Jul 28, 2026 Special Meeting

[1. CALL TO ORDER]

[00:00:10]

>> GOOD EVENING FOLKS AND WELCOME TO OUR CITY COMMISSION

SPECIAL MEETING. >> MAYOR? VICE MAYOR? COMMISSIONER MINSHEW?

COMMISSIONER POYNTER? >> PLEASE STAND FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY THE VICE MAYOR.

>> I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS ONE NATION UNDER

[4.1 TENTATIVE MILLAGE RATE — FISCAL YEAR 2026/2027 - RESOLUTION 2026-93 SETTING A TENTATIVE MILLAGE RATE FOR OPERATING EXPENSES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026/2027; AUTHORIZING ADMINISTRATIVE CORRECTION OF SCRIVENER’S ERRORS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Synopsis: Establishes the tentative millage rate for FY 2026/2027.]

>> YOU MAY BE SEATED. AND OUR SOLE ITEM ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT WILL BE OUR TENTATIVE MILLAGE RATE FOR FISCAL YEAR 20262027. THE PRESENTATION WILL BE LED BY OUR CITY MANAGER AND ASSISTED BY ANY STAFF SHOULD HAVE QUESTIONS. TAKE IT AWAY.

>> THANK YOU MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS.

I WANTED TO PRESENT TO YOU FROM THE PODIUM TONIGHT, THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO HAVE A LENGTHIER DIALOG, I THOUGHT THIS WAS MORE APPROPRIATE FOR OUR DISCUSSION.

TONIGHT IS ONE OF THE MORE UNUSUAL STEPS IN THE CITY BUDGET PROCESS. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SET A TENTATIVE MILLAGE RATE BEFORE YOU GET THE BUDGET.

NONE OF YOU HAVE SEEN THE BUDGET YET, IT IS STILL THE MANAGER'S BUDGET SO YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT I HAVE BUILT OR PLANNED OR PROGRAMED. YOU WILL GET THAT LATER THIS WEEK. SO YOU HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION SOMEWHAT BLINDLY ABOUT WHAT I AM PROPOSING TO YOU AND THEN YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS TONIGHT AND GOING FORWARD THROUGHOUT THE BUDGET PROCESS.

SO THE MILLAGE SETTING ONLY AFFECTS THE GENERAL FUND OF THIS CITY. EVERYTHING WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IS GENERAL FUND ONLY TONIGHT, IT DOESN'T AFFECT WATER, SEWER, STORMWATER, AIRPORT, MARINA, GOLF, IT ONLY AFFECTS THE CORE SERVICES OF THE CITY AND THE GENERAL FUND.

AND I HAVE SEVERAL OPTIONS TO SHOW TO YOU TONIGHT.

FIRST OF ALL, I WILL START WITH FOUR DIFFERENT RATE OPTIONS FOR YOU TO CONSIDER. I'M GETTING AHEAD OF MYSELF.

SO OUR CURRENT RATE FOR THIS YEAR IS 4.6849 MILLS.

IF YOU WERE TO KEEP THAT RATE FOR NEXT YEAR, THAT WOULD GENERATE $23.8 MILLION IN PROPERTY TAX REVENUE.

THERE WERE SOME CHANGES IN STATE LAW THIS YEAR TO YOUR VOTING THRESHOLDS. SO IF YOU WANTED TO KEEP THE CURRENT YEAR RATE, FOUR OF YOU WOULD BE NEEDED TO APPROVE THAT LEVEL OF A MILLAGE. SECOND FOR CONSIDERATION IS THE ROLLBACK RATE. THAT KEEPS THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THE SAME AS THE CURRENT YEAR. THAT WOULD BE 4.4425.

THAT ONLY REQUIRES THREE VOTES TO PASS.

WHAT I AM RECOMMENDING TO YOU TONIGHT AND WHAT I HAVE BUILT THE BUDGET ON IS A 3% REDUCTION IN THE MILLAGE RATE.

THAT IS SOMETHING WE HAVE CALLED THE MODIFIED ROLLBACK RATE, ALTHOUGH THE STATE DOESN'T FORMALLY RECOGNIZE THAT TERMINOLOGY. THAT RATE IS 4.5444 AND WOULD GENERATE $23.1 MILLION. IT DOES REQUIRE FOUR VOTES TO PASS. THE REASON I BUILT THE BUDGET USING THIS NUMBER WITH THE 3% REDUCTION IS BECAUSE WE HAD SOME BIG WINS IN THE GENERAL FUND THIS YEAR THAT I REALLY THINK ARE THE HEADLINE OF THE BUDGET STORY, THAT IS THAT GOLF AND MARINA ARE SELF FUNDED FOR THE FIRST TIME IN SEVEN YEARS.

WE HAD A GOAL OF ELIMINATING THOSE TRANSFERS OVER A THREE YEAR. AND KUDOS TO LEADERSHIP IN THOSE DEPARTMENTS, WE WERE ABLE TO GET IT DONE IN TWO YEARS.

SO NO MORE TRANSFERS TO THOSE FUNDS, THAT SAVES THE GENERAL FUND $1 MILLION THIS YEAR. WE ALSO ARE PROPOSING SOME FURTHER REDUCTIONS IN FULL TIME HEAD COUNT, THOSE ARE POSITIONS THAT HAVE BEEN VACANT AND WE DON'T INTEND TO FILL THEM.

SO FURTHER LOWERING THE NUMBER OF BUDGETED POSITIONS.

AND THERE ARE SOME OTHER ADJUSTMENTS THAT WE ARE WORKING ON BUT I WANT TO TOUCH ON THOSE IN JUST A MOMENT.

THE LAST RATE FOR YOU TO CONSIDER IS WHAT I'M CALLING THE "WHAT IF" SCENARIO. THE 4.8530 WOULD INCREASE THE PROPERTY TAX COLLECTIONS BY $1.5 MILLION, TO 24.7.

THE REASON THAT NUMBER IS SO SPECIFIC IS BECAUSE 1.5 MILLION IS HOW MUCH PAID PARKING REVENUE WE HAVE ALLOCATED TO THE WATERFRONT REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT.

NOW WE HAVE HEARD FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY THAT REGARDLESS OF WHAT

[00:05:02]

THE ORDER OF THIS TIMELINE IS SUCH THAT YOU MAKE A DECISION, A TENTATIVE DECISION TONIGHT, THE VOTE HAPPENS IN ABOUT THREE WEEKS. YOUR PUBLIC HEARINGS ARE IN SEPTEMBER, YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY AT EITHER OF THOSE PUBLIC HEARINGS TO LOWER THE MILLAGE, DEPENDING ON YOUR DECISION THERE. SO YOU CAN GO DOWN FROM WHAT YOU CHOOSE TONIGHT, YOU CANNOT GO UP FROM WHAT YOU CHOOSE TONIGHT.

SO BEING A LITTLE BIT MORE SPECIFIC ABOUT THE DOLLAR IMPACT OF THESE DECISIONS, I PUT THAT ARROW THERE AT THE 4.5, 4.4.

THAT IS WHAT I BALANCE THE BUDGET ON.

IF YOU CHOOSE THAT TONIGHT, THERE IS NO IMPACT ON THE BUDGET I HAVE DRAFTED. IF YOU DECIDE TO GO TO THE ROLLBACK RATE, WE WOULD NEED TO FIND AN ADDITIONAL $519,000 TO REMOVE FROM THIS YEAR'S BUDGET. IF YOU ADOPT THE 4.6849, YOU WOULD HAVE AN ADDITIONAL 716,260.

I HAVE LISTED SOME OPTIONAL ITEMS BELOW.

YOU COULD PUT THAT EXCESS FUNDING TOWARDS IT IF YOU WOULD NEED IT. BUT AGAIN, HAVING IT AS A POTENTIAL PAID PARKING REVENUE REPLACEMENT GETS YOU KIND OF HALFWAY THERE. AND THEN LASTLY, IF YOU WANTED THE FULL REPLACEMENT OF THE 1.5 MILLION, YOU WOULD GO UP TO THE 4.8530. SO ADDITIONAL FUNDING CUTS, WE CAN MORE MONEY INTO CONTINGENCY, ALTHOUGH WE WERE JUST ADVISED OF CONTINGENCY FUNDS FOR THE BUDGET THAT I WILL BE GIVING YOU, SO WE WILL HAVE SOME IN CONTINGENCY. WE COULD ALWAYS USE IT TO PAY DOWN DEBT, WE COULD FUND THE CONSERVATION LAND ACQUISITION PROGRAM AND AGAIN, AS A SET ASIDE FOR THE PAID PARKING PROGRAM. I WANTED TO MENTION HERE I SENT OUT SOME INFORMATION TO THE FIVE OF YOU HERE TODAY, BASED ON SOME AREAS THAT INCREASED IN THE BUDGET AND WHY THE SAVINGS AREN'T BIGGER THAN THEY ARE. OUR HEALTH INSURANCE IS PROJECTED TO BE UP OVER 8%. I THINK IT WAS OUR GAS THAT WAS UP ABOUT 8%. THERE WERE TWO THAT WERE UP 8% AND THERE WERE TWO MORE UP 4%. SO HEALTH INSURANCE, GAS AND FUEL, WORKER'S COMP AND ELECTRIC UTILITIES, THOSE WERE ALL PRETTY SIGNIFICANT INCREASES IN THE BUDGET THIS YEAR THAT THE CITY DOESN'T HAVE A LOT OF CONTROL OVER.

I WOULD TELL YOU THAT WE ARE STILL WORKING ON THE HEALTH INSURANCE COMPONENT. IT COULD GO DOWN, IT WON'T GO UP. WE WERE IN A TWO YEAR RATE GUARANTEE, SO WE ARE CAPPED AT A 12% RATE INCREASE FOR THIS YEAR.

HOWEVER, CIGNA AND BAPTIST HAVE NOT COME TO TERMS AND THAT HAS DRAMATICALLY AFFECTED OUR EMPLOYEES ABILITY TO GET HEALTH CARE ON THE ISLAND WITH BAPTIST NOW BEING OUT OF NETWORK. SO STAFF IS LOOKING AT OTHER ALTERNATIVES TO GET AWAY FROM CIGNA.

WE HAVE GOT A MEETING ON FRIDAY TO REVIEW SOME OF THOSE PROPOSALS. BUT AGAIN, I DON'T ENVISION IT GOING UP FROM WHERE WE ARE AT. BUT WE COULD HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL SAVINGS ON HEALTH INSURANCE, WE ARE SHOPPING THAT PLAN. THIS IS JUST A QUICK GLANCE FROM THE PAGE IN OUR BUDGET BOOK THAT SHOWS THE HISTORY OF THE CITY'S MILLAGE RATE FOR THE LAST 20 YEARS.

GOING BACK TO 2006, WE WERE AT A 4.4106.

WHAT YOU CAN SEE IS THREE DRAMATIC CHANGE IN THE VALUATION OF PROPERTIES IN THE CITY. IT HAS BEEN FAIRLY GOOD STEWARDS OF REDUCING THAT MILLAGE YEAR OVER YEAR, TRYING TO BRING THAT DOWN. YOU CAN SEE THE STEADY INCREASE IN TAXABLE VALUES. LASTLY, THIS IS THE SCHEDULE FOR THE NEXT SEVERAL MEETINGS WE HAVE OUR WORKSHOP BEFORE THE COMMISSION MEETING NEXT TUESDAY NIGHT AT 5:00.

WE HAVE ANOTHER BUDGET WORKSHOP SCHEDULED FOR WEDNESDAY EVENING AND THEN IF NEEDED, INTO THURSDAY WITH ADDITIONAL DATES THE FOLLOWING WEEK IF WE NEED TO CONTINUE ON.

AND THEN THE PUBLIC HEARINGS, I WANTED TO POINT OUT PARTICULARLY THAT THE FIRST PUBLIC HEARING IS ON A THURSDAY NIGHT.

BECAUSE OF THE TRIM CALENDAR AND THE NUMBER OF DAYS REQUIRED

[00:10:01]

AND THE FINAL PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 15TH. AT THIS POINT I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE AND FEEDBACK.

>> THANK YOU. FOR THE COMMISSION, DO I HAVE

ANYTHING ON ALREADY? >> POINT OF INFORMATION, I'M

LOOKING AT YOUR EMAIL -- >> IT'S UP 8%.

DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH WAS FOUND TO GO IN CONTINGENCY?

>> NOT YET. WE HAVE SOME FINAL ADJUSTMENTS TO MAKE, THREE AREAS I WOULD LIKE TO LOOK AT BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THAT FINAL CONTINGENCY. BUT I AM VERY COMFORTABLE THAT WE WOULD HAVE THAT LEVEL OF CONTINGENCY.

>> AND IS THERE ANY MONEY IN LAND CONSERVATION?

>> THAT IS IN ITS OWN FUND. IT HAS GOT ABOUT A LITTLE OVER $250,000 IN IT RIGHT NOW. WE WILL BE BRINGING YOU A PROPOSAL VERY SOON TO USE THAT EXISTING FUND BALANCE TO ACQUIRE SOME CONSERVATION LAND. BUT ANYTHING AFTER THAT, THERE WOULDN'T BE A FUNDING SOURCE FOR.

>> THAT'S THE CURRENT BALANCE BUT THERE'S NOTHING IN THE BALANCE TO ADD TO THAT? OKAY.

THAT'S ALL I HAD. >> THANK YOU COMMISSIONER.

I SEE NO OTHER LIGHTS CACTUS ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE MOMENT? ALL RIGHT.

>> LET ME JUST ASK A QUESTION. CAN YOU TALK ABOUT SALARY?

>> SALARY VARIES WIDELY DEPENDING ON WHAT UNIT YOU WORK IN. SO WE ARE IN THE THIRD YEAR OF A FIRE UNION, A COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT.

AND I THINK THEIR SALARIES ARE PROJECTED TO BE UP ABOUT 10% THIS YEAR. POLICE -- WE ARE STILL IN THE BARGAINING PROCESS, WE HAVE SETTLED ON SOMETHING.

THEIR GROUP HAS TO RATIFY IT AND THEN THEY COME TO YOU FOR RATIFICATION. POLICE, THAT SALARY WOULD GO UP ABOUT 8%. IS IT FIVE -- 3.5? SO THE UNION, WHICH IS MORE FRONT LINE EMPLOYEES, PUBLIC WORKS, THINGS LIKE THAT, THEY ARE 3.5%.

NONUNION EMPLOYEES ARE AT 3%. >> AND IF WE WENT TO THE ROLLBACK RATE, WHICH IS THE 519 WEST, WHERE WOULD THAT MONEY

COME FROM? >> I CAN GO BACK TO EVERY DEPARTMENT AND TRY TO THIN SLICE AND FIND MORE SAVINGS, BUT I THINK THAT IS KIND OF A NICKEL AND DIME WAY TO DO IT.

MOST LIKELY I WOULD GO TO THE CAPITAL BUDGET AND FIND ONE PROJECT TO DEFER AND THEN WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO TRANSFER MONEY INTO THE CAPITAL FUND IN ORDER TO PAY FOR THAT PROJECT.

SO WE WOULD LIKELY LOOK TO DEFER A CAPITAL PROGRAM.

>> AND WE HAVE ALREADY DEFERRED 2.5 MILLION IN THE UPCOMING YEAR, SO WE WOULD BE DEFERRING OVER $3 MILLION IN CAPITAL PROJECTS IF WE WENT TO THE ROLLBACK RATE.

WHICH HAS BEEN, HISTORICALLY, WHY WE ARE HERE TODAY.

AND WHERE WE ARE WITHDRAWING THIS.

>> THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS?

YOU MAY HAVE THE FLOOR. >> THE SALARY INCREASES, EVEN THOUGH THE BARGAINING IS NOT QUITE DONE, YOU HAVE THEM

ALREADY ESTIMATED -- >> IT IS INCLUDED, YES.

>> I SEE NO OTHER REQUESTS TO SPEAK, DO WE HAVE CONSENSUS ON THE DIRECTION? VICE MAYOR?

ARE YOU CLICKING YOUR LIGHT? >> NO.

I THINK NOT KNOWING ABOUT THE PAID PARKING AND WHAT THAT POTENTIALLY COULD OR COULD NOT DO, I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE GO TO THE 4.8530, WITH THE -- WITH NOT KNOWING WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. AND WE WON'T KNOW WHAT THE VOTE IS. THEN WE CAN ALWAYS LOWER IT.

BUT IF WE GO TOO LOW AND -- WE'VE GOT THE BILL.

SOMEONE'S GOT TO PAY FOR IT. SO IT IS EITHER WE KEEP THE PAID

[00:15:05]

>> ALL RIGHT, I HAVE ONE VOTE IN FAVOR OF THAT.

>> ALL RIGHT. I CANNOT VOTE FOR THE 4.4425, BECAUSE, AGAIN, THAT HAS GOTTEN US TO WHERE WE ARE TODAY, WHERE WE CONTINUE TO DEFER IMPORTANT CAPITAL PROJECTS THAT COST US MORE. I ALSO HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ISSUE WITH THE QUOTE, UNQUOTE, SO-CALLED MODIFIED ROLLBACK RATE. TO ME, THAT IS NOT A MODIFIED ROLLBACK RATE, THAT IS A POLITICAL ROLLBACK RATE.

THAT RATE PROTECTS HOMESTEADED PROPERTIES, WHICH ALSO IS PANDERING TO VOTERS, BECAUSE HOMESTEAD PROPERTIES ARE PRIMARILY VOTERS. AND WE ARE HURTING NON-HOMESTEAD PROPERTIES AND COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES.

WHICH WE SHOULD NOT BE DOING. I JUST CANNOT SUPPORT IT.

BY NOT CONTROLLING NON-HOMESTEAD PROPERTIES, YOU ARE NEGATIVELY IMPACTING RENTAL RATES AND CONTINUING TO TALK ABOUT AFFORDABILITY IN THIS COMMUNITY. AND IF YOU CANNOT HAVE SOME CONTROL OR SOME IDEA HOW YOU CAN MANAGE -- HELP MANAGE OUR RENTAL RATES, THEN YOU ARE NOT HELPING THE AFFORDABILITY PROBLEM.

AGAIN, I JUST THINK THAT IS -- TO SAVE OUR HOMES, THE 3% CAP IS DESIGNED TO PROTECT HOMESTEADED PROPERTIES.

SO WITH THIS RATE WE ARE TRYING TO PROTECT HOMESTEADED PROPERTIES MORE. WHICH DOES NOT HELP US IN THE LONG RUN. SO I CANNOT SUPPORT A 4.544.

THE OTHER TWO ARE, FOR ME, REASONABLE TO SUPPORT BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT WE ARE GOING TO NEED -- WE ARE GOING TO HAVE COST OVERRUNS ON THE MARINA PROJECT, THE BALL FIELDS, WE HAVE STILL NOT RESOLVED WHAT WE ARE GOING TO DO, WE HAVE SIGNIFICANT ISSUES SITTING ON THE TABLE THAT ARE ALL CONNECTED FINANCIALLY, THAT WE DO NOT HAVE A LONG TERM PLAN FOR YET.

AND I ALSO AM CONCERNED ABOUT THIS IDEA THAT WE HAVE NOW TIED PAID PARKING REVENUE COMMITMENTS TO THE WATERFRONT PARK -- THE WATERFRONT RENOURISHMENT WHICH MAKES PERFECT SENSE TO ME.

BUT THIS IDEA THAT THE MONEY IS IN JEOPARDY IS VERY WORRISOME.

SO I COULD EITHER SUPPORT THE 4.6849 OR THE 4.8530.

AT THIS POINT IN TIME, SO THAT WE CAN THEN GET TO PASS THE AUGUST VOTE AND GET INTO SEPTEMBER WHERE WE WOULD MAKE FINAL DECISIONS ON THE BUDGET. AND ALSO NOT HAVING SEEN THE BUDGET, IT IS NOT GIVING US AN OPPORTUNITY TO SIT DOWN AND DO A DEEP DIVE AND REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT IS IN THERE, WHAT IS NOT IN THERE. AND WHAT WE NEED TO BE DEALING WITH WHAT. I CAN SUPPORT TWO OF THESE AND I

CANNOT SUPPORT THE OTHER TWO. >> SO I HAVE TWO VOTES IN FAVOR OF OUR HIGHEST MILLAGE RATE, ONE VOTE IN FAVOR OF OUR SECOND HIGHEST MILLAGE RATE. COMMISSIONER?

>> I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER MINSHEW.

I DID NOT LIKE THE NOTION OF THE ROLLBACK RATE.

IT PUTS A LARGER BURDEN ON OUR NONHOMESTEADED PROPERTIES, WHICH ARE THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES. SURE THE SECOND HOME IS FINE, BUT A LOT OF -- A. LOT OF THE NONHOMESTEADED PROPERTIES, AS THE COMMISSIONER SAID, ARE RENTALS.

AND THE OWNER OF THOSE RENTAL PROPERTIES IS NOT ABSORBING THAT ADDITIONAL TAX, THEY ARE JUST GOING TO RAISE THEIR RENT.

SO I DON'T LOVE THAT. I ALSO -- I. WOULD ALSO LIKE TO SEE A MEASURABLE AMOUNT OF MONEY PUT INTO LAND CONSERVATION.

[00:20:02]

AND SO WE HAVE TO DO ONE OF TWO THINGS.

WE EITHER HAVE TO STOP COMPLAINING WHEN SOMEBODY OWNS A PROPERTY AND WANTS TO DEVELOP IT, THEY HAVE RIGHTS.

IN FLORIDA THEY HAVE A LOT OF RIGHTS.

AND THEY ARE ALLOWED TO DEVELOP WITHIN THE CONFINES OF OUR CODE.

AND IF WE WANT TO PROTECT SOME OF OUR INCREDIBLE PROPERTIES THAT ARE STILL UNDEVELOPED THEN WE NEED TO BUY THEM AND WE NEED THE MONEY TO BUY THEM. AND THE LAST TIME WE GOT ANY SIGNIFICANT MONEY WAS IN 2019 WHEN THE MAYOR GOT A 0.5 MILL INCREASE AND THEN IT WAS SPENT OVER THE SUBSEQUENT YEARS TO BUY SEVEN OR 8 ACRES, I FORGET WHAT WE ALL BOUGHT.

AND THAT WAS GREAT AND THAT WAS LAUDED BY THE COMMUNITY.

AND WHY WE HAVE NEVER FOUND THE WILL TO DO THAT AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW. BUT I AM ALL FOR THE 4.8530.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN WITH THE VOTE ON AUGUST 18TH. AND IF THE FLORIDA STATE LAW HANDCUFFS US THAT WE CAN LOWER, THEN FINE.

WE CAN LOWER. WE CAN LOWER WHATEVER WE NEED TO AFTER THE AUGUST VOTE. BUT WE CANNOT RAISE IT BACK UP.

SO... YEAH.

WITH ALL THAT IS COMING DOWN THE PIKE, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A ROBUST CONTINGENCY FUND, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE LAND CONSERVATION AND HECK, YEAH, PAY DOWN SOME DEBT THAT WE ARE PAYING ANY PIECE OF DEBT THAT WE HAVE, LARGE INTEREST RATES ON.

I DON'T KNOW WHY WE WOULD PUT THINGS OFF ON THE FUTURE PRECEDENCE. AND A LOT OF US HOPE FOR OUR CHILDREN. SO, YEAH, I AM ALL FOR IT.

THE 4.8530. >> THANK YOU COMMISSIONER.

VICE MAYOR? >> THANK YOU MAYOR.

LAST YEAR AT THIS TIME, THERE WERE QUESTIONS ABOUT PROPERTY TAX REFORM. AND I SAID VERY CLEARLY, YOU CAN BET THAT IF YOU SEE SOMETHING, IT IS GOING TO DO WITH HOMESTEAD PROPERTIES. WHAT DO WE SEE ON THE BALLOT? HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION BEING INCREASED.

SO THE MODIFIED ROLLBACK RATE WHICH I TRIED TO PUSH FOR LAST YEAR, HELPED SAVE THOSE HOMESTEADED PROPERTIES, WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT THE CONSTITUENTS WENT TO THE LEGISLATURE FOR TO TRY TO GET THIS YEAR. SO I APPRECIATE STAFF WORKING OFF OF THAT NUMBER. BECAUSE I THINK IT IS A GOOD POLICY GOING FORWARD. I AM OBVIOUSLY GOING TO BE FOR THE ROLLBACK RATE. I MEAN, WHEN YOU LOOK AT WHAT HAPPENED LAST YEAR, WHEN THE RATE WAS HELD, GUESS, HOMESTEADED PROPERTIES PAID THEIR 3%.

BUT COMMERCIAL AND NON-HOMESTEAD PROPERTIES PAID EIGHT.

AND WE GO TO THE MODIFIED ROLLBACK, THAT AT LEAST WOULD HAVE GOTTEN A BREAK, A LITTLE BIT OF A BREAK.

AND NOW LET'S NOT EVEN TALK ABOUT RAISING IT.

IF YOU WERE TO EVEN HOLD IT, YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT A 15% INCREASE IN NON-HOMESTEAD PROPERTY AND COMMERCIAL PROPERTY VALUES.

15%. THAT IS INCREDIBLE.

THEN YOU ARE GOING TO PUT WASTEWATER FEES ON TOP OF IT, WE HAVE ONE WASTEWATER FEE GOING FROM $170 A YEAR -- I. AM NOT SAYING THAT PROPERTY SHOULDN'T PAY MORE, BUT $170 A YEAR UP TO 170,000? HOLY COW, WHAT ARE WE DOING TO OUR COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES? AND WHAT ABOUT THE NONPROFITS THAT OPERATE OUT OF THOSE COMMERCIAL STRUCTURES? WHERE IS THAT MONEY GETTING PASSED TO? I'M LOOKING AT TRYING TO HELP OUT EXACTLY WHAT WE ARE SEEING HAPPEN, THAT IS THE SCREAMING OF THE STOP AND SPEND.

AND I THINK WE CAN FIND IT, THAT IS WHERE I AM GOING TO BE.

BUT ON THE ISSUE OF REVERSING PAID PARKING OR REPLACING IT, NOBODY ON THIS COMMISSION HAS SAID THAT IF THE VOTE IS YES ON THE REFERENDUM, THAT YOU WILL REPEAL PAID PARKING.

HOW CAN ANYBODY OUT HERE TRUST THIS COMMISSION WILL DO THAT IF YOU HAVE YET TO GO ON RECORD TO SAY "IF IT PASSES, YES, WE WILL GET RID OF IT?" I DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW WE ARE PREPARING FOR SOMETHING THAT NOBODY UP HERE HAS SAID THAT THEY WILL DO. IF THAT WAS THE CASE, I COULD UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU WERE GOING WITH THAT.

[00:25:02]

BUT Y'ALL KNOW WHERE I'M ON IT, I KNOW I WILL GET OUTVOTED BUT

THAT'S WHERE I AM. >> THANK YOU VICE MAYOR.

AND FOR MY PERSONAL FEEDBACK, IF I HAD A CRYSTAL BALL TO PREDICT THAT THIS COMMISSION AND THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE IS TO KEEP PAID PARKING, I WOULD BE VERY COMFORTABLE WITH THE UNMODIFIED RATE. BUT TO THE POINT OF MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS, THERE IS NO REASON OF THE BUDGET TO PREVENT US FROM HAPPENING THE MOST FLEXIBILITY TO MAKE A VOTE IN THE FUTURE SO FOR THAT REASON, I'M COMFORTABLE TODAY, WITH THE 4.8530 KNOWING THAT IF WE SEE A OPPORTUNITY, WE WILL COME DOWN.

AND COMMISSIONER TUTEN, I STILL HAVE YOUR LIGHT ON?

GO AHEAD. >> ONE THING I WOULD LIKE TO SAY, COMMISSIONER AYSCUE, WE WERE ADVISED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY NOT TO DIRECTLY ANSWER PEOPLE ABOUT WHAT WE WOULD DO FOLLOWING THE AUGUST 18TH VOTE, BECAUSE WE WERE ADVISED -- CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, ADVISEMENT THAT IT WOULD POTENTIALLY CREATE A VIOLATION OF SUNSHINE, BECAUSE THEN WE WOULD ALL FIND OUT EACH OTHER'S INTENTIONS WHEN WE ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE COMMUNICATING OUTSIDE OF A PUBLIC FORUM.

AND THE LEGISLATURE IS -- IN THE NOVEMBER ELECTION THE LEGISLATURE IS NOT JUST PROTECTING HOMESTEAD OR PROPERTIES FOR A GREATER EXEMPTION, THEY ARE ALSO GOING TO HAMSTRING MUNICIPALITIES WITH NOT ALLOWING NONHOMESTEADED PROPERTIES. THEY ARE ALLOWED TO RISE 10% IN VALUATION. THEY ARE ONLY GOING TO BE ALLOWED 5%. SO THEY ARE PROTECTING BOTH SIDES. I AM ALL FOR GIVING US MAXIMUM FLEXIBILITY WITH THE 4.8530 AND WAITING TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS.

>> COMMISSIONER? >> I JUST HAVE TO SAY THAT IN MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE WORK THAT HAS BEEN DONE ON WHAT IS NOW CALLED AMENDMENT THREE, WAS NOT FROM THE PUBLIC SPEAKING UP, IT WAS FROM A GOVERNOR WHO HAS NATIONAL ASPIRATIONS AND WANTS SOMETHING TO HANG HIS HAT ON. AND THAT BILL THAT ENDED UP BEING PROCESSED THROUGH THE LEGISLATURE IS, AGAIN, CONTINUING TO TAKE AWAY AND IS HAMSTRINGING US AND HAS SO MANY MISSING COMPONENTS TO UNDERSTAND HOW THIS THING WOULD WORK THAT I JUST THINK IS DISINGENUOUS TO SAY THAT IT WAS BEING PUT FORTH BY THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE BECAUSE I DON'T BELIEVE THAT AT ALL. THANK YOU.

>> VICE MAYOR? >> I'M NOT GOING TO GET TOO MUCH INTO AMENDMENT THREE, I KNOW WE WILL SPEAK ABOUT IT AT A WORKSHOP. BUT I SPEAK WITH A LOT OF REPRESENTATIVES, PROBABLY MORE THAN THIS COMMISSION COMBINED, I CAN TELL YOU THE NUMBER 1 ISSUE THAT THEY WERE GETTING EMAILED WAS PROPERTY TAX RELIEF. AND NUMBERS TWO, THREE, FOUR AND FIVE COULDN'T COMBINE. THEY WERE GETTING ABSOLUTELY HAMMERED. THAT'S WHY THE HOUSE TOOK IT UP CACTUS SENATE DIDN'T UNTIL THEY GOT CALLED BACK INTO SESSION.

BUT IT ABSOLUTELY WAS THE NUMBEE BEING HANDED ON, THIS SESSION.

SO YES, THE CONSTITUENTS WERE BEGGING FOR IT.

PROPERTY TAX REFORM POLLS IN THE HIGH 70S.

I MEAN IT POLLS -- THAT OUGHT TO TELL YOU IT IS A VERY, VERY, VERY POPULAR TOPIC TO TRY TO GET.

NOW MAYBE THIS AMENDMENT DOESN'T FIX THAT.

EVERYBODY HAS THEIR OWN VIEW OF THAT.

MAYBE AMENDMENT THREE DOESN'T NECESSARILY ACHIEVE WHAT THE CONSTITUENTS WANT. BUT IT POLLS VERY HIGH.

SO I CAN TELL YOU THAT EVEN IF IT DOESN'T PASS, IT IS STILL GOING TO REACH AN OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF PEOPLE THAT WANT PROPERTY TAX RELIEF. SO IT IS NOT JUST LET'S SAY THAT IT FAILS, IT IS STILL GOING TO HAVE AN OVERWHELMING POPULARITY.

JUST BECAUSE IT DOESN'T REACH THE 60% THRESHOLD.

>> THANK YOU VICE MAYOR. COMMISSIONER POYNTER?

>> RIGHT NOW I'M PRETTY MUCH JUST WORRIED ABOUT OUR TOWN.

CAN'T FIX THE STATE, CAN'T FIX THE COUNTY.

WE CAN TRY TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT OUR TOWN, THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO CONCENTRATE ON. THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE GREATEST POSSIBILITY AT THIS POINT AND

[00:30:02]

THEN SEE WHERE THINGS FALL OUT. >> THANK YOU COMMISSIONER.

SEEING NO OTHER REQUESTS TO SPEAK, DO I HAVE A MOTION?

>> [INAUDIBLE] >> WELL TECHNICALLY WITH OUR 5.0 PUBLIC COMMENT, SHOULD WE MAKE THE MOTION AND THEN HEAR PUBLIC COMMENT AFTER? OR SHOULD I LOCK THAT IN?

>> YOU CAN MAKE THE MOTION FIRST.

THE RESOLUTION IS SETTING IN AT 5.454, SO WHOEVER IS GOING TO MAKE A MOTION WOULD HAVE TO MAKE THAT AMENDMENT AND THEN A SECOND AND THEN YOU WOULD HAVE TO PAUSE.

>> I MOVE TO SET THE TENTATIVE RATE AT 4.8530.

[5. PUBLIC COMMENT]

>> I HAVE A MOTION, DO I HAVE A SECOND?

>> I WILL SECOND. >> ALL RIGHT.

I HAVE TWO REQUESTS TO SPEAK, OUR FIRST SPEAKER IS MR. ROGER

MARTIN. >> ROGER MARTIN, 1517, ATLANTIC AVENUE. THE LAST PERSON THAT I TALKED TO ABOUT BUDGET WAS TRIP ROSS. WE HAD MANY CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THE BUDGET. HE WOULD ALWAYS SAY THERE IS NO MONEY AND I WOULD SAY THERE IS PLENTY OF MONEY COMING IN.

THE FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY OF THIS COMMISSION TO SPEND IT AND TO SPEND IT IN A WAY IN WHICH SATISFIES THE CONSTITUENTS.

THE LAST PERSON YOU WANT TO ASK ABOUT HOMESTEAD PROPERTIES OR RENTAL PROPERTIES IS A REALTOR. I WILL ADDRESS A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT WERE SAID. FIRST OFF, THERE WAS NOT A MAJORITY OF RENTED PROPERTIES, THEY ARE SECOND HOMES, BY FAR.

THERE ARE PLENTY AND I DO AGREE THAT WILL AFFECT THE RATES.

THE OTHER THING THAT I WILL SAY IS THAT AMENDMENT THREE DOES NOT ELIMINATE THE ABILITY FOR NON-HOMESTEAD PROPERTIES TO RAISE, IT GOES FROM A 10% CAP TO A 5% CAP, THAT IS STILL PRETTY SIGNIFICANT, ESPECIALLY WHEN LOOKING AT SOME COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES THAT ARE IN THIS TOWN.

THE OTHER THING THAT I WOULD MENTION IS THAT THIS DOES NOT HAVE TO BE AN EITHER/OR THING. WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT PAID PARKING, EITHER WE HAVE PAID PARKING AND WE DON'T HAVE HIGHER TAXES OR WE DON'T HAVE PAID PARKING.

I THINK THAT BOTH CAN BE ACHIEVED VERY EASILY.

SHARPENING A PENCIL, I THINK MISS CAMPBELL HAS DONE A GREAT JOB WITH HER PRESENTATION AND THE BUDGET THAT WOULD SAY THAT.

SO I WILL TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT SOME PROPERTIES THAT HAVE CHANGED HANDS. 41 PROPERTIES ON SOUTH FLETCHER ALONE HAVE CHANGED HANDS, THE AVERAGE PRICE IS $1.2 MILLION FOR A TOTAL OF $51 MILLION. I AM SURE MORE THAN HALF OF THAT WAS NON-HOMESTEAD PROPERTIES. BUT PROBABLY MANY OF THEM WERE OLDER PROPERTIES THAT ARE BEING COMPLETELY REASSESSED.

LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT SOME OF THOSE.

21302 SOUTH FLETCHER. SOLD -- ORIGINALLY IT WAS PURCHASED -- NOT ORIGINALLY, WAS PURCHASED IN 2019 FOR $1.2 MILLION. WHETHER OR NOT IT WAS HOMESTEADED OR NOT, IT WAS NOW REASSESSED, IT WAS SOLD FOR FOUR-POINT -- $4.2 MILLION, 85% BY STATE STATUTE, WHICH IS WHAT KEVIN AND LILLY ASSESSED IT FOR WHICH WOULD BE $4.3 MILLION, IS PRETTY CLOSE TO BEING A THE PROPOSED.

QUITE A JUMP UP. LET'S LOOK AT 2560 SOUTH FLETCHER. LAST YEAR IT WAS ASSESSED AT 704,000. THIS YEAR PROPOSED $1.5 MILLION.

THERE IS A LOT THAT WASN'T FROM LAST YEAR.

LET'S LOOK AT 832 NORTH FLETCHER WHICH WAS A HOMESTEADED PROPERTY. IT WAS ASSESSED AT 328,000.

THE SALE PRICE IS TOO LATE FOR IT TO PROBABLY AFFECT THIS BUDGET, 85% OF ITS NEW SALES PRICE OF 815,000 WOULD BE 692.

OVER 50% INCREASE. LET'S LOOK AT CRANE ISLAND.

SEVEN PROPERTIES FOR AN AVERAGE PRICE OF ALMOST $2.4 MILLION, $16.7 MILLION ADDED TO OUR TAX ROLLS.

WITH SIX MORE UNDER CONSTRUCTION.

YOU CAN DO THE MATH THERE. LET'S LOOK AT NON-HOMESTEAD -- LET'S LOOK AT NOT BEACHFRONT PROPERTY, BUT WHAT WE REFER TO

AS AREA THREE, WHICH IS NOT -- >> THANK YOU.

>> FIFTY-FIVE PROPERTIES IS ALMOST A MILLION DOLLARS.

THERE IS ONE THAT IS COMING. >> NEXT I HAVE MR. ALLEN HOPKI

HOPKINS. >> GOOD EVENING.

FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR SERVING.

I KNOW IT'S NOT EASY. >> IF I COULD HAVE YOUR NAME AND

ADDRESS PLEASE? >> ALLEN HOPKINS LIVE AT 2272 PARTICIPANT DRIVE. THANKS AGAIN FOR SERVING.

I KNOW IT'S NOT EASY. PEOPLE COMING AT YOU FROM ALL DIFFERENT ANGLES, I WANTED TO JUST EXPRESS MY APPRECIATION FOR THAT. ONE OF THE THINGS WHEN I WAS

[00:35:03]

WHEN YOU HAVE A SUBSTITUTE, IT GOES DOWN IN PRICE.

COSTS LESS, IT IS CHEAPER, EASIER TO AFFORD.

AND THE THING THEY'RE TRYING TO COMPETE WITH, IF YOU WERE COMPETING IN THAT MARKET, THE PRICES ARE GOING TO COME DOWN, NOT GO UP. SO IF HOUSES BECOME CHEAPER AND MORE AFFORDABLE, THE RENTALS WILL AS WELL.

THAT IS JUST ECON 101. I JUST WANTED TO GET THAT OUT OF THE WAY. THE REASON YOU HAD TO COME UP WITH THIS BUDGET AND WANTED TO GO WITH A HIGHER BUDGET IS BECAUSE OF COST OVERRUNS THAT YOU BELIEVE WILL HAPPEN.

WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT IN THE FIRST PLACE? WHO WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR SETTING THAT AGENDA WHERE SOMETHING IS GOING TO COST ORIGINALLY? ARE YOU JUST ASSUMING OR ADMITTING THAT YOUR PROCESS IS THAT BAD, THAT YOU KNOW IT WILL BE EXPONENTIALLY HIGHER? THAT IS REALLY UNFORTUNATE.

THE WHOLE THING ABOUT PAID PARKING.

AND USING THAT IS A REASON WHY YOU HAVE TO HAVE THIS HIGHER MILLAGE RATE. THAT IS NOT TRUE.

YOU KNOW IT IS NOT TRUE, WE ALL KNOW IT IS NOT TRUE.

YOU ALL JUST ADMITTED IT. YOU CAN CONTROL WHETHER IT'S GOING TO CONTINUE OR NOT, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE AMENDMENT PASSES OR NOT. CORRECT? CORRECT. SO TO SAY THAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE IT IN THERE JUST IN CASE THE AMENDMENT PASSES, BECAUSE YOU DON'T KNOW IF THE MONEY WILL BE AVAILABLE, YES, YOU DO.

YOU WERE ALL SITTING RIGHT THERE, YOU KNOW.

SO PLEASE, DON'T MAKE THAT ARGUMENT.

IF YOU WANT TO MAKE AN ARGUMENT BECAUSE YOU NEED THE SPENDING FOR OTHER THINGS, RIGHT. BUT DON'T MAKE IT BECAUSE PAID PARKING IN THE FACTORY AMENDMENT MIGHT PASS, YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU WOULD HAVE THAT ANSWER.

EARLIER THIS YEAR YOU COULD HAVE PUT ON THE BALLOT THAT NOT ONLY WOULD PAID PARKING HAVE TO BE VOTED ON FOR ANY ADDITIONAL PAID PARKING IN THE FUTURE, YOU COULD PUT IT ON TO ELIMINATE THE PAID PARKING THAT YOU PUT IN PLACE. BUT YOU DIDN'T DO THAT.

I DON'T KNOW WHY, YOU KNOW WHY, BUT I DON'T.

THAT WOULD HAVE SOLVED ALL OF THIS.

THEN YOU WOULD ACTUALLY KNOW WHETHER YOU HAVE THAT MONEY OR NOT, BUT YOU DIDN'T DO IT. I LOVE LIVING HERE.

I LOVE THIS CITY. AND I'M REALLY UPSET AT THE RANCOR THAT EXISTS HERE NOW AND I HOPE YOU CAN FIX IT.

THIS AIN'T GOING TO DO IT. THANK YOU.

>> I HAVE NO OTHER REQUESTS TO SPEAK.

AND WITH THAT, WE WILL ADJOURN. >> CAN I MAKE A POINT OF INFORMATION? MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT WHAT WENT ON THE BALLOT WAS WHAT THE POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE WROTE. THEY WROTE THEIR INITIATIVE AND WE CANNOT ADD OR SUBTRACT OR CHANGE WHAT GOES IN OR OUT.

>> WE COULD HAVE DONE OUR OWN. >> WE COULD HAVE DONE OUR OWN, OKAY. WE COULD HAVE DONE IT SECOND.

THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT.

>> YES, I WILL TAKE THE VOTE. I JUST GOT AHEAD OF MYSELF THERE. I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, ANY ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.

THAT PASSES 4-1. AND THAT WILL

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.