[00:00:01]
[1. CALL TO ORDER]
THANK YOU. THIS IS THE AUGUST 24, 2021 CITY COMMISSION BUDGET WORKSHOP AND MADAM CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE CLERK.IF YOU WILL SILENCE YOUR PERSONAL DEVICES, AIRPLANE MODE OR COMPLETELY OFF THAT WOULD BE GREATLY APPRECIATED.
THE QUORUM, THE BUDGET, WE CAN HAVE SPIRITED CONVERSATIONS AND DEBATE BUT LET'S MAINTAIN RESPECT AND INTEGRITY AROUND THOSE CONVERSATIONS. AND COVID-19, SO I SAW THE COVID REPORT THIS MORNING, WE'RE AT 22 PERCENT INFECTION RATE, SLIGHTLY DOWN FROM 25, BUT I WATCHED THE COUNTY COMMISSION MEETING LAST NIGHT IN WHICH THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR SAID, AND I BELIEVE COMMISSION ROSS WAS THERE AS WELL, IF I UNDERSTOOD HIM CORRECTLY, THE PEAK WAS GOING TO BE IN EIGHT WEEKS. WE SHOWED THE CHART AND HE SAID THIS IS PEAKING AND HE SAID PRIMARILY THE REASON IT'S GOING TO PEAK SIX TO EIGHT WEEKS OUT IS BECAUSE KIDS ARE BACK IN SCHOOL. SO THIS TREND IS ON THE RISE, NOT ON THE DECLINE. OKAY. SO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SOME DISCUSSION AND COMMISSIONERS, I PUT TOGETHER A ROUGH ORDER OF THE DISCUSSION. WE'RE HERE TONIGHT BECAUSE WE
[4.1 Proposed FY 2021/2022 Budget]
HAD A REVERSAL OF A LEGAL OPINION ABOUT THE USE OF IMPACT FEES. AND THE CITY ATTORNEY AND I HAD A VERY NICE LUNCH LAST FRIDAY AND ACTUALLY TALKED FOR AN HOUR AND A HALF, ALMOST TWO HOURS, AND I CAN TELL YOU FROM THAT DISCUSSION REGARDING IMPACT FEES, YOU CAN GO ROUND AND ROUND AND ROUND ON THE LEGALITY AND USE OF THE IMPACT FEES, AND THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO AVOID. SO I PUT TOGETHER THIS ORDER OF THIS DISCUSSION AND PLEASE GIVE ME YOUR FEEDBACK, IF THIS IS HOW YOU WOULD LIKE TO PROCEED. FIRST OF ALL, WE HAVE ALL RECEIVED EMAILS FROM MEMBERS OF COMMON SENSE, AND SO I PUT THAT FIRST AS A POINT OF DISCUSSION THAT ADDRESSES THE ISSUES THAT COMMON SENSE RAISED THAT MR. CLIFFORD AND KNOCCKY WANTED TO PUBLICLY SPEAK AND I THOUGHT I WOULD ADDRESS YOUR QUESTIONS AND IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK THAT WAY WE'RE NOT PUTTING THE CART IN FRONT OF THE HORSE, OKAY. SO I WANT TO SAY A COUPLE OF WORDS ABOUT COMMON SENSE. I WANT TO SAY A COUPLE OF WORDS ABOUT CITIZEN ENGAGEMENT. CITIZEN ENGAGEMENT AND OVERSIGHT SIGNIFICANTLY IMPROVES THE USE OF CITY RESOURCES, ELEVATING THE QUALITY OF POLITICAL REPRESENTATION AND PROVIDES OUR CITIZENS WITH BETTER CITY SERVICES.GROUPS LIKE COMMON SENSE CAN HELP TO ASSURE THAT EVERYONE IN THE CITY IS TREATED FAIRLY, THAT ALL CITIZENS OF FERNANDINA BEACH GET WHAT THEY NEED AND THAT PEOPLE UNDERSTAND AND SUPPORT THE NEED FOR CHANGE TO MAKE FERNANDINA BEACH A BETTER PLACE TO LIVE. I'LL END THIS WITH WHAT THOMAS JEFFERSON WROTE IN 1820: I KNOW NO SAFETY DEPOSITORY OF THE ULTIMATE POWERS OF A SOCIETY BUT THE PEOPLE THEMSELVES AND IF WE THINK THEM NOT ENLIGHTENED ENOUGH TO EXERCISE THEIR CONTROL WITH THE DISCRETION, THE REMEDY IS NOT TO TAKE IT FROM THEM BUT TO INFORM THEIR DISCRETION. AND ISSUE THAT'S OUR OBLIGATION AS A CITY COMMISSION IS TO INFORM THEIR DISCRETION.
WHEN PEOPLE ASK US QUESTIONS, PEOPLE DESERVE ANSWERS.
SO COMMISSIONERS, IS THAT ORDER SEQUENCE OF TOPICS?
>> WHAT HAPPENS AFTERWARDS? >> AFTER? I'M SORRY? AFTER WHAT?
>> THE COMMENT THEN. >> OH, DID I STOP AT PUBLIC COMMENT. SHORT-TERM MEMORY.
THANK YOU. >> SHORT PENCILS, LONG MEMORY.
NUMBER TWO IS, SO CITY STAFF MET SINCE THE LAST BUDGET MEETING
[00:05:08]
AND THEY HAVE POSED A NEW BUDGET WITH THEIR CUTS SO WE CAN DISCUSS THAT AND THEN THIRD, WE CAN DISCUSS IMPACT FEES.SO THAT'S THE ORDER OF THE DISCUSSION THAT I HAD.
>> YOU FORGOT THE MOST IMPORTANT THING.
>> WHICH IS? >> AT THE END OF THE DAY WE NEED TO BALANCE THE BUDGET, WE NEED A BALANCED BUDGET.
>> THAT'S UNSPOKEN AND HOPEFULLY WERE THERE BY THE TIME WE GET TO THREE. YES, WE NEED TO GET TO A BALANCED BUDGET. SO WE'RE GOING? OKAY. SO MR. CNOCKY, AND MS. CLIFFORD, I HAVE SIX QUESTIONS YOUR FOLKS HAVE SENT US.
I'M GOING TO READ THEM AND MAKE SURE THAT, A, THEY'RE ACCURATE AND THAT WE NOT OMITTED ANYTHING.
NUMBER ONE, IN THE QUESTIONS ABOUT SAVING FROM THE BUDGET, 272,000 SAVED BY HOLDING OPERATING EXPENSES IN NONSAFETY DEPARTMENTS TO CURRENT YEAR LEVEL.
NUMBER TWO, 157,000 TO DEFER RECREATION VEHICLE REPLACEMENT.
NUMBER THREE, THE $320,000 FOR THE NEW PAYROLL MODULE, DEFER OR FINANCE OVER SEVERAL BUDGETS. NUMBER FOUR, $30,000 REDUCE BEACH MONITORING TO 25,000 PRECOVID LEVEL.
NUMBER FIVE, 16,000 CITY COMMISSION PROMOTIONAL, THAT'S A LINE ITEM IN THE CITY COMMISSION BUDGET.
AND THEN NUMBER SIX, $250,000, DEFER OR CUT THE CITY HALL DESIGN. ARE THOSE THE SIX RECOMMENDATIONS? DID I STATE THOSE ACCURATELY?
I'LL CALL UPON THE CITY MANAGER AND SO FOR TRANSPARENCY THE CITY MANAGER AND I DISCUSSED THESE YESTERDAY MORNING.
IS THAT CORRECT, CITY MANAGER? >> YES, SIR.
>> SO, NUMBER ONE, LET'S TALK ABOUT $272,000, BY HOLDING OPERATING EXPENSES. CAN WE OR CAN'T WE DO THAT AND
WHY? >> OBVIOUSLY YOU CAN DO IT.
STAFF RECOMMENDS YOU CAN. $37 MILLION OF GENERAL REVENUE.
THE BULK, 235,000, PARKS AND RECS, AND THE BIGGEST INCREASE IN COSTS ARE DUE TO TENNIS WHICH IS THE REVENUE INCREASED BECAUSE OF THE NUMBER OF TENNIS LESSONS AND THOSE PROGRAM COSTS ARE DIRECT PASS-THROUGH BUT THE CITY MAKES A PERCENTAGE OF REVENUES.
YOU DECREASE THAT AND INCREASE THE REVENUE.
>> OKAY. NUMBER TWO, 157,000 DEFER
RECREATION PEOPLE REPLACEMENT. >> MR. GLISSAN SHARED WITH ME THE SIX EXPENDITURES ARE IN LINE WITH THE CITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH VEHICLE PURCHASING PLAN WHICH IS RESOLUTION NO. 2,006-26 INDICATING HOW VEHICLES ARE TO BE REPLACED AND THAT THESE VEHICLES, AGAIN, THE CITY HAS A $13 MILLION FLEET AND THE TIMELY RESPONSE OF REPLACEMENT OF THE VEHICLES IS CRITICAL TO MAINTAINING COSTS OF THAT. HE HAS PROVIDED A SPREADSHEET THAT SHOWS THE NUMBER OF VEHICLES DEFERRED LAST YEAR AND THEN ALSO A NUMBER OF VEHICLES THAT WERE CUT PRIOR TO THE
ORIGINAL BUDGET COMING TO YOU. >> HOW MANY VEHICLES DOES THIS
>> TWO. >> A POLICE VEHICLE AND -- PARKS AND REC REPLACEMENT, PARKS AND REC AND POLICE VEHICLE.
>> AND SO I HAVE A QUESTION AS YOU SAID, "POLICE," UNDER THE NEW LEGISLATIVE ACTION ON IMPACT FEES, CAN POLICE BE USED?
>> SOME WERE MOVED INTO THE IMPACT FEE FUND.
AND THE $50,000 [INDISCERNIBLE] FOR THE VEHICLE?
>> 55 OF THE 157. HE MENTIONED TWO VEHICLES.
[00:10:04]
SO I'M TRYING TO ASCERTAIN IS THE POLICE VEHICLE CURRENTLY BEING FUNDED THROUGH THE OPERATING BUDGET OR THROUGHIMPACT FEES? >> WHAT'S SHOWING HERE, YEAH, A PORTION OF DEFERRED PORTION OF POLICE VEHICLE REPLACEMENT, SO THAT'S $50,000. I BELIEVE THAT'S THROUGH THE
GENERAL FUND. >> SO MY QUESTION IS CAN WE USE IMPACT FEES TO REPLACEMENT THAT VEHICLE?
POLICE IMPACT FEES. >> I WOULD WANT TO KNOW [INDISCERNIBLE] PORTION OF A POLICE VEHICLE.
I WOULD WANT TO KNOW MORE ABOUT THE PURCHASE.
>> WHAT IS A PORTION OF A POLICE VEHICLE?
HALF A CAR. >> ALL I KNOW IS I'M RESPONDING TO THE COMMENTS BY -- [CROSSTALK] --
>> I UNDERSTAND. PERHAPS MR. GLISSAN CAN SHED
MORE LIGHT, IF YOU WOULD, SIR. >> YES, SIR.
>> FLEET FACILITIES, AND I THINK WHY THERE'S QUESTIONS IS WE DON'T HAVE 50,000 SET ASIDE FOR POLICE VEHICLES MORE THAN THAT REALIZING THAT AT POLICE VEHICLE IS NOT JUST A VEHICLE BUT ALL THE EQUIPMENT REQUIRED TO FIT IT FOR EMERGENCY USE AND THAT PRICE IS A BIT HIGHER THAN THAT. TWO PART OF YOUR QUESTION, YES, YOU'LL SEE IN THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THE CITY MANAGER PROVIDED ONE ATV PURCHASE, EXPANSION TO THE BEACH RANGER PROGRAM, THAT 20,000 HAS BEEN RECOMMENDED TO MOVE TO IMPACT FEES. TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, PART OF THAT WOULD GO TO THE IMPACT FEES, AND AS FAR AS THE OTHER VEHICLE REPLACEMENTS, JUST REPLACING EXISTING FLEET AND FROM OUR EXPERIENCE AND WHAT WE'VE BEEN GUIDED, THAT WOULD NOT BE AN APPROPRIATE USE OF IMPACT FEES.
>> JEREMIAH, WHAT VEHICLES ARE YOU REPLACING?
>> OF THAT, AND ANOTHER REASON THERE'S SOME HESITATION IS WE'RE NOT SURE WHAT VERSION OF THE BUDGET THE COMMON SENSE GROUP WAS REFERRING TO BECAUSE POLICE DEPARTMENT OF AND I WE MET AND WE DID DEFER ONE VEHICLE PURCHASE TO NEXT YEAR, AND THAT'S TO REPLACE UNIT NO. 74, WHICH IS CURRENTLY IN THE ADMINISTRATION PORTION OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
THAT'S DEFERRED. AS WE HAVE SCHEDULED WE'RE LOOKING AT FIVE PATROL CAR REPLACEMENTS FOR THIS COMING
>> YES, SIR. THE OTHER VEHICLE REFERENCED WERE ON THE PARKS SIDE OF THE GENERAL FUND AND YOU'RE LOOKING
AT TWO MOWERS AND TWO TRUCKS. >> GOT IT.
>> OKAY. >> THAT 157 IS ACTUAL --
>> YES. A BIT LOWER THAN THAT.
>> OKAY. AT LEAST 20,000 LOWER?
LOOKING AT OUR FLEET PURCHASE PLAN YOU'RE LOOKING IF IF YOU WERE TO DEFER TO PARKS VEHICLE REPLACEMENT, 95,000 ON THE PARKS
SIDE, DEFERRING THAT ONE YEAR. >> 95 ON THE PARKS SIDE?
>> YES, SIR. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> ABSOLUTELY. >> ANY QUESTIONS AROUND THAT?
>> YES. I THINK WITH IMPACT FUNDS YOU CAN REPLACE POLICE AND FIRE VEHICLES BUT IT HAS TO BE AS A RESULT OF NEW GROWTH SO YOU CAN'T REPLACE AN EXISTING VEHICLE. IF YOUR ADDING A VEHICLE THAT'S
NEW GROWTH. >> THAT'S CORRECT.
BIG DIFFERENCE. ON THE BUDGET PROCESS YOU SEE THE VEHICLE PURCHASE PLAN FOR THIS COMING HERE AND YOU'LL SEE WHERE IT'S CARVED OUT, WHAT IS REPLACEMENT AND WHAT'S AN
>> ALL RIGHT. SO 30,000 TO REDUCE -- THANK YOU FOR COMING BACK, CITY MANAGER. 30,000 REDUCE THAT TO 25 K --
PAYROLL MODULE. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER ROSS.
>> CRITICAL LEAD. RIGHT NOW OUR CURRENT PAYROLL IS NOT SUPPORTED FOR A VERY TIE OF MANUFACTURES AND WILL MOST LIKELY LEAD TO A HIGH RISK ENVIRONMENT OF OUR SOFTWARE
PACKAGE. >> YOU ALSO INDICATED TO ME AND PLEASE CHECK MY STATEMENT FOR ACCURACY, THIS IS ADOBE FLASH
>> ADOBE ENDED FLASH SEVERAL YEARS AGO.
TO BAND-AID IT WOULD BE $200,000.
>> YES, SIR, THAT WAS THE WORD FROM MR. WICK.
>> WHY NOT INVEST IN THE NEW SOFTWARE THEN, ALL RIGHT.
$30,000, REDUCE THAT TO $25,000 ON THE BEACH MONITORING.
>> THE BEACH MONITORING IS NOT GENERAL FUND TAXES.
THAT COMES OUT OF THE COUNTY, THE MSTU.
[00:15:04]
>> 16,000 ON THE CITY COMMISSION PROMOTIONAL BUDGET LINE?
>> I BELIEVE THE LARGE AMOUNT OF THAT, THE OVERWHELMING AMOUNT IS $15,000 FOR LIGHT UP AMELIA FIREWORKS.
>> ANYBODY WANT TO CUT THE FIREWORKS?
>> FINALLY THE $250,000 ON THE CITY HALL DESIGN, THAT WAS THROUGH ADMINISTRATIVE IMPACT FEES AND WE ACTUALLY CUT THAT
>> CORRECT. >> THAT WAS ELIMINATED.
>> CORRECT. >> THANK YOU, SIR.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> ALL RIGHT.
SO WITH THAT REVIEW, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK? STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE, SIR.
>> JACK KNOCKY, 2809 OCEAN VIEW COURT, FERNANDINA BEACH, AND I'M REPRESENTING COMMON SENSE. I APPRECIATE YOUR KIND WORDS AS FAR AS SOME THINGS WE'VE BEEN BRINGING TO YOUR ATTENTION TO TRY TO HELP THE CITY THROUGH SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE CHALLENGED WITH SO I CAME HERE LAST YEAR TALKING ABOUT THE FLEET PROGRAM AND AS I LOOK AROUND TOWN AND I LOOK AT A CAR, THE CITY FLEET IS SO NEW THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT THAT PLAN AND FIND A WAY TO DEFER THAT. WE HAVE SUCH A SMALL PORTION OF THE ISLAND YET WE'RE TAKING CARS AND TURNING THEM OVER SO QUICKLY. I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S BECAUSE WE'RE DRIVING THEM HOME AT NIGHT AND PUTTING MORE MILES ON OR WHAT BUT WE NEED TO LOOK AT THAT.
THE FIRST ITEM WE TALKED ABOUT, 272,000 ON HOLDING OPERATING EXPENSES FLAT, I'M SHOCKED WE'RE JUST WAVING A HAND AND SAYING WE CAN CUT THAT, PARKS AND REC. IT SEEMS STRANGE.
I THINK WE SHOULD LOOK AT THAT MORE BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S SAVINGS. THE PAYROLL MODULE, HAS ANYBODY LOOKED AT OUTSOURCING THAT, A STAFF OUR SIZE? WE MIGHT WANT TO LOOK AT OUTSOURCING FOR A WHILE.
THANK YOU FOR TAKING CITY HALL OUT THERE.
THE OTHER THING ON THE FLEET IS I THINK WE SHOULD LOOK AT SOME OF THE SPARES THAT WE HAVE IN THE BUDGET BECAUSE SOME OF THIS BUDGET MAKES SURE THAT WE HAVE SPARES, LIKE A BILLING PERMIT.
I THINK THERE'S A SPARE TRUCK OR TWO.
SO THERE'S OTHER IDEAS THAT I HAVE AS WELL ABOUT SELLING CITY PROPERTY THAT COULD HELP THE BUDGET, ON 101 FRONT STREET, 750,000, WE BOUGHT IT, AND WE COULD SELL IT FOR $2.5 MILLION.
CITY HALL, WE COULD SELL THIS BUILDING AND LEASE IT TO SOMEONE ELSE, MAKE MONEY OFF OF IT. THIS IS PRIME PROPERTY IN THE CITY AND WE COULD BUILD THE CITY HALL SOMEWHERE ELSE.
TAKE THE REVENUES FROM THE SALE AND REINVEST THEM.
I THINK THOSE ARE THINGS WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT.
WE NEED TAKE THE CITY PARK RETAIL SECTION AND PUT IT OUT FOR BID. WE SHOULD PUT THAT OUT FOR BID BECAUSE THAT'S GOING TO CREATE REVENUES AGAIN.
THAT COULD HELP THE BUDGET AND WE COULD TALK ABOUT HOW TO DO THAT. I THINK WE SHOULD LEASE OUT NINE HOLES OF THE GOLF COURSE FOR RECREATIONAL PURPOSES.
I WOULD PROMOTE PUTTING PATOK COURTS, TENNIS COURTS, PICKLEBALL, VOLLEYBALL. WE CAN TAKE NINE HOLES AND MAKE IT A REVENUE-GENERATOR FOR THE CITY.
I THINK WE SHOULD LOOK INTO THAT.
I WANT TO TALK ABOUT A CURVE OF OTHERS THINGS BUT I THINK MY TIME IS UP. IF WE GET BACK TO IMPACT FEES I WOULD LIKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK AGAIN AND YOU HAVE ALL SEASON MY INFORMATION ABOUT THE ATLANTIC SEAFOOD LEASE AND THE LACK OF INSURANCE AND I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT THAT.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SIR. >> I WAS GOING TO SHARE COPIES OF THIS BUT YOU READ IT ALL TO ME.
>> THANK YOU, SIR. COMMISSIONERS, WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO ADDRESS SELLING CITY PROPERTY? 101 FRONT STREET, OR CITY HALL? ANY COMMENT?
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I'LL GO ON RECORD TO SAY THAT I DO NOT BELIEVE SELLING OUR WATERFRONT PROPERTY IS THE WAY TO GO. IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE MAINTAIN A SENSE OF OWNERSHIP OF THE WATERFRONT AND MY BELIEF IS THAT IF THERE'S ANYTHING WE SHOULD BE USING, IT'S THE WATERFRONT AND THE GREENWAY AND THAT'S WHERE OUR DUTY AS A COMMISSION IS, AND I WOULD BE NERVOUS THAT IF WE LOSE CONTROL OF THAT, IT WOULD BE VERY SHORT BEFORE SOMETHING FAR WORSE HAPPENS SO I WANT TO
[00:20:01]
MAKE SURE WE RETAIN CONTROL OF THE WATERFRONT PROPERTY.>> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER BEAN. >> THE IDEA YOU CAN GET $2 MILLION IS LUDICROUS. IT'S BASED ON THE APPRAISAL NEXT DOOR WHICH HAD ASTOUNDING ASSUMPTIONS IN IT THAT WERE NOT CORRECT AND IT'S NOT TRUE. IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO WRITE A TECH FOR $2.5 MILLION FOR THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY I WOULD SERIOUSLY CONSIDER IT BUT I DON'T THINK THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. I DO THINK THE CITY SHOULD MAINTAIN THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY. AS FAR AS CITY HALL, THAT'S ANOTHER DISCUSSION AND I CAN PUT IT ON FOR THE BUDGET FOR A WORKSHOP IN THE SECOND MEETING IN SEPTEMBER.
>> THANK YOU, SIR. VICE-MAYOR.
>> I'M ALL FOR INNOVATIVE AND CREATIVE IDEAS.
101 FRONT STREET, IF YOU REMEMBER, IT'S IN OUR PARK FOOTPRINT AND WE HAVEN'T EFFECTIVELY DEALT WITH THAT ISSUE YET. I THINK WE NEED TO DEAL WITH THAT, WHAT WE'RE GOING TO WITH THE SIMMONS PROPERTY BEING OFF TEMPORARILY AND WHAT WE'RE GOING TO BEFORE WE EVEN THINK ABOUT SELLING THAT PROPERTY. I WOULDN'T SELL CITY HALL NOW. WE DON'T HAVE A PLACE TO MEET.
I BELIEVE MANY THINGS COULD BE DONE AND WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT THEM.
I'M ALWAYS RAGGING ON THE VEHICLES AND I SUGGESTED AND TALKED TO THE CITY MANAGER, WHY DON'T WE HOT-SEAT THEM OR DOUBLE-SHIFT THEM OR DOING DIFFERENT THINGS TO INCREASE PRODUCTIVITY AND I THINK WE'LL MOVE TOWARDS THOSE DIRECTIONS. BUT AS FAR AS -- I'M ALSO CONCERNED WITH PARKS AND RECS. I THINK WE HAVE A VERY EFFECTIVE PARKS AND RECS AND RATED HIGH BY THE POPULATION AND I DON'T WANT TO DESTROY THAT. I'M NOT SO SURE THAT WE COULD OUTSOURCE SOME OF THOSE THINGS BUT IT'S WORTH LOOKING AT BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN
IN THIS BUDGET YEAR. >> THANK YOU, SIR. >> ALL RIGHT.
THE SECOND SUGGESTION WAS THE PARK, THE WATERFRONT PARK PROPERTY, MAKING THAT A RETAIL
COMPLEX. DID I SAY THAT CORRECTLY? >> [INDISCERNIBLE].
>> THE 27,000 SQUARE FEET. ALL RIGHT. AND I CAN ADDRESS THIS THAT WE HAD A VERY VIGOROUS CONVERSATION ABOUT THAT PROPERTY. I BELIEVE THAT WAS TWO WORKSHOPS AGO, AND THE FEELING OF THIS COMMUNITY I FEEL LIKE I HAVE TWO DIFFERENT, ONE ON THIS SHOULDER AND ONE ON THAT SHOULDER AND ONE SAYS, MAXIMIZE REVENUE AND LEASE OUT THAT SPACE, GET MORE CITY REVENUE, AND THE OTHER ONE SAYS TO KEEP IT PRISTINE. THIS IS FERNANDINA BEACH.
WE WANT THAT HISTORY AND THOSE TWO ARGUMENTS ARE STRONG. I HEAR EQUAL REPRESENTATION OF BOTH OF THOSE ARGUMENTS AND WHAT WE'VE INSTRUCTED THE CITY MANAGER TO DO IS TO COME BACK TO US WITH A FEEDBACK MECHANISM TO HAVE TAXPAYERS AND CITIZENS OF THIS CITY GIVE US CLEARLY WHAT THEY WANT TO SEE HAPPEN ON THOSE PARCELS. AND SO THAT PROCESS IS IN THE
PLANNING STAGES. COMMISSIONER ROSS? >> I THINK THE REASON WE'RE HERE TONIGHT IS TO FOCUS ON THE BUDGET AND WE'RE GOING AFIELD WITH THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN REHASHED BEFORE AND WE HAVE 400 SOMETHING THOUSAND DOLLARS TO BALANCE THE BUDGET AND I THINK
THAT SHOULD BE THE FOCUS OF TONIGHT. >> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER ROSS.
MS. CLIFFORD? >> I'LL ADDRESS IMPACT FEES. PATTY CLIFFORD, 1747 AZALEA BEACH, FERNANDINA BEACH. SHAME ON THE CITY ATTORNEY FOR GIVING WRONG ADVICE ON THE USE OF IMPACT FEES. SHAME ON THE COMPTROLLER FOR SITTING SILENT, IN FACT WRITING IN WHICH IMPACT FEE APPLIES IN THIS USE. SHAME ON THE CITY MANAGER AND EXPERIENCED COMMISSIONERS. THAT'S ALL I'M GOING TO SAY ABOUT IMPACT FEES, IMPACT FEES.
I APPRECIATE THE MAYOR CALLING FOR THIS NEEDED SECOND WORKSHOP. THE CITY MANAGER SHOULD BE BRINGING IDEAS AS TO WHERE TO CUT. I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU CAN EXPECT CITIZENS TO COME FORWARD WITH IDEAS BUT I DO HAVE A FEW. MY NUMBER ONE IS DO NOT HIRE THE
[00:25:03]
TWO NEW LABORERS IF YOU ARE REORGANIZING. SHOULDN'T YOU BE LOOKING FOR EFFICIENCIES? INCREASE THE FEE FOR YARD WASTE DISPOSAL.CLEARLY IT COSTS MORE THAN YOU ARE CHARGING. IF THE GENERAL FUND NEEDS TO TRANSFER DOLLARS, $80,000 TO THE SANITATION ENTERPRISE FUND, THIS IS $80,000 THAT COULD AND SHOULD BE ELIMINATED. IN THE PREVIOUS WORKSHOP IT WAS SUGGESTED TO REDUCE THE-AMOUNT SPENT ON ROAD RESURFACING AND I HOPE YOU RECONSIDER THAT AS WELL AS OTHER CAPITAL EXPENDITURES
LOOKING FOR SAVINGS. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MA'AM.
>> COMMISSIONER ROSS? VICE-MAYOR? >> I'LL COMMENT A LITTLE BIT ON THAT. THE IMPACT FEES HAVE BASICALLY WHEN YOU REALLY READ THIS, THE STATE LAWS, TO ALLOW CITIES A FLEXIBLE THING. YOU HAVE TO MEET THE NEXT STATUS. FOR YEARS HERE WE HAVE DONE THAT IN SOME CASES AND WE HAVE NOT DONE IT IN OTHERS. IT HASN'T BEEN CHALLENGED I DON'T THINK SINCE THE SEWER SYSTEM. ALL THE DISCUSSION, NOTHING WAS SUBMITTED.
IT'S VERY SIMPLE. IT'S ABOUT INFRASTRUCTURE CORE GROWTH AND NOW THEY'RE DEFINING, "INFRASTRUCTURE" A LITTLE BIT BETTER. IT'S BETTER BECAUSE THEY INCLUDE POLICE AND FIRE AND SOME OTHER THINGS AND ACQUISITION OF APPROPRIATE PROPERTY BUT, YOU KNOW, MOVING FORWARD I THINK, YOU KNOW, THE -- I'M GOING TO DEFEND THE CONTROLLER AND THE ATTORNEY. THEY STOOD UP AND SAID: YOU CAN'T DO IT.
I REMEMBER WHEN WE USED IMPACT FEES FOR STUFF SIX OR SEVEN YEARS AGO AND WE SHOULDN'T HAVE DONE IT AND IT WAS FLEXIBLE AND WASN'T CHALLENGED, SO THE PROBABLY BE CHALLENGED AND
THAT'S A GOOD THING BECAUSE WE'LL LOOK CLOSER AT THE USE. >> COMMISSIONER ROSS.
>> I'LL SUPPORT THEM. THERE WAS PUBLIC DISCUSSION. THEY WERE NOT ABOUT TO GET UP AND ARGUE WITH THE CITY COMMISSIONERS. ONE CITY COMMISSIONER READ THE LAW THREE TIMES AND THE REST DECIDED NOT TO ABIDE BY THAT SO, YOU KNOW, IT'S OVER.
LET'S JUST MOVE ON. I DON'T THINK PUTTING BLAME ON ANYBODY AND SAYING SOMETHING SHAMEFUL IS VERY HELPFUL. I THINK MOVING FORWARD AND COMING UP WITH THE BUDGET IS
WHAT WE NEED TO DO. >> HEY, SIR. MR. JOE BLANCHARD?
STATE YOUR NAME. >> JOE BLANCHARD, 593 AMELIA CIRCLE, FERNANDINA BEACH, FLORIDA. I'D LIKE TO DISCUSS THE DREDGING AT THE MARINA.
WE HAVE A GRANT RIGHT NOW FROM FIND AND WE NEED MATCHING FINDS. I KNOW YOU ARE TRYING TO CUT MONEY TODAY AND I APPRECIATE THAT BUT OUR MARINA IS FILLING UP WITH SILT AND AT THE MARINE ADVISORY BOARD MEETING WE DISCUSSED IT AND HOW MUCH MONEY WILL BE LOST NEXT YEAR IF WE DON'T GET THAT DREDGING DONE AND IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN IT WAS IN THE TENS OF THOUSANDS.
>> 600,000, I BELIEVE. >> $600,000 WILL BE LOST NEXT YEAR AT THE MARINA IF WE DON'T DREDGE. THAT'S A LOT OF MONEY. I'D LIKE TO HAVE THAT PUT ON A PRIORITY LIST IF AT ALL POSSIBLE. THAT'S MY COMMENT ON THAT REGARD. THE OTHER ONE IS HOW MANY CARS OR VEHICLES DOES THE REC
DEPARTMENT HAVE? DOES ANYBODY KNOW? >> I THINK JEREMIAH DOES.
>> I WANT TO SAY -- >> [INDISCERNIBLE] MR. GLISSAN PROVIDED A COPY.
THIS WILL GO TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE PERCEPTIONS OF THE AGE OF THE CITY FLEET OF VEHICLES.
THIS IS THE 2122 PURCHASE PLAN. YOU'LL SEE VEHICLES TEN, 29, 25, 23 YEARS, 22 YEARS, TEN YEARS, 13 YEARS, SIX YEARS, 11 YEARS, 16 YEARS, 25 YEARS, AND SO TO CONTEND THAT THE FLEET IS NEW IS SOMEWHAT MISLEADING. THIS JUST REPRESENTS THE PURCHASE PLAN FROM LAST YEAR.
THE ONES IN RED WERE ACTUALLY ONES DEFERRED FROM LAST YEAR'S BUDGET TO THIS YEAR'S BUDGET.
THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE THE TOTAL FLEET NUMBERS BUT MR. GLISSAN PROBABLY CAN PROVIDE THAT
INFORMATION AS WELL. >> I HOPE THIS IS NOT GOING AGAINST MY TIME.
[00:30:05]
>> NO, SIR. >> LET'S SEE. >> BY DEPARTMENT, I DON'T HAVE THAT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD HERE. LET'S SEE HERE.
RIGHT NOW PARKS AND RECREATION TOGETHER, YOU'RE LOOKING AT A TOTAL OF 12 IN RECREATION, 17 IN PARKS, AND THAT'S ALL ROLLING ASSETS. THAT'S TRAILERS, MOWERS,
TRUCKINGS, VEHICLES, TRACTORS -- [CROSSTALK] -- >> ALL VEHICLES.
>> 17 AND 12. >> ALSO. THANK YOU.
HOW MANY VEHICLES DID THE POLICE DEPARTMENT HAVE? >> THEY HAVE ALL ROLLING
INVENTORY. YOU'RE LOOKING AT ABOUT 55, 56. >> 56 VEHICLES, OKAY.
THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> APPRECIATE IT.
>> I'D LIKE TO -- COMMISSIONER ROSS? >> THE BIDS CAME IN FOR DREDGING TODAY AND THE CHEAPEST BID FOR DREDGING, 14,500 CUBIC YARDS OF MATERIAL, WHICH IS WHAT'S NECESSARY, $650,000. THROWING IN 200, SO YOU'RE SHORT, DO THE MATH, $450,000.
>> ONE OF THE LIKELY INTENTIONS IS THAT AS YOU DISCUSS -- RIGHT NOW WHEN THE CITY REFINANCED THE MARINA DEBT, IT CURRENTLY CHOSE APPROXIMATELY 700 TO $750,000 OF DEBT SERVICE COST AND WHEN WE CONCLUDE THE FEMA AND GET REIMBURSED AND YOU GOT ALL INDICATED THAT THAT MONEY WOULD GO ONLY TO REDUCE THE ONGOING DEBT, OUR DEBT SERVICE PAYMENT WOULD LIKELY REDUCE TO ABOUT $350,000, SO THE INTENT IS TO TAKE THAT DIFFERENCE WHICH IS ALREADY INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET
TO SUPPORT THE DREDGING COSTS. >> OKAY. THAT STILL LEAVES US 150, IF THE
NUMBERS ARE RIGHT. >> CORRECT. >> THAT WE NEED TO FIND
SOMEWHERE? >> CORRECT. >> THANK YOU, SIR.
ALL RIGHT. MS. STEPHANIE HOLT. >> SORRY.
I [INDISCERNIBLE]. >> SURE. >> TRYING TO BE QUIET.
I WANTED TO APOLOGIZE FOR MY ATTIRE. SOMETIMES PERSONAL GOALS AND
CIVIC DUTY DON'T MATCH UP. >> NAME AND ADDRESS. >> STEPHANIE HOLT.
92024 CRANE DRIVE BUT I OWN 960687 GATEWAY BOULEVARD, SUITE 201 L AND J.
I WAS ACTUALLY COMING TO SPEAK MORE ON THE REVENUE GENERATION SIDE AND THE FACT THAT I WATCHED THE CITY COMMISSION MEETING LAST WEEK AND THE DISCUSSION ABOUT RESIDENTS' FEES AND I KNOW YOU'LL HAVE A SPECIAL WORKSHOP BUT I WANTED A PUBLIC COMMENT SO EVERYBODY COULD PROCESS THIS.
THIS IS A VERY FRAGILE ECOSYSTEM, AND I AM A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF THIS.
WITH MY THREE CHILDREN AT CAMP AMELIA, PLUS PARTICIPATING IN SWIM LESSONS, I PAY MORE IN COUNTY DIFFERENT RECENTLY SHELL THAN ANYBODY ON THE BOARD OR OUR CITY MANAGER IN THAT AMOUNT.
AND SO I'M NOT ALONE. ALL IT TAKES IS TWO KIDS AT CAMP AMELIA FOR THE CITY, JUST THE COUNTY DIFFERENTIAL, NOT, YOU KNOW, THE BASE RATE BUT JUST THE COUNTY DIFFERENTIAL TO ACTUALLY PAY MORE THAN THE MEDIAN, CITY TAX SALE, WHAT I COULD FIND ONLINE, JUST OVER $900. THAT'S ALL IT TAKES FOR YOU TO HAVE CONTRIBUTED MORE THAN SOMEONE, AND IT'S SENSITIVE BETWEEN ECOSYSTEMS COUNTY AND WHO PARTICIPATED AND TRUE CITY RESIDENTS. I'M NOT AN ANOMALY. THERE'S QUITE A FEW COUNTY RESIDENTS THAT OWN CITY COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES THAT DON'T GET THE SAME BENEFITS BUT PAY THE TAXES. I PAY OVER $1200 IN CITY TAXES WITH MY OFFICE SUITE WHICH IS MORE THAN THE MEDIAN OF A RESIDENTIAL HOME. THAT ECOSYSTEM IS SENSITIVE AND IT WAS MILDLY OFFENSIVE WHEN PEOPLE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE FACT THAT THAT'S ONLY $11.
WHEN YOU HAVE TWO KIDS TIMES $11, TIMES 12 WEEKS OF SWIM LESSONS OR WHAT HAVE YOU IT ACTUALLY ADDS UP AND ADDS UP TO A LOT. WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT SOCCER CLUB AND A $30 COUNTY DIFFERENTIAL TIMES THREE KIDS, TIMES TWO SEASONS A YEAR, THAT'S HALF OF
[00:35:05]
YOUR MEDIAN CITY TAX RESIDENT RATE. AND SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT SHE CLEAR AND ALLOW EVERYBODY TO HAVE TIME TO FULL ON THAT BETWEEN NOW AND SEPTEMBER 7. AS A REVENUE GENERATOR, WHEN YOU'RE TRYING TO WORK THROUGHTHIS BUDGET THAT THAT'S GOING TO COME UP. >> COMMISSIONER ROSS?
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR COMMENTS. I WOULD HOPE YOU WOULD TALK TO COMMISSIONER BELL AND MARTIN AND THEY'RE THE ONES WHO SAID TO US, RAISE COUNTY RESIDENT FEES.
THEY WERE CLEAR. THEY WERE LOUD ABOUT IT AND THEY WERE ARTICULATE ABOUT IT.
>> YES, THERE WERE. >> THE COUNTY HELPS OUT, WE'RE ALL FOR KIDS AND WE'RE ALL FOR DOING THIS BUT IT'S NOT SUSTAINABLE. AND IF THEY WOULD PITCH IN WE
COULD MAKE THIS WORK. >> I UNDERSTAND THAT. I FULLY UNDERSTAND THAT AND I DON'T MIND MY COUNTY DIFFERENTIAL JUST SO THAT WE CAN BE CLEAR.
MY CONTENT IS WITH THE FACT THAT IT IS BEING PRESENTED AS THOUGH A COUNTY RESIDENT DOES NOT CONTRIBUTE AND DOES NOT CONTRIBUTE AT THE LEVEL THAT OF A CITY RESIDENT AND I'M A OFFICER EXAMPLE AND THERE'S MANY FAMILIES ESPECIALLY ONES THAT CAMP THERE BECAUSE IT'S A COMPOUND FACTOR OF $14 A WEEK, TIMES X WEEKS A YEAR, AND THEN THE SUMMER CAMP RAIMENT IS EVEN HIGHER BUT THEY ACTUALLY DO CONTRIBUTE AND CONTRIBUTE MORE THAN THAT.
THE OTHER THING I WANTED TO MENTION QUICK, AND I HOPE I'M NOT OUT OF TIME, IS THAT I WOULD REALLY LIKE YOU TO LOOK AT THOSE, INSTEAD OF A PERCENTAGE, APPLY THEM TO YOUR BUDGET.
WHEN I WAS REVIEWING YOUR BUDGET I NOTICED THAT CAMP AMELIA IS A REVENUE GENERATOR, NOT MUCH BUT IT IS, AND THINGS LIKE THE AQUATIC FACILITY, THERE'S A DIFFERENTIAL SURPLUS, RIGHT.
LIKE THE CITY TAXES SUPPORT THAT AND SO I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO LOOK AT THOSE RATES, IF YOU ARE GOING TO RAISE THEM FOR COUNTY RESIDENTS, TO LOOK AT THEM BASED OFF OF WHETHER THEY ARE REVENUE GENERATORS OR WHETHER IT'S CITY TAXPAYERS DIRECTLY THAT ARE SUPPORTING THE PROGRAMS INSTEAD OF LOOKING AT IT, LIKE THIS SHOULD BE 20 PERCENT MORE OR $11 DOESN'T LOOK LIKE A LOT.
I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT. I THINK YOU'LL GET MORE BUY-IN FROM YOUR COMMUNITY.
>> THANK YOU, MA'AM. >> THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT.
THAT CONCLUDES PUBLIC COMMENT. VICE-MAYOR? >> YES.
I WANTED TO ECHO WHAT COMMISSIONER ROSS SAID. THE COUNTY HAS FLAT-OUT REFUSED TO SUPPORT US CONSISTENTLY. WE ARE COUNTY RESIDENTS ALSO. MOST OF THESE COSTS, WHEN YOU SAY THEY'RE REVENUE, DON'T INCLUDE THE INDIRECT COSTS. THE CITY TAXPAYER HAVE BUILT AND SUPPORTED THESE FACILITIES FOR YEARS WITH NO ASSISTANCE FROM THE COUNTY.
THE COUNTY CAN COME YOU RIGHT NOW AND HELP SUPPORT THESE PROGRAMS. ALL THEY'RE TRYING TO DO IS SAY WON'T YOU KEEP DOING IT? WON'T YOU KEEP DOING IT? WE'LL GET BETTER NEXT YEAR. IT'S TIME WE SUPPORT OUR SUPPORT RESIDENTS.
AND MOST TEAMS AREN'T PAYING ANYWAY. >> WHAT.
>> MOST TEAMS DON'T PAY ANYTHING ANYWAY. >> RIGHT.
>> NO, MA'AM. WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO BACK AND FORTH.
>> THANK YOU. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, VICE-MAYOR.
ALL RIGHT. WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE CITY STAFF REVISED BUDGET.
AND THEIR RECOMMENDED CUTS. COMMISSIONERS, DOES EVERYONE HAVE THIS, A COPY OF THIS.
>> IN MY EMAIL? LET ME TAKE A LOOK. .
>> I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT -- CITY MANAGER, DO YOU HAVE ANY EXTRA COPIES?
>> [INDISCERNIBLE]. >> MS. BEST LEFT THE ROOM, I NOTE.
I HATE TO PROCEED WITHOUT OUR CLERK HERE. SHE'S BACK.
THANK YOU, MA'AM. WE'LL WAIT FOR HER TO BE SEATED. >> YES, SIR.
>> OKAY. SO CITY MANAGER, DO YOU WANT TO WALK US THROUGH THIS DOCUMENT
JUST LINE BY LINE, PLEASE. >> YOU HAVE AT THE TOP THE MAGIC NUMBER OF THE 417 THAT WE STARTED THE PREVIOUS BUDGET WORKSHOP WITH AND THEN YOU HAVE LINE-BY-LINE REDUCTIONS GETTING US DOWN TO THE PREFERRED ADJUSTED ROLL-BACK RATE BEGINNING WITH THE REMOVAL OF THE BUCCANEER FENCING THAT WAS TAKEN OUT. THAT WAS $50,000.
THERE'S A PROPOSAL TO REDUCE THE STREET'S PAVING BUDGET BY $100,000.
[00:40:03]
>> STOP. WHY DON'T WE STOP THERE. I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE DISCUSSION
ON THESE ITEMS. >> OKAY. >> THANK YOU, SIR.
ON THE BUCCANEER FIELD FENCING, WE TALKED IN LENGTH ABOUT THAT LAST WEEK AND THAT HAD BEEN CUT,
RIGHT. >> RIGHT. >> AND SO ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THAT? WE'RE ALL GOOD WITH THIS? OKAY.
NUMBER ONE, YOU'RE GOOD TO GO. ALL RIGHT. REDUCE STREET PAVING BY $100,000, AND IF I RECALL WE HAD PRETTY SPIRITED DISCUSSION ABOUT THE THE REDUCTION OF PAVING AS
I WOULD BE RELUCTANT TO REDUCE THAT AMOUNT. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE, AS I DRIVE AROUND THE STREETS, I FIND IT PARTICULARLY DOWNTOWN IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, THERE'S A NUMBER OF STREETS NOT IN GOOD SHAPE THAT I WOULD LIKE TO LOOK AT THAT NUMBER CLOSER AND I THINK THE CITY MANAGER CAME UP WITH SOME RECOMMENDATIONS TO REDUCE THAT DEBT TO 100,000 AND
GET IT FROM SOMEWHERE ELSE. >> IF I MAY, MR. MAYOR. >> YES, SIR.
>> SOME OF THOSE INCLUDED ALSO IN THE BUDGET IS $75,000 FOR SUBSTITUTE FOR THAT $100,000.
I HEARD FROM SEVERAL THAT YOU SUPPORT THE PROPOSED STREET RESURFACING PLAN SO HOW DO WE SUBSTITUTE FOR THAT $100,000? I HAVE IN THE BUDGET $75,000 FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF NORTH BEACH WALK-OVER WHICH WE COULD IN TURN SUBMIT AS A LEGISLATIVE PRIORITY.
THE STATE HAS BEEN VERY GRAY SUSPECTS IN SUPPORTING OUR REQUEST FOR BEACH-WALK-OVER, SO THAT'S REDUCED. THIS REDUCTION WOULD STILL BE OVER $700,000 FOR NEW STREETS
AND ROAD PAVINGS. >> COMMISSIONER ROSS? >> ADAMANTLY OPPOSED TO CUTTING THAT. THE HISTORY OF THE CITY MANIFESTED BY THIS BUILDING AND MULTIPLE OTHER BUILDINGS IS THAT WE DON'T REPAIR. WE DON'T REPAIR.
WE DON'T PUT MONEY INTO FIXING THINGS AND STREETS IS ONE OF THE ESSENTIAL SERVICES THAT WE'RE HERE TOO. WHAT THE CITY IS TO DO IS TO PROVIDE SERVICES AND ONE OF THE SERVICES THAT THEY DEPEND UPON IS THE ROADS. WE WENT OUT AND HIRED A VERY CAPABLE NATIONALLY RECOGNIZED FIRM AND CAME IN WITH A RECOMMENDATION THAT TO KEEP THE STATUS QUO YOU NEEDED TO STAY AT A CERTAIN RATE AND IF WE COULD GO TO THIS $100,000, WE'RE NOWHERE NEAR THAT RATE. SO I THINK WE NEED TO MAINTAIN OUR INFRASTRUCTURE, WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT, AND IF IT AIN'T BROKE, DON'T FIX IT. OUR ROADS ARE BROKE AND THEY NEED TO BE CONTINUALLY FIXED AND IT'S AN ONGOING PROCESS, SO I'M ADAMANTLY OPPOSED TO CUTTING
THAT FROM THE BUDGET. >> COMMISSIONER BEAN. >> WHAT WAS THE ROADS BUDGET
LAST YEAR? >> APPROXIMATELY $450,000. >> AND THE ROADS BUDGET THAT WAS
PROPOSED THIS YEAR WAS $650,000? >> CORRECT. >> SO WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS THAT A REDUCTION OF $100,000 FROM THAT BUDGET WOULD STILL BE OVER 100 -- IT WOULD BE $100,000 MORE THAN LAST YEAR SO WITH THIS REDUCTION WE'LL STILL SPEND YEAR OVER YEAR THE SAME AMOUNT THAT WE DID ON ROADS LAST YEAR PLUS AN ADDITIONAL $100,000. I SEE THAT AS ENOUGH FOR THE ROADS. THE ROADS WILL BE TAKEN CARE OF AND WE'LL MOVE FORWARD BUT WE DON'T NEED SPEND $200,000 MORE THAN WE DID LAST YEAR. WE ONLY NEED TO SPEND $100,000.
WE'RE ACTING LIKE THIS IS A BIG CUT BUT THIS IS AN INCREASING OVER LAST YEAR.
THIS IS AN INCREASE IN THE AMOUNT WE'RE SPENDING ON ROADS. I'M IN FAVOR OF TAKING OUT THE
$100,000. >> THANK YOU, SIR. >> COMMISSIONER ROSS.
>> WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, LAST YEAR WE DIDN'T SPEND ANYWHERE NEAR WHAT WE SHOULD HAVE SPENT.
WE'VE HIRED AN EXPERT. THE EXPERT, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, SAID YOU NEED TO SPEND X AMOUNT OF MONEY TO MAINTAIN THE CURRENT THING. YOU MAY GO AROUND AND SAY THEY'RE OKAY BUT THE PEOPLE WHO DID THE STUDY AND WENT THROUGH ALL THE ROADS SAID THAT NOT QUITE SURE. BECAUSE WE SPENT NOWHERE NEAR ENOUGH LAST YEAR AND WE'RE SPENDING A LITTLE BIT MORE THIS YEAR DOESN'T MAKE IT RIGHT. SO I'M OPPOSED, AS I SAID.
>> ANYONE ELSE? >> VICE-MAYOR? >> YEAH.
I AGREE. WE CONTINUALLY DEFER MAINTENANCE, SEEMS TO BE THE EASY THING TO, DO AND JUST WHEN YOU GO HOME TONIGHT, DRIVE DOWN FOURTH, FIFTH, SIX, SEVENTH
[00:45:01]
STREET, TAKE A LOOK. IT'S NOTHING BUT PATCH WORK. IT'S CRAZY.WE NEED TO MAINTAIN OUR STREETS. THE FACT THAT WE DIDN'T SPEND ENOUGH DOESN'T MEAN WE SHOULDN'T
SPEND ENOUGH. >> THANK YOU. WHERE WOULD YOU PROPOSE, IF WE WERE TO NOT CUT THIS $100,000 CITY MANAGER, WHERE WOULD YOU PROPOSE THAT WE WOULD COME UP
WITH THE $100,000? >> THE SUGGESTION OF TAKING THE $75,000 OUT FOR NORTH BEACH BOARDWALK, THAT 75,000, AND THAT, YES, TAKE ONLY $25,000 OUT OF THE STREET'S BUDGET.
OF THIS 100, INSTEAD OF 100, TAKE OUT 25,000, AND THEN ALSO THE $75,000 -- [CROSSTALK] --
>> WHAT DO YOU THINK THE ODDS ARE THAT THE STATE WOULD FUND OR HELP FUND THE $75,000? WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT NORTH BEACH YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT UP AT THE END OF TARPON, THE LAST
HANDICAP ACCESS. >> CORRECT. >> WHICH IS IN DIRE STRAITS.
>> I GO OUT THERE AND I USE IT BECAUSE IT'S THE BEST PLACE TO GO SHARK TEETH HUNTING OR
LOOKING AND IT'S IN BAD SHAPE. >> I WOULD CONTEND THE ODDS WOULD BE VERY GOOD BASED UPON THE EFFORTS OF MS. JACOBS AND THE CITY'S LOBBYIST. THE STATE HAS PROVIDED SUBSTANTIAL REVENUES TO SUPPORT I THINK IN THE LAST TWO YEARS HAVE BEEN FOUR BEACH WALK-OVERS FUNDED THROUGH STATE SOURCES SO I THINK WITH THE POSITION THAT SENATOR BEAN HOLDING, WE STAND A GOOD CHANCE OF A SOLID APPLICATION AND MOVING FORWARD WITH THAT.
>> I COULD GO THAT ROUTE IF WE CAN GET THE FUNDING TO DO WHAT THAT WOULD REQUIRE AND REDUCING $25,000 OFF THE BUDGET BUT WE'RE STILL TAKING THE $100,000 OUT, JUST NOT OUT OF STREETS.
>> YES, SIR. >> TAKE IT OUT OF THE NORTH BOARDWALK.
>> YES, SIR. >> TEMPORARILY. >> THAT'S THE ITEM ON DISCUSSION
IN FRONT OF YOU NOW. >> COMMISSIONER BEAN? >> THANK YOU.
I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THE EXPERT WHO I SAYING WE NEED TO SPEND THIS IS A GUY WHOSE JOB IT IS IS TO SELL ROADS. HE'S NOT GOING TO COME BACK AND SAY DON'T SPEND ANY MONEY ON THE ROADS. WE HIRED A GUY WHO'S GOING TO TELL US HOW BAD OUR ROADS ARE.
HE SAID, THEY'RE PRETTY BAD. YOU'VE GOT TO SPEND ALL THIS MONEY ON.
I SAY KEEP SPENDING IT ON ROADS AND THEN $100,000 OFF IS STILL $100,000 MORE THAN WE SPENT LAST YEAR. IT'S STILL A HALF MILLION DOLLARS ON ROADS.
IT'S NOT LIKE WE'RE NEGLECTING THEM. LET'S DO THIS THING WITH GETTING A GRANT AND TAKE THE ROADS -- I WOULD LOVE TO CUT BOTH. LET'S CUT THEM.
I'M IN. >> COMMISSIONER ROSS? >> I THINK THAT THINKING IS RIDICULOUS BUT THAT'S JUST ME. IF YOU WANT TO CUT SOMETHING, HOW ABOUT THE LAFITTE WALK-OVER?
>> WE'RE GOING ASTRAY. >> WE'RE LOOKING FOR OTHER WAYS TO REPLACE THE $100,000.
>> AGREED. BUT LET'S GET RESOLUTION AROUND THIS 100 GRAND.
>> VICE-MAYOR? >> YEAH. I THINK IT'S A VIABLE OPTION, 75,000, TAKE IT OUT OF NORTH BEACH AND I'LL COMMENT THAT IN THE LAST TWO YEARS WE'VE GOT FOUR BEACH WALK-OVERS BUILT BY STATE MONEY. WE HAVE ANOTHER ONE COMING UP NOW. WE WOULD HAVE HAD TEN THAT MADE IT THROUGH THE BUDGET BUT THEY GOT VETOED BECAUSE OF THE PANDEMIC SO OUR SUCCESS RATE WITH THOSE THANKS TO OUR STAFF IS REALLY GOOD. WE WILL BE TALKING ABOUT THAT THE 5TH OF OCTOBER, IN A
WORKSHOP, THE LEGISLATURE. >> THANK YOU, VICE-MAYOR. ARE WE GOOD WITH APPLYING FOR STATE FUNDING FOR THE WALK-OVER AND LOSING ONLY 25,000 OFF THIS BUDGET LINE?
>> AND [INDISCERNIBLE]. >> WELL, 75,000 FOR THE WALK-OVER, RIGHT?
WE STILL HAVE TO CUT 25? >> CORRECT. >> MAYBE I IS UNDERSTOOD.
YOU STILL HAVE TO FIND ANOTHER 25,000. >> YOU ARE ENTRENCHABLE.
[00:50:02]
>> LOWERING THIS, CUTTING IT BY 25 GRAND. >> INSTEAD OF 650,000, YOU ARE
SAYING IT'S $625,000 BUDGET, RIGHT? >> CORRECT.
>> CORRECT. >> SAY THAT AGAIN. >> INSTEAD OF A $650,000 LINE ITEM, IT'S GOING TO BE A $625,000 LINE ITEM BECAUSE WE'RE STILL GOING TO CUT $25,000 OFF
TO GET IT DOWN. >> STILL GOING TO CUT $25,000 OUT OF THE ROADS.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? >> YES, SIR. >> I DON'T AGREE WITH IT.
>> I'LL AGREE. >> COMMISSIONER BEAN. >> SOUNDS GOOD.
>> I'LL GIVE YOU A MIDDLE THUMB BECAUSE I WOULD LIKE ALL OF ALL OF IT CUT BUT I'LL TAKE 25.
>> LET'S PROCEED WITH THE CITY MANAGER'S PLAN FOR THE STATE FUNDING AND THEN REDUCING THE PREPAVING BUDGET BY 25,000. ALL RIGHT. NEXT LINE ITEM, CITY MANAGER?
>> WE DID GO OUT FOR QUOTES ON THE PROPOSED SKID STEER. THAT BID CAME IN, THE QUOTE, $10,000 LOWER THAN WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY PROPOSED IN THE BUDGET SO THAT'S A $10,000
REDUCTION. >> I THINK WE'RE ALL GOOD WITH THAT.
>> THE NEXT TWO ITEMS MEET THE STATE LEGISLATION FOR IMPACT FEES SO THOSE ARE REMOVED FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO THE APPROPRIATE IMPACT FEES, $20,000 FOR BEACH RANGER VEHICLE AND
$12,000 FOR AN OCEAN RESCUE VEHICLE. >> OKAY.
>> THE GENERATOR, WHICH WAS PREVIOUSLY DIVIDED BETWEEN I BELIEVE STREETS AND FLEET, WE MOVED THAT ENTIRE PURCHASE OVER TO FLEET WHICH IS AN INTERNAL SERVICE FUND SO THAT RESULTS IN
A REDUCTION OF $17,000 TO THE GENERAL FUND. >> OKAY.
GOOD WITH THAT, COMMISSIONERS? ALL RIGHT. >> SAME THING WITH THE STAIRS.
THESE ARE STARES LEADING TO THE UPSTAIRS AT THE -- THESE ARE THE STAIRS LEADING TO THE UPSTAIRS
AND THEY ARE SHIFTED ENTIRELY TO FLEET. >> ALL RIGHT.
>> AND THEN THE NEXT LINE IS A REDUCTION OF STREET SIGNAGE. AND WE BELIEVE THAT WE CAN -- WE BELIEVE THAT WE CAN MANAGE THAT LOT REDUCTION OF $5,000 FOR OUR SIGN PRODUCTION EQUIPMENT.
>> OKAY. >> BADGE LOCKS ARE REDUCED ALSO. AGAIN, LOWER ESTIMATED COST.
PROBABLY NOT GET AS SUCCESS LOCKS AS ORIGINALLY INTENDED. STREETS AND ROADS MATERIAL, THIS IS THE MATERIAL, WHETHER IT'S ASPHALT, LIME ROCK, THINGS LIKE THAT, SIMPLE REDUCTION OF $5,000
TO THAT LINE ITEM AS WELL. SAME THING WITH CHEMICALS. >> FIRE TRAVEL.
>> FIRE DEPARTMENT TRAVEL, INCLUDED IN THE FIRE DEPARTMENT CONTRACT WHICH WE ENTER INTO NEGOTIATIONS TOMORROW, WE HAVE TO AM LOCATE SO MUCH DOLLARS PER FIREFIGHTER FOR TWO TRAINING SESSIONS PER YEAR. RARELY IS THAT FULLY EXPENDED SO IT CAN PROBABLY BE MANAGED WITHIN THAT BUDGET AND WE'RE IN NEGOTIATIONS AS WELL SO WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO MAINTAIN THAT
REDUCTION. >> THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT.
FINANCE WORK STATIONS, SOME OF THOSE HAVE BEEN REPLACED THIS YEAR.
BASICALLY THAT INCREASE WAS TO REPLACE WORK STATIONS IN THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT WHICH WERE APPROXIMATELY TEN TO 15 YEARS OLD, SO THAT PURCHASE, THE BULK OF THAT PURCHASE HAS BEEN MADE
THIS YEAR SO IT'S NOT NECESSARY IN NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET. >> OKAY.
>> PLANNING DEPARTMENT TRAVEL, TRAINING AND TRAVEL, WE JUST ELIMINATED SOME CONFERENCES AND TRAINING SESSIONS FOR THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT SO THAT LEAVES THAT $5,000 EXPENDITURE REDUCTION THERE. THE NEXT THREE LINES, POLICE, AND THEY ARE MOVED FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO IMPACT FEES AND THE ONE POLICE VEHICLE PURCHASE WENT TO FUND 190, SO THEY'RE
REMOVED FROM THE GENERAL FUND. >> GOT IT. >> THEN THE REMAINING ITEMS ARE MAINTENANCE AND REPLACEMENT ITEMS AT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, REDUCTION IN THE NUMBER OF GLASS DOORS TO REPLACE, ELIMINATE REPLACING FENCING, REMOVE COURTYARD LANDSCAPING, REMOVE AN OUTDOOR OUTSIDE LAWN SERVICE AND ELIMINATE THE REPLACEMENT OF AN AWNING AT THE POLICE STATION.
ALL THOSE REDUCTIONS LEAD TO A SHORTFALL OF $33,000 AND WITH THE REDUCTION IN THE TRANSFER,
[00:55:07]
YOU ARE TO THE GOOD APPROXIMATELY $11,000. >> [INDISCERNIBLE].
>> I'M SORRY? WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY, "TO THE GOOD"?
>> AN $11,000 SURPLUS. >> COMMENTS? VICE-MAYOR?
>> I SUPPORT THAT AND, YOU KNOW, I WANT TO COMMENT THAT I BELIEVE THIS IS THE WAY YOU DO BUDGETS.
YOU GO TO THE PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY ADMINISTER THE MONEY AND YOU GET THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS. EVEN IF THEY DON'T WANT TO CUT THEY'RE BETTER AT CUTTING THAN
WE WERE. >> ANY OTHER COMMENTS, COMMISSIONERS?
>> I HAVE ONE, JUST MAINLY MOSTLY THE STUFF THAT'S BEEN CUT IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, THE GLASS DOORS, AND JUST THE AWNING AND STUFF, IT CAN WAIT ANOTHER YEAR, I'M ASSUMING?
>> YES. REDUCTIONS TO THE RECOMMENDATION OF CHIEF FOXWORTH.
>> I'M HAPPY WE GOT HERE AND WE'RE DOING IT LEGALLY AND MAKING SURE WE ARE MEETING ALL REQUIREMENTS. I FURTHER WANT TO ASK TO ONE OF THE POINTS FROM PUBLIC COMMENT, ARE WE GOOD ON THE MATCHING GRANT? IS THAT INCLUDED IN THIS BUDGET OR IF WE WANTED TO MAKE THAT GRANT MATCH WE WOULD STILL NEED TO DO FURTHER?
>> [INDISCERNIBLE]. >> THE DREDGING FOR THE MARINA. >> THAT'S INCLUDED IN THE
BUDGET. >> EXCELLENT. >> OKAY.
>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS. >> COMMISSIONER ROSS? >> I PROPOSE WE LEAD FROM THE FRONT AND COMMISSIONER BEAN SAID WE SHOULD CUT THE BUDGET BY 10 PERCENT AND I WOULD PROPOSE
THAT WE CUT OUR SALARIES BY 10 PERCENT. >> GENTLEMEN, I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD EVEN GO HERE. IT'S BEEN BROUGHT YOU TWICE. IT'S INSULTING AND DON'T MAKE ME GO TO HOW MUCH DOES AN EMERGENCY ROOM PHYSICIAN MAKE PER SHIFT. I DON'T WANT TO GO THERE.
I DON'T WANT TO PLAY THAT GAME. IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. GENTLEMEN, IF YOU WANT TO THE HAVE THIS DISCUSSION I WON'T CUT YOU OFF BUT I THINK IT'S INAPPROPRIATE.
WE JUST BALANCE THE BUDGET. I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO GO HERE, PERSONALLY.
ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONER BEAN? >> I'M GOOD.
APPRECIATE IT. >> DO WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT IMPACT FEES? DO WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT IMPACT FEES? VICE-MAYOR?
>> I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO. THE LAW IS VERY SPECIFIC AND THE NEW INFRASTRUCTURE LAW IS VERY SPECIFIC AND OUR STAFF IS WELL-COMPETENT TO DETERMINE WHAT WE CAN USE THEM FOR AND WHAT WE CAN'T USE THEM FOR. IT'S INFRASTRUCTURE DUE TO NEW GROWTH AND WE HAVE TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS. THERE'S BEEN MANY COURT CASES, SOME COURT CASES, AND SOME WIN AND LOSE, IF IT'S CHALLENGED, AND I THINK -- I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO DISCUSS IT BUT THE LAW
IS VERY SPECIFIC. >> ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONER BEAN?
>> I WANT TO CONFIRM WITH OUR CITY STAFF THAT THE FIVE ITEMS THAT COME FROM -- THESE ARE DUE TO GROWTH. THESE WOULD MEET THE DEFINITION AND I WANT TO CONFIRM WITH CITY STAFF THIS TIME BEFORE WE LEAVE TODAY THAT WHAT WE ARE -- IT'S MUCH LESS THAN WE WERE BEFORE BECAUSE WE HAVE IDENTIFIED FIVE ITEMS ARE DUE TO NEW GROWTH AND ARE WHAT IMPACT FEES WERE
INTENDED TO BE USED. THAT WILL WAS MY COMMENT. >> IF I MAY ASK, MR. MAYOR, JUST
TO THE ATTORNEY. >> YES. >> WE WERE ABLE TO TAKE EACH ONE, YES, AND THE COMPTROLLER AND I CONFERRED ABOUT IT AND OF COURSE WITH THE DEPARTMENT DIRECTORS AND WE FOUND THAT THEY WERE ADDITIONAL OR NEW ITEMS THAT ARE DUE TO GROWTH.
>> THANK YOU. EXCELLENT. >> YES.
>> CITY ATTORNEY, DURING OUR LUNCH LAST FRIDAY WE DISCUSSED THE PECK CENTER AND WE BOTH GREED THOSE ARE LIKELY A BRIDGE TOO FAR. HOWEVER, I DID RAISE ABOUT ONE DOZEN OTHER ITEMS THAT WERE $28,500 THAT WERE REPLACEMENT IN PARKS AND REC AND ASKED YOU FOR
A DETERMINATION ON THOSE. >> I HAVE THAT. >> GREAT.
>> AND WHAT DID YOU DETERMINE? >> AND I THINK THAT THIS -- IT WILL BE A SHORT DISCUSSION UNLESS THERE'S QUESTIONS BUT I THINK IT WILL HELP MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TOO TO UNDERSTAND.
[01:00:08]
THE $28,500, IN PARKS AND REC, WAS FOR $3,000 TO REPLACE TWO WATER FOUNTAINS, $2,000 TO REPAIR AND REPLACE LIGHTENING AT MAIN BEACH, $2,500 TO REPLACE THE HVAC UNIT ON TOP WARNER, REPLACE THE WINDER PUMP, AND THE MLK KITTY TOOL FEATURE, WHICH IS THE SLIDE.I ASKED PARKS AND REC TO TELL ME WHAT THOSE PROJECTS WERE, EXACTLY WHAT WE WERE REPLACING, AND SO FOR EACH ONE I'LL GO THROUGH. THE REPLACEMENT OF THE FOUNTAINS, THE FOUNTAINS ARE TO BE REPLACED WITH THE EXACT SAME STYLE AND SPECIFIC INDICATIONS AND THEY'RE BEING REPLACED BECAUSE THEY HAVE FAILED AND THEY'VE -- THEIR LIFE IS OVER.
THEY'RE DONE. THE MAIN BEACH LIGHTS -- >> IS THAT PROPERTY OR NOT?
>> THAT IS NOT AN APPROPRIATE EXPENDITURE OF IMPACT FEES. >> OKAY.
>> BECAUSE IT'S NOT DUE TO GROWTH. THAT'S THE OTHER PART, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE RATIONALE NEXUS TEST, IT'S DUAL, AND PART OF THIS IS IS THIS NECESSITATED BY GROWTH? REPLACE DAMAGE LIGHTS AT MAIN BEACH.
THEY ARE DAMAGED AND FAILING AND BEING REPLACED BY THE EXACT SAME LIGHTS.
WE'RE NOT ADDING THEM OR ADDING COMPONENTS TO LIGHTS OR ADDING BRIGHTER LIGHTS.
IT'S JUST REPLACING DAMAGE AND FAILING LIGHTS AND [INDISCERNIBLE].
>> THE AC UNIT AT POP WARNER IS REPLACED WITH THE SAME EXACT TONNAGE UNIT, REPLACING A UNIT THAT HAS FAILED AND IS OLD. SO I'M SURE THE ONE ENHANCEMENT IS PROBABLY THE SEAR RATING IS PROBABLY HIGHER BECAUSE THEY GO UP IN TERMS OF WHAT'S REQUIRED& BUT OTHER THAN THAT IT'S THE SAME HVAC SYSTEM, NOT AN ADDITIONAL SYSTEM TO KEEP THE FACILITY OPEN MORE SO IT'S NOT AN PROCEDURE USE OF IMPACT FEES. THE PUMP AT THE PIRATE PLAYGROUND IS BEING REPLACED WITH THE EXACT SAME PUMP, THE INTERIOR OF THE PUMP FAILED ENTIRELY DUE TO ITS AGE AND ITS USE SO IT'S BEING REPLACED WITH THE SAME PUMP, NOT A NEW PUMP OR ADDITIONAL PUMP.
IT'S A NEW PUMP BUT NOT ADDITIONAL. IT DOESN'T HAVE ADDITIONAL FEATURES. IT'S NOT AN APPROPRIATE USE OF IMPACT FEES.
LASTLY THE WATER SLIDE FEATURE AT THE MLK POOL, IT'S CLOSE TO FAILURE AND BEFORE IT NAMES IT NEEDS TO BE REPLACED AND THAT'S DUE TO AGE AND WEATHER AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
SO IT'S NOT AN APPROPRIATE USE OF IMPACT FEES. >> THANK YOU.
I DID TEN YEARS WORTH OF IMPACT FEES USE AND QUOTES FROM THE VICE-MAYOR, FROM THE ATTORNEY, THE NEW LEGISLATION, BUT I'M NOT GOING TO GO DOWN THIS PATH. WE HAVE BALANCED THE BUDGET AND INSTEAD WE'LL DISCUSS IMPACT FEES ON A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS BUT I DO AGREE WITH WHAT THE -- IN REVIEWING VIDEO OF ALL OF THESE DISCUSSIONS, THE VICE-MAYOR REPEATEDLY SAID: WE NEED A CITY POLICY. COMMISSIONER ROSS OPPOSED THAT, AND THE STATE LAW IS VAGUE AND NEBULOUS, AND THE IMPACT FEE USE FOR THE PAST FOR YOU YEARS IS INCONSISTENT AS HECK AND THE ONLY WAY WE'RE GOING TO GET CONSISTENCY IS TO HAVE A CITY POLICY SO I WOULD ASK THE CITY ATTORNEY TO TRY TO DRAFT SOMETHING SO THAT WE CAN FINALLY FIGURE THIS OUT.
SO ANY OTHER BUSINESS? SEEING NONE, THEN COMMISSIONER BEAN?
>> I JUST REMEMBERED I WANTED TO DO THIS. THANK YOU TO THE CITY STAFF FOR COMING BACK WITH CUTS. I APPRECIATE ALL THE DEPARTMENTS THAT DID MAKE THE CUTS TO BALANCE THE BUDGET AND I WANT TO THE SAY THANKS TO CITY STAFF. EXCELLENT WORK.
>> THANK YOU. >> JUST A REMINDER, THE NEXT STEP IN THE BUDGET PROCESS IS THE PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULED FOR 5:05 SEPTEMBER 7TH. THAT IS THE FIRST OF TWO REQUIRED PUBLIC HEARINGS, SO THAT IS THE NEXT STEP IN THE BUDGET PROCESS.
>> WE HAVE A PRIOR MEETING TO THAT, CORRECT? >> WE HAVE THE WORKSHOP SCHEDULED AT 4:00 P.M. TO DISCUSS FEES, FEE SCHEDULE THAT WAS -- THE FIRST READING WAS PRESENTED TO YOU AND THE DISCUSSION WAS TO COME BACK AND HAVE A DEDICATED WORKSHOP AND THAT IS SCHEDULED AT 4:00 P.M. ON SEPTEMBER 7. IF YOU CAN SEND US REMINDERS,
[01:05:01]
THAT IS AN UNUSUAL ORDER OF MEETINGS ON THAT DATE, THAT WOULD BE GREATLY APPRECIATED AND WE'LL ALL BE