[00:00:06]
>> LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE'RE CALLING THIS MEETING TO ORDER.
AS ALWAYS WE'LL START WITH THE ROLL CALL.
>> WE WILL NOW STAND FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
[4.1 Water and Wastewater Capacity Fees]
>> ALL RIGHT. SOT STARTING OFF THIS WORKSHOP WE FIRST HAVE A PRESENTATION FROM OUR -- ANDRE IS HERE TO PRESENT THAT. WE HAVE OUR WATER AND WASTE
WATER CAPACITY FEES AND A STUDY. >> GOOD EVENING.
UTILITIES DIRECTOR. FIRST OFF I NEED TO APOLOGIZE.
ON THE AGENDA WE HAD TWO PRESENTATIONS ON OUR RATE STUDY AND CAPACITY FEES. THE WATER ASSOCIATION IS WORKING ON THE RATE CHANGE FOR US AND HAD DELAYS IN FINALIZING THAT REPORT. THEY WERE UNABLE TO BE HERE TO MAKE THAT PRESENTATION HERE TONIGHT.
SO WE'VE KIND OF BACKED UP JUST A LITTLE BIT AND WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO IN LIEU OF THAT, WE HAVE A TIMELINE WITH REGARD TO THE RATE INCREASE. WE HAVE TO PROVIDE NOTICE TO ALL RATE PAYERS OF ANY MEETINGS AT WHICH POTENTIAL RATE INCREASES WILL BE DISCUSSED. THAT NOTICE BEGAN THIS MONTH.
BOTH ON THE UTILITIES WEBSITE AS WELL AS ON OUR UTILITY BILL.
SO IN THE ABSENCE OF A FINALIZED STUDY, WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO IS JUST KIND OF PRESENT A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF UTILITY RATE STRUCTURES AND WHAT OUR RECOMMENDATION IS GOING TO BE MOVING FORWARD. WE HAVE BOTH RATES AND FEES IN THE UTILITY SECTION OF THE MASTER FEE SCHEDULE.
WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS IDENTIFIES THAT PERTAIN TO UTILITY EXTENSIONS. WHEN WE GET AN APPLICATION FOR SERVICE. IF THERE'S NOT WATER AND SEWER MAIN DIRECTLY OUTSIDE THE PROPERTY, WE'LL CALCULATE THE FEE TO BRING THE REQUESTED SERVICE TO THE PROPERTY AND THIS IS HOW WE BREAK DOWN OUR FEES. WE RAISED THESE LAST YEAR TO -- THEY HAVEN'T BEEN UPDATED IN QUITE SOME TIME.
SO THESE FEES WE'RE NOT PROPOSING AN INCREASE AT TALL AT THIS TIME. JUST TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF HOW THESE FEETS ARE SET. IT'S PER FOOTAGE LINE ITEMS FOR THE LARGER -- AND THINGS LIKE THAT ARE WHAT OUR ACTUAL COSTS ARE. WE DON'T KNOW ALL THE PARTICULARS FOR A DIFFERENT SITUATION.
MOVING ON TO THE RATES, WHAT OUR ORDINANCE SECTION 82-160 REQUIRES US TO DO OR RECOMMENDS THAT WE DO IS YEARLY INCREASE OF EITHER 3% FOR THE 12 MONTH CHANGE IN CONSUMER PRICE INDEX.
IF YOU RECALL LAST YEAR, WE ELECTED TO ONLY DO THE 3% INCREASE. AT THE TIME THE CONSUMER PRICE INDEX WAS MUCH HIGHER BUT GIVEN SEVERAL FACTORS WE DECIDED THAT 3% WAS MORE PRUDENT AT THAT TIME.
WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW IS 5.7%. AND THIS IS FROM THE U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS. IT IS A CPI THAT'S SPECIFIC TO WATER AND SEWER AND TRASH BEING COMBINED.
SO OUR RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS YEAR IS GOING TO BE AN INCREASE IN WATER SEWER RATES AT 5.7%. GIVING YOU AN IDEA, THIS IS HOW WE BREAK DOWN OUR UTILITY RATES. THIS IS OUR WATER FEES.
IT'S BASED ON THE DIFFERENT METER SIZES.
WE HAVE BOTH A BASE RATE AND USAGE RATE.
AND THE BASE RATE IS INTENDED TO REFLECT THE CAPACITY FOR USAGE.
INFLICT YOU HAVE A FOUR-INCH METER YOU MIGHT NOT BE USING ANY WATER BUT OUR SYSTEM HAS TO BE PREPARED TO DELIVER THAT WATER ANY TIME OF DAY. SAME WITH FIRE HYDRANTS.
YOU KNOW, ANY SYSTEM IN THE CITY IT'S -- YOUR USAGE IS ON TOP OF THAT BASE RATE WHICH IS THAT CONSTANT AVAILABILITY OF SERVICE. SO THIS IS JUST THE BREAKDOWN OF -- WE HAVE MULTIFAMILY, MULTICOMMERCIAL.
[00:05:01]
THE DIFFERENT FACTORS. THIS REFLECTS -- THE RED NUMBERS REFLECT THAT 5.7%. THIS IS THE SAME INFORMATION FOR OUR WASTE WATER. IT'S A LITTLE MORE SIMPLE.THE USAGE FOR THIS IS ALSO BASED ON THE WATER FLOW.
THAT'S ONE OF OUR REQUIREMENTS HAVE YOU TO HAVE WATER TO GET WASTE WATER BECAUSE THAT'S THE ONLY WAY WE KNOW HOW MUCH WATER IS COMING INTO THE SYSTEM. THE -- WE'RE PROPOSING THE SAME 5.7% INCREASE FOR STORM WATER FEES WHICH ARE FLAT FEE JUST BASED ON EITHER RESIDENTIAL OR COMMERCIAL UNITS.
SO WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF TRYING TO UPDATE OUR PROCESS FOR ASSESSING THOSE FEES. TO UTILIZE THE PROPERTY APPRAISER DATA THAT INCLUDES IMIMPERVIOUS COVERAGE ON A PARCEL. RIGHT NOW NO MATTER THE SIZE HOUSE THERE'S A FLAT FEE. SO THAT IS JUST IN BRIEF WHAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING TO MOVE FORWARD TO TRY TO CATCH UP.
WE HAD COST INCREASES THAT FAR EXCEEDED THE CONSUMER PRICE INDEX. IN THE LAST FEW YEARS THE CHLORINE GAS WE USE HAS MORE THAN DOUBLED.
PVC PIPE HAS GONE UP 50%. GRASS FITTINGS FOR OUR WATER SYSTEM HAVE GONE UP MORE THAN 50%.
WE'RE STILL STRUGGLING WITH AVAILABILITY FOR A LOT OF IT.
THIS IS JUST TRYING TO KEEP US MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.
AND WHEN WE COMPLETE THIS RATE STUDY WITH THE FLORIDA WATER ASSOCIATION WE'LL FIGURE OUT WHETHER WE BRING THAT BACK NEXT YEAR WHEN WE'RE DEALING WITH RATES AND FEES OR WHETHER WE WANT TO DO SOMETHING SOONER AND PRESENT THAT AND MAYBE GET SOME DIRECTION.
SO WE'RE NOT ASKING -- THERE'S NO APPROVALS. WE'RE JURS WORKSHOPING THIS -- JUST WORKSHOPING THIS BUT THIS IS OUR
RECOMMENDATION MOVING FORWARD. >> THANK YOU.
>> BEFORE YOU GO I BELIEVE THE COMMISSION HAS A FEW QUESTIONS FOR YOU AND I'LL START WITH ONE. FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YOU DO A GREAT JOB RUNNING OUR UTILITIIES DEPARTMENT. WE JUST REALLY APPRECIATE THAT.
MY QUESTION IS AND I KNOW THAT OUR UTILITIES DEPARTMENT HAS BEEN IN THE BLACK AND VERY WELL MANAGED AND THE FUNDS HAVE MORE THAN EXCEEDED THE COST OF THE MAINTENANCE AND UPKEEP OF OUR WONDERFUL UTILITIES SYSTEM. WILL THIS 5.6% INCREASE MATCH HADDING INFLATION, WILL WE BE IN GOOD SHAPE NEXT YEAR?
>> YES, WE WILL. THE RATE STUDY AS STANDALOAN DOCUMENT ANALYZING THE ENTIRE SYSTEM WAS ON TRACK TO PROPOSE A LARGER INCREASE. WE'RE LOOKING AT A TEN-YEAR PLAN. AND WE DID HAVE A DEFICIT THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS. WE WERE -- OUR EXPENSES EXCEEDED OUR REVENUE JUST BECAUSE OF THESE LARGE MATERIAL INCREASES THAT WE'RE ABSORBING. BUT THAT'S WHY WE RUN A RESERVE TO HELP BALANCE THOSE OUT. BUT WE DO HAVE SOME LARGE UPCOMING EXPENSES RELATED TO THE REUSE SYSTEM THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE REQUIRED TO PUT IN PLACE BY THE WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT AS A CONDITION OF OUR USE PERMIT WHICH GOES IN HAND IN HAND WITH WASTE WATER REQUIREMENTS TO ELIMINATE OUR SURFACE TO WATER DISCHARGE FROM OUR TREATMENT PLANTED BY THE YEAR 2032.
THOSE ARE FACTORED IN. >> ABSOLUTELY.
THE 5.6% INCREASE WILL PUT US BACK IN NOT THE DEFICIT.
IS THAT CORRECT? >> WE STILL MIGHT BE A LITTLE SHY NEXT YEAR. AGAIN, I WAS HOPING TO HAVE THE FULL ABILITY TO GRAPH OUT OUR TEN YEAR PLAN TO SEE WHERE THIS RATE INCREASE PUTS US. SO UNFORTUNATELY IT DOESN'T QUITE GET US THERE BUT IN THE ABSENCE OF A FULL STUDY, THIS IS WHAT I'M COMFORTABLE RECOMMENDING AT THIS TIME.
>> I APPRECIATE YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. SO BASICALLY ANDRE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS MY ONLY QUESTION, I WANT TO GO BACK FOR A SECOND.
WHEN YOU FIRST STARTED YOUR PRESENTATION, YOU SAID THAT PRICE INDEX THAT YOU CAME WITH WAS 5.6 OR 5.7%.
THAT INVOLVED IN WHAT THEY LOOK AT AS WATER, SEWAGE, AND GARBAGE. WHY IS THAT WORD IN THERE, GARBAGE. AND THEN ALSO, BASED ON THAT,
[00:10:04]
JUST IF THAT'S JUST AN INDEX PUT OUT NATIONALLY OR KIND OF GIVES US A GAUGE, WHY -->> THIS IS WHAT -- THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT METHODS AND OUR ORDINANCE DOESN'T SPECIFY. WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT ORDINANCE REVISIONS IN THE FUTURE, WE WOULD LIKE TO SPECIFY A SPECIFIC INDEX THAT WE'RE TRYING TO TRACK.
BUT I BELIEVE THIS IS -- THERE'S SOME COMMONALTIES WHICH IS WHY
THEY'RE IN ONE LINE ITEM. >> I UNDERSTAND.
YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH 5.6 OR 5.7% BECAUSE YOU KNOW THAT'S ALREADY GOING TO PUT US BEHIND SLIGHTLY OR AT EVEN BUT BEHIND
RATE STUDIES WAS ON TRACK TO RECOMMEND A LARGER INCREASE.
>> ALL RIGHT. BUT BECAUSE THAT'S NOT FINALIZED, WE DON'T HAVE THAT TO RELY WITH YOU AND PRESENT TONIGHT. THAT'S WHY I'M RECOMMENDING IT
THANK YOU. >> ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS?
>> SEEING NONE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR
AT THIS TIME I WOULD LIKE TO INTRODUCE CATHERINE VANSANDT.
SHE'S OUR CONSULTEN AND HELPING US COMPLETE OUR CAPACITY FEE STUDY.
>> APOLOGIZE THAT YOU CAN'T SEE THAT ON THE SCREEN BUT YOU CAN --
>>. >> SO AS COMMISSION YOU REQUESTED IT AND THE FLORIDA WATER ASSOCIATION DO AN IMPACT FEE STUDY FOR UTILITIES. I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU BACKGROUND AND EXPLAIN WHY A BETTER NAME FOR IT IS CAPACITY FEE STUDY RATHER THAN IMPACT FEE STUDY. I'LL GIVE YOU SOME BACKGROUND ON WHAT IT MEANS AND ALSO TELL YOU THE NUMBERS THAT COME UP FOR YOUR CITY. LET'S SEE.
FLORIDA RURAL WATER ASSOCIATION SPECIALIZES IN WATER AND WASTE WATER RATES AND HAS COMPLETED AT THIS POINT WELL OVER A THOUSAND FINANCING STUDIES AND HAS NEVER HAD A LEGAL CHALLENGE.
I THINK THAT'S ESPECIALLY IMPORTANT IN THIS AREA.
WE USE INDUSTRY STANDARDS AND IT'S BASED ON FLORIDA STATUTES, FLORIDA CASE LAW, REVIEWED BY ATTORNEYS SPECIALIZING IN THIS KIND OF WORK BEFORE IT COMES TO YOU.
YOU'VE ALREADY HEARD THERE'S FOUR FUNDING SOURCES FOR UTILITY. RATES WHICH WE'VE GONE THROUGH HERE AND WE KNOW ABOUT THOSE BECAUSE WE SEE THEM EVERY MONTH.
IT'S JUST WHAT IT COSTS THE UTILITY TO DO THAT PARTICULAR CONNECTION. AND THEN MISCELLANEOUS FEES, LATE CHARGES, TURNOFFS THAT COME FROM THE UTILITY.
CAPACITY FEES ARE A ONE TIME CHARGE THAT IS ASSESSED TO A NEW USER COMING INTO THE SYSTEM. EXISTING USERS DO NOT PAY THEM.
AND WHAT IT IS, IS UTILITY CANNOT HAVE SOMEBODY SAY I'M BUILDING 50 NEW HOUSES. THEY'RE GOING TO BE READY IN A YEAR. AND COME INTO YOUR SYSTEM AND, OKAY, WILL IT SPAN THE PLANT. WE'LL MAKE OUR PIPES BIGGER.
ADD LIFT STATIONS. IT TAKES A LONG TIME TO HAVE
[00:15:02]
UTILITIES PREPARED. SO THAT IT CAN BE AVAILABLE WHEN THEY WANT TO COME ON BOARD. THE CAPACITY FEES ARE -- AND THAT'S WHY I SAID IT'S CAPACITY FEES RATHER THAN IMPACT FEES.SIX CAPITAL COSTS SO THAT YOU'RE PAYING FOR TREATMENT PLANS, STRUCTURE. IT'S NOT YOUR OPERATIONS COST.
IT'S NOT YOUR PAYING FOR SALARY. THIS IS PAYING FOR THE INFRASTRUCTURE TO PROVIDE WATER AND SEWER TO NEW PEOPLE COMING INTO THE SYSTEM. YOUR EXISTING UTILITY RATES HAVE ALREADY BEEN PAID FOR. SO YOU'VE HAD TO GET LOANS.
THEY'VE HAD TO INCORPORATE INTO THEIR RATES THE REPAYMENTS ON THE LOANS. SO THE FAIR WAY TO HANDLE IT IS MAKE IT POSSIBLE FOR THE NEW USERS TO PAY FOR THE CAPACITY THAT'S ALREADY BEEN PILL THERE. THERE'S ALWAYS A QUESTION OF DO WE REALLY NEED TO -- DO WE REALLY NEED TO ADD ANOTHER FEE AND IT'S A REASONABLE QUESTION IN OUR ECONOMY RIGHT NOW.
AND WE'RE GOING TO ADDRESS THAT BUT THE FACT IS THESE ARE COSTS THAT HAVE TO BE PAID AND SOMEBODY'S GOING TO HAVE TO PAY THEM. SO YOU CAN HAVE YOUR EXISTING USERS UNEQUITABLELY PAY FOR THE COST OF NEW PEOPLE COMING IN AND USING THE CAPACITY THAT'S BEEN HELD FOR THEM OR THOSE COMING IN AND NEEDING THAT CAPACITY CAN COME IN AND PAY FOR THE AMOUNT THAT THEY NEED. AN EXAMPLE WOULD BE A BUS.
YOU HAVE TO HAVE SEATS READY FOR WHO IS GOING TO GET ON THE BUS.
THE EXISTING RATES PAY FOR THE OPERATION AND GAS AND DRIVER, REPAIRS ON THE BUS. THAT'S YOUR RATES.
THE RATE PAYERS HAVE PAID FOR THAT.
AND THEY ARE PAYING FOR THAT. CAPACITY FEES ARE THE NEW USERS COMING IN HAVING THEIR SEAT THAT YOU'VE BEEN HOLDING FOR THEM TO BE ABLE TO USE SO THAT'S THE JUSTIFIABLE COST.
THE IDEA IS THAT THE NEW DEVELOPMENT PAYS ITS OWN WAY, MINIMIZE THE DEBT BECAUSE AS ANDRE MENTIONED YOU HAVE SOME BIG COSTS COMING UP. YOU CAN CHOOSE WHETHER TO EQUITABLY HAVE YOUR UTILITY BEING PAID FOR WHAT HAVE YOU IN PLACE OR INCUR MORE AND MORE DEBT AND ALSO PROVIDE FOR APPROPRIATE LEVEL OF RETAINED EARNINGS FOR YOU TO BE ABLE TO USE FOR WHAT'S NEEDED TO KEEP THE SYSTEM RUNNING PROPERLY FOR YOUR EXISTING USERS AND NEW USERS.
AND THAT WAS THE QUESTION. IS ONE MORE FEE REALLY NEEDED.
WHAT I HAVEN'T MENTIONED YET IS YOU ARE LEGALLY REQUIREDED TO PROVIDE THIS CAPACITY. WHEN YOU GET WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT PERMITS, WATER TREATMENT PLANT PERMITS, YOU HAVE TO DEMONSTRATE THE FLOW YOU'RE EXPECTING THE NEXT 20 YEARS AND IF YOU'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE THE CAPACITY FOR YOUR FUTURE FLOW EVEN THEN YOU HAVE TO SHOW OKAY WE'VE HIRED A CONSUL ABOUT THE. WE'RE -- CONSULTANT.
WE'RE ALREADY PREPARING AND DOING PLANNING AND PEA PREPARING HOW TO PAY FOR THAT INFRASTRUCTURE.
GOING FOR LOANS WITH THE STATE, WITH PRIVATE LENDERS.
IT MAKES MANY YEARS TO BUILD CAPACITY INTO A SYSTEM.
SO YOU HAVE TO PLAN AHEAD OF TIME AND HAVE THAT EXTRA CAPACITY AVAILABLE. IN ADDITION WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WATER AND WASTE WATER AND EVEN IN YOUR CASE TALKING ABOUT A SALT WATER ENVIRONMENT. IT TAKES UTILITIES HAVE TO MAINTAIN ALL OF IT IN A GOOD OPERATING CONDITION AND THEY'RE
[00:20:01]
WORKING AGAINST NATURE AND THE USAGE THAT HAPPENS.SO HOW THE CAPACITY FEES ARE DETERMINED, THERE'S A CHOICE.
YOU CAN JUST SEE WHAT OTHER PEOPLE ARE CHARGING IN THE AREA AND SAY WE'LL TAKE THE AVERAGE OF THAT.
THE PROBLEM IS THAT'S NOT LEGALLY DEFENSIBLE.
AND THE PROBLEM IS THAT THEIR SYSTEM IS GOING TO BE DIFFERENT THAN YOURS. IT DEPENDS ON WHAT YOU HAVE OUT OF YOUR COLLECTION SYSTEM AND YOUR WASTE WATER TREATMENT SYSTEM THAT YOU HAVE. YOU HAVE A UNIQUE SYSTEM.
THE SITUATION COMPARED TO SOMEBODY FURTHER INLAND BECAUSE YOU HAVE DISCHARGE THAT REQUIRES A VERY HIGH LEVEL OF TREATMENT AND IS GETTING READY TO REQUIRE A LOT MORE LEVEL OF TREATMENT, AN ALTERNATIVE TO IT. SO WHAT YOU HAVE FOR YOUR CAPACITY IS NOT COMPARABLE TO JUST PICKING SOMEBODY ELSE FROM ANY OTHER SIZE SYSTEM OR EVEN THIS SIZE SYSTEM.
BASICALLY OVERALL, YOU TAKE THE TOTAL VALUE OF ALL OF YOUR INFRASTRUCTURE, DIVIDED BY HOW MANY EQUIVALENT RESIDENTIAL CONNECTIONS YOU HAVE SO THAT WOULD BE THE SAME AS A HOUSE OR A COMMERCIAL CONNECTION AND THAT'S YOUR VALUE PER ERC.
THAT'S YOUR CAPACITY FEE. THERE'S TWO OPTIONS THAT WE OFFERED IN THE STUDY. ONE IS REMAINING -- THE OTHER ONE IS THE REPLACEMENT VALUE BASIS.
THE REMAINING USEFUL LIFE BASIS PROVIDES A VALUE TO THE ASSETS BASED ON THEIR CURRENT CONDITION, BASED ON THE YEARS THEY'RE EXPECTED TO CONTINUE. THE PROBLEM WITH THAT IS YOU HAVE MASTER -- AS AN EXAMPLE, YOU HAVE MASTER LIFT STATIONS, THE BIG ONES THAT ARE RECEIVING FLOW FROM OTHER LIFT STATIONS IN SEVERAL AREAS, THEIR AVERAGE AGE IS 45 YEARS.
THE INDUSTRY STANDARD IS 40 YEARS.
SO IF YOU DID -- THEY BASICALLY HAVE NO VALUE.
SOMEBODY COMING INTO YOUR SYSTEM THAT'S GOING TO BE USING THAT LIFT STATION THAT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO KEEP UP THAT LIFT STATION AND VERY SOON REPLACE THAT LIFT STATION IS NOT HAVING TO DO ANYTHING FOR THAT ARE LIFT STATION SO IT'S REALLY NOT AN EQUITABLE ANSWER FOR WHAT YOU'RE HAVING TO DO FOR UTILITIES.
SOP YOU'RE RECOMMENDING CAPACITY FEES.
CURRENTLY, YOU PAY $959. THIS IS FROM A 2015 STUDY THAT WAS DONE. NOW FOR THE REMAINING IT'S $520 PER ERC OR 2,760 PER ERC. YOU HAVE VICE PRESIDENT PLENTY OF CAPACITY STILL IN YOUR WATER TREATMENT PLANT.
YOU'RE USING ABOUT 36% OF IT. FOR THE WASTE WATER CAPACITY YO DECISIONS TO MAKE ABOUT WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO BE DOING WITH YOUR WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT.
SO THAT IS WHAT YOU'RE FACING. WHAT YOU'RE UTILITY IS WORTH AND WHAT IS WORTH FOR NEW YEASERS COMING IN.
>> JUST SO IT'S CLEAR FOR EVERYBODY IN THE ROOM.
WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THAT CURRENTLY WHEN SOMEBODY WANTS TO HOOK UP TO OUR SYSTEM, IN CAPACITY FEES, THEY PAY ABOUT $3,200. AND FROM NOW ON GOING FORWARD, YOU'RE RECOMMENDING SO IN THE FUTURE IT WILL BE CAPACITY FOR NOT ONLY PEOPLE USING THE SYSTEM BUT FOR THE NEW USERS THAT WE NEED TO INCREASE THAT TO A LITTLE OVER $10,000.
>> THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND WHAT'S THE ALTERNATIVE OF
NOT DOING THAT? >> WELL, THE ALTERNATIVE IS
[00:25:02]
DRASTIC. AS AN EXAMPLE, I TOLD YOU THAT YOU HAVE MASTER LIFT STATIONS THAT ARE ON AVERAGE 45 YEARS OLD. YOU ARE NOT -- WITH WHAT YOU HAVE WITH YOUR EXISTING RATES BACK FROM 2015 YOU'RE NOT RECEIVING SUFFICIENT MONEY FOR THE CAPACITY THAT PEOPLE ARE GETTING. SINCE 2015 WE ALL KNOW THAT PRICES HAVE INCREASED GREATLY. YOU'VE PUT IN TWO NEW WELLS.HAD CHANGES ON YOUR SYSTEM. I HAD A CONTRACTOR TELL ME LAST WEEK THAT IN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS HIS PRICES HAVE INCREASED FOUR TIMES. SO THAT IS NOT AN APPROPRIATE VALUE ANYMORE BUT WITH MASTER LIFT STATIONS, THAT AGE, THAT AFFECTS EVERY PERSON IN THIS ROOM.
BECAUSE IF YOU HAVE A MASTER LIFT STATION GO DOWN YOU'RE HAVING SEWAGE BACKING UP INTO NEIGHBORHOODS AND HOUSES.
YOU HAVE ALL KINDS OF PROBLEMS HAPPENING AND TO HANDLE IT ON AN EMERGENCY BASIS, I KNOW THAT UTILITIES WILL TELL YOU THIS.
IT COSTS MANY TIMES MORE THAN KEEPING YOUR SYSTEM IN WORKING ORDER LIKE YOU'VE BEEN DOING SO YOU CAN'T JUST NOT KEEP THE SYSTEM UP. YOU CAN'T JUST NOT PROVIDE FOR WHAT'S NEEDED FOR THE SYSTEM. YOU CAN'T NOT HAVE THE CAPACITY WHICH IS ANOTHER NOT RAISING SUFFICIENT FEES ALSO MEANS PEOPLE WANT TO COME IN. YOU HAVEN'T RAISED THE MONEY TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THE CAPACITY. SO THE CITY GOES INTO MORE DEBT.
RIGHT NOW YOU HAVE ABOUT $21 MILLION OF PRINCIPLE DEBT FOR YOUR UTILITIES. YOU MAKING A CHOICE WITH THIS OF HOW MUCH YOU'RE GOING TO ADD TO THAT AS YOU NEED TO TAKE CARE OF
YOUR INFRASTRUCTURE. >> WHEN DOES THAT NEED TO BE INSTITUTED? TWO YEARS FROM NOW, FIVE YEARS
FROM NOW, THE NEXT SIX MONTHS? >> WELL, YOU NEED TO INSTITUTE IT NOW AND YOU NEED TO REVISE IT IN TWO TO FIVE YEARS DEPENDING ON -- BECAUSE YOU'RE GETTING READY TO MAKE CHANGES ON YOUR UTILITY, PRICES ARE FLUID. TY TELL YOU ABOUT THE CONTRACTOR THAT SAID HIS PRICES HAVE GONE UP BY 400%.
ANOTHER TOLD ME LAST WEEK THAT HE CAN'T MAKE BIDS THE WAY HE USED TO. HE DOESN'T KNOW WHAT HIS PRICES ARE GOING TO BE. HE JUST HAS TO CALL UP EACH PERSON AND GET PRICES AT THE TIME OF THE BID.
THEY'RE VERY FLUID. IN ORDER TO KEEP YOUR UTILITY ABLE TO DO WHAT YOU NEED TO DO, YOU NEED TO IMPLEMENT IT NOW AND YOU NEED TO BE PREPARED TO REVISE IT AS YOU SEE THE PRICES CHANGE, AS YOU ADD NEW PHREN STRUCTURE TO YOUR SYSTEM AND UPGRADE YOUR SYSTEM SO THAT YOU'RE KEEPING CURRENT VALUE OF YOUR CAPACITY FOR THE NEW PEOPLE COMING IN.
>> SO WHAT YOU'RE RECOMMENDING BASED ON WHAT YOU SAID IS THAT IN THE NEXT FEW MONTHS THE CITY COMMISSION SHOULD PASS THIS RATE
INCREASE FOR THE CAPACITY FEES? >> THAT'S CORRECT.
>> ALL RIGHT. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? TODAY WHAT CAPACITY ARE WE RUNNING AT PERCENTAGE WISE.
YOU'VE DONE A STUDY AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
ARE WE AT 100% CAPACITY? DO WE HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL SPACE? WHAT CAPACITY ARE WE RUNNING ON TODAY.
>> FOR YOUR WATER TREATMENT PLANT ABOUT 36% AND FOR YOUR WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT ABOUT 50%.
SO HAVE YOU TO -- THAT YOU'VE ALREADY -- THAT YOU HAVE BUILT IN AND PAID FOR THAT YOU HAVE AVAILABLE.
AND SO YOU CAN THINK IN TERMS OF WHAT DOES THAT MEAN FOR THE CITY AS FAR AS PAYING THE CAPACITY FEE PER ERC.
DOES THAT MEAN, OH, WELL, WE'RE AT CAPACITY.
WHAT ARE WE WARED ABOUT? -- WORRIED ABOUT? NO. WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS YOU'RE PUTTING WHAT YOU'VE ALREADY DONE AND WHAT YOU HAVE ON THE BACK OF YOUR EXISTING USERS INSTEAD OF EQUITABLY PROVIDING FOR IT TO ALL BE PAID FOR AND THEN ALLOWING YOURSELF TO HAVE RETAINED EARNINGS AND NOT HAVE TO GO INTO MORE DEBT FOR WHAT'S INEVITABLE OF NOT JUST CAPACITY OF THE PLANT BUT WHAT YOU NEED ON THE PLANT PLUS ALL THROUGHOUT YOUR SYSTEM LIKE THOSE MASTER
SO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING THOUGH TO MAKE SURE I'M CLEAR AS TO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS WITH OUR CURRENT CAPACITY TODAY, TODAY, DO NOTHING ELSE. WE COULD DOUBLE THE AMOUNT OF
[00:30:03]
USAGE. WE COULD DOUBLE THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE RIGHT NOW WE HAVE BUILT A UTILITY SYSTEM THAT COULD HANDLE TWICE WHAT WE'RE PUTTING IN RIGHT NOW AND WE'D STILL BE OKAYIS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? >> WELL, YOU WOULD -- YOU COULD
>> 50% MORE BECAUSE AT THE POINT YOU GET -- BY THE TIME IT'S ABOUT 75% YOU HAVE TO START PLANNING THE EXPANSION OF YOUR PLANT. SO YOU CAN'T DOUBLE IT AND THEN
>> SO JUST IN GENERAL I WOULD COMMENT THAT I DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH CHARGING NEW PEOPLE IN A FEE.
THE QUESTION IS DO WE JUMP THAT FROM ABOUT $3,000 TO $10,000 IN ONE YEAR AND THAT'S THE RECOMMENDATION.
AND ONE FINAL QUESTION, TODAY YOU'RE HERE ON -- ARE YOU WHAT WE CAN TALKED ABOUT WITH THE SUPPLIED.
YOU SAID IF YOU DON'T MEET CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS THAT'S WHEN WE HIRE A CONSULTANT. IS THAT FITTING YOUR BILL OR ARE YOU HERE JUST AT TIN I HAVATION OF -- IS THAT HOW --
>> NO. YOU ALL ARE MEMBERS OF FLORIDA RURAL WATER ASSOCIATION AND THIS IS A SERVICE THAT FRWA PROVIDES AND FRWA HAS A LIMITED NUMBER OF ENGI ENGINEERS WHO ALSO USE OTHER ENGINEERS TO DO THEIR WORK.
SO I'M WORKING FOR FRWA FOR THEM TO PROVIDE THIS SERVICE TO YOU.
>> ALL RIGHT. LET'S GO TO COMMISSIONER ASKEW.
>> IF THE CITY WANTED TO PUT ON A MASTER LIFT STATION, CAN YOU GIVE ME A BALLPARK OF WHAT THAT COST IS? I MEAN, I KNOW YOU SAID EVERYTHING FLUCTUATES.
I UNDERSTAND THAT. I MEAN BALLPARK.
>> FOR YOUR AREA I THINK -- DO YOU HAVE BALLPARK?
CONSERVATIVELY TO COMPLETELY BUT WE'RE -- IT'S AN UPHILL PATHOLOGIST CONSTANTLY. SO THE NEXT FEW YEARS WE WILL BE REBUILDING SEVERAL OF THESE MASTER STATIONS.
>> OKAY. AND A FOLLOW UP IF THERE WAS AN AREA OF GROWTH THAT JUST HAPPENED TO HAPPEN WOULD $300,000 BE WHAT A NEW ONE WOULD HAVE COST LIKE TO ADD ONE OR WOULD THERE BE OTHER COSTS
I THINK THAT WOULD BE IN THE REALM OF ACCURATE FOR A STATION.
>> OKAY. >> I THINK THAT'S FIT -- THAT FITS WITH WHAT I SEE IN OTHER AREAS.
>> HE ASKED MY QUESTION. >> ALL RIGHT.
COMMISSIONER ROSS. >> THE OTHER ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM IS SENATE BILL 64 WHICH WAS PASSED BACK IN 2019.
WHICH IS GOING TO REQUIRE THAT THE CITY -- THE -- IS ABOUT 1.7 GALLON COMING OUT OF THE PLANT INTO THE RIVER AND WE HAVE TO FIND A PLACE TO PUT THAT THAT'S NOT IN THE RIVER AND THE COST ESTIMATE WHICH WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT LATER ON IN THE GENERAL MEETING IS ABOUT $9 MILLION CONSERVATIVELY.
SO THIS IS STARTING TO PLAN FOR THAT CORRECT?
>> YES. THIS -- THIS YEAR ONE THING YOU HAVE TO STAY INVOLVED WITH YOUR LEGAL ADVICE AS FAR AS SETTING UP YOUR IMPACT FEES THEY HAVE TO BE IN A SEPARATE FUND.
AND YOU HAVE TO VERY SPECIFICALLY USE THEM FOR INFRASTRUCTURE AND FOR WHAT THE NEW USER IS GOING TO NEED.
>> DID YOU'RE STUDY TAKE INTO EFFECT THE EFFECTS OF DEAL,
BECAUSE THIS STUDY NEEDS TO BE A PICTURE OF WHAT YOU HAVE RIGHT NOW BECAUSE IF I SAID WELL YOU MIGHT BE DOING THIS AND YOU MIGHT BE DOING THIS, IT IT WOULD UNDERMINE THE LEGALITY OF THE STUDY BECAUSE YOU MIGHT NOT DO EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE THINKING MAY
[00:35:03]
HAPPEN. >> SO THIS INCREASE DOESN'T EVEN
TAKE INTO ACCOUNT -- >> RIGHT.
DOESN'T TAKE INTO ACCOUNT SENATE BILL 64.
THAT'S PART OF THE REASON I SAID YOU NEED TO REVISE IT AS YOU MAKE CHANGES ON YOUR UTILITY SYSTEM.
>> ALL RIGHT. ANY KWURTH QUESTIONS? -- ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
[4.2 Water and Wastewater Rate Study]
>> COMMISSIONER. >> I JUST WANT TO ADD A FAINT COMMONALITY. SO THE -- FINAL COMMENT.
IMPACT FEES ARE ESTABLISHED BY ORDINANCE SO BASED ON YOUR DIRECTION THIS AFTERNOON WE'LL COME BACK WITH A FIRST READING OF REVISED ORDINANCE INCLUDING A NEW FEE STRUCTURE.
AMONG OTHER CHANGES THAT WE NEED TO UPDATE OUR ORDINANCE.
SO WE'RE LOOKING AT, YOU KNOW, SEVERAL MONTHS IN THE FUTURE BEFORE ANY OF THIS CAN BE IMPLEMENTED.
BUT TO ADDRESS SOMETHING THAT SHE MENTIONED AS FAR AS THE USAGE OF IMPACT FEES. THE CITY VERY STRICTLY ACCOUNTS FROM ALL THE OTHER RATES AND EVERYTHING COMING IN THE SYSTEM.
FOR OUR PARTICULAR PURPOSES, THE MAJORITY OF OUR CAPACITY IS ALREADY IN THE SYSTEM. ALREADY BEEN PURCHASED.
IT'S ALREADY -- THERE WAS A BOND TAKEN OUT OF THE WASTE WATER PLANT YEARS AGO TO UPDATE THE PLANT -- EXPAND THE PLANT.
WE'RE STILL PAYING OFF THE REBUILD PURCHASE FROM THE WATER SYSTEM SO OUR DEBT SERVICE FOR THOSE FAR EXCEEDS WHAT WE COLLECT IN IMPACT FEES SO THOSE FEES ARE USED FOR DEBT SERVICE FOR THAT EXISTING CAPACITY, IT'S ALREADY IN THE SYSTEM THAT THE NEW USERS TAKE ADVANTAGE OF SO IF THERE'S ANY QUESTION ABOUT THOSE FEES THAT'S HOW THEY'RE UTILIZED.
I'M AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS. >> ARE YOU ASKING FOR DIRECTION
WE WOULD LIKE A LITTLE BIT OF DIRECTION.
>> THANK YOU. >> SO TO CONFIRM WHAT YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS ARE IS YOU SAID IN THE FIRST SLIDE NO CHANGE IN FEES BUT YOU RECOMMEND THE 5.7% CPI INDEX RATE INCREASE
>> CORRECT. AND SO THAT WILL COME BACK AS
PART OF THE MASTER FEE SCHEDULE. >> UNDERSTOOD.
OKAY. SO DULY NOTED AND I CAN SEE --
>> WAIT. >> ROUGH A RATE INCREASE AND -- SUCH A RATE INCREASE AND I WANT TO HEAR THAT.
DO I HEAR MOTION OR DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT?
>> CAN I ASK A QUESTION. >> I WANT TO KNOW ABOUT THE
BASED ON THE TWO AVAILABLE OPTIONS THAT WERE PRESENTED IN THE REPORT, THE EXISTING VALUE METHOD AND THE NEW REPLACEMENT VALUE PROVIDING THE TWO DIFFERENT RECOMMENDED CAPACITY FEES IS THERE A DIRECTION THAT COMMISSION HAS REGARDING HOW YOU
WOULD LIKE TO PROCEED WITH THAT? >> MY VOTE WOULD BE TO PROCEED WITH REPLACEMENT VALUE STRONGLY RECOMMENDED BY THE CONSULTANT.
SO WE CAN CONTINUE TO FLUSH OVER THE NEXT TEN, 15, 20 YEARS.
>> COMMISSIONER. >> I ALSO AGREE.
I THINK WE SHOULD BE WORKING TOWARDS REPLACEMENT VALUE BUT I WOULD BE INTERESTED IF WE COULD FIND A WAY NOT TO JUMP THAT FEE UP IMMEDIATELY AND GRADUATE TOWARDS IT OVER TWO OR THREE
YEARS TO MAKE IT HURTLESS. >> IT'S HURTING ONE PERSON AT A TIME. SO WHY SHOULD THE FIRST PERSON HAVE TO PAY LESS THAN THE THIRD PERSON? I MEAN IT'S NOT LIKE WE'RE GRADUATING WITH THE SAM PERSON.
EACH ONE OF THESE IS A SEPARATE FEE.
>> IT'S STRICTLY NEW USERS. >> OKAY.
>> CURRENT USERS WILL NOT SEE ANY INCREASE BASED ON THIS.
>> OKAY. >> ANDRE, HOW MANY MASTER LIFT STATIONS DO WE HAVE IN TOTAL IN THE CITY?
>> WE HAVE 37 LIFT STATIONS I THINK PROBABLY TEN WOULD BE QUALIFIED AS MASTER STATION THAT RECEIVE FLOW FROM OTHER
STATIONS. >> SO THERE'S TEN MASTER STATIONS. THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT COST
300,000 TO REPLACE. >> BALLPARK, YES.
>> AND THEN THE LIFT STATION WOULD BELESS.
SO JUST IN MY MIND JUST SO I CAN JUST CRUNCH THE NUMBERS HERE, THE RECOMMENDED NEW USER RATE IT WOULD BE LESS THAN 30 NEW PEOPLE WOULD PAY FOR ONE MASTER LIFT STATION.
IS THAT BASED ON THAT NUMBER THERE?
>> YES. IF YOU WANT TO LOOK AT JUST ON THAT ASSET. BUT WHAT THE STUDY AND I BELIEVE
[00:40:03]
THE FULL STUDY WAS INCLUDED IN THE AGENDA PACKET.IT BREAKS DOWN THE VALUE OF EACH PORTION OF THE SYSTEM.
THE AGE OF THAT SYSTEM, YOU KNOW, OUR SEWER SYSTEM HAS BEEN LINED WHEN WAS IT INSTALLED? THE DIFFERENT TANKS THAT -- IT GOES INTO A GREAT DEAL OF DETAIL.
ACCURATE SNAPSHOT OF THE HEALTH OF OUR SYSTEM.
SO IF YOU WANT TO BREAK IT DOWN, ONE ASSET, YES.
BUT IT TAKES INTO ACCOUNT THE MAINTENANCE AND RECONSTRUCTION OF THE ENTIRE WATER WASTE WATER SYSTEM.
>> COMMISSIONER ASKEW. >> SIT EITHER A OR B.
IS THERE ANY WAY TO STAY WITHIN THE LEGAL REALM?
>> CORRECT. THE REQUIREMENT FOR CAPACITY FEES OR IMPACT FEES IS THAT BASED ON A DUAL RATIONAL NEXUS SO WE CAN'T ARBITRARILY SAY LET'S SPLIT THE DIFFERENCE BECAUSE NEITHER ONE OF THOSE WOULD HAVE A MATHEMATICAL BASIS APPLICATION OF THOSE FEES. THOSE ARE THE TWO OPTIONS ON THE
TABLE RIGHT NOW. >> AND TO FOLLOW THAT UP, ARE WE TALKING RESIDENTIAL CONNECTIONS OR COMMERCIAL CONNECTIONS AS
WELL? >> IT'S ALL CONNECTIONS.
THE UNIT THAT WE MEASURE IS EQUIVALENT RESIDENTIAL CONNECTION AND THAT'S BETWEEN WATER AND WASTE WATER 300 TO 350 GALLONS PER DAY. SO THERE'S REALLY NO IN BETWEEN.
IT HAS TO BE ONE OR THE OTHER. >> THAT'S MY -- FOR US TO BE IN LINE ARE THE FLORIDA STATUTE WE NEED TO HAVE THE BACK UP, DOCUMENTATION FOR THAT STUDY AND -- OR THOSE RATES.
THIS STUDY PROVIDES THAT. I KNOW OPTION B IS A LITTLE OVER
$10,000 FOR THE HOOK UP. >> $3,200.
WHICH IS LESS THAN -- >> THAT'S ERC THOUGH RIGHT?
>> THAT'S EQUIVALENT RESIDENTIAL CONNECTION YES.
>> SO A COMMERCIAL COULD GO -- SO --
>> CORRECT. >> THOSE NUMBERS ARE ON PAGE 5 OF THE REPORT.
IT'S 3,000 ACTUALLY. AS OPPOSED TO 10,040.
>> AND THE CURRENT FEE IS ABOUT 3,500.
>> 3280 TOTAL. THIS IS BOTH SEWER AND WATER.
SO TWO THINGS TO THINK ABOUT HERE.
WHEN YOU NEED TO MAKE A DECISION BECAUSE WE HAVE TO OTHER THINGS TO GO THROUGH TONIGHT. THE TWO THINGS HERE TO THINK ABOUT IS THAT THIS IS NOT THE LAST TIME WE WILL SEE THIS.
THERE WILL BE A RATE STUDY. WE'RE GIVING GUIDANCE TONIGHT FOR THAT RATE -- FOR THE TIME WHEN WE APPROVE THE RATES.
[00:45:01]
THAT'S COMING UP SOON. THIS IS JUST GUIDANCE SCENE NOT A FINAL VOTE. THIS IS JUST RECOMMENDATIONS.SO I'VE HEARD FROM COMMISSIONER ROSS THAT HE WANTS OPTION B.
DOES ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER HAVE A PREFERENCE RIGHT OFF THE BAT,
A OR B. >> MYSELF I'M LEERY OF OPTION B BUT IF THERE IS NO CHOICE IN BETWEEN I WOULD REALLY HAVE TO LEAN TOWARDS B. UNFORTUNATELY BY STATUTE WE CAN'T GO LEFT BECAUSE IN MY OPINION I ALREADY KNOW THAT WE'RE UNDERPAYING ANYBODY THAT'S A NEW USER IS UNDERPAYING.
I'M AWARE OF THAT. >> UNDERSTOOD.
>> FROM THIS SIDE OF THE ROOM. ANYBODY THINKING ANYTHING DIFFERENTLY OR ANYTHING OPTION B SOUNDS LIKE OUR ONLY CHOICE.
>> IF THAT'S THE CASE I'VE HEARD THREE OPTION BS AN I'M GOING TO SAY WE HAVE CONSENSUS ON OPTION B FOR THE FEE VOTE.
THE RATE -- >> SOMEBODY HELP ME OUT.
>> CAPACITY FEE ON OUR MASTER FEE SCHEDULE.
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO -- WE'LL LOOK TO RECOMMEND.
THIS IS NOT THE FINAL VOTE. WE'LL HEAR PUBLIC COMMENT WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO THE SCHEDULE. AND THAT WILL BE THE TIME FOR
THAT. >> SO WITH THAT I THINK THAT'S THE -- IS EVERYONE AGREEING THAT WE HAVE CONSENSUS.
AYSCUE. >> ONE IS THE PASTER FEE, THE CPI AT 5.1 WHATEVER IT WAS%. AYSCUE TOTALLY SEPARATE ORDINANCE. MASTER FEES HAVE NO CHANGE.
THE RATE IS WHAT'S INCREASING BY 5.6%.
>> THEY WERE BOTH CHANGED. THE RATES WILL CHANGE BASED ON MASTER FEE SCHEDULE. THAT'S ADOPTED FOR CITY WIDE FEES. BUT YOUR RECOMMEND IS NO CHANGE
I APOLOGIZE. THE FEES FOR EXTENSION OF SERVICE WE RECOMMENDED NO INCREASE.
THE RATES FOR USAGE WAS INCREASED BY 35.7%.
>> UNDERSTOOD. >> BOTH OF THOSE ARE ON THE
MASTER FEE SCHEDULE. >> 5.6% FOR THE RATE INCREASE.
AND THEN FOR THE FEES FOR EXTENSIONS THERE'S NO CHANGE
>> AND THEN FOR IMPACT FEES WE'RE TALKING OPTION B RIGHT
SEPARATE FROM THE MASTER FEE SCHEDULE BUT STILL PUBLIC HEARING. PUBLIC INPUT.
>> OF COURSE. THOSE ARE THE THREE RECOMMENDATIONS. DO I HAVE CONSENSUS THAT WE'RE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THOSE THREE.
THANK YOU GUYS. I APPRECIATE IT.
>> ALL RIGHT. WE'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH THE LIGHTENING ROUND. WE'RE GOING TO GO FAST.
I THINK WE CAN KNOCK THIS OUT AND WE'LL SEE WHAT WE CAN DO.
[5.1 MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT - SETBACK RESTRICTIONS ]
WE'LL START WITH MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT SETBACK RESTRICTIONS AND WE'LL GO TO COMMISSIONER AYSCUE.>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SO RIGHT NOW WE HAVE A MECHANICAL SETBACK OF FIVE FEET ON ALL OUR PROPERTIES.
THIS RESTRICTS A LOT OF RESIDENTS FROM PUTTING ANY KIND OF MECHANICAL WITHIN THAT FIVE FOOT.
PUTTING IN SYSTEMS LIKE THIS CAN COST A HOMEOWNER AN EXTREME AMOUNT OF MONEY TO BE ABLE TO HAVE TO MOVE IT TO SOMEWHERE ELSE. AND AS WE SPOKE LAST MEETING, YOU KNOW GANGBANG FOR THEM TO COME AND GET A VARIANCE IS $2,500 SO THEY COULD COME IN AND TRI TO GET A VARIANCE FOR THIS SETBACK AND BE TOLD NO AND IT'S $2,500.
I'M LOOKING OUT FOR SOME OF OUR CONSTITUENTS THAT ARE LOOKING TO IMPROVE OR REBUILD OR WHATEVER AS FAR AS MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT IN THAT SET BACK. THAT'S IT.
>> COMMISSIONER AYSCUE, I APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING THAT UP.
COMMISSIONER ROSS. >> I THINK THIS IS A TERRIBLE IDEA AND HERE'S WHY: NUMBER ONE, THAT 5 FOOT SET BACK ENSURES ACCESSIBILITY FOR EMERGENCY SERVICES.
YOU CAN'T GET THROUGH A LOT OF THIS STUFF AND IF YOU HAVE AN EMERGENCY THEY HAVE TO GET THROUGH THAT AREA.
NUMBER TWO YOU NEED ACCESSIBILITY FOR MAINTENANCE.
NUMBER THREE, WHEN YOU START PUTTING MECHANICALS RIGHT NEXT TO THE PROPERTY LINE YOU'RE INCREASING THE NOISE THAT GOES TO YOUR NEIGHBORS SO IT'S NOT JUST YOU.
YOU HAVE A NEIGHBOR ON THAT PROPERTY LINE.
AND SO YOU ARE IMPEDING YOUR NEIGHBOR.
[00:50:06]
YOU PUT IT RIGHTS ON THE PROPERTY LINE.THIS IS WHAT YOU'RE DOING AND IT GOES ON YOUR NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY.
NUMBER FIVE THE CLEARANCE PARTICULARLY ON GENERAL RATERS IS AT LEAST 36 FEET. 48 INCHES FOR FOR STRUCTURE AND IF YOU START PUTTING THAT AGAINST THE PROPERTY LINE THEN YOUR NEIGHBOR CAN'T PUT A FENCE ON THEIR PROPERTY LINE.
ALSO, A FIVE FOOT GENERATOR HAS TO BE FIVE FEET FOR COME BUSTABLE MATERIAL SO YOUR NEIGHBOR WILL BE UNABLE TO DO THAT. PUBLIC SAFETY AND BEING A GOOD NEIGHBOR AND NOT IMPINGING ON YOUR NEIGHBOR.
I THINK THIS IS AN IDEA THAT IS NOT A GOOD ONE.
AND I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR WHAT THE CITY MANAGER HAS TO SAY
MR. GEORGE. >> IT'S SPECIFIC ABOUT WHERE YOU CAN PUT SOMETHING LIKE THIS. IT'S PRIMARILY FOR IMPEDING ACCESS TO THE BACK AND THE SIDE SOCIAL SECURITY NOT SO MUCH THE REAR ISSUE. BUT IT'S ALSO THE NOISE OF THE GENERATED NOISE OF AN HVAC UNIT AND JUST AND WHAT THAT DOES TO AN ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER. I'M NOT SURE HOW PROVE ATLANTA THIS ISSUE IS. IT -- PREVALENT THIS ISSUE IS.
YOU CAN PUT IT IN THE REAR AND MAKE A CONNECTION BACK BECAUSE MOST ARE CONNECTED FROM THE GARAGE TO THE TRANSFER SWITCH OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT SO THERE IS OPPORTUNITIES TO PUT IT IN THE BACK. BUT I THINK TO LOOK FOR THE WHOLE PUBLIC PURPOSE I THINK THIS NEEDS TO STAY.
>> THANK YOU, MR. GEORGE. APPRECIATE YOU.
>> ALL RIGHT. SO WITH THAT ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS? COMMISSIONER AYSCUE, I APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING THIS UP. I KNOW CITIZENS ARE CONSTANTLY MAKING SURE THEIR VOICE IS HEARD SO I APPRECIATE YOU DOING THAT.
IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMENT EITHER WAY ON THIS? LET'S KEEP THESE UNDER 30 SECOND EASE OR LESS.
>> I SPOKE WITH A GENTLEMAN THAT BROUGHT THIS CONCERN PARTICULARLY IN THE EXAMPLE OF AN ELDERLY THAT NEEDED THIS PUT IN THEIR HOME IF THERE WERE CHALLENGES THAT'S WHY BUT THE MORE I HEAR ABOUT SAFETY REGULATIONS IT JUST IS GETTING HARDER FOR HE TO TRY TO SUPPORT WHAT'S GOING ON HERE.
UNFORTUNATELY I BELIEVE THAT THIS SHOULD STAY.
>> ALL RIGHT. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR.
THERE ARE SOME CONCERNS BUT CHARLIE, IF THERE WAS EVER A UNIT SPECIFICALLY I'M SPEAKING TO YOU AS OUR CITY ENGINEER IF THERE'S EVER A GENERATOR UNIT WHERE THEY HAVE A SETBACK TO THE RIGHT OR CAN'T PUT NIT THEIR REAR YARD FOR SOME REASON THEY CAN APPEAL OR GO FOR A VARIANCE IS THAT CORRECT?
>> THAT IS TRUE. BUT YOU ALSO HAVE THE -- IT'S NOT SO MUCH HOW CLOSE IT GETS TO THE PROPERTY LINE.
THERE IS AN ADDITIONAL SET BACK FROM A STRUCTURE.
THAT PIECE OF EQUIPMENT HAS TO BE OFF.
SO BY THE TIME YOU DO THAT AND MOSTLY SMALL LOTS THAT EQUIPMENT WILL BE A PARKING LOT. I THINK IT'S A REAL TIGHT CONSTRAINT BUT WE HAVE A LOT OF SMALL NARROW LOTS THAT JUST WON'T ALLOW THIS KIND OF THING TO ACTUALLY WORK.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU. >> BASED ON WHAT WE HAVE BEING IN THE CITY WE'RE NOT A RURAL AREA.
EVERYBODY ELSE'S PROPERTY LINE RAZE SO WIDE SO I UNDERSTAND THE
[5.2 FISCAL YEAR 2023/2024 CAPITAL PROJECTS]
FULL PROBLEM. THANK YOU.>> GO AHEAD AND SAY IF YOU'RE GOING TO GET -- FISCAL YEAR CAPITAL PROJECTS. I'M GOING TO MOVE THIS TO THE NEXT ITEM. WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO FIRST OF ALL ONCE AGAIN THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER AYSCUE FOR MAKING OUR CITIZENS BE HEARD. WE APPRECIATE THAT.
I'M GOING TO USE MAYORAL PRIVILEGE AND EXTEND THE WORKSHOP TO 6:10 AND THE OFFICIAL MEETING WILL START AT 6:15 TONIGHT. SO WE'LL LOOK FORWARD TO THAT HAVING YOU AT 6:15 IF YOU'RE HERE FOR THE MEETING BUT IT'S IMPORTANT TO GET THROUGH OUR CAPITAL PROJECTS LIST FOR FISCAL
YEAR 23-24. >> COLUMN THREE INDICATES THE
[00:55:42]
FUNDING OF PROJECTS PROJECTED FOR YEAR 2 OF THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN WHEN WE MADE THAT PLAN -- AUDIO] THAT'S WHAT WE FIGURED FOR THIS COMING YEAR AND THAT TOTALS ABOUT $4.4 MILLION. SO ABOUT $1.2 MILLION LESS THAN WHAT WE ARE DOING THIS CURRENT YEAR.>>> THE PROPOSED 23-24 THAT WE'RE GOING TO PRESENT TO YOU GUYS FOR THIS COMING YEAR IS WHAT ARE A ROLLBACK BUDGET WOULD NEED TO BE TO MEET THE $2.2 MILLION OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE CURRENT MILLAGE RATE AND THE ROLL BACK RATE BASED ON THE MILLAGE RATE PROVIDED. SO YOU CAN SEE THAT NUMBER ENDS UP BEING A DIFFERENCE OF ABOUT 2.5 MILLION BETWEEN WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING FOR THIS COMING YEAR AND WHAT THE CURRENT MILLAGE RATE IS THIS YEAR NOW. SO IT'S ABOUT 2.5.
WHAT WE NEED TO GET OUT OF THE BUDGET TO MAKE THE ROLL BACK RATE. IF THAT MAKES SENSE.
>> THE FUNDING DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE CURRENT MILLAGE RATE AND THE ROLL BACK RATE IS APPROXIMATELY 2.3 MILLION.
WE'RE SHOWING ABOUT 2.5 NOW. SO WE HAVE SOME TWEAKING TO DO BUT WE'RE IN THAT RANGE. THE DINNERS BETWEEN THE ROLLBACK RATE AND ADJUSTED ROLLBACK RATE IS $500,000.
SO THAT KIND OF GIVES YOU A SENSE OF IF YOU WENT TO THE ADJUSTED ROLLBACK RATE YOU GAINED $500,000 THAT COULD BE USED TO OFFSET SOME OF THE CUTS WE'RE MAKING HERE.
AND THEN COLUMN FOUR SHOWS THE PROJECTS AND ASSOCIATED SASTS TO ACHIEVE THE REDUCTION.
2.5. WITH OPERATING EXPENSES INCREASING IT WOULD COME FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS.
WE'VE LOOKED AT OPERATING COSTS BUT FELT THIS COULD THE PLACE THAT WE COULD CUT THE MOST TO GET TO THE ROLLBACK RATE.
THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IS THE ITEMS NOT IN THE 23-24 BUDGET.
>> THAT'S PRETTY MUCH WHERE WE ARE.
WE CAN ALL FIND WAYS TO HELP THAT BUT THIS IS THE BEST WAY WE KNOW TO GET TO THE LOCALBACK RATE.
>> ANY COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSION?
>> I HAVE A WHOLE BUNCH OF COMMENTS BUT IT WILL NOT BE A
LIGHTENING ROUND. >> UNDERSTOOD.
WE'RE GOING TO FIT IT IN BETWEEN 6:10.
WE CAN GET YOU -- BEFORE THAT THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION.
I DO WANT TO HEAR FROM THE CHAIR OF OUR TASK FORCE FOR PUBLIC SAFETY BIKE AND WALKING.
>> ALL RIGHT. SO WE'LL GO TO COMMISSIONER DISCUSSION. LOOKS LIKE COMMISSIONER ROSS WANTS TO KICK OFF. WE ARE GOING TO HARD STOP AT 6 SO. SO EVERYBODY IF YOU WANT TWO
MINUTES YOU GET THAT MAX. >> I'LL GO FIRST.
>> COMMISSIONER ROSS. >> I MEAN THIS BUDGET IS PRETEND AND EXTEND. WE'RE PRETENDING THAT WE DON'T -- WE ARE PRETENDING THAT WE HAVE A NUMBER OF CAPITAL
[01:00:03]
NEEDS THAT KNEAD TO BE FULFILLED THAT WE'RE IGNORING AND WE'RE TELLING THE TAXPAYERS WE'LL GIVE THEM THESE BENEFITS BUT WE'RE NOT. FOR EXAMPLE, THE DOWNTOWN.LIGHTS SIDEWALKS LANDSCAPING. DEMOLITION.
THERE ARE MULTIPLE PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN PROMISEDED TO THE TAXPAYER THAT ARE COMPLETELY IGNORED IN THIS BUDGET.
AND I WILL SEND THIS OUT AS AN EMAIL.
AND I WOULD HOPE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE TO TALK ABOUT THIS IN THE FUTURE BUT WE ARE PRETENDING THAT ALL THESE NEEDS DON'T EXIST IN THIS BUDGET. WE ARE PRETENDING THAT WE'RE SOMEHOW GOING TO ACCOMPLISH THESE THINGS BUT WE'RE UNWILLING BY A BUDGETING -- TO BEGIN TO PAY THESE THINGS DOWN.
WE HAVE BEEN PROMISING THE TAXPAYERS FOR YEARS TO GIVE THEM THE BEACH WALKOVERS. LET'S PICK ON THOSE THAT WE TOOK OUT BACK IN 2019. 6, 4, 35 SOUTH, 27, 38.
I GET ABOUT ONE OR TWO EMAILS A MONTH ON WHEN WILL YOU PUT THESE BACK AND THE ANSWER IS FROM OUR BUDGETING THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO PUT THEM BACK. SO I THINK THAT WE EITHER HAVE TO SAY WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO THIS AND WE'RE GOING TO CUT TAXES WHICH IS FINE. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT. BUT IF YOU WANT TO NOT TAX PEOPLE YOU HAVE TO TELL THEM WHAT YOU'RE NOT GOING TO DO AND WE'RE CLEARLY NOT GOING TO DO BEACH WALKOVERS.
I THINK WE NEEDED TO BE HONEST WITH THE TAXPAYERS AND TELL THEM WE'RE NOT DOING THIS. WE'RE NOT GOING RAISE YOUR TAXES BUT WE'RE ALSO NOT GOING TO GIVE THAT YOU.
WE ARE NOT FUNDING THE DOWNTOWN. THE STREETS.
THE CURBS ARE BREAKING APART. BRICK WORK BREAKING THE PART.
LIGHTS CAN'T BE REPLACED. AND THAT'S ALL ABOUT 3 OR $4 MILLION TO REPLACE. IF YOU JUST WANT TO TAKE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE ROLLBACK RATE AND THE CURRENT MILLAGE RATE AND LOCK BOX IT WE CAN DO DOWNTOWN.
>> THERE ARE PROJECTS FUNDED FOR THIS YEAR THAT ARE GOING TO ROLL OVER TO NEXT YEAR. LIKE THE ATLANTIC REC CENTER BECAUSE WE JUST DIDN'T GET THE TIME TO GET SOME OF THOSE PROJECTS DONE SO THERE WILL BE WORK BEING DONE ON SOME PROJECTS LIKE BEACH ACCESS 40 CAN'T START UNTIL THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR BECAUSE OF TURTLE SEASON. SAME WITH SEA SIDE PARK.
WE BUDGETED $6,258,000 FOR ATLANTIC REC CENTER.
SO THERE ARE SOME ROLLOVERS FROM THIS YEAR TO NEXT YEAR JUST
BECAUSE OF TIME. >> ANY FURTHER COMMENTS?
>> THANK YOU. I THINK THAT WE HAVE BEACH WALKOVERS THAT ARE ALLOTTED TO NONE.
>> WE HAVE 16 AND 40 THAT WILL BE DONE THIS YEAR BUT BECAUSE OF TURTLE SEASON WE'LL DO THEM NEXT YEAR.
>> I WANTED TO MAKE SURE. >> ONE IS COMMISSIONER ROSS ON MY --
>> THAT'S ONE REASON I WANTED TO SHOW YOU THIS BECAUSE THIS GIVES YOU A LINE ITEM DEAL WHERE YOU CAN SIT THERE AND SAY LET'S DON'T DO THAT. LET'S DO THIS.
>> ONE THING I'M CURIOUS ABOUT AND I SEE IT BARELY IN YOUR -- BECAUSE THAT'S OURS IS THE INSURANCE, THE WAVE ACTION
>> I KNOW THAT COULD GO TO -- >> WE GOT TO COTHAT THIS WEEK --
[01:05:02]
DO THAT THIS WEEK. SOCIAL IT'S IN THERE. IT'S SCHEDULED FOR $600,000 FORTHIS UPCOMING YEAR. >> THAT'S A GOOD REDUCTION BUT
YOU'RE COUNTING ON THAT OR NOT? >> COUNTING ON IT.
>> THAT'S $600,000 THAT WE CAN USE AT ANOTHER POINT.
THAT'S IT. >> IF WE GET THE WAIVER BUT WE GOT TO DO IT BY THE END OF THIS YEAR.
>> WE NEED TO DO IT. >> DROP EVERYTHING ELSE AND DO IT. THAT'S MY OPINION.
>> YEAH. >> THAT'S THE TOP PRIORITY.
WORK ON THAT. >> THAT'S IN THIS -- WE'VE GOT THAT SCHEDULED IN THIS BUDGET. FSHZ
>> 15 SECONDS. >> $600,000 IN THIS YEAR'S BUDGET. NOT NEXT YEAR.
WE'VE ALREADY SPENT THAT MONEY. I VISITED SHOWN FOR THIS COMING
SO IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY IF WE GET WAVED IT WOULD BE $600,000.
>> WE'RE STILL AWAITING. -- IN THE LIGHTENING RATE.
>> FOR THE WALKOVERS TO CLOSE US OUT I'LL JUST SAY THAT I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH THE VICE MAYOR. THERE'S MANY WAYS YOU CAN LOOK AT A SITUATION AND MAKE A LIST OF EVERYTHING THE BUDGET DOESN'T FUND BUT I CHOOSE TO LOOK AT WHAT IT DOES FUND AND THERE'S SO MANY GREAT THINGS THAT OUR COMMUNITY NEEDS THAT THIS BUDGET WILL FUND WITHOUT HAVING TO RAISE TAXES.
THERE IS BEACH WALKOVERS IN THERE.
THERE ARE OTHER THINGS LIKE THAT.
THERE'S PLENTY OF GREAT THINGS THAT OUR COMMUNITY NEEDS BUT WHAT I AGREE IS THAT IT'S ABOUT TO COME DOWN TO BUDGET TIME AND WE'LL HAVE TO SIT DOWN AND TAKE A HARD LOOK AT THIS.
FIGURE OUT WHICH ITEMS WE WANT TO KEEP AND I BELIEVE THIS COMMISSION CAN GET THAT DONE. WE'LL MAKE A GREAT DECISION AND WE'LL FIGURE OUT WHERE WE'RE GOING TO SPEND OUR VALUABLE CITY DOLLARS. WITH THAT THAT'S THE END OF OUR WORKSHOP. APPRECIATE YOU GUYS.
WE'RE RECONVENING AT 6:15 FOR OUR REGULARLY-SCHEDULED MEETING.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.