Jun 23, 2022 Citizens' Budget Advisory Board

[CALL TO ORDER]

[00:00:02]

I WILL CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER MEETING NUMBER 2022, DASH ZERO SIX.

SO THE CITIZENS BUDGET ADVISORY BOARD, WE HAVE A 631 HOUSE TIME AND IF WE COULD HAVE A ROLL CALL BY MR. WOJCIECHOWSKI, PLEASE.

YES, SIR. RANDALL LASZEWSKI, PRESIDENT.

THEN A BEAUCHAMP PRESENT ON GUITAR.

PRESENT ALBERTA.

CLINKSCALES. SUSAN CONLEY ISN'T.

ON RATTO MARTINEZ.

WAIT. ISN'T.

THEY HAVE A QUORUM. GOOD TO GO.

THANK YOU, SIR. ALL RIGHT.

THIS PORTION OF THE AGENDA IS THE PUBLIC COMMENT SECTION.

DO WE HAVE ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC? THAT'S FAIR ENOUGH. WELCOME.

BEFORE WE DIVE INTO ACTUAL BUSINESS, I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT TO THE BOARD THAT WE DO HAVE A NEW MEMBER IN ATTENDANCE.

MS.. BETTER, WELCOME TO THE BOARD.

I JUST WANT TO GIVE YOU A MOMENT TO SAY HELLO, IF YOU IF YOU LIKE.

WELL, FIRST OFF, I WANT TO SAY HELLO TO SUZANNE.

THE TO SEE YOU.

GOOD TO MEET SO MANY NEW FACES TONIGHT.

AND I WANT TO, FIRST OFF, THANK THE COUNCIL MEMBERS AND THE MAYOR FOR BASICALLY APPOINTING ME AND ALLOWING ME TO BE HERE TONIGHT TO REPRESENT THE CITY AGAIN.

AND I'M EXCITED TO BE HERE.

I LIVE HERE IN THE SOUTHWEST SECTION OF PALM BAY.

SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

GOOD EVENING. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR WILLINGNESS TO SERVE AND FOR JOINING US HERE TONIGHT.

IT'S MUCH APPRECIATED.

SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, FOLKS, WE HAVE ITEM NUMBER ONE UNDER UNFINISHED BUSINESS IS THE DEVELOPMENT OF QUESTIONS FROM REMAINING DEPARTMENT PRESENTATIONS.

[1. Development of questions from remaining department presentations.]

BUT BEFORE WE DO, I WANTED TO BRING TO THE BOARD'S ATTENTION AND STAFF.

AT THE SAME TIME, WE DON'T CURRENTLY HAVE A VICE CHAIR ON THIS BOARD.

I WAS THE VICE CHAIR AND I ASSUME THE ROLE IS CHAIR AND WE HAVE SINCE NOT SELECTED A VICE CHAIR.

SO I KIND OF THOUGHT ABOUT THAT.

YEAH. AND SO PERHAPS WOULD THAT BE FINE IF WE THREW IT ON THE NEXT AGENDA WHEN WE HOPEFULLY HAVE A FULL HOUSE? WELL, WE'LL JUST SEE TO IT THAT WE GO THROUGH THIS MEETING.

SO. OKAY. JUST WANTED TO MENTION THAT.

HOUSEKEEPING WISE. BUT YEAH.

SO THE DEVELOPMENT OF QUESTIONS FROM REMAINING DEPARTMENT PRESENTATIONS, THE REMAINING PORTION BEING THAT WE, WE WERE ABLE TO WORK THROUGH THE MAJORITY THAT WE GOT, THE ONES WE DID NOT WORK THROUGH THE LAST MEETING WERE UTILITIES AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT.

SO I JUST WANT TO USE THIS OPPORTUNITY.

IF ANY MEMBER OF THE BOARD HAD WORKED THROUGH THAT PRESENTATION AND HAD QUESTIONS THAT THEY WANTED TO ADD TO THE QUEUE, SO TO SPEAK, FOR STAFF TO GO BACK TO THOSE DEPARTMENTS AND THEN GET THE ANSWERS FOR US.

SO DID ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING FOR THOSE THOSE TWO DEPARTMENTS THAT WE MISSED LAST TIME? I'M SEEING THOSE.

JUST WANT TO HEAR FROM MISS CONLEY.

NO. NO.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

SO, HONESTLY, WITH NO LOOSE ENDS ON THAT, I THINK WE CAN MOVE ON UNLESS ANYONE HAS ANYTHING THAT THEY THEY NEED.

RIGHT. WHAT'S THAT.

NOT ON THESE TWO PARTICULAR.

NO, NOT ON THESE TWO PARTICULAR DEPARTMENTS.

NOW, I'M GOING TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, MISS BEAUCHAMP AND THE REST OF THE BOARD, AND I DON'T KNOW A LOT ABOUT ANY DEPARTMENT, BUT WITH GROWTH MANAGEMENT, I FEEL IN TUNE FROM MY PERSONAL SERVICE ON P AND Z AND JUST MY PERSONAL INTERACTIONS.

BUT OF COURSE I DID READ THE PRESENTATION AS WELL.

SO I JUST PERSONALLY DON'T HAVE ANYTHING THERE.

AND UTILITIES AGAIN, SINCE YOU ASKED MS..

BEAUCHAMP, I HAVE TOO MANY QUESTIONS, SO I WOULDN'T WANT TO GET INTO THAT IN THIS FORUM.

IT JUST WOULDN'T BE APPROPRIATE.

SO THAT'S IT. THAT'S WHAT I KIND OF.

THERE YOU GO. TO BE SPECIFIC, BECAUSE FROM A BUDGETARY STANDPOINT, AS WE LEARNED IN MS..

ANGELICA COLLINS PRESENTATION THE OTHER NIGHT, AND SHE'LL PROBABLY SHARE WITH US AGAIN, YOU KNOW, UTILITIES IS A UNIQUE DEPARTMENT AND THAT THEY KIND OF FUND THEMSELVES IN IN IN ESSENCE. SO A LOT OF MY QUESTIONS SEEK TO SEE HOW WOULD THEY EXPAND AS AN APARTMENT, BUT ALL THAT WOULD BE WITHIN THEMSELVES.

SO IT'D BE OUTSIDE OF THE CONFINES OF WHAT WE'RE REALLY FOCUSED ON IS THE GENERAL FUND.

RIGHT. SO, SO THAT WOULD TRANSITION US INTO OUR ORDER OF A NEW BUSINESS, WHICH IS DISCUSSION OF THE 20, 20,

[2. Discussion of June 21, 2022 Budget Workshop.]

AND I'M HOPING THAT MOST OF THE BOARD WAS ABLE TO SEE IT, WHETHER IN PERSON I KNOW A COUPLE MYSELF AND A COUPLE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS WERE ABLE TO SEE IT IN PERSON.

IT WAS THERE VIRTUALLY.

THE PRESENTATION HAS SINCE BEEN PUBLISHED AND SENT TO US.

SO JUST TO KIND OF ASK FOR A NOD OF HEADS, IS EVERYONE SEEING THE MATERIAL TO DATE?

[00:05:06]

NO. OKAY. NO PROBLEM.

I JUST WANT TO LEVEL SET WHERE WE'RE AT, SO WE WILL.

MS.. COLLINS DOES HAVE IT LOADED.

I WILL SAY THAT WHEN SHE PRESENTED IT TO COUNCIL ON TUESDAY, IT WAS A 90 MINUTE PRESENTATION AND IT WAS FANTASTIC AND I WOULDN'T TRIM A SINGLE MINUTE OFF OF IT, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF WE QUITE HAVE THE BANDWIDTH, THE FORUM, THE TIME TO DO ANOTHER 90 MINUTES EXCLUSIVELY TO THIS BORDER.

IF WE WANT TO DO A MORE ABBREVIATED VERSION, MORE EXPEDITED VERSION, WHERE WE KIND OF WE PAUSE, WE WE LET HER GO AT A RAPID, HIGH LEVEL PACE.

AND THEN IF WE NEED FURTHER DETAIL, DO WE DIVE IN? DOES THAT SOUND MORE AGREEABLE THEN BECAUSE IT'S ONLINE, CORRECT? YEAH, EXACTLY.

BECAUSE WHAT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE BOARD HAS IS THE GENERAL FLAVOR.

AND THIS GIVES MORE THAN JUST A GENERAL FLAVOR.

IT REALLY DOES GIVE GREAT DETAIL, BUT THE GENERAL FLAVOR OF WHERE WE'RE AT COMING INTO FISCAL YEAR 2023, BECAUSE WHAT WE'RE GOING TO SEE AND WHAT IS CONTAINED IN THE PRESENTATION IS WHAT WE EXPECT OUR REVENUES TO BE, WHAT WE EXPECT OUR EXPENDITURES TO BE, WHAT WE EXPECT OUR SURPLUS AND I SAID SURPLUS TO BE.

SO I THINK THAT WE CAN HAVE A HEALTHY DISCUSSION OF WHAT OUR ADVICE TO COUNCIL WITH THAT SURPLUS WOULD BE AND THEN WHAT TO DO TO CREATE ANY FURTHER.

THAT BEING SAID, AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S THE MOST APPROPRIATE TIME, BUT I JUST WANT TO BRING IT UP IS I WOULD LIKE US TO DISCUSS WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO TIMELINE WISE WITH SHARING OUR OPINIONS WITH COUNCIL BECAUSE ON A REVIEW OF THE BYLAWS, TRYING TO UNDERSTAND TIMING WISE, TRADITIONALLY WHEN THE BOARD OFFICIALLY SPEAKS TO COUNCIL, THE BYLAWS WERE CRYPTIC AND THAT THEY SAY THE FIRST PUBLIC BUDGET WORKSHOP, BUT THERE'S BUDGET WORKSHOPS AND THEN THERE'S PUBLIC HEARINGS.

SO I FEEL LIKE THAT'S THE KIND OF AMBIGUOUS TERM.

SO I WAS LOOKING FOR SOME DIRECTION FROM STAFF AND REALLY FROM THE FROM THE BOARD ON WHEN WE WOULD WANT TO HAVE A PRESENTATION FROM COUNCIL, WHICH AS THE CHAIR I'D BE VERY HAPPY TO DO A PRESENTATION TO COUNCIL.

I MEANT TO SAY IF I SAID FROM EXCUSE ME PRESENTATION TO COUNCIL I'D BE VERY HAPPY TO DO AS THE CHAIR.

I'D LIKE TO DO THAT AT THE APPROPRIATE POINT IN THE PROCESS SO THAT OUR WORK IS AS HEAVILY INFLUENTIAL AS IT POSSIBLY CAN BE, FRANKLY.

SO STAFF ANY OPINIONS? BUT THE NEXT WORKSHOP IS JULY 5TH.

I NOTED THAT SO.

YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE ANY TYPE OF PRESENTATION.

IT WOULD HAVE TO BE AT THAT MEETING.

BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO START MOVING FORWARD THE NEXT TIME.

NEXT TIME THEY MEET IS THEY'RE SETTING TENTATIVE MILEAGE.

SO THAT'S THE ONE AND ONLY WORKSHOP BEFORE THEY'RE SETTING A TENTATIVE MILLAGE.

AND THE BUDGET HASN'T ACTUALLY BEEN OFFICIALLY TURNED IN TO COUNCIL YET UNTIL THE 28TH OF JULY FOR THEM TO GET IT.

SO THAT WOULD BE THE TIME FOR YOU TO VOICE YOUR.

VOICE BASICALLY AS A BOARD.

OKAY. WELL, I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO DO THAT, BUT THAT MAKES AN ACTIONABLE ITEM OR A DIRECT GOAL OF TODAY'S MEETING FOR US TO BE ABLE TO LEAVE WITH THAT, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE'D HAVE TO LEAVE WITH THAT IN ORDER.

AND THEN I'LL BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO COME TO THE CHAMBER.

I GUESS IT'S A WEEK FROM TUESDAY AND DELIVER THAT.

BUT AS WE HAVE THIS DISCUSSION ABOUT THE MATERIAL AND AS WE READ THINGS OVER AND WE LOOK AT THE MILLAGE RATES THAT MS..

COLLINS HAS FOR US AND THINGS OF THAT SORT, WHEN WE GET TO THE FULL OUT DISCUSSION PHASE, LET US UNDERSTAND THAT THAT'S KIND OF THE RESULT WE'RE LOOKING FOR, IS THAT THAT'S OUR ACTION ITEM THAT WE'RE CHASING, IS TO BE ABLE TO PUT TOGETHER KIND OF AN OPINION THAT WILL SHARE WITH COUNCIL ON ON THE FIFTH THAT I'LL SHARE WITH COUNCIL ON OUR BEHALF.

YES, MA'AM. MS.. CONNELLY, PLEASE.

THAT PRESENTATION TUESDAY WAS EXCELLENT.

AND WHAT I WOULD LIKE, HOW I SEE IT.

JUST ASK IS THAT.

WE CAN CONCENTRATE ON AND JUST GO TO THE BOTTOM LINE.

WHAT REVENUES ARE ANTICIPATED? AND. UM.

NEXT THING IS.

HE DID A VERY EXCEPTIONAL JOB OF SUMMARIZING WHAT THE PERCENTAGES OF THE REQUEST, THE ONE THAT STOOD OUT THE MOST WAS A 68% CAPITAL NEED.

AND THEN WE DON'T HAVE THE SALARY STUDIES IN, BUT THAT WOULD BE THE NEXT BIGGEST THING.

SO OF THE REVENUES EXPECTED FITTING INTO THAT, THAT'S THE KEY THING.

I THINK WE NEED TO HELP COUNCIL WITH.

WHAT THEY THE MAYOR ASKED FOR IS THEY ALL SAID THEY WANT TO FUND FIRE.

SAFETY. AND SO IN ORDER TO DO THAT, THERE ARE REQUESTS FOR PERSONNEL AND CAPITAL ON THE FIRE AND POLICE.

SO MATCHING TRYING TO GET THE TWO NUMBERS TO EQUAL AND MAKE THE SURPLUS.

[00:10:05]

HE CAN WRITE ON THAT.

THAT'S HOW WE CAN BE OF SERVICE, KEEPING IN MIND THAT WE ARE CITIZENS.

AND OF COURSE WE WANT TO KEEP OUR PROPERTY TAXES AS LOW AS POSSIBLE AND REPRESENT THAT.

BUT I THINK COUNCILMAN FOSTER SAID IT, TOO, IS THERE'S A $330 MILLION. CONSTRUCTION REVENUE FROM DECEMBER 2021 AND HOW TO MAXIMIZE.

MOST. MM HMM.

AND PART OF THE THEORY OF THAT IS BECAUSE WE HAVE NEW REVENUE AND A BROADER TAX BASE, THAT TAX CAN BE SHARED AND TAXES. GO BE PARTIALLY AUTOMATICALLY LOWERED.

IF. OUR MONEY.

OKAY. WELL, THANK YOU FOR PROVIDING THAT THAT KIND OF DIRECTION WHERE YOU'RE LOOKING TO NARROW IN.

I WOULD DEFINITELY AGREE THAT THAT KIND OF HONING IN PRESENTATION WISE ON ON OUR EXPECTED REVENUES ARE EXPECTED EXPENDITURES.

AND THEN WHAT WE CAN DO WITH THAT SO FAR AS THE ADDITIONAL BECAUSE OUR OPINION ENDS UP BEING WE SEE FROM WHAT FINANCE IS TOLD US THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE THIS THIS AMOUNT THAT MAY OR MAY NOT BE CALLED DISCRETIONARY.

IF IT IS, WE WOULD SEE SEE FIT THAT YOU SPEND IT IN THESE WAYS.

BUT BASED UPON THE REVIEWS THAT WE HAD.

SO. OKAY.

DID ANYONE ELSE WANT TO OFFER COMMENTARY BEFORE MS..

COLLINS KIND OF JUMPED UP AND TRIED TO DO HER BEST AT SUMMARIZING THE PRESENTATION? I TOTALLY AGREE. OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. WITH ALL THAT SAID, YOU DO YOUR BEST TO DO 90 AND NINE.

ALL RIGHT. WELL, IN CASE YOU DO NOT KNOW ME, MY NAME IS ANGELICA COLLINS.

I'M THE BUDGET ADMINISTRATOR FOR THE CITY OF PALM BAY.

AND YES, I DID DO THE PRESENTATION ON TUESDAY.

IT IS VERY MUCH IN DEPTH.

THERE'S A LOT BEHIND IT.

AND TO GO THROUGH IT AGAIN, IT'S A LOT.

SO I DID EMAIL IT OUT TO EVERYBODY.

SO THERE'S A LOT OF INFORMATION IN THERE.

SO WHAT WE HAVE ACCOMPLISHED REALLY TO DATE IS WE HAVE CREATED A BASE BUDGET FOR NEXT YEAR.

SO THE FIRST SLIDE THAT I'D LIKE TO GO OVER THAT WILL HIGHLIGHT WHAT OUR ESTIMATED REVENUES AND ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES CURRENTLY IN WHAT WE CALL THE BASE BUDGET IS.

SO ESTIMATED REVENUES CURRENTLY WE'RE ANTICIPATING IN TOTAL FOR THE GENERAL FUND ABOUT 88.3 MILLION AND ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES FOR THOSE DEPARTMENTS, ABOUT 84.7, MEANING THAT CURRENTLY WE HAD SHOWN A SURPLUS OF 3.5 MILLION.

NOW THE DIFFERENCE THAT YOU WOULD SEE FOR FISCAL YEAR 23 AS TO THE CURRENT AND THE PREVIOUS FISCAL YEARS, WE CHANGED THE WAY WE BUDGET AND OUR METHOD OF BUDGETING.

IN THE CURRENT YEAR AND IN 21, WE ALLOWED DEPARTMENTS TO BUILD THEIR BUDGET BASED ON A ZERO BASE, MEANING THAT THEY PROVIDED US THEIR BASE BUDGET ON THEIR OPERATIONAL NEEDS, WHICH INCLUDES ALL HIGH PRIORITY ITEMS. HIGH PRIORITIES ARE NEW CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS, ONGOING CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS, OR ANY KIND OF EQUIPMENT OR ITEMS THAT THAT ARE REQUIRED EITHER BY LAW OR BY AUDIT OR BY A DREADED DROP DATE, ESSENTIALLY, THAT HAVE TO BE REPLACED WITH FISCAL YEAR 23.

THEY WERE NOT ALLOWED TO INCLUDE THOSE ITEMS. SO THOSE ARE PROVIDED TO YOU IN A LITTLE BIT IN THE FORM OF REQUESTS, A TOTAL ABOUT 1.7 MILLION.

SO WHEN YOU SEE THE 3.5, IT LOOKS DIFFERENT FROM LAST YEAR BECAUSE LAST YEAR THAT 1.7 WAS ALREADY INCLUDED.

SO HYPOTHETICALLY, IF WE WOULD HAVE INCLUDED THE 1.7, THEN THAT THAT SURPLUS OBVIOUSLY WOULD WOULD GO DOWN.

UM, SO BASED ON THE CURRENT BASED BUDGET, ON HOW IT WAS PRESENTED TUESDAY, THE OPERATING MILLAGE WAS SET TO THE 3.3% CAP, AND WE'LL GO INTO THOSE RATES IN A LITTLE BIT.

WE DID BUILD OUR MAXIMUM OPERATING BUDGET, AS I HAD MENTIONED, IS THIS THAT THE DEPARTMENTS RECEIVED WHAT THEY WERE APPROVED FOR FOR THIS CURRENT YEAR.

SO IF ANYTHING INCREASES, THEY HAVE TO REQUEST THOSE ITEMS. WE ARE ANTICIPATING A PRELIMINARY OVERALL ESTIMATED INCREASE OF ABOUT 3.8% IN STATE SHARED REVENUES.

WE INCLUDED SALARY INCREASES FOR GENERAL EMPLOYEES, COUNCIL AND UNION CONTRACTS, WHICH INCLUDES OUR AGE WHITE AND BLUE AND MANDATORY POLICE AND FIRE RETIREMENTS AND ALSO THEIR CONTRACTUAL INCREASES.

SO THEY RECENTLY WENT THROUGH NEW CONTRACTUAL REQUIREMENTS AND NEW CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENTS WHERE THEY ACTUALLY RECEIVE 3% PLUS A STEP INCREASE.

[00:15:07]

OUR HEALTH INSURANCE IS ESTIMATED TO INCREASE BY ABOUT 7%.

AND AS I MENTIONED, THE THE 3.5 MILLION OF A SURPLUS CURRENTLY DOES NOT INCLUDE THE 1.7 MILLION IN THOSE HIGH PRIORITY ITEMS. JUST LOOKING AT OUR.

WE DO HAVE SLIDES FOR THAT TALKS IN DETAIL ABOUT OUR GENERAL FUND REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES.

SO THESE SHOW YOU A THREE YEAR HISTORY AND IT ESSENTIALLY JUST BREAKS IT DOWN BY TYPE FROM PROPERTY TAXES TO THE STATE, SHARED REVENUES AND OTHER TYPES OF THINGS WE DO RECEIVE. SO THOSE TWO NUMBERS I JUST DISCUSSED WILL MATCH WHAT YOU SEE IN THOSE DISCLOSURES.

THE EXPENDITURE SIDE, WE LIST ALL DEPARTMENTS THAT CURRENTLY OPERATE EITHER FULLY OR PARTIALLY IN THE GENERAL FUND.

AND AS YOU SEE, UTILITIES AND BUILDING ARE TWO DEPARTMENTS THAT EXCLUSIVELY DO NOT OPERATE IN THE GENERAL FUND.

SO THEY ARE CONSIDERED ENTERPRISE FUNDS, WHICH MEANS ANY FUNDS THAT ARE GENERATED BY THOSE DEPARTMENTS, THE SERVICE FEES OR ANY OF THOSE TYPES OF FEES THAT ARE CHARGED, STAY WITH THOSE DEPARTMENTS.

THEY ARE NOT SHARED WITH ANY OF THESE THESE PARTICULAR DEPARTMENTS.

STORMWATER UTILITY AND SOLID WASTE OR ENTERPRISE FUNDS AS WELL.

THEY ARE MANAGED BY PUBLIC WORKS, BUT THEY ARE ALSO NOT INCLUDED IN THOSE FUNDS.

SO JUST BECAUSE YOU SEE PUBLIC WORKS, THAT'S JUST THEIR ADMINISTRATION AND THEIR OPERATIONAL NEEDS FOR THEIR STANDARD OPERATIONALLY.

SO IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THOSE FUNDS THAT WE JUST TALKED ABOUT.

ANOTHER SLIDE THAT I SHOW IS THE SAME EXPENDITURES ON A TYPE LEVEL, MEANING THAT WE SHOW TO YOU BY PERSONNEL OPERATING CAPITAL IN SUCH SO AS YOU SEE THE MAJORITY OF OUR EXPENDITURES OF THAT 84.7 MILLION, ROUGHLY ABOUT 61.2 ACTUALLY JUST SIT IN PERSONNEL COSTS.

SO THAT'S SALARY WAGES, RETIREMENT PENSION CONTRIBUTIONS.

ALL OF THAT IS REALLY JUST TO HAVE OUR PEOPLE STAFFED.

AND ONLY ABOUT 16.8 MILLION OF THAT 84 ACTUALLY JUST TO OPERATE THOSE DEPARTMENTS.

SO THAT INCLUDES POLICE, FIRE, OUR IT, HR, ALL OF THOSE DEPARTMENTS.

IT'S JUST 16.8 MILLION OFF OF THAT 84.

DEBT SERVICE, WHICH IS ANOTHER SLIDE ROUGHLY WITHIN THE GENERAL FUND.

CURRENTLY TRANSFERRING OUT EQUALS TO ABOUT SIX AND ONE HALF TO 7 MILLION.

SO OUT OF THAT 84, THAT'S THE FIRST THING THAT COMES OUT.

SO WE HAVE TO PAY OUR CREDITORS JUST LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE DOES.

SO THAT SERVICE IS EVEN A HIGHER PRIORITY ITEM.

WE HAVE TO PAY THOSE PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST PAYMENTS.

ANOTHER SLIDE THAT I REALLY ENJOY TALKING ABOUT WAS I KIND OF LOOK TO ADD, SO BEFORE WE GET INTO OUR MILITARY, IT'S BECAUSE THOSE ARE A LITTLE, LITTLE DIFFICULT TO TALK ABOUT.

BUT ANOTHER THING THAT I HAD KIND OF ADDED THIS YEAR FOR OUR BUDGET WORKSHOP IS LOOKING AT PREVIOUS YEARS ACTUAL.

SO THE CONCEPT OF OUR FUND BALANCE COMES UP A LOT.

WE'RE REQUESTING FUNDS FROM FUND BALANCE THAT THE FUND BALANCE IS CONTINUOUSLY GROWING AND IT'S BROUGHT UP IN VARIOUS DISCUSSIONS AS TO HOW WE RELATE IT TO INCREASING MILLAGE RATES OR MAINTAINING MILITARY RATES, THINGS LIKE THAT.

SO ONE THING THAT I WANTED TO DO WAS TO SHOW WHY OUR FUND BALANCE CONTINUOUSLY INCREASES.

SO WHAT WE DO IS WE WAIT UNTIL THE PREVIOUS YEAR CLOSES OUT.

SO WE'RE CURRENTLY IN FISCAL YEAR 22, SO I HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL 2021 CLOSES TO ACTUALLY RECEIVE ACTUALS FROM OUR ACCOUNTING DEPARTMENT.

SO THE SLIDE THAT I PRESENTED SHOWED THAT.

YES. BASED ON REVENUES VERSUS EXPENDITURES.

WE DID HAVE A HEALTHY AMOUNT GO BACK TO FUND BALANCE.

HOWEVER, OF THAT, ALMOST HALF IS PERSONNEL COSTS, MEANING THAT OUT OF THAT $8 MILLION OF EXPENSED FUNDS JUST FOR THE OPERATING SIDE.

SO THIS INCLUDES PERSONNEL OPERATING.

ALMOST 46% ARE JUST PERSONNEL COSTS.

AND HOW WE BUDGET IS WE DON'T BUDGET FOR POSITIONS THAT AREN'T FILLED.

WE DON'T BUDGET FOR POSITIONS THAT AREN'T AUTHORIZED.

THESE ARE EITHER PEOPLE THAT ARE LEAVING THE CITY AND WE CANNOT FILL THOSE VACANCIES OR THEY ARE VACANCIES THAT WE INITIALLY JUST CAN'T EVEN FILL. SO THAT IS ANOTHER ANOTHER ISSUE THAT WE HAVE, THAT IT'S AN AUTHORIZED POSITION, IT'S BUDGETED.

[00:20:05]

OUT OF THAT 45, 46%.

SO IN TOTAL, YOU HAD ABOUT 8 MILLION IN OPERATIONAL SAVINGS.

3.7 IS THE PERSONNEL.

SO OUT OF THAT, 3.7, 70% IS PUBLIC SAFETY, WHICH IS FOR FIRE AND POLICE DEPARTMENTS.

SO OUT OF THAT 3.6 MILLION OF PERSONNEL COSTS THAT YOU'RE SAVING THAT GOES BACK TO FUND BALANCE, 2.5 MILLION IS A SPLIT BETWEEN POLICE AND FIRE.

NOW, OUT OF THAT 2.5 MILLION, ALMOST 1.9 ARE POLICE OFFICERS.

SO THAT MEANS THAT POLICE OFFICERS ARE COMING AND LEAVING OR THEY'RE JUST NOT EVEN COMING.

AND THESE ARE BUDGETED POSITIONS.

SO. IT'S HARD TO SAY THAT, YES, OUR FUND BALANCE IS GROWING, BUT UNFORTUNATELY IT'S NOT GROWING FOR THE RIGHT REASONS.

SO THAT IS MAINLY WHAT THE SLIDE SHOWS.

ANOTHER ITEM THAT A LOT OF TIMES YOU SEE IS THAT, OH, WELL, WE HAVE OPERATIONAL AND CAPITAL SAVINGS.

WE COMPARE WHAT WE SPEND TO OUR BUDGET AND A TOTAL OF 4.3 MILLION WASN'T SPENT.

SO THAT STICKS OUT A LOT.

WELL, OUT OF THAT 4.3 MILLION, 2.7 ACTUALLY ROLLS TO THE NEXT YEAR BECAUSE THEY ARE.

BILLS THAT HAVE TO BE PAID.

A LOT OF THEM ARE VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT THAT WE HAVE PLACED PURCHASE ORDERS ON, BUT THEY'RE SIMPLY NOT COMING IN.

SO. PRESENTING THAT.

YES, OUR FUND BALANCE IS GROWING.

HOWEVER, THAT IS.

IDEALLY NOT SOMETHING THAT YOU WANT TO HAVE CONTINUE IN SUCH A WAY BECAUSE IT'S HAPPENING FOR THE WRONG REASONS.

ALL RIGHT. SO LET'S LOOK A LITTLE BIT AT OUR REQUESTS.

SO AS YOU AS I PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED, BASED ON THE BASE BUDGET, THERE WAS THREE AND ONE HALF MILLION OF A SURPLUS IN THAT BUDGET, WAS BASED WAS BUILT INITIALLY ON THE 3% CAP RATE.

SO WITHIN THE GENERAL FUND, JUST FOR FISCAL YEAR 23 ALONE, IN TOTAL WE HAD $12.2 MILLION.

I MEAN, YES, $12.2 MILLION IN REQUESTS.

SO WHEN YOU DO THE MATH, YOU HAVE THREE AND A HALF MILLION THAT THAT YOU'RE SHOWING THAT YOU'RE ABLE TO SPEND.

YOU HAVE DEPARTMENTS REQUESTING $12.2 MILLION WORTH OF ASKS.

OF THOSE ASKS, 1.7 MILLION ARE YOUR HIGH PRIORITY ITEMS. OUT OF THAT 12.2 MILLION, 7.9 OR 65% IS SIMPLY CAPITAL.

WE LOOKED AT CAPITAL IN MORE DETAIL, AND 68% OF THAT CAPITAL IS SIMPLY JUST REPLACING ASSETS THAT ARE AT THEIR END OF LIFE, WHICH INCLUDES POLICE VEHICLES, OTHER VEHICLES FOR OTHER DEPARTMENTS, EQUIPMENT, MOWERS, THOSE TYPES OF THINGS THAT CONTINUOUSLY BREAK DOWN AND END UP BEING IN THE SERVICE SHOP LONGER THAN THEY'RE IN USE.

SEE. I KIND OF SKIP OVER THE OTHER FUNDS AT THE MOMENT BECAUSE WITH UTILITIES, LIKE LIKE WE HAD TALKED ABOUT THIS, THOSE ARE USUALLY FUNDED AND WE DO WELL WITH WORKING WITH THOSE DEPARTMENTS AND BALANCING THEIR BUDGETS.

SO I'M GOING TO SKIP OVER THOSE AND JUST KIND OF FOCUS ON THE GENERAL FUND.

SO WITHIN THE GENERAL FUND.

THAT $84 MILLION WORTH OF EXPENDITURES THAT WE HAVE TO PAY THE PRIMARY SOURCE OF REVENUE TO SUPPORT THAT IS AD VALOREM TAXATION.

IT MAKES UP MORE THAN HALF OF THE REVENUE THAT COMES IN, AND THAT IS DONE THROUGH THE MILITARY PROCESS AND THE TAXABLE VALUE PROCESS THAT WE GO THROUGH WITH THE PROPERTY APPRAISER'S OFFICE.

SO THE PROPERTY APPRAISERS OFFICE SENDS US OUR PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES ESSENTIALLY ON WHAT OUR CITY'S WORTH, AND IT'S ALWAYS BASED ON PREVIOUS YEAR CALENDAR.

SO IT'S ANYTHING THAT'S BEEN ON HIT THE BOOKS AS OF 1231, 2021, WE RECEIVE IT THIS CALENDAR YEAR AND THEN WE USE THAT TO CALCULATE FISCAL YEAR 23 DATA.

SO IT'S ESSENTIALLY A YEAR'S LAG.

SO THE PROPERTY BILLS THAT US RESIDENTS AND HOMEOWNERS PAY IN DECEMBER ARE BASED ON VALUATIONS AS OF CALENDAR YEAR. SO THAT'S JUST HOW THE PROPERTY APPRAISER DOES IT.

[00:25:02]

THAT IS ESSENTIALLY WHAT'S BEEN ON THE BOOKS FOR MORE THAN A YEAR.

THEY PROVIDE US OUR NEW TAXABLE VALUE THAT HAS HIT THE BOOKS FOR THAT CALENDAR YEAR, AND THEN WE ADD THAT TOGETHER AND IT ESSENTIALLY BECOMES OUR GROSS TAXABLE VALUE. THIS IS WHAT THE CITY IS WORTH.

THE CITY OF PALM BAY IS IN A UNIQUE SITUATION WHERE WE OPERATE UNDER A 3% CAP.

THAT MEANS THAT THE CITY IS NOT ALLOWED TO GENERATE MORE THAN 3% REVENUE FROM THE CURRENT YEAR.

SO I HAVE TO LOOK AT FISCAL YEAR 22, WHAT THAT AD VALOREM TAXATION IS.

I TAKE 3%.

I ADD IT TO THAT, AND THAT'S THE MAXIMUM I'M ALLOWED TO COLLECT.

HOW RESIDENTS OR HOMEOWNERS ARE TAXED.

IT'S NOT LIKE AN HOA WHERE EVERYONE RECEIVES A SET AMOUNT.

ESSENTIALLY, HOW YOUR TAX BILL IS CALCULATED IS, IS THAT YOU HAVE YOUR VALUE OF YOUR HOME AND THEN A RATE IS APPLIED, MULTIPLIED DIVIDED BY 1000.

AND THAT'S HOW YOUR PROPERTY TAXES ARE DETERMINED.

SO THAT JUST MEANS THAT SOMEONE WHO HAS A LARGER HOME THAT'S WORTH MORE MONEY, THEY PAY MORE PROPERTY TAXES.

SO THAT'S HOW IT'S FAIR.

SO I GO THROUGH A PROCESS OF DETERMINING A RATE THAT ESSENTIALLY.

LIMITS HOW MUCH WE CAN GENERATE ON THE ADJUSTED TAXABLE VALUE AND ANYTHING THAT'S BEEN ON THE BOOKS FOR MORE THAN TWO YEARS. TO WHERE THE RATE IS SET TO WHERE THAT REVENUE DOES NOT EXCEED THE CURRENT YEAR PLUS 3% RATE.

NEW TAXABLE VALUE IS ALWAYS EXEMPT FOR THE FIRST YEAR, MEANING THAT WHEN I DO MY CALCULATIONS I CAN TAKE THAT AMOUNT AWAY, BASE IT JUST OFF ANYTHING THAT'S BEEN OVER TWO YEARS, I DETERMINE THAT RATE.

I STILL HAVE TO APPLY THAT RATE TO THE NEW TAXABLE VALUE, BUT THEN I ADD IT TOGETHER.

SO IT ESSENTIALLY REDUCES INITIALLY HOW MUCH, HOW MUCH I CAN GENERATE BECAUSE THAT AMOUNT IS INITIALLY NOT INCLUDED. THE FOLLOWING YEAR THAT NEW TAXABLE VALUE ROLLS TO YOUR CURRENT BOOKS AND THEN IT IS SUBJECTED TO THE 3%. THE LARGER YOUR CURRENT TAXABLE VALUE BECOMES, MEANING ANYTHING THAT'S BEEN ON THE BOOKS FOR MORE THAN TWO YEARS. THE LOWER YOUR RATE WILL GO BECAUSE YOU'RE TAXING MORE PEOPLE, YOU'RE TAXING MORE VALUES.

AND ESSENTIALLY WHEN YOU'RE RESTRICTING HOW MUCH YOU'RE BRINGING IN.

THE MORE I HAVE TO LOWER THE RATE, I'M SPREADING IT OUT.

SO. THE LARGER THE CURRENT TAXABLE VALUE OF THE NEW ITEMS THAT ARE HITTING THE BOOKS.

IT'S GREAT FOR THE FIRST YEAR BECAUSE IT'S EXEMPT FROM YEAR 3%.

BUT ONCE IT HITS THE BOOKS FOR THE SECOND YEAR, YOU ARE NOT REALIZING FULL POTENTIAL ON THE GROWTH BECAUSE YOU ARE LIMITING TO 3%. RIGHT? SO WHAT I HAVE NOTICED IS THAT.

THE RATE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023 COMING UP.

IS 0.8.

INSUR MILLS LOWER THAN THE PREVIOUS YEAR.

THE CURRENT YEAR, BECAUSE LAST YEAR WHEN WE WENT THROUGH THIS PROCESS, WE HAD $208 MILLION WORTH OF NEW CONSTRUCTION THAT WAS RECORDED.

THAT WAS GREAT FOR LAST YEAR.

WE SAID, THIS IS WONDERFUL.

THE CITY IS GROWING.

IT'S HAS THIS THE FIRST TIME I'VE SEEN IT THAT HIGH IN I'VE EVER SEEN IT THAT HIGH.

SO THAT'S GOOD, RIGHT? SO YOU WOULD THINK THAT THAT'S WONDERFUL THAT YOU'RE GROWING.

IT'S EXEMPT FROM THE 3% YOU'RE ABLE TO REALLY CAPITALIZE OFF OF THAT.

SO WHAT'S HAPPENING THIS YEAR, THAT 208 MILLION THAT WE BENEFITED FROM LAST YEAR IS NOW ON THE BOOKS FOR MORE THAN TWO YEARS OR MORE THAN A YEAR.

SO NOW OUR.

VALUES ARE GROWING SO SIGNIFICANTLY.

MORE THAN 3%.

HOWEVER, WE ARE RESTRICTING OUR REVENUE OF COMING IN AT THREE.

IMAGINE THAT YOUR POTENTIAL OF GROWTH IS HYPOTHETICALLY 10%.

YOU'RE LIMITING 3%.

SO YOU'RE CAPITALIZING AT A DEFICIT OF SEVEN.

[00:30:05]

THIS YEAR. 423 SO.

MIND BOGGLING TO ME WHEN I DO THE NUMBERS.

WE RECEIVED OUR VALUATIONS AND OUR NEW CONSTRUCTION IS $330 MILLION, WHICH IS ONE AND ONE HALF TIMES OF WHAT WE WENT THROUGH LAST YEAR.

YEP. WE DO MATH.

THE WAY IT WORKS NEXT YEAR WHEN WE GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS.

I ANTICIPATE NOW I DON'T HAVE A CRYSTAL BALL.

IF I DID, I WOULD NOT WORK HERE.

BUT. THIS CONTINUES AT THIS RATE, WE WILL SEE OUR RATE, MILITARY RATE DROP MORE THAN ONE WHOLE POINT.

PLUS, IT WILL GO SO SIGNIFICANTLY BELOW OUR ROLLBACK RATE THAT.

IT'S ESSENTIALLY I DON'T WANT TO SAY THE CITY IS LOSING MONEY.

HOWEVER. HE.

A ROLLBACK RATE IS CALCULATED SO THAT THE CITY OR THE TAXPAYERS DO NOT PAY ANY MORE IN TAXES.

SO WE ARE ESSENTIALLY SAYING EVERY TAXPAYER THE SAME AMOUNT THE CITY GENERATES MORE BECAUSE WE HAVE MORE PEOPLE PAYING TAXES.

BUT IT'S A BENEFIT TO THE HOMEOWNER.

THAT ROLLBACK RATE, EVERYBODY IS PAYING WHAT THEY PAID.

AT THIS PROCESS, THE CD WILL GO BELOW ROLLBACK RATE, WHICH I DON'T KNOW OF ANY OTHER TAXING AUTHORITY IN THE COUNTY. THAT DOES THIS.

I DON'T KNOW OF ANY OTHER TAXING AUTHORITY THAT HAS THIS GROWTH THAT WOULD DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS.

ESSENTIALLY THE 3% CAP IN A NUTSHELL IS WITH THE GROWTH THAT'S OCCURRING.

HERE, LIKE I SAID, IS IS THAT YOU ARE YOU CANNOT YOU'RE NOT CAPITALIZING OF.

WHAT THE GROWTH IS DOING.

SO THE GROWTH IS OUTGROWING WHAT THE CITY IS ABLE TO GENERATE.

APARTMENTS THAT FALL UNDER THAT FUND OR THAT ACCOUNT, ESSENTIALLY.

ARE. 90% OF YOUR CITY OPERATIONS.

IT'S FIRE. IT'S POLICE.

IT IS PARKS AND RECREATION, PARKS AND FACILITIES.

IT'S PUBLIC WORKS. IT'S THE PEOPLE THAT MOW THEY DEPEND ON THE REVENUE THAT COMES IN TO NOT ONLY SUSTAIN BUT TO GROW.

CITY GROWS, THERE IS NEEDS THAT HAVE TO BE MET WITH THAT.

IT'S NOT JUST STORMWATER BECAUSE STORMWATER IS A DIFFERENT FUND.

STORMWATER DOES NOT DEPEND ON THE REVENUE.

IT'S NOT UTILITIES.

THEY DO NOT DEPEND ON THIS.

REQUIRE FIRE STATIONS, REQUIRE PEOPLE TO STAFF THOSE WHO HIRE POLICE OFFICERS, EVEN PARKS.

THERE ARE CERTAIN NEEDS THAT A CITY HAS.

NOT JUST TO SUSTAIN BUT TO KEEP UP WITH THE GROWTH.

THAT IS HAPPENING.

AND THE NUMBERS IN FROM PROPERTY APPRAISER'S OFFICE SHOW THAT IT'S NOT SLOWING DOWN.

SO WITH THAT, LET'S JUST SEE.

SO ANOTHER SLIDE THAT I THAT I HAD IS SHOWS OUR TEN, 20 YEAR HISTORY OF OUR GROSS TAXABLE VALUE.

SO THIS IS THE FIRST YEAR WHERE WE HAVE EXCEEDED OUR GROSS TAXABLE VALUE.

SO THIS IS EVERYTHING.

SO THIS IS OUR TOTAL EVERYTHING THAT'S BEEN ON THE BOOKS FOR MORE THAN A YEAR IN OUR NEW CONSTRUCTION.

SO IT HAS LITERALLY TAKEN US 15 YEARS TO RECOVER FROM THE DOWNTURN IN 2008.

THAT'S HOW LONG IT TAKES TO TO COME OUT.

LET'S TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE RATES.

SO THE CURRENT RATE FOR THIS YEAR IS 7.5995.

THAT IS THE 3% CAP RATE.

SO THAT IS WHAT WAS CALCULATED FOR THE CURRENT YEAR.

AND THAT IS THE THE THE ONE PRIOR TO THAT.

SO IN FISCAL YEAR 21 WAS 7.8378.

SO AS YOU SEE, IT DROPPED BY ABOUT 0.3 POINTS.

SO YOU WON'T SEE THIS ON THAT SLIDE.

BUT FROM THE PREVIOUS FISCAL YEAR, YOU HAD ABOUT A 0.3 DROP AND THAT WAS BECAUSE OF SOME NEW CONSTRUCTION THAT'S HIT THE BOOKS.

HOWEVER, THAT 208 MILLION THAT I TALKED ABOUT THAT WE CAPITALIZED OFF LAST YEAR, BUT THIS YEAR, IT'S IT'S HURTING

[00:35:03]

SO THAT'S BASED ON THAT 208 MILLION THAT HIT HIT THE BOOKS FOR THAT SECOND YEAR.

SO YOU'RE GOING FROM A 0.3 TO 0.8.

REMEMBER THIS YEAR WE'RE ADDING 330 MILLION.

THAT'S NEXT YEAR YOU'RE GOING TO SEE THAT 330 MILLION AND IT'S GOING TO BE SUBJECTED TO THE LIMIT.

THAT'S WHY I'M PREDICTING YOU'RE GOING TO DROP.

ONE POINT, ONE POINT.

AND OUR ROLLBACK RATE FOR THIS YEAR IS 6.6060.

YOU'RE SO CLOSE TO ROLL BACK ALREADY, YOU DROP HYPOTHETICALLY ONE WHOLE POINT.

NOW THE ROLLBACK DOES ADJUST.

NEXT YEAR, OF COURSE YOU WILL BE WELL BELOW ROLLBACK.

LIKE I SAID, IT'S THIS. I PERSONALLY I HAVE A RAPPORT WITH ALL THE TAXING AUTHORITY BUDGET BUDGET INDIVIDUALS IN THE COUNTY AND VERY FEW EVEN GO TO ROLLBACK.

SO, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT THAT'S COMMON.

AND TO GO BELOW ROLL BACK.

I, I HAVE NOT I HAVE NOT SEEN IT, HONESTLY.

SO ANOTHER ITEM THAT'S SO THIS CHART KIND OF JUST TELLS YOU WHAT THE DIFFERENCE IS AND VARIATIONS WOULD BE IN HOW MUCH MONEY YOU GENERATE AND SUCH.

SO LET'S SEE.

NEXT SLIDE SHOWS THE SAME INFORMATION.

IT JUST SHOWS IT A LITTLE DIFFERENT.

SO IT KIND OF SHOWS THAT.

YOU KNOW, WE ALWAYS WE ALWAYS GO TO COUNCIL AND SAY, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF WE MAINTAIN THE CURRENT YEAR'S RATE? A LOT OF MUNICIPALITIES AND TAXING AUTHORITIES DO THAT.

THEY GO INTO THE NEW YEAR PROPOSING JUST TO MAINTAIN THE RATE.

TECHNICALLY, YOU'RE NOT INCREASING TAXES.

YOU'RE MAINTAINING YOUR TAX RATE.

YOUR HOME IS WORTH MORE.

SO YOU'RE PAYING MORE IN TAXES BECAUSE THE VALUE OF YOUR HOME GOES UP.

THE CITY HAS NO CONTROL OVER THAT, BUT WE'RE MAINTAINING OUR RATE.

SO WHILE YOU ARE INCREASING TAXES BECAUSE YOUR TAX BILL INCREASES, BUT THAT'S BECAUSE OF THE VALUE OF YOUR HOME.

THE CITY IN ITSELF ACTUALLY DOES NOT TECHNICALLY INCREASE THEIR RATE.

OKAY. SO THAT IS OUR INTENT IS TO ALWAYS PROPOSE TO GO INTO THE YEAR.

AT THE CURRENT RATE.

WE BUILD OUR BUDGET BASED ON THE 3% CAP BECAUSE OUR CITY IS SOMEWHAT UNIQUE.

SO IT TELLS US JUST SORT OF THAT PICTURE WHERE WE PROVIDE CITY COUNCIL WITH A THIS IS HOW MUCH MORE REVENUE YOU CAN GENERATE IF YOU GO INTO AT THIS RATE THIS RATE. THAT RATE VERSUS AT GOING IN AT YOUR.

ONE THING THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE TALK ABOUT IS, IS THAT I THINK MOST OF YOU KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE IS AN INTENT OF GOING OUT IN NOVEMBER ON THE BALLOTS TO REMOVE THE 3% CAP AND JUST TAX AS BY STATE LAW.

I THINK OUTSIDE OF THE COUNTY, I PERSONALLY DON'T KNOW OF ANY OTHER STATES AND I COULD SEE TAXING AUTHORITIES BECAUSE IT'S NOT JUST CITIES, BUT YOU HAVE TOWNS, YOU HAVE ALL OF THAT.

SO I PERSONALLY DON'T KNOW OF ANY OTHER TAXING AUTHORITY IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA THAT DOES THIS.

BUT. BUT THE IDEA IS, IS THAT PEOPLE WOULD THINK THAT, OH, IF WE GET RID OF THIS, THEN YOU YOU CAN TAX RAISE YOUR RATES BY TWO POINTS, MEANING THAT YOU'RE GOING TO GENERATE ALL THIS ADDITIONAL REVENUE.

WELL, WE ACTUALLY FALL UNDER A FLORIDA STATUTE BY LAW THAT LIMITS HOW MUCH IN TOTAL WE CAN ACTUALLY TAX AND HOW MUCH WE CAN INCREASE OUR TAXES EVERY YEAR.

SO A LOT OF PEOPLE, THE MAIN THING THAT THAT STANDS OUT IS, IS YOU CANNOT GO ABOVE A TEN MILL RATE.

SO THE NUMBERS THAT YOU SEE HERE, TEN POINTS OR TEN MILLS IS THE HIGHEST YOU CAN GO.

RIGHT. SO THAT'S A STATUTORY REQUIREMENT.

HOWEVER, THERE'S ALSO A STATUTORY REQUIREMENT THAT LIMITS HOW MUCH YOU CAN INCREASE FROM ONE YEAR TO THE NEXT, AND THAT IS BASED ON THE ROLLBACK RATE.

WHERE ESSENTIALLY, BASED ON THE NUMBER OF VOTES THAT THAT HAPPENS AT CITY COUNCIL, YOU CANNOT RAISE YOUR RATES HYPOTHETICALLY 110% MORE THAN WHAT YOU HAVE BEFORE.

SO IT'S A CALCULATION FACTOR.

SO IN THEORY, THE LOWER YOUR RATE GOES, THE HARDER YOU HAVE A TIME OF COMING BACK OUT.

SO THE LOWER YOU GO, REGARDLESS OF IF WE CONTINUE DOING A 3% CAP OR NOT, THAT IS OUTSIDE.

THAT IS WHAT THE VOTERS WOULD THINK AND HOW THE VOTERS VOTE.

[00:40:04]

HOWEVER, THE LOWER YOU GO, THE HARDER IT IS TO COME BACK OUT.

EVEN IF THERE WAS EMERGENCY SITUATION.

SO IT DOES LIMIT YOU.

SO AGAIN, WE HAD THE THREE AND ONE HALF MILLION ALREADY IN THAT SURPLUS, WHICH DOESN'T INCLUDE THE 1.7 MILLION OF HIGH PRIORITY ITEMS THAT YOU REALLY HAVE TO REALLY HAVE TO FUND. WE ALSO TALK TO CITY COUNCIL ABOUT.

YOU KNOW WHAT WOULD BE THE DIFFERENCE IS IF WE WERE TO GO INTO THE NEW YEAR WITH THE.

THAT DOES EXCEED THE CAP.

SYDNEY CITY COUNCIL IS ALLOWED TO EXCEED THAT CAP WITH A SUPERMAJORITY VOTE, SO THAT WOULD BE A 4 TO 1 AND IT HAS TO BE BASED ON EMERGENCY SITUATIONS AS THEY SEE FIT.

SO THAT IS ALL IT INDICATES IN THE CHARTER.

AND SO WE PROVIDED THEM WITH INFORMATION ON SAYING, WELL, WHAT IF WE WERE TO GO INTO THE NEW YEAR NOT RAISING OUR RATE? OH, I HAVE A QUESTION.

NOW I'D LIKE TO JUST ASK A QUICK QUESTION IN THE VEIN WITH REGARDS TO THE CAP OR NOT TO HAVE THE CAP, LET'S SAY WE DIDN'T HAVE THE CAP.

WHAT WOULD THAT I MEAN, HYPOTHETICALLY SPEAKING, WE DON'T HAVE A CAP.

GIVEN THAT. THESE ARE GOOD RIGHT NOW.

WE'D BE ABLE TO HAVE MORE OF A SURPLUS, ESSENTIALLY, IF.

GRANTED IT BASED ON VALUE.

YES. WELL, SO ESSENTIALLY IT IS SORT OF LIKE LIKE THESE TWO SLIDES RIGHT HERE WHERE A CAP SIMPLY JUST DOES NOT RESTRICT YOU FROM SETTING THE RATE TO A CERTAIN AMOUNT.

SO HYPOTHETICALLY, IF WE DID NOT HAVE A CAP IN OUR RATE WAS AT 7.5995.

WE HAD THE FLEXIBILITY OF SETTING TO THE RATE EITHER MAINTAINING IT.

THE GOAL IS TO GET TO ROLLBACK.

I MEAN THAT WOULD BE THAT'S MOST TAXING AUTHORITY'S GOAL IS TO GO TO ROLLBACK BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT INCREASING TAXES FOR THE HOMEOWNER, YOU'RE SIMPLY BENEFITING OFF THAT NEW GROWTH THAT'S HAPPENING.

BUT YOU ESSENTIALLY THE CITY HAS THE FLEXIBILITY OF BUILDING THEIR BUDGET BASED ON NEEDS TO SUPPORT THE GROWTH.

UNDERSTOOD. BUT LET'S SAY, GOD FORBID, THE GROWTH STOPS, WHICH IT IS ACTUALLY.

I MEAN, CURRENTLY OUR NUMBERS ARE BASED ON.

MONTHS AGO AND THINGS WERE REALLY GOOD AND THINGS ARE KIND OF DROPPING OFF.

SO THE QUESTION IS, IF THINGS DON'T CONTINUE TO GO UP, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF WE WERE LOOKING MORE OF THIS? WELL, I MEAN, SO AGAIN, IS HOW IT RELATES TO THE 3% CAP RATE ESSENTIALLY IN NOT HAVING THE CAP DOES NOT RESTRICT THE TAXING AUTHORITY TO LIMIT THE REVENUE COMING IN.

I HAVE SEEN OTHER TAXING AUTHORITIES RAISE THEIR RATES.

THEY THEY GO OUT AND THEY DO RAISE THEIR RATES.

I HAVE SOME THAT MAINTAIN WE HAVE SOME THAT LOWER.

IT IS ESSENTIALLY A.

IT DOESN'T RESTRICT THE MUNICIPALITY TO START BUILDING THEIR BUDGET BASED ON A LIMITATION.

IT JUST WOULD BE NICE THAT IF THINGS WERE NOT GOING AS GOOD AS THEY HAVE HERE IN THE PAST, AND WE'RE LOOKING AT HARD TIMES OR MORE DIFFICULT TIMES THAT WE WERE NOT IN A PENNY PINCHING MODE VERSUS.

SOMETHING DIFFERENT.

I MEAN, IN THE PAST WE HAD THIS ISSUE WHERE THINGS WERE REALLY GOOD AND SUDDENLY EVERYTHING STOPPED AND VALUES WENT LIKE THIS, AND SUDDENLY THE CITY WAS IN HARD TIMES AND HAD TO LAY PEOPLE OFF.

SO IT WOULD BE IDEAL THAT AS WE GO THROUGH THIS GOOD TIME, THAT WE'RE ABLE TO BENEFIT FROM INCREASED VALUES AND BE ABLE TO PUT ASIDE THE MONIES NEEDED IN ORDER TO BE READY FOR THAT RAINY DAY.

SO WE'RE NOT RUNNING AROUND SCRAMBLING TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO MANAGE THE POLICE, MANAGE THE FIRE, MANAGE OUR NORMAL PERSONNEL.

AND I'M JUST THINKING OF THE PAST.

IN 2009 THROUGH 2013, THINGS WERE NOT ALL THAT GREAT.

AND WE DID. WE SAW THIS POOR CITY TAKE A HIT.

IT WOULD BE NICE TO SEE OUR FOLKS WHO ARE IN CHARGE KIND OF LOOK IN THAT DIRECTION AND HELP US TO

[00:45:08]

AND JUST AN OBSERVATION.

YEAH. AND IT BECOMES WELL, AND IT'S SO FROM OUR STANDPOINT OR MY STANDPOINT, IT BECOMES DIFFICULT BECAUSE WE CAN NEVER TO START WITH BUILD A BUDGET BASED ON WHAT THE NEEDS OF THE CITY ARE.

THAT IS, I CANNOT I CAN'T BUILD A BUDGET LIKE THAT.

MY BUDGET STARTS WITH THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE.

AND NOW LET'S TALK ABOUT WHAT THE WANTS AND NEEDS ARE.

SO THE BASE BUDGET THAT YOU SEE IS A SUSTAINS OPERATIONS.

IT'S TO THE BEST OF THEIR ABILITY.

FOR A YEAR.

THERE ARE NO INVESTMENTS IN CAPITAL.

THERE ARE NO INVESTMENTS IN REPLACEMENTS.

THAT'S THREE AND ONE HALF MILLION THAT YOU HAVE TO THAT YOU HAVE LEFT OVER ESSENTIALLY TO INVEST IN $12 MILLION WORTH OF ASSETS.

AND THAT IS ONLY THE FIRST YEAR.

SO WE ARE BUILDING A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN THAT WILL SHOW YOU THE FUTURE FOR YEARS SO THAT 12 MILLION WILL QUADRUPLE MORE THAN LIKELY FROM WHAT I SEE.

AND THAT THREE AND A HALF MILLION.

SO ALL YOU REALLY HAVE TO SPEND ON REALLY JUST CRITICAL NEED ITEMS. AND WHILE WE DO HAVE THE FUN BALANCE.

ON BALANCE, YOU CAN'T GO BACK INTO FUND BALANCE AND ASK FOR FUNDING OR REOCCURRING ITEMS. MEANING THAT REALLY SHOULD NOT DO THAT BECAUSE.

FUNDING MAY BE AVAILABLE THIS YEAR, BUT IT MAY NOT BE HERE.

WAS IT ACTUALLY IMPLYING THAT? BUT WOULDN'T IT BE AWESOME THAT IF WE HAD AN EXTRA 12 MILLION TO MEET THE 12 MILLION NEEDS? AND SO BUT UNFORTUNATELY, A LOT OF OUR ITEMS CURRENTLY THAT NEED REPLACEMENT ARE BEING SOURCED THROUGH THE FUND BALANCE IS ESSENTIALLY LIKE DIPPING INTO YOUR SAVINGS ACCOUNT BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE THE FUNDS BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT CAPITALIZING OFF THE GROWTH.

SO FOR ME, WHENEVER I START MY BUDGET.

I. CAN'T LOOK AT WHAT ARE THE NEEDS FOR THE CITY? WHAT ARE STRATEGIC GOALS FOR THE CITY? WHAT IS OUR VISION 2040? WHERE DO WE WANT TO BE? BECAUSE THE FUNDING SIMPLY ISN'T THERE.

SO I HAVE TO START WITH OK.

WHAT DO WE NEED TO OPERATE TO SIMPLY MAINTAIN OPERATION? WHAT'S LEFT? AND THEN WHAT CAN WE ADDRESS OUT OF THAT 12 MILLION? SURE. GO AHEAD. YOU MENTIONED THAT YOU CAN'T PULL FROM THE FUND BALANCE FOR REOCCURRING.

SHOULDN'T. YEAH, YOU SHOULDN'T.

BECAUSE WE DID ABOUT $400,000 IN THOSE TWO MEETINGS THAT WE SPENT $5.1 MILLION.

400,000 OF THAT WAS EITHER RAISES OR NEW POSITIONS.

SO THAT I MEAN, AGAIN, IT IS UP TO CITY MANAGEMENT AND CITY COUNCIL.

HOWEVER, THE GENERAL RULE IS THAT WE SHOULD NOT.

WE ALSO LOOK AT OUR FUND BALANCE.

IS IT SOMETHING IN THE FUTURE THAT WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO SUSTAIN? SO. I'M GOING TO JUMP IN HERE.

I THINK THAT THE INFORMATION SO FAR I'LL GIVE VERY INFORMATIVE AND ESPECIALLY THE FRAMING OF THE CAT.

VERY INFORMATIVE.

KEEP THE CONVERSATION GERMANE TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2023 BUDGET.

THERE'S NOTHING THAT THIS BOARD CAN DO TO CHANGE THE 3% CAP.

SO TALKING ABOUT THE FISCAL YEAR 2023 BUDGET, THESE ARE THE OPTIONS WE HAVE.

WE CAN RECOMMEND TO COUNCIL THAT THEY REMAIN AT THE CURRENT RATE, WHICH IS WHAT THEY INDICATED IN THE BUDGET WORKSHOP, THAT THEY'RE AT LEAST GOING TO COME OUT OF THE GATE DOING BECAUSE YOU ALWAYS START HIGH, SO TO SPEAK.

WE CAN RECOMMEND THAT THEY HOLD THERE THE WHOLE TIME THROUGH AND COME UP WITH SOME SORT OF JUSTIFIABLE REASON THAT THAT PASSES THE MUSTER OF THE CITY ATTORNEY REFERENCING LEGAL PRECEDENT AND SAYS THAT IT'S AN EMERGENCY OR AN EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCE NEED.

OR WE CAN RECOMMEND THAT THEY.

STAY WITHIN THE 3% CAP AND AT THAT MAXIMIZE IT.

I THINK WE ALL AGREE WE NEED TO MAXIMIZE WHERE WE CAN AT THIS 7.7947.

OF COURSE, WE DO ALSO THEORETICALLY HAVE THE OPTION OF RECOMMENDING THE COUNSEL THAT THEY WOULD GO TO A ROLLBACK RATE.

BUT I FEEL COMFORTABLE FOR CONVERSATION'S SAKE, FRAMING IT IN THAT WE NEED TO DECIDE WHETHER IT'S THE WILL OF THE BOARD THAT THE COUNSEL SHOULD STAY UP AT THE 7.5995 THAT THEY ARE GOING TO START AT, AND THEY SHOULD STAY THERE THE ENTIRE TIME THROUGHOUT THE BUDGET PROCESS.

AND IF YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE A CASE FOR THAT, BE READY TO MAKE A CASE THAT AGAIN, NEEDS TO PASS A LEGAL MUSTER OF WHY IT'S AN EMERGENCY AND WHAT THE EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES IS OR THE OPINION IS GOING TO BE TO SET IT AT SEVEN POINT EXCUSE ME, 6.7, 947 AND STAY WITHIN THE 3% CAP.

[00:50:08]

COLLIN'S BUDGET ESTIMATES AND WE CAN START HAVING CONVERSATIONS ABOUT, BASED UPON THAT, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S THE SURPLUS GOING TO BE, SO ON AND SO FORTH.

IF, IF WE WANTED TO HAVE A CONVERSATION WITHIN THE 7.5995 SURPLUS, WE EVEN COULD DO THAT.

GIVEN THAT MS.. COLLINS DOES HAVE THAT INFORMATION, MY PERSONAL PREFERENCE WOULD BE TO SMART START SMALL AND WORK BACKWARDS.

SO JUST WHILE I'M TALKING.

HERE'S WHAT WE HAVE. IF $3.5 MILLION SURPLUS, CONVERSATIONALLY SPEAKING AT THE 3% CAP, WHICH IS THE HIGHEST WE CAN GO WITHOUT COMING UP WITH A LEGITIMATE EMERGENCY CIRCUMSTANCE.

RIGHT. IS COLLINS DOES A GOOD JOB OF TELLING US THERE'S $1.7 MILLION BINNED UP AS HIGH PRIORITY THROUGHOUT THE DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS.

AND THIS IS NEW CONTEXT TO US FOR THIS YEAR BECAUSE THIS ISN'T ON THEIR ZERO BASED BUDGET ANYMORE.

SO THIS IS THEY LEFT IT OUT.

NOW THEY'RE COMING WITH ALL IN TOTAL ACROSS THE CITY, ALMOST $13 MILLION WORTH OF CAPITAL INVESTMENT.

BUT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE IS 1.7 HAS BEEN LABELED AS HIGH PRIORITY DEPARTMENTAL REQUESTS.

AND SHE'S EVEN DONE A WONDERFUL JOB OF SAYING WITHIN THAT, WHAT IS IT ON THAT SLIDE 1.7 IN HIGH PRIORITY, 1.2 OF WHICH IS PUBLIC SAFETY RELATED, WHICH IS THE POLICE AND FIRE OUT OF 3.5, I SEE NO TROUBLE FUNDING 1.7.

SO IF EVERYONE CAN FOLLOW MY LINE OF THINKING SO FAR WE HAVE THREE AND A HALF.

WE NEED TO FUND 1.7.

LET'S GO AHEAD AND DO THAT. NOW WE'RE HAVING A CONVERSATION ABOUT 1.8 AT 1.8 MILLION WITH A MILLAGE RATE SET AT OUR 3% CAP, WE HAVE 1.8 MILLION IN SURPLUS.

TO HAVE A CONVERSATION AS TO WHAT WE THINK THE CITY COUNCIL SHOULD, SHOULD SEE FIT TO GET TAKEN CARE OF.

NOW, IF THE HIGHEST PRIORITIES OF ALL THE DEPARTMENTS HAVE BEEN UP IS 1.7, AND WE'VE COVERED THAT WITHIN THAT 1.7, WE'VE COVERED 1.2 OF PUBLIC SAFETY, WHICH I'D ARGUE TO SAY, IS EVERYONE ON THE BOARD IS MOST IMPORTANT AND CERTAINLY IS IN YOUR CHAIRS.

WHY DON'T WE START HAVING A CONVERSATION ABOUT 1.8? IF WE DO, THE FIRST THING THAT I'M GOING TO WANT TO HIGHLIGHT IS THE SALARY STUDY.

AND I'M GOING TO ASK MADAM SHERMAN IF THERE IS ANY FINANCIAL INDICATION AS TO WHAT THE CORRECTIONS FOR THE SURVEY, THE SALARY STUDY ARE GOING TO BE BECAUSE.

THESE RESULTS ARE HERE AND THEY NEED TO BE FUNDED THROUGHOUT THE YEAR.

AND IF THEY DON'T GET FUNDED IN THIS PROCESS, THEY'RE GOING TO END UP GETTING FUNDED OUT OF THE FUND BALANCE.

WELL, AS IT PERTAINS TO PUBLIC SAFETY, WE HAVE ALWAYS EXPECTED, ALTHOUGH THE RESULTS ARE NOT QUITE IN YET, WE'VE ALWAYS EXPECTED THAT BECAUSE WE MADE MOVES IN PUBLIC SAFETY SALARIES LAST YEAR, THAT THE AMOUNT OF FUNDING WE NEED TO FIX THOSE POSITIONS SHOULD BE A LOT LESS RIGHT.

SO WHAT WE'RE REALLY FOCUSED ON, WE'RE LOOKING AT ALL POSITIONS, BUT WE'RE REALLY GOING TO FOCUS ON THE IMPACT TO WHAT WE CALL OUR NEEDS, WIDER NEEDS, BLUE EMPLOYEES AND OUR GENERAL EMPLOYEES, WHICH IS EVERYONE BEYOND POLICE, SWORN LAW ENFORCEMENT AND THEN FIREFIGHTERS.

WE'VE SEEN SEVERAL VERSIONS OF THE REPORTS WE'VE BEEN WORKING THROUGH, CORRECTING THE DATA AND MAKING SURE ALL OF THE POSITIONS ARE PROPERLY LISTED, ALIGNED, ETC..

SO THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF MANUAL LABOR ON IT, I SHOULD SAY, BUT WE'VE ALWAYS EXPECTED THAT THE TOTAL NUT FOR THE ENTIRE CITY IS GOING TO BE IN THE SEVERAL MILLION DOLLARS RANGE.

WE JUST DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH YET.

AND WE'VE ALSO ALWAYS TALKED ABOUT THE POTENTIAL TO HAVE TO PHASE THAT IN OVER A COUPLE TO THREE FISCAL YEARS.

SHORTER IS BETTER BECAUSE EVERY TIME YOU DELAY MOVING A POSITION COMPARED TO YOUR NEIGHBORS, THE COMPETITION CONTINUES.

THAT'S THE BEST I CAN GIVE YOU RIGHT NOW.

ALTHOUGH WE'RE TRYING TO GET TO THE HOMESTRETCH ON THE REPORT, CURRENTLY, SEVERAL MEANING FIVE IS LIKE CONSERVATIVE. I THINK 3 TO 5 IS A GOOD RANGE RIGHT NOW.

I DON'T I THINK FIVE WOULD BE REALLY SURPRISINGLY HIGH IF THAT'S WHERE IT ALL ENDED UP AFTER ALL OF OUR CORRECTIONS TO THE DATA.

BUT AGAIN, UNTIL I'VE SEEN THAT FINAL REPORT, IT'S HARD FOR ME TO PIN YOU DOWN A NUMBER BECAUSE WE NEED A ONE TIME BUMP PEOPLE, AND THEN YOU HAVE TO BUDGET FOR IT IN PRECEDING YEARS. SO I GUESS MOST SPECIFICALLY, HOW IMPACTFUL DO WE THINK THAT THAT ONE TIME BUMP TO PEOPLE IS GOING TO BE? AND ARE YOU SAYING THAT YOU MIGHT PHASE IT OUT TO DIFFERENT JOB ROLES AT ANY GIVEN TIME OR WE'RE NOT SURE HOW WE'RE GOING TO SLICE IT? YOU KNOW, WE COULD DO PORTIONS ACROSS THE BOARD TO ALL WE COULD DO PRIORITY ON POSITIONS THAT ARE HARDER TO FILL.

AND THERE ARE A NUMBER OF THOSE.

WE DEFINITELY WILL HAVE TO FOCUS ON WHITE AND BLUE POSITIONS BECAUSE THOSE CONTRACTS ARE CURRENTLY UNDER NEGOTIATION, THAT NEW CONTRACTS TAKE EFFECT OCTOBER 1ST.

SO I'M SORRY TO BE MORE VAGUE THAN I WOULD LIKE TO BE.

I JUST DON'T HAVE ALL THAT DATA FINE TUNED YET.

I MEAN, THAT'S OKAY. THAT'S THE REALITY OF THE SITUATION.

AND THE PICTURE THAT I'M HOPING TO PAINT FOLKS IS HOW AMBIGUOUS THAT SITUATION IS, BUT HOW IMPORTANT IT IS.

[00:55:03]

AND WHEN WE WHEN WE USE THE $5 MILLION AT THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR, WE TOOK CARE OF SOME VERY IMPORTANT CAPITAL NEEDS UP TO AND INCLUDING THOSE POSITIONS.

BUT IF YOU LOOK AT A HUGE DRAWDOWN OF OF YOUR ON DESIGNATED BALANCE TO MAKE UP FOR WELL OVERDUE CAPITAL AND YOU REALIZE THAT I WON'T SAY ALMOST TEN SO LET'S BE MORE MATHEMATICALLY CORRECT AND SAY 8% IS TOWARDS REOCCURRING.

THEN IT MAKES ME NOT WANT US TO BE IN A POSITION TO DO THAT AGAIN WITH SOMETHING OF THE SAME NATURE THAT WE KNOW IS HERE.

WE KNOW IT'S HERE.

THESE FOLKS HAVE TO GET THESE NEW SALARIES OR THEY WILL CONTINUE TO WALK AND THE FUND BALANCE WILL CONTINUE TO BUILD IN THE WAY THAT MS..

COLLINS EXPRESSED AND SO ON.

SO THIS ISN'T ANY SORT OF LIKE PREFERENCE NECESSARILY FOR THE HR DEPARTMENT IN SAYING THIS.

I'M JUST SAYING FROM A FUNCTIONALITY PERSPECTIVE OR A CITY, WHAT'S GOING TO KEEP OUR LIGHTS ON, GETTING THE HIGHEST PRIORITY, CAPITAL INVESTMENTS TAKEN CARE OF, ESPECIALLY OUR PUBLIC SAFETY? AND THEN WHAT'S GOING TO KEEP THE LIGHTS ON AFTER THAT? I SEE GIVING ATTENTION TO THIS AND FILLING ALL OF THESE SEATS THAT SUBSEQUENTLY WE'RE GOING TO WORK TO FUND.

YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING TO WE'RE WE'RE WORKING TO FIND ADDITIONAL POLICE OFFICERS.

BUT THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS, IS WE HAVE, WHAT WAS IT, 189,000 IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN 1.8 MILLION.

IT WAS 1.8 MILLION THAT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TURNED OVER FISCAL YEAR OVER FISCAL YEAR BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T HAVE OFFICERS IN THE SLOTS.

EXACTLY RIGHT. SO IF WE DON'T START FOCUSING ON THE FUNCTIONALITY OF THE CITY, IT DOESN'T MATTER HOW MANY THINGS WE DO FUND.

I MEAN, WE COULDN'T GET A LOT OF THE VEHICLES THAT WE FUNDED.

BUT EVEN IF WE DO GET SOME OF THE VEHICLES IN, WHEN YOU CAN'T GET THEM THROUGH A PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, GET THEM LABELED, GET THEM STICKERED UP AND EVERYTHING ELSE AND GET THEM ON THE STREET. IT DOESN'T MATTER IF YOU HAD THE MONEY TO BUY THAT CAR, RIGHT? SO I DON'T WANT TO MAKE TOO STRONG OF A CASE HERE, BUT WHERE I'M GOING IS IS IN KEEPING THE CITY FUNCTIONAL.

ONE QUESTION I DO WANT TO ASK AND THEN I WANT TO KIND OF TURN IT OVER TO DISCUSSION.

BUT WITHIN THIS BUDGET THAT'S MADE AND WE HAVE THIS UNDER THE CAP AND THAT WE HAVE THE 3.5, DOES THAT INCLUDE SETTING ASIDE OR 750,000 FOR ROAD MAINTENANCE OC? BUT IT DOES INCLUDE NOT SETTING ASIDE BUT HAVING THE RESERVE BECAUSE WE HAVE POLICIES IN PLACE THAT HAVE OUR RESERVE, WE'VE SWITCHED IT FROM 10% TO TWO MONTHS OPERATING, BUT WE DON'T HAVE AN ACTUAL POLICY IN PLACE FOR THE ROAD MAINTENANCE FUND YET.

IT'S JUST LIKE A GENERAL PRACTICE THAT WE SHOOT FOR THE 750.

CORRECT. BUT THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS WE'RE GOING TO WORK ON FOR THIS BUDGET BUMPING UP.

SURE. AND ONE OF THE SCENARIOS WE'VE TALKED BRIEFLY WITH COUNCIL ABOUT IS SIMILAR TO OUR STABILIZATION FUND, WHERE WE SAY WE'LL SET ASIDE IN ADDITION TO THE THE CORE DESIGNATED FUND BALANCE THAT WE HOLD, WE ALREADY SET ASIDE IN A 3 TO 4% RANGE.

THAT'S OUR FISCAL POLICY AS A STABILIZATION.

WE'RE LOOKING AT SOMETHING POTENTIALLY SIMILAR WITH COUNCIL BECAUSE THAT'S BEEN ASKED OF US.

SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT PERCENTAGE OR NUMBER WILL BE.

BUT ANGELICA IS RIGHT. IT'S NOT CURRENTLY BUILT INTO THE BUDGET.

OKAY. AND THAT'S THE REASON I ASK, IS BECAUSE I KNOW THAT THE NUMBER'S BEEN THROWN AROUND, HAS BEEN IN THE 2 MILLION RANGE.

REALISTICALLY, 4 MILLION WOULD BE BETTER.

BUT HEY, SO IT'S SIX, RIGHT? BUT YOU KNOW, WHEN I LOOK AT THIS 1.8 MILLION THAT I DEDUCE FROM WHAT I JUST SHARED WITH YOU ALL.

AGAIN, MY FIRST HIGHLIGHT IS TO SAY WE SHOULD PUT IT TOWARDS THE MOST IMMEDIATE ACTIONS NECESSARY WITH THE SALARY ADJUSTMENTS.

BUT THERE AGAIN, IT MAY NOT BECAUSE OF CHAIRMAN'S DESCRIBING WHAT IT MAY NOT BE ENOUGH, BUT ALSO MAYBE AN OVERABUNDANCE FROM THE STAGE THAT THEY'RE READY TO EXECUTE ON LIKE THEY MIGHT ONLY NEED A COUPLE HUNDRED.

SO WHERE I'M GOING IS IF WE END UP IN A POSITION WHERE WE'RE NOT VERY TARGETED WITH IT, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATION OF ROLLING IT INTO THAT TO GET EVEN CLOSE TO 2 MILLION TO START WITH FOR THE FISCAL YEAR.

IF WE'RE STARTING AT ZERO AND WE HAVE A GOAL TO CONTRIBUTE AT LEAST 2 MILLION TO THE TO THE ROAD MAINTENANCE FUND FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 23.

I WOULD LIKE TO RECOMMEND THAT IF WE GET TO ANY SORT OF STANDSTILL THROUGH CONVERSATION OR WHATEVER AND WE DO ANY ROUNDING THAT WE WOULD JUST TO JUST TO USE AN EXAMPLE OR AS AS PRESIDENT, WE GOT IN A STANDSTILL, I WOULD SAY, LAST YEAR ON THIS BOARD, BECAUSE THE CONVERSATION WAS ABOUT LIKE 100,000, 148,000, I THINK WAS THE NUMBER ONE.

WHAT THE HECK ARE WE GOING TO DO THAT? SO OUR RECOMMENDATION WAS TO ROLL IT JUST INTO THE GENERAL FUND, BECAUSE WE KNEW THAT PEOPLE WOULD COME ASKING FOR GENERAL FUND MONEY AND IT WOULD WORK.

SO THE DELINEATION I'M MAKING HERE NOW IS IF WE GO IN THAT DIRECTION, I WOULDN'T WANT IT TO JUST GO INTO THE GENERAL POT.

I WANT IT TO GO SPECIFICALLY INTO ROAD MAINTENANCE SO THAT IN THE FUTURE THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE CONVERSATIONS, THERE'S GOING TO BE MORE MONEY COME UP.

THAT WAS JUST SOME MONEY COME UP THAT ENDED UP GETTING IN THERE FOR FISCAL YEAR 22 OUT OF THE BCR.

SO WHEN THEY HAVE THESE CONVERSATIONS, THE LAST CONVERSATION THEY HAD, I KNOW I'M TALKING FAST, I APOLOGIZE.

BOARD MEMBERS 1.3 MILLION THEY TOOK FROM THE CRA WAS COMING THE CITY'S WAY BECAUSE IT'S SUPPOSED TO AND THEY PUT IT INTO ROAD MAINTENANCE AND EVERYONE WAS WAS COOL WITH THAT.

BUT EVERYONE WAS LIKE, MAN, THAT'S THAT'S ALMOST A MILLION AND A HALF BUCKS.

AND THEN WHEN WE STARTED TALKING ABOUT FIRE STATIONS AGAIN, THEY'RE LIKE, MAN, WHAT COULD WE HAVE DONE IF WE HAD PAUSED AND BEEN MORE FLEXIBLE ABOUT THAT MONEY?

[01:00:07]

AND I'M NOT TRYING TO UNDER CREDIT ROAD MAINTENANCE.

I'M ACTUALLY PUTTING IT AS HIGH PRIORITY.

BUT I JUST THINK IF THERE IS ENTRIES THAT WE ARE ABLE TO I DON'T WANT TO USE THE WORD SNEAK, BUT SNEAK IN THERE IN APPROPRIATE WAYS THAT THEN WHEN COUNCIL IS DOES COME INTO ANOTHER MILLION, 2 MILLION, THEY CAN SAY, WELL, LUCKILY WE DID PUT A FEW HUNDRED THOUSAND ON ROAD AND SO FAR MAYBE IT CAN MAKE THIS THIS DENT.

SO I'VE SAID A LOT THERE.

I'D LIKE TO GET AN OVERALL FEEL OF THE BOARD.

SO IF WE COULD KIND OF JUST GO THROUGH I KNOW I CUT MISS COLLIN'S PRESENTATION SHORT, BUT AS FAR AS WE GO, IF EVERYONE JUST KIND OF WANTS TO TAKE A TURN, SHARE WITH THE BOARD WHERE YOUR HEAD'S AT, WHAT INFORMATION YOU MAY NEED TO OBTAIN, BECAUSE I GUARANTEE IF YOU WANT MORE INFORMATION, THE INFO YOU'RE LOOKING FOR IS IN THAT PRESENTATION, WE'LL GET IT TO YOU AND THEN SEE IF WE CAN COME BACK AROUND TO SOME FORM OF A CONSENSUS.

SO IF IT'S SERVES EVERYBODY, I WOULD LIKE TO START FROM THIS SIDE AND HAVE OUR NEWEST MEMBER, OUR FIRST MEETING MEMBER TODAY MIGHT BETTER START US OFF WITH JUST THAT, JUST GIVING US YOUR FEEL. WELL, FIRST OFF, I WANT TO THANK ANGELICA FOR DOING SUCH A FABULOUS JOB, TRULY, AND DETAILING EVERYTHING AND HOW YOU COME ABOUT TO ESTABLISH HOW WE'RE GOING TO SPEND OUR MONEY HERE EVERY YEAR, WHICH IS QUITE THE TASK. SAY THE LEAST.

MY CONCERNS ARE SHARED WITH THE CHAIRMAN BASED ON THE ROAD MAINTENANCE.

AS. WE KNOW THIS HAS BEEN A TOPIC FOR MANY, MANY YEARS, AND IT DISMAYS ME THAT THIS IS NOT A PERMANENT LINE ITEM IN THIS CITY'S BUDGET ANNUALLY, PERIOD.

I'M NOT GOING TO BEAT A DEAD HORSE BECAUSE I THINK.

OUR CITY MANAGER KNOWS THIS HORSE HAS BEEN TROTTED AROUND THIS.

RING MANY, MANY TIMES.

I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING WHY WITH 830 MILES OF ROADS IN THE CITY, WHY WE DON'T.

CHAIR. MAY I RESPOND, PLEASE? THANK YOU. I'M SORRY.

I DIDN'T KNOW YOU HAD A RESPONSE FOR THAT.

SORRY. WELL, I JUST WANTED TO ADD A LITTLE EXTRA BECAUSE MR. POTTER IS RIGHT. THAT IS ABSOLUTELY BEEN OUR GOAL FOR THE PAST COUPLE OF YEARS THAT I'VE BEEN DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN THIS THIS YEAR.

AND THIS YEAR WE PUT $750,000 IN DROP IN THE BUCKET.

WE NEED TO GET TO LIKE 3 MILLION ON AVERAGE EVERY YEAR.

ONE OF MY STRATEGIES, WHICH I HOPE TO CONTINUE IMPLORING COUNCIL TO EXPLORE, IS THE CONCEPT OF TRANSFERRING THE CRA FUNDING INTO ROAD MAINTENANCE PERMANENTLY.

SO 2024 IS THE LAST YEAR OF THE CRA.

IT WILL DISSOLVE AFTER THAT.

THIS IS THE LAST YEAR OF OUR DEBT PAYMENT IN THE CRA.

SO NEXT YEAR, THIS YEAR, LET ME JUST START AGAIN.

THIS FISCAL YEAR, THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT COMES BACK TO GENERAL FUND IS ABOUT $1.3 MILLION.

WE JUST RECENTLY TALKED ABOUT THAT.

NEXT YEAR, I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE CLOSER TO 1.7, 1.8, MAYBE EVEN CLOSER TO TWO.

I DON'T KNOW YET, BUT PROPERTY VALUES GOING UP, PLUS THE FACT THE DEBT IS NOT BEING PAID.

IT'S ALL ALL FINISHED.

SO MY POINT IS, ONE OF MY HOPES WAS TO COMBINE A 750,000, $1,000,000 NORMAL GENERAL FUND CONTRIBUTION WITH THE CRA FUNDING. COMING DIRECTLY INTO GENERAL FUND AND JUST DIRECTLY ALLOCATE THAT EVERY YEAR GOING FORWARD.

AND THEN FOR ME, THAT'S A STRATEGY.

THERE COULD BE OTHERS THAT'S A STRATEGY TO VERY QUICKLY GET US TO WHERE WE NEED TO BE.

AND THE TIMING IN MY MIND ALIGNS WELL WITH GETTING US THERE IF COUNCIL SUPPORTS THAT, WHICH ULTIMATELY IS THEIR DECISION.

AND AGAIN, THAT FOR ME AS A CITIZEN, AS A BOARD MEMBER HERE, THAT IS REALLY I KNOW.

YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHY I'M BACK.

I'M BACK. OKAY.

AND TO FOLLOW IT UP WITH THE CHAIRMAN'S PASSION FOR OUR FIRE AND OUR POLICE, YOU KNOW, VERY FRANKLY, WHEN OUR ROADS ARE IN BETTER SHAPE, THE POOR VEHICLES AREN'T GOING TO TAKE THE BEATING THAT THEY ARE RIGHT NOW.

AND IT GOES HAND IN HAND.

SO, YOU KNOW, THE OBVIOUS ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM ARE THE HUGE POTHOLES THAT ARE HIDING THEM THAT WE NEED TO FIX.

[01:05:02]

AND I MEAN, THERE'S A LOT MORE THAT WE COULD TALK ABOUT.

BUT TO ME, IF THOSE TWO THINGS COULD BE WRAPPED UP AND RESOLVED FOR THIS CITY, THE REST WILL JUST COME.

THANK YOU FOR SHARING MR. GUITAR.

AND AS A RESIDENT OF THE SOUTHWEST PORTION OF THE CITY, I CAN UNDERSTAND WHY IT'S A PASSION PROJECT FOR YOU.

I'M IN THE NORTHEAST AND I'M EQUALLY AS PASSIONATE.

BUT TRUST ME, I UNDERSTAND MEADOWBROOK.

YOU KNOW, YOUR YOUR BEAUTIFUL MEADOWBROOK THERE IN NORTHEAST IS IN BAD SHAPE.

YEAH. YOU KNOW, SO THAT'S GOING TO GET FIXED SOON.

I'M ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF NORTHEAST, SO I'M IN THE LAST PHASE.

SO I'M JUST HOPING THE GRANT, THE BOND MONEY LASTS.

AND THAT'S THE DELINEATION I WANT TO MAKE FOR THE BOARD'S BENEFIT.

AND ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT WE DO HAVE WATCHING AT HOME IS THE ROAD MAINTENANCE FUND IS VERY IMPORTANT BECAUSE ALTHOUGH WE HAVE THE BOND MONEY, THAT ISN'T WHAT WRAPPED IT UP.

YOU USED A GREAT TERM. CAN'T WE JUST GET THIS ROAD STUFF BEHIND US WHEN WE ISSUED THAT BOND AND PUT THAT ON OUR PROPERTY TAX BILL TO COMBAT THAT AND RISING MILITARIES? WHEN WE PUT ALL THAT TOGETHER AND WE TAKE THIS $150 MILLION DOWN, THAT'S JUST TO REBUILD THE ROADS AND WE NEED THIS MONEY TO KEEP UP WITH THEM.

SO I TELL THIS BOARD AND I TELL ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, THE CITY ENGINEER, MR. FRANK WATANABE, HE DID A REALLY NICE PRESENTATION TO THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION ABOUT THE ROAD MAINTENANCE FUND, AND THAT'S IN THE ARCHIVES.

AND JUST FOR REFERENCE, THAT'S A REALLY GOOD ONE TO JUST GIVE THE OUTLAY OF ALL THE WHILE, BECAUSE WE'RE IN PHASE THREE NOW OF THE RECONSTRUCTING THE ROADS WE'RE IN THE FIRST COUPLE OF PHASES OF THE MAINTENANCE OF THEM AND WE'RE NOT AND WE'RE BEHIND.

WE'RE BEHIND. SO THE BOND ISN'T EVEN DONE AND WE'RE BEHIND THE EIGHT BALL.

SO JUST TO UNDERSTAND, I AGREE WITH YOU ENTIRELY AND JUST WANT TO FRAME THAT UP EVEN MORE.

THANK YOU. SO THANK YOU.

NOW, MS.. BEAUCHAMP, WHAT WAS YOUR FEELINGS ON EVERYTHING HERE, THOUGH? FROM MY LAST PREVIOUS MEETING, THE ONE THING THAT SHOOK ME IS THE VACANCIES AND THE FACT THAT WE HAVE SO MANY PERSONNEL FOR OUR CITY THAT'S BEEN VACANT. NOT A FEW MONTHS, NOT ONE YEAR.

WE HAD A VACANCY THAT WENT BACK TO 2019.

THAT'S THREE YEARS.

SO I STARTED ASKING MYSELF THE QUESTION, WHY DON'T ANYONE WANT TO WORK FOR THE CITY? BECAUSE WORKING FOR A MUNICIPALITY IS LIKE WORKING WITH THE GOVERNMENT.

IT'S SECURITY BECAUSE THE FACT IS YOU GET PRETTY MUCH DECENT BENEFITS AND JOB SECURITY BECAUSE THE CITY SHOULDN'T GO ANYWHERE.

SO THEN I GO BACK TO ASKING MYSELF, SHE DID HER PRESENTATION.

WE HAD $3.5 MILLION COME BACK BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE PERSONNEL SITTING IN THOSE SEATS.

AND I AGREE, WE SHOULDN'T OPERATE OUR CITY ANTICIPATING OUR FUND GETTING BUILT OFF OF NO PERSONNEL BECAUSE NOW WE DON'T HAVE PERSONNEL.

WE HAVE PEOPLE FILLING THOSE ROLES BECAUSE THAT JOB STILL HAS TO GET DONE.

SO YOU HAVE PEOPLE DOUBLE WORK OVER TIME AND THEN EVENTUALLY I ASK MYSELF, IS THAT WHY PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO WORK FOR US? BUT THEN WE GO TO THE SALARY, MAYBE WE'RE NOT PAYING ENOUGH.

AND THEN I COMPARE OURSELVES TO OTHER CITIES.

WE HAVE PEOPLE THAT ACTUALLY LIVE IN OUR CITY.

AND AGAIN, I'VE SAID IT BEFORE, I'D RATHER HAVE PEOPLE WHO LIVE HERE WORK HERE.

WE HAVE PEOPLE WHO LIVE HERE WORKING IN MELBOURNE.

THAT'S A PROBLEM. AND SO FOR ME WITH WHAT WE CAN DO IS I SAY STAY WHERE WE AT WITH THE RATE BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO SEE US GO BACK TO WHERE WE'RE BELOW ROLLBACK BECAUSE THAT'S EVEN WORSE.

AND AS MUCH AS WE SAY THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET MORE, WE DO HAVE MORE BUILDING.

WE HAVE MORE PEOPLE ACTUALLY BUILDING HOUSES.

BECAUSE WHEN I WENT TO THE MAYOR'S BREAKFAST, I THINK THERE WAS LIKE 5600 PERMITS.

ISSUED. THAT'S NEW CONSTRUCTION.

THAT'S NEW MONEY.

I DON'T WANT TO SEE US NOT CAPITALIZE ON THAT MONEY BECAUSE WE NEED TO ACTUALLY PICK UP THE BALL.

I MEAN, THE TECHNOLOGY ALONE, WE'RE WE'RE STILL USING A DA SYSTEM THAT'S CRAZY TO ME.

LIKE, WE'RE STREAMING AND EVERYTHING AND WE'RE ON A DART SYSTEM.

AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY PEOPLE DON'T SEE, LIKE, I'M NOT EVEN A TECH PERSON.

MY KIDS HAD TO TEACH ME HOW TO USE AN IPHONE.

SO THE FACT THAT MY CITY IS WORSE THAN ME WHEN IT COMES TO TECHNOLOGY, I'M SCARED.

I'M REALLY WORRIED BECAUSE LIKE.

SO THAT'S MY OPINION. I THINK WE SHOULD STAY AT THIS RATE.

WE SHOULD NOT VISIT THE 3% CAP BECAUSE THEN WE WILL BE NEXT YEAR SITTING HERE WONDERING WHY WE STILL DON'T HAVE A FIRE STATION UNDER GROUP.

LIKE THOSE PEOPLE WHO HAVE TO BE SERVICED.

AND IF WE GET MORE AND MORE HOMES, THEIR HOMEOWNERS ARE GOING TO GO UP.

BECAUSE, AGAIN, LIKE I SAID BEFORE, YOU GOT TO HAVE ENOUGH STATIONS TO SERVICE THESE HOMES WITHIN A FIVE MILE RADIUS.

IF WE DON'T HAVE THAT AND WE STILL DON'T HAVE DISPATCH HERE, I MEAN, IT'S STILL OUTSIDE OF OUR CITY.

SO THE ONE THING IS THE CITIZENS NEED TO UNDERSTAND COME NOVEMBER, YOU NEED TO REEVALUATE IT.

DON'T LOOK AT YOUR POCKETS NOW.

LOOK AT YOUR POCKETS LATER, BECAUSE IT'S NOT JUST THE CITY TAXES THAT YOU'RE GOING TO PAY, YOU'RE GOING TO PAY ON YOUR HOMEOWNERS, THE ROAD TIRES.

[01:10:01]

THAT'S NOT THAT'S NOT GOOD.

ABSOLUTELY. SO JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, MISS BEAUCHAMP, YOU BELIEVE THAT IT WOULD BE IN THE CITY'S BEST INTEREST FOR THE COUNCIL TO STAY AT THE 7.59995 THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE PROCESS? IS THAT YOUR ASSESSMENT AS WELL? OKAY. SO BEFORE I COME TO THE OTHER SIDE AND HEAR FROM THE OTHER HALF OF THE BOARD HERE, LET ME ASK EITHER ONE OF YOU, GIVEN THE LANGUAGE IN THE CHARTER THAT TO TO BREAK IT, YOU NEED A SUPERMAJORITY OF COUNCIL AND YOU NEED AN EMERGENCY OR EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCE.

WHAT IS YOUR EMERGENCY OR EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES? TO ME, IT'S PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY BASED ON POPULATION.

AND IT'S QUITE OBVIOUS, RIGHT? OKAY. SO BASICALLY THE CASE THAT WOULD BE PROPOSED IS FROM A PUBLIC SAFETY PERSPECTIVE.

RIGHT. AND CALLING THAT A PUBLIC SAFETY EMERGENCY.

I'M SORRY. WE GOT THE MAJORITY OF OUR MONEY.

PUBLIC SAFETY PERSONNEL IS NOT BEING ACTUALLY BUILT.

SO TO ME IS IF I DON'T HAVE ENOUGH POLICE.

BUT WE HAVE MORE HOMES BECAUSE LET'S BE HONEST, WE HAVE MORE HOMES THAT'S GOING TO ATTRACT FROM THE OUTSIDE TO COME VISIT THE HOMES, POSSIBLY COMMIT CRIMES.

IF I DON'T HAVE THE POLICE TO KEEP ME SAFE OR IF I HAVE A FIRE BREAK OUT, I DON'T HAVE A FIRE DEPARTMENT OR AN ENGINE TO ACTUALLY MAKE IT THERE AND PUT THE FIRE OUT.

THAT'S PUBLIC SAFETY, RIGHT? I WANT TO FEEL SAFE.

I WANT THE DISPATCH NOT TO TAKE WHAT WAS IT, 7 MINUTES.

THAT A MINUTE. THAT'S CRAZY.

AND WE'RE GETTING BIGGER.

SO YOU THINK THE 7 MINUTES IS GOING TO GO DOWN? NO, IT'S GOING TO GET BIGGER IF WE DON'T FIX THAT.

SO, YEAH. PUBLIC SAFETY.

GOTCHA. MS.. PATEL, YOU WANTED TO ADD THERE? I'M TOTALLY ON BOARD WITH MY COMPADRE.

OKAY. I UNDERSTAND YOU GUYS AND I HEAR SOME POINTS TO SUPPORT SAID CASE.

BUT JUST TO SUMMARIZE YOUR CASE, YOU WERE ANY RECOMMENDATION THAT WOULD FLOAT UP.

WHAT HAVE YOU WOULD BE ON THE PREMISE OF A PUBLIC SAFETY EMERGENCY THAT WE FIND OURSELVES IN? ON MY FACEBOOK PAGE, I ACTUALLY POSTED UP A VIDEO OF AN EMERGENCY VEHICLE DRIVING DOWN THE ROADS.

AND IF YOU SEE HOW LONG IT TAKES FOR THEM TO GO FROM POINT A TO POINT B, SELF EXPLANATORY ON THE Y.

NOTED. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, BOTH OF YOU GUYS MUCH APPRECIATE IT.

I'M GOING TO GO ALL THE WAY OPPOSITE HERE AND ASK MR. WHITE TO SHARE YOUR ASSESSMENT HERE, SIR.

UH. SEVERAL THINGS COME TO MIND WITH REGARDS TO THIS DISCUSSION.

WHAT IS THAT? SIMPLY PUT, I DO NOT BELIEVE IT'S.

LEGALLY POSSIBLE TO CONSTRUE THE SITUATION THAT THE CITY IS IN AS A EMERGENCY OR CRITICAL NEED.

FROM THE LEGAL WORDING STANDPOINT, ONE THING WE HAVE.

MORE REVENUE THAN WE'VE EVER HAD BEFORE BY A SIGNIFICANT PORTION.

AND THAT'S BEEN THE CONSISTENT CASE FOR MULTIPLE YEARS NOW THAT THE RATES THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RIGHT NOW, EVEN STICKING WITH THE 3% CAP, WE'RE STILL LOOKING AT OVER $3 MILLION IN ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR THE GENERAL FUND, ABOUT 8.5% MORE.

THE ORIGINAL BUDGET FOR 2022.

OR IS THE TOTAL BUDGET? THAT'S WITH STICKING WITH THE CAP AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MAINTAINING THE CURRENT RATE, WHICH INSTEAD OF 8.5, THAT'S A 21% INCREASE.

IN THE FUNDS 21%.

AND THAT'S THE THAT'S WHAT WE'RE CALLING WHERE WE SEEM TO BE DISCUSSING IT AS IF IT'S A MIDDLE OF THE ROAD MEASURE.

IT IS MOST CERTAINLY NOT.

IF WE ARE GOING TO DO EVEN JUST THE 3% CAP AND GET THAT EXTRA 3 MILLION.

THAT WOULD BE. FROM EVERYTHING I'M SEEING THAT WOULD BE WORKABLE.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HOW THE ROLLBACK RATE IS A POSITIVE THING TO GET TO, SOMETHING TO ASPIRE TO.

BUT. THE FACT THAT WE MIGHT BE GETTING TO IT NOW SEEMS TO CAUSE A GREAT DEAL OF CONCERN.

SO THESE SEEM TO BE THE EXACT CIRCUMSTANCES THAT NATURALLY LEAD TO IT, AS EVIDENCED BY THE FACT THAT.

YOU'RE BEING LED TO IT.

HAVE. JUST THE PROPERTY TAXES AD VALOREM TAX REVENUE.

2022 APPROVED BUDGET $38 MILLION.

WE HAVE STAPLED THE PAGES TOGETHER.

WE DID IT ANYWAY.

AT THE 3% CAP, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT $41.2 MILLION OR MAINTAINING THE CURRENT RATE, $46.187 MILLION.

[01:15:02]

AND WE ALSO, AGAIN, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE FACT THAT WE ARE FINISHING OUT 2022 WITH SURPLUS AGAIN.

SURPLUS THAT SEEMS TO CONTINUE TO GO UP, DESPITE THE FACT THAT WE SPENT DOWN SO MUCH OF THE MONEY IN OUR RESERVE FUND.

IT GOES BY SEVERAL NAMES. THE FUND.

PUTTING ON THINGS THAT.

FOR FINANCE FINANCIALLY RESPONSIBLE ASPECT FOR POINT OF VIEW, WE'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE DOING ALMOST HALF A MILLION DOLLARS ON REOCCURRING EXPENSES, PERSONNEL ON POSITIONS WHEN, AGAIN, AS WE'VE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT, OVER $3 MILLION IN PERSONNEL OVER THREE AND A HALF MILLION DOLLARS.

AND PERSONNEL UNSPENT BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THOSE PERSONNEL THAT WE'RE BUDGETING FOR CONSISTENTLY.

THE FACT THAT SO MUCH OF THAT IS COMING FROM PUBLIC SAFETY IS DEEPLY CONCERNING AND OBVIOUSLY DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE SHOULD DEFUND THOSE POSITIONS BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY WE NEED THEM FILLED. BUT AS WAS MENTIONED, WE HAVE ALSO HAVE POSITIONS THAT HAVE BEEN VACANT FOR THREE PLUS YEARS OUTSIDE OF PUBLIC SAFETY.

BUT WE'D BE LOOKING AT THE POSSIBILITY THAT THAT POSITION ISN'T NECESSARY AND MAYBE THE POSITIONS WHERE THAT WORK, THE WORKLOAD FOR THAT POSITION HAS LANDED IN THOSE THREE YEARS.

PERHAPS DESERVE SOME REEVALUATION AND PERHAPS A SIGNIFICANT BUMP IN PAY REGARDLESS OF THE SALARY STUDY.

I WANT TO STOP YOU ROLLING, BUT THIS IS SO RELEVANT.

IS THAT WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THE STUDY WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT PHYSICIANS, ARE WE LOOKING AT THE FEASIBILITY OF A POSITION WHEN WE'RE RESTRUCTURING THE ORGANIZATION BASED UPON OR IS IT STRICTLY WE HAVE FOLKS THAT DO THIS WORK.

ARE THEY MAKING ENOUGH CORRECT.

IT EVALUATES CURRENT CURRENT STRUCTURE.

I'M JUST CURIOUS WHAT WOULD FALL UNDER A RESTRUCTURING? ANOTHER COMPLICATED PROCESS.

I MEAN, I KNOW I KNOW FROM FROM PERSONAL EXPERIENCE.

MY WIFE MY WIFE WAS WITH A COMPANY AND THEY HAD AN APARTMENT, THEIR LITTLE GROUP OF PEOPLE DOING THEIR ONE JOB THAT THEY WERE ALL DOING.

16 PEOPLE THAT WAS GOING ON EARLY RETIREMENT OFFERED.

TOO MANY PEOPLE TOOK IT.

AND THOSE 16 PEOPLE'S WORK WAS DEEMED BEING DONE BY FOUR.

AND THEN THEY THEY THEY TALK TO BIG TALK AND THEN THEY OFFERED THEM A 3% RAISE.

AND NOW THAT THREE IS DOWN TO DOWN TO ONE LAST WE CHECKED, BECAUSE SHE WAS ONE OF THE LAST THREE THE LEFT.

UM, THAT'S, THAT'S THE KIND OF THING THAT WOULD TELL ME OR THAT WOULD INDICATE A POSSIBLE REASON WHY WE HAVE SO MANY VACANT POSITIONS IF WE'RE NOT PROPERLY.

AWARDING PEOPLE FOR THEIR WORK, NOT JUST IN THE SENSE OF THIS POSITION NORMALLY SHOULD BE PAID THIS MUCH, BUT IF THEY'VE BEEN IN THE POSITION FOR THREE YEARS DOING PART OF THE WORKLOAD FOR ONE OF THOSE POSITIONS THAT'S BEEN VACANT AND THAT'S NOT BEEN ADDRESSED.

THE SOLUTION TO THAT IS NOT A SALARY STUDY.

NOW. I MEAN, SALARIES ARE OBVIOUSLY EXTREMELY IMPORTANT.

KNOW THAT. YEAH.

IT JUST SEEMS IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE COMING AT SOME OF THESE THINGS FROM THE WRONG ANGLE HERE.

INCREASE IN REVENUE.

22 WITH 3% CAP 8.92% ACCORDING TO THIS CHART.

AND THIS IS ALL WITHIN THE GENERAL FUND.

WHICH IS LESS THAN HALF OF OUR BUDGET.

ALL OF THE ESSENTIAL SOURCES COME FROM.

PUBLIC SAFETY REGARDING ROADS, BUT ALL FUNDS.

32. PURCHASED FOR SERVICES, BROUGHT IN NINE AND ONE HALF MILLION.

LIKE THERE ARE OTHER DIRECTIONS WE COULD BE COMING AT THIS PROBLEM OTHER THAN LET'S RAISE PEOPLE'S TAXES, LET'S INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF THAT REVENUE WE CAN CAPTURE.

I GREATLY DISLIKE WHEN PEOPLE TALK ABOUT CAPTURING THINGS OUT OF MY WALLET.

SO I THINK THERE ARE OTHER OTHER DIRECTIONS TO BE TAKEN WITH REGARDS TO LOOKING AT THESE.

HIS NEEDS. OBVIOUSLY, WITH SOME OF THOSE POSITIONS PERHAPS DO BE NEEDED OR ARE WE PROPERLY REWARDING? WORK. BECAUSE OF.

LAST WORD ON THE ON THE MILITARY.

OBVIOUSLY, THAT DOES FALL TO THE.

VOTERS. FIRST BUDGET AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL.

A. THE APPROACH THAT.

I. TALKED ABOUT.

IMPACT ON PRESIDENT OR THIS MILITARY SITUATION? DID THE MEAN. DID.

THE MAINTAINING RATE THAT WAS USED WAS THE PROPERTY VALUATION AMOUNT OF 75,000.

INCREASE THE AMOUNT THAT SOMEONE WILL PAY.

$60. SENT.

[01:20:04]

ANY OF MY BILLS WENT UP BY 11%.

I WOULD BE QUESTIONING WHO I'M GETTING MY SERVICE PROVIDED FROM.

I THINK THAT'S HAPPENING TO A LOT OF PEOPLE.

IT'S NOT TALKING ABOUT THIS IS.

MANY OF YOU KNOW THAT I'M CURRENTLY CAMPAIGNING, SO I'M DOORKNOCKING.

SOMETHING I HEAR A LOT IS I MOVED HERE X MANY YEARS AGO BECAUSE OF TAXES OF NORTH.

COME FORWARD ANYWHERE BUT OVER HERE BECAUSE TAXES UP NORTH.

I'VE BEEN HERE FOR THIS MANY YEARS AND NOW I'M PAYING MORE THAN I WAS UP THERE.

WE'VE GOT PEOPLE THAT LIVED HERE LONGER AND IT'S EVEN WORSE FOR THEM BECAUSE THEY BOUGHT HOUSES THAT ARE NOW WORTH TWICE WHAT THEY WERE WHEN THEY BOUGHT THEM.

AND IF THEY MADE THE GRAVE MISTAKE OF HAVING MULTIPLE HOUSES OR NOT LEAVING THEIR HOMESTEAD IN THE RIGHT PLACE.

THEIR BILLS HAVE GONE UP EXPONENTIALLY.

AND EVEN IF THEY ARE HOMESTEADED.

A JUMP OF THIS MAGNITUDE WOULD STILL HAVE A DRAMATIC IMPACT ON THEIR FINANCES.

THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT MOVED HERE FOR THE SAKE OF TRYING TO.

REIN IN THEIR EXPENDITURES, SO TO SPEAK, LIVING ON A FIXED INCOME KINDS OF SITUATIONS.

AND THEY WERE MAKING IT WORK AND THEY WERE HIRING THINGS LIKE THAT.

AND NOW THEY'RE ENTERING A PLACE WHERE THEY EITHER NEED TO CHANGE THAT PLAN ENTIRELY OR CHANGE WHERE THEY EXECUTE THAT.

YOU NEED TO BE VERY CAREFUL AS WE APPROACH THIS SITUATION THAT WE'RE NOT WE CAN'T TALK ABOUT TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE SITUATION WITHOUT ACKNOWLEDGING THAT.

DOING SO BY INCREASING THE AMOUNT THAT RESIDENTS ARE PAYING IN TAXES, THAT'S NOT TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE SITUATION.

THAT'S TAKING ADVANTAGE OF TAXPAYER.

WE'RE ENDING EVERY YEAR WITH A SURPLUS.

GETTING 8% MORE REVENUE, 12% MORE REVENUE, 21% MORE REVENUE DEPENDING ON CIRCUMSTANCE.

THAT'S NOT AN EMERGENCY OR A CRITICAL NEED THAT JUSTIFIES US BREAKING HALF.

HAVE THOSE PUT IN PLACE WITH 70% OF THE.

LIKE AT THAT POINT, IT'S JUST.

OBVIOUSLY YOU HAVEN'T BEEN OUT IN SOUTHWEST PALM BAY AT ALL.

I LIVE IN SOUTHWEST BOMBAY.

SO DO I.

AND BASICALLY, WE HAVE NOTHING BUT GROWTH.

WE DON'T HAVE A FIRE STATION.

WE HAVE LIMITED RESOURCES OUT THERE.

AND IN MOST CASES, WE DON'T EVEN HAVE ROADS.

SO THE FACT THAT YOU CAN SAY THAT IT'S NOT PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY FOR THOSE FOLKS THAT LIVE OUT THERE AND THEY HAVE TO WAIT AND WAIT AND WAIT.

IS INTERESTING, BUT NOT NECESSARILY FACTUAL.

OUR CITY CHARTER MANDATES THAT PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY IS OUR PRIORITY AS A CITY FOR THE RESIDENTS.

CURRENTLY IT DOESN'T MANDATE THAT EMERGENCY SERVICES ARE PRIORITY, THAT THEY EXIST.

OBVIOUSLY, I DO AGREE WITH THE THE NEED AND THE FACT THAT THEY SHOULD IN FACT, BE A PRIORITY.

AND THAT'S REALLY MY MY PROBLEM OR MY FRUSTRATION HERE IS THAT WE SEEM TO HAVE.

EXCESS OF FUNDS.

GREAT MANY PLACES SEVERAL YEARS.

AND YET THE MOST FUNDAMENTAL THINGS.

ROADS. POLICE.

FIRE. ARE THE THREE MOST SUFFERING ASPECTS TO THE CITY.

TALKED ABOUT IN THIS PRESENTATION THAT EVEN PUBLIC SAFETY IS THE MOST ONE OF THE MOST PREDICTABLE NEEDS.

AND YET THREE FIRE STATIONS BEHIND.

INCREASING. EXPONENTIALLY EVERY YEAR.

2021 IS 120 MILLION.

2023 IT'S 200 OR EXCUSE ME, 220 MILLION, 2023 IT'S 220, 132 EXCUSE ME, MILLION, 12 AND A $12 MILLION INCREASE IN ONE YEAR.

GET THE THREE MOST BASIC THINGS THAT WE CAN THINK OF AS FAR AS WHAT A LOCAL GOVERNMENT IS SUPPOSED TO BE DOING.

WE'RE NOT MEETING, SO WHY AREN'T WE MEETING THOSE? MY QUESTION. I THINK MORE MONEY IS A LITTLE BIT TOO SIMPLISTIC FOR THE SITUATION.

I BELIEVE THAT HAS BEEN NOTED THAT SALARIES NEED TO BE ADDRESSED AND HAVE BEEN A ISSUE IN THE CITY FOR SEVERAL YEARS.

IT'S NOT A NEW ISSUE.

IT'S ONE THAT HAS BEEN FESTERING FOR A FEW YEARS NOW.

AND IN SPEAKING WITH THE POLICE AND THE FIRE.

MY UNDERSTANDING, AGAIN, IS THOSE RESOURCES ARE STRETCHED TO THE LIMIT CURRENTLY.

AS IF YOU AREN'T SPEAKING WITH THE PEOPLE THERE THAN PERHAPS YOU'RE NOT AWARE OF THE NEED THAT IS EXISTING IN OUR CITY.

AND THESE ARE THE PEOPLE WE MUST RELY ON REGARDLESS OF HOW WE FEEL POLITICALLY.

ONE WAY OR ANOTHER, IT'S A REQUIREMENT FOR PEOPLE TO FEEL SAFE.

[01:25:09]

BUT BEFORE WE DO SO, I WANT TO HEAR FROM MS..

CONLEY. MR. WHITE, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU'VE KIND OF MADE YOUR YOUR POINTS KNOWN AND WHAT HAVE YOU.

AND THEN I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR FROM MS..

CONNELLY, AND WE CAN GET INTO A LITTLE BIT MORE CHRIS CROSS HERE, BUT MS..

CONNELLY, PLEASE. DO I FORGET THAT? AS I SEE IT, I THINK.

INTERPRETING NUMBERS.

THERE'S ALWAYS A STORY BEHIND THE NUMBERS.

AND I THINK FOR THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS OUR CITY HAS.

NET BUDGET.

OUR BUDGETS HAVE BEEN BUILT ON BARE MINIMUM BUDGETS WE HAVE REQUESTED FROM DEPARTMENTS ARE JUST THE ABSOLUTE ESSENTIAL.

AS THE.

BECAUSE OF THE CAP AND BECAUSE OF LIMITED REVENUE, OUR DEPARTMENT HEADS HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO BE REALLY.

IN MY OPINION, CREATIVE OR TO DO THINGS THAT WOULD GO BEYOND THE ABSOLUTE NEED.

AND YOU TALK ABOUT PEOPLE.

HOW HAVE WE MANAGED FOR SEVERAL YEARS WITH SO MANY STAFF MISSING? THAT COULD BE ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE'RE MISSING SOME STAFF IS THAT THAT IS A HEAVY BURDEN TO DO NOT ONLY YOUR JOB, BUT SOMEBODY ELSE'S.

I'VE HEARD THE CHIEF OF POLICE RIGHT HERE WHEN HE'S ASKED ABOUT RESPONDING ON THIS NEW CONSTRUCTION AND.

THE ANSWER IS.

NO MATTER WHAT THEY'RE ASKED TO DO, THEY WILL RESPOND IF IT TAKES THEM 8 MINUTES.

IT WILL RESPOND AND THEY WILL DO IT THE VERY BEST.

BUT I THINK WHERE WE WANT TO BE IS A CITY THAT HAS A QUALITY OF LIFE AND IS THRIVING.

NOT. NOT STRIVING TO GET THERE, BUT BEING THERE AND.

I UNDERSTAND.

STARECHESKI THAT WITH THE 3% CAP, IT CAN WORK OUT.

AND. BUT DO WE WANT IT TO WORK OUT THAT WAY OR DO WE WANT TO SAY INSTEAD OF PHASING IN, WE KNOW PEOPLE? OUR MEETING RAISES.

WE KNOW THEY'RE UNDERPAID.

VALUE PEOPLE AND WANT TO BENEFIT FULLY BENEFIT PEOPLE.

BE CREATIVE THERE TO.

INSTEAD OF EVEN THINKING OF PHASING IN, IF WE COULD MAINTAIN THE RATE AND ALLOCATE THOSE FUNDS AND RAISE EVERYBODY ONE YEAR.

UM. THE OTHER THING THAT I SEE IS.

IF WE RECOMMEND TO COUNCIL AND MAINTAIN THAT RATE.

HOW DO WE WANT TO USE THAT RATE? WOULD IT THAT EXCESS WOULD IT ALL GO TO PERSONNEL, WHICH I WONDER IS.

SEEMS LIKE THIS FOR THE PERSONNEL WE HAVE.

IT'S GOING TO BE A GREAT NEED TO RAISE THOSE.

SALARIES, INCLUDING BENEFITS.

AND THAT'S NOT EVEN TALKING ABOUT FILLING POSITIONS THAT ARE ALREADY BUDGETED, BUT UNFILLED.

BUT I'VE HEARD.

MS.. SHERMAN ALREADY IS THINKING IN TERMS OF FIRE STATIONS THAT ARE NOT YET BUILT BUT REQUIRE 12 PERSONNEL.

I'VE HEARD HER PLAN.

SHE'S ALREADY.

THIS CAN'T. THEN PUT 12 PEOPLE IN THERE.

IT TAKES DEVELOPING THEM AND BRINGING THEM ON BOARD.

AND AND SO THAT COULD BE SOMETHING TO THAT WOULD BE PART OF THIS EXTRA OR SURPLUS MONEY.

SO MY THOUGHT WOULD BE THAT WOULD HOLD THE RATE BUT THAT WE VERY CAREFULLY WORK WITH COUNCIL AND ALSO USE OUR VOICES AS CITIZENS TO MAKE SURE THESE PRECIOUS

[01:30:04]

AND THAT IS INTO THINGS LIKE PUBLIC SAFETY.

THEN THE NEXT WOULD BE ANYTHING ELSE RELATED TO INFRASTRUCTURE.

OF COURSE RHODES IS IN THAT THINGS THAT FOR YEARS WE HAVE JUST MAINTAINED THAT AND BY.

DID THE BEST.

FORTUNATELY, THIS CITY IS RICH IN GOOD EMPLOYEES.

AND I THINK THAT IS TO SAID THAT.

BILL BACKBONE AND A REAL PLUS.

OUR COMMUNITY.

I'M. SO THE ONLY.

I WOULD HAVE THEN IS.

UH, NOT UNDERSTANDING.

AND THIS MIGHT BE FOR YOU, TOO, IF WE HAVE.

A POOL OF MONEY.

WE USE THAT MONEY FOR.

BUILDING FIRE STATIONS OR BUILDING.

USE THOSE FUNDS? ARE WE LIMITED IN HOW WE CAN USE THOSE FUNDS? ANOTHER AREA IS TECHNOLOGY LIKE.

SHE SAID.

OUR THING THAT.

SO THANK YOU. UM, THERE'S, THERE'S NOT ANY PARTICULAR LIMITS ON IT.

SO WHETHER YOU HAVE 3 MILLION OR $8 MILLION, IT'S ALL ABOUT WHAT THE PRIORITIES ARE THAT COUNCIL WANTS TO SET FOR HOW THAT SHOULD BE DIRECTED.

SO PUBLIC SAFETY IS A RESONATING THEME HERE, AND IT'S BEEN A COUNCIL MEETINGS TOO.

SO MY EXPECTATION IS THAT THE BUDGET WE END UP WITH HAS INCREASED FUNDING FOR POLICE PERSONNEL.

FIRE PERSONNEL.

GIVES US A PATH FORWARD ON FUNDING THE FIRE STATIONS THAT WE NEED.

WE KNOW WE CAN'T FUND THEM ALL AT ONCE, NOR CAN WE BUILD THEM ALL AT ONCE.

SO WE'RE WE'RE LOOKING AT TWO DIFFERENT THINGS RIGHT NOW.

I MEAN, THERE'S OBVIOUSLY THE CONCEPT OF TRY TO PUT ALL THE MONEY ASIDE NOW FOR THE FIRE STATIONS.

BUT WE'RE ALSO LOOKING AT WHAT OUR OUR DEBT SERVICE OPTIONS ARE BECAUSE THAT MIGHT GET US TO A BETTER PLACE.

AND THEN WE CAN USE OUR MONEY A LITTLE MORE EFFECTIVELY RIGHT NOW WHEN WE HAVE A LOT OF REPLACEMENT VEHICLES THAT WE NEED TO INVEST IN AS WE'RE TRYING TO CATCH UP ON OUR CAPITAL INFRASTRUCTURE ISSUES.

AND THEN THAT ALSO, AGAIN, DOESN'T OVERDUE AND LEAVES MONEY FOR ROAD MAINTENANCE, ALL THE IMPORTANT THINGS WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT.

SO YOU REALLY HAVE WHATEVER YOU CAN NORMALLY FUND OUT OF GENERAL FUND.

YOU COULD FUND WITH WHATEVER THE THE AVAILABLE DOLLARS ARE, IF THAT HELPS.

SO REALLY THE BIGGEST MOVING PIECE SEEMS TO BE.

I WOULD AGREE, BECAUSE REALLY PART OF THE REASON WE'RE IN THIS PREDICAMENT, AS YOU'VE ALL HAVE SAID IN DIFFERENT WAYS, IS IT'S REALLY TWOFOLD.

BUT THE BIGGEST CHUNK IS WE HAVEN'T REALLY ADJUSTED OUR PAY RANGES FOR TEN, 15 YEARS, AND THAT'S DONE US A DISSERVICE.

AND WHEN I HAVE I WAS LOOKING EARLIER WITH WITH LARRY ACTUALLY HAD THE CITY OF COCOS PAY SCALES.

AND WHEN I HAVE PEOPLE WHO ARE TEN, $12,000 LESS IN THEIR ANNUAL STARTING SALARY COMPARED TO A NEIGHBOR OVER THERE, EVEN WITH THE PRICE OF GAS, THEY MIGHT STILL CHOOSE TO GO THERE VERSUS HERE.

SO SO THAT'S A BIG CHUNK FOR US.

I MEAN, THERE'S ALSO A LOT OF STRANGENESS IN THE WORLD TODAY, AND WE ALL KNOW ABOUT THAT.

BUT I THINK THAT'S MAKING SOME PEOPLE MAKE DIFFERENT CHOICES, LIKE GOING TO JOBS WHERE THEY CAN WORK FROM HOME COMPLETELY, WHICH IS TOTALLY COOL.

BUT SOMETIMES THEY'RE LEAVING JOBS WHERE I CAN'T HAVE THEM WORK.

TELL TELEWORK.

IT'S JUST NOT A FUNCTIONAL POSSIBILITY.

SO THERE ARE A VARIETY OF REASONS, BUT WE WANT TO BE A LOT MORE COMPETITIVE SO WE CAN HAVE THE BEST STAFF AND PROVIDE THE GREATEST SERVICES THAT OUR RESIDENTS NEED.

THAT IS A CORE PRIORITY FOR US.

BRINGING IT TO A CLOSE, MS.. CONNELLY.

ALL RIGHT. WELL, THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, BOARD FOR SHARING.

I'D LIKE TO TAKE A GO AT IT.

AND I REALLY APPRECIATE, AGAIN, WHAT EVERYBODY SHARED.

AND, YOU KNOW, I TOOK A FEW NOTES AND WE HEARD WE HEARD THAT THE FACT THAT THE MAINTENANCE FUND NOT BEING A RECURRING LINE ITEM, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOTHING SHORT OF EGREGIOUS. RIGHT. THE VACANCIES AND THE FACT THAT WE CAN'T FILL THEM AND THEN WE GET INTO AN OVERWORKED AND UNDERPAID.

THAT'S WHAT I WROTE DOWN. OVERWORKED AND UNDERPAID.

[01:35:01]

YOU KNOW, THERE'S THERE'S MS..

CONNELLY BRINGS BRINGS IT THE THE BUDGETS ARE WRITTEN WITH BARE BONES AND JUST THE ESSENTIALS WRITTEN ON THEM AND NO CREATIVITY SHE USED.

THERE'S NO THERE'S NO LACK OF SAYING THAT WE DON'T HAVE AS MUCH MONEY AS WE WISH WE DID.

BUT I SAY ALL THAT TO SAY.

LISZEWSKI HOUSEHOLD DOESN'T HAVE AS MUCH MONEY AS RANDALL THOUGHT.

YOU KNOW, YOU GOT TO BUY NOW THAT I WISH THAT I HAD AND I'VE HEARD MULTIPLE PEOPLE TELL ME AND EVERYONE ELSE THAT YOU CANNOT APPROACH A MUNICIPALITY'S FINANCES LIKE YOU CAN'T, CAN YOU PERSONALS.

THAT'S FINE. SO I'LL TRANSVERSE PERSONAL AND I'LL GET INTO BUSINESS.

THE BUSINESS THAT I WORK FOR, MULTINATIONAL WORLDWIDE CORPORATION.

WE LOVE MONEY.

WE WANT TO HAVE MORE MONEY.

WE HAVE PRODUCTS RIGHT NOW THAT WILL MAKE US MORE MONEY THAN WE'VE EVER MADE.

IF WE CAN MANUFACTURE THEM, BUT WE CAN'T MANUFACTURE THEM.

THOSE DARN MICROCHIPS WHERE WE AT? RIGHT. WE'RE AT CRUNCHING NUMBERS OF WHAT WE HAVE.

SO I DON'T MEAN TO BE DISMISSIVE OVER ANY VERY EDUCATIONAL INFORMATION SURROUNDING THE CAT.

I THINK IT'S VERY RELEVANT AND I THINK THIS IS A PROPER FORUM TO MAKE SURE IT'S SHARED WITH THE COMMUNITY.

BUT I THINK IN THIS CONVERSATION, WHETHER WE SHOULD HAVE A CAT OR WHETHER WE SHOULDN'T BECOMES MOOT WHEN WE TRY TO HONE IN VERY OBJECTIVELY AND SAY, WELL, WHAT SHOULD WE DO FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023? TO THE DEGREE THAT WE CAN, THE MOST MONEY WE CAN TRY TO REALIZE IS WITH THIS MILLAGE RATE OF OF A 6.7947, WHICH TO MR. WHITE'S POINT, DOES NOT GRANT OUR TAXPAYERS A REDUCTION IN THEIR PROPERTY TAXES, IT SIMPLY MINIMIZES THEIR INCREASE IN PROPERTY TAXES.

BUT TO THAT DEGREE, I'M COMFORTABLE.

I PERSONALLY WOULD LIKE TO BE IN A IN A ROLL BACK WORLD, AS WOULD MOST MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY, TO KNOW THAT THE ONLY THING THEY'RE COMBATING YEAR IN AND YEAR OUT IS THE RISE IN PROPERTY VALUES.

BECAUSE AS AWESOME AS PROPERTY VALUES RISING SEEMS ON THE SURFACE, IF YOU PLAN TO STAY IN YOUR HOME, IT'S NOT NECESSARILY THE BEST THING BECAUSE JUST BECAUSE YOU CAN NOW SELL YOUR HOUSE FOR TWICE AS MUCH AS YOU EVER THOUGHT IT WOULD BE WORTH IN THE RETAIL MARKET, IF YOU CALL A REALTOR AND SELL YOUR HOUSE TOMORROW, WHERE THE HECK ARE YOU GOING TO MOVE? WHERE ARE YOU GOING TO MOVE? WE'RE GOING TO GO. SO THAT VALUE BECOMES A PROBLEM.

IT BECOMES A PROBLEM. AND WE HAVE YOU KNOW, I KNOW EVERYBODY HERE HAS FAMILY THAT LIVES IN A MAJOR METROPOLITAN AREA, WHETHER IT IS IN THE SOUTH OR THE NORTH OR THE WEST OR WHAT HAVE YOU. YOU WANT TO CALL IT TALK ABOUT THE DALLAS OF THE WORLD, THE CHICAGOS OF THE WORLD.

AND IN THOSE COUNTIES, THE CITIZENS HAVE TO GO TO THE PROPERTY APPRAISER AND AND APPEAL THEIR PROPERTY VALUES.

AND I'M SURE WE HAVE PROCESSES LIKE THAT IN BREVARD COUNTY, BUT YOU DON'T HEAR MANY PEOPLE TALKING ABOUT, YEAH, I'M GETTING UP THERE TO THE BREVARD COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER'S OFFICE. I'M GIVING THEM A PIECE OF MY MIND.

WE WE SEE THE PERCENTAGES GO UP.

WE SEE THE TAXES GO UP.

WE MANAGE WITH WHAT WE HAVE TO.

BUT THE POINT BEING IS WHEN WE GET TO A POINT WHERE MILLAGE RATE DOES HANG OUT AT ROLLBACK, THEN THE CITIZEN ONLY HAS TO LOOK AT THAT PROPERTY VALUE, WHICH I'M JUST GOING TO SAVE AS A SUMMARY FOR CONVERSATION SAKE IS MANAGEABLE NOW IN THE WORLD.

AND WE DON'T HAVE THIS HUGE SITUATION IN BREVARD COUNTY WHERE EVERYBODY'S APPEALING THEIR PROPERTY VALUES.

DON'T WORRY, THAT HORIZON WILL COME IF WE GO ON THE RATE THAT WE'RE ON.

I MEAN, GIVE IT TWO OR THREE MORE FISCAL YEARS FOR THESE THINGS TO REALLY COME AROUND AND THEY'LL BE A ROBUST AND WE'LL GET TO THE POINT OF OF AS EXTREME AS IT IS IN THOSE METROPOLITAN AREAS WHERE THERE'S THERE'S THE LAWYERS, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT GO OUT TO PEOPLE AND SAY, OH, YOU KNOW, IF I DON'T GET YOUR STUFF LOWERED, I DON'T GET PAID WHATEVER. AND WE'RE GOING TO CREATE A WHOLE SUB INDUSTRIES FIGHTING PROPERTY VALUES.

BUT BEFORE OUR CITIZENS GET TO THE POINT THAT THEY HAVE TO DO THAT, THEY WANT A LITTLE BIT OF CONTROL IN THE MILITARY.

AND WHILE I'M TALKING, MS..

COLLINS, IF IT'S EASY ENOUGH FOR YOU TO SHOW THE HISTORICAL MILLAGE RATES, I'D APPRECIATE IT.

BUT CAP GETS VOTED IN IN 2016.

IT GETS EFFECTIVE FOR THE 18 FISCAL YEAR, BUT IT DOESN'T GET USED BECAUSE WE HAD FISCAL EMERGENCIES COME UP HURRICANE NEXT YEAR, HURRICANE. SO THE CITY COUNCIL SAID WE NEED TO GO ABOVE WHAT SHOULD BE IN FISCAL YEAR 18.

WE NEED TO GO ABOVE 8.1.

WE NEED TO GO TO 8.4.

WE NEED TO GO ABOVE 8.0 IN 2019.

WE NEED TO GO TO 8.45.

WE'RE ACTUALLY WE NEED TO STAY AT 8.45 IS WHAT THEY SAID.

OH, EXCUSE ME. THAT'S WHAT THEY SAID IN 18 OVER 17 IS THIS WHOLE NARRATIVE OF, WE NEED TO STAY.

WE NEED TO STAY BECAUSE THERE WAS A HURRICANE AND WE SPENT A BUNCH OF MONEY AND I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT SOURCE OF WHAT THE DEFICITS WERE OR WHAT THE PROPOSED DEFICITS WERE.

BUT THE COUNCIL BY SUPERMAJORITY SAID, EVEN THOUGH THE PEOPLE JUST VOTED THIS IN THIS YEAR, WE'RE GOING TO SAY, NOPE, GOT TO HAVE MORE MONEY.

THIS YEAR WE'RE GOING TO SAY, NOPE, GOT TO HAVE MORE MONEY BECAUSE WE HAVE AN EMERGENCY.

THERE WAS A HURRICANE THAT WAS THE EMERGENCY THAT WAS USED.

SO TO GO BEFORE THE COUNCIL FOR FISCAL YEAR 23 WHERE IT SHOULD BE 6.7947.

AND AGAIN, THE ONLY TWO THINGS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY, IT, FOR CONVERSATION'S SAKE, IS THAT OR THE 7.5995 TO MAKE THE CASE THAT IT SHOULD STAY AT

[01:40:08]

ARE WE MEETING THAT PRECEDENT BY SAYING WE ONLY HAVE A SURPLUS OF 3.5 MILLION? I'M GOING TO SAY NO AND I'M GOING TO SAY NO, AND THEN I'M GOING TO SUPPORT IT WITH SOME FACTS.

I DON'T THINK THAT THAT PROPOSITION CONSTITUTES A FISCAL EMERGENCY, NOT EVEN FOR PUBLIC SAFETY, BECAUSE THE HIGHEST PRIORITIES THAT ARE PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICIALS HAVE RISEN TO US TOTAL $1.2 MILLION.

I PROPOSE WE FUND THOSE THE HIGHEST PRIORITIES THAT OUR DEPARTMENTS HAVE BROUGHT TO US, SOME UP TO 1.7 MILLION, ONLY AN ADDITIONAL 500,000 FROM THAT 1.2 I JUST MENTIONED. SO THE HIGHEST PRIORITY IS THAT OUR DEPARTMENTS HAVE SOME UP TO 1.7 AND WE CAN COVER THEM WITH 3.5 MILLION.

AND THEN WE GET INTO A CONVERSATION OF A SURPLUS OF 1.8.

NOW THERE IS A TON THAT WE NEED TO DO IN CAPITAL INVESTMENT ALL THE TIME.

ABSOLUTELY. FIREHOUSES, THE WHOLE NINE.

BUT WHAT WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND IS THAT THE CITY MANAGER AND HER STAFF ARE WORKING ON A MASTER CAPITAL INVESTMENT PLAN.

AND SOME FOLKS WILL SAY, WELL, IF YOU DON'T GIVE THEM ANY MONEY TO WORK WITH, HOW DO THEY KNOW WHAT TO PLAN FOR? BUT THERE'S BEEN SO MANY, SO MANY YEARS THAT THEY HAVEN'T GOTTEN THE MONEY TO WORK WITH THAT THEY'RE GETTING CREATIVE ENOUGH TO SAY, WE HAVE TO MAKE A PLAN WITH AT LEAST BALLPARK FIGURES AND SAY, HEY, GUYS AND GALS, WE NEED 20 MILLION OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS.

WE NEED 40 MILLION OVER THE NEXT SIX YEARS.

WE NEED SOMETHING TO GO OFF OF BEFORE WE CAN FEASIBLY SAY ONE THAT WE'RE IN EMERGENCY STATUS, AND TWO, BEFORE WE WOULD EVEN BE ABLE TO PROPERLY SPEND ADDITIONAL MONEY. SO LET'S PULL CONVERSATION SAKE.

WE DON'T WANT TO PULL DOWN THE 3.5.

WE WANT TO STAY A SURPLUS.

WE WANT TO STAY AT THE 7.5995, WHICH I THINK WOULD BRING OUR SURPLUS CLOSER TO 8 MILLION.

9 MILLION. CONVERSATION SAKE.

IT WOULD TRIPLE OUR SURPLUS.

WELL, THEN LET'S GET INTO A BRASS TACKS CONVERSATION.

HOW DO WE SPEND THAT? BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE'RE GOING TO GET TO IS WE'RE NOT GOING TO MAKE A DENT.

WE'RE GOING TO TRY.

AND IT WILL MAKE A DENT.

I DON'T WANT TO DISCREDIT ANYTHING THAT $6 MILLION WOULD DO.

BUT THE BIG PICTURE THAT ALL OF US ARE PASSIONATE ABOUT AND SEEING THERE MAY OR MAY NOT BE POLAR SIDES OF THIS, BUT EVERYONE IS PASSIONATE ABOUT THE SAME THING IS THAT WE HAVE A BIG PROBLEM THAT WE NEED TO SOLVE.

AND IF WE GET MORE MONEY RIGHT NOW, TODAY BY BREAKING THE CAP, WE ARE NOT PREPARED TO PROPERLY ALLOCATE THOSE FUNDS.

IN MY HUMBLE OPINION, MY HUMBLE OPINION FOR MY PROFESSIONAL LIFE, FROM MY MY CIVIL ENGAGEMENT IN THIS COMMUNITY WHERE I GO, WHAT I SEE, WHO I TALK TO, I FEEL AS THOUGH WE ARE ON THE ROAD TO BEING PREPARED TO PROPERLY IMPLEMENT AN AWESOME PLAN.

AND WE HAVE THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UNDER WAY.

AND THE 2040 VISION IS, YOU KNOW, THE KEY TERM THERE.

I HAVE MY OWN VISION OF 2040.

YOU KNOW, MY KID IS GOING TO GRADUATE HIGH SCHOOL AND LIKE, I DON'T KNOW, THE EARLY THIRTIES OR THE MID THIRTIES OR SOMETHING.

SO WHEN I LOOK AT 2040, I'M A HOLY MOLY, RIGHT? THIS IS COLLEGE DAYS. THESE ARE BIG, BIG TIMES FOR RANDALL.

WHEN I LOOK WHAT'S GOING TO BE GOING AROUND IN THIS CITY, I SEE US ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THIS.

I SEE US ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THIS REALLY BIG PROBLEM.

BUT I DON'T SEE US ON THE OTHER SIDE ENTIRELY OF THIS REALLY BIG PROBLEM IN 2025 OR 2026.

I SEE US WELL UNDERWAY IN 2030, BUT THIS ISN'T SOMETHING THAT WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE IN A YEAR OR TWO OR FIVE.

THIS IS A HUGE UNDERTAKING TO TAKE A CITY THAT WAS DEVELOPED BY A DEVELOPER THAT LITERALLY THROUGH WALL STREET INFLUENCES, CAME AND KNOCK DOWN SWAMPLAND AT A RATE NO ONE COULD KEEP UP WITH AND CREATED VALUE WHERE IT DIDN'T EXIST, AND THEN TURNED THE KEYS OVER TO SAID CONGLOMERATE OF LAND TO A MUNICIPALITY AND SAID, HEY, DO YOUR BEST, DO YOUR BEST.

KEEPING UP WITH 88 SQUARE MILES OF ROAD.

HEY, ROUGHLY 20% OF IT HAS ACCESS TO UTILITIES.

ROUGHLY 40% OF THE ROADS ARE GOOD ENOUGH TO DRIVE ON.

BUT HEY, DO YOUR BEST, GIVE YOUR BEST WHACK AT IT.

AND ALL THE WHILE WE'VE HAD ALL SORTS OF OTHER FAVORED DOERS.

WE'VE HAD THE COUNTY GIVE US PROPERTY, WE'VE HAD THE COUNTY GIVE US ASSETS SUCH AS THE POOL ASSETS, THEIR LIABILITIES.

ALL THESE PEOPLE HAVE BEEN DOING ALL THESE FAVORS AND GIVING US ALL THESE THEIR IDEAS OF ASSETS OVER THE YEARS.

AND IT'S ALL REACHED AHEAD.

IT ALL DID REACH A HEAD WHEN WE HIT THAT HORRIBLE BOTTOM OUT OF THE MARKET IN 2013 OR SO.

AND WHEN UNFORTUNATELY, YOU COULD BUY A HOUSE IN PALM BAY FOR $30,000, YOU KNOW, THAT'S A THAT'S AN UNFORTUNATE CIRCUMSTANCE WHEN IT GETS TO THAT, BECAUSE THEY HAD NO VALUE, BECAUSE WHAT THEY WERE AND WHERE THEY WERE HAD NO VALUE.

THERE WAS NO THERE WAS NO SUBSTANCE.

[01:45:01]

BUT NOW WE ARE IN A STATE WHERE WE'RE GROWING, WHERE EVERY SECTOR OF THE CITY, WHERE THERE IS SOUTHWEST, WHETHER IT'S THE ONE SIDE OF NORTHEAST, MY SIDE OF NORTHEAST, WHICH IS RIGHT HERE CLOSE TO CITY HALL.

ANY CORNER OF THE CITY YOU GO.

THERE'S GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT IN IT, WHICH LEADS ME TO BELIEVE THAT IN AN EVENTUAL SENSE, IN THOSE CORNERS WILL BE ABLE TO EXPAND THE UTILITY WHEN, WHEN, WHEN WOULD UTILITY OK NOT EVEN WATER UTILITY POWER IS GOING TO GET OUT TO CENTER LANE, YOU KNOW, PLACES THAT WE ANNEX, THOUSANDS OF ACRES THAT WE'VE ANNEXED INTO OUR CITY, TOWARDS CENTER LANE IN THE SOUTHEAST PORTION OF THE CITY.

WHEN IS IT GOING TO GO FURTHER INTO THE COMPOUND TO MAKE SOME OF THE COMPOUND USEFUL FOR WHAT IT IS WHEN THE HIGHWAY IS DONE RIGHT? WHEN ARE THESE THINGS GOING TO HAPPEN? IT'S ALL SO FAR OFF, RIGHT WHERE WE HAVE TO START DOING WHAT WE CAN WITH WHAT WE CAN TODAY.

AND I PAINT ALL THAT PICTURE.

I GO FAR BACK TO BRING YOU GUYS BACK CENTER TO WHERE MASTER PLANNING.

AND IF YOU TRY TO PLAY WHAC-A-MOLE AND TRY TO MAKE A MASTER PLAN AT THE SAME TIME, YOU'RE GOING TO DO YOURSELF SOME FAVORS AND YOU'RE GOING TO DO YOURSELF SOME DETRIMENT.

THE FAVORS YOU'RE GOING TO GET SOME THINGS DONE.

NOBODY'S GOING TO SAY THAT THE $5 MILLION THAT WE SPENT ON CAPITAL INVESTMENTS AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS YEAR IS A DETRIMENT TO THE OVERALL MASTER PLAN.

BUT NOW, AS WE'RE WRITING THE MASTER PLAN, WE CAN'T EVEN CARBON COPY SOME OF THAT STUFF.

WE GOT A FIRE ENGINE FOR, I DON'T KNOW, 216,000 WE CAN'T CARBON COPY THAT INTO THE MASTER PLAN AND SAY WE'RE GOING TO GET ANOTHER ONE FOR 216.

WE HAVE TO QUOTE THE REALITY OF THE SITUATION THAT WE WANT ONE AT A RATE OF 300 OR 305 OR WHATEVER THE HECK IT'S GOING TO BE.

SO WE NEED TO WRITE A MASTER PLAN AND WE'RE DOING IT.

THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE IS PUTTING TOGETHER CAPITAL INVESTMENT PLANS THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT IS GOING TO DIGEST.

HOW DO WE CHUNK THAT UP? WHAT DO WE LOOK AT? DO WE LOOK AT TAKING OUT MORE DEBT? I'M NOT AN ADVOCATE FOR IT.

I'M ALSO NOT OPPOSED. IF IT'S A SOLUTION, WE'RE NOT GOING TO SOLVE THAT PROBLEM HERE TONIGHT.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO SOLVE THAT PROBLEM WITH THE MILLAGE RATE THAT WE ASKED CITY COUNCIL TO SET IF WE ASK.

AND THEY OBLIGE TO SET THE MILLAGE RATE AT 7.5995, THEY NEED TO LIST THEIR EMERGENCY CIRCUMSTANCE AND IT NEEDS TO PASS A MUSTER OF LEGAL CHALLENGE ABILITY.

THE MUSTER WILL BE WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY.

THE CITY ATTORNEY HAS THE PRESIDENT OF THE TWO YEARS THAT THE CAP WAS BROKEN TO GO TO.

SO I AM NOT HERE TO SPEAK FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY BY ANY MEANS, BUT SHE'S GOING TO LOOK AT THE LEGAL PRECEDENT THAT WE USE AND THAT WE SET THE LAST TIME.

AND THE STANDARD IS A HURRICANE HAPPENED AND WE DON'T HAVE ANY HURRICANE HERE AND WE HAVE $3.5 MILLION SURPLUS.

THERE'S NOTHING THERE.

AND WE'VE HAD CONVERSATIONS IN THE PAST, EVEN IN THIS BOARD, LET ALONE IN THE CITY COUNCIL VENUE, ABOUT THINGS THAT NEED EMERGENCY CIRCUMSTANCES TO BE SPENT.

IT'S NOT THAT WE DON'T WISH THAT IT COULD BE DEFINED AS AN EMERGENCY.

I CALL IT AN EMERGENCY.

MR. WHITE PROBABLY CALLS IT AN EMERGENCY, BUT THE LETTER OF THE LAW HAS TO CALL IT AN EMERGENCY FOR US TO BE ABLE TO DO IT.

SO WITH ARPA FUNDS, WE HAD MANY THINGS THAT WE WANTED TO SPEND THE CLOSE TO $18 MILLION THAT OUR CITY WAS BLESSED ENOUGH TO GET, BUT WE COULDN'T BECAUSE THEY COULD ONLY BE TOWARDS LOST REVENUES.

VERY SPECIFIC THINGS ONLY BE THROUGH DETRIMENTS THAT WE HIT THROUGH COVID.

THEY HAD TO FIT CERTAIN LEGAL DEFINITIONS AND TO BREAK THIS CAP THE WAY IT STANDS NOW, THE COUNCIL FOUR MEMBERS OUT OF FIVE HAVE TO VOTE FOR IT.

AND THERE HAS TO BE THAT LEGAL REPRESENTATION OF THE WHY.

AND I'M GOING TO SAY IT, BOARD MEMBERS, I HAVEN'T HEARD TONIGHT A Y THAT I COULD BRING TO THE COUNCIL, LET ALONE TO THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY, JUST TO THE COUNCIL AND TO THE CITY ATTORNEY AT THE FIRST WORKSHOP AND SAY, MAKE IT 7.5995, BECAUSE WE NEED A LOT OF CAPITAL INVESTMENT, BUT ALSO SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE WE HAVE THIS EMERGENCY.

I DON'T HAVE THAT HERE.

AND IF ANYBODY DOES, PLEASE, BUT I DON'T HAVE IT.

MS.. BEAUCHAMP, YOU SAID IT WORKED FOR A COMPANY.

Y'ALL GOT MERCHANDISE YOU CAN SELL.

YOU CAN'T SELL IT BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE IT RIGHT.

WE HAVE VEHICLES THAT WE NEED TO BUY, BUT WE CAN'T BUY IT BECAUSE WE CAN'T GET IT.

THAT'S WHAT MY COMPANY IS. I MAKE CARS, BUT I'M JUST SAYING.

SO IF YOU'RE LOOKING FOR EMERGENCY THAT WE NOT JUST COME OFF OF A PANDEMIC.

THAT COULD BE A REASON WHY WE LOST SO MANY PERSONNEL.

SO THE FACT IS, YOU'RE LOOKING FOR A HURRICANE, WHICH WE HAVEN'T HAD ONE IN A COUPLE OF YEARS.

SO NOAA IS SAYING WE'RE GOING TO GET HIT HARD LIKE WE'VE BEEN GETTING HIT THESE LAST FEW WEEKS.

AND AGAIN, WITH THE ROAD SAFETIES, THE DRAINAGE ROADS GETTING FLOODED, PEOPLE CAN'T GO HOME, PEOPLE GETTING STUCK AT HOME.

SO AS MUCH AS WE WANT TO SAY WE'RE LOOKING FOR A REASON TO SAY THERE'S NO PUZZLE, THERE'S TONS OF REASONS.

THE PANDEMIC ALONE WAS ONE OF THOSE THOSE REASONS THAT WE SUFFERED IT FOR TWO YEARS AND WE'RE STILL SUFFERING IT.

SO IF YOU'RE LOOKING FOR A REASON TO SAY OUR EMERGENCY, THE PANDEMIC INFLATION, THE COST FOR EVERYTHING IS GOING UP WITH THE BUDGET.

AND WE'RE TELLING OUR CURRENT PEOPLE AND DEPARTMENTS, YOU'RE ONLY GOING TO GO WITH THE BARE MINIMUM.

OF COURSE, THEY SAID THEY ONLY NEEDED $1.8 MILLION BECAUSE THEY WERE TOLD THEY CAN ONLY PUT WHAT WAS NEEDED.

[01:50:03]

BECAUSE HONESTLY, BEFORE I JOINED THE BOARD TO FIND OUT THAT WE ARE DEALING WITH WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH AND BEEN DOING IT FOR YEARS, IT'S CRAZY.

THAT WAS WAY BEFORE WE WENT UP TO THE 8.1.

IT TOOK A HURRICANE FOR US TO ACTUALLY GIVE THE MONEY THAT WAS NEEDED TO JUST SUSTAIN WHAT WE WERE WORKING WITH.

WE'VE BEEN SUSTAINING LIKE UNDER PAR.

I'LL JUST BE PERFECTLY HONEST.

LIKE, CAN WE OUTSOURCE OUR UTILITY BILLS TO A COMPANY BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE IN OUR TECHNOLOGY TO SEND OUR OWN BILLS OUT TO THE POINT WHERE WE WENT THROUGH CYBER ATTACKS SEVERAL YEARS.

LIKE RIGHT NOW I JUST GOT A CHECK FROM THE CITY BECAUSE WHEN I PAID MY WATER BILL, I WAS ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE WHOSE INFORMATION WAS COMPROMISED.

WE CONTINUE TO DO THAT TO WHERE WE HAVE TO CONTINUALLY PAY OUT FOR LIABILITIES THAT WE SHOULD ALREADY BEEN PROTECTED FOR.

SO THE EMERGENCY FOR ME IS JUST LIKE YOU SAID, INFRASTRUCTURE, PUBLIC SAFETY.

WE HAD A PANDEMIC LIKE THE COST AND INFLATION FOR THINGS THAT WE NORMALLY WOULD PAY, 206,000.

NOW YOU GOT TO MAYBE PAY A HALF A MILLION DOLLARS FOR IF WE SET OUR BUDGET AT THE BARE MINIMUMS, WE'RE NEVER GOING TO GET IT.

AND WE SAY, YEAH, WE CAN WAIT A YEAR OR TWO, BUT IN A YEAR OR TWO, WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IN BETWEEN? LIKE SHE SAID, WE NEED TO BE READY FOR A RAINY DAY.

WE'RE NEVER BEEN READY.

WE HAVE IT AND FOR A CITY, YEAH, WE GOT IT FROM GENERAL DEVELOPMENT AND THEY JUST GAVE IT TO US AND TOLD US WE HAD TO DO WHAT WE HAD TO DO.

BUT WE HAVE ENOUGH PEOPLE HERE.

WE'RE GROWING. THERE'S ENOUGH KNOWLEDGE WE NEED TO ACTUALLY TAKE IN CONSIDERATION OF IDEAS AND CREATIVITY SO WE CAN EVOLVE.

IT'S LIKE SHE WENT TO COCO. COCO PEOPLE MAKING 12 TO $13000 MORE.

I COMMUTE TO VIERA.

I WOULD GO TO CAVIAR TO FOR 12 $13,000 MORE BECAUSE OF THE COST OF LIVING HAS GONE UP.

WENT TO GO BUY GROCERIES, MILK, ALMOST $5.

NOW THAT'S CRAZY.

SO WHEN WE LOOK AT THE INFLATION AND COST OF LIVING GOING UP, WHY WOULDN'T THE CITY REQUIRE MORE RESOURCES AND REVENUE TO OPERATE? THAT'S ALL I'M SAYING. AND AND I RESPECT EVERYTHING HE SAID ENTIRELY.

AND I DON'T I DON'T SET OUT TO DEMERIT ANYTHING HE SAID IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM EITHER.

WHAT I WOULD I AIM TO BRING ATTENTION TO IS THAT THIS CAT WENT BEFORE VOTERS GOT VOTED IN AND NOW EXISTS IN OUR CITY CHARTER.

AND THE ONLY WAY THAT IT CAN BE BROKEN IS WITH A LEGALLY DEFINED EMERGENCY OR LEGALLY AGREED UPON EMERGENCY.

I'M GOING TO COME TO YOU IN A SECOND AND.

WHEN WE HAVE NUMBERS LIKE THE ONES THAT WE DO, IT DOESN'T ADD UP ON PAPER, IN MY OPINION, TO THE SAME EMERGENCY CIRCUMSTANCES THAT THOSE NUMBERS HAD TO HAVE ADDED UP TO FOR THEM TO MEET THAT LEGAL MUSTER.

I WILL SAY THAT THERE IS A REQUIREMENT THAT WE KEEP A FUND BALANCE TO COVER TWO MONTHS OF OUR OPERATION.

60 DAYS WORTH OF OUR OPERATIONS WAS 10%.

THEY UPPED IT TO 60 DAYS OPERATIONS.

SO AS MS.. COLLINS PRESENTATION SAYS, IT WAS 10%.

NOW IT'S AT ABOUT 16 OR 17% OF THE BUDGET, WHICH IS $12.

OKAY. SO WE HAVE $12 MILLION THAT WE NEED TO KEEP IN THE FUND FOR A RAINY DAY, FOR A RAINY 60 DAYS, WHICH A ONE FRONT 60 DAYS.

THAT SEEMS LIKE A LONG TIME ON ANOTHER.

IF WE'RE IN A SITUATION WHERE THE CITY IS NOT BRINGING IN INCOME FOR 60 DAYS, WHAT THE HECK IS GOING ON IN THE WORLD AND IS 60 DAYS IS GOING TO CUT IT? PROBABLY NOT. RIGHT. BUT ANYWAYS, 60 DAYS OPERATION CAN'T GET TOUCHED.

THAT'S 12 MILLION.

WE HAVE 22 MILLION ON DESIGNATED FUND BALANCE.

SO THERE'S $10 MILLION THAT IS IN THERE FOR RAINY DAY.

QUITE FRANKLY SPEAKING, MISS BEAUCHAMP, THERE'S $10 MILLION THERE THAT ONCE THERE IS A GRAND MASTER PLAN OF CAPITAL INVESTMENT.

WE CAN MAYBE TALK ABOUT WE HAVE $10 MILLION IN THE BANK ACCOUNT.

WE HAVE THIS PLAN OF OF GRAND CAPITAL INVESTMENT.

LET'S SPEND EIGHT IN THIS WAY.

LET'S SPEND SIX IN THIS WAY.

LET'S SPEND TEN IN THIS WAY.

THERE'S MONEY SITTING THERE RIGHT NOW THAT WE COULD SPEND ON HOPEFULLY SOMETHING THAT WASN'T REOCCURRING, THAT WE COULD COME OUT AND SAY, WE ARE BUILDING TWO FIRE STATIONS, SOMETHING THAT MS..

SHERMAN HAS HAS SAID IN IN THE PAST IN THE PUBLIC FORUM.

AND MS.. SHERMAN, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT THAT THEY'RE WORKING ON IN THE MASTER PLANNING FOR CAPITAL IS COMING UP WITH A BLUEPRINT FOR THESE FIREHOUSES SO THAT THEY'RE REPEATABLE, SO THAT IT COMES.

WE KNOW THIS IS SQUARE FOOTAGE.

WHAT WE NEED, THIS IS WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE.

THIS IS ROUGHLY SQUARE FOOTAGE, HOW MUCH MATERIALS WE'RE GOING TO NEED.

SO WE KNOW THAT COST. NOW WE NEED A PIECE OF LAND.

WE NEED SOMETHING WE CAN STICK IT ON.

WHEN WE HAVE A PLAN LIKE THAT, WE CAN START WITH SOME OF THE MONEY THAT WE HAVE IN ON DESIGNATED FUND BALANCE, AND THEN WE CAN COME TO THE COUNCIL, WE CAN COME TO THE PUBLIC, WE CAN COME TO EVERYBODY IN BETWEEN, AND WE CAN SAY WE HAVE THIS PLAN.

AND IF WE'RE TO OBTAIN THIS MUCH MORE MONEY THIS FISCAL YEAR BY IN THIS INSTANCE, RAISING THE MILLAGE RATE UP HERE, THESE ARE THE EFFECTS WE CAN MAKE.

I THINK THAT WE'LL BE ABLE TO CREATE A SITUATION THAT THE COMMUNITY HAS MORE TRUST IN ALL THE PEOPLE THAT ARE MAKING THE DECISIONS.

AND MAYBE IT'LL BE A CIRCUMSTANCE THAT THE COMMUNITY WOULD BE COMFORTABLE RELEASING THE CAP.

[01:55:04]

MISS BEAUCHAMP FOR THE REST OF THE BOARD, THE COUNCIL PUSHED FORWARD TO ALLOW WHAT HAPPENS TO HAPPEN FOR IT TO GO ON THE BALLOT TO GET VOTED ON IN NOVEMBER.

SO AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW, IF NOTHING ELSE CHANGES, IT'S GOING TO END UP ON THE BALLOT IN NOVEMBER.

SO ALL YOUR POINTS.

VALID AS THEY ARE.

THAT IS THE CONVERSATION TO HAVE THEM AROUND AND WITHIN AND TO DISPLAY.

AND IF THE PUBLIC FEELS THIS NOVEMBER THAT IT'S TIME, THEN THEN THEY'LL DO IT.

THAT WON'T HAVE ANY EFFECT ON 23 FISCAL YEAR BUDGET AND MOST LIKELY WON'T HAVE ANY EFFECT ON 24 FISCAL YEAR BUDGET.

AND I DON'T KNOW BEYOND THAT, BUT IT CERTAINLY WON'T ON THIS ONE.

SO WHAT CAN WE DO IN THIS ONE AND CAN WE BREAK THE CAP BY THE LETTER OF THE LAW? I JUST PERSONALLY DON'T SEE AND I'LL SAY EVERYTHING SHORT OF SAYING I WISH I COULD SEE, BUT I JUST FRANKLY DON'T SEE IT BECAUSE I DO SEE NUMBERS TO WORK WITH.

I'M NOT HAPPY WITH HOW BIG THEY ARE, BUT I DO SEE NUMBERS TO WORK WITH.

SO I SEE LEGAL CHALLENGES TO THE IDEA THAT WE'RE IN AN EMERGENCY DEFICIT.

SO THAT AND I DON'T I DON'T MEAN ANY OF THAT TO REBUT YOUR POINT, BUT TO ACTUALLY ADD TO IT, BECAUSE THIS IS VERY, VERY COMPLICATED SITUATION WITH BOTH JIM AND THE REST OF THE BOARD. IT JUST IS.

IT'S VERY TOUGH. MY ONLY DILEMMA IS WE'RE COUNTING FUNDS THAT REALISTICALLY, HAD WE HAD THOSE PERSONNEL FAILED IN, WOULD WE HAVE HAD THAT MONEY TO PUT BACK IN THE FUND? AND THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR YEARS.

SO FOR YEARS, LIKE YOU SAID, OUR FUN BUDGET HAS OUR FUN BALANCE, HAS ALL THIS MONEY IN IT.

BUT IS IT ON PEOPLE THAT'S NOT ACTUALLY WORKING THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN WORKING? SO WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT MONEY AS IF IT WAS MONEY FROM GROWTH WHEN HONESTLY, IT WASN'T.

IT WAS MONEY THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN SPENT FOR PERSONNEL THAT REALLY SHOULD HAVE BEEN USED.

SO WITH OUR BALANCE, BE AS BIG AS IT IS NOW, IF WE WERE FUNDING WHERE IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN FUNDED BECAUSE WE GOT ALL THAT MONEY BACK, NOT FROM GROWTH, WE GOT MONEY BACK BECAUSE PEOPLE WASN'T IN THOSE JOBS THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN.

SO THAT'S MY ONLY DILEMMA WITH WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

AND JUST LIKE WHAT HE SAID, I TOTALLY AGREE.

WE SHOULDN'T INCREASE MONEY IF WE HAVE THE MONEY TECHNICALLY.

DO WE REALLY HAVE THE MONEY? REALLY HAVE IT? NO, WE DIDN'T HAVE THOSE PEOPLE.

DO WE HAVE IT THIS YEAR AND DO WE HAVE IT IN IN THE NEXT FEW FISCAL YEARS COMING IN? YES. NEW CONSTRUCTION IS WORTH $4 MILLION WORTH OF REVENUE THIS YEAR AT A CLIP OF ONE AND ONE HALF TIMES LAST YEAR'S NEW CONSTRUCTION.

WHAT DO YOU THINK NEXT YEAR'S NEW CONSTRUCTION IS GOING TO BE IN COMPARISON TO THIS YEAR? SO ARE WE GOING TO GET ADDITIONAL REVENUE? BECAUSE A NEW CONSTRUCTION FOR THE NEXT COUPLE FISCAL YEARS.

ABSOLUTELY. THERE'S NO THERE'S NO WAY THAT WE DON'T WRITE THE ASSESSMENT THAT IS BEING MADE HERE IS AS THAT NEW CONSTRUCTION COMES ON THE BOOKS, WOULDN'T WE WANT TO HIT THEM WITH A HEALTHY MILITARY TO GET THE MOST THAT WE COULD OUT OF THAT? SURE. THEORETICALLY, IF I COULD HIT EVERYBODY NEW THAT'S NEVER LIVED IN PALM BAY AND THAT'S MOVING TO A SITE THAT SOMEONE JUST CREATED VALUE OUT OF SWAMP LAND.

I'D LOVE TO DO THAT, BUT UNFORTUNATELY I'M GOING TO HAVE TO RAISE IT FOR MYSELF AND EVERYONE ELSE ON THIS BOARD WHO HAS A HOME IN THE ESTABLISHED CITY, WHO HAS ALREADY BEEN PAYING TAXES FOR YEARS AND YEARS AND BEEN DEALING WITH THIS LOW LEVEL OF SERVICE.

SO WHEN OUR MILITARY SNEAKS TOWARDS ROLL BACK AND THE IDEA THAT OUR CITIZENS IN THE INTERIOR OF OUR CITY WON'T SEE THEIR TAXES GO UP, BUT I KNOW FOR SURE THAT MY CITY'S REVENUE WILL GO UP, AT LEAST IN THE SHORT TERM, WHICH IS ALL EVEN THOUGH I HAVE THIS LONG TERM VISION.

THAT'S WHY I SHARED MY LONG TERM VISION WITH YOU.

I'M TRYING TO THINK WHAT I AND ME AND WE AND THE BOARD CAN DO IN THE SHORT TERM.

IN THE SHORT TERM, TO LIVE WITHIN WHAT WE HAVE.

I THINK WE CAN HIGHLIGHT THE FACT THAT THAT NEW REVENUE IS COMING.

IT WOULD BE GREAT TO CAPITALIZE ON IT GREATER, BUT THE ONLY WAY TO CAPITALIZE ON IT GREATER IS TO MR. WHITE'S POINT TO CAPITALIZE UPON THE CURRENT RESIDENTS OF THE CITY.

AND IF IS AT A ROLLBACK RATE AND WE'RE ALMOST NEAR A ROLLBACK RATE, I UNDERSTAND WHY THERE IS CAUTION BEHIND FALLING UNDER IT.

IT'S JUST ILLOGICAL FROM THE MUNICIPAL MANAGEMENT PERSPECTIVE.

BUT WE'RE NOT AT IT NOW.

WE WEREN'T NEAR IT THERE WHEN THAT GRAPH CAME OUT AND NOW THE CAP HAS DONE ITS THING AND IT'S GOTTEN US TO WHERE WE'RE AT.

SO AGAIN, WITHOUT MAKING IT TOO MUCH OF A CONVERSATION ABOUT SHOULD THE CAP STAY OR SHOULD THE CAT GO, WHICH I THINK THAT WE SHOULD TALK ABOUT IN THE CORRECT TIMES AND PLACES, AND WE SHOULD DEFINITELY TALK WITH OUR NEIGHBORS ABOUT AND FOLKS SHOULD TAKE IT VERY SERIOUSLY WHEN THEY VOTE ON THAT.

AMONGST ALL OUR CHARTER AMENDMENTS THIS FALL, THEY SHOULD TAKE THIS ONE VERY SERIOUSLY BECAUSE THERE ARE MERITS TO BE HAD FOR ELIMINATING THE CAP.

THERE ARE MERITS TO BE HAD FOR KEEPING THE CAP.

BUT THIS CONVERSATION IS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023.

[02:00:01]

AND I THINK THAT I THINK WE WILL GO IN CIRCLES IF WE DON'T DELINEATE THE TWO WE CAN.

THERE'S SO MUCH HEALTHY DEBATE AND CONVERSATION TO HAVE.

WHAT SHOULD ALL OF US DO AS VOTERS IN NOVEMBER? SHOULD CAP BE ABOLISHED OR NOT? THAT'S NOT THAT'S NOT TONIGHT'S BUSINESS.

TONIGHT'S BUSINESS IS DO WE ADVOCATE FOR GOING ABOVE IT BASED UPON THE STATE OF EMERGENCY? AND I'M JUST GOING TO SAY ONE MORE TIME, I DON'T SEE THAT EMERGENCY.

NOW, MS.. BEITAR, YOU WAITED PATIENTLY OVER THERE.

I WOULD LIKE TO COME YOUR WAY OR YOU'RE ALL GOOD.

I WAS GOING TO JUST SIMPLY SAY THAT PER FEMA, COVID IS AN EMERGENCY.

THAT'S WHY THEY GAVE US $18 MILLION.

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT GAVE OUR CITY $18 MILLION TO DEAL WITH.

AND I APOLOGIZE FOR INTERRUPTING.

NO, NO, THAT'S OKAY. BUT IT'S NOT LIKE A 30 DAY EVENT.

AND AND VERY FRANKLY, IN THE NEXT DECADE, WHEN WE LOOK BACK, WE'LL BE ACTUALLY ABLE TO FACTUALLY COME UP WITH HOW IT WAS AFFECTING THE PEOPLE TODAY.

HINDSIGHT'S ALWAYS 2020.

AND I CAN ALSO SAY, FACTUALLY SPEAKING, WE'RE ABOUT TO HIT A RECESSION.

THIS IS A FACT.

IT'S AN UGLY FACT.

BUT IT IS A FACT.

IT'S NOT WHAT I'M MAKING UP.

IT'S WHAT'S GOING ON PER THE FEDERAL RESERVE.

SO WITH THAT BEING SAID TO ME, THOSE ARE CLEAR INDICATORS ON WHAT WE CAN ANTICIPATE FOR THE FUTURE.

I THINK THAT TO EXPECT THINGS ARE GOING TO BE CONFETTI AND AWESOME AND FABULOUS IS SHORTSIGHTED BECAUSE LIFE IS NOT LIKE THAT.

AND THE IDEA THAT WE HAVE A UNIQUE OPPORTUNITY GIVEN THE EMERGENCY CIRCUMSTANCES AND I'LL TAKE IT ONE STEP FURTHER WE HAVE A WAR GOING ON THAT'S AFFECTED THE GAS PRICES IN A WAY NOBODY ANTICIPATED.

WE HAVE UNPRECEDENTED INFLATION.

AND YOU KNOW WHAT? UNDER NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES, I'D SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT, WE NEED TO ROLL IT BACK.

WE NEED TO BE CONCERNED.

BUT RIGHT NOW, WITH VALUES BEING GOOD AND THERE'S A UNIQUE OPPORTUNITY TO TRY TO GET AHEAD OF THIS WAVE AND REALLY THE ROAD MAINTENANCE.

YOU KEEP HARPING ON THIS ONE.

HASN'T BEEN FUNDED EFFICIENTLY IN EVER.

WE WON'T EVEN GET INTO THAT.

IT'S LIKE, AGAIN, BEATING THE DEAD HORSE.

BUT. I THINK IF WE HAD THE ABILITY TO ACTUALLY MOVE THE PARADE FORWARD IN THE MANNER THAT IT SHOULD BE, THOSE FUNDS, THOSE EXTRA FUNDS SHOULD GO STRAIGHT TO THAT.

ANYTHING OVER AND ABOVE SHOULD GO RIGHT THERE.

IT SHOULD BE THERE ANYWAYS, TO BE FRANK.

AND TO THE LADIES ON THE BOARDS POINT HERE.

THE FUNDS THAT WE ARE ALL ARGUING OVER RIGHT NOW ARE FUGAZI, BECAUSE THEY REPRESENT FUNDS THAT WOULDN'T NORMALLY BE THERE HAD WE NOT BEEN UNDERFUNDED FOR SALARIES AND POSITIONS IN THE CITY.

SO AGAIN, WE'RE ARGUING OVER FUGAZI BECAUSE THERE'S NOTHING THERE.

IT'S SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE FIXED THAT WE'RE BENEFITING FROM TODAY, THAT THAT'S IT.

SO IF WE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO RAISE THE RATES AND CALL IT AN EMERGENCY, SET THE FUNDS ASIDE, MAKE THE ROADS BETTER. GET THE PARADE MOVING FORWARD IN THE DIRECTION WE NEED.

WITH REGARDS TO THE ROADS, THEN SO BE IT.

THAT'S WHAT I SAY.

NOTED. THANK YOU.

I COME TO THIS SIDE OF THE BOARD.

LOVE. YOU SEEM READY, MS..

CONLEY, PLEASE.

I AM. AND YOU'RE ON, SO YOU JUST GO RIGHT AHEAD.

WAY. OUR CONVERSATIONS ARE USELESS.

WE'LL FIND OUT EQUALLY.

WE ARE IN A STATE OF EMERGENCY.

IT'S CLEAR.

SESSION. JOBS.

YES. WE'RE IN AN EMERGENCY.

CRISIS. WE MAY BE FEELING IT LESS.

UM. I DON'T KNOW.

I THINK CITY COUNCIL REQUESTED THAT THEY NOT AT THE LAST MEETING WITH THE ATTORNEY ABOUT.

[02:05:08]

AND I DON'T WANT TO PUT ANY WORDS IN YOUR MOUTH.

SO PLEASE, I JUST I DID WANT TO ADD, AS ALL THE CONVERSATIONS GOING ON JUST DIDN'T HAVE A CHANCE.

SO THERE'S TWO PARTS TO THE CHARTER.

IT SAYS IN THERE THAT YOU CAN.

HAVE A SUPERMAJORITY VOTE TO EXCEED THE CAP BASED ON AN EMERGENCY OR A CRITICAL NEED.

HOW THAT'S GOING TO BE DEFINED.

I MEAN, THE POINT IS GOOD.

WE'VE ONLY USED THE EMERGENCY SIDE OF THAT, AND THAT WAS BECAUSE OF A HURRICANE.

ONE PLUS ONE EQUALS TWO FOR ME TO.

YOU KNOW, THIS IS NOT THE PLATFORM FOR ME TO TRY TO WAX ELOQUENT ABOUT HOW I WOULD DEFINE A CRITICAL NEED.

IT REALLY IS GOING TO BE A LEGAL DISCUSSION.

AND IF THE CITY ATTORNEY ADVISES THAT SHE CAN SUPPORT SAYING THINGS LIKE EXPANDING YOUR PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES IS A CRITICAL NEED, THEN THAT'S WHERE WE'LL BE.

IF SHE SAYS WE CAN'T, THAT'S WHERE WE'LL BE TOO.

SO I JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT TO THE CONVERSATION, BECAUSE I'M NOT CERTAINLY APPROACHING IT FROM AN EMERGENCY STANDPOINT, ALTHOUGH THE COVID CONVERSATION THAT'S THAT'S AN INTERESTING POINT. AND WE ARE IN A VERY STRANGE PLACE IN THE WORLD, BUT IT'S FOR ME, I'M LOOKING AT THE CRITICAL NEEDS SIDE OF THAT AND HOW THAT WOULD BE DEFINED AND OR JUSTIFIED.

WILL THE ATTORNEY HAVE AN ANSWER? WELL, I'M HOPING THAT SHE AND I CAN TALK ABOUT THIS AND BE READY FOR THE JULY 5TH COUNCIL WORKSHOP, BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE THE MOST APPROPRIATE TIME TO SAY AND ESTABLISH, YES, YOU CAN DO THIS OR NO, YOU CAN'T.

AND IF THE ANSWER IS YES, YOU CAN, AND COUNSEL WANTS TO CONTINUE DOWN THE SUPERMAJORITY VOTE PATH, THEN WE WOULD HAVE WHAT WE NEEDED SO THAT THEY COULD FEEL COMFORTABLE TO GIVE US THAT DIRECTION. IT IS JUST A WORKSHOP, SO THEY CAN ONLY JUST GIVE US DIRECTION VERSUS FORMALLY VOTE ON THINGS.

BUT THAT WOULD BE WE NEED TO HAVE IT READY FOR THEM.

SO ONE THING I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IN OUR REPORT IS THAT WE HAVE HELPED DEFINE, I THINK TONIGHT WHAT WE CALL CRITICAL NEED. AND SO I THINK THAT'S OF SERVICE.

I DID. THAT IS.

YOU MENTIONED THIS IS ON.

SIDE. A SMILE ON MY FACE MAKES ME HAPPY.

LIVE IN A CITY.

OKAY. AND IF WE DID HAVE $8.

UNDERSTAND YOUR WORRY THAT IT WOULD.

SORRY TO HAVE TO GO BACK INTO THE GENERAL FUND, BUT I DON'T THINK.

BECAUSE I WOULD TAKE 3 MILLION AND PLOP IT RIGHT.

WHAT WE NEED ON ONE YEAR ROAD FUND.

JUST ONE. 3 MILLION.

I WOULD TAKE WHATEVER IT TAKES TO GET EVERY SEWER EVERY.

OR. I WOULD GIVE PEOPLE I SAW THAT I WOULD DO THINGS THAT I WOULD FUND A SOLAR. FOR THERE.

FPL IS WORKING WITH US IN THE SOLAR FIELDS.

I WOULD GIVE MORE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AND MORE PEOPLE GETTING OFF THE GRID.

COUNCILMAN FOSTER TALKS ABOUT.

WELL, IN ADDITION TO THAT, I WOULD START A WHOLE PROGRAM OF IF WE HAVE FUNDS AND CAN PUT THAT MONEY IMMEDIATELY TO.

HOW WE COULD DO IT WOULD BE TO HIRE PEOPLE THROUGH.

PEOPLE. SIMILAR TO HABITAT HIRE PEOPLE TO BUILD THEIR OWN HOMES.

MAKE IT A COMBINATION.

THEY GET PAID AND THEN THEY GET THE HOME.

THE CITY THAT $8 MILLION COULD BE FUNDED OR THINGS REGARDING AGRICULTURE? NO, WE'RE GOING TO BE IN A CRISIS.

OUR WATER.

PUT PEOPLE TO WORK AND DO IT CREATIVELY.

GO LOCAL. EVERYTHING WE'RE DOING NOW.

IN FACT. IT CHIPS.

THE PAPERS.

UM. SO THAT 8 MILLION I COULD COME UP WITH AN.

RIGHT. SET IT TO.

YOU END UP WITH SURPLUS FUNDS.

WHAT BUILDS CONFIDENCE IS.

NO. AND ALSO HAVING OUR CITIZENS.

BENEFIT. SO.

[02:10:07]

I. IT'LL RESOLVE ITSELF.

YEAH, I THINK THAT US ON THE BOARD ARE CLOSER IN THOUGHT THAN.

THAN ANY OF US MAY OR MAY THINK WHILE WE'RE, WHILE WE'RE HEARING THE OTHER TALK.

AND I JUST WANT TO SAY, YOU KNOW, FOR CONVERSATION'S SAKE, IF NOT FOR THE RECORD, THAT FULLY AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT THAT THERE'S NOT ENOUGH MONEY HERE, I'M JUST BRINGING INTO ACKNOWLEDGMENT THE WAYS THAT WE GET MORE MONEY MECHANICALLY WHAT THOSE LOOK LIKE.

THOSE LOOK LIKE CHARGING PEOPLE MORE TAXES.

THOSE LOOK LIKE GOING ABOVE AND BEYOND A CHARTER AMENDMENT THAT'S IN PLACE AND THERE'S LEGAL STANDARDS TO MEET.

SO THAT'S JUST WHERE I HANG OUT.

TO THAT DEGREE, I SAT ON THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION.

THE SHOULD THE CAP BE ABOLISHED CAME UP.

I ADAMANTLY SAID NO, AND I WANTED TO HAVE A DIALOG ABOUT RAISING THE CAP, BUT DISMISSED WHATEVER. I ACTUALLY WASN'T THERE FOR THE FIRST CONVERSATION.

THEN ONE OF MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS SOMEHOW GOT THE ATTENTION OF THE BOARD.

GOOD FOR HIM TO ALLOW TO BE HEARD OUT TO SAY, HEY, CAN WE AT LEAST HAVE A PRESENTATION THAT SAYS THIS IS WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE IF WE RAISE THE CAP AS OPPOSED TO ABOLISH IT? WE HAD A PRESENTATION, WE HAD THE, THE CONSULTANT, YOU KNOW, STANTEC.

COM AS COLLINS CAME, I THINK MR. WOJCIECHOWSKI WAS THERE AS WELL.

EVERYBODY CAME OUT AND WE HAVE THIS CONVERSATION AND WE GO THROUGH THE MODELS AND WE TALK ABOUT RAISING IT.

AND MR. CHANDLER, THE OTHER COMMISSIONER, HIS PROPOSITION WAS TO RAISE IT TO EITHER FIVE OR SIX.

I JUST SAY ROUND NUMBERS. RIGHT? LET'S LOOK AT THREE. LET'S LOOK AT SIX.

WHAT WOULD DOUBLE IN IT MEAN? AND ANYWAYS, MOST OF THE PRESENTATION WE LOOKED AT FIVE AND YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE NUMBERS STARTED TO LINE UP.

BUT THEN THERE WAS SOME DISCREPANCIES BECAUSE THE CAPITAL IS NOT IN THERE.

WHATEVER CONVERSATION FIZZLED OUT.

AND THEN AT THE END OF IT, THE BOARD SAYS, OKAY, WELL, WE ALREADY VOTED THAT.

WE'RE GOING TO WE'RE JUST GOING TO SEND OUT THAT IT SHOULD BE ABOLISHED.

SO WHATEVER.

SO I ONLY TELL YOU GUYS THAT STORY.

IT'S ALL IN THE ARCHIVES PUBLIC RECORD.

I TELL YOU THAT STORY TO SAY, LIKE, I'M A PERSON THAT WANTS TO GET TO A REASONABLE SOLUTION HERE.

I JUST KNOW THE FACTS OF THE MATTER.

THERE'S LEGAL STANDARDS OUT THERE.

AND ONE THING THAT WAS TOUTED ON THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION, IF YOU DO WATCH THE VIDEO BACK, YOU'LL HEAR THIS NARRATIVE.

SO I'LL TELL IT TO YOU NOW IS WELL, IT WAS NEVER LEGAL IN THE FIRST PLACE.

SO IF IT WAS LEGALLY CHALLENGED, YOU KNOW, THE CHALLENGER WOULD LOSE.

WELL, THE ONLY PERSON THAT WOULD BRING FORTH A LEGAL CHALLENGE WOULD BE THE CITY.

SO THE CITY WOULD LITERALLY THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE WOULD HAVE TO UTILIZE THEIR TAXPAYER FUNDED RESOURCES TO BRING A CASE AGAINST, I DON'T KNOW, ITSELF, THE CITIZENRY, WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT, TO BUST IT OR ABOLISH IT.

THE POINT IS MOOT. THE FACT IS THE CAP IS HERE.

IT'S AN AGREED UPON. IT'S A SOCIAL CONTRACT AT THIS POINT, LET ALONE ENFORCEABLE BY COURTS, BECAUSE THAT WAS THE THING.

WELL WELL, IT'S NOT REALLY ENFORCEABLE BY COURTS.

SO IT WAS ALMOST INDICATED.

WELL, LET IT GO TO COURT.

LET IT NOT GO TO COURT, BECAUSE IF IT GOES TO COURT, ALL IT'S GOING TO DO IS COST THE CITY MONEY.

IT'S GOING TO MAKE THE CITY MONEY.

RIGHT. SO IT BECOMES A SOCIAL CONTRACT AT A CERTAIN POINT.

AND THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THIS, MANY PEOPLE SAID YES TO THIS LANGUAGE UNTIL THIS MANY PEOPLE SAY YES OR NO TO NEW LANGUAGE.

IN THIS INSTANCE, IT WOULD BE YES.

THE CHARTER AMENDMENT IS TO REDACT ALL OF THAT STUFF, OR SO IT SHALL BE.

SO THE ANSWER THIS NOVEMBER WOULD BE YES.

REDACT THE CAP UNTIL THE PUBLIC DOES THAT.

WE MECHANICALLY, AS AN ADVISORY BOARD, I DON'T FIND OURSELVES TO BE WITHIN OUR RIGHTS TO ADVISE GOING AGAINST WHAT'S WRITTEN IN BLACK AND WHITE LEGAL PRECEDENT, LEGAL STANDARD, JUST BECAUSE WE CAN I TAKE THAT HAT OFF AS TRYING TO JUST GET THE BUSINESS OF THIS BOARD TAKEN CARE OF AND TALK TO YOU GUYS HUMBLY AS A CITIZEN OF THIS SAME CITY THAT YOU LIVE IN.

YEAH, I WANT US TO SOLVE THESE PROBLEMS. I REALLY DO.

AND I AND I DON'T THINK THAT THIS 3% CAP IS DOING US MANY FAVORS, BUT I WILL NOT BUY INTO A NARRATIVE THAT IT DOES US NO FAVORS.

AND I WON'T LAMENT THE FACT THAT IT HAS BROUGHT OUR CITIZENS CLOSER TO ROLLBACK.

I CAN'T LAMENT THAT BECAUSE EACH OF THE HOUSEHOLDS IN THIS CITY ADDS UP TO WHAT THIS WHOLE CITY IS.

AND IN EACH HOUSEHOLD, THE FACT THAT IT IS COMING DOWN TOWARDS A ROLLBACK WHILE THE VALUES ARE GOING UP IS HELPING PEOPLE.

IT'S HELPING PEOPLE.

MR. WHITE USED THE STATISTIC, YOU KNOW, HE TALKED ABOUT ONE OF THE QUOTES WAS THAT THE CITY'S PORTION AT 75 VALUATION WOULD GO UP 10%.

IT'S ONLY 50 BUCKS.

WE CAN SAY IT'S ONLY 50 BUCKS HERE AND THERE, BUT JUST FROM THE CITY, IF WE DO WHAT WE HOPE WE COULD FROM A SUSTAINABILITY PERSPECTIVE.

CONNELLY AND MAKE EVERYBODY THAT CAN SIGN UP FOR UTILITIES AND GET ON SEWER, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE A UTILITY BILL, YOU KNOW, UTILITY DEPARTMENTS ON SCHEDULE TO RAISE

[02:15:08]

JUST GOT NOTIFICATION FROM THE COUNTY THAT THE GARBAGE THING IS GOING TO GO UP, YOU KNOW, ALL IN ALL BY LIKE 15% OVER THREE FISCAL YEARS.

AND THE TRICK OF THAT IS.

WE HERE IN THE CITY OF PALM BAY PAY THE CITY THROUGH THE UTILITIES DEPARTMENT TO PAY REPUBLIC TO COME PICK IT UP, TO GO TAKE IT TO THE DUMP THAT WE PAY TO USE ANYWAY.

RIGHT. SO ALL OF THIS IS HAPPENING.

EVERYTHING IS INCREASING NO MATTER WHAT.

EVERYBODY'S BILLS ARE INCREASING.

MISS BEAUCHAMP DID THE BEST ABOUT SAYING WHAT'S OUT THERE.

INFLATION, TALKING ABOUT THE MILK, TALKING ABOUT GAS, TALKING ABOUT EVERYTHING.

IT'S SO CORRECT.

I AGREE WITH HER WHOLEHEARTEDLY BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT MY HOUSE IS DEALING WITH.

I'M FILLING UP AN SUV FOR DAMN NEAR $100 FOR A LITTLE TINY SUV.

I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT A PICKUP TRUCK OR ANYTHING ELSE LIKE THAT.

AN SUV AT DAMN NEAR $100.

I CAN'T MAKE THESE THINGS ADD UP, BUT THE ONE THING THAT I CAN FIND SOME SOLACE IN IS THAT THERE IS NO WAY THAT MY PROPERTY TAXES CAN JUST BOUNCE OUT.

THERE'S NO WAY THAT MY PROPERTY TAXES CAN EVEN BOUNCE UP TO THE REGULATIONS THAT THE STATE HAS.

THERE'S NO WAY THAT ANYBODY ON MY CITY COUNCIL'S DYAS CAN GET EMOTIONAL AND SAY, HEY, BECAUSE THE HORIZON LOOKS BAD, LET'S BE SELF PRESERVATIVE FOR THE CITY AND LET'S MAKE SURE WE TAKE IN SOME MORE MONEY.

RIGHT NOW I'M PROTECTED AND I'M SAFE BECAUSE AMONGST OTHERS, 70% OF THE VOTING CONGLOMERATE IN 2016, THE CITY DECLARED, WE WOULD LIKE THIS FORM OF PROTECTION AND WE GOT THAT FORM OF PROTECTION.

SO NOW THAT THE FORM OF PROTECTION IS IN PLACE, WE LIVE WITHIN IT.

WE WANT TO TALK TO OUR NEIGHBORS AND WE WANT TO ADVOCATE FOR IT TO BE REMOVED AND SO ON.

DO SO GO PRACTICE THAT DEMOCRATIC RIGHT.

GO TALK TO PEOPLE, GET THEM REGISTERED TO VOTE.

THERE'S 120,000 PEOPLE HERE, ONLY 80,000 REGISTERED VOTE.

THAT'S RIDICULOUS. TWO THIRDS OF THE POPULATION WE NEED AT LEAST THREE QUARTERS OF OUR POPULATION REGISTERED TO VOTE.

SO GO TALK TO YOUR NEIGHBORS, GET THEM REGISTERED TO VOTE AND GET THEM TO VOTE TO TAKE THE DARN CAP OFF.

AND I'LL BE SITTING ON THIS BOARD NEXT YEAR.

I'LL STILL BE THE CHAIR IF YOU GUYS WILL ALLOW ME AND WE'LL HAVE CONVERSATION THAT DOESN'T EXIST.

I CAN'T HAVE THAT CONVERSATION TONIGHT BECAUSE IT DOES EXIST.

AND MY SELFISH POINT, NOBODY ENTERTAINED THE IDEA OF RAISING IT.

WHAT I DID ENTERTAIN THE IDEA OF GOING FORWARD TO TO THE VOTING PUBLIC AND SAYING, HEY, TEAM, I KNOW YOU WANT A SAFETY.

I KNOW WE AGREED TO 3% AT THE TIME.

IT WAS PROBABLY SOLD TO YOU AS 3% IS RIGHT AROUND THE CONSUMER PRICE INDEX.

SO HEY, 3% IS GOING TO BE A 3% RAISE.

WE GET A 3% RAISE.

IT ALL MAKE SENSE, RIGHT? THAT'S NOT EXISTENT ANYMORE.

CONSUMER PRICE INDEX, THE RATE OF INFLATION, EVERYTHING ELSE IS EIGHT, NINE, 10%.

THINGS THAT ARE BASED ON CONSUMER PRICE INDEX RIGHT NOW ARE AT 9%.

SO IT WOULD BE VERY REASONABLE TO GO TO THAT PUBLIC TODAY AND SAY, HEY, TEAM, WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO RAISE OUR PAY 6%.

WE'VE BEEN GIVING OURSELVES 3% RAISES THE PAST COUPLE OF YEARS.

WE NEED IT TO BE 6%.

AND WE KNOW THAT THAT'S ASKING A LOT OF YOU.

WE KNOW THAT'S GOING TO INCREASE YOUR BILL.

WE KNOW, WE KNOW, WE KNOW.

BUT WE HAVE TO DO IT BECAUSE EVERYTHING ALL FIVE OF US SAID TONIGHT.

BUT THAT'S NOT THE PROPOSITION.

THE PROPOSITION IS WE NEED TO GO FROM THIS RULE, WHICH MANY PEOPLE FIND INEFFECTIVE TO THE OLD WAY.

AND THE OLD WAY IS THE ONLY THING THAT LED US TO THIS SITUATION THAT WE'RE AT.

AND AS I TALK MYSELF IN CIRCLES AND SAY, I DON'T WANT TO TALK TOO MUCH MORE ABOUT VOTING THE CAP OFF OR NOT, WE HAVE TO COME TO A CONCLUSION IN THIS MEETING IN 11 MINUTES BECAUSE WE HAVE A CURFEW AT 9:00 ON THIS BOARD.

WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO PRESENT TO THE COUNCIL.

SO I'M NOT GOING TO MAKE ANY SORT OF MOTION OR ANYTHING, BUT I AM GOING TO SAY THAT AS THE PERSON PRESENTING, I WOULD NOT FEEL RIGHT, NOT PRESENTING THE WILL OF THE BOARD, AND I WOULD ALSO NOT FEEL RIGHT, NOT PRESENTING MY OWN PERSONAL WILL AS A MAN, AS A PERSON, AS A HUMAN BEING, AS AN INDIVIDUAL, AS RANDALL, THE PERSON.

SO I AM LEANING TOWARDS TRYING MY BEST TO SUMMARIZE THIS BEAUTIFUL, HEALTHY CONVERSATION WE HAD TONIGHT IN SAYING THAT WE'RE STUMPED AS THEY ARE.

WE'RE STUMPED AS THEY ARE.

WE KNOW THAT THERE'S MORE MONEY NEEDED.

WE KNOW THAT THERE'S THIS MECHANISM HERE.

WE DON'T KNOW IF THEY CAN BREAK IT OR NOT.

WE DON'T KNOW IF IT'S THEIR WILL TO BREAK IT, BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY, IF IT'S NOT MY WILL TO BREAK IT, IF IT'S NOT SOMEONE ELSE IS ON THIS BOARD, WE'LL IF WE ALL VOTE THAT IT SHOULD NOT BE BROKEN AND WE COULD ADVISE THAT UP.

BUT IF THERE'S A SUPERMAJORITY, A COUNCIL THAT'S GOING TO DO IT AND THE CITY ATTORNEY SAYS THEY CAN THEY'RE GOING TO DO IT RIGHT.

SO LET US NOT LIMIT OUR ADVICE TO WHAT WE THINK IS GOING TO BE ADOPTED.

LET'S JUST GIVE THE ADVICE THAT WE'RE CAPABLE OF.

AND I CAN ONLY SEE RIGHT NOW, AND I'LL ENTERTAIN ANY FORMS OF MOTIONS OR OTHER DIALOG.

I CAN ONLY SEE RIGHT NOW EXPLAINING THAT THIS SITUATION IS IS SO TOUGH THAT THAT THERE WAS HARDLY A MAJORITY IF THERE WAS.

BUT AGAIN, THAT IS MY GROSS SUMMARY.

THAT IS NOTHING OFFICIAL.

IF ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO PIPE IN, PLEASE DO.

I GOT A QUESTION. YES, MA'AM.

SO YOUR APPREHENSION IN REGARDS TO KEEPING THE RATE WHERE IT IS IS BECAUSE WE LEGALLY DON'T HAVE A STANCE TO SAY IT'S EMERGENCY OR CRITICAL NEED.

[02:20:06]

SO WE'RE JUST ASSUMING THAT THE IDEALS AND THINGS THAT WE'RE SAYING IS REASONS FOR EMERGENCY OR CRITICAL NEED THE PANDEMIC.

FROM YOUR BASIS, YOU'RE JUST ASSUMING THAT IT'S GOING TO BE SHOT DOWN.

IF I WERE TO MOVE FORWARD IN A STRONG STANCE THAT SAYS WE HAVE NO POSSIBLE EMERGENCY JUSTIFICATION HERE.

YES. AND THAT'S WHY I DON'T WANT TO THAT'S WHY I'M NOT ADVOCATING FOR SUCH.

THAT'S WHY I'M MORE STUCK.

IF WE DON'T HAVE A CONCLUSION, THEN TRYING TO COME TO LET'S JUST SAY IT'S BOTH SIDES HERE.

IT'S NOT. WE KNOW HOW IT'S WEIGHTED HERE.

BUT I'M NOT TRYING TO COME TO YOU GUYS AND SAY, YOU KNOW, YOU DIDN'T MEAN MUCH TO THE CITY ATTORNEY HAS NOTHING FOR YOU, SO WE CAN'T DO YOUR PLAN.

I'M NOT TRYING TO TURN TO THIS SIDE OF THE BOARD AND SAY, HEY, YEP.

YOU KNOW, THE CITY ATTORNEY HAS SAID THAT THERE IS AN EMERGENCY, SO WE NEED TO GO THAT WAY BECAUSE WE CAN.

SO WE DON'T KNOW HOW REASONABLE OR FEASIBLE IT IS TO ADVOCATE FOR THAT.

SO I WOULD JUST IF IT PLEASED THE BOARD, I WOULD JUST SHARE THE SENTIMENTS THAT WERE LISTED, THE NEEDS THAT WE SEE, THE FACT THAT MULTIPLE PEOPLE ON THE BOARD VERY PASSIONATELY DO FEEL LIKE THEY WOULD WANT TO BREAK THE CAP.

IF ANYBODY WANTS TO MAKE A MOTION AND CREATE A MAJORITY AGAIN, I'LL TAKE THAT.

I'LL TALK ABOUT THAT. NO PROBLEM.

YOU KNOW, IN THIS EXAMPLE, THERE WAS A MAJORITY THAT SAID THEY WOULD LIKE TO BREAK IT.

THE ONLY THING WE GOT HELD UP ON WAS THE LEGAL JUSTIFICATION, BECAUSE I DON'T SEE THAT WE PASSED THAT MUSTER TONIGHT.

I DON'T SEE THAT WE DO.

BUT PERHAPS IF I'M TO SAY THAT THIS WAS THE OPINION, BUT WE DIDN'T HAVE IT, AND THEN IN THE SAME EXACT MEETING, WHICH WOULD BE THE CIRCUMSTANCE, THE CITY ATTORNEY SAYS THAT THEY THAT SHE DOES OR DOESN'T HAVE IT.

THEN COUNCIL CAN TAKE OUR ADVICE, OUR LEARNINGS, OUR CONVERSATIONS.

THEY CAN TAKE THE CITY ATTORNEY'S ADVICE AND THEY CAN MAKE THE DECISION THAT THEY'RE GOING TO MAKE BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE THE FIVE OF THEM THAT MAKE THE DECISION.

AT THE END OF THE DAY, EVEN IF IT'S THE FOUR THAT WANT TO BE A SUPER MAJORITY AND GET EXCITED, IT'S GOING TO BE THAT WITH THE JUSTIFICATION THAT ALLOWS IT TO GO FORWARD.

SO THAT'S MY POINT IS I WOULD BE REMISS IF I DIDN'T SHARE WITH SIMILAR PASSION THE CRITICAL NEED THAT.

MS.. BEAUCHAMP. MS.. BEITAR, YOU GUYS HAVE SHARED THIS EVENING.

I'D ALSO BE REMISS IF I DIDN'T SHARE THE PASSION THAT I SHARE WITH MR. WHITE THAT EXPLAINED IT THAT I DON'T WANT TO SEE OUR CITIZENS PICKING UP THE OPPORTUNITY, SO TO SPEAK.

I DON'T WANT TO SEE THIS CAPITALIZATION OPPORTUNITY GOING.

I DON'T WANT TO SEE AN EMERGENCY DECLARED SOLELY IN ORDER TO CAPTURE THE MOMENT.

I JUST. I'D BE REMISS IF I SAID I DID ONLY.

YEAH. HAVE.

I SEE YOUR BLANK PIECE OF PAPER IN YOUR PEN.

RIGHT. OKAY.

FIRST OFF, I DON'T WANT US TO KEEP GOING BACK TO A NARROW ISSUE OF DO WE BREAK THE CAP OR NOT? RIGHT. THAT IS OUR FIRST RESPONSIBILITY IS WE ARE A CITIZENS ADVISORY BOARD, OUR CITIZENS AND AS CITIZENS. THE FIRST THING, WE DO HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO US AS CITIZENS THAT THE 3% CAP IS IN PLACE AT THIS POINT.

A SECOND POINT IS THAT.

THERE IS A WE HAVE DEFINED WHAT A CRITICAL NEED AND THAT'S WHAT I WOULD PUT IN THERE SIMILAR TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT WE BELIEVE WE ARE AT A PLACE OF A CRITICAL NEED.

AND BECAUSE OF THAT.

WE HAVE TO CONSIDER NOT ONLY MAINTAINING WHAT WE WOULD DO WITH THE CAP, BUT ALSO IF WE WENT WITH THE OTHER AMOUNT.

AND THAT'S WHAT DISCUSSIONS WE HAD.

BASICALLY WHAT WE'RE GOING TO PRESENT TO COUNCIL, I HOPE YOU WILL, IS THE DILEMMA.

THE PROBLEM, DEFINING THE PROBLEM.

SO THE PROBLEM IS IF WE HAVE TO LIVE WITHIN THE CAP, THEN THE PROBLEM IS CONTINUING TO HAVE THIS REAL CONSTRICTIVE, NARROW WAY OF NOT ADVANCING A SOLUTION OF THE PROBLEM.

IF WE CAN HAVE THE $8 MILLION, THEN WE HAVE RECOMMENDATIONS.

AND THE BIG THING YOU SAID THERE WAS THAT WE RECOMMEND A PLAN FOR SPENDING THOSE FUNDS AND HOLDING THE CITY ACCOUNTABLE.

THAT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING, IS THAT THE CITIZENS GET HEARD AND THAT WE FOLLOW WHAT WE THE CITIZENS.

AT THIS POINT, IT'S THE CAP.

BUT IN LIGHT OF OTHER THINGS, THAT DECISION MAY CHANGE RIGHT NOW.

[02:25:06]

ARE WE AT OUR MINUTE NOW? WE'RE FINE AT THE JULY 5TH MEETING OR B, YOU DO A VERY GOOD YOU HAVE A VERY GOOD PRESENCE AND A VERY GOOD VERBAL STYLE THAT I THINK YOU CAN CAPTURE ALL OF US.

HERE. HEAR, HEARD.

SO EVEN THOUGH WE DON'T AGREE, IT'S AMAZING TO GO TO THE SAME MEETING.

WE HEAR THE SAME STUFF.

YOU DO THE SAME, THE SAME THINGS, BUT IT'S GOOD THAT WE HAVE DIFFERENT INSTITUTIONS AND DIFFERENT OUTCOMES, AND THAT IS WHAT WE'RE ALL ABOUT HERE.

THAT'S RIGHT. IS THERE JUST A MOMENT.

IT'S 857.

THE PROPER PROCEDURE FOR THE BOARD IS THAT WE END AT NINE UNLESS WE HEAR A MOTION TO CONTINUE IN 15 MINUTE INCREMENTS.

SO. OKAY.

I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO EXTEND THE MEETING BY 15 MINUTES.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR. ALL RIGHT.

SO WE'RE GOING TO GO TILL 915.

WAS THAT ALL, MR. WHITE, THAT YOU HAD AT THAT EXACT MOMENT? OKAY. SO JUST TO RESPOND TO MS..

CONLEY DIRECTLY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR FEEDBACK.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR KIND WORDS TOWARDS MYSELF, BUT JUST THANK YOU FOR YOUR FEEDBACK BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO DO.

I WANT TO SHARE THE SENTIMENT OF THE BOARD, BUT THAT IS NOT DONE.

SO IN ONE RECOMMENDATION.

IT'S NOT. WE'RE ON OPPOSITE SIDES IN WE'RE NOT ON OPPOSITE SIDES.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TWO PROBLEMS AT ONCE IS TRUTHFULLY WHERE IT'S AT.

AND EACH PERSON MAY OR MAY NOT BE MORE COMMITTED TOWARDS TALKING ABOUT THAT SIDE FIRST.

BUT THE BOARD HAS A KEEN UNDERSTANDING AND AWARENESS THAT WE ARE IN HORRIBLE SHAPE AS FAR AS CAPITAL INVESTMENT GOES, THAT WE ARE IN MINIMAL SHAPE SO FAR AS INCREMENTAL SPENDING GOES.

WE WE KNOW THAT AND WE KNOW THAT THAT'S A PROBLEM.

AND WE KNOW THAT OUR LEVEL OF SERVICE IS LESS THAN ANY OF US AGREE TO OR WHAT HAVE YOU.

THE PATH FORWARD, WE NEED MORE CLARITY.

AGAIN, NOT THE GETTING RID OF THE CAP ENTIRELY FISCAL YEAR 2032.

MS. BEAUCHAMP TO YOUR POINT IS IF THE SUPERMAJORITY IF A SUPERMAJORITY WAS TO PURSUE RAISING IT, COULD THEY? WE DON'T KNOW THAT.

SO COULD WE MAKE ADVICE THAT THEY SHOULD WITHOUT THEM KNOWING THAT? WITHOUT KNOWING THAT? AND I DON'T WANT TO BE WHERE YOU ARE, AND THAT'S FINE.

AND THAT'S WHY I'M TRYING TO SUM IT UP AS FAR AS I'M HOPING I CAN HELP YOU.

YOU HAVE TO DO THE PRESENTATION INSTEAD OF DOING A RECOMMENDATION IN REGARDS TO, LIKE YOU SAID, YOU WANT TO GIVE A SUMMARY IN REGARDS TO THE FEELING, THE ENERGY, THE SOURCE, SO TO SPEAK, OF WHAT WE'RE FEELING.

SO THEN THEY CAN TAKE WHAT WE'RE FEELING AND MAKE THEIR OWN DECISION.

I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE FEELING.

YES, MA'AM. THAT'S MY GOAL.

EXACTLY, BECAUSE TO COME INTO TONIGHT, IT'S LIKE, HEY, LET'S GET A RECOMMENDATION.

YOU KNOW, BY THE END OF THE CONVERSATION, SOMEONE SAY, YOU KNOW, I RECOMMEND THE MILITARY IS EIGHT AND THEN SECOND VOTE.

RANDALL GOES UP THERE AND SAYS, MAN, MR. MAYOR, THANKS FOR HAVING ME.

IN MANY WORDS, YOU KNOW, EIGHT EIGHTS, THE NUMBER, WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET THERE.

IT'S NOT REALISTIC.

SO I DON'T WANT TO I THAT'S NOT WHERE I WANT TO BE.

THAT'S NOT WHERE YOU WANT ME TO BE.

I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHERE THE REST OF THE BOARD WANTS ME TO BE, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK IT WOULD DO THE ISSUE JUSTICE.

I DON'T WANT TO TRY TO CONVINCE A MAJORITY OR WHAT HAVE YOU.

AND, YOU KNOW, I KNOW HOW THE VOTE WOULD GO RIGHT NOW.

SO EVEN AT THAT, I DON'T WANT TO JUST GO UP THERE AND SIMPLY JUST SAY, YEAH, THIS IS WHAT THE MAJORITY SAID.

I'D RATHER HAVE MY BEST ABILITY.

AND MS.. CONNOLLY, THANK YOU FOR THE COMPLIMENT, BUT JUST TAKE AND SUMMARIZE.

THE KEY FEEL OF IT ALL IS THAT THIS BOARD IS OVERALL IN A TORN STATE OF KNOWING THAT WE HAVE THIS MECHANISM THAT RESTRICTS US AND NOT LOVING IT, BUT KNOWING IT'S THERE AND HAVING A LOT OF TROUBLE WITH THAT.

THAT'S HOW I WOULD SUMMARIZE THIS CONVERSATION.

SO RECOMMENDING THAT WE EXPLORE CRITICAL NEED AND RECOMMENDING THAT WE.

UH. NATION, BUT.

UH. I MEAN, I GUESS I WOULD SAY AT LEAST INDICATING OUR OR FRANKLY, OUR INTEREST IN UNDERSTANDING HOW THEIR CONVERSATIONS GO IN THE WORKSHOP ITSELF.

IF I HAD TO GUESS HOW THE WORKSHOP AGENDA IS GOING TO BE, THEY'RE GOING TO MAKE ME GO FIRST.

SO AS THAT HAPPENS, AS IT DEVELOPS AND THEY DO, BECAUSE THE CONSENSUS OUT OF THE LAST IT WAS A SPECIAL MEETING OUT OF WORKSHOP.

I THINK SO. ANYWAYS, COMING OUT A SPECIAL MEETING, THERE WAS A CONSENSUS FROM A SUPERMAJORITY.

SO NOW THEY'RE LITERALLY AT THE POINT OF LIKE IT'S POSSIBLE OR NOT.

[02:30:03]

THEY WERE LIKE, OH YEAH, IT'S 7.5.

THAT SEEMS INTERESTING.

IT SEEMS INTRIGUING, SO LET'S HAVE THAT DIALOG.

SO I THINK TO COME BEFORE THE COUNCIL AND SAY, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHERE THE THAT'S WHERE THE BOARD WAS LEANING, THAT'S WHERE THE BOARD WAS LEANING TO.

THERE WAS A CONSENSUS.

THERE WAS NOTHING OFFICIAL. WE CAN MAKE IT OFFICIAL IF YOU GUYS DESIRE.

THERE'S NOTHING OFFICIAL. BUT THERE WAS A CONSENSUS THAT STAYING UP THERE WOULD BE GOOD.

OUT OF RESPECT FOR YOU, I DON'T WANT BECAUSE LIKE SHE SAID, YOU HAVE THIS ENERGY AND YOU CAN PRESENT SO WELL.

BUT AT THE SAME TIME I PRESENT TOO.

BUT I WANT TO FEEL COMFORTABLE ABOUT PRESENTING.

YEAH. SO ME BEING A MEMBER, I WOULD NEVER WANT TO BE PUT INTO A SITUATION WHERE I HAVE TO PRESENT BECAUSE I'M GONNA TRY IT TO THE BEST OF MY ABILITY.

BUT IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE PASSION FOR IT, YEAH, IT'S NOT GOING TO COME OFF LIKE THE CHEF.

YEAH. SO I WOULDN'T, I WOULD, I WOULD NOT MAKE A MOTION TO PUT YOU IN A SITUATION TO NOT BE THE CHEF.

SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WHEN YOU DO PRESENT THAT EVERYONE'S REFLECTED AND THEN WE JUST LEAVE IT TO THEM TO TAKE WHAT WE FEEL AND MAKE THEIR OWN DECISION.

THAT'S THAT'S MY OWN THING.

AND I THINK THAT WOULD MAKE YOU FEEL BETTER AND US FEEL BETTER, TOO.

AT THE SAME TIME. IT WOULD.

IT WOULD. AND I JUST HAVE TO SHARE THAT.

THAT'S THAT'S MY ONLY DESIRE EVER.

THAT'S MY ONLY DESIRE.

REPRESENTING THIS BOARD IS THE CHAIR.

YOU KNOW, I'M VICE CHAIR, I'M RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD.

I HAVE MEMBERS OF COUNCIL TALK TO ME AND ASK ME ABOUT THINGS, RECREATION OR WHATEVER.

AND I COME TO THE COUNCIL MEETINGS AND I ALWAYS SAY, YOU KNOW, IF IT'S A P AND Z, I'LL SIT UP HERE ON THE DAIS AT P AND Z, TALK LIKE THE CHEF I TRADEMARK AT P AND Z, TALK RIGHT TO THE DEVELOPER, VOTE NAY FOR WHATEVER.

I MAY STILL COME UP AND TALK TO THE COUNCIL AND I SAY, HEY, LISTEN, THIS IS JUST RANDOM.

NOW, THIS IS NOT REPRESENTATIVE OF THE BOARD, NOT WHATEVER.

RIGHT? BUT THAT'S THE POINT IS FOR ME TO STAND UP THERE, I TAKE A RESPONSIBILITY TO YOU GUYS AS A BOARD.

SO I AM PASSIONATE AND I AM STRONG IN ONE WAY.

I WAS TRYING TO BE A LITTLE BIT VULNERABLE AND SHOW YOU GUYS, I'M NOT AS STRONG AS I MAY APPEAR.

YOU KNOW, I GOT A SOFT SPOT.

I DO. BUT THAT MY MY MAIN GOAL WOULD BE TO FIRST COMMUNICATE THE SENTIMENT OF THE BOARD.

AND IT'S THINGS THAT YOU'RE DESCRIBING, BECAUSE THAT'S THE DUTY THAT I HAVE.

I GET PLENTY OF AT A TIME, THREE, 3 MINUTES, 180 SECONDS AT A TIME ON THAT MICROPHONE.

I WOULD NOT STEAL THIS AVENUE TO TAKE MORE TO EXPAND UPON MY THEORY.

YOU KNOW, I'M GOING TO SHARE THE SENTIMENT OF THE BOARD.

SO THANK YOU, MR. GUITAR. I THINK WHAT YOU GOT.

WELL, I WAS GOING TO SAY THEN, BASED ON EXCUSE ME, BASED ON WHAT I HAVE BEEN LISTENING TO, WE'RE REALLY DISCUSSING.

THE 1.8 MILLION THAT REMAINS AT THE END OF THE DAY.

AND WHEN WE HASH THIS OUT BECAUSE I'M A NUMBERS GIRL.

YES. YES.

WE'RE LOOKING AT ONE POINT TO GOING TO THE POLICE AND FIRE, WHICH LEAVES 600,000.

AND AS FAR AS I CAN HEAR FROM THIS WHOLE CREW, I THINK THE DIRECTION WAS THAT WE WOULD WANT TO PUT THE REST OF THAT RIGHT TO THE ROADS.

JUST IT'S NOT THE SALARIES.

JUST A CORRECTION ON YOUR FIGURES IS WE GOT DOWN TO 1.8 BECAUSE WE STARTED AT 3.5 AND WE PULLED DOWN 1.7 IN HIGH PRIORITY, 1.2 OF WHICH WAS THE PUBLIC SAFETY.

SO THAT BRINGS US TO 1.8 TOTAL.

SO NOW YOU'RE PUBLIC SAFETY IS COVERED.

WE STILL HAVE 1.8.

SO YOU'VE GIVEN ME MORE MONEY.

EXACTLY. SO I LOVE THAT.

YEAH. YEAH. YOU THINK WE'RE IN A CRITICAL EMERGENCY NOW? I'M JUST KIDDING. I'M JUST KIDDING BECAUSE IT WAS JUST TOO GOOD OF AN OPPORTUNITY.

BUT, HEY, I GOT TO TAKE HIM WHERE I GET HIM.

BUT ANYWAY. YES, MA'AM.

SO WHERE WE GOT IN THE PREVIOUS CONVERSATION WAS DRAWING A 3.5 DOWN TO A 1.8 FROM COVERING THE 1.7 AT 1.2 IS IN THAT 1.7, CORRECT? YES. OKAY. SO REALLY, AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE NEED TO GIVE A GIVE DIRECTION OR COME TO AN AGREEMENT AS A GROUP ON WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO WITH THE 1.8.

BUT I WANT TO SAY AS A NOTE.

SAYING IS THAT IF YOU DON'T LIKE WHAT'S HAPPENING, THEN MAYBE YOU NEED TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT.

AND I SAY THAT IN REFLECTION OF THIS DISCUSSION, BECAUSE I THINK THE CONSENSUS HERE IS THAT WE ALL LOVE OUR CITY, ALL OF US HERE, AND WE WANT NOTHING BUT A BETTER PLACE TO LIVE IN.

BUT I THINK GOING FORWARD IN REVIEW OF THE TAX RATE.

AND ANYBODY WHO HAS A BUDGET AT HOME KNOWS THAT IF YOU ARE NOT SUPPORTING WHAT YOU NEED AND YOU ARE ROBBING PETER TO PAY PAUL, AT SOME POINT THIS ALL COMES TO ROOST.

AND I THINK THAT'S REALLY WHERE WE'RE AT.

OKAY. SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOUR PROPOSAL IS FOR THE 1.8.

IF YOU WANT TO TAKE WHAT IS NEEDED FOR THE SALARIES OR FOCUS IT IN THAT DIRECTION, GIVEN THAT WE DO HAVE A SERIOUS ISSUE

[02:35:01]

I MEAN, I'M TORN BETWEEN THAT AND THE ROADS.

THERE IT IS. OR WHAT? YES. SO THE PROPOSITION THAT I HAVE, JUST TO BRING IT ALL FULL CIRCLE AND I APPRECIATE YOU KIND OF LOOPING THAT PART IN BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO OVER, YOU KNOW, LOOK LOOK OVER.

IT IS PRESENT TO THEM THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A CONSENSUS TOWARDS THE IDEA OF A 7.5995 BUT NOT UNDERSTANDING HOW FEASIBLE IT IS WITHIN THE LEGAL PERSPECTIVE, WHAT HAVE YOU.

ALL THAT SAID, WE'RE LOOKING AT THESE CRITICAL NEEDS.

WE'RE SEEING HOW GAPING THEY ARE.

IF WE'RE TO ASSUME THAT YOU GO WITH THE CAT BECAUSE THAT'S THE LOWEST, WE JUST WANT TO ASSUME THE LOWEST, THEN WE WOULD RECOMMEND THAT ONE.

YOU COVER THE 1.7 TO.

YOU LOOK AT THE 1.8.

AND IN THAT, WHAT MY PROPOSITION IS, IF IT'S AGREEABLE, IS I WOULD SAY THAT THE FIRST PRIORITY FOR THAT MONEY SHOULD BE TO MAKE AN IMPACT ON THE STUDY SO FAR AS IF IT'S THE PLAN ISN'T COOKED YET AND WE'RE IN THE WORKSHOP PHASE.

SO THE PLAN HOPEFULLY WILL BE COOKED RIGHT AROUND THE SAME TIME AS THE BUDGET IS, BUT TO MAKE THE BIGGEST IMPACT THAT THEY CAN INITIALLY.

SO IF THEY REALIZE THAT THEY NEED 1.44 FOR THAT ONE TIME BUMP SITUATION, TAKE IT AND ROLL THE REMAINDER INTO ROAD MAINTENANCE FUND. THEN I THINK WE NEED TO MAKE THAT SO BECAUSE I THINK JUST GIVEN THE DISCUSSIONS AND I'M NOT TRYING TO STEP ON ANYBODY HERE, BUT I THINK THAT'S REALLY WHAT WE'VE ALL AGREED UPON HERE.

I FEEL TO THAT IT JUST REACHES THIS TO LIKE AN AMICABLE SPOT WITH THAT MONEY.

SO THAT WHAT I THINK HERE, MR. WHITE MAKING A FACE. WE'RE GOING TO TURN TO HIM IN A SECOND.

I'M IN THE BACK OF MY HEAD IS TELLING A DIFFERENT STORY MS..

GUITAR BUT I'M COMING TO YOU.

BUT THAT SAID RATE EACH END UP WHATEVER WE KNOW THAT YOU'LL HAVE AT LEAST 3.5 SURPLUS.

IF IT GOES THE OTHER WAY, YOU'LL HAVE MORE THAN THAT.

BUT WITHIN THAT WE SEE GET YOUR HIGH PRIORITIES TAKEN CARE OF, GET A VERY HIGH PRIORITY OF KEEPING THE CITY RUNNING BY GETTING THESE PEOPLE FILLED UP AND WHEN IN DOUBT, PUT IT IN ROAD MAINTENANCE.

AMEN IS A SUMMARY.

MR. WHITE. GO AHEAD.

I LIKE THAT. I LIKE THAT SUMMARY BETTER THAN WHAT MADE ME MAKE THE FACE SO I THINK I CAN.

IT WAS A PREMATURE FACE I HADN'T MADE AN OFFICIAL MOTION TO MAKE.

THAT WAS AN OFFICIAL FACE. IT'S AN OFFICIAL.

I GOT YOU, MR. WHITE. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO IN OUR CITIZENS.

AND THAT. SAY.

WE REPRESENT CITIZENS ON THAT.

THAT IS, WE'RE BOUND.

WE CHOOSE TO BE BOUND BY THAT.

AND THE SECOND THING IS THAT OUR ADVISORS ARE.

THAT CAPACITY OF.

AND UNDERSTOOD ENTIRELY.

THANK YOU FOR THAT, MS.. CONNELLY.

THE MORE DISTANCE I GOT TO ACTUALLY INFORM MY MIND, I WAS GOING TO SAY IS WOULD THE MOST CONCISE WAY TO PRESENT BOTH THE OPINIONS AND THE DIVISION AMONGST THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF THOSE OPINIONS IS SIMPLY TO HAVE A VOTE ON A COUPLE OR TWO OR THREE OF THE POINTS. THEY VOTED.

SUCH AND SUCH. THAT'S.

SUMMARY. AND I WAS JUST.

SO THAT OUT HAVING TO EXPLAIN IT.

DON'T ASK.

I'M NOT VOTING. I SEE MERETZ.

I SEE LOTS OF THREE TWOS GOING ON.

MS.. BEAUCHAMP, YOU HAD A MOTION ON THE TIP OF YOUR TONGUE? YES. NOTHING ABOUT IN REGARDS TO THE PRESENTATION, I WANT TO MAKE A MOTION IN REGARDS TO THE ONE POINT.

I THINK WE NEED TO MAKE A MOTION ON THAT BECAUSE I THINK WE'RE ALL IN AGREEANCE THAT WE'RE SAYING WE WANT TO SEE THE MONEY GO TO CERTAIN AREAS FIRST TO THE AIR WITH THE EMPLOYEES, BECAUSE WE ALL AGREE THAT PERSONNEL NEED TO BE TAKEN CARE OF.

YOUR YOUR MOTION WOULD BE THE 3.5, BUT TO ADDRESS THE 1.7 AND THEN BREAK IT IN.

YES, MA'AM. OKAY.

YES, THANK YOU. THAT'S MY MOTION.

AND. WELL, YEAH, THAT'S CLEAR.

THAT'S AS CLEAR AS YOUR EMERGENCY IS.

OKAY. I'LL GIVE YOU A CONCISE OK MY MOTION.

SHOULD WE KEEP TO THE CAP? WE WOULD GO WITH THE SURPLUS OF THE 3.5 ADDRESS.

THE THE DIRE.

THE MOST IMPORTANT, WHICH IS THE 1.7.

IF THAT'S TAKEN CARE OF.

AND THEN THE REMAINING 1.8 WOULD WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WHATEVER IF THE HR REPORT IS OUT, WHATEVER THE NEED IS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE

[02:40:02]

PAID THAT GO FIRST AND THEN WHATEVER EXTRA IS LEFT OVER GOES TO THE ROAD MAINTENANCE.

AT 1.7.

SAY 1.2 OF THAT IS PUBLIC SAFETY.

SURE. I SECOND THAT.

YES. OK FOLLOWS MS..

COLLINS EXACT FIGURES.

AND. YEAH.

SHE JUST WANTS TO OK IN FRAMING IT TO COUNSEL, MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE SAYING, HEY, WE'RE COVERING 1.2 OF PUBLIC SAFETY WITHIN 1.7.8 STILL ARE.

OKAY. SO I HEAR A MOTION FROM MS..

BEAUCHAMP, SECONDED BY MS..

BEITAR, THAT SAYS THAT WHEN WHEN I'M PRESENTING TO COUNCIL, I WILL SAY THAT IF THEY ARE TO STAY AT THE 3% CAP THAT WE ADVISE THAT THEY TAKE THEIR 3.5 MILLION SURPLUS, THEY COVER THEIR 1.7 IN HIGH IMPACT NEEDS, WHICH INCLUDES 1.2 OF THOSE BEING FOR PUBLIC SAFETY.

BUT THEY COVER THAT 1.7 AND THEN THEY TAKE THAT 1.8 MILLION AND THEY USE IT TO ADDRESS WHATEVER THEY CAN AS FAR AS AN IMMEDIATE IMPACT TO THE AIR THEIR SALARY RESULTS ARE, AND WHATEVER DIFFERENCE THERE MAY OR MAY NOT BE FROM THAT ALLOCATION OF FUNDS THAT THEY ROLL INTO ROAD MAINTENANCE FUNDS TO GET THE YEAR STARTED. ED.

WHAT YOU GOT, MS.. CONNELLY.

WE STARTED WITH THAT.

WE ALSO RECOMMEND THAT EXPLORE.

WITH COOPERATION WITH THE COUNCIL DEFINING CRITICAL NEED.

I WOULD SAY CONVERSATIONALLY THAT THAT IS FULLY THE INTENTION.

I EVEN WROTE CRITICAL NEED TO YOU USE THOSE WORDS TO SAY VERY IMPORTANT.

YES. WOULDN'T THAT BE SOMETHING DIFFERENT? JUST. OH, WE'RE DOWN TO THE CLOCK.

YEAH. OK.

SO THERE'S THERE'S THE MOTION FOR MS..

BEAUCHAMP, SECONDED BY MS..

BEITAR, TO GET SPECIFIC ABOUT THE 3.5 SURPLUS THAT WOULD EXIST TO SAY, AS I MENTIONED, PUT THE 1.8 TOWARDS IMMEDIATELY ADDRESSING THE AIR STUDY.

IF THAT IMMEDIATE IS LESS THAN 1.8 OUT OF THE GATE, THEN JUST ROLL THE REST INTO ROAD MAINTENANCE FUND.

START THE FISCAL YEAR OFF.

GOOD. SO THERE'S A MOTION, THERE'S A SECOND.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, I.

ALL RIGHT. SO THAT'S UNANIMOUS.

SO WE'LL DO THAT IN FRAMING IT.

YES, MISS COLLEEN. YES. TO THE REST OF THE BOARD.

I WILL TALK TO THE FACT THAT THE CONSENSUS OF THE BOARD WAS MOVING IN A CURIOSITY OF OF EXCEEDING THE CAP, BUT NOT UNDERSTANDING THE FEASIBILITY AND THE DEFINITIONS OF CRITICAL NEED.

AND THAT THE THE FOLKS ON THE BOARD, JUST AS WELL AS EVERYONE IN THE PUBLIC, IS VERY CURIOUS HOW FEASIBLE THAT IS OR IS NOT THIS YEAR.

EVERYONE WE ALL WANT TO KNOW THE JURY IS OUT NOT TO USE THE LEGAL TERM.

WELL, I WOULD START WITH THAT.

WE ARE IN WE REALIZE AND DEFINE THAT WE ARE IN A.

WHAT WE DON'T KNOW IS THAT.

THAT LEGALLY.

UNDERSTOOD OR CAPTURED.

I'LL SHOW IT AS WE DRAW TO THE LAST MINUTE.

REGULAR MEETING NEXT WOULD BE SCHEDULED FOR THE 13TH OF JULY.

SHOULD WE KEEP THAT SO WE CAN RECAP BETWEEN BUDGET WORKSHOPS? YEAH. SO WE'LL TALK ABOUT HOW THE FIFTH WENT AND EVERYTHING LIKE THAT.

SO WITH THAT SAID, WE SHALL SEE EVERYONE IN THIS CHAMBER ON THE 13TH OF JULY AT 6:30 P.M.

FOR OUR NEXT REGULAR MEETING, AND THAT THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED.

915 HOUSE TIME.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.