOPLE BE ABLE TO ELECT THE PERSON THEY WANT TO ELECT.
WE DON'T HAVE A SPECIAL ELECTION, JUST HAPPEN AT ANY POINT IN TIME IN THE YEAR.
WE'RE GOING TO HOLD THAT SPECIAL ELECTION ALONG WITH THE CURRENT ELECTIONS THAT WE USUALLY HAVE, AND THEN WE'LL SEE A HIGHER VOTER TURNOUT TO ELECT THE PERSON THAT WE WANT TO ELECT TO THAT YOUR COUNCIL SEATS.
ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK? TAKE COUNCILMAN FILIBERTO.
I'M GOING TO START ON YOUR END TODAY.
THANK YOU, MAYOR. SO REGARDING TO ITEM NUMBER THREE, AND I THANK YOU FOR HAVING TERESA READ THE ORDINANCE OUT REGARDING IF IT'S UNDER ONE YEAR, IT WILL BE AN APPOINTMENT. IF IT'S OVER ONE YEAR, THERE WILL BE A SPECIAL ELECTION.
SO BASICALLY WE DON'T HAVE ONE OR THE OTHER.
AND THAT'S THAT'S GREAT FOR PALM BAY.
I THINK THE HYBRID SYSTEM WORKS.
WE WERE JUST RIGHT THERE ON THE PRECIPICE OF THE ONE YEAR AND THE VOTERS CAME OUT.
AND THAT'S WHY IT WAS CONTENTIOUS. IT WAS HIGHLY CONTESTED BECAUSE WE WERE RIGHT THERE.
ARE WE GOING TO DO THE SPECIAL ELECTION OR WE'RE GOING TO DO AN APPOINTMENT? AND THAT'S WHAT MADE IT CONTESTED.
IF IT WAS TWO OR THREE YEARS OUT, THERE WOULD BE NO IT WOULD HAVE BEEN AN ELECTION.
EITHER WAY, THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN NO CONTESTS.
BUT BECAUSE IT WAS SO CLOSE TO THAT ONE YEAR.
IT'S FRESH ON EVERYBODY'S MINDS.
I CAN'T HAVE THIS GO TO THE BALLOT, SIR.
AND THAT'S THE REST OF MY COMMENTS.
HERE. THANK YOU. I THINK ENOUGH SAID AS TO WHY I'M VERY EXITED PERFECTLY.
VOTER SUPPRESSION HAS BEEN THROWN AROUND ALL.
I THINK THAT'S A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF VOTER SUPPRESSION FOR US.
NOT PUSHING THIS FORWARD, NOT GIVING 80%.
OF ALL VOTERS TO HAVE A CHANCE TO TO HAVE A SAY.
THAT'S THE PERFECT EXAMPLE OF VOTER SUPPRESSION.
I WILL SUPPORT THIS AS IS OUR COUNCILMAN FOSTER.
I DON'T WANT TO NOT INCLUDE YOU.
AND. THERE'S A I LIKE TO SAY, NO, WE'RE NOT WEST MELBOURNE, WE'RE NOT COCO, YOU'RE NOT MELBOURNE.
BUT THEY ALSO DON'T WASTE MONEY LIKE WE DO.
IN. THAT'S WHY I VOTED TO APPOINT.
EVERYBODY TO A POINT DURING THAT COUNCIL MEETING.
OKAY. AND I DID IT BECAUSE I FELT THAT OVER $250,000.
COULD HAVE HELD THE ELECTION IN NOVEMBER.
BECAUSE YOU HAVE WORKERS READY TO GO.
THE SUPERVISOR ELECTION COULD HAVE HELD THE ELECTION IN NOVEMBER.
I MEAN, I'LL FORGET ABOUT THAT.
AND IT WENT ALL THE WAY TO MARCH.
OKAY. ALSO, GEOFF BARELY KNEW THAT HE WAS LEAVING THE COUNCIL BACK IN JANUARY BECAUSE HE WENT TO APPLY FOR HIS TEACHING CERTIFICATE IN ALABAMA.
OKAY. SO SO THAT'S WHEN THE PROBLEM STARTED.
HE SHOULD RESIGN AND WENT ON TO ALABAMA TO START TEACHING.
INSTEAD OF HANGING AROUND UNTIL WE GET CLOSER AND CLOSER TO THE ELECTION.
NOW THE ORDINANCE GAVE THE CITY COUNCIL THE AUTHORITY TO APPOINT JUST LIKE THE GOVERNOR.
THE GOVERNOR APPOINT PEOPLE TO ELECTIONS TO.
SO A STATE REPRESENTATIVE, YOU CAN APPOINT SOMEONE TO A STATE SENATOR.
THAT'S NOT. IS THAT VOTER SUPPRESSION? SUPPRESSION. HE COULD POINT TO SOMEONE ON A COUNTY COMMISSION.
HE HAS THE AUTHORITY TO DO THAT.
AND I DON'T SEE PEOPLE MARCHING ON TALLAHASSEE NOW.
WHO GAVE US THAT AUTHORITY TO APPOINT.
I WASN'T HERE DOING THAT ELECTION WHEN IT WAS ON THE BALLOT.
[01:15:01]
YEAH, I VOTED FOR THAT.THEY GAVE THE FUTURE COUNSEL TO MAKE A DECISION.
NOW WE'RE TAKING IT RIGHT BACK TO THE VOTERS.
WELL, I GOT TO JUST GO TO THE VOTERS TO MAKE IT CLEAR.
WE WANT THIS. WE WANT TO KEEP THE OLD WAY.
BECAUSE THE NEXT CITY COUNCIL SITS ON THE DICE WHEN THIS COME UP AND IT WILL COME UP AGAIN.
MIGHT NOT DO WHAT THIS CITY COUNCIL DID.
SO I DIDN'T VOTE FOR I WANTED APPOINTMENTS TO MOVE ON.
I WANTED I DIDN'T WANT TO RAISE CITY MONEY.
I WANTED A FIVE PERSON COUNCIL.
OKAY. AND THEN IN NOVEMBER, THEY WOULD HAVE VOTED.
THE NEXT ELECTION, THOUGH, BOTH WILL HAVE TO RUN.
YOU MIGHT HAVE A PRIMARY IN ANY OTHER RUN IN A GENERAL.
IT'S NOT FAIR TO ME TO RUN THAT MANY TIMES.
WELL, ONE SEAT AND YOU DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE GOING TO GET IT.
I'M READY FOR THIS TO GO BEFORE THE VOTERS AND LET THEM MAKE ANOTHER DECISION, WHICH THEY ALREADY MADE WAY BACK WHEN OR HOW WE SHOULD APPOINT. I'M FOR PEOPLE VOTING.
BUT NOT FOR WAY TOO GOOD AT BORROWING MONEY WHEN THE SUPERVISOR ELECTION COULD HAVE BEEN HELD IN NOVEMBER AND SHE PUSHED IT BACK TO MARCH.
AND WE HAVE TO PAY THAT MONEY.
WELL, A 12,000 VOTE TURNOUT AND PUT PEOPLE AT RISK DURING A PANDEMIC.
LET'S MOVE THIS FORWARD. I'M FOR IT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, DEPUTY MAYOR.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AMENDMENT THREE.
I WILL MAKE IT. OH, WELL, GO AHEAD.
CARRY ON. WELL, SEE, BEFORE YOU EVEN MAKE THAT MOTION.
RIGHT. I WAS JUST TRYING TO GET YOUR FEEDBACK ON IT.
WELL, YOU KNOW, AS PROCEDURE WISE, WE CAN MAKE A MOTION AND STILL HAVE.
I GET THAT. BUT I WANTED TO MAKE A COMMENT.
I JUST WANT TO SAY, I THINK WHAT WE HAVE CURRENTLY, IT WORKS RIGHT NOW.
OR LESS, RIGHT? YOU APPOINT ONE YEAR OR MORE OR MORE THAN A YEAR.
THAT'S THE DRILL. THAT'S THAT'S WHERE I STAND.
I THINK WHAT'S IN PLACE TODAY IS GOOD.
I WAS MAKING THE MOTION FOR AMENDMENT THREE TO PUT IT ON THE CITY CHARTER.
SECOND, I GOT A MOTION BY DEPUTY MAYOR JOHNSON, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN FELIX.
ANY ADDITIONAL DISCUSSIONS? I'LL JUST SAY THIS BRIEFLY.
LET THE VOTERS VOTE, BUT DON'T LET THEM VOTE ON THIS.
SO, LIKE I SAID, WHICHEVER WAY IT GOES, THAT'S HOW WE THAT'S HOW WE GOVERN.
BUT I'M FINE WITH ALL THESE ITEMS GOING TO THE TO THE CITIZENS, TO OUR BOSSES AND LET THEM DECIDE.
AND I'M THE SAME WAY WITH THIS.
SO. THEY FEEL IT NEEDS TO STAY THE WAY IT STAYS WILL GOVERN BY THAT AND SO FORTH.
THANK YOU, DEPUTY MAYOR NELSON, FELIX, ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS? I I'M WILLING TO SUPPORT IT AS IS RIGHT NOW.
ROLL CALL. WHAT WAS YOUR VOTE, MR. FILIBERTO? I.
RIGHT. WELL, THIS GUY OC THREE, TWO, TWO PASSES.
THIS IS PROCEDURES IN OUR MEETINGS.
CORRECT. ANYONE WISH TO SPEAK? AS THE CHIEF, PLEASE.
I HAVE EVERYONE CALLING YOU MASTER CHIEF.
BILL BATTEN, 586 OCEAN SPRAY STREET, SOUTH WEST.
I WANT THE PAY RAISE THAT GOES WITH IT.
[01:20:01]
YOU GOT ONE MAYBE? NO. THE NAVY.THE NAVY FROCKS, THEY'RE THEIR ENLISTED PERSONNEL.
OKAY. WE'LL LIVE WITH IT, I THINK.
ALL RIGHT, BILL BATTEN, 586 OCEAN SPRAY STREET SOUTHWEST, BEGINNING JANUARY 20, 23.
YOU GET THE MONTH OF JUNE OFF.
WELL, I JUST BROUGHT UP WHAT HAPPENS IF SOMEBODY LEAVES THE CHAIR? THAT MEANS THAT NOBODY'S HERE FOR ONE MONTH.
THAT WOULD ONLY LEAVE YOU 29 DAYS, POTENTIALLY, DURING THAT TIME TO APPOINT SOMEBODY THAT YOU DIDN'T EVEN DESIGNATE WHO WAS GOING TO BE FILLING THAT SEAT BECAUSE YOU WOULDN'T BE HERE. RIGHT.
WELL, WE HAVE A TELEPHONE CALL.
THAT'S NOT WHAT I WANT. I DIDN'T PAY YOU TO BE ON PHONE CALL.
I PAID YOU TO BE IN MY CHAMBERS.
YOU CAN TAKE VACATION ANY TIME YOU WANT, IF YOU NEED.
IF YOU FEEL THE DESIRE TO BE GONE, YOU CAN TAKE THE VACATION ANY TIME YOU WANT.
YOU PUT IT IN. YOU PUT YOUR REQUEST.
AS IT CURRENTLY STANDS RIGHT NOW.
FOUR CONSECUTIVE MEETINGS IN THE CITY OF PALM BAY BEFORE YOU'RE REMOVED FROM YOUR SEAT.
SO YOU COULD YOU COULD LEAVE 3 TO 1 AND YOU COULD BE GONE WITH NO PROBLEM AT ALL.
YOU'D BE LIKE EVERY OTHER EMPLOYEE THAT WANTS TO TAKE A VACATION.
YOU PUT YOUR TIME AND YOUR REQUEST AND YOU GO ON VACATION.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO SAY EVERYBODY GOES ON VACATION THE SAME DAY.
WE STILL WILL HAVE PEOPLE HERE TO CONDUCT THE BUSINESS WITHIN THE CITY.
I THINK THAT'S WHAT THE BIG FEAR IS.
THE NEXT ONE YOU HAVE, YOU CAN MISS.
IF YOU MISS SIX MEETINGS IN 12 MONTHS, THEN YOU WILL BE REMOVED BY THE CITIZENS.
RIGHT? WE ARE NOT THE COUNTY, WE ARE THE CITY OF PALM BAY.
SO YOU CAN STILL TAKE YOUR VACATIONS, YOU CAN STILL HAVE YOUR TIME OFF.
YOU JUST DON'T MAKE IT MANDATORY THAT EVERYBODY SITTING ON THIS DAIS HAS GONE AT THE SAME TIME.
PUT A LITTLE BIT OF FAITH IN YOUR COMPADRES.
GEOFF MACLEOD, BOTH SOVEREIGN A PALM BAY.
I AM ALWAYS AMAZED AT WHAT PEOPLE WILL SAY TO INFLUENCE OTHER FOLK.
THIS COUNCIL CAN HAVE A SPECIAL MEETING AT ANY TIME IT CHOOSES.
SO TO SAY GOING AWAY IS GOING TO DISRUPT GOVERNMENT IS SIMPLY NONSENSE.
IT IS ONLY FAIR THAT PERSONS WHO WORK FOR THE CITY 24 SEVEN THEY ARE GIVEN A DESIGNATED TIME TO TAKE CARE OF THEIR PERSONAL BUSINESS. WHAT IS WRONG WITH THAT? ALMOST EVERY STATE, ALMOST EVERY CITY HAS THIS PROVISION.
WHY DO WE WANT TO LIVE IN THE DARK AGES? YOU'RE NOT SLAVES.
ACCORDINGLY, YOU MUST BE GIVEN FREE TIME TO DO WHAT YOU WANT.
AND IF IT NEEDS TO BE, YOU COME BACK FOR A SPECIAL MEETING.
WHAT IS THE BIG DEAL? THIS IS WHAT I CAN UNDERSTAND.
SIMILARLY TO SAY WE'RE SUPPRESSING VOTES WHEN THE IDEA THAT YOU'RE PUSHING REDUCES THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE VOTING. IT'S JUST A FALLACIOUS STATEMENT.
PLANET RICH COURT, SOUTHEAST PALM BAY.
BUT THIS GENTLEMAN JUST SAID I WORK FOR L3 HARRIS OK AND WORKING AT L3 HARRIS.
I WORK FOR GREATER THINGS THAN JUST, YOU KNOW, LIKE THIS.
I WORK FOR THE WARFIGHTER, SO I JUST CAN'T.
EVERYBODY JUST CAN'T TAKE OFF.
WE GOT TO PLAN AND SCHEDULE OUR TIME OFF SO WE DON'T DISRUPT THE BIG PICTURE, WHICH IS THE WARFIGHTER. SO WOULD YOU SAY, SIR, THAT'S NOT CORRECT.
I JUST WANT TO PUT MY LITTLE $0.02 IN.
I DON'T THINK YOU SHOULD ALL TAKE OFF AT THE SAME TIME.
THAT'S ALL I'M SAYING. THANK YOU.
AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE TO OUR WARFIGHTERS, SIR.
[01:25:01]
I'M OK WILLIAM CAPOTE, 1452 GLENDALE AVENUE, OK.THAT'S WHY WHEN I USED TO SIT UP THERE, IT WOULD RATTLE ME SOMETIMES BECAUSE PEOPLE ALWAYS TRY TO.
IT'S HARD TO ASSIMILATE HOME TO GOVERNMENT AND PRIVATE INDUSTRY.
OK. WHEN YOU DO GET, LET'S SAY, THE VOTERS VOTE FOR YOUR JUNE OK AND YOU GET YOUR JUNE OFF, YOU KNOW, YOU REALLY WHO ARE YOU GIVING TIME OFF? IS STAFF. THAT'S REALLY IT'S NOT ALL.
AND AS IT IS IN JUNE, THEY'RE GEARING UP FOR BUDGETS.
SO IMAGINE IF THEY HAD THAT MONTH TO BE ABLE TO SAY, OKAY, WE DON'T HAVE TO PREPARE FOR A MEETING.
WE COULD CONCENTRATE ON THE BUDGET AND HAVE IT PREPARED FOR COUNCIL.
AND WE AND IF ANYTHING EMERGENCY HAPPENS, WE COULD CALL A SPECIAL A SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING AND COUNCIL CONVENES EVEN IF THEY'RE ON VACATION, ON THE PHONE WILL HAVE TO COME BACK.
IS HAVING A FULL UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THAT JOB ENTAILS.
YOU CANNOT COMPARE YOUR HOME TO THOSE SEATS.
YOU CANNOT COMPARE THE PRIVATE SECTOR TO THOSE SEATS.
I UNDERSTAND THE EMOTION THAT PEOPLE BRING HERE.
TO THIS DAIS TO SPEAK AND TO THIS PODIUM, BUT UNDERSTAND REALITY.
I'M ONLY GOING TO SPEAK WHEN I FEEL THAT I NEED TO SAY SOMETHING.
YOU CAN'T COMPARE PRIVATE AND HOME TO WHAT YOU GUYS DO.
TEN DELGADO 154 ANGELA ROAD, SOUTHEAST PALM BAY.
AND IT'S FUNNY HOW SOMETIMES WE WANT TO COMPARE WITH THE PRIVATE INDUSTRY, SALARIES, ETC.
AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN NOW WE DON'T WANT TO COMPARE IT AND HOW WE WANT TO CHANGE WORDINGS.
MY POINT HERE IS THIS, AND YOU'RE PROBABLY GOING TO HEAR ME SAY THAT IN OTHER PLACES.
QUITE FRANKLY, THERE'S A LOT OF GOOD THOUGHTS IN THIS POINT.
THE PROBLEM REMAINS IS THAT IF YOU HAVE A WHOLE PIE AND THEN ONE CHILD SAYS, I WANT THE WHOLE PIE AND TRIES TO GRAB IT. MORE THAN LIKELY WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IS THAT CHILD IS NOT GOING TO HAVE ANY OF IT, EVEN IF A PART OF IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE FOR HIM. AND MY ISSUE REALLY WITH ALL OF THIS IS, IS THE PERSPECTIVE THAT'S GOING TO BE PRESENTED TO THE CITY OF PALM BAY.
IT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE THAT THE DIOCESE IN ITS PROPOSAL IS GOING TO WANT THE PIE, THE CAKE, THE MEAL, THE FROSTING, THE ICE CREAM AND THE COOKIE.
BESIDES. SO, SO UP TILL NOW, THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE.
NUMBER ONE, NOT ONLY DO WE RELEASE OUR AUTHORITY TO VOTE, SO SO YOU GOT THAT PIE THEN I WANT TO RAISE TO AT MY PLACE.
AND I WISH YOU YOU'D HAVE PART OF THE PIE.
ON TOP OF THAT, I'M GOING TO HAVE A VACATION.
WHAT WAS THE OTHER ONE? THE ONE. Q I'M SORRY.
THE OTHER POINT. I'VE GOT THIS, I'VE GOT THAT.
AND THEN AS WE GO ON, WE'RE GOING TO FIND OUT THAT THE PIE THAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR CONTINUES GETTING BIGGER AND BIGGER AND BIGGER. AND WHAT HAPPENS IS THAT WHEN IT GOES TO VOTING, EMOTIONS DO RISE.
[01:30:02]
AND THEY LOOK AT THAT AND THEY'RE GOING TO SAY, THEY'RE TRYING TO TAKE MY PORTION.AND THEN WHAT ENDS UP HAPPENING IS THAT WHAT YOU GUYS DESERVE? THEY END UP SAYING YOU GET NOTHING.
AND THEN WHAT DO WE HAVE LEFT OVER? WE'RE BACK TO SQUARE ONE.
UNFORTUNATELY, THOUGH, YOU DESERVE SOME OF THE STUFF THAT'S IN HERE.
I LIVE ON SHERMAN STREET, SOUTHEAST, AND PALM BAY AND I HAVE TWO COMMENTS.
ONE HAS TO DO WITH THE TIME OFF RETIRED FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
SO I UNDERSTAND GOVERNMENT WORKERS AND WE WERE ONLY ALLOWED TO HAVE EITHER ONE PERSON OR A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF EACH DEPARTMENT THAT WAS ALLOWED OFF AT ANY GIVEN TIME BECAUSE THE DEPARTMENT COULD STILL FUNCTION IF WE JUST HAD A LIMITED STAFF.
NUMBER TWO IS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PRETTY MUCH AT THIS POINT, EVERYTHING IS PASSING, WHICH MEANS THEY'RE ALL GOING TO BE ON THE NOVEMBER BALLOT.
AND ON THE SURFACE IT SOUNDS GREAT, BUT IT COSTS APPROXIMATELY $13,000 PER PAGE ADDED TO THE BALLOT.
BUT IF YOU'RE TALKING TEN LINE ITEMS OR EIGHT, WHATEVER IT IS THAT WE HAVE, HOW MANY PAGES IS IT GOING TO ADD AND HOW MANY MORE SALARIES AT TODAY'S RATE COULD WE BE PAYING BECAUSE WE'RE USING THAT TO ADD PAGES TO THE NOVEMBER BALLOT.
SO THAT'S IT. THANK YOU, MA'AM.
ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK? ON THIS ISSUE. PLEASE STEP FORWARD.
NATHAN WHITE, 1301 SEABREEZE STREET SOUTHWEST.
I'LL KEEP IT BRIEF. I'M GLAD TO.
TO BE CONFIDENT THAT THIS IS NOT LIKELY TO PASS.
AS COUNSEL INFORMED US ALL NEAR THE LATTER PORTION OF LAST YEAR, IT WOULD BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE WORKING OF THE CITY TO ONLY HAVE A FOUR PERSON COUNCIL IN THE TIME IT WOULD TAKE TO HAVE A SPECIAL ELECTION.
SO I'M SURE THAT THOSE COUNCILMEN WOULD ALSO BE OPPOSED TO HAVING NO COUNCILMAN FOR 9% OF THE YEAR.
RIGHT AFTER ASKING FOR A 100% RAISE.
SO. I'M GLAD THAT WE'RE PUTTING THE CITY FIRST.
THANK YOU. AT LEAST THE FOLKS.
DAVE JONES 1107 MERRITT NORTHWEST PALM BAY.
I GOT TO YOU KNOW, SOMETHING WAS SET UP HERE AND MASTER CHIEF AND I HAD THIS CONVERSATION BEFORE WHERE I'VE HEARD MAYOR CAPOTE TALK ABOUT HOW WE LOOK AT THE PRIVATE VERSUS GOVERNMENT.
AND IT'S JUST TWO DIFFERENT WAYS WE SHOULD LOOK AT IT.
WHEN I LOOKED AT THIS, I LOOK AT IT FROM A FROM A BUSINESSMAN PERSPECTIVE.
I WORK WITH SENIOR LEVELS OF LEADERSHIP.
AND I WOULD TELL YOU RIGHT NOW, THE HARDEST PEOPLE TO GET TO TAKE ANY TYPE OF VACATION ARE FOR THE SENIOR LEVELS OF LEADERSHIP THAT ACTUALLY CARE, SAY THAT THEY DON'T WANT TO TAKE VACATION. THEY FEEL GUILTY AT TIMES OF VACATIONS, THAT IT STRUGGLES TO TAKE VACATION AND AT TIMES WORKING WITH ORGANIZATIONS.
WE'D HAVE TO CONVINCE THEM SOMETIMES, YOU KNOW, WANT TO SAY FORCE THEM TO TAKE VACATION.
BUT IT'S LIKE, HEY, MAN, LIKE, YOU GOT TO TAKE TIME OFF.
IT'S NOT JUST FOR YOU. IT'S FOR THE STAFF THAT YOU ANNOY ON A REGULAR BASIS.
IT'S FOR ALL PARTIES INVOLVED.
AND I THINK SOMETIMES THAT THAT'S IT'S BEING POSITIONED AS IF WE PUSH THIS THROUGH.
THE ENTIRE CITY OF PALM BAY WILL NOT BE ABLE TO RUN AND OPERATE.
[01:35:03]
WE HAVE A VERY EFFECTIVE AND QUALIFIED AND GOOD CITY MANAGER, DEPUTY MANAGER, CITY STAFF CONTINUES TO SHOW UP AND SHOW UP WELL, WHILE BEING UNDERSTAFFED.AND WHEN I THINK ABOUT THAT, I THINK ABOUT THE NECESSARY BUT STILL STRAIN THAT THE COUNCIL DOES HAVE TO PUT ON PARTICULAR POSITIONS IN ORDER FOR THESE THINGS TO HAPPEN. I THINK IT DOES MAKE SENSE FOR FOR YOUR MENTAL MAKEUP, YOUR MENTAL HEALTH, YOUR BREAK, YOUR TIME WITH FAMILY, ESPECIALLY IF YOU KNOW WHEN IT'S SET.
WHAT CAN WE GET DONE? WHAT ARE THE THINGS THAT WE CAN DO NOW THAT WE KNOW WHEN THIS IS GOING TO TAKE PLACE, THAT WE CAN'T DO BECAUSE WE'RE STRONGHOLD IN THE WAY IN WHICH WE ARE TODAY. SO THAT IS WHY I VOTED THE WAY I DID AS A CHARTER MEMBER.
I DO BELIEVE THAT THERE'S A REALLY GOOD OPPORTUNITY TO HELP EVERYONE PROGRESS FORWARD, WHETHER YOU'RE UP THERE ON THE DAIS OR WHETHER YOU'RE AN ACTUAL INDIVIDUAL WORKING FOR THE CITY.
BUT I DO THINK IT NEEDS TO BE CLEAR THE CITY WON'T SHUT DOWN IN JUNE.
ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK? GOOD EVENING, ROBERTS. 1796 WIN BOOK.
HOW'S EVERYBODY DOING? EVERYBODY NEEDS DOWNTIME.
NOW, I ALWAYS HAD TO BE A BACKUP, SO I DON'T KNOW.
SORRY I CAME IN LATE, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S IN YOUR PLAN.
BUT IF IT HITS THE FAN, DO YOU WANT SOMEBODY WHO CAN MAKE THEM MAKE THE TOUGH DECISIONS THAT MAY NEED TO BE MADE? AND AGAIN, I'VE HAD PLACES THAT THAT NEVER, EVER SHUT DOWN.
WHAT IF THIS WHAT IF POWER? WHAT IF FIRE YOU'VE GOT YOU'VE GOT A PROBLEM.
YOU'RE UNDERSTAFFED. WITH REGARD TO FIRE MANAGEMENT, I DID SEND LETTERS OUT TO THE STAFF.
I HOLD YOU. HOPE YOU GOT THEM.
BUT I WOULD ASK, WHAT IF YOU KNOW AND ASK SOME TOUGH QUESTIONS, WHAT DO WE DO IF IF YOU HAD A CAT THREE OR CAT FOUR, COME KNOCKING ON THE DOOR, SO PLEASE GIVE THAT DUE CONSIDERATION.
THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS? LISTEN, ON THIS ONE, I WANT TO I WANT TO KICK IT OFF, COUNSEL.
WE ALL NEED SOME DOWNTIME, RIGHT? EACH AND EVERY ONE OF US.
I WANT TO THROW THAT OUT THERE.
SO MAYBE WE MEET ONCE IN JUNE AND THEN ONCE IN DECEMBER AS OPPOSED TO TWICE EACH IN THOSE MONTHS.
THAT WOULD ALLEVIATE STAFF IN THE MONTH OF JUNE AND ALSO IN THE MONTH OF DECEMBER.
WHERE'S THE HOLIDAY SEASON? JUST WANT TO THROW IT OUT THERE.
WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THAT? I'M NOT GOING TO MAKE A MOTION YET.
NOT LIKE. THIS REALLY COMES DOWN TO STAFF.
THIS IS JUST OR COUNCIL MEETINGS.
MAYOR MEDINA WILL NOT BE ACCESSIBLE.
COUNCILMAN FILIBERTO WILL NOT BE ACCESSIBLE.
YOU STAFF WILL NOT BE ACCESSIBLE.
EVERYBODY WILL STILL BE ACCESSIBLE.
BUT WE'RE JUST NOT GOING TO BE UP HERE LIKE THAT'S REALLY WHAT IT IS.
SO, YOU KNOW, I GO ON VACATION.
WHEN I GO ON VACATION, I WORK AROUND IT.
YOU KNOW, I'LL TAKE CALLS AND EMAILS EITHER WAY.
THIS IS REALLY FOR STAFF AT THE END OF THE DAY.
OUR STAFF DESERVES IT MORE THAN ANYBODY.
AND THAT'S THAT'S WHY I STAND ON THIS, MAYOR.
[01:40:01]
AND I AGREE IN A SENSE.I AGREE. SO LET ME ASK MADAM SHERMAN BEFORE WE EVEN GET FURTHER INTO THIS DISCUSSION.
DO YOU FEEL THERE WOULD BE MERIT TO HAVING A JUNE TIME OFF, YOU KNOW, AND DECEMBER OR JUST ONE MONTH ALL? WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THAT? WELL, BASED UPON THE AMOUNT OF WORK THAT IS INVOLVED IN NOT JUST MY OFFICE, THE DEPARTMENTS AND THE OTHER TWO CHARTER OFFICERS FOR PREPARATION OF ITEMS IN ADVANCE OF EVERY MEETING FOR US, WHETHER YOU RECOMMENDED AND THE VOTERS UP TO THEM, BUT WHETHER YOU RECOMMENDED A FULL MONTH OF JUNE, WHICH WOULD BE TWO MEETINGS OR IF YOUR PROPOSAL WAS TO CHANGE THE EXISTING LANGUAGE FROM THE AT LEAST TWICE A MONTH.
CRITERIA TO A MINIMUM OF TEN MEETINGS PER YEAR OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
EITHER WAY, IT STILL ACCOMPLISHES THE SAME GOAL, WHICH WOULD BE YOU WOULD HAVE TWO LESS MEETINGS IN THE YEAR, WHICH MEANS THAT TIME IS FREED UP TO WORK ON THE MANY OTHER PROJECTS THAT WE'RE ALWAYS WORKING ON.
WHEN WE ACTUALLY THERE'S TWO MONTHS IN THE YEAR WHERE THERE'S AN EXTRA WEEK.
SO IT'S LIKE A CYCLE THAT YOU HAVE TO REALLY STAY ON POINT.
YEAH. AND THAT'S MY PERSPECTIVE.
I WOULD LOOK AT MY OTHER FELLOW CHARTER OFFICERS AND SEE IF THEY HAD ANY OTHER THOUGHTS BEFORE.
MADAM ATTORNEY. AS FAR AS LEGALLY.
I MEAN, IT'S CERTAINLY WHATEVER COUNCIL AND THE VOTERS DECIDE EITHER WAY.
IF IT WAS PUT IN THE CHARTER, IT WOULD BE LEGAL.
IF WE WERE TO SAY TO ATTEND MEET TEN.
YOU KNOW, 11 MONTHS OUT OF THE YEAR.
IS THAT IS THAT WHAT I'M HEARING FROM YOU, MADAM SHERMAN? THOSE TWO EXTRA MEETINGS? I WOULD THINK THAT WOULD STILL BE A COUNCIL DECISION.
I WOULD POINT OUT, MARY, ESPECIALLY IF YOU LOOK AT THIS MONTH OF JUNE, WHERE EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE TWO COUNCIL MEETINGS, WE'RE GOING TO BE MEETING EVERY WEEK, INCLUDING THE OFF WEEK.
MADAM TERESE, WOULD YOU PLEASE WEIGH IN? CERTAINLY. AT THE AT THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION, WHEN WE SPOKE ABOUT THIS, I WAS ALL FOR ANY TIME, ANY ADDITIONAL TIME OFF THAT WE HAVE WHERE WE DON'T HAVE TO PREPARE FOR A REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING.
SO IF IT'S DONE THROUGHOUT THE YEAR, IF IT'S DONE FOR AN ENTIRE MONTH, I'M SUPPORTIVE EITHER WAY.
THANK YOU, MA'AM. AND SO, MADAM ATTORNEY, HOW WILL WE PHRASE THIS? WHAT WOULD BE THE BEST WAY TO PHRASE THIS? YOU KNOW, AS A AS OPPOSED TO EXCEPT FOR JUNE GIVEN GIVEN US THE OPTION.
ARE YOU LOOKING TO ADOPT LANGUAGE SIMILAR TO WHAT MS..
SHERMAN SUGGESTED, WHERE THERE WOULD BE A MINIMUM NUMBER OF MEETINGS PER YEAR? YES, MA'AM. I THOUGHT THAT WOULD BE A GOOD SOLUTION.
OR IF YOU WANTED TO SAY THAT COUNCIL WILL IS GOING TO MEET AT LEAST TWICE EACH MONTH EXCEPT FOR JUNE IN DECEMBER, WHEN IT WILL MEET AT LEAST ONCE A MONTH. IT'S LIKE A SIMPLE MAN I LIKE.
HOW WAS IT THAT YOU JUST PHRASED IT? WAS IT? HOW MANY TIMES EITHER? HOW MANY TIMES PER YEAR WHEN? THE TWO MONTHS THAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR? JUST ONE LESS, MA'AM. X AMOUNT OF TIMES PER YEAR.
[01:45:02]
AT LEAST TEN TIMES PER YEAR.AT LEAST WHAT? I WOULD HAVE MEETINGS.
AT LEAST. I SAID IT WOULD PROBABLY BE BETTER TO FIGURE OUT HOW MANY MEETINGS.
SO INSTEAD OF 24, YOU'RE LOOKING AT PROBABLY 20, 22 MEETINGS.
SIMPLE. AND THAT WAY YOU'RE NOT TIED TO THE MONTH OF JUNE.
THAT'S ALL I WAS LOOKING TO DO.
BUT I WANT TO GIVE COUNCILMAN FOSTER AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK NOW.
THE STATE LEGISLATOR IS OFF DURING JUNE.
THE US CONGRESS IS OFF TO JUNE.
MAYBE YOU COULD CLARIFY THAT FOR THE MAYOR.
AND THE COUNTY COMMISSION IS OFFERING A JUNE.
AND THE SCHOOL IS OUT DURING JUNE.
BUT THAT JUNE IS THE BEST TIME TO TAKE OFF.
HURRICANE SEASON DON'T KICK IN REALLY TO JULY OF.
SO THIS GIVES THE STAFF SOME QUALITY OF LIFE.
AND IT GIVES. COUNCIL MEMBERS TO RESET AND GET THE REST OF THE BECAUSE AFTER JUNE IT'S THE BUDGET AND THERE'S A LOT OF WORK THAT GOES IN THE BUDGET AND A LOT OF READING THAT GOES IN THE BUDGET.
SO I'M SORT OF JUST STICKING WITH JUNE AND MOVING ON.
THANK YOU, SIR. COUNCILMAN FILIBERTO.
THANK YOU, MAYOR. I'M GOOD WITH IT, SIR.
I DO. I DO HAVE A CONCERN REGARDING THE HURRICANES THAT CAME THROUGH.
BUT I THINK DAVID PUT IT BEST.
I MEAN, I DON'T TAKE VACATION.
I REALLY DON'T. AND IT HAD TO BE FORCED VACATION, IF ANYTHING.
SO THIS WOULD BE THAT FORCED VACATION.
KIND OF LIKE WHAT WORK DOES TO ME WHEN THEY'RE TELLING ME, HEY, PUT YOUR OVERBURDENING ON YOUR HOURS SO I'M FINE WITH THIS AND GOOD TO GO WITH THE BALLOT BOX. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, SIR.
OR FELIX. MAYOR AGAIN, A LOT HAS BEEN SAID.
I THINK DEPUTY MAYOR PUT IT WELL AND THIS DECISION IS.
ON AN AVERAGE COUNCIL MEETING DAY.
THEY PUT IN, WHAT, 15, 14, ANYWHERE 14 TO 16 HOURS.
I THINK GIVING THEM THAT THE MONTH OF JUNE.
IT WOULD IT WOULD REALLY HELP.
IT WOULD REALLY HELP. SO AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED.
I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT YOU KNOW, COUNCILMAN FILIBERTO MENTIONED THAT HE DOESN'T TAKE VACATION.
I NEEDED VACATION, GET MY HEAD RIGHT AND I'M WILLING TO SUPPORT IT AS IS.
I TRY TO TAKE AS MANY AS THREE VACATION A YEAR WHEN IN NORMAL TIME.
ONE OF THEM IS REALLY A DEDICATED MISSION TRIP, INTERNATIONAL MISSION TRIPS.
AND AND THE MAJORITY OF THEM, IT TAKES MORE THAN A WEEK.
AND THAT'S THE TIME I DID IT, DEDICATED FOR THE LAST TEN YEARS FROM 2013 TO 2019.
I DO MISSION TRIPS, A LOT OF THEM.
THE LAST ONE I WENT WAS THAILAND WAS 14 DAYS.
SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, IT'S JUST REALLY CERTAINLY NOT ABOUT ME.
BUT I THINK THAT MAKES COMPLETE SENSE.
GIVING COUNSEL AND STAFF AN OPPORTUNITY TO RESET, AS HAS BEEN SAID AND WILL TO BETTER SERVE YOU.
WILLIE, YOU WANT TO COUNSEL THAT THAT THAT RIGHT UP HERE.
TO WILL THEY BE ABLE TO SERVE YOU BETTER? AND I'M WILLING TO SUPPORT IT AS IS.
OKAY. WELL, THANK YOU, DEPUTY MAYOR JOHNSON.
[01:50:03]
ANY ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION, GENTLEMEN? SEE, AND NONE ALL IN FAVOR.ANY OPPOSE PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
THIS IS REGARDING THE PETITIONS AMENDING FROM 5% TO 10%.
CORRECT. ANYONE WISH TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST US? COME ON IN. AN OFFICER.
THOMAS GARDENS, 1700 LANTANA COURT NORTHWEST JUST TO GO BACK THE 2019 ELECTION.
IT WAS LOWERED FROM 10% TO 5%.
EVERY ONE OF YOU RAN AND SAID YOU'RE GOING TO BE TRANSPARENT, SAID YOU ARE RUNNING FOR THE PEOPLE.
THE ONLY TIME IN A PETITION FOR THE CITY HAS EVER BEEN.
ATTEMPTED. I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT TO AVOID THE CONTROVERSY.
BUT DURING THIS 2019 ELECTION.
IT WOULD DELAY. IT WOULDN'T HAVE A SPECIAL ELECTION.
IT WOULD BE LATE. IT DELAYED UNTIL THE NEXT GENERAL ELECTION, WHICH RUNS EVERY TWO YEARS.
BUT WHAT CITIZEN IN THEIR RIGHT MIND IS GOING TO SAY, IF I NEED TO GO TO THE CITY AND DO A PETITION, THAT WE SHOULD VOTE TO MAKE IT DOUBLE? WHO'S GOING TO VOTE FOR THAT? I'M NOT. THANK YOU.
BILL BATTEN, 586 OCEAN SPRAY STREET, SOUTH WEST.
AN ORDINANCE IN THE CITY OF PALM BAY TAKES THREE PEOPLE TO PASS.
THEY HAPPEN TO BE SITTING UP THERE.
WE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY WHEN COUNCIL MEMBER LEFT.
AND SO THEY SAID, WELL, ORDINANCE SAYS WE HAVE TO DO IT THIS WAY.
SO YOU KNOW WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO? WE'RE GOING TO USE THE COUNCIL.
WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE THE ORDINANCE.
IT ONLY TAKES THREE PEOPLE TO CHANGE THE ORDINANCE AS A RESULT OF THAT PROCESS.
WE ENDED UP SPENDING TWO MONTHS AND THAT'S WHAT PART OF THAT TIME LINE OF WHY THE EFFECT OF THE SPECIAL ELECTION, BECAUSE CITY COUNCIL DECIDED THEY WERE GOING TO CHANGE THE ORDINANCE.
YOU WANT TO HAVE 10% OF THEM TO REPRIMAND, RECOMMEND IF YOU EVEN CHANGE AN ORDINANCE.
BATONS RECOMMENDATION IS YOU LOWER THAT SO THAT THE CITIZENS HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO IMPACT.
WITHOUT MAKING A HINDRANCE TO 1% FOR AN ORDINANCE.
BECAUSE ORDINANCE ONLY REQUIRE THREE PEOPLE TO AFFECT THE ENTIRE CITY.
YET I HEAR BLAME BEING PASSED ON ANYBODY AND EVERYBODY ELSE.
TWO MONTHS OF THAT DELAY IN A SPECIAL ELECTION.
WE BECAUSE THE COUNCIL WANTED TO CHANGE AN ORDINANCE.
BUT THE CITIZENS HAVE TO SIGN PETITIONS OF 10%.
YOU WANT 10% OF THE VOTING POPULATION TO EVEN BRING THAT RECOMMENDATION TO YOU.
IT LOOKS LIKE A LITTLE BIT OF OVERREACH BY BATON STANDARD.
[01:55:08]
PROBABLY WERE NOT VALID.PEOPLE LIKE SNOWBIRDS AND PEOPLE WHO CAME FROM THE OTHER AREAS, AND THAT WAS 5%, WHICH REQUIRED PROBABLY OVER 3000 SIGNATURES, VALID SIGNATURES TO GET IT ON THE BALLOT AND GET IT GET IT RESCINDED.
NOW, YOU WANT TO TAKE IT BACK TO 10% AGAIN.
BUT I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, IS WHY WHY 10%? WHY NOT MAKE IT 25%? I MEAN, IF YOU REALLY WANT TO PROHIBIT US FROM PETITIONING THE GOVERNMENT, MAKE IT 25%, THEN THAT'D BE GOOD.
NOW YOU WANT TO TAKE IT BACK TO TEN.
WHY STOP THERE AND LET'S JUST MAKE IT 25% AND WE CAN GO OUT AND GET ALL THE PETITIONS AND WE CAN DO ALL THE WORK AND PETITION THE CITY AND COME UP TEN BALLOTS SHORT OR TEN VOTES SHORT. AND FOR ALL THAT WORK, NOTHING WILL HAPPEN.
SO IF YOU WANT TO SUPPRESS OUR ABILITY TO PETITION THE GOVERNMENT, THAT'S FINE.
BUT IF YOU WANT OUR CONCERNS AND THAT WE DO HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT NOT ONLY ORDINANCES, BUT THE CITY CHARTER, THEN GIVE US THE ABILITY AS CITIZENS TO APPROACH OUR GOVERNMENT.
SO. I DON'T KNOW WHY THIS IS EVEN ON A DISCUSSION.
I DON'T KNOW WHY WHAT THE INTENTION OF THIS IS.
BUT, YOU KNOW, IF YOU WANT TO MAKE IT 10%, YOU CAN TAKE IT AS HIGH AS YOU WANT TO MAKE IT.
ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK? STEP FORWARD. KINDERGARTNER 154. ANGELA WROTE SOUTHEAST.
I'D LIKE TO SAY LET'S NOT USE THE WORD VACATION, BECAUSE IN THE MINDS OF PEOPLE IT HAS A WHOLE DIFFERENT CONNOTATION BETWEEN HAVING TEN MEETINGS VERSUS TAKING A VACATION.
I SAY THAT BECAUSE IN REFERENCE TO THIS, GOING BACK TO THE THE FAMOUS LEMON LINE MERINGUE PIE, THIS IS THIS IS WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE.
I'M FROM FROM AN OUTSIDE PERSON, MAYBE LOOKING IN WHAT IT COULD LOOK LIKE.
FIRST, WE START OFF WITH A RAISE.
NOT SAYING YOU DON'T DESERVE ONE, I'M SAYING, BUT THIS.
I'M GOING TO NOT LET YOU VOTE FOR YOUR REPRESENTATIVE.
IF WE USE THE WORD VACATION, I'M GOING TO TAKE A VACATION.
EVEN THOUGH REALLY WHAT WE'RE DOING IS HELPING THE CITY GO.
AND THEN ON TOP OF THAT, NOT ONLY WILL I.
I'M GOING TO MAKE IT EVEN HARDER FOR YOU TO DO ANY ADJUSTMENTS.
SO NOW THIS PIE IS GETTING BIGGER.
WHEN YOU SHOULD HAVE A PIECE OF THE PIE.
THE POSSIBILITY OR THE PROBABILITY IS PEOPLE'S MINDS ARE GOING TO GO HAYWIRE AND THEY'RE GOING TO SAY, NOT ONLY ARE YOU SUPPRESSING MY RIGHT TO VOTE, BUT NOW YOU'RE SUPPRESSING MY ABILITY TO COUNTER ANYTHING THAT WE DON'T AGREE WITH.
AND AND THEN YOU HAVE REDRESS IS THE RIGHT WORD.
AND THIS PROBLEM WILL CONTINUE TO GROW AS WE LOOK AT THE NEXT COUPLE OF ITEMS THAT ARE COMING UP.
THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK? IF I MAY, COUNCILMAN.
IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE HAVE THE SPEAKERS STICK TO THE TOPIC AT HAND.
NOT TO RETURN, NOT TO REFER TO ALL THE OTHER ISSUES ALL AT ONCE.
OKAY. IT'S WE'RE ON THE TOPIC RIGHT NOW OF ITEM NUMBER FIVE.
[02:00:03]
SECONDLY, TO CHANGE THE SPECTRUM, 5%, 5% OF THE VOTERS AND PALM BAY IS FOURTHS ABSURD TO LOWER IT TO THAT EXTENT.VICE CHAIR. I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION FOR YOU.
WHAT WAS THE VOTE ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM OF THE COMMISSION SENATE RECALL? I DON'T HAVE IT IN FRONT OF ME.
I DON'T RECALL OFFHAND. OF COURSE, TYREECE WOULD HAVE THAT.
AS AS MADAM CHAIR, I MEAN, A CLERK CHECKING FOR US.
WHAT WAS THE OVERALL SENTIMENT OF THE BOARD? WELL, YOU KNOW, I THINK, AGAIN, LIKE I SAID, YOU KNOW, IN MY PRESENTATION RIGHT NOW, IT TAKES A 10% OF THE ELECTORS TO AMEND THE CITY CHARTER, WHICH IS REASONABLE.
I MEAN, EVEN THAT IS A FAIRLY LOW BAR.
AND LIKE I SAID, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE HAVE ROUGHLY 80,000 REGISTERED VOTERS TO REDUCE THE THE REQUIREMENT TO CHANGE AN ORDINANCE TO TO, YOU KNOW, 5% OR 4000 PEOPLE IS JUST THE BAR IS JUST SO INCREDIBLY LOW.
IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. IN OTHER WORDS, IT'S NOT A FAIR REPRESENTATION OF THE OVERALL VOTERS.
WELL. THE SENTIMENT, OVERALL SENTIMENT.
IT'S NOT A FAIR REPRESENTATION OF THE OVERALL REGISTERED VOTERS.
IT'S TRUE TO COME UP WITH A SIGNIFICANTLY.
UM. YES. IT PASSED BY A VOTE OF 7 TO 1.
THANK YOU. ANYTHING ELSE? I'M IN FAVOR. I.
I'M JUST DOING THE MATH AND I'M GLAD THAT PHIL SAID IT.
80,000 REGISTERED VOTERS HERE, 5% NEEDED FOR.
FOR A PETITION OF 4000 PEOPLE ARE GOING TO INCREASE THAT TO EIGHT.
BOTTOM LINE FOR ME, I MEAN, GOVERNMENT WAS CREATED FOR THE PEOPLE AND BY THE PEOPLE.
SO I'M OKAY WITH THE 5% AS A PETITION AND IT DOESN'T HAPPEN VERY OFTEN.
AND IT'S NOT EASY TO GET 4000 SIGNATURES ON ON A PIECE OF PAPER, EVEN FOR THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS.
THEY HAVE TO GO AROUND AND GET THOUSANDS OF SIGNATURES JUST TO GET THEIR NAME ON THE BALLOT.
SO I'M FINE WITH THE 5%, AS IS AS WRITTEN HAS IS CURRENTLY, I THINK, SIR OR COUNCILMAN FOSTER.
I'M GOING TO STICK WITH THE CHARTER REVIEW RECOMMENDATION 10% AND MOVE ON.
STEP FORWARD. I THOUGHT EVERYONE WAS COMPLETED.
ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK, PLEASE, BY SHOW OF HANDS.
I REALLY THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. NATHAN WHITE, 1301 SEABREEZE STREET SOUTHWEST.
AND IN FACT, THE FACT THAT IT'S NOT BEEN DONE SINCE THE CHANGE TO 5% WAS MADE MAKES IT SEEM ALL THE MORE OUT OF NOWHERE, SO TO SPEAK.
NOT RELEVANT TO THE CURRENT CONVERSATION.
WHY WE WANT TO DOUBLE THIS NUMBER.
UM, OTHER THAN THE, THE THEME THAT APPEARS TO BE ARISING FROM THESE AMENDMENTS, BUT.
IF THIS IS DESIRED, I CAN ONLY ASSUME IT'S BECAUSE WE THINK THAT THERE SHOULD BE A CONSENSUS OF 10% OF PALM BAY REGISTERED VOTERS.
IN ORDER FOR THIS. A PETITION TO AMEND THE CHARTER OR ORDINANCES OR THE ORDINANCES IN THIS CASE. BUT FROM WHAT HAS BEEN STATED ALREADY TONIGHT.
EVEN 15 OR SPECIFICALLY 14.9% OF VOTERS IS AN INSIGNIFICANT TURNOUT.
HER VOTING. SO SHOULD WE NOT BE RAISING THIS TO 20% THEN?
[02:05:09]
THERE IS AN INCONSISTENCY IN THE DISCUSSION OF WHAT VOTES ARE IMPORTANT, WHAT PLACES TO SPEND DOLLARS ARE IMPORTANT.I EAGERLY AWAIT COUNSEL'S DISCUSSION ON THIS TO HEAR WHY THIS HELPS.
ANY CONTRADICTION TO THE OBVIOUS REASONS THAT IT HURTS.
ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? SO I KNOW WE'VE HEARD FROM COUNCIL, I BELIEVE IN THAT 5% THRESHOLD.
YOU KNOW, LET THE CITIZENS HAVE A LEAST AMOUNT OF OF EFFORT OUT THERE.
WE'RE LEAVING IT THE WAY IT IS.
THIS THIS DOESN'T INCREASING THAT THAT PERCENTAGE IS IS PUTTING MORE OF AN EFFORT OR PREPONDERANCE FOR OUR CITIZENS TO ACTIVELY REPEAL SOMETHING.
I BELIEVE IN GIVING THEM IT IS GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE.
SO THOSE ARE MY THOUGHTS ON THAT.
COUNCILMAN OR DEPUTY MAYOR JOHNSON.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AMENDMENT FIVE TO THE CHARTER.
SECOND GOT A MOTION BY DEPUTY MAYOR JOHNSON, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN FELIX.
ANY ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION, GENTLEMEN? WELL, WE'LL LET THE 80 SOMETHING THOUSAND DECIDE.
THAT'S THE THAT'S WHAT I'M JUST TRYING TO EMPHASIZE.
ANY OPPOSE? THAT'S PASSES 3 TO 2 WITH MEDINA AND FILIBERTO.
NAY. BEFORE WE GO TO ITEM SIX, I'D LIKE TO TAKE A FEW MINUTES.
I'M CALLING THIS MEETING BACK TO ORDER.
THE APPOINTMENT OF OUR CITY MANAGER.
ANYONE WISH TO SPEAK REGARDING ITEM NUMBER SIX? YES, MA'AM. STEP FORWARD.
[02:10:06]
HI. MY NAME IS JAN SNYDER.1301 GINZA, WHICH IS THE RODEO DRIVE OF TOKYO, BY THE WAY.
AND I HAVE A QUESTION ON NUMBER SIX.
IT SAYS THE COUNCIL SHALL APPOINT A MANAGER BY A MAJORITY OF THE VOTE OF ALL THE COUNCIL MEMBERS.
THAT'S AS IT SHOULD BE AT THE TIME OF THE APPOINTMENT.
THE MANAGER NEED NOT BE A RESIDENT OF THE CITY OR THE STATE.
YOU MAY GET SOME BIG TALENT FROM OUT OF STATE.
HOWEVER, SHOULD THE MANAGER CHANGE RESIDENCY SUBSEQUENT TO HIS OR HER APPOINTMENT? THE MANAGER MANAGER SHALL RESIDE WITHIN THE CITY.
SO THEN MY, MY NEXT IS JUST A QUESTION.
IF THE CITY COUNCIL APPOINTS THE MANAGER, DOES SHE ANSWER TO ALL FIVE MEMBERS? SO HER STATUS IN HER POSITION WOULD RELY UPON ALL FIVE OF OF THE MEMBERS AGREE.
RIGHT. NO, IT WOULD BE A MAJORITY VOTE.
OH, A MAJORITY. OKAY, THAT'S FINE.
I MEAN, I DON'T THINK SHE'D MIND THAT.
BUT IT'S ALWAYS GOOD FOR THE CITY MANAGER TO GET A UNANIMOUS VOTE.
THAT WOULD BE TRUE. IT SETS A TONE THAT THE WHOLE ENTIRE COUNCIL SUPPORTS HER ARRIVAL.
HIS OR HER ARRIVAL? WELL, YOU GUYS WOULD KNOW BEST.
I JUST WANTED TO KNOW HOW THAT WORKED.
YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
LAURIE LAFAVE, 1211 JOURNAL THE CIRCLE.
SO I DON'T SEE ANY REASON WHY WE NEED TO WASTE MONEY PUTTING THIS ON THE BALLOT.
THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? IT'S THE FORCE. DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE TO SAY? NOW. SOME ENFORCEMENT. YES.
OKAY. ANYONE ELSE? CARRY ON ME.
MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AMENDMENT SIX TO GO TO THE CITY CHARTER.
WELL, TO GO FOR A VOTE FOR THE CITY CHARTER.
SECOND, THAT A MOTION BY DEPUTY MAYOR JOHNSON STANDING BY COUNCILMAN FELIX ALL IN FAVOR I.
ALL RIGHT. PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
THAT IS THE ELECTIONS OF COUNCIL MEMBERS.
ITEM NUMBER SEVEN. ANYONE WISH TO SPEAK REGARDING ITEM NUMBER SEVEN? IN NONE BEYOND SOME ENFORCER.
YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS? NO, NOT AT THIS TIME.
OKAY. ANYONE ELSE ON THE DIAS WISH TO SPEAK? DEPUTY MAYOR, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AMENDMENT SEVEN TO GO FOR THE VOTE.
SECOND, A MOTION BY DEPUTY MAYOR JOHNSON, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN FELIX ALL IN FAVOR.
ANY OPPOSE PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
WE ARE NOW ON ITEM NUMBER EIGHT.
ANYONE WISH TO SPEAK REGARDING THIS ITEM? MASTER CHIEF BATTEN.
BILL BATTEN, 586 OCEAN SPRAY STREET, SOUTH WEST.
IT'S PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD WHAT YOU'RE WHAT YOU'RE DOING.
WE HAD PROBLEMS WITH THE 3% CAP.
AND THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO ALLEVIATE.
BUT WHEN YOU MAKE SOMETHING SO VAGUE AS THE COUNCIL SHALL HAVE FULL POWER AND AUTHORITY TO LEVY TAXES AS AUTHORIZED BY LAW, THAT DOESN'T REALLY TELL THE PEOPLE, YEAH, I WANT TO DO THAT.
BUT BATTEN BEING THE TYPE OF PERSON HE IS WHEN HE'S WRITING HIS CHECK TO HIS TO THE TAX COLLECTOR, I NOT ONLY SEE MY TAXES ON MY MILLAGE RATE, I ALSO SEE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT.
I SEE BOND SERVICES AND SO FORTH LIKE THAT.
SO IF WE IF WE TAKE A LOOK AT THIS WAY, ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, AND THERE WAS SOMETHING THAT SAYS WE'RE LIMITING IT TO THE MILLAGE RATE NOT TO EXCEED WHAT LAW IS OF TEN ON EVERYTHING YOUR AD, YOUR VALOREM TAX OR YOUR AD NON VALOREM OR YOUR AD VALOREM TAXES
[02:15:10]
NOT TO EXCEED TEN.BUT IT ALSO GIVES ME SOME PROTECTION AND THAT THAT MAKES IT A WIN WIN SITUATION.
ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? PLEASE STEP FORWARD.
KINDERGARTNER 154 ANGELO ROAD SOUTHEAST.
GOD BLESS YOU ALL. THIS IS THE LAST PIECE OF THE PIE.
AND THE LAST PIECE OF THE PIE SAYS NOT ONLY ALL THE OTHER PIECES, BUT NOW WE'RE JUST GOING TO.
HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO LEVY ANY TAX THAT WE DESIRE.
AND WE'RE GOING TO ELIMINATE ALL THE.
THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE VOTERS, UNFORTUNATELY, WILL LOOK LIKE THIS IS A POWER GRAB.
I'M NOT SAYING IT'S A POWER GRAB.
I'M SAYING AS A VOTER, LOOK AT IT.
WHEN WE COULD HAVE HAD PART OF THE PIE.
THEY'RE GOING TO END UP LOOKING AT IT AND SAYING.
TAXES WHEN INFLATION IS RUNNING RAMPANT.
WHEN CARS ARE DOUBLING ON THEIR.
THE AMOUNT OF THEIR GAS TANK, WHAT IT COSTS TO FILL IT UP.
TAXES WILL INCREASE AUTOMATICALLY BECAUSE VALUES ARE GOING UP.
AT SOME POINT, THEIR MINDS ARE GOING TO GO TILT AND THEY'RE GOING TO SAY, WHAT ARE THEY DOING? AND SO MY MY SUGGESTION IS TAKE THIS PIECE OF THE PIE OUT.
SO THAT THE POSSIBILITY THE OTHER IMPORTANT PIECES OF THE PIE CAN BE RECEIVED.
BUT IF YOU GO FOR THE FULL PIE.
WE HAVE QUESTIONS. CARE OF CHAIR, WHOEVER.
MR. MAYOR. THOMAS GUM, 1700 LANTANA COURT.
THIS 3% CAP WAS PUT IN PLACE IN 2016 BY THE ELECTRIC WITH 69.8% OF THE VOTE, A LANDSLIDE BY ANYBODY'S STANDARD. THIS.
THE 3% CAP HAS BEEN BROKEN SEVERAL TIMES IN THE SIX YEARS IT'S BEEN IN EXISTENCE.
CURRENTLY, THE COUNTY'S 3% TAX IS UNDER LITIGATION.
THAT THE COUNTY IS WRONG IN THE WAY THEY ASSESSED THEIR 3% TAX, THAT WE MAY NEED TO GO BACK TO PRIOR YEAR'S BUDGETS AND READJUST OUR OUR 3% BECAUSE WE DIDN'T RESET AFTER WE BROKE THE CAP.
WE BROKE THE CAP BY MORE THAN 3%.
THE NEXT YEAR, WE SHOULD HAVE RESET BACK TO THAT 3% LEVEL AND WENT 3% FROM THERE.
THEY DIDN'T DO THAT. THEY JUST KEPT STACKING ON, KEPT BREAKING THE CAP.
BUT I WILL CLOSE WITH THIS BECAUSE THIS IS THE LAST ITEM I'M GOING TO SPEAK ON, WHICH IS A SHAME, BECAUSE COUNCILMAN FELIX AND COUNCILMAN FILIBERTO BOTH BROUGHT FORWARD THINGS THAT ARE ADVANTAGEOUS TO THE CITIZENS OF PALM BAY AND I SUPPORT THOSE.
WHEN I'M TALKING TO PEOPLE ABOUT THE TEN QUESTIONS THAT ARE GOING TO BE ON THE BALLOT.
AND REMEMBER IN 2016 HOW EVERYBODY SAID THAT THEY FOOLED US WITH THE WORDING ON THE BALLOT.
THEY FOOLED US WITH THE WORDING ON THE BALLOT.
SO NOW YOU HAVE TEN QUESTIONS IN LEGALESE, ENGLISH AND SPANISH.
[02:20:05]
HOW DO I KEEP PEOPLE FROM BEING CONFUSED? YOU CAN'T KEEP THE VOTERS FROM BEING CONFUSED ABOUT TEN QUESTIONS.THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? OH. ON.
I'LL WAIT FOR EVERYBODY. WELL, GO AHEAD.
SURE. HOLD ON A SECOND, MR. WEINBERG. PLEASE STEP FORWARD.
WELL, IT WAS TWO THINGS I WANTED TO ASK.
ONE FOR THE VICE CHAIR, BECAUSE MR. BANNON DID BRING UP A GREAT POINT, BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO SAY A LOT OF PEOPLE MANY PEOPLE DO KNOW THAT THERE'S A 10% CAP.
SO MY QUESTION, DID THE BOARD DISCUSS PUTTING THAT LANGUAGE IN THERE THAT THERE'S ALREADY A CAP OVER THE CITY OF PALM BAY? NO, ACTUALLY, THAT THAT DIDN'T COME UP.
I MEAN, THAT'S THAT'S ACKNOWLEDGED AS STATE LAW.
YOU CAN CERTAINLY PUT IT IN THERE JUST FOR FOR FOR, YOU KNOW, FOR INFORMATION PURPOSES, BECAUSE I'M SURE, YOU KNOW, LIKE A LOT OF GENERAL PUBLIC DON'T REALIZE THAT JUST AS THEY DON'T REALIZE, AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, JUST AS THEY DON'T REALIZE THAT TO SAVE OUR HOMES ALREADY PUTS A 3% LIMITATION ON THE ON THE ANNUAL INCREASE ON THEIR ASSESSED VALUES OF THEIR HOMES.
AGAIN, PEOPLE ARE NOT GENERALLY AWARE OF THAT UNLESS IT'S POINTED OUT TO THEM.
SO NO, WE REALLY DIDN'T HAVE THAT DISCUSSION.
THAT WAS MY QUESTION. I WASN'T SURE IF IT WAS DISCUSSED.
I WAS HOPING THEY CAN SPEAK ON IT.
MAYOR YEAH, LET MR. OK, MRS. JONES, STEP FORWARD, THAT'S ALL.
HOWDY. DAVID JONES, 1107 MERRICK AVENUE.
YOU KNOW, IT'S FUNNY THAT, YOU KNOW, DEPUTY MAYOR WAS GOING TO ASK THEM TO COME FORWARD.
I HAVE TO SAY, ORIGINALLY, AS WE HAD THE CONVERSATION AROUND THIS AS A CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE.
IT WAS HARD FOR ME TO TO UNDERSTAND WHICH WAY TO GO IN THIS ONE.
THIS WAS A IT WAS IT FELT VERY COMPLICATED.
AND THEN WE HAD TWO PRESENTATIONS THAT WERE DONE WITH ROPES, ONE BY SOME VERY SMART FINANCE PEOPLE FROM THE CITY AND THEN OTHERS FROM A THIRD PARTY THAT WAS BROUGHT IN TO HELP US UNDERSTAND WHAT IS THE CAP AT 3% ACTUALLY DOING FOR OR TO US? WHAT WOULD IT BE TO MOVE IT TO FIVE TO THIS OR TO REMOVE IT? AND I BELIEVE AT LEAST FROM WHERE I SAT, IT WAS VERY EYE OPENING TO EVERYBODY THAT WAS IN THAT ROOM.
AND UNFORTUNATELY, THAT'S NOT A PRESENTATION THAT ALL CITIZENS CAN SEE.
I MEAN, I GUESS THEY CAN IF THEY WANT TO GO BACK AND WATCH IT.
BUT IT WAS VERY TELLING TO SEE WHAT THE CAP WAS DOING TO US INSTEAD OF FOR US.
AND, YOU KNOW, I WILL ALSO MAKE THE STATEMENT OF OUTSIDE OF PASS HAS GOT TO BE HUNGRY.
HE KEEPS TELLING MY PI, I'M READY TO GO EAT.
BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I DID SAY THERE IS WE CANNOT MOVE IN FEAR.
TO BE AFRAID THAT IF WE GENUINELY BELIEVE AND BASED OFF OF A MAJORITY.
SO THAT'S WHY I HAVE TO SAY WE SO THE MAJORITY BELIEVES THAT THIS IS THE RIGHT THING TO PUT FORTH IN FRONT OF COUNCIL, WHO CAN THEN MAKE THE DECISION IF THEY WANT TO PUT THAT OR FOR THE CITIZENS TO VOTE ON FEAR CAN'T BE THE REASON WHY WE DON'T MAKE A MOVE.
I CAN SELL ANYTHING TO ANYBODY, YOU KNOW? YOU KNOW, I COME FROM A SALES BACKGROUND.
I WORK WITH MARKETING ORGANIZATIONS.
SO I, I DO AGREE THAT DEPENDING ON HOW THIS IS POSITIONED IS HOW IT'S GOING TO BE VOTED UPON.
AND THAT'S WHY, AS YOU ALL KNOW, YOU HAVE TO SPEND A LOT OF MONEY ON RUNNING A CAMPAIGN AND WHY ORGANIZATIONS OR LOBBYISTS WILL SPEND THE MONEY THE WAY THEY DO TO GET THINGS TO SWAY A CERTAIN WAY.
BECAUSE THESE DECISIONS WEREN'T MADE, IN MY OPINION, HOPEFULLY WITH BIAS.
[02:25:08]
WE TRY TO BE VERY CLEAR AND TO THE POINT OF WHAT MAKES THE BEST SENSE TO CONTINUE TO PUSH US FORWARD TO BE THE GREATEST CITY ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH.SO PLEASE, IF YOU GET A CHANCE.
GEOFFREY MACLEOD BOATS AVENUE.
I JUST WANT TO ECHO EVERYTHING THAT DAVID JUST SAID.
DURING THE DISCUSSIONS, MANY OF US DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THE PROS AND CONS OF THE 3% CAP.
IT WAS AFTER THE PRESENTATIONS THAT WE GAVE IT A LOT OF THOUGHT.
AND WE BEGAN TO UNDERSTAND HOW IT HANDICAPPED THE CITY AND HOW THAT REQUIRED US TO LOOK AT CHANGING.
THAT SITUATION FOR THE BETTERMENT OF OUR CITY.
AND I ALSO URGE ANYONE WHO IS INTERESTED, AND I WOULD ASK THE CITY MANAGER, WHOEVER CONTROLS THE VIDEO, TO PLAY THAT PRESENTATION OVER AND OVER AGAIN FOR THE EDIFICATION OF OUR VOTERS.
NATHAN WHITE, 1301 SEABREEZE STREET SOUTHWEST.
I WILL ECHO STRONGLY THE SENTIMENTS OF ONE OF THE PREVIOUS SPEAKERS.
I STRONGLY ENCOURAGE AND HOPE AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE DO GO BACK AND WATCH THAT VIDEO.
I WAS THERE FOR THAT PRESENTATION AND I'VE REWATCHED THE VIDEO AND IN FACT, I HAVE THE PRINTOUTS OF THE DATA HERE BECAUSE I CARRY IT WITH ME TO EVERY COUNCIL MEETING, PARTIALLY BECAUSE I GO OVER IT ON A THREE KNOW TWICE WEEKLY BASIS AND.
INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH, I'M NOT SEEING THE SAME THINGS SOME OF THE OTHER SPEAKERS ARE.
THE CAMP WAS PUT IN PLACE BY 70% OF THE VOTERS.
TECHNICALLY SINCE SINCE JUNE, LESS THAN FOUR YEARS AGO.
WE DIDN'T JUST BREAK IT MULTIPLE TIMES.
WE BROKE IT THE FIRST TWO YEARS IT WAS IN PLACE.
IT'S BEEN MENTIONED TONIGHT THAT THE CITIZENS ARE DEMANDING MORE AND MORE OF COUNSEL.
BUT I DON'T BELIEVE THAT'S TRUE.
FROM EVERYONE THAT I'VE TALKED TO, WHICH IS A GREAT MANY.
THEY'RE DEMANDING THE SAME THINGS THAT THEY'VE STILL NOT GOTTEN.
THE GREATEST PROGRESS WE'VE MADE HAS BEEN ON THE ROADS.
THEY DIDN'T USE OUR TAX DOLLARS FOR THAT.
WHICH ISN'T GOING TO COVER EVERYTHING.
SO. WE'RE GOING TO MAKE IT HARDER FOR CITIZENS TO BRING THINGS BY PETITION.
WE'RE GOING TO TAKE AWAY 9% OF THE OPPORTUNITIES CITIZENS HAVE TO COME BEFORE THIS BODY TO BRING THEIR GRIEVANCES OR ISSUES OR STRUGGLES, WHATEVER IT MAY BE.
AND WE WANT TO TAKE AWAY 75% OF THIS PAGE REGARDING THE CITY'S AUTHORITY TO LEVY TAXES.
BECAUSE THAT WILL FIX EVERYTHING.
RAISING THE TAXES MORE AND MORE, UP TO 10%.
THEY SAY THAT LIKE IT'S A SMALL NUMBER.
IT'S NOT IT DIDN'T FIX ANYTHING IN 2018 WHEN WE BROKE THE FRESH THE BRADLEY INSTALLED CAP.
IT DIDN'T FIX IT IN 2019 EITHER.
GOOD EVENING, MR. MAYOR. GOOD EVENING, COUNSEL.
RANDALL OLSZEWSKI 348 BROOK STREET NORTHEAST.
I DID HAPPEN TO SERVE ON THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION.
I DO HAPPEN TO SERVE ON THE CITIZENS BUDGET ADVISORY BOARD, OF WHICH I'M THE CHAIR.
[02:30:04]
I ALSO DO HAPPEN TO SERVE ON THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD, BUT I DON'T COME TO YOU FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE.I COME TO YOU FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF STRAIGHT FACTS.
SO THE CAP HAS CHECKS AND BALANCES BUILT INTO IT.
FORGIVE THE GROSS OVER SUMMARIZATION, BUT THEY CAN SPEND WHAT THEY SEE FIT THAT YEAR.
SO THERE ARE ALREADY CHECKS AND BALANCES IN PLACE.
LET'S ALL PUT OUR PURPLE SHIRTS ON AND LET'S LOOK AT THE OTHER.
IT'S NOT THIS, IT'S NOT THAT, IT'S THE OTHER.
SHOULD WE ABOLISH THE CAP? ABSOLUTELY NOT. BECAUSE THE VOTERS OF THIS CITY PUT IT IN PLACE BECAUSE AT THE TIME THEY FELT IT WAS NECESSARY.
AND IF YOU DO SEND FORTH A AN AMENDMENT SUCH AS THIS TO ABOLISH THE CAP AND LEAVE ONLY A SIMPLE SENTENCE THAT SAYS THE COUNCIL HAS THE FULL POWER AND AUTHORITY TO LEVY TAXES AS AUTHORIZED BY LAW, IT'S NOT GOING TO GO THROUGH.
BUT I'M GOING TO STICK THE NECK OUT THERE FOR THE FISCAL FUTURE OF MY CITY.
AND I'M GOING TO SAY THAT THE CAP SHOULD BE RAISED.
THAT'S WHAT YOU GUYS SHOULD HAVE A NICE, SPIRITED, HEALTHY POLITICAL DEBATE ABOUT.
HE ASKED STANTEC TO COME PREPARED TO SHOW US WHAT A RAISE TO 5% AND WHAT I RAISED TO 6% WOULD DO.
AND AS MR. JONES SAID PREVIOUSLY, WE CAN SHAVE IT HOWEVER WE WANT.
SO WE'RE ALREADY DOING BETTER THAN THEIR MODEL.
AND THEIR MODEL SAYS THAT A RAISE TO 5% WOULD SUFFICE TO GET US INTO FISCAL SHAPE.
AND AGAIN, I'M GOING TO STICK MY NECK OUT THERE, CHOP MY HEAD OFF, IF YOU WILL, CITIZENRY.
BUT I DO THINK THAT WE SHOULD CONSIDER RAISING IT TO 6% REVENUE INCREASE.
AND I HOPE YOU GUYS HAVE A VERY SPIRITED, HEALTHY POLITICAL CONVERSATION ABOUT THAT.
BUT AGAIN, DON'T RIDE PARTY LINES, RIDE LOGIC LINES.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SIR. THANK YOU.
ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK? HEY, DEPUTY MAYOR JOHNSON.
OH, I'LL SAY SOMETHING, MR. MOORE. PHIL MOORE, PALM BAY, FLORIDA.
KEEP PULLING THAT MIC OFF. SORRY.
IT'S TO GIVE DIRECTION ON HOW A CITY IS SUPPOSED TO BE ESTABLISHED.
IT'S NOT MEANT TO SET UP MICROMANAGING FUNCTIONS.
SO WHEN I LOOKED AT LANGUAGE IN OTHER CITIES ON WHAT THEY HAVE IN TERMS OF LEVYING TAXES AND FEES, I LOOKED AT OTHER CITIES IN COMPARISON TO SEE WHAT THEY HAVE DOWN AND OTHER CITIES LIKE MELBOURNE HAVE A ONE SENTENCE LINE AND IT IS THAT LINE THAT JUST SAYS THE CITY.
THE COUNCIL HAS FULL AUTHORITY AND POWER TO LEVY TAXES.
WHEN YOU LOOK AT WHEN I LOOK AT PEOPLE SAYING, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO HAVE THIS CAP IN PLACE, WHAT I REALLY HEAR IS THAT THEY DON'T TRUST YOU TO BE ABLE TO DO THE RIGHT THINGS, THE CITY COUNCIL, TO BE ABLE TO BUDGET AND WORK THE CITY WITHIN A FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE MANNER SO THAT YOU'RE NOT RAISING TAXES ON THE CITIZENRY ABOVE AND BEYOND MORE THAN THEY NEED TO IN ORDER TO HAVE A FUNCTIONING, RUNNING CITY.
SO THEY SAY THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE THIS CAP IN PLACE NOW GO BACK TO FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE.
YOU KNOW, WHEN WE HAD, AS WAS MENTIONED BEFORE, A NUMBER OF EXPERTS COME AND GIVE US THEIR OPINION ON WHAT'S GOING TO WHAT THIS THE DETRIMENT OF HAVING THIS CAP IN PLACE AND WHAT WE SHOULD BE DOING IN ORDER TO HAVE A BETTER FUNCTIONING GOVERNMENT AND MAKE IT RUN BETTER.
WHEN I REVIEWED BACK AND THE OTHER CITY COUNCIL, THERE WAS NO SUCH REVIEWS BY OTHER EXPERTS.
[02:35:03]
AND WE'VE SEEN WHAT HAPPENS.WE'VE SEEN THE CITY OF I'M SORRY, WE SEE THE COUNTY AND AS WAS MENTIONED, THE CITY, THEY HAVE TO BREAK THESE CAPS BECAUSE YOU CAN'T RUN THE CITY OR A COUNTY WITH THESE EXTREME LIMITATIONS IN PLACE.
AND SO WE LOOKED AT THAT AND SAID, YOU KNOW WHAT, LET'S ALLOW YOU GUYS TO BE ABLE TO RUN THE CITY, THE CITY OF PALM BAY, THE GREATEST CITY, AS YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO RUN THAT AND ELIMINATE THIS MICROMANAGING FEATURE THAT IS ACTUALLY A DETRIMENT TO HOW WE'RE BEING ABLE TO DO THINGS RIGHT NOW.
THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK? YES, MA'AM. I'M SUSAN CONNOLLY, 3901 DIXIE HIGHWAY NORTHEAST.
I WORK IN THE FINANCIAL FIELD AND I ALSO SERVE ON THE CITIZEN'S BUDGET.
AND. I STILL DON'T UNDERSTAND THE 3% CAP HOW TO COMPUTE IT.
I THINK THE REASONING IS THAT CITIZENS WANT ACCOUNTABILITY FROM OUR GOVERNMENT.
WE ALL DO. WHAT MAKES SENSE TO ME IS MONEY IN, MONEY OUT.
DO SOMETHING THAT WE DO IN OUR HOUSEHOLDS.
THINGS THAT WE CAN UNDERSTAND.
DON'T OVERDO YOUR BUDGET BASED ON THE MONEY COMING IN AND DON'T GO INTO DEBT.
SO THAT FOR THOSE PURPOSES I WOULD AGREE WITH ELIMINATING THE CAP, BUT PUTTING IN PLACE AND TRUSTING THE GOOD FISCAL MANAGEMENT THAT I KNOW EXIST WITH THIS COUNCIL AND WITH THIS CITY MANAGER.
STEP FORWARD, MA'AM. ARC MIRAGE TEN 911 FOUR WITH OPINION. ONE OF THE REASONS WHY I SUPPORT ELIMINATING THE CAP IS THAT SIMPLY IT HANDCUFFS OUR CITY.
WE WANT TO HAVE A CITY THAT IS FUNCTIONING PROPERLY, FISCALLY, AND WE CANNOT DO IT WITH THIS 3% CAP.
WE CANNOT AT THIS POINT BENEFIT FROM ALL THIS GROWTH RIGHT NOW SIMPLY BECAUSE OF THE CAP.
SO WE LOOKED AT THE POSSIBLE 6%, POSSIBLY 5%, AND IT JUST DIDN'T MAKE SENSE.
IT JUST DIDN'T MAKE FISCAL SENSE.
WHAT IT SAYS TO US WHEN WE HEARD EXPERTS WAS NOT HANDCUFF THE CITY.
WE HAVE TO LOOK AT BEST PRACTICES.
WHEN WE LOOK ACROSS THE COUNTY AND WE LOOKED ACROSS THE STATE, NO CITY WAS ACTUALLY OPERATING WITH THIS THIS CAP.
AND SO I AM FULLY IN SUPPORT AND I THINK IT'S BEST FOR OUR CITIZENS TO.
WELL, HOW DO I PUT IT? IT'S BEST FOR US TO ELIMINATE THE CAP, BUT EDUCATE OUR CITIZENS AS TO WHAT THE IMPACT OF HAVING THE CAP AND HOW WE SEE WHAT WILL HAPPEN WHEN WE DON'T HAVE THIS CAP.
SO EDUCATION IS KEY AND HOW ARE WE GOING TO DO IT? BUT EDUCATION IS KEY BECAUSE WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT STIFLING OURSELVES NOW AND THEN, OF COURSE, IN ADDITION TO THAT, STIFLE THE FUTURE OF OUR CITY.
HELLO. JAN SNYDER, 1301 GINZA ROAD NORTHWEST.
WHEN YOU READ THIS BLANK SENTENCE, IT'S VERY SHORT.
THE COUNCIL SHALL HAVE FULL POWER AND AUTHORITY TO LEVY TAXES AS AUTHORIZED BY LAW.
IF YOU'RE READING THAT IN A VOTING BOOTH, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO KNOW WHAT LAW THEY'RE GOING TO FOLLOW.
YOU HAVE TO HAVE A LITTLE MORE DESCRIPTION, A COUPLE OF MODIFIERS WHAT LAW THIS IS AND WHY IS IT GOING TO BE GOOD FOR YOU TO SAY YES, YOU HAVE TO AT LEAST PERSUADE THEM TO YOUR WAY OF THINKING.
[02:40:03]
I DON'T THINK YOU CAN JUST LEAVE IT AT LAW.YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO TELL THEM WHAT YOU'RE USING IT FOR.
THAT'S IF YOU CAN SAY WHAT IN SHORT, NORTH FOUR OR FIVE WORDS.
THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK? IN NONE, MADAM JOAN OR.
ANGELICA COLLINS, OUR BUDGET ADMINISTRATOR, IF YOU'D LIKE HER TO COME UP AND WE DO HAVE A PRESENTATION THAT SHE CAN GO THROUGH, IT'S SIMILAR TO WHAT WAS PROVIDED AT THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION.
SO FORMAL PRESENTATION OR JUST REAL HIGH LEVEL AND ANSWER QUESTIONS.
YOU'RE GOOD. EITHER WAY. EITHER WAY.
I KNOW. SHE'S BOUND. I KNOW SHE'S BUNDLED UP AND EVERYTHING.
HOW ARE WE GOING TO POP UP FOR THE SCREEN? OH, WE'RE UP IN A MINUTE TO SET IT UP.
YOU'LL HAVE TO TURN ON THE COMPUTER A LITTLE BIT.
SO. SO IN THE MEANTIME, AS SHE POWERS UP.
ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK? BEER WHILE SHE'S DOING THAT.
WHAT WHAT YEAR WAS THE 3% COUNT CAP PUT INTO PLACE NOW? WHAT YEAR WAS IT VOTED? IT WAS VOTED ON IN 2016, 2016, BUT IT DIDN'T TAKE EFFECT UNTIL THE NEXT BUDGET YEAR.
I CAN FOLLOW UP WITH A QUESTION.
WHEN WAS THAT? YOU KNOW, EXCEED WHAT WHAT YEAR, WHAT BUDGET YEAR WAS THAT? UM, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THAT WAS BACK IN 2017 AND I THINK 2018 AS WELL.
OF WHICH WE DIDN'T GET MONEY BACK FROM FEMA LIKE UNTIL TWO YEARS LATER.
BEYOND. YEAH. THE WHEELS OF GOVERNMENT DO TURN EVER SO SLOWLY.
I'M THE BUDGET ADMINISTRATOR FOR THE CITY OF PALM BAY.
YES, I DID BRING OUT MY WINTER COAT.
IT IS VERY COLD IN HERE FOR ME.
SO I HAD THE PLEASURE OF GIVING THE PRESENTATION AT THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE.
IF YOU DO HAVE A CHANCE, EVERYBODY, PLEASE, PLEASE DO GO BACK AND WATCH IT.
IT'S VERY DETAILED AND WE DISCUSS ON HOW THE CAP IS CALCULATED.
AND AT THAT TIME, I ONLY HAD DATA THROUGH FISCAL YEAR 2022.
SO WE DID SOME HIGHLIGHTS ON 5%, 6%.
WHAT IF THERE WAS NO CAP? SO IT IS A VERY INFORMATIONAL MEETING AND AGAIN, I WOULD HIGHLY RECOMMEND ANYBODY.
BUT I WAS ASKED TONIGHT TO HAVE SOME WHAT I CALL SOME ADD ONS.
SO WE ARE IN THE MIDDLE OF OUR BUDGET PROCESS FOR THE UPCOMING FISCAL YEAR, FISCAL YEAR 23.
SO I ALREADY HAVE SOME PRELIMINARY DATA.
SO I WAS ABLE TO ACTUALLY PULL THAT AND PULL SOME OF THE SLIDES.
AND I WANT TO PRESENT THOSE TONIGHT.
SO I'M GOING TO HAVE A LITTLE AGENDA I WANT TO GO THROUGH JUST AS A SHOUT OUT.
WE ARE HAVING OUR MID-YEAR BUDGET WORKSHOP THIS UPCOMING TUESDAY AT 6:00 PM, STARTING AT 6 P.M.
[02:45:05]
IN THIS COUNCIL CHAMBERS.WE TALK A LOT ABOUT THE 3% CAP.
WE TALK A LOT ABOUT STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS.
SO THAT IS THIS UPCOMING TUESDAY STARTING AT 6:00 IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS.
ALL RIGHT. SO THE LITTLE ADD ONS THAT I HAVE PUT TOGETHER FOR THIS EVENING AS WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT OUR PRELIMINARY TAX DATA FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023, WHICH IS COMING EFFECTIVE THIS OCTOBER 1ST.
SO OUR FISCAL YEAR RUNS OCTOBER 1ST THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30TH OF NEXT YEAR.
I ALREADY HAVE SOME PRELIMINARY AD VALOREM RATE OPTIONS THAT WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT.
OUR FINAL AD VALOREM TAXATION VALUES FROM THE PROPERTY.
APPRAISER DON'T COME UNTIL JULY 1ST.
SO THE ITEMS WILL CHANGE COME IN JULY.
THEN I FEEL LIKE I'M SHIVERING.
I'M SO COLD, IT'S MAKING IT HARD TO TALK.
SO WE DO HAVE A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN, BUT IT IS VERY LIMITED AND WE ARE WORKING ON A MASTER, WHICH IS A FIVE YEAR VIEW OF WHAT THE CITY NEEDS ARE FOR BOTH UTILITIES AND OUR NON UTILITY DEPARTMENTS.
SO ALL THE OTHER DEPARTMENTS THAT ARE NOT UTILITIES ARE ALSO IN THAT PLAN.
SO I ALREADY HAVE SOME FISCAL YEAR, FISCAL YEAR 2023 CAPITAL NEEDS THAT HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED.
WE ALSO HAVE A LIST OF FACILITY MAINTENANCE NEEDS.
SO THOSE ARE PROJECTS AND NEEDS THAT DON'T NECESSARILY QUALIFY AS CAPITAL, BUT THEY ARE STILL OPERATIONAL NEEDS FOR THE CITY FACILITIES AND PARK FACILITIES IN ORDER TO HAVE THOSE ITEMS MAINTAINED.
IT'S NOT WORKING WITH ME TODAY.
BUT WE ALSO HAVE SOME HIGH PRIORITY ITEMS AND THOSE ARE UNFUNDED.
SO WHAT HIGH PRIORITY ITEMS ARE WITHIN THE BUDGET PROCESS? I DESIGNATE THOSE A CERTAIN WAY WHERE DEPARTMENTS DO HAVE TO SUBMIT REQUESTS FOR THOSE ITEMS BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT INCLUDED IN THE BASE BUDGET.
AND WE'LL TALK A LITTLE BIT OF WHAT HOW THOSE HIGH PRIORITY ITEMS ARE MET.
I MEAN, HOLD ON A SECOND. MAYBE I SHOULD LOG IN.
ALL RIGHT. HOPEFULLY THAT TOOK CARE OF IT AND.
THE LAST TIME I WANT TO TALK TONIGHT ABOUT IS OUR PUBLIC SAFETY PERSONNEL NEEDS.
SO PUBLIC SAFETY GENERALLY MAKES UP ABOUT 50 TO 60% OF THE BUDGET FOR A GENERAL FUND.
AND THERE ARE SOME SPECIFIC PUBLIC SAFETY NEEDS FOR FIRE AND POLICE THAT ARE A HIGHLIGHT THAT WE NEED TO DISCUSS THAT DO NOT FALL UNDER HIGH PRIORITY ITEMS OR THE CAPITAL MAINTENANCE FACILITY NEEDS.
ALL RIGHT. SO THIS IS A TABLE THAT GENERALLY WHENEVER I DO MY BUDGET WORKSHOPS, YOU WILL SEE OFTEN.
SO THERE'S A LOT OF DATA ON THIS ONE AND THE FOLLOWING ONE, BUT IT IS BASICALLY A HIGH VIEW OF WHAT OUR AD VALOREM TAX RATE ITERATIONS, TAX RATE OPTIONS ARE AND IN RELATION TO THE CURRENT YEAR ON HOW THEY IMPACT THE REVENUE.
SO JUNE 1ST IS WHEN OUR BREVARD COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER'S OFFICE, THEY SEND OUR PRELIMINARY TAXABLE VALUATIONS, SO WE GET THEM AS A CITY AS A WHOLE.
AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE THAT PORTION FOR OUR NEW CONSTRUCTION.
SO WHAT WE DO IS WE START SETTING A RATE, SO THAT RATE IS OUR TAX AD VALOREM RATE.
AND FOR THE CURRENT YEAR, FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022, OUR RATE IS 7.5995 AND WE'RE CURRENTLY GENERATING 37.9 MILLION BASED ON THE TAXATION THAT THE PROPERTY APPRAISER'S OFFICE SET FOR THE CURRENT YEAR THAT WE'RE IN.
[02:50:02]
RIGHT. SO WITH THE NEW TAXATION VALUES, I ALWAYS KIND OF START SAYING, OKAY, WELL WHAT IF WE WERE TO MAINTAIN THE RATE THAT WE HAVE CURRENTLY? IF WE GO INTO THE NEW YEAR, WE ADOPT THE SAME RATE AT 7.5995 BASED ON TAXABLE VALUATIONS, WE WOULD BE GENERATING $46.1 MILLION.SO THOSE ARE JUST ADDITIONAL COLUMNS FOR CALCULATIONS YOU CAN USE.
I ALSO START CALCULATING A PRELIMINARY 3% CAP.
SO WHAT I DO IS WITHIN MY CALCULATIONS, I SET THAT RATE TO WHERE THE REVENUE THAT IS GENERATED EXCLUDING NEW CONSTRUCTION BASED ON THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR.
SO AGAIN THIS WILL CHANGE IN JULY WITH THE FINAL TAXABLE VALUES WILL BE 6.7947, GENERATING A TOTAL OF 41, ROUGHLY ABOUT $41.3 MILLION.
SO IT'S NOT NECESSARILY JUST SLOWING IT, WE'RE NOT INCREASING IT.
SO WE'RE JUST GOING INTO FISCAL YEAR 2023 IS MAINTAINING YOU ARE SEEING A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN GENERATING AN ADDITIONAL 3.3 MILLION FROM THE CURRENT YEAR.
SO YOU'RE TALKING ROUGHLY ABOUT A $5 MILLION.
SO WHAT YOU SEE HERE A LOT ABOUT AND SEE A LOT ABOUT IS WHAT'S CALLED A ROLLBACK RATE.
SO A ROLLBACK RATE IS A STATUTORY REQUIREMENT.
SO THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE'RE NOT GENERATING MORE THAN THE 37.9 THAT WE'RE BRINGING IN THIS YEAR, BECAUSE YOU ALWAYS HAVE TO REMEMBER TAXABLE VALUES DO GO UP AND YOU ARE ADDING TAXABLE VALUE WITH THAT NEW CONSTRUCTION TO YOUR TO YOUR TAX BASE.
SO THAT NATURALLY ALLOWS YOU TO GENERATE MORE REVENUE.
BUT FOR TAXPAYERS, THAT MEANS THAT IT SHOULDN'T BE AN INCREASE TO THEIR TAXES.
WE ARE SIMPLY ROLLING THE RATE BACK TO WHERE THEY WOULDN'T SEE AN INCREASE.
SO HISTORICALLY THERE HAS ALWAYS BEEN A BIT OF A LARGER GAP BETWEEN THAT 3% CAP AND THE ROLLBACK.
SO WITH PRELIMINARY NUMBERS, THAT ROLLBACK FOR NEXT YEAR IS A LITTLE LESS THAN THE 3% CAP, WHICH IS 6.6 IS 060. RIGHT.
SO THAT REVENUE YOU WOULD BE GENERATING IF YOU WERE TO GO WITH THAT CAP, IT'S ABOUT $40.14 MILLION.
SO BETWEEN THE 3% AND THE ROLLBACK, THERE'S REALLY ONLY ABOUT THAT DIFFERENCE FROM THAT 41.2 OR THAT 40.1 MILLION TO THAT 41.2 MILLION.
SO AS YOU SEE OUR TAX BASE GROW, THE PROJECTION WOULD BE THAT YOUR 3% CAP RATE WILL CONTINUE TO GET CLOSER TO YOUR ROLLBACK.
OR EVENTUALLY, BASED ON THE DATA THAT I SEE, THAT IT WOULD ACTUALLY BE GOING BELOW ROLLBACK.
RIGHT. SO THIS IS REALLY THE FIRST YEAR AND IT'S SORT OF GOOD THAT I HAD THESE NUMBERS READY BECAUSE THEY DO DIFFER A LITTLE BIT FROM WHAT YOU SEE EVEN SAW IN THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE PRESENTATION THAT I COMPLETED BECAUSE I DIDN'T HAVE THE FISCAL YEAR 23 ITEMS YET, BUT THERE'S A SIGNIFICANT DROP FROM 22 TO 23 IN THE CAP REDUCTION IN THAT RATE, AND THAT IS BECAUSE OF THE NEW CONSTRUCTION.
SO YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER THAT, YES, THAT NEW CONSTRUCTION THE FIRST YEAR IS EXEMPT FROM YOUR 3% CAP, BUT THE SECOND YEAR IT HITS YOUR TAX ROLL.
SO YOUR TAX ROLL FROM FISCAL YEAR 22 TO 23 SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASED BECAUSE NEW TAXABLE VALUES
[02:55:10]
IN 22 FOR THE CURRENT YEAR WAS ROUGHLY ABOUT $206 MILLION.SO AS YOU CONTINUE THAT PATTERN INTO THE FUTURE.
I PROJECT THAT STARTING IN FISCAL YEAR 24, YOU WILL SEE A 3% CAP RATE THAT IS BELOW ROLLBACK.
THE REASON WHY I SAY THAT IS, IS THAT NEW CONSTRUCTION FOR FISCAL YEAR 23 IS $330 MILLION.
THAT'S HITTING YOUR TAX RATE LIMITATIONS.
SO I'M ANTICIPATING A NEW CONSTRUCTION VALUATIONS THAT IS ONE AND ONE HALF TIMES AS MUCH, WHICH IS GREAT THAT FIRST YEAR IN 24 THAT IS GOING TO HIT YOUR TAX ROLL.
OKAY. SO THAT IS MY PROJECTION.
THIS IS THE FIRST TIME WHERE I'VE SEEN A SIGNIFICANT DROP.
WE ARE DROPPING APPROXIMATELY 0.8 IN A MILITARY VOTE FROM 22 TO 23.
FROM 21 TO 22, YOU ONLY DROPPED ABOUT 0.3.
OKAY. SO THAT PROJECTION CONTINUES AND THE VALUATIONS THIS YEAR ARE HEALTHY.
THEY'RE GREAT FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION.
BUT REMEMBER THAT SECOND YEAR THAT IS GOING TO HIT YOUR HIT YOUR YOUR CAP, RIGHT.
SO THAT IS ESSENTIALLY WHAT WHAT I WHAT I PROVIDE.
THE SECOND SLIDE IS THE SAME CONCEPT.
SO IF YOU WERE MAINTAINING GOING INTO 23 AT THE SAME RATE, YOU WOULD BE GENERATING ABOUT 8.2 MILLION MORE THAN WHAT YOU'RE DOING THIS YEAR. AND IF YOU CHOOSE TO GO WITH A 3% CAP, THEN YOU WOULD BE GENERATING 3.3 MILLION, WHICH IS ABOUT 4.9 MILLION LESS THAN IF YOU WERE TO MAINTAIN.
AND IT IS TRUE, THERE'S A THERE'S A TAXING LIMITATION THAT PER FLORIDA STATUE.
AND I WOULD HIGHLY IT'S A LOT OF LANGUAGE BUT FLORIDA STATUTE 200.065 IS IS INDICATED THAT THE METHOD OF FIXING MILLAGE THERE'S A LOT OF RESTRICTIONS ON WHAT CITIES CAN DO IN ORDER TO SET THEIR RATE AND ACTUALLY GENERATE TAXES.
TAXATION LIMIT ON HOW YOU CAN INCREASE FROM ONE YEAR TO ANOTHER.
SO IT'S NOT JUST SAYING 10% IS THE MAX.
THERE'S ALSO A LIMITATION ON HOW MUCH YOU CAN INCREASE FROM ONE YEAR TO ANOTHER.
RIGHT. AND THAT IS BASED ON THE ROLLBACK RATE.
SO THE ROLLBACK RATE IS REALLY THE KEY.
RIGHT. SO IN SEPTEMBER, THE STATES ISSUE A ADJUSTED ROLLBACK RATE.
SO HYPOTHETICALLY SPEAKING, FOR THE CURRENT YEAR OR FOR NEXT YEAR, THAT ROLLBACK IS 6.6 IS 060.
THEY RESTRICT HOW HIGH YOU CAN GO ABOVE THAT RATE FOR THAT YEAR BASED ON THE NUMBER OF VOTES FROM OUR COUNCIL, PEOPLE WHO SIT ON THE DAIS.
SO AN EXAMPLE FOR, FOR EXAMPLE, IS FISCAL YEAR 22, WHICH IS THE CURRENT YEAR.
RIGHT. SO THE ADJUSTED ROLLBACK FOR 2021, BECAUSE WE ALWAYS LOOK AT THE PREVIOUS YEAR WAS 8.2004.
SO THAT ALREADY TELLS YOU HOW QUICKLY THAT ROLLBACK RATE IS DROPPING BECAUSE OF YOUR TAXABLE VALUE.
ALL RIGHT. SO BASED ON THAT IN 2021, BASED ON THAT RATE IN 2022, THERE IS A RESTRICTION TO WHERE WE CANNOT GO ABOVE 8.584 IF WE HAVE A MAJORITY VOTE OR 9.443 WITH A TWO THIRDS VOTE, I KNOW IT SEEMS LIKE IT SHOULD BE THE OTHER WAY AROUND, BUT BUT THAT'S HOW THE STATUTORY LAW IS WRITTEN.
[03:00:07]
SO YOU ALWAYS HAVE TO REMEMBER THAT AS YOU CONTINUE WITH CAPS IN PLACE AND WITH THE NEW CONSTRUCTION BEING GENERATED AS HEAVILY AS THERE IS SUCH A HEAVY FOCUS ON IT AND WE ARE GROWING BY LEAPS AND BOUNDS AND THAT'S GREAT AND THAT'S WHAT WE WANT.BUT ALWAYS REMEMBER THAT SECOND YEAR IT WILL HIT YOUR TAX ROLL.
IT WILL CONTINUE TO DRIVE DOWN YOUR RATE.
I PROJECTED TO GO BELOW ROLLBACK IN FISCAL YEAR 23.
BASED ON WHAT I SEE, IT COULD BE A WHOLE MILL.
SO GOING INTO THE YEARS THEREAFTER, THERE IS A RESTRICTION THAT IS PUT IN PLACE BY THE LAW THAT YOU CANNOT INCREASE YOUR RATE MORE THAN A CERTAIN AMOUNT.
SO IF YOU WERE TO COME AND SAY, I WANT TO INCREASE MY MY RATE IS AT 6.0 AND I WANT TO GO TO 9.0.
YOU ARE LEGALLY NOT ALLOWED TO DO THAT.
ALL RIGHT. THE STATE RESTRICTS HOW FAST YOU CAN INCREASE THAT RATE.
SO THAT'S AN IMPORTANT THING TO REMEMBER.
IT'S NOT JUST OVERALL TAXATION.
YOU ARE BEING RESTRICTED FROM ONE YEAR TO THE NEXT ON HOW FAST YOU CAN INCREASE IT.
SO IF YOU IF YOU IF IT'S CONTINUED TO BE LOWERED, AT SOME POINT YOU WILL GET TO A PLACE WHERE EVEN IF THAT EVEN IF A CAP WERE TO BE IN PLACE FOR THE NEXT TEN YEARS, AND THEN YOU WERE TO GO AND GET RID OF IT AT THAT POINT, REMEMBER WHERE YOU ARE IN TEN YEARS.
SO THAT'S ONE THING TO LOOK AT.
ALL RIGHT. SO I'M AT A POINT WHERE I'M PUTTING TOGETHER OUR CAPITAL NEEDS.
SO THIS WILL THOROUGHLY BE DISCUSSED NEXT TUESDAY.
I HIGHLY RECOMMEND EVERYBODY ATTEND.
IF YOU'RE REALLY INTERESTED IN ATTENDING THE BUDGET AND GETTING MORE, KNOW ABOUT IT.
ALL RIGHT. SO FOR AS FAR AS CAPITAL NEEDS ARE CONCERNED, AND THIS IS JUST GENERAL FUND, RIGHT? SO GENERAL FUND, REMEMBER THAT APPROXIMATELY 75% OF GENERAL FUND REVENUES ARE BASED ON AD VALOREM TAXATION.
SO THAT'S WHAT WE JUST TALKED ABOUT AS FAR AS CAPITAL NEEDS ARE CONCERNED.
SO THESE ARE CAPITAL ASSETS, CAPITAL PROJECTS AND CAPITAL ASSETS.
I JUST WROTE SOME THINGS DOWN.
WE HAVE VARIOUS POLICE VEHICLES.
WE HAVE FIRE, AIR PACKS, REGULATORS.
WE HAVE TRUCK REPLACEMENTS FOR VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS THAT OPERATE IN THE GENERAL FUND.
WE HAVE DUMP TRUCKS FOR OUR PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT.
WE HAVE STREETLIGHT POLE REPLACEMENTS.
THESE ARE ALL CAPITAL PROJECTS REQUESTED IN FISCAL YEAR 23 $7.9 MILLION.
SO FACILITY MAINTENANCE NEEDS DON'T NECESSARILY QUALIFY AS A CAPITAL ITEM.
CAPITAL IS ALL ABOUT HOW YOU DEPRECIATE, HOW LONG OF AN ASSET THE VALUE IS.
SO THESE ARE STANDARD FACILITY MAINTENANCE ITEMS FOR NOT JUST THESE CITY FACILITIES, BUT THESE ARE PARKS, FACILITY STRUCTURES WITHIN PARKS AND ACTUALLY FIELDS AND ANYTHING THAT'S OUT THERE THAT OUR FACILITY, PARKS AND FACILITIES DEPARTMENTS MAINTAINS.
SO THEY'VE ACTUALLY ALREADY COME UP WITH THEIR WHOLE FIVE YEAR PLAN.
SO WITHIN THE FIRST YEAR IT'S $570,000 WORTH OF NEEDS IN THE FOLLOWING YEARS.
OVER THE NEXT FOUR YEARS AFTER THAT, IT'S $5.4 MILLION IN TOTAL OF FACILITY PROJECTS.
AND THEN JUST TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA, THAT'S 3.3 MILLION OF THOSE ARE ADA OPERATIONAL UPGRADES.
TRULY NEEDS, WHETHER THEY'RE REQUIRED OR NOT REQUIRED, BUT THEY ARE.
SO WHEN I DO THE BUDGET, ALL DEPARTMENTS HAVE TO SUBMIT THEIR BUDGET REQUESTS THAT ARE ABOVE WHAT THE OPERATING BUDGETS THEY'VE BEEN RECEIVED HAVE TO SUBMIT THEM TO MY OFFICE AND THEY WILL BE PROPERLY VETTED WITH OUR CITY MANAGER.
AND ONCE WE HAVE FUNDING, WE KIND OF GO THROUGH ALL THE NEEDS.
SO I JUST PULLED HIGH PRIORITY, RIGHT? SO THE LIST AND YOU WILL SEE THIS NEXT WEEK, I HAVE A LIST OF 40 TO 50 ITEMS. SO THESE ARE JUST HIGH PRIORITY.
IN ORDER TO BE A HIGH PRIORITY ITEM TO BE INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET, THEY HAVE TO BE BASED ON EITHER A NEW CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATION, AN ONGOING CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATION, OR A MANDATED LOCAL, STATE OR FEDERAL REQUIREMENT.
THESE ARE THINGS THAT HAVE TO BE PAID RIGHT OUTSIDE OF DEBT SERVICE.
[03:05:02]
I WORK IN FINANCE. WE WORK WITH TREASURY A LOT.BUT THESE ARE CONTRACTUAL AND OBLIGATION OBLIGATIONS THAT HAVE TO BE DONE.
AND THIS IS NOT IN THIS IS NOT INCLUDING WITH THE ITEMS WE JUST TALKED ABOUT.
THESE ARE IN ADDITION TO THE CAPITAL NEEDS AND THE FACILITY OPERATIONAL NEEDS.
SO YOU HAVE CAPITAL 7.9, YOU HAVE YOUR FACILITIES AND MAINTENANCE ITEMS AND NOW I HAVE AN ADDITIONAL 1.7 IN GENERAL FUND HIGH PRIORITY NEEDS PUBLIC SAFETY IS 1.2 MILLION OF THOSE 1.7 AND THAT INCLUDES 236,000 IN REQUIRED POLICE RADIO REPLACEMENTS.
RIGHT. AND THAT IS WITH FIRES, THE SAME THING THAT ALSO INCLUDES 445,000 IN AIR PACK REGULATORS AND MASK REPLACEMENTS FOR OUR OUR FIRE DEPARTMENT.
RIGHT. SO THESE ARE THE FIREFIGHTERS THAT ARE THAT ARE OUT FIGHTING THOSE FIRES.
AND THOSE TYPES OF ITEMS DO HAVE WHAT WE CALL THAT DROP DEAD DATE, MEANING THAT THEY EXPIRE.
RIGHT. SO THEY HAVE TO BE PURCHASED.
IS THAT JUST GENERALLY WHAT HAPPENS? SO I DO KNOW FOR A FACT THAT WITHIN THE SUSTAINABILITY ANALYSIS THAT WAS PRESENTED TO THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE, WE DID NOT HAVE THESE NUMBERS YET. WE INCLUDED AN ESTIMATED OF $1.5 MILLION ANNUALLY IN FUTURE FOR CAPITAL NEEDS.
WE DID NOT HAVE THE 7.9 AT THAT TIME.
SO THE SUSTAINABILITY ANALYSIS THAT WAS PRESENTED WAS BASED ON FISCAL YEAR 22.
WE DID A LOT OF UPGRADES THIS YEAR AS FAR AS AMENDMENTS AND WE HAD DURING THE MONTH OF DECEMBER.
IN JANUARY, CITY MANAGER CAME WITH A LARGER REQUEST ON UNFUNDED CAPITAL NEEDS.
SO WE ADDED A GOOD AMOUNT TO THE BUDGET FOR FOR THOSE ITEMS. SO THAT'S WHAT WE BASE THAT ESTIMATE ON, RIGHT? SO THAT WAS ABOUT SIX MONTHS BEFORE I HAD A CHANCE TO RECEIVE ALL THE DEPARTMENT REQUESTS.
SO WHEN YOU HEAR THE SUSTAINABILITY ANALYSIS AT THE MOMENT, IT DOES NOT INCLUDE THIS AMOUNT.
THE FUTURE SUSTAINABILITY ANALYSIS REVISION WILL INCLUDE THIS AMOUNT.
THEY WILL LOOK AT THESE REQUESTS.
JUNE 24TH IS WHEN ALL OF OUR DEPARTMENTS WILL HAVE THEIR FUTURE NEEDS.
THAT DOES NOT INCLUDE 24 THROUGH 27.
RIGHT. SO THAT JUST GOING FORWARD WHEN WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE SUSTAINABILITY AS IS JUST BE CAUTIOUS THAT THERE IS A LARGER NEED THAN WHAT WAS WHAT WAS REFLECTED AT THAT TIME.
ALL RIGHT. ONE OF THE LAST ITEMS THAT WE DID WANT TO INCLUDE IS WE TALK A LOT ABOUT PUBLIC SAFETY.
PUBLIC SAFETY PERSONNEL AND OUR NEEDS.
MORE THAN HALF IS JUST OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT AND OUR FIRE DEPARTMENT.
ALL RIGHT. CITIES GROWING BY LEAPS AND BOUNDS.
EVENTUALLY, THAT HAS TO BE ADDED.
RIGHT. SO WE WORKED WITH OUR FIRE AND POLICE DEPARTMENT TO GET SOME ESTIMATES FROM THEM AS TO WHAT IT WOULD COST TO CONTINUE STAFFING ANNUALLY BASED ON THE GROWTH THAT WE'RE SEEING.
SO IT'S NOT JUST FIRE STATIONS.
SO POLICE STATIONS AND FIRE STATIONS ARE CAPITAL INVESTMENTS THAT YES, WE DO NEED THOSE, BUT THERE HAVE TO BE PEOPLE IN THOSE IN THOSE FACILITIES IN ORDER TO SERVICE THE GROWING COMMUNITY.
SO FIRE DEPARTMENT, THE COST TO STAFF, ONE FULL, ONE FULLY OPERATIONAL FIRE STATION AND I MAY NOT KNOW THE EXACT AMOUNT, BUT I THINK WE'RE LOOKING AT THREE. THREE OR FOUR.
I WAS CLOSE. SO WE'RE LOOKING AT WITH A GROWTH 3 TO 4 FIRE STATIONS.
[03:10:04]
SO THIS IS JUST NUMBERS FOR ONE.IN ORDER TO BE FULLY, FULLY OPERATIONAL PER OUR FIRE CHIEF, REQUIRES 12 FTES.
THAT IS THREE THREE LIEUTENANTS, THREE DRIVER ENGINEERS AND SIX FIREFIGHTERS, WHICH IN TOTAL SALARY AND WAGES AND BENEFITS, WHICH INCLUDES THEIR PENSION, IS $1.1 MILLION. SO THAT'S JUST ONE FIRE STATION, 3 TO 4, 3.3, 4.4 MILLION POLICE DEPARTMENT.
SO I WORKED WITH OUR BUDGET OFFICER IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND WE HAD A QUOTE JUST TO MATCH IT UP, 12 AND 12 TO HAVE 12 FTES, WHICH IS ALL POLICE OFFICERS THAT ARE BEING ADDED TO THE FORCE BETWEEN SALARY, WAGES, BENEFITS.
AND DO REMEMBER THAT EACH POLICE OFFICER DOES NEED A FULLY EQUIPPED VEHICLE, $1.9 MILLION FOR 12.
RIGHT. SO IF WE'RE ADDING 12 A YEAR, I'M NOT SURE IF THAT'S THE ROUTE THEY'RE GOING, BUT 12 A YEAR IN ORDER TO MATCH WHAT THE FIRE DEPARTMENT IS GROWING. SO YOU WOULD SEE THOSE NEEDS.
RIGHT. AND THESE ARE ALL UNBUDGETED FUND ITEMS. SO WHEN I'M TALKING ABOUT CAPITAL, WHEN I'M TALKING ABOUT OUR FACILITY MAINTENANCE NEEDS, WHEN I'M TALKING ABOUT OUR HIGH PRIORITY ITEMS, WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FIRE, POLICE DEPARTMENT, FTES, THESE ARE ALL NOT BUDGETED.
ALL OF THOSE ITEMS. WOULD HAVE TO BE FUNDED.
YOU HAVE TO BE FUNDED BY THE ORANGE LINE AND THE SECOND TO LAST COLUMN, WHICH IS $3.3 MILLION.
THAT IS WHAT THE CAP LIMITATION ALLOWS US TO TAX.
SO THAT $3.3 MILLION, IDEALLY, IF THE OTHER ITEMS IS ALL THE THINGS THAT YOU WOULD WANT TO FUND, OF COURSE YOU COULD THROW IT AND YOU HAVE YOUR PRIORITY NEEDS AND YOU HAVE A VISION OF WHAT YOU'RE STAGGERING OUT.
BUT HYPOTHETICALLY, IF YOU WANTED TO FUND ALL THOSE ITEMS, YOU ONLY HAVE $3.3 MILLION TO WORK WITH.
I DID NOT PUT THEM IN THE PRESENTATION.
I SHOULD HAVE PUT THEM IN THIS CHART, BUT I THOUGHT OF IT AFTER THE FACT.
SO WE TALKED A LOT ABOUT FIVE OR 6% CAP.
LIKE WHAT IS THE 5% LOOK LIKE? WHAT IS THE 6% LOOK LIKE? SO IF YOU WANTED TO GO FROM A 3% CAP OF $41.2, HYPOTHETICALLY SAYING YOU WANTED TO DO A 5% CAP, YOU ARE LOOKING AT $42.1 MILLION, ABOUT 800,000 MORE.
SO THAT'S WHAT THE DIFFERENCE IS FROM THAT 3.3 MILLION, YOU WOULD ADD JUST AN ADDITIONAL ROUGHLY ABOUT 801,000 IF YOU WERE TO GO FROM A 3% TO A 5% CAP.
THAT IS WHAT WHAT THE LIMITATION WOULD BE.
A 6% CAP WOULD MEAN THAT WE'RE GENERATING ONLY ABOUT $42.5 MILLION, WHICH WOULD BE 1.2 MILLION ADDITIONAL TO THE 3.3.
SO THEY ALL FALL WITHIN BETWEEN THE 6.9 AND THE 7.1.
REALLY LOOKING AT THE TAXABLE VALUE THAT IS BEING ADDED TO YOUR TAX BASE, DOES NOT RAISE YOUR RATE OR DOES NOT RAISE YOUR REVENUE SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER THAN WHAT YOU WOULD WHAT YOU WOULD REALLY THINK IT WOULD.
ALL RIGHT. SO THAT'S THE INFORMATION I HAVE FOR TONIGHT.
AGAIN, I HAVE MUCH MORE NEXT WEEK, TUESDAY, AS I'M WORKING ON A LOT OF ITEMS. SO YOU'LL SEE ALL THE CAPITAL IN DETAIL.
YOU SEE ALL THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF REQUESTS.
AND WE WILL ALSO DO A MID-YEAR REVIEW LOOKING AT FISCAL YEAR 2022.
SO IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM.
MAYOR JOHNSON GOT I JUST HAVE ONE MORE BECAUSE ALL THIS INFORMATION WAS BEAUTIFUL.
THANK YOU. WONDERFULLY PRESENTED.
THE LAST THING AND I THINK IS PROBABLY ONE OF THE MOST IMPACTFUL THINGS.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN PULL IT UP, BUT THE TAX BILL MILLS RATE IMPACT.
LET ME PULL IT UP. IT'S ON THE CHARTER.
IT'S ON THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION ONE.
SO WHILE SHE'S PULLING THAT UP, WHAT WHAT MAKES MORE SENSE? I DON'T WANT TO SAY MAKES MORE SENSE.
BUT WHAT WILL DRIVE MORE TO THE RESIDENTS IS SEEING WHAT THEIR BILL LOOKS LIKE AT 3%, 5% OR 6%.
[03:15:06]
YOU KNOW, NOT JUST FROM A CITY WIDE STANDPOINT, BUT WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE WHEN YOU GET IT.SURE. SO THIS IS INCLUDED IN THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE.
SO AGAIN, THESE ARE FISCAL FISCAL YEAR 2022 NUMBERS.
BUT ESSENTIALLY WHAT HOW YOU CAN CALCULATE WHAT THE WHAT AN IMPACT ON YOUR TAX BILL WOULD BE IS YOU GO TO THE PROPERTY APPRAISER'S OFFICE AND YOU JUST PULL UP YOUR RESIDENCE AND YOU GO TO THE TAXABLE VALUE NON-SCHOOL AMOUNTS.
SO THAT'S THE AMOUNT THAT YOU'RE GOING TO WANT TO LOOK FOR.
AND YOU TIMES THAT BY THE RATE AND YOU DIVIDE IT BY 1000.
SO USUALLY WHAT I DO IS, IS PROVIDE A VARIETY OF RANGES OF WHAT YOUR PROPERTY VALUATIONS WOULD BE.
SO WE LOOK AT AN ANNUAL COST AT THE VARIANCES.
SO AT THAT TIME, OF COURSE, I ONLY HAD 20, 22 NUMBERS, SO LET'S PICK 50,000.
SO 50,000 FOR YOUR PROPERTY VALUATION AMOUNTS AT THE CURRENT RATE THAT WE HAVE ADOPTED, WHICH IS THE 3% CAP, WHICH IS THAT FIRST COLUMN THAT SAYS 7.5995, YOU ARE PAYING ROUGHLY ABOUT $378 ANNUALLY FOR YOUR PROPERTY TAX BILL.
IF WE WOULD HAVE GONE TO A 5% CAP, WHICH THE RATE IS 7.7471 FOR THAT $50,000, YOUR CHANGE WOULD HAVE BEEN TO ROUGHLY ABOUT $8 A YEAR.
SO THAT IS ESSENTIALLY A COMPARISON OF A 3% TO A 5% OR TO A 6% CAP CHANGE.
OF COURSE, I WISH I WOULD HAVE HAD THE INFORMATION EVEN IF YOU IF YOU'RE APPLYING THE RATE TO YOUR THE CURRENT RATE THAT WE HAVE, IT ALL DEPENDS ON YOUR TAXABLE VALUE.
OF COURSE VALUATIONS ARE INCREASING, SO THIS IS NOT EXACT.
SO DON'T TAKE THIS AND SAY, WELL, MINE IS TAXABLE, VALUE IS $50,000.
YOU REALLY HAVE TO LOOK AT YOUR TAXABLE VALUE OF WHAT THE PROPERTY APPRAISER DOES PROVIDE.
SO WITH THAT 50,000, YOU KNOW, THOSE COMPARISONS ARE THERE.
WE ALSO APPLIED AGAINST NEW TAXABLE VALUE AND WE COME UP WITH AN ANNUAL REVENUE.
SO FOR THE CURRENT YEAR, WHICH WE ARE UNDER THAT 3% CAP AT THAT 7.5995, WE ARE GENERATING 37.9 MILLION AT THE 5% CAP.
IT WOULD INCREASE TO 38.6 MILLION.
SO YOU WOULD YOU'RE LOOKING AT TAKING IN AN ADDITIONAL 700,000.
SO WE ARE COMPARING WHAT CITIZENS OR RESIDENTS ON THEIR TAX BILL WOULD BE PAYING VERSUS WHAT THE CITY GENERATES IN REVENUE JUST BY INCREASING THAT RATE.
ONLY ROUGHLY ABOUT ONE THIRD ACTUALLY GOES TO THE CITY OF PALM BAY.
I WILL SAY THAT AND I WILL PUBLISH THIS NEXT WEEK.
BUT FOR THE GEO BONDS, BECAUSE I'VE ALREADY CALCULATED THOSE GEO BONDS ARE A LITTLE BIT EASIER TO CALCULATE BECAUSE I HAVE A SET AMOUNT THAT THAT THAT REVENUE COVERS. SO THAT IS WITHIN THE ORDINANCE AND THE GEO BOND REGULATIONS THAT WE HAVE GONE OUT.
IS THAT SO I HAVE A CERTAIN AMOUNT THAT I HAVE TO COVER.
[03:20:05]
BECAUSE THE DEBT SERVICE PAYMENT IS PRETTY MUCH STAYING THE SAME, BUT YOU'RE ABLE TO SPREAD IT OUT ACROSS THE LARGER TAX BASE.SO THE CITIZENS, TAXPAYERS SHOULD SEE A SAVINGS IF WE CONTINUE WITH THE NUMBERS THAT WE SEE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COUNCIL. THANK YOU, MA'AM.
LOOKING FORWARD TO YOUR COMPLETE PRESENTATION.
THANK YOU. YOU ALWAYS DO AN OUTSTANDING JOB THEN.
I'LL HAVE MR. FOSTER SPEAK FIRST.
THE CITY MANAGER COULD ANSWER THIS QUESTION BEFORE.
I JUST WANT TO GET SOME CLARIFICATION ON THIS.
WE IN OUR BUDGET, WE GET MONEY FROM THE STATE, RIGHT? THE STATES ARE NOW A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF MONEY TO HELP FUND OUR BUDGET.
OKAY. DO YOU KNOW APPROXIMATELY HOW MUCH? OFFHAND. THIS ESTIMATE.
STATE SHARED REVENUES, I THINK FOR THIS YEAR WERE THREE SOMETHING MILLION.
ANGELICA IS GOING TO LOOK IT UP FOR US.
THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, RIGHT? STATE SHARED REVENUE.
THAT'S RIGHT. IT'S ABOUT 3 MILLION.
ANGELICA IS GOING TO DOUBLE CHECK FOR ME REAL QUICK AND I'M PULLING IT UP.
IF WE GET WE GET MORE REVENUE LAST YEAR OR THE YEAR PRIOR OR LESS.
AS THE INCREASE OR DECREASE OVER THE LAST THREE YEARS, YOU KNOW? I WE'LL WE'LL CHECK THAT OUT FOR YOU, SIR.
THE STATE DOES PUT A CAP ON HOW YOU CAN GO RIGHT THAT WAY, SHE SAID IN A PRESENTATION.
ONE OF THEM IS YOU CAN'T GO HIGHER THAN A TOTAL OF TEN MILES FOR YOUR YOUR CITY.
AND PERCENT AS WELL, IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR, SIR, YOU'RE ABOUT 12% OR 8%.
SAVE OUR HOMES IS 3% AND THEN THE MILLAGE IS TEN.
I'M SORRY, DID I SAY 10%? OKAY, SO WE GOT RESTRICTIONS BY THE STATE, DON'T IT? YES, SIR. OKAY.
AND THEN BOTH RESTRICTIONS IS OVER 3%.
I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTOOD. COULD YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION? I'M SORRY. THE RESTRICTIONS BY THE STATE.
RIGHT? WELL, IT CAN'T REALLY EQUATED APPLES TO ORANGES ON THAT, I GUESS, BECAUSE THE MILITARY IS NOT REALLY A PERCENTAGE CALCULATION. IT'S JUST A OVERALL CAP FOR A CITY.
YOU CAN'T GET TO A MILLAGE THAT'S ABOVE TEN MILLS TOTAL LIKE WE'RE AT 7.5995 RIGHT NOW.
OKAY. YOU COULDN'T GO ABOVE TEN MILLS, BUT IT'S NOT REALLY PERCENTAGE LIMITED.
IT'S JUST MILL LIMITED, I GUESS, IF THE STATE GIVES US.
YOU STAY, SHERIFF. IF THEY GIVE US LESS MONEY.
HOW DO WE MAKE UP THAT DIFFERENCE? SO, UH, FINE QUESTION.
THE POINT YOU'RE MAKING IS THAT WE ARE HEAVILY RELIANT ON AD VALOREM REVENUE, WHICH IS ONE OF THE REASONS WE'RE IN IN GREAT PURSUIT OF A MORE DIVERSIFIED TAX BASE SO THAT WE HAVE MORE COMMERCIAL MULTIFAMILY.
BALANCING OUT THE IMPACTS OF SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
BUT THE BULK OF IT IS AD VALOREM.
ANGELICA DID YOU FIND THAT NUMBER ON STATE? SO STATE SHARED REVENUE WHICH FOR FISCAL YEAR 21 WAS ABOUT 9.4.
[03:25:03]
FISCAL YEAR 22 I'M SORRY, 19.4 FISCAL YEAR 22.WE ARE LOOKING AT IT TO BE ABOUT THE SAME.
SO WE'RE NOT SEEING A LARGER INCREASE REALLY ON WHAT HAS BEEN BUDGETED FOR THIS PARTICULAR YEAR, WHICH REALLY IS ABOUT ONLY ABOUT 9.19 .48. SO OF COURSE, AT TIMES WE WANT TO WAIT UNTIL THE ACTUALS COME IN BECAUSE IT COULD BE A LITTLE BIT MORE.
BUT DUE TO COVID, WE DID SEE A A FOR US, IT WAS A SIGNIFICANT DECLINE FROM FISCAL YEAR 19 TO FISCAL YEAR 20 IS WHERE WE ACTUALLY LOST ALMOST $1,000,000 IN REVENUE.
SO WE'RE KIND OF JUST AT THAT POINT WHERE WE'RE TRYING TO COME BACK UP.
SMALL PORTION. IT'S A SMALL PORTION TO OUR BUDGET FOR GENERAL FUND REVENUES THAT COME IN.
SO GENERALLY OUR GENERAL FUND BUDGET IS ROUGHLY SOMEWHERE AROUND IN THE $80 MILLION MARK, WHERE ONLY APPROXIMATELY 19 MILLION OF THAT IS ACTUALLY STATE SHARED REVENUES.
A.B., IS THE SHARE OF REVENUE, RIGHT? YES. OKAY.
RIGHT. SO BUT IF WE DIDN'T IF THEY DIDN'T GIVE US SAY THEY GAVE US TEN OUT OF THE 19, WHAT WOULD WE MAKE OF THAT, THAT THAT 9 MILLION? YOUR ONLY OPTION WOULD BE TO TRY TO ADDRESS IT WITH YOUR AD VALOREM TAXES, KNOW, ADJUSTING YOUR RATES OR YOU WOULD BE LOOKING AT REDUCING YOUR EXPENDITURES.
SO THE AVALON TAXES WILL HAVE TO INCREASE TO COVER THAT SHORTFALL OR WE HAVE TO REDUCE SERVICES OR LAY OFF PEOPLE. WHAT? YOU KNOW, THOSE WOULD BE THE PRIMARY OPTIONS I WOULD THINK WE'D BE FACED WITH, SIR.
EVERY EVERY YEAR WE WAIT ON THIS, YOU KNOW, WE WAIT AND SEE WHAT THE STATE'S GOING TO DROP DOWN.
AND THAT KIND OF FINALIZE OUR BUDGET NUMBERS, RIGHT? YOU CAN'T MAKE A BUDGET UNTIL WE GET THAT RIGHT.
THE STATE SHARE OF REVENUE, RIGHT? CORRECT. WE'RE WE'RE WAITING ON THE, UM, THE FINAL TAXABLE VALUE NUMBERS WHICH COME IN JULY 1ST.
THAT'S WHY THIS IS THIS IS MY POINT.
IT'S KIND OF LIKE A, YOU KNOW, ONE HAND WASHES.
BUT IF THE STATE DON'T GIVE US WHAT WE NEED.
BECAUSE WE GET IT EVERY YEAR AND WE'VE GOT TO MAKE UP THAT SHORTFALL.
AND UNLIKE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, WHEN I USED TO WORK FOR, THEY COULD PRINT MONEY.
DO WE PRINT MONEY, CITY MANAGER? CAN WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO PRINT MONEY? NO, SIR, WE DO NOT.
OKAY. I KNOW WE DIDN'T HAVE A PRINTING PRESS.
THAT WOULD BE COUNTERFEIT, SIR.
THAT'S A VIOLATION OF THE UNITED STATES TREASURY.
THEY JUST KEEP PRINTING. IN FACT, I DON'T LIKE TAXES.
I DON'T WANT TO RAISE NOBODY TAXES.
I DON'T WANT TO RAISE MY PROPERTY TAX.
WHAT I WANT WHEN I CALL 911, I WANT A POLICE OFFICER TO SHOW UP AT MY DOOR.
IF I IF THE SMOKE IS COMING OUT OF MY ATTIC, I WANT A FIREFIGHTER AND A FIRE IN SHOW UP.
IF I HAVE A WATER MAIN BREAK IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, I WANT PUBLIC WORKS TO COME OUT.
I COULD GO ON AND ON. BUT THIS IS MY MY MY POINT IS, IF WE IF WE DON'T.
I MEAN, OUR BUDGET IS TIED TO.
YOU KNOW WHAT? WE NEED TO KEEP OUR CITY FUNCTION.
AND IT SEEMS LIKE THIS 3% CAP, WE'RE GOING TO BE BELOW THE ROLLBACK RATE.
[03:30:06]
AND WE KEEP GOING BELOW THE ROLLBACK ROLLBACK RATE.HOW CAN WE PAY OUR EMPLOYEES? CITY MANAGER I CAN'T KEEP GOING BELOW THE ROAD.
WELL, I WOULD SAY YOU'D HAVE LESS PEOPLE FOR SURE.
BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT WE HAVEN'T MADE SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES IN OUR PAY RANGES FOR WELL OVER TEN YEARS, BUT THAT THOSE POTENTIAL PROJECTIONS ARE NOT EVEN REFLECTED IN WHAT YOU SAW TONIGHT. RIGHT.
WELL, YOU KNOW, I COULD GO ON AND ON.
I DON'T I KNOW IT'S GETTING LATE AND I DON'T WANT TO BEAT A DEAD HORSE.
I'VE BEEN CAMPAIGNING SINCE 2016 WHEN I RAN FOR THE COUNTY COMMISSION AND WHEN I RAN FOR THE CITY COUNCIL ABOUT GETTING RID OF THE CAP. I'VE BEEN VERY VOCAL AND I STILL GOT ELECTED.
THEY STILL ELECTED ME. STUDENT VOTES.
FISCAL CONSERVATIVE WHEN IT COMES TO THE CITY MONEY, THE TAXPAYER MONEY.
THAT'S WHAT THEY HIRED ME TO DO.
ON YOUR WRIST AND SHACKLES ON YOUR FEET.
YOU'RE NOT GOING TO MOVE VERY FAST.
THE BUNCH OF BS WE NEED TO GO WITH REMOVING THE CAP.
AND AS A COUNCIL, WE NEED TO TRY TO KEEP TAXES LOW, BUT PROVIDE THE SERVICE.
AND WE HAVE TO SPEND A LITTLE MONEY TO PROVIDE A CERTAIN SERVICE LIKE OUR FIRE STATION, OUR POLICE OFFICER, OUR UTILITY WORKERS, OUR PUBLIC WORK PEOPLE WORK.
SO EXPECTING SOME MORE REVENUE THERE.
THERE IS A LOT OF UNCERTAINTY IN TODAY'S WORLD.
GAS PRICES ARE UP, STOCK MARKETS DOWN, AND INFLATION, FOOD PRICES ARE UP.
BUT ONE THING FOR CERTAIN, FOR THE ELDERLY PEOPLE AND FOR THOSE ON A FIXED INCOME IS OUR 3% CAP.
I UNDERSTAND THE HANDCUFFS, THE 3% CAPS BROWN PUTS ON THE CITY.
WE HAVE A SUPERMAJORITY WHICH CAN REMOVE THAT CAP.
AND IF IT CAME FOR A JUST CAUSE, I'LL BE PART OF THAT SUPERMAJORITY 100%.
I UNDERSTAND THERE'S A PUBLIC SAFETY PROBLEM.
PUTTING MYSELF AND PREVIOUS COUNCILS HAVE BROUGHT THIS PUBLIC SAFETY PROBLEM UPON OURSELVES AND WE NEED TO USE THE TOOLS THAT WE HAVE IN OUR HANDS TO BE ABLE TO SOLVE THAT PROBLEM. SO THAT'S ME WHEN IT COMES TO THE 3% CAP.
THANK YOU. COUNCILMAN FILIBERTO, COUNCILMAN FELIX THERE BEING A LOT OF BEING SAID.
I DON'T KNOW IF I CAN ADD ANY MORE TO.
WE REALLY TRY TO CONVEY THE MESSAGE HOW IMPORTANT THAT IS TO US IN ORDER FOR US TO MOVE FORWARD AS WE HEADING TOWARDS BEING THE GREATEST CITY ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH.
HAVING A 3% CAP, I'M AFRAID WE'LL EVER GET THERE.
WE HAVE A CHALLENGE, A PUBLIC SAFETY CHALLENGE WE FACE IN IT NOW.
AND TELL YOU SOME OF THE THING THAT KEEPS ME UP AT NIGHT OR INFRASTRUCTURE ISSUES, ALL PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUES WHEN WHEN, YOU KNOW, MY COLLEAGUE, COUNCILMAN FILIBERTO, ELOQUENTLY CHALLENGED DEVELOPERS TO BUILD A FIRE STATION, WHEN WE HAVE THE ABILITY, WE HAVE THE CAPABILITY OF DOING IT OURSELVES.
SPEAKING OF TOOLS, YOU KNOW, THE CAP IS NOT A TOOL.
A 3% CAP IS CERTAINLY NOT A TOOL TO HELP US GET TO THAT NEXT LEVEL.
WE CANNOT PUT A PRICE TAG ON THE LIFE.
WE CANNOT PUT A PRICE TAG ON ON PROVIDING SERVICE TO OUR COMMUNITY WHEN IT COMES TO TO LIFE SAVING THOSE SERVICES, THE PUBLIC SERVICE SAFETY SERVICES.
SO. I MEAN, I DON'T NEED TO ADD MORE.
MY COLLEAGUE, COUNCILMAN FOSTER, MADE A LOT OF GREAT VOLUME POINTS.
SO MERIT, I CONCLUDE MY MY COMMENTS.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COUNCILMAN.
[03:35:02]
THANK YOU, MAYOR. SO IN PREVIOUS COUNCIL MEETINGS WE'VE HAD DISCUSSION TALKING ABOUT FIRE STATIONS, POLICE STATIONS, BUT IF WE CAN'T PUT PEOPLE IN THERE, THEN WHAT'S THE POINT OF HAVING, YOU KNOW, THE IMPACT FEES HELP BUILD THE FIRE STATION AND POLICE STATION? BUT IF WE DON'T HAVE, YOU KNOW, THE PEOPLE AND THE MEN AND WOMEN TO SERVE IN THERE, THEN WE JUST HAVE AN EMPTY STATION.SO, YOU KNOW, SO I THINK THIS DEFINITELY NEEDS TO GO ON THE BALLOT.
YOU KNOW, I DO BELIEVE EDUCATION NEEDS TO BE BROUGHT UP WITH IT.
MADAM ATTORNEY, I SPOKE TO YOU BRIEFLY BECAUSE I AGREE WITH MA'AM IN THE BACK YOU BROUGHT UP BY LAW.
BUT I WAS SPEAKING TO MADAM ATTORNEY AND TYPICALLY, IF YOU CAN ELABORATE A LITTLE BIT.
I WAS SAYING, AS ANGELIKA EXPLAINED, IT'S KIND OF HARD TO SAY THAT.
IT'S BECAUSE IF YOU SAY UP TO TEN MILLS, PEOPLE ARE GOING TO INTERPRET THAT TO ME, THAT EVERY YEAR WE HAVE THE POTENTIAL OF SETTING THE MILLS AT TEN MILLS, WHICH IS NOT TRUE.
AND ALL OF A SUDDEN THE NARRATIVE WILL BE IS THAT FOR THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE, YOUR MILEAGE IS GOING TO BE AT TEN WHEN COUNSEL IS NOT GOING TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO THAT. BUT WHAT CAN HAPPEN AND WHAT DOES HAPPEN WHEN WE HAVE THESE? CERTAINLY WE CAN'T ADVOCATE FOR ANY POSITION, BUT WHAT WE CAN DO IS PROVIDE FACTS.
SO SOME OF THE FACTS THAT ANJELICA PROVIDED, AS FAR AS HOW THIS IS CALCULATED, LOOKING AT THE STATUTE, PROVIDING A FACTUAL SITUATION THAT WE CAN PROVIDE IS IN TYPICALLY THE WILL CREATE.
A NOTE, NOT NECESSARILY A BOOKLET, BUT WE'LL HAVE SOMETHING ONLINE THAT PROVIDES WHAT EACH OF THE PROVISIONS IS AND HOW IT AFFECTS YOU IN A FACTUAL MANNER.
I HAVE A QUESTION REGARDING REGARDING THE FACTS THAT WE CAN PROVIDE BACK IN WHEN AN OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF OF THE VOTERS VOTED FOR THIS CAP.
WERE THOSE FACTS PROVIDED? WOULD YOU KNOW WHERE WE.
WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO THE CITY'S BUDGET? OR. WAS THAT EVER DISCUSSED AS FAR AS.
I DON'T KNOW. WHAT I CAN'T RECALL IS I DON'T THINK THAT WE PROVIDED ANY SAMPLE AS FAR AS.
IN THE IN THE LANGUAGE WHETHER SOMEONE MAY HAVE SPOKE AT A MEETING SIMILAR TO THIS AND ESSENTIALLY SAID WHAT A 3% CAP WOULD BE IF IT WAS IN PLACE AND HOW THAT WOULD AFFECT OUR REVENUE AT SOME TYPE OF WORKSHOP AT A COUNCIL MEETING, I'M NOT CERTAIN.
WELL, I GUESS AND I DON'T RECALL EITHER.
THAT'S WHY I WAS BRINGING IT UP.
WAS THERE A HUGE CAMPAIGN FOR IT OR 70? I BELIEVE 70% OF THE VOTERS VOTED FOR IT.
SO I WAS JUST WONDERING HOW THOSE FACTS CAME OUT, IF YOU DON'T HAVE ANY HISTORY OF THAT.
AS FAR AS WHEN YOU SAY CAMPAIGN, THAT SOUNDS LIKE ADVOCACY THAT WE MAY BE INVOLVED, AS YOU WERE ADVOCACY, MA'AM, BUT IT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, REALLY TELLING PEOPLE IN A VERY VANILLA, YOU KNOW, WAY, HEY, THIS IS WHAT THIS MEANS THAT WE CAN PROVIDE.
BUT AS A CITY, WE CAN'T ADVOCATE FOR A POSITION.
SO, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS, RIGHT, AN OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE VOTED.
SO I REALLY THINK I LIKE WITH.
AND I KNOW MAYBE THE 6% WOULDN'T WOULDN'T REALLY BE EFFECTIVE, AS IS FROM WHAT I'M SEEING HERE.
BUT THE FACT REMAINS THAT LEAVING A BLANKET NO CAP FROM A 3% CAP, I'M NOT SURE YOU'RE GOING TO OVERTURN THAT 70% OF THE VOTERS THAT CHANGE ON THAT.
OF COURSE, IT DEPENDS ON THE ADVOCACY, OF COURSE, BUT THAT'S GOING TO BE A TALL ONE.
AND PART OF THAT IS THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE TAXING AT THE WRONG TIME.
[03:40:05]
SO I'M NOT SUPPORTIVE OF THIS.MAYOR, IF I MAY. BUT I'M CLERK BY ANY CHANCE, DO YOU HAVE THAT LANGUAGE THAT ACTUALLY AS IT WENT ON THE BALLOT, IF YOU HAVE IT, WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO SHARE IT WITH US? BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S I HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT IT, THE EXACT AMENDMENT, THE LANGUAGE OF IT.
I CAN TELL YOU, I PERSONALLY FELT IT WAS VERY MISLEADING.
THIS LED TO DO EXACTLY WHAT YOU JUST STATED.
FOR 70%, I THINK IT WAS 60 PLUS TO VOTE FORWARD BECAUSE IT WAS TO ME, IN MY OPINION, CERTAINLY I'M NOT A LAWYER OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, BUT I WRITE IT AS IF IT'S A SCARE TACTICS TO SAY, HEY, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A WAY TO STOP CITY COUNCIL NOT TO INCREASE YOUR TAXES.
THAT'S THE WAY I LOOKED AT IT. I WOULD HAVE PROBABLY VOTED FOR IT AS WELL.
I MAY HAVE. BUT BECAUSE IT IS A SCARE TACTIC, THE LANGUAGE, THE WAY IT WAS WORDED, TO SPECIFICALLY SAY, HEY, YOU KNOW, SCARE, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, FEAR WORKS.
WE KNOW THAT. WE KNOW THAT FOR A FACT.
SO IF YOU HAVE THE LANGUAGE, WOULD YOU READ IT FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE PUBLIC FROM US AS WELL? 2016. YES. THE BALLOT LANGUAGE.
THE YES, MA'AM. BALLOT LANGUAGE, PLEASE.
THE SUMMARY READ AS FOLLOWS SHALL SECTION 6.01 OF THE CITY OF PALM BAY CHARTER BE AMENDED TO PROVIDE THAT THE CITY COUNCIL SHALL NOT IMPOSE ANY AD VALOREM TAX AT A MILLAGE RATE THAT RESULTS IN TOTAL AD VALOREM REVENUES FOR THAT FISCAL YEAR, EXCEEDING THE TOTAL AD VALOREM REVENUES FROM THE PREVIOUS FISCAL YEAR BY MORE THAN 3% UNLESS THE CITY COUNCIL BY SUPERMAJORITY VOTE FINDS THAT AN EMERGENCY OR CRITICAL NEED EXISTS.
YOU BRING UP A VALID POINT, COUNCILMAN FELIX AND LOOK AT THE WAY THIS WILL READ.
NOW THE COUNCIL SHALL HAVE FULL POWER AND AUTHORITY TO LEVY TAXES AS AUTHORIZED BY LAW.
I DON'T THINK THAT'LL BE THE FINAL LANGUAGE.
IS THAT CORRECT, MADAM ATTORNEY? THAT'S HOW IT WOULD BE PRESENTED ON THE BALLOT, WOULD IT? ACTUALLY IT WOULD BE AMENDED TO THAT.
THE COUNCIL SHALL HAVE FULL POWER AND AUTHORITY TO LEVY TAXES AUTHORIZED BY LAW.
SO IT BE SOMEWHAT VERY SIMILAR.
SIMILAR OK. SO I MEAN, TO YOUR POINT, COUNCILMAN FELIX YOU AS A VOTER, HOW DID HOW DO YOU RECEIVE THAT? WELL, I MEAN, MY ARGUMENT TO THAT MAYOR WOULD BE THIS IS THE SAME THE SAME VOTER.
THAT MAJORITY FOR MOST MAJORITY OF US, WE HAVE A BIG CHUNK OF THOSE VOTERS THAT ENTRUST THEIR FAITH INTO THEIR ELECTED OFFICIAL TO MAKE DECISION ON THEIR BEHALF, TO LOOK FOR TO LOOK FOR THE WELL FOR THEIR WELL-BEING AS A COMMUNITY.
AND ONE THING WE ALL RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND TO SAY, HEY, WE'RE WE'LL DO RIGHT BY YOU.
YOU KNOW, EVERY DECISION I MAKE ON THIS DAY AS I GO TO SLEEP, I SLEEP WELL.
I APPRECIATE THAT. I JUST THINK THAT'S TOO OPEN ENDED IS IS WHAT I'M SAYING.
BASED ON WHAT YOU SAID ABOUT THE LAST DIALOG THAT ALMOST 70% OF THE VOTERS VOTED FOR THE CAP.
THIS ISN'T GIVING VOTERS MUCH OF A CRITERIA.
AND SO THE ARGUMENT IS CORRECT.
WHAT YOU VALID YOUR VALID POINT IS IS ACCURATE.
IT'S KIND OF OPEN. BUT WE'VE WE'VE DISCUSSED THIS AND AND WE'VE MADE EACH OTHER.
SO WHAT'S THE PLEASURE OF COUNCIL? I DO HAVE A QUESTION FOR, I GUESS, A VICE CHAIR.
WHY DIDN'T YOU ALL GO WITH 6% LIKE THE FORWARD? WHY DIDN'T WE GO WITH 6%? BECAUSE YOU SAW THE PRESENTATION BY ANGELICA.
IT DOESN'T MAKE A WHOLE HECK OF A LOT OF DIFFERENCE IN IRAQ.
AND I AGREE. I AGREE WITH THAT.
AND BUT IN REGARDS TO, LIKE THE DISCUSSION YOU'RE HEARING, YOU KNOW, SO VOTERS CAN UNDERSTAND.
[03:45:03]
THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING.WELL, I UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT, YOU KNOW, THE LANGUAGE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, YEAH, IT'S VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD AND PLAIN AND SIMPLE, BUT THAT'S WHAT IT WAS FOR YEARS AND YEARS AND YEARS AND YEARS BEFORE 2016.
IT'S VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD AND PLAIN.
WHAT IS THE PLEASURE OF COUNSEL? WHAT IS YOUR PLEASURE? HEY.
MOTION TO ACCEPT THE THE LANGUAGE AS IS.
SUGAR ADDED TO BE ADDED TO THE.
ARE YOU TRYING TO SECOND THAT MOTION, COUNCILMAN FOSTER? YES, SIR. YES, MA'AM.
SO I GOT A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN FELIX, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN FOSTER.
ANY ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION, GENTLEMEN? I. DEPUTY MAYOR, LIKE I.
LIKE I SAID BEFORE, I SUPPORT ALL THESE, AS IS.
SO SCHAKOWSKY DOES BRING UP A VALID POINT.
SO I DO HAVE CONCERNS REGARDING THAT.
YOU KNOW, JUST I GUESS IT'S JUST REALLY VOTER EDUCATION AT THAT POINT.
SO BUT I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS ITEM.
ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. COUNCILMAN FELIX, DID YOU WANT TO YOU MAKE THE MOTION? YOU. MAYOR.
I DON'T REALLY HAVE MUCH TO ADD, EXCEPT AS IS COUNCILMAN FOSTER.
I'VE BEEN VERY VOCAL ABOUT GETTING RID OF CAP.
[2. Consideration of proposed amendments to the City Charter. (Councilmembers Felix and Filiberto)]
THE WRONG THING. THAT'S OUR JOB.THAT'S WHAT WE. THAT'S WHY WE ELECTED.
AND OUR JOB IS TO DO A BUDGET THAT'S A NUMBER ONE THING AND PASS A BUDGET EVERY YEAR.
AND WE NEED TO DO IT RESPONSIBLY.
YOU DID IT LAST YEAR AND YOU COULD DO IT AGAIN.
BUT WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S COMING DOWN THE HORIZON.
WE'VE GOT TO HAVE FLEXIBILITY.
AND I GET YOU KNOW, WE GOT SENIORS IN THIS COMMUNITY.
I GET THAT. BUT I ALSO WANT MY SENIORS SAFE.
AND I WANT IF THEY FALL DOWN WITH A HEART ATTACK, I WANT A FIREFIGHTER TO SAVE THEM.
I WANT A POLICE OFFICER TO PROTECT THEM.
SO AND THERE'S NO AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT YOU COULD PUT ON THAT.
SO WITH THE ROLLBACK, THE 3% GOING IN THE BELOW THE ROLLBACK RATE, I BELIEVE THAT'S A DISASTER FOR THE CITY AND IT COULD BE LAYING OFF PEOPLE.
WE DON'T HAVE THE MONEY TO PAY FOR THEIR SALARIES OR MONEY TO PAY FOR EQUIPMENT.
I'M NOT SAYING THE NEXT BUDGET, I'LL VOTE FOR SOMETHING OVER 3%.
I'VE GOT A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN FELIX, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN FOSTER.
HEY. SORRY. ANY OPPOSE PASS IS 3 TO 2.
WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT COUNCILMAN, FELIX AND FILIBERTO CHOSE TO PRESENT THEIR ITEMS. WE'LL START WITH COUNCILMAN FELIX.
WE'LL GO IN ALPHABETICAL ORDER HERE.
WHAT I WANTED TO PROPOSE IS THAT CURRENTLY.
THREE THREE TERMS. CONSECUTIVE TERM OR 444 YEARS.
UM. MY PROPOSAL IS TO REDUCE IT TO TWO.
AND I HAVE ABOUT THREE REASONS WHY I'D LIKE TO PROPOSE THAT.
IS THE IDEA OF CAREER POLITICIAN.
I'VE NEVER YOU KNOW, I'VE NEVER BEEN A BELIEVER OF OF AS PUBLIC SERVANT.
WE SHOULD MAKE TURNING INTO A CAREER.
[03:50:01]
I MEAN, WE SHOULD SERVE.BUT IN TERMS OF ELECTED AN ELECTED CAPACITY, I DON'T BELIEVE IT SHOULD BE DONE TO BE A CAREER.
YOU KNOW, THE IF YOU WANT TO SEE THAT WORKS, DON'T LOOK TOO FAR.
TODAY. HOW'D THAT WORKING OUT? WITH ALL SENATE AND ALL HOUSE NUMBER TWO.
THE. I BELIEVE WE SHOULD MAKE ROOM FOR NEW IDEAS, INNOVATION, INNOVATION, INNOVATIVE IDEAS, NEW BLOOD, YOUNGER FOLKS THAT NEEDS TO SERVE AND THAT THAT EAGER TO SERVE.
I THINK THE MORE WE STAY IN OFFICE, THAT LIMIT LIMIT.
THAT'S PUT THE LIMITATION ON THOSE THAT MAY WANT TO SERVE.
IF YOU CANNOT DELIVER THE GOODS IN EIGHT YEARS, SOMETHING IS WRONG.
MAYBE. FIRST OF ALL, YOU SHOULD NEVER BE THERE.
I BELIEVE THE FIRST TERM YOU LEARN.
ACQUIRED THE EXPERIENCE BY THE SECOND TERM.
YOU SHOULD YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO DELIVER WITH THE WILLINGNESS TO TO REALLY DO THE RIGHT THING.
YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO TO TO DELIVER THE GOODS.
SO THESE ARE THE REASONS, REALLY, THAT I CAME FORTH WITH THIS THIS ALTHOUGH THE CHARTER AMENDMENT CERTAINLY OPEN TO TO HEAR WHAT MY COLLEAGUES FEEL ABOUT THAT AND.
I'LL KICK THAT OFF AND THEN I'LL TURN IT OVER TO THE PUBLIC.
THE OTHER THING I WANT TO SAY, THE WHEELS OF GOVERNMENT TURN EVER SO SLOWLY.
AND RIGHT NOW, WE'RE DISCUSSING TOPICS THAT WE'RE GOING TO PERHAPS PASS ON TO A FUTURE COUNCIL.
SO THERE'S THERE'S THIS WENT FROM THREE YEARS.
RIGHT. THEY USED TO BE THREE YEAR TERMS. AND NOW I THINK THE LAST TIME IT WAS CHANGED TO FOUR, THREE YEAR TERMS OR AS YOU WERE, THREE, FOUR YEAR TERMS, A TOTAL OF 12 YEARS. I'M GOOD WITH THE WAY IT IS.
BUT SINCE THIS IS THIS WAS BROUGHT UP, I WANT TO HEAR, DOES ANYONE WISH TO COME AND SPEAK REGARDING THIS MASTER SERGEANT OR AS SENIOR CHIEF? HE IS THE MASTER MASTER CHIEF.
HE IS YOU KNOW, HE IS A SENIOR CHIEF.
BUT I PROMOTED TO WHICH IS A MASTER SERGEANT IN THE MARINE CORPS.
NO, IT ISN'T. AS YOU WERE SENIOR CHIEF.
I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHERE HE ATE.
BUT THERE'S BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A SENIOR CHIEF AND A MASTER SERGEANT.
OKAY. OKAY. YEAH, YOU'RE RIGHT.
IN THE MARINE CORPS, THEY'RE TOUGHER.
CARRY ON. JUST APARTMENT IN THE NAVY.
ALL RIGHT? I HAVE NO REAL CONCERN WITH THIS.
WHEN, OTHER THAN THE FACT THAT I PERSONALLY FIND VERY FEW POLITICIANS THAT I WANT TO SEE REPEATED FOR THREE TERMS, IT'S JUST THAT'S BILL BATTEN STANDARD. SO I'M SOMEWHAT IN FAVOR OF THIS PROCESS, BUT IT LEADS TO ONE QUESTION I NEED TO GET AN ANSWER ON ON THIS ONE.
CAN A PERSON CAN A PERSON SERVE THEIR TERMS AND THEN HAVE A TERM OFF AND THEN RUN FOR OFFICE AGAIN IN THE SAME IN THE SAME CITY, SAME COUNCIL. SO YOU COULD HAVE TERM AFTER TERM AFTER TERM.
IT'S JUST CONSECUTIVE TERMS, THAT'S ALL YOU'RE LIMITING.
SO THEY COULD STILL GET I COULD STILL SEE THE SAME POLITICIAN YEAR AFTER YEAR AFTER YEAR AFTER OK.
THE WAY THIS. THAT IS CORRECT.
ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK? NO ONE ELSE HERE, IF I MAY.
THE OTHER THING I WANT I DID NOT MENTION.
COUNTY. ONLY DID THAT IN THE IN THE EARLY NINETIES.
YOU KNOW, THE VOTERS TURN OUT HUGE, HUGE TURN OUT.
THEY WANT TO SEE THE IDEA OF OF OF CAREER POLITICIAN.
I THINK 12 YEARS IS A LONG TIME DOING WHAT WE DO.
I WOULD AGREE THAT THE COUNTY, THE VOTERS IN THE COUNTY THOUGHT IT WAS A GREAT IDEA.
EVEN YOU, TO TERM WITH YOURSELF, YOU WISH TO SERVE.
[03:55:01]
SO. I MEAN, I GET WHAT YOU.WHERE YOU GOING WITH THAT? MY MY.
TO THAT END, I'M JUST THINKING THIS IS LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
THIS IS THERE'S SO MUCH VALUE WITH HISTORICAL KNOWLEDGE.
AND NOT ONLY THAT, AND I SAID, SAY, DEPUTY MAYOR JOHNSON, HE HE RUNS AND HE'S GOT EIGHT YEARS AND THEN MAYBE HE'D WANT TO RUN CONSECUTIVELY TO TO BE THE MAYOR THE NEXT TIME AROUND.
SO I THAT'S WHERE I'M COMING FROM.
OR IT COULD BE, COULD BE, YOU KNOW, THE NEXT TERM.
IT COULD BE IT'S A TOTAL, TOTAL OF EIGHT YEARS OR FOUR TERM AS COUNCIL.
I MEAN, FOUR YEARS AT COUNCIL, FOUR YEARS AS MAYOR.
SO THAT THAT THAT JUST MY TAKE ON IT.
COUNCILMAN FOSTER? YES. YES, MAYOR.
UH, I'M KIND OF ON THE SAME PAGE WITH THIS.
I MEAN, LET ME. I MEAN, THE VOTERS DETERMINE HOW LONG YOU SERVE, NOT THE TERM LIMIT.
THE VOTER, HOW WELLS WEST MELBOURNE MAYOR, HOW LONG YOU'VE BEEN IN OFFICE.
AND LET ME GIVE YOU ANOTHER ONE.
THERE'S NO LIMIT OVER THERE, THOUGH, SIR.
RIGHT. THERE'S NO LIMIT, BUT IT IS.
ELECTIONS DETERMINE THE LIMITS.
HOW LONG ARE YOU GOING TO SERVE? WE'RE GOING TO VOTE YOU IN.
YOUR BOSS, CONGRESSMAN POSEY, THEY KEEP VOTING HIM.
AND HE SAID THE OTHER THING, BECAUSE THE VOTERS WANT HIM IN OFFICE.
JOHN TOBIAS DID EIGHT YEARS IN THE STATE REPRESENTED.
NOW HE'S GOING TO DO EIGHT YEARS ON A COUNTY COMMISSION BACK TO BACK.
THE VOTERS WANT PEOPLE LIKE HIM IN OFFICE.
THE VOTER WANT PEOPLE LIKE THAT IN OFFICE.
BUT WITH THIS PROPOSAL, COUNCILMAN FILIBERTO WOULD BE DONE AFTER NOVEMBER BECAUSE HE'S SERVING OBJECT BARELY TERM, AND THEN THAT'S GOING TO COUNT AS FOUR YEARS.
AND THEN IN NOVEMBER HE HAVE EIGHT AND HE ONLY REALLY SERVED A LITTLE MORE THAN FOUR.
I JUST, YOU KNOW, MY THING IS TO KEEP IT LIKE IT IS.
THANK YOU, MAYOR. A COUNCILMAN FELIX.
THIS WAS A GOOD PROPOSAL YOU BROUGHT BEFORE US, AND IT CREATED A GOOD CONVERSATION.
SO I MAY NEED OR COUNCILMAN MAY NEED TWO TERMS BEFORE THEY CAN REACH THAT MAYOR STATUS.
ROB IS THE EXCEPTION. SORRY, MAYOR MEDINA IS THE EXCEPTION.
THEY'RE GOING STRAIGHT TO MAYOR.
THAT'S THE REASON WHY I'M GOING TO VOTE NO ON THIS, SIR.
BUT IT DID CREATE A VERY GOOD DISCUSSION.
YOU DON'T THIS MIGHT DETER SOMEONE WHO IS A COUNCILMAN TO GO TO MAYOR.
I'VE HEARD IT SAID TWICE NOW, SO I DO AGREE WITH THAT.
AND THEY'RE SECOND GUESSING ON WHETHER OR NOT, HEY, SHOULD I JUST RUN FOR MAYOR OR SHOULD I TRY TO GET MY FEET WET AS A COUNCILMAN OR A COUNCILWOMAN? SO I LIKE THE INTENT.
BUT I THINK IT'S BETTER AS HOW IT IS CURRENTLY.
MAYOR AND I AGREE THAT WE DO HAVE TERM LIMITS.
COUNCILMAN FELIX YOU KNOW, AND I DON'T THINK IT'S A CAREER, BUT AND IT IS WELL INTENDED.
SO I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH THE REST OF COUNCIL.
I DON'T THINK THIS IS NECESSARY.
OH. WHAT I WOULD SAY, MAYOR, IT'S ALWAYS A CHALLENGE.
[04:00:01]
AND I GET THE ARGUMENT THAT ULTIMATELY THE VOTERS THAT MAKE THAT DECISION RIGHT, RATHER THEY'RE GOING TO TERMED US OUT OF OFFICE OR NOT.RIGHT. BUT THE CHALLENGE HISTORICALLY, WE ALL KNOW 70%.
THE INCUMBENT. YOU REALLY YOU KNOW, YOU'RE NOT DOING THE RIGHT THING.
THERE'S A 70% CHANCE THAT THE INCUMBENTS STAY IN OFFICE.
AND AND WHAT I LOOK THAT AGAIN YOU KNOW MY INTENT MAYBE IT'S MY NONPOLITICAL NON CAREER POLITICIAN YOU KNOW IDEA BECAUSE I'M I SIGN UP TO SERVE RATHER I SERVE AS YOU KNOW I SERVE AS A COUNCILMAN THEY ARE TO ME SITTING ON THIS DIAS YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO SAME AS THE MAYOR, TO MAKE DECISION ON BEHALF OF THE CITY.
BUT AGAIN, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH THE ASPIRATION OF BEING MAYOR.
I DON'T NECESSARILY SEE THE DIFFERENCE IN TERM OF HAVING THE ABILITY TO TO TO MAKE DECISION.
FOR THE BETTERMENT OF THE CITY.
TO ME, EIGHT YEARS IS PLENTY IF YOU'RE WILLING TO SERVE AND SERVE FOR THE RIGHT REASON.
NOT LOOKING AT THIS AS A STEP, A STEPPING STONE TO FOR BIGGER DREAM, POLITICAL DREAM.
ALTHOUGH THERE'S NECESSARILY NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT.
YOU CAN SERVE HERE EIGHT, EIGHT YEARS AND MOVE ON TO THE NEXT OFFICE.
DOESN'T HAVE TO BE HERE 12 YEARS.
THIS IS NOT A DEAL BREAKER FOR ME.
THAT'S THE WAY. AND THAT WON'T CHANGE NECESSARILY.
HOWEVER, COUNCIL DECIDED TO VOTE TONIGHT.
ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. WE WE DON'T THE ONLY WAY WE VOTE ON THIS IS IF SOMEONE MAKES A MOTION AND.
SO I DON'T I DON'T HEAR EMOTION.
SO WE'RE GOING ON TO COUNCILMAN PHIL ALBERTO'S PROPOSED AMENDMENT.
THANK YOU, MAYOR. I OFF WITH A MINUTE.
NUMBER ONE HERE. QUALIFICATIONS IN ELECTIONS.
I'VE SEEN THIS AS A PROBLEM IN THE PAST.
I RAN IN TWO ELECTIONS, ONE AGAINST COUNCILMAN FELIX HERE AND THERE HAPPENED TO BE ONE PERSON IN OUR ELECTION, COUNCILMAN FELIX, WHO DIDN'T REALLY LIVE IN PALM BAY. AND RIGHT WHEN SHE LOST THE ELECTION, SHE MOVED OUT OF PALM BAY.
SO THAT WAS KIND OF THAT WAS A CASE THEN I FELT LIKE THERE WAS A CASE MORE RECENTLY SO AND I TRIED TO SAY, HOW CAN I HOW CAN I PROVE THIS OR NOT PROVE IT? AND THEN SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS TELL ME I SHOULD SEE THE CITY CLERK.
CITY CLERKS TELL ME I HAVE TO SEE A SUPERVISOR ELECTIONS.
AND EVENTUALLY THEY TELL ME, OH, YOU GOT TO TAKE IT.
SMALL CLAIMS COURT. I'M LIKE, THIS IS GETTING RIDICULOUS OUT OF HAND.
IT SHOULDN'T BE THE CANDIDATE TO DO THIS STUFF.
SO I FEEL IT'S MORE IT SHOULD BE MORE ON THE CITY CLERK.
ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE, I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER.
MADAM. MADAM ATTORNEY, I KNOW THIS ISSUE DID COME UP BEFORE, AND I WAS I DID PROVIDE AN OPINION ON THIS, AND I WILL PROVIDE THAT SAME OPINION.
I MEAN, THERE IS VARIOUS CASES AND OPINIONS THAT THE QUALIFYING OFFICERS OF RESPONSIBILITY AS IS ACTUALLY MINISTERIAL.
IT GOES WAY BACK TO SEVEN V STONE, WHICH IS A 1972 CASE.
AND AND THERE'S THIS IS OLD IS STILL VALID IS STILL CITED.
THERE ARE STILL OPINIONS BY THE ATTORNEY GENERALS.
THERE ARE STILL OPINIONS BY THE DEPARTMENT OF ELECTIONS THAT ESSENTIALLY SAY IS THAT, YOU KNOW, I WOULD SAY THE CLERK DOESN'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO REJECT QUALIFYING DOCUMENTS IF THEY ARE COMPLETE ON THEIR FACE AND THEY'RE PROPERLY EXECUTED UNDER OATH OR AFFIRMATION.
AND OPPOSING CANDIDATES RECOURSE IS TO QUESTION.
BECAUSE WHEN YOU SAY THAT THE CLERK SHOULD VERIFY, HOW WOULD THE CLERK HAVE THE ABILITY TO VERIFY?
[04:05:05]
WHAT IS THE CLERK GOING TO DO? SO WHEN THEY SAY, YOU KNOW, A CLERK, WHETHER IT'S THE CLERK IS A SUPERVISOR ELECTION, IF YOU AFFIRM IT, THEY GO BUY IT.SOMEBODY ELSE WANTS TO CHALLENGE THAT.
YOU HAVE THE COURT, THE COURT.
YOU CAN SUBPOENA RECORDS. YOU CAN LOOK AT THE HOUSE, YOU LOOK AT BANK RECORDS.
THEY HAVE ALL SORTS OF TOOLS AT THEIR DISPOSAL.
I MEAN, YOU LOOK AT A CLERK OR A SECRETARY OF STATE OR SUPERVISOR OF ELECTION, WHAT IS IT THEY'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO TO VERIFY THIS RESIDENCY? I STILL THINK I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE IS A LEGAL WAY IN WHICH THAT CAN BE DONE.
I THINK THE OPINION IS AND THE PREVAILING OPINION IS THAT OUR JOB IS MINISTERIAL IF THE PERSON CERTIFIES UNDER OATH. YOU COULD CERTAINLY LATER ON ATTACK THEM.
IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO CHALLENGE IT, THEY TAKE IT.
BUT THAT CONTINUES TO BE MY LEGAL OPINION.
I SEE. SO. SO, IN OTHER WORDS, WHEN YOU SAY IT'S MINISTERIAL, THE CITY CLERK WOULDN'T HAVE ANY TYPE OF AUTHORITY TO TO NOT ONLY ENFORCE IT, BUT PUT ANY ANY BITE TO THAT.
RIGHT. NOW, HER HIGHER AUTHORITY IS TO LOOK AND SEE.
ARE THE DOCUMENTS COMPLETE? IF THE DOCUMENTS ARE COMPLETE, THE PERSON SIGNS THE OATH AFFIRMING THAT, OH, THE RESIDENCY OR ANY OF THE OTHER REQUIREMENTS.
SHE DOESN'T GET TO LOOK BEYOND.
IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO CHALLENGE THAT, THEY TAKE IT TO A COURT.
YOU GO BEFORE THE COURT, YOU MAKE YOUR CASE, YOU CAN GET EVIDENCE, YOU CAN JUDGE, CAN MAKE A RULING, BUT IT DOESN'T MAKE CLERKS AND, YOU KNOW, SUPERVISOR ELECTIONS LIKE A MINI COURT'S UNTO THEMSELVES.
YOU KNOW, ESSENTIALLY, IF SHE'S GOING TO HOW SHE WOULD VERIFY THIS AND THEN WHAT IS THE DUE PROCESS? SO SHE THINKS, WELL, I DON'T LIVE THERE.
SO WHAT DO YOU DO IF YOU DISAGREE? WHAT'S THE MECHANISM? BUT WHEN YOU GO TO COURT, EACH SIDE HAS THE ABILITY TO PRESENT EVIDENCE TO BE HEARD.
I JUST DON'T SEE A LEGAL BASIS TO DO THIS.
SO. THE CITY CLERK CAN ENFORCE ANYTHING OTHER THAN JUST THE CANDIDATES ON THEIR HONOR, IS WHAT I'M HEARING. THEY COULD RAISE THEIR RIGHT HAND AND BE COMMITTING PERJURY.
BUT THERE'S NO RECOURSE FOR THE CITY CLERK, IS THAT I MEAN, THERE'S NOTHING TO FOR THEM TO PROVIDE.
IT HAS TO BE A JUDGE THAT MAKES THAT DECISION.
THE CITY ATTORNEY DROPPED CASE LAW.
SO, I MEAN, THAT'S FINE WITH ME EVEN THOUGH IT'S AN OPINION.
IT'S WHATEVER THIS COUNCIL WANTS TO DO AGAIN.
I WAS TOLD I CAN MAKE SOME AMENDMENTS HERE.
THERE'S NO HARD FEELINGS HERE. SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THAT.
I'LL BE THERE. YOU WANT TO WEIGH IN? YES, MA'AM. I'LL SEE YOU.
SO I THINK A BETTER APPROACH WOULD BE TO SIT WITH THE CITY MANAGER OR OR CITY ATTORNEY AND LOOK PIECE BY PIECE WHAT IS NOT BEING IMPLEMENTED.
BECAUSE LOOKING AT IT, A LOT OF IT IS.
SO THAT'S THAT'S THE WAY I WAS LOOKING AT IT BECAUSE IT IS A LOT, BUT A LOT OF IT I'M LOOKING AT, I'M READING IT AND I'M LIKE, OKAY, BUDGET, WE DO THIS OR IN OTHER ITEMS, BUT I UNDERSTAND THE INTENT.
SO. MR. MAYOR AND SORRY, DEPUTY MAYOR, I THINK THAT'S THE ONLY PROPER APPROACH.
SO THE THESE THINGS THAT HE'S BRINGING UP, THEY'RE ALL PART OF THE CHARTER.
GO AHEAD, SIR. YOU WERE? YEAH. OBVIOUSLY, THERE'S ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR.
WE WERE ONLY DISCUSSING NUMBER ONE AT THE MOMENT.
AND THEN THE DEPUTY MAYOR WENT DOWN TO FOUR.
[04:10:01]
I THOUGHT WE WERE JUST PERTAINING TO ONE.IF YOU WANT ME TO GO THROUGH ALL OF THEM, I'LL BE HAPPY TO GO THROUGH ALL OF THEM.
WE'RE WE'RE WE'VE ALREADY WE'VE ALREADY COVERED ONE.
IT'S YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST A MATTER.
YOU CAN'T HAVE THE CITY CLERK ENFORCE THE WORDS.
ALL RIGHT. THIS IS PART OF FLORIDA STATUTE.
THAT'S FINE. LET'S MOVE TO NUMBER TWO.
THEN THERE SHALL BE A POLICE DEPARTMENT WHICH SHALL CONSIST OF A CHIEF OF POLICE AND PERSONNEL, ALLOWING TO THE BEST OF THIS CITY'S ABILITY TO MEET MUNICIPAL AND STATE STANDARDS FOR THE RESIDENTS OF PALM BAY.
AS THE SAME THING ALSO SAYS FOR FIRE DEPARTMENT UNDER UNDER SECTION THREE.
AND MEETING MUNICIPAL STANDARDS AND MUNICIPAL STANDARDS ARE USUALLY STATE STANDARDS WHEN IT COMES TO RESPONSE TIMES AND TO POLICE PER CAPITA. AND THE WAY IT READS NOW IS CARRY ON.
THE WAY IT READS NOW IS THERE SHALL BE A POLICE DEPARTMENT PERIOD RIGHT THEN.
AND THEN IT GOES ON TO SAY THREE.
YEAH. SO ANYONE WISH TO SPEAK ON THESE ITEMS? STEP FORWARD. ARE YOU WILLING TO GO BECAUSE THIS.
WELL, YEAH, BECAUSE THIS ONE ITEM.
BECAUSE IF WE PREVIOUSLY WE DISCUSS EVERY ITEM THAT WAS BEING PRESENTED IN CITY COUNCIL.
SO THEORETICALLY, SAME WITH THIS.
BILL BURTON 586 OCEAN SPRAY STREET, SOUTH WEST.
I UNDERSTAND WHAT THE PROCESS IS.
WE'RE WE'RE SHY IN OUR FIRE DEPARTMENT AND POLICE DEPARTMENT.
WE'RE SHY BY STANDARDS, BUT BY MANDATING IT BY CITY CHARTER, IF WE DON'T DO IT, THAT MEANS WE'RE IN VIOLATION OF SOME FORM OR ANOTHER BY CITY CHARTER, BECAUSE IF WE CAN'T MEET IT BECAUSE IT'S HERE, IT SAYS WE'RE SUPPOSED TO DO IT.
SO BE CAREFUL WHEN WE PUT STUFF IN THERE.
IT SAYS, YEAH, WELL WE'RE GOING TO MEET THE MINIMUM MUNICIPAL STANDARD.
WE DON'T MEET THE STANDARD NOW, SO THEORETICALLY WE WOULD BE IN VIOLATION.
AND THE NEXT THING THAT COMES OUT OF BANTON'S MIND IS IT DOESN'T HAVE A FUNDING SOURCE TO MEET IT.
AND WE JUST WATCH WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE CAP.
IF THAT DOESN'T FILE, WE'LL NEVER, EVER BE ABLE TO MEET THESE CRITERIAS.
SO THE ONLY OTHER RESTRICTION YOU COULD HAVE THEN TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT IN VIOLATION OF OUR CITY CHARTER WOULD BE TO SAY, WELL, HERE'S WHAT THE POPULATION WE CAN SUPPORT. WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO EXPAND THE CITY'S POPULATION BASED ON CITY ORDINANCE BY CITY CHARTER THAT SAYS WE DON'T MEET THE MINIMUM CRITERIA FOR POLICE AND FIRE, SO WE'D HAVE TO CAP IT AT POPULATION SO WE WOULD BE IN NON VIOLATION.
ANYONE ELSE WISH TO COME AND SPEAK? STEP FORWARD, SIR.
PHIL WEINBERG ESSENTIALLY, YOU KNOW, THE WAY THIS IS WRITTEN, WHICH SHALL CONSIST OF A POLICE CHIEF, POLICE AND PERSONNEL ALLOWING THE BEST OF THE CITY'S ABILITY TO MEET MINIMAL MUNICIPAL AND STATE STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTS OF PALM BAY.
THE CITY IS ALREADY DOING IT TO THE BEST OF THEIR ABILITY.
YOU KNOW, THIS DOESN'T IT WOULDN'T REALLY CHANGE ANYTHING BECAUSE IT'S NOT A REQUIREMENT.
IT'S JUST BASICALLY RECOMMENDATION.
AND THAT'S WHAT THE CITY IS ALREADY DOING IT TO THE BEST OF OUR ABILITY.
ANYONE ELSE, SIR? NATHAN WHITE, 32 ONE SEABURY STREET SOUTHWEST.
I FIND MYSELF LANDING SOMEWHERE IN BETWEEN THE LAST TWO SPEAKERS.
I WAS BASICALLY GOING TO SAY, I GUESS THE POINT'S REALLY BEEN MADE.
REALLY GOING TO SAY THAT THIS ACTUALLY ISN'T STRONG ENOUGH WORDING TO ACHIEVE THE GOAL.
I OBVIOUSLY THERE'D BE PROBLEMS IF IT WAS EXACTLY AS STRONG AS MR. BATTEN WAS TALKING ABOUT, BUT ALSO, AS MR. WEINBERG POINTED OUT, TO THE BEST OF OUR ABILITY.
EASILY OR CONCISELY DEFINED STANDARD.
SO I AM IN FAVOR OF THIS ENTIRELY IN SPIRIT.
I BELIEVE IT WOULD NEED TO BE REWORKED A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE, AS I SAID, IT WOULDN'T TECHNICALLY FORCE A CHANGE IN ANY WAY AS WORDED, BUT IT WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF IT WITH SOMEWHAT STRONGER WORDING.
[04:15:07]
THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK? CNN. SO WHAT IS COUNCIL'S PLEASURE? OR AS YOU WERE, COUNCILMAN FOSTER? YEAH. IT'S BETTER. ARE YOU ABLE TO SEE? DO YOU HAVE THAT PULLED UP? CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, SIR, I CAN HEAR YOU.I WAS ASKING, ARE YOU ABLE TO SEE OUR COUNCILMAN'S FILIBERTO PROPOSAL? YES, I LOOKED AT IT.
IT'S STILL WITH STANDARDS WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, RIGHT? YES, SIR. AND THE FIRED? YES, SIR. IN THE FIRE.
WELL. I BELIEVE OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT IS CERTIFIED.
WE MEET LAW ENFORCEMENT, SORT OF THE STANDARDS.
RIGHT. WE HAVE CERTIFIED DEPARTMENT.
YOU WANT TO ANSWER? YES, SIR. WE ARE AN ACCREDITED LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY.
THAT'S THE STANDARDS WE NEED TO GO BY.
LAW ENFORCEMENT AND OUR FIRE DEPARTMENT IS OUR FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCREDITED.
OKAY, WELL, THEY NEED TO GET ACCREDITED.
BUT WE WE ARE WE HAVE ACCREDITED BY THE LAW ENFORCEMENT STANDARDS.
I'VE BEEN UNDER THAT STANDARD WHEN I WAS A POLICE OFFICER IN NORTH CAROLINA.
I WENT THROUGH THE ACCREDITATION PROCESS.
AND IT SHOWS YOU THAT YOU'VE GOT A WELL-RUN POLICE DEPARTMENT.
THEY FOLLOW THEIR POLICIES AND PROCEDURES.
THEY KEEP YOU OUT OF LAWSUITS AND THEY DO IT AND THEY KEEP THE CITIZENS IN THEIR COMMUNITY HAPPY.
SO WE NEED WE DON'T NEED TO PUT STANDARDS IN OUR CHARTER.
WE NEED TO GO BY A NATIONWIDE ACCREDITATION, WHICH WE ALREADY ACCREDITED.
I'M NOT MOVING FORWARD ON THIS.
THANK YOU. YOU KNOW, AS I AS I'M READING THESE COUNCILMEN FILIBERTO, I SEE DEPUTY MAYOR JOHNSON'S POINT OF PERHAPS WORKING WITH STAFF AND GETTING TO WORDSMITH THIS.
SO IS THAT SOMETHING YOU WOULD CONSIDER? I'D LIKE TO GO THROUGH IT, IF YOU DON'T MIND.
I MEAN, I'LL GO THROUGH IT QUICKLY IN 10 MINUTES.
BUT WOULD YOU MIND IF WE GO IF I MAKE THE MOTIONS FOR ONE, TWO AND THREE? I UNDERSTAND THERE MIGHT NOT BE A SECOND, BUT WE DID IT FOR DONNY.
YOU DON'T MIND WE DO IT FOR. NO, NOT AT ALL.
I'M JUST THINKING, PERHAPS WHAT MY THOUGHT PROCESS IS I WOULD LIKE TO SHARE IS THERE MAY BE SOME VALIDITY TO WHAT YOU'RE DOING AND IT MAY BE TOO MUCH TO DIGEST RIGHT NOW.
AND SO I'M THINKING, MADAM CLERK, DO WE HAVE TIME TO GO OVER THESE AND AND GET A RESOLVE FOR THESE? IN THE TIME FRAME THAT YOU NEED TO GET ON TO MAKE THESE GET ON THE BALLOT OR HAVE THESE PUT ON THE BALLOT.
WELL, THAT THAT WOULD BE BASED ON THE APPROVALS BY COUNCIL.
SMITH TO COORDINATE IF NEEDED WITH OUTSIDE COUNSEL TO COME UP WITH THE BALLOT WORDING.
THEN WE COME BACK WITH THE ORDINANCE FOR COUNCIL TO APPROVE THE BALLOT LANGUAGE.
OKAY. SO IF THERE ARE IF THERE'S FURTHER DISCUSSION.
ALL RIGHT, COUNCILMAN FILIBERTO.
THANK YOU, MAYOR. I'M JUST GONNA MAKE A MOTION TO.
TO APPROVE ARTICLE FIVE QUALIFICATIONS OF ELECTIONS PRESENTED BY COUNCILMAN PETER FILIBERTO.
RESIDENCY QUALIFICATIONS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO AND VERIFIED BY THE CITY CLERK.
ARE YOU ARE YOU DISCUSS? I'D LIKE FOLKS TO LOOK AT THIS AND THE VALIDITY OF IT.
CERTAINLY WHEN YOU LOOK AT THAT WAS THAT WAS ONLY FOR NUMBER ONE.
I THOUGHT YOU WOULD. INCLUDING ALL OF THEM.
SO I WANTED TO JUST DO THE MOTIONS.
AND THEN WE COULD DISCUSS NUMBER FOUR, SIR.
YEAH. AND WE DISCUSSED TWO AND WE DISCUSSED THREE.
OKAY, SO WHICH ONE ARE YOU MAKING THE MOTION FOR? I'M GONNA MAKE A MOTION FOR ALL THREE.
AND I UNDERSTAND THERE MAY NOT BE A SECOND, BUT I JUST WANT TO GO THROUGH THE MOTIONS.
THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU. ALL THREE.
ALL RIGHT, SO I'M JUST. I'M JUST GOING TO SAY THIS.
TO APPROVE ITEM NUMBER ONE, TWO AND THREE UNDERNEATH COUNCILMAN PETER FILIBERTO PROPOSED AMENDMENTS.
EMOTION DIES WITHOUT A SECOND.
[04:20:01]
OKAY, SO NOW WE'RE GOING TO FOUR FOR ASSISTANCE BILL OF RIGHTS.TRUTH IN GOVERNMENT, NO MUNICIPAL OFFICIAL OR EMPLOYEE SHALL KNOWINGLY FURNISH FALSE INFORMATION.
FOR THE MINUTES TO BE PRESENTED, THE RIGHT TO BE HEARD, EVERY PERSON HERE HAS THE RIGHT TO BE HEARD IN FRONT OF COUNSEL, THE RIGHT TO NOTICE EVERY ITEM THAT'S ON THE AGENDA SHALL BE PROPERLY NOTICED.
AND THIS ONE I REALLY WANTED REALLY RESONATED WITH ME.
IT JUST HAPPENED. I WANT TO SAY THREE COUNCIL MEETINGS AGO, AN ELDERLY LADY WAS HERE.
SHE COMES UP, HEY, I CAME HERE TO SEE THIS THIS THING, BUT IT WAS PULLED.
IS IT GOING TO BE HEARD OR NOT CAN BE HEARD.
AND THEN THIS. SHE COMES BACK TO ME, SHE SAYS, WELL, I GUESS I'M GOING TO LEAVE.
SO AND THIS HAS BEEN HAPPENING TOO MUCH, IN MY OPINION.
SO THAT'S WHY I WANTED TO BRING THIS UP FOR FOR NUMBER SEVEN.
A NINE NOTES OF ACTIONS OF REASONS.
THE CITY MANAGER OR WHOEVER IT IS, SHOULD GIVE AN ACTION AND A REASON FOR THAT.
THIS SPECIFICALLY, IT COMES TO SOME PEOPLE WHO GET DENIED A JOB OFFERING.
OR GET DENIED WHEN THEY'RE APPLYING FOR A JOB WITH THE CITY.
ARE YOU REFERRING. I WANT TO GO BACK TO NUMBER SEVEN.
YES, SIR. ARE YOU REFERRING LIKE WITHDRAWALS WHEN WE HAVE NO CONTROL OVER WITHDRAWALS AS WELL? I WOULD SAY THAT, TOO, BECAUSE IT'S IT'S BEEN TACTICS.
I DIDN'T I DIDN'T INCLUDE THE WORD WITHDRAWAL IN THERE BECAUSE WITHDRAWAL IS THE FIRST.
THAT'S KIND OF THE FIRST TIME I REALLY SAW THAT I'M.
THAT'S COMPLETELY DIFFERENT, SIR.
THAT WOULD BE GOOD, CAUSE IF THE APPLICANT WAS IN AN ACCIDENT, THAT'S A GOOD CAUSE.
BUT IF. IF IT'S BECAUSE OF A LEGAL NOTICE, OR IS IT BECAUSE THE DOG ATE MY HOMEWORK? THAT'S NOT GOOD. CAUSE THESE AGAIN, TIME AND TIME AGAIN, THE APPLICANT HAS POSTPONED.
YES, SIR. MAY I ASK? I'M GOING TO ASK THE CITY CLERK.
YES. HOW SOON AFTER THE CONCLUSION OF THE MEETING DO YOU HAVE THE MINUTES READILY AVAILABLE? AS FAR AS LIKE FULLY COMPLETED.
YES, MA'AM. THIS THIS CITY CLERK SHALL MAINTAIN AND MAKE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION, WRITTEN MINUTES OF ALL MEETINGS, AND THEY SHALL BE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION NOT LATER THAN 30 DAYS AFTER THE CONCLUSION OF THE MEETING.
OF COURSE, THE MINUTES ARE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION IMMEDIATELY BECAUSE I DO A DRAFT AT THE MEETING.
SO THOSE ARE ALWAYS AVAILABLE.
BUT AS FAR AS THE COMPLETED MINUTES.
I'LL TRY TO PUT THIS IN A A NICE WAY.
BUT OF COURSE, BECAUSE OF THE, THE LENGTH OF THE MEETINGS THAT HAVE BEEN OCCURRING, IT TAKES I CAN LET COUNCIL KNOW IT TAKES DOUBLE THE TIME TO TRANSCRIBE A MEETING FOR HOWEVER LONG THE MEETING WAS.
NO. I'M THE ONE THAT PROCESSES THE MINUTES.
I HANDLE THE REGULAR MEETINGS, THE SPECIAL MEETINGS WHERE I DO ALL THE MINUTES.
SO, YES, A 30 DAY TIME LIMIT IS AT THIS POINT NOT REASONABLE.
ONLY BECAUSE, AGAIN, IT TAKES AN EXTREME AMOUNT OF TIME.
AND WE DO HAVE A LOT OF MEETINGS AND MANY OF THEM ARE LAW.
I UNDERSTOOD THAT THAT WAS THAT WAS AN AREA OF CONCERN FOR ME AS WELL, THE STAFF TIME THAT IT TAKES.
AND THEN THAT'S NOT TO SAY THAT WE'VE APPROVED THOSE MINUTES.
CORRECT. SO THOSE THOSE ARE, I THINK, COUNCILMAN OR AS YOU WERE DEPUTY MAYOR JOHNSON HAD A I WANT TO VALIDATE YOUR HARD WORK IN THIS.
[04:25:07]
THESE ISSUES TO TRY AND ENHANCE AND AND HONE IN ON WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO CONVEY.YOU KNOW, THIS IS JUST A STARTING POINT WHICH I WOULD LIKE TO WORK ON COUNCIL WITH.
YEAH. I JUST DON'T THINK YOU KNOW THIS TO, TO BE CHARGED.
I THINK THERE'S MORE POLICY, A LOT OF IT TOO.
RIGHT. SO BUT I WANT TO COMMEND YOU FOR YOUR HARD WORK IN THIS.
WE COULD HAVE. IS THAT IS THAT GOOD WITH COUNCIL CONSENSUS.
CONSENSUS WAY? YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I WAS SAYING. MAYOR, LIKE ORDINANCE WISE, I THINK IT WOULD BE A LOT.
AND THAT'S SOMETHING I CAN DEFINITELY GET BEHIND.
WELL, YOU KNOW, THAT'S JUST MY OPINION.
YEAH. NO, I FOLD RIGHT ALONG WITH YOU ON THAT.
THAT'S FINE. IF YOU GUYS ARE WILLING TO FOLLOW UP WITH ME ON THAT, THAT.
THAT'D BE GREAT. YEAH, THAT'S GOOD.
I'M STILL GOING TO MAKE THE MOTION, THOUGH, TO TO APPROVE ITEM NUMBER FOUR FOR THE ASSISTANT BILL.
YEAH, I'LL MAKE THE MOTION TO APPROVE.
SO THIS IS BILL OF RIGHTS FOR ADDING IT TO THE CHARTER.
THEN WE MADE A MOTION, BUT I THOUGHT I GAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ALREADY.
ARE YOU. ARE YOU WANTING TO SPEAK? COME ON IN. COME ON UP.
I'VE MY APOLOGIES ON THAT, MAYOR.
SORRY ABOUT THAT. AND THEY CAN WAIT 13 TO 1 SEABREEZE STREET SOUTHWEST.
I APOLOGIZE IF I MISUNDERSTOOD THE PROMPTING, AS WE'D ONLY STARTED TO DISCUSS UP TO ITEMS OR TO, WELL, 3.7 OR EIGHT OUT OF 19 OF THE CITIZENS BILL OF RIGHTS.
I. THINK I'M MISSING SOMETHING BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE HOW.
30 DAYS DOESN'T WORK TO PROVIDE THE MINUTES FOR A MEETING.
IF BY THE TIME 30 DAYS IS ELAPSED, WE'RE ALSO TWO WEEKS PAST A SECOND MEETING.
SO IF 30 DAYS ISN'T ENOUGH TO PRODUCE THE MINUTES FOR ONE MEETING, HOW WERE WE NOT CONSISTENTLY FALLING EVER MORE BEHIND ON THE PRODUCTION OF THE MINUTES? JUST KIND OF MATH WISE.
IT MIGHT BE BECAUSE IT'S LATE AT NIGHT.
OF THAT. SO WITH REGARDS TO THAT, I'M NOT SURE HOW THAT WORKS OUT.
I THINK IT'S WELL, TO SUMMARIZE, I THINK IT'S FAIR TO SAY THAT SOME OF THESE NEED TO BE REWORKED.
I LOVE THE THE TO SAY HEART BEHIND ALL OF THEM REALLY.
I'M ESPECIALLY ENDEARED TO NUMBERS 11 AND 12, BUT.
AND I BELIEVE THE QUESTION WAS ANSWERED.
BUT, MADAM CLERK, WOULD YOU PLEASE RESPOND TO THE QUESTION?
[3. Consideration of dissolving the Charter Review Commission.]
SO IF I HEARD CORRECTLY, BASICALLY THE QUESTION IS, WHY ARE MINUTES NOT PRODUCED WITHIN 30 DAYS? CORRECT? WELL, MINUTES ARE NOT MY SOLE DUTY FOR MY JOB.SO DOING MINUTES AS WELL AS EVERYTHING ELSE THAT I DO IN MY JOB WITH THREE OTHER MEMBERS OF STAFF.
AND I'M THE ONLY ONE THAT DOES THE MINUTES.
YOU DID SAY THAT THE MINUTES ARE READILY AVAILABLE, THOUGH THE THE DRAFT MINUTES.
SO THAT INFORMATION IS ALWAYS AVAILABLE.
IT'S JUST NOT COMPLETE MINUTES.
OK. ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK? OKAY. CARRY ON.
I JUST WANT TO POINT ONE OUT, ONE MORE OUT, WHICH WAS 19, AND THAT'S THE IMPROVEMENT ON THE PUBLIC EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES AVAILABLE TO THE PALM BAY CITIZENS SHALL BE THE POLICY OF THE CITY OF PALM BAY TO COOPERATE WITH THE COUNTY'S PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND WITH OTHER APPROPRIATE GOVERNMENT AGENCIES, WHICH WILL STRIVE TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY AND THE QUANTITY OF PUBLIC EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES AVAILABLE TO THE CITIZENS OF PALM BAY, FLORIDA.
I'M STILL GOING TO MAKE THE MOTION.
I'LL WORK WITH STAFF ON GETTING A COUPLE AUDIENCES TOGETHER.
THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR SUPPORT ON THIS.
[04:30:01]
SO BUT THANK YOU. AND MY MOTION STILL STANDS, SIR.AND SO YOUR MOTION DIES WITHOUT A SECOND.
ALL RIGHT, SIR. OKAY, SO OUR NEXT ITEM IS TO DISSOLVE THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION.
IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK OR AGAINST THAT? MR. VICE CHAIR.
PHIL WEINBERG NO, I'M NOT GOING TO SPEAK AGAINST IT.
WELL, THANK YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR SERVICE.
AND THAT'S TO THE ENTIRE COMMISSION.
THANK YOU SO MUCH. YOU'RE VERY WELCOME.
SO MOVED. SECOND MOTION BY DEPUTY MAYOR JOHNSON, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN FELIX.
ANY DISCUSSION, COUNCILMAN FOSTER? THAT'S ALL IN FAVOR.
I HOPE YOU'RE FEELING BETTER, BROTHER.
THANKS FOR JOINING ON THIS CALL.
THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.