[1. Call to Order.] [00:00:02] THE CLERK TO PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. TRACY UPCHURCH. YES. NANCY SIKES-KLINE. YES. ROXANNE HORVATH. JOHN VALDES. HERE. BARBARA BLONDER. PRESENT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE HAVE A QUORUM AND COMMISSIONER HORVATH IS AWAY. HER ABSENCE WAS ANTICIPATED, AND WE, OF COURSE, WILL MISS HER. THE FIRST THING THAT I WOULD LIKE TO BEGIN WITH IS ITEM TWO ON OUR AGENDA, WHICH IS THE GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENTS. AT THIS PERIOD OF TIME IS THERE ANYBODY THAT WISHES TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ABOUT THE MATTERS THAT ARE ON THE AGENDA FOR THIS SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION MEETING, WHICH ARE PRIMARILY REVENUE PROJECTIONS FOR THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR . SEEING NO ONE AND I HAVE NO CARDS, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT SECTION. IF TIME ALLOWS WE MAY HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ONE AT THE END OF THE MEETING. AND SO NOW, MR. [3. Discussion of 2023 Budget Assumptions with Focus on Revenues ] SIMPSON, I ASSUME YOU'LL BE LEADING US THROUGH THIS SECTION OF THE MEETING BUDGET ASSUMPTIONS WITH FOCUS ON REVENUES. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR, COMMISSIONERS. MARK SIMPSON, FINANCE DIRECTOR. WE ARE HERE TODAY TO TALK ABOUT OUR ASSUMED REVENUES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023 SO THAT I MAY HAVE SOME GUIDANCE FROM YOU TO BALANCE OUR BUDGET. THIS IS A WORKSHOP. SO AT THIS POINT IN THE BUDGET CYCLE, WHAT WE HAVE IS OUR DEPARTMENT DIRECTORS HAVE SUBMITTED THE BUDGET TEAM AND THE CITY MANAGER REQUESTS FOR NEW PERSONNEL, REQUESTS FOR THEIR EXPENDITURE BUDGETS. BUT IN ORDER TO BALANCE ALL OF THAT, WE NEED TO MAKE SOME ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT OUR REVENUE. SO I'M GOING TO STEP YOU THROUGH OUR MATERIAL SOURCES OF REVENUE AND ASK FOR YOUR GUIDANCE. THERE ARE MANY INSTANCES WHERE WE WILL BE ASKING FOR A FEE INCREASE BECAUSE OF INCREASING COSTS AND YOU'LL HEAR THE WORD INFLATION REPEATED OVER AND OVER. SO IN ADDITION, WE WILL MEET AGAIN, I BELIEVE, AT 3:00 ON AUGUST 8TH TO SORT OF FIRM UP THIS DISCUSSION AND PREPARE FOR OUR BUDGET WORKSHOP, WHICH IS ON THE 18TH OF AUGUST. I'D LIKE TO ALSO MENTION THAT WE HAVE LOCATED A LONG TERM BUDGET FORECASTING MODEL THAT WAS CREATED IN, I BELIEVE, 2016 BY OUR FINANCIAL CONSULTANT PFM AND WE ARE WORKING ON UPDATING THAT WITH THE PAST FIVE YEARS OF ACTUAL DATA AND FORECASTING MUCH FURTHER INTO THE FUTURE THAN WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DISCUSS TODAY. SO I HOPE TO HAVE THAT FOR YOU EITHER ON THE 8TH OR THE 18TH TO PRESENT IN DETAIL. THERE WE GO. THANK YOU, MAYOR. SO I'LL START WITH OUR AD VALOREM TAXES, OUR GENERAL FUND PRIMARY SOURCE OF REVENUE. WE ARE RECOMMENDING TO KEEP THE MILLAGE THE SAME AT 7.5 MILLS. THIS WILL GENERATE US AN ADDITIONAL $2.1 MILLION DOLLARS OF ANNUAL REVENUE TO FUND OUR OPERATIONS IN THE GENERAL FUND. IT'S A RATHER DRAMATIC INCREASE DUE TO INCREASED HOME VALUES. WE'VE GOT MADEIRA AND ANTIGUA COMING ON THE ROLLS AND THIS GRAPH THAT YOU CAN SEE HERE SHOWS OUR INCREASE IN AD VALOREM SINCE 2015. THERE IN A SITUATION LIKE THIS THERE MIGHT BE A TENDENCY TO WANT TO REDUCE THE MILLAGE RATE BECAUSE OF THE INCREASED AD VALOREM TAX DOLLARS. SO I LOCATED THIS DATA AND I WANTED TO POINT OUT IN PARTICULAR WHAT HAPPENED THE LAST TIME WE HAD A RECESSION. AND WHAT YOU SEE THERE WITH THIS CIRCLE IS WHEN TIMES WERE BOOMING THE COMMISSION LOWERED THE MILLAGE RATE AND THE CITY WAS OK FOR A YEAR. BUT THEN BECAUSE OF THE DELAY IN PROPERTY VALUES AND HOW THEY HIT THE TAX ROLLS AND HOW THEY COME TO THIS CITY AND OTHER REVENUES DECLINED AS WELL, YOU CAN SEE THAT SHARP INCREASE IN AD VALOREM, WHICH I BELIEVE OCCURRED IN 2009 OR 2010, RIGHT AT THE HEART OF THE RECESSION, WE HAD TO INCREASE MILLAGE DRAMATICALLY. [00:05:01] SO I THINK THIS GRAPH HERE DEMONSTRATES WHY WE WOULDN'T WANT TO LOWER IT AT THIS TIME. THIS LOOKS LIKE VOLATILITY TO ME WITH A DECREASE AND THEN A SHARP INCREASE AND LEAVING IT AT 7.5 NOW SETS US UP MUCH BETTER FOR THE FUTURE TO WHERE WE DON'T HAVE TO RAISE IT IN THE FUTURE. SO I DID WANT TO SHOW YOU THAT AND POINT OUT THAT IN RECESSIONARY TIMES IT DOES TAKE A COUPLE OF YEARS BEFORE THE AD VALOREM REVENUE DECREASES. AND THAT'S DEMONSTRATED IN. AND MR. SIMPSON, THE GRAPH ON THE LEFT, WHICH WE DON'T HAVE OK YOU'VE CIRCLED IT NOW. THAT WAS THE INCOME THAT'S BEEN GENERATED, THE REVENUE THAT'S BEEN GENERATED OVER TIME. THAT'S THE AD VALOREM TAX REVENUE FROM 2007 WHEN PROPERTY TAXES WERE PROPERTY VALUES WERE AT THEIR MAX. YOU CAN SEE THAT IT TOOK TILL 2013 EVEN WITH A MILLAGE RATE INCREASE. WE STILL BOTTOMED OUT WHEN THE RECESSION REALLY STARTED IN MARCH OF 2008. SO THERE'S A DELAY. SO YOU CAN SEE WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING FOR 2023 AND 2024, WHAT WE MIGHT EXPECT WITH A MODEST INCREASE IN PROPERTY VALUES, BUT HOPEFULLY LEAVE MILLAGE THE SAME AND DEPENDING ON ECONOMIC CIRCUMSTANCES, PERHAPS LOWERING THE MILLAGE NEXT YEAR OR THE YEAR AFTER. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE I MOVE ON, ON AD VALOREM? OTHER GENERAL FUND REVENUES. IN YOUR PACKET YOU HAVE ALL OF OUR MAJOR SOURCES OF REVENUE. I'VE HIGHLIGHTED A COUPLE AND WE'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE ON OUR OTHER GENERAL FUND REVENUES, SUCH AS FRANCHISE FEES. THE TRAINS AND TROLLEYS HAVE BEEN PACKED WITH PEOPLE AND OUR REVENUES ARE. THERE WE GO. OKAY. THANK YOU. FRANCHISE FEES. I DON'T BELIEVE WE CAN SUSTAIN THE LEVEL OF GROWTH THAT WE'VE SEEN IN THIS REVENUE SOURCE FOR VERY MUCH LONGER. I DO BELIEVE THAT THERE'S BEEN QUITE A BIT OF TOURISM FROM PENT UP DEMAND AFTER THE SHUTDOWN. AND SO WE'RE PROJECTING A MODEST SLOWDOWN AS FRANCHISE VEHICLES DON'T HAVE AS MANY TOURISM. ON THE UTILITY TAXES, JUST A MODEST INCREASE DUE TO THE NEW DEVELOPMENTS COMING ONLINE. OUR STATE REVENUE SHARING LINES. THOSE ARE PROJECTED BY THE STATE. AND I WILL GET THAT DATA LATER THIS MONTH AND UPDATE YOU ON AUGUST 8TH. BUT AT THIS TIME I'VE ONLY PROGRAMMED IN A MODEST INCREASE IN STATE REVENUE SHARING UNTIL WE GET THOSE FORECASTS. THE HALF CENT SALES TAX IS A LARGE SOURCE OF REVENUE FOR US. I BELIEVE IT MAY HAVE PEAKED WITH ALL THE TOURISM. SO I'M JUST PROJECTING KIND OF FISCAL YEAR 23 TO BE SIMILAR TO A COMBINATION OF FISCAL YEAR 20 AND 21. PRETTY CONSERVATIVE WITH THAT HALF CENT SALES TAX. THAT IS ANOTHER ONE THAT WE WILL GET A PROJECTION FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA ON. BUT OVER $1,000,000 A YEAR FOR OUR BUDGET. LOCAL OPTION GAS TAX IS SHARED WITH THE COUNTY. AND AS YOU CAN SEE, I'VE FORECASTED IT RELATIVELY FLAT FOR CONSERVATIVE REASONS. BUILDING PERMITS. TYPICALLY EACH YEAR WE BUDGET A HALF MILLION DOLLARS FOR BUILDING PERMITS, AND IN RECENT YEARS WE'VE EXCEEDED THOSE, BUT WE'RE RESTRICTED IN WHAT WE CAN USE THEM FOR. THEY HAVE TO BE USED TO ENFORCE THE BUILDING CODE. SO I'VE LEFT IT FLAT AT A $500,000 ESTIMATE, KNOWING THAT IF WE RECEIVE MORE, WE CAN APPROPRIATE IT. BUT IT HAS TO BE USED TO ENFORCE THE BUILDING CODE. [00:10:02] THE FIRE ASSESSMENT FEE HAS BEEN WONDERFUL FOR THE CITY FOR THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS AND IT CURRENTLY PAYS FOR 42 AND A HALF PERCENT OF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT BUDGET. WITH THIS FEE THAT WE'VE USED. NO INCREASES ARE BEING RECOMMENDED AT THIS TIME, ALTHOUGH THERE IS SURE TO BE SOME INCREASES IN TAXABLE VALUES FOR THAT FEE, WHICH WE WILL GET FROM THE COUNTY ONCE AGAIN LATER ON THIS MONTH. AND WE'LL KNOW MORE IN AUGUST ON THE FIRE ASSESSMENT FEE. LET'S STAY THERE JUST A MINUTE, BECAUSE THE GOAL, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, SET LONG BEFORE I RETURNED TO THE COMMISSION WAS TO TO BASICALLY GET TO A 50%. AND WE'RE NOT THERE YET. AND WE'RE RECOMMENDING SOME VERY SIGNIFICANT INCREASES IN OTHER AREAS TO ADDRESS COST OF LIVING. SO I'M WONDERING THE RATIONALE FOR NOT RECOMMENDING CONTINUING TO MOVE TOWARDS THE 50% GOAL. I WOULD CERTAINLY ENTERTAIN THAT AND WOULD LOVE TO GET TO THAT 50% GOAL. SO IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU INSTRUCT ME TO LOOK AT, I CERTAINLY WILL. WELL, AND I APPRECIATE THAT. BUT I'M JUST I GUESS I'M WONDERING WHY STAFF HAS NOT RECOMMENDED THAT AT THIS POINT IN TIME. WELL, WITH THE GENERAL FUND AND PROPERTY TAXES, TO ME, WE'RE NOT INCREASING A RATE. IT'S THE FUNCTION OF VALUES INCREASING. SO WE'RE NOT NECESSARILY INCREASING THE RATE. I THINK WITH THE FIRE ASSESSMENT FEE TO GENERATE THE REVENUE NECESSARY TO PAY FOR 50% OF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, WE WOULD HAVE TO INCREASE THE RATE. AND I WOULD BE HAPPY TO BRING YOU BACK NUMBERS. SURE. HI. MEREDITH BREIDENSTEIN, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY ONE THING ON THE 42% VERSUS THE 50%. WHEN WE DID THIS, SET THIS IN PLACE AND STUDIED IT LONG AGO, WE CANNOT RECOVER THE FULL AMOUNT OF OUR FIRE DEPARTMENT WITH FIRE ASSESSMENT FEES. THE MAXIMUM WE CAN RECOVER IS WHAT IS TRULY FOR FIRE RESPONSE, NOT ANY OTHER TYPE. SO WE DO RECOVER 50% OF OUR ELIGIBLE COSTS THAT WE CAN. THE 42% THAT MARK IS TALKING ABOUT IS WHEN WE LOOK AT THE TOTAL DEPARTMENT, WE'RE ONLY RECOGNIZING 42% WITH THE FIRE ASSESSMENT FEE. BUT WE DID REACH THAT 50% GOAL THAT WE HAD TRIED TO GET TO OVER THE THREE YEARS OF WHAT WE CAN ASSESS, 50% THERE. NOW, IT CAN STILL INCREASE. IT JUST CAN'T EVER GO MORE THAN 100% OF WHAT IS ASSESSABLE, WHICH IS TRULY DEFINED AS FIRE SERVICE. SO I HOPE THAT CLARIFIES A LITTLE BIT. YOU WERE DOING REALLY GOOD UNTIL THE LAST SENTENCE. [LAUGHTER] OKAY, SO WHAT I UNDERSTOOD YOU TO SAY AT FIRST IS THAT WE HAD REACHED THE 50% GOAL. YES. SO YOU'RE SAYING WE COULD PUSH FORWARD TO A HIGHER PERCENTAGE? THE 50% IS INTERNALLY SELF. YES. BUT IT CAN ONLY BE DIRECTED TOWARDS A PORTION OF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT BUDGET. YES, THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. SO. ALL RIGHT, THANKS. THANK YOU. I WOULD THINK THAT WOULD BE THE BOOTS ON THE GROUND VERSUS THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. BUT I WOULD STILL HAPPILY ENTERTAIN ANYTHING TO TAKE THE PRESSURE OFF THE AD VALOREM TAXPAYER. RENTS ARE GOVERNED BY OUR CONTRACTS, AND OUR CONTRACTS STIPULATE THAT THERE IS A COST OF LIVING INCREASE BUILT INTO THE CONTRACT. EVERY YEAR WE USE THE MAY TO MAY NUMBER FOR THE CONSUMER PRICE INDEX FOR SMALL CITIES IN THE SOUTH, WITH POPULATION UNDER 50,000. THIS YEAR, THAT NUMBER CAME IN AT AN ASTOUNDING 9.1%. SO WE'VE ALREADY SENT OUT OUR RENT RENEWAL REQUESTS AND OUR RENTS WILL INCREASE BY 9.1%. AND THOSE ARE ALREADY BAKED INTO THE LEASE. YES, SIR. AND THAT'S GOING TO YIELD APPROXIMATELY $90,000 OF ADDITIONAL REVENUE FOR THE GENERAL FUND. SO NOW I'D LIKE TO MOVE ON TO OUR UTILITIES. AND YOU KNOW, I'D LIKE TO RECOMMEND THAT WE RAISE ALMOST ALL OF OUR UTILITIES BY THE 9.1% CPI SO THAT WE CAN KEEP UP WITH INFLATION BECAUSE WE DO NOT EXPECT IT TO SLOW DOWN ANY TIME SOON. [00:15:10] WE HAVEN'T SEEN INFLATION LIKE THIS IN 40 YEARS AND REALLY THE FEDERAL RESERVE HAS TO FIX IT. AND WE'RE LOOKING AT ANOTHER 75 BASIS POINT INCREASE IN THE FEDERAL FUNDS RATE THIS MONTH. ADDITIONAL INFLATION DATA SHOULD BE OUT ON WEDNESDAY, BUT IT'S NOT EXPECTED TO SLOW DOWN YET. THIS SLIDE SHOWS OUR INFLATION RATE SINCE LAST BUDGET CYCLE. LAST YEAR WE HAD AN INFLATION RATE OF 5.1% AND YOU CAN SEE HOW IT'S STEADILY RISEN SINCE THEN, PEAKING IN MARCH. SLIGHT DIP IN APRIL WITH FUEL PRICES, BUT THEN RIGHT BACK UP IN MAY. AND LIKE I SAY IN THIS SLIDE, THE US CONSUMER IS ACCUSTOMED TO 3% OVER OUR LIFETIME WE'VE GROWN TO EXPECT 3%. BUT REALLY SINCE THE GREAT RECESSION, WITH THE FED HAVING INTEREST RATES NEAR ZERO OR 1% THE LAST TEN YEARS IT'S BEEN MORE LIKE 1.75%. SO TO BE USED TO A 1.75% INFLATION, TO HAVE IT GO TO 9.1% IS DRAMATIC. IF WE DON'T TAKE ACTION, CATCHING UP WITH IT IS GOING TO BE EXTREMELY DIFFICULT. SO I WOULD LIKE TO KEEP UP WITH INFLATION. I WILL RECOMMEND 9.1% INCREASES, BUT TELL YOU THAT WE WILL TRY OUR BEST TO LOWER THOSE AS WE ANALYZE THE EXPENDITURE BUDGETS. COMMISSIONER BLONDER. MY FROM WHAT I READ IN THE PACKAGE THAT YOU GAVE US, SOLID WASTE WENT WAY UP, RIGHT? YES, MA'AM. TIPPING FEES WENT WAY UP. AND I'M ASSUMING SOME OF THAT IS ALSO TRANSPORTATION COSTS FOR FUEL. AND WITH STORMWATER, THOSE COSTS ARE GOING UP IN ORDER TO MEET THE CHALLENGES WE HAVE OUT THERE. REFRESH MY MEMORY AND MAYBE MR. FRANKLIN CAN HELP WITH THIS, TOO. I THINK I ASKED ABOUT A TIERED SYSTEM FOR WATER, AND I'M WONDERING IF WE COULD HAVE AN INCENTIVE BASED IF WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS PLEASE FORGIVE ME BECAUSE I'VE FORGOTTEN THE DETAILS, BUT AN INCENTIVE BASED SYSTEM FOR STORMWATER FEES THAT MIGHT BE BASED ON THE GOOD WORK OF MR. VALDES' COMMITTEE AND WHERE IN A NEW DEVELOPMENT OR REDEVELOPMENT WOULD GET A LOWER STORMWATER FEES IF THEY INCORPORATED MORE DESIGN FEATURES AND OTHER FEATURES THAT WOULD ACTUALLY REDUCE THEIR GENERATION OF STORMWATER. I BELIEVE WE'VE ADDRESSED YOUR CONCERN PERHAPS HALFWAY, AND THAT DEVELOPMENTS LIKE MADEIRA THAT HAVE THEIR OWN STORMWATER INFRASTRUCTURE, WE ARE STILL BILLING THEM FOR STORMWATER, BUT IT'S AT A MUCH REDUCED RATE. AS FAR AS INCENTIVIZING PEOPLE, I WOULD HAVE TO DEFER TO REUBEN OR GET BACK TO YOU AT A LATER DATE ON HOW WE'RE DOING THAT. BUT IT'S CERTAINLY AN OPTION. HE'S RIGHT. HE'S COMING UP. THANK YOU, MR. FRANKLIN. YES. REUBEN FRANKLIN PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR. SO CURRENTLY WITH THE STORMWATER FEE THAT WE HAVE ESTABLISHED, THERE'S A 30% CREDIT THAT IS GIVEN TO ANYBODY THAT HOLDS A PERMIT WHERE THEY'RE MANAGING THEIR OWN STORMWATER ON SITE SO THAT YOU GET A 30% CREDIT CURRENTLY TODAY IF YOU HAVE THAT. OUR INTENTION WAS TO LOOK AT THAT. WE HAVE A STORMWATER MASTER PLAN COMING UP WHERE WE WERE GOING TO RELOOK AT OUR STORMWATER CODE ORDINANCES, INCENTIVES, AND WE WERE PLANNING TO CAPTURE THAT DURING THE MASTER PLANNING EFFORTS. I'D LIKE TO SEE WHAT YOU COME UP WITH FOR THAT, BECAUSE I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY, IF A PROPERTY IS GENERATING LESS STORMWATER BECAUSE THEY'VE INVESTED IN MORE OF THESE STORMWATER RETENTION SYSTEMS OR WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE, THEN THEY SHOULD BE REWARDED FOR THAT IN SOME WAY. YEAH. SO WE HAVE A CURRENT, THERE'S AN APPLICATION THAT YOU CAN SUBMIT FOR, BUT WE ALSO NOW TRY TO CAPTURE IT ON NEW DEVELOPMENTS IF WE KNOW IT HAS PERMITTED, WE'RE APPLYING THAT 30% REDUCTION OR CREDIT TO THAT DEVELOPMENT. OKAY. GOOD. WELL, I HOPE WE CAN GO FURTHER WITH THE STORMWATER MASTER PLAN. THANK YOU. I COULDN'T HELP MYSELF ON THE PICTURE ON THIS SLIDE [00:20:06] TO WRAP UP THE INFLATION DISCUSSION. REALLY, WHAT WE NEED TO KEEP IN MIND IS THAT IN THE PAST 60 YEARS, THE FED HAS ONLY MANAGED TO SIGNIFICANTLY NOT CAUSE A RECESSION THREE TIMES. SO AS THEY RATCHET UP INTEREST RATES OUR PROBABILITY FOR A RECESSION ARE SIGNIFICANT AND I DON'T MEAN TO SOUND LIKE THE SKY IS FALLING, BUT IT IS JUST BASIC ECONOMICS. BUT I WOULD SAY CERTAINLY COMMISSIONER BLONDER AND I WHO SHARE THE SAME EMPLOYER ARE NOT GOING TO SEE A 9.8% INCREASE IN OUR PAYCHECK. SO MUCH OF PRIVATE INDUSTRY DOES, WORKS HARD TO ABSORB THE COST OF INFLATION AND DON'T NECESSARILY PASS ON PROTECTION FROM INFLATION TO THEIR EMPLOYEES. AND SO I WOULD STRONGLY URGE YOU TO BE AS CONSERVATIVE AS POSSIBLE WITH THESE INFLATION NUMBERS. THEY'RE VERY HIGH. THIS HAS A DIRECT IMPACT ON PEOPLE'S MONTHLY BUDGET AND IN WAYS EVEN THAT I THINK TAX INCREASES DON'T NECESSARILY. SO THAT'S ONE COMMISSIONER. MR. MAYOR. PLEASE. I WOULD ADD TO THAT AND I THOUGHT ABOUT SAYING THIS ANYWAY, BUT IT REALLY HELPS UNDERSCORE WHAT THE MAYOR SAID IS THAT WE I WOULD HOPE THAT THERE IS SOMETHING THAT IS COMING IN THE UPCOMING BUDGET FOR STAFF SALARIES TO HELP ADDRESS THE INFLATION THAT WE'RE SEEING SO THAT THEY DON'T FLOCK AWAY FROM US, THE GOOD PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, THAT WE HAVE. WE NOT ONLY WANT THEM TO NOT FLOCK AWAY FROM US, WE WOULD LIKE THEM TO COME JOIN US BECAUSE OF THE NUMBER OF VACANCIES THAT WE HAVE AND THE LEVEL OF SERVICE THAT WE NEED TO PROVIDE TO KEEP UP WITH OUR UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE, STORMWATER INFRASTRUCTURE, BUT REALLY TO TAKE OUT THE GARBAGE. I MEAN, WE'LL GET TO THAT SLIDE, BUT WE'RE IN A DIFFICULT SITUATION WITH WITH SOLID WASTE AND SOME DIFFICULT DECISIONS NEED TO BE MADE. BUT, MAYOR, TO YOUR POINT, I WILL TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION. WE WILL CRAFT OUR BUDGET ACCORDINGLY AND KEEP YOU UPDATED ON THAT. SO ON THE WATER AND SEWER REVENUES THAT I'VE JUST HIGHLIGHTED FOR YOU THAT IF WE DID INCREASE BY THE CPI OF 9.1%, IT WOULD YIELD $1.7 MILLION DOLLARS IN FEE REVENUE. AND THIS WOULD ASSIST WITH OUR CHALLENGES TO RECRUIT AND RETAIN WORKERS. THE CONSTANT TRAINING OF NEW PEOPLE. I CAN'T PUT A DOLLAR VALUE ON THAT. I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH IT COST TO TURN PEOPLE OVER CONSTANTLY. I'M SURE SOME OF YOU AT THE TABLE KNOW THAT EVERY TIME YOU LOSE SOMEBODY AND HAVE TO TRAIN A NEW PERSON, IT REALLY DOES COST YOU MONEY. SO TO RECRUIT AND RETAIN PEOPLE WOULD BE FANTASTIC. AND I THINK IN THE CITY'S LONG TERM, BEST FINANCIAL INTEREST. JUST HIGHLIGHTED THAT THE UTILITY FUND WOULD LIKE AN ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE INSPECTOR IMMEDIATELY IT DOES NOT WANT TO WAIT UNTIL 10/1 WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THAT PERSON IN PLACE NOW. THEY ARE REQUESTING TWO ADDITIONAL CREWS FOR WATER AND WASTEWATER TO KEEP UP WITH THE DEMAND FOR 21 MILES OF NEW WATER MAINS, 17 MILES OF SEWER MAIN, AND 22 NEW LIFT STATIONS IN THE LAST NINE YEARS SINCE THERE WAS AN INCREASE. THOSE TEN FULL TIME EQUIVALENTS WOULD COST ROUGHLY $600,000. SO THE REMAINING FEES WOULD BE USED TO OFFSET COST INCREASES AND INCREASE PERSONNEL COSTS FOR OUR CURRENT STAFF IN PLACE. BUT I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THE LAST BULLET MEANS. THE LAST BULLET MEANS THAT WHILE 9.1% IS WHAT I'M CURRENTLY RECOMMENDING, WHAT I'M DOING IS GOING THROUGH EVERY LINE OF EVERYBODY'S BUDGET TO CUT OUT STAPLES AND PAPERCLIPS AND EVERY LITTLE THING TO TRY TO GET US DOWN TO EIGHT AND AS MUCH AS I POSSIBLY CAN, JUST TO TO WHITTLE THIS BUDGET OF ANY TYPE OF FAT. IF I MAY, WE HAVE TALKED TO YOU AND ME PREVIOUSLY ABOUT GOING PAPERLESS. WOULD THAT HELP US MEET SOME OF THESE GOALS? OH, ABSOLUTELY. WE DO SPEND A LOT ON PAPER AND COPIES AND THINGS LIKE THAT, NOT IN A MATERIAL WAY, BUT IT'S BEEN A LONG TERM [00:25:05] GOAL OF MINE FOR MANY, MANY YEARS. SO WE ARE TAKING BIG STEPS IN FINANCIAL SERVICES BY UPDATING OUR ERP SYSTEM THAT WILL ALLOW US TO NOT PRINT AND THEN TURN AROUND AND SCAN AND THEN TURN AROUND AN EMAIL JUST TO EXPORT EVERYTHING TO PDF AND EVERYTHING ELECTRONIC. SO THAT IS IN OUR BUSINESS PROCESS ENGINEERING THAT WE'RE WORKING ON CITYWIDE, BUT IT DOES COME THROUGH FINANCE THROUGH OUR ERP SYSTEM UPGRADE. WELL, I WOULD ENCOURAGE AS MUCH OF THAT AS WE CAN POSSIBLY DO. THANK YOU. OH, YOU'RE WELCOME. IT WOULD BE MY PLEASURE TO SEE THAT. ON THE STORMWATER FEES, 9.1% ONLY ADDS $180,000 A YEAR TO THAT FUND. IT'S NOT A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT. BUT THERE ARE PROJECTS THAT WE CAN UNDERTAKE FOR PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE THAT THIS FUND HAS NEVER BEEN CAPABLE OF DOING BECAUSE OF FUND SHORTAGES. SO OF THE INCREASE THERE IS $160,000 OF PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE IN THE STORM WATER BUDGET THAT THOSE CREWS WOULD LIKE TO DO. SO A 9.1% INCREASE WOULD TAKE THE SFU RATE FROM $9 TO $9.82. IF WE SCALED IT BACK TO 8%, IT WOULD BE $9.72 FOR YOUR STORMWATER BILL. I BELIEVE THERE'S A TYPO. IT SAYS WE RAISE ADDITIONAL $0.18 IT WOULD BE $10 PER SFU AND IT WOULD BE $1 PER FSU. THIS IS ON THE. IN OUR PACKET. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WAS A TYPO OR THEN I DON'T. IF IT'S NOT, I DON'T UNDERSTAND. OH, YES. THAT SECOND PARAGRAPH IS A TYPO. I'M SORRY. IF WE COULD GO BACK TO THE WATER AND SEWER FOR JUST A MINUTE. SURE. WHAT IS OUR CURRENT SURCHARGE FOR CUSTOMERS OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS? IS IT 20% MEREDITH OR 25? TWENTY. 20% SURCHARGE. IS THERE A STEP PROPOSED TO REDUCE THAT IN THIS BUDGET? NO, SIR, THERE'S NOT. ONTO THE CHALLENGE. RESIDENTIAL COLLECTION FEES ARE STILL A PROBLEM IN THE SOLID WASTE FUND. WE RAISED RATES BY $5 LAST YEAR FROM $17 TO $22 AND HAVE BEEN HIT AGAIN WITH DIFFICULT CHALLENGES, REPLACING EQUIPMENT AND KEEPING OUR STAFFING LEVELS. BUT REALLY, IT'S THE FEES THAT WERE CHARGED FOR TIPPING FEES. THE RECYCLING TIPPING FEES HAVE ALMOST TRIPLED AND THE REGULAR GARBAGE FEES HAVE JUST ABOUT DOUBLED. AND WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT CURRENTLY IS THAT THIS YEAR THE SOLID WASTE FUND COULD RUN OVER BUDGET BY $500,000 BEFORE DEPRECIATION. IT IS NOT AN IDEAL SITUATION AT ALL. WE CAN REMEDY THIS WITH ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL COLLECTION FEES. JUST RECENTLY, I BELIEVE PALM COAST WENT TO $32 A MONTH. GOING FROM 22 TO 32 WOULD BE A LITTLE RADICAL. RIGHT NOW, WE'RE JUST LOOKING AT ANOTHER $5 INCREASE UP TO 27, BUT WE MIGHT NEED 30. WE'RE CURRENTLY RENTING TWO GARBAGE TRUCKS BECAUSE WE CAN'T FIND ONE. WE CAN'T GET ONE. SO WE'RE RENTING TWO FOR $15,000 A MONTH TO KEEP THE GARBAGE BEING COLLECTED. THERE'S ALSO STAFFING ISSUES. THERE ARE NUMEROUS WAYS THAT WE CAN FIX NOT ONLY THE RESIDENTIAL FEES, BUT IF YOU FLIP TO THE NEXT PAGE ON THE COMMERCIAL FEES. AND I'VE GOT OLIVIA SMITH, THE SOLID WASTE MANAGER, HERE, IF YOU'D LIKE TO GET INTO THE DETAILS OF SOME OF THE COMMERCIAL COLLECTION FEES. BUT WHAT I BELIEVE WE HAVE IS KIND OF AN ANTIQUATED SYSTEM WHERE ON A LOT OF BUSINESSES WE'RE CHARGING THEM BY THE SQUARE FOOT OF THEIR BUSINESS AND NOT NECESSARILY BY THE NATURE OF THEIR BUSINESS. [00:30:02] SO JUST ONE EXAMPLE IS A CLOTHING STORE ON ST. GEORGE STREET SWITCHING HANDS AND GOING FROM BEING A CLOTHING STORE TO A CINNABON AND THEN PAYING THE SAME RATE WHEN CLEARLY THEY PRODUCE MORE GARBAGE THAN A CLOTHING STORE. SO WHAT WE LIKE TO DO IS MAKE THE FEE STRUCTURE ON THE COMMERCIAL RATES A LITTLE MORE FAIR GIVEN THE CONSUMPTION. SO WE'RE IN THE INFANCY OF STUDYING THIS, BUT IN ADDITION TO AN INCREASE IN RESIDENTIAL COLLECTION, WE HAVE NOT TOUCHED THE COMMERCIAL COLLECTION RATES SINCE 2008. SO IT'S TIME THAT WE LOOKED AT THE COMMERCIAL COLLECTION RATES UNDER A MICROSCOPE AND COME UP WITH SOMETHING A LITTLE MORE EQUITABLE FOR BUSINESSES. AND PERHAPS TO COMMISSIONER BLONDER'S FORMER POINT TO INCENTIVIZE FOLKS LIKE THE AMPHITHEATER WHO, YOU KNOW, YOU'VE GOT TO BUY THEIR CUP, SOMETHING LIKE THAT. THERE'S GOT TO BE INCENTIVES OUT THERE TO REDUCE THE SOLID WASTE AND THUS REDUCE OUR COST OF TIPPING FEES. ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS ON SOLID WASTE? IT'S MY NUMBER ONE CONCERN THIS YEAR. I WOULD SUPPORT ABSOLUTELY REEXAMINING THE COMMERCIAL FEES AND AN INCENTIVE PROGRAM FOR THOSE IDEAS. LIKE I SAID IN THIS SLIDE, IT'S BEEN SINCE 2008, SINCE WE'VE RAISED THE COMMERCIAL RATES. IN YOUR PACKET I DID AN ANALYSIS OF OUR PARKING FINES. IT IS A SIGNIFICANT SOURCE OF REVENUE. NO RECOMMENDATIONS RIGHT NOW ON CITATIONS. THEY WERE RAISED. I BELIEVE THEY MAY BE AT THE MAX. PARKING FEES. THE GENERAL FUND. APPROXIMATELY $2 MILLION DOLLARS. AND YOU CAN SEE I'VE ESTIMATED THOSE TO REMAIN FAIRLY STATIC. AND THEN I'VE GOT A PAGE ON THE VIC PARKING FEES WHERE YOU CAN ALSO SEE I'VE TAKEN A CONSERVATIVE APPROACH BECAUSE OF THE POST COVID. WHAT I CALL EXCITED DELIRIUM OF PEOPLE TRAVELING. AND WE MAY HAVE HIT THE PEAK OF OUR PARKING GARAGE REVENUES, SO I'M CONSERVATIVELY ESTIMATED THEM TO DECLINE SLIGHTLY. SO NOWHERE IN THE PACKET DID WE TALK ABOUT MARINA REVENUES. THE HARBOR MASTER IS ELIGIBLE TO RAISE THOSE FEES WITHOUT COMMISSION APPROVAL. I THINK THAT WAS CHANGED IN 2017 OR 2018, BUT WE THOUGHT OUT OF THE SPIRIT OF TRANSPARENCY, WE SHOULD BRING THOSE FEES TO YOU. THERE IS A PROPOSAL AND WE WOULD LIKE TO INCREASE OUR MOORING FIELD FEES BASED ON ANALYSIS OF THE UTILIZATION AND OTHER CITIES. AND WE FEEL LIKE WE COULD GENERATE SOME MORE REVENUE AT THE MARINA WITH WITH AN INCREASE IN THE MOORING FIELD FEES. THE GAS AND DIESEL SALES ARE JUST BASED ON WHAT WE PAY FOR IT, PLUS $0.80 A GALLON. SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE CHARGING RIGHT NOW. AND WE DO CALL AROUND TO OTHER MARINAS TO MAKE SURE THOSE PRICES ARE FAIR AND COMPETITIVE. THE INCREASE OF 6.2% FOR ELECTRICITY IS SIMPLY DUE TO THE COST AND WHAT WE'RE PAYING FOR AMPERAGE AT THE MARINA. AND THE HARBOR MASTER WOULD LIKE TO SEE DOCKAGE FEES RISE BY 8% TO KEEP UP WITH COSTS AND DEMAND. AND HE FEELS LIKE IT'S DOABLE AND THAT OUR CUSTOMERS WOULD NOT BLINK AN EYE AT AN 8% INCREASE IN DOCKAGE. AND THE TICKET BOOTH RENTS AT THE MARINA ARE CONTRACTUALLY INCREASING BY THE 9.1% CPI. SO THESE ARE I WOULD CONSIDER STAGGERING NUMBERS, BUT WE'RE IN A VERY DIFFICULT TIME WITH INFLATION AND COST INCREASING THE WAY THEY ARE. [00:35:03] AND IT'S MY RECOMMENDATION THAT WE TRY TO KEEP UP WITH IT AS BEST WE CAN AND NOT DIG OURSELVES TOO DEEP OF A HOLE TO HAVE TO GET OUT OF ONCE WE DO GET HIT BY A RECESSION. QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, INSTRUCTIONS FOR ME AS I TRY TO BALANCE THIS BUDGET. COMMISSIONER BLONDER. THERE WERE A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT I WANTED TO BRING UP AS YOU MOVE FORWARD WITH DEVELOPING THE BUDGET. THE FIRST IS THAT YOU HAD TOLD ME WHEN WE MET LAST WEEK THAT THE ARPA FUNDS OF THE AMOUNT OF $2 MILLION FOR THE REPLACEMENT GARBAGE TRUCKS ARE NOT AVAILABLE UNDER ARPA OR THEY'RE JUST TOO HARD TO GET AT. CAN YOU ELABORATE ON THAT FOR ME, PLEASE? SURE. WE WERE ABLE TO ORDER NOT GARBAGE TRUCKS PER SE, BUT WE DID GET AN ORDER IN FOR A CLAW TRUCK AND THERE ARE SOME FUNDS REMAINING IN ARPA AS A RESULT OF US KIND OF ABANDONING THAT AS A REVENUE SOURCE FOR THE GARBAGE TRUCKS. BUT WHAT WE'RE FINDING IS, IS THAT ARPA WAS PASSED IN MARCH OF 2021 AND OUR INITIAL BUDGET ESTIMATES ARE NO LONGER VALID. SO WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IS FOR THOSE EXCESS GARBAGE TRUCK FUNDS TO BE SORT OF HELD BACK FOR COST OVERRUNS. I'LL GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE. THE $12 MILLION DOLLAR BORROWING FOR THE HEAD WORKS PROJECT, WE BUDGETED $4 MILLION DOLLARS FOR THE HEAD WORKS PROJECT. THE ESTIMATES ARE COMING IN MORE LIKE 5.3 MILLION. SO BEFORE WE COMMIT TO USING ADDITIONAL OR USING EXTRA ARPA FUNDS FROM THE GARBAGE TRUCKS, I REALLY WOULD LIKE SOME BETTER COST ESTIMATES FOR SOME OF THESE PROJECTS BECAUSE THE PRICES ARE JUST OUT OF CONTROL. BUT I DON'T UNDERSTAND ARE GARBAGE TRUCKS NOT AN APPROVED EXPENDITURE UNDER ARPA OR OUR GARBAGE TRUCKS SIMPLY NOT AVAILABLE IN THE MARKETPLACE TO PURCHASE? WELL, KIND OF BOTH. WHAT WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO DO IS PURCHASE THESE GARBAGE TRUCKS AS SOON AS THEY BECOME AVAILABLE. AND THE SPENDING RESTRICTIONS ON FEDERAL MONIES ARE SUCH THAT TO GO OUT AND TRY TO COMPETITIVELY BID THEM AND DO ALL THE FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS, WE'RE NEVER GOING TO BE ABLE TO GET THEM. SO WHAT WE'D LIKE TO DO IS AN INTER FUND LOAN THROUGH UTILITIES AND USE OUR OWN PURCHASING GUIDELINES AND PERHAPS CALL IN AN EMERGENCY AND SCOOP UP GARBAGE TRUCKS WHEN WE CAN VERSUS HAVING TO USE THE ARPA PURCHASING GUIDELINES. THIS WOULD BE MY ORDER OF PRIORITY. I THINK CLEARLY WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE SOLID WASTE FUND IS AS SOLID GROUND AS WE CAN GET IT. SO THAT'S FOR ME, THE NUMBER ONE PRIORITY. MY SECOND PRIORITY WOULD BE TO MINIMIZE THE CPI INCREASES OTHER THAN THOSE THAT ARE CONTRACTUAL. THE THIRD WOULD BE TO EVEN IF IT'S AN INCREMENTAL, TINY STEP, IS TO REDUCE THE SURCHARGE THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY CHARGING OUR CUSTOMERS OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS. I DON'T THINK WE CAN JUSTIFY THAT. WE, I THINK, ARE RECOUPING EVERY COST WE CAN. AND SO I THINK WE NEED TO GET AWAY FROM THAT AND CONTINUE TO REDUCE IT. THE THING THAT THAT DOES NOT RESONATE WITH ME RIGHT NOW IS THE INCREASE IN THE STORM WATER. I KNOW IT'S A SMALL NUMBER. I KNOW THAT STORM WATER FEES ARE VERY IMPORTANT TO US, AND I'VE CERTAINLY BEEN SUPPORTIVE OF ACCELERATING THOSE IN THE PAST. BUT WE DON'T HAVE THE MANPOWER TO DO THE PROJECTS AND SO TO INCREASE THE FEE IN ANTICIPATION OF NEED, WE DON'T HAVE THE PEOPLE TO DO THE WORK. AND SO THAT SEEMS TO ME A PRETTY EASY ONE TO LET GO OTHER THAN THE $0.82 THAT'S RECOMMENDED. OKAY. THANK YOU. VICE MAYOR, COMMISSIONER VALDES. WHAT ABOUT THE COMMERCIAL FEES? WE TALKED ABOUT POSSIBLY SWITCHING OVER. I SUPPORT THAT AS WELL. FIRST OF ALL, I AGREE WITH YOUR LIST. I LIKE YOUR LIST AND I DEFINITELY FEEL LIKE WE NEED TO KEEP WORKING ON THAT 20% CHARGES, SURCHARGES OUTSIDE OF THE [00:40:05] CITY. THAT WAS THE PROMISE WE MADE TO THE COMMUNITY. AND IF WE CAN KEEP GOING WITH IT AT ALL POSSIBLE, I THINK WE SHOULD. AND I CERTAINLY I CONCUR WITH THE REDOING OF THE COMMERCIAL RATE. RIGHT. AND YOU GOT THE FIRE FEE. I DIDN'T I DIDN'T INCLUDE THAT. I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT ADJUSTED IF POSSIBLE. BUT THAT'S SOMETHING. MY QUESTION, I DID HAVE A QUESTION. WHAT I DON'T SEE AND WHAT I'D LIKE TO SEE AT THE NEXT MEETING IS RESERVES. I'D LIKE TO SEE OUR RESERVE LEVELS BECAUSE IF WE ARE INDEED GOING INTO RECESSION, IT'S GOING TO BE IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE GOOD RESERVES, GOOD HEALTHY RESERVES. AND I KNOW WE HAVE A POLICY. ERIC, COULD I GET THE OVERHEAD? IS THE MOST RECENT UPDATE TO OUR RESERVES. YOU CAN SEE THE GENERAL FUND. WE CAN'T SEE ANYTHING. IT'S JUST WAY TOO SMALL FOR US TO SEE. LET ME JUST BRIEF YOU REAL QUICK. THE GENERAL FUND HAS 5.3 MILLION IN RESERVES. THE UTILITY FUND HAS 38. WAS THAT 380,000? STORM WATER THAT WAS 38,000 OF UNRESTRICTED RESERVES IN THE UTILITY FUNDS STORMWATER 77,000. THE SOLID WASTE FUND IS ALREADY 226,000 IN THE HOLE ON RESERVES. THE MARINA HAS 1.2 MILLION. THE VIC HAS 1.5 MILLION. WHAT? THE VISITOR INFORMATION CENTER HAS 1.5 MILLION. I'M SORRY. I JUST DID NOT HEAR YOU. THE VISITOR INFORMATION HAS, WHAT? 1.5 MILLION IN RESERVES. UNRESTRICTED RESERVES. RESERVES. UNRESTRICTED OK. IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO HAVE A BREAKOUT. THIS IS REALLY HARD TO SEE, BUT I CAN MAKE IT PART OF OUR NEXT PRESENTATION. NEXT PRESENTATION BE GREAT. YEP, GREAT. IN THEORY, WHAT WE SHOULD DO IS INSTEAD OF HAVING REVENUES MINUS EXPENDITURES EQUALS ZERO ON OUR BUDGET. WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS BEGINNING RESERVES PLUS REVENUES MINUS EXPENDITURES EQUALS ENDING RESERVES. THAT'S PROPER GOVERNMENTAL BUDGET PRESENTATION SO THAT WE SEE IT EVERY TIME WE TALK ABOUT THE BUDGET. YES. YES. I DON'T KNOW. WE USED TO GET IT AT THE BOTTOM, BUT NOT THE WAY YOU DESCRIBE IT. SO I REMEMBER AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE THEY WOULD SAY RESERVES ARE. BUT I JUST WANT TO BE SURE THAT WE HAVE ADEQUATE RESERVES. SO HOW WOULD I BE ABLE TO DETERMINE THAT? BECAUSE I'M GETTING STRAIGHT NUMBERS HERE. HOW WOULD I BE ABLE TO DETERMINE IT? WELL, YOUR POLICY HAS RESTRICTED RESERVES IN A GENERAL FUND OF FOUR MONTHS AND ENTERPRISE FUNDS THREE MONTHS. SO THE RESERVES I JUST GAVE YOU ARE OVER AND ABOVE THE FOUR MONTH AND THE THREE MONTH. OKAY, GOOD. THANK YOU. YES. YES. SORRY FOR NOT CLARIFYING THAT. YES, WE HAVE WE HAVE OUR FOUR MONTHS IN OUR THREE MONTHS PLUS SOME ADDITIONAL. OKAY, GOOD. THANK YOU. THAT MAKES A BIG DIFFERENCE. COMMISSIONER VALDES. YES, THIS IS A TOPIC I HATE BECAUSE I DEAL WITH IT EVERY DAY IN MY BUSINESS BUSINESSES AND YOU KNOW, WE HAVE OUR NEEDS AS A CITY AND THEY ARE MANY AND THEY'RE PLENTIFUL AND THEY'RE DIFFICULT RIGHT NOW BECAUSE OF INFLATION. BUT I ALSO HAVE TO LOOK AT IT FROM THE STANDPOINT OF OUR SURVIVING AS A CITY AND FINDING THE FUNDS TO ADEQUATELY COVER OUR NEEDS. WHERE ARE THE MOST NEGATIVE IMPACTS THE TAXPAYERS GOING TO BE FELT? WHO'S GOING TO HURT THE MOST FROM WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR? AND, YOU KNOW, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S I'D LIKE TO LOOK AT OUR VARIOUS NUMBERS AND SEE WHERE THE INCREASES CAN BE MAXIMIZED WITH THE LEAST AMOUNT OF PAIN AND WHERE THE INCREASES CAN BE POSSIBLY MINIMIZED TO AVOID PAIN. I'M LOOKING AT A STACK OF PAPER RIGHT HERE. I KNEW WE COULD GET RID OF REAL QUICK AND THERE'S A LOT OF THAT AROUND. AND I KNOW YOU'RE ALREADY ON THAT. [00:45:02] I'M ALSO CURIOUS ABOUT NEW REVENUE STREAMS. IS THERE SOMETHING OUT THAT I KNOW THIS IS PROBABLY GONE THROUGH 1000 TIMES, BUT, YOU KNOW, I'D RATHER COLLECT A COUPLE OF PENNIES OFF ALL THE TOURISTS THAT COME THROUGH THE CITY AND SOME MEANS THAT MAYBE WE HAVEN'T THOUGHT OF YET. INSTEAD OF HITTING SOMEONE THAT'S ON A FIXED INCOME OR RETIRED INCOME WITH A HIGHER RATES AT WHAT [INAUDIBLE]. THIS IS DIFFICULT. THIS IS VERY DIFFICULT BECAUSE I DID THIS EVERY DAY WITH MY EMPLOYEES. I JUST GAVE MY EMPLOYEES ACROSS THE BOARD INCREASE, NOT NEARLY ENOUGH, BUT IT WAS A DIRECTION. AND I'M LOOKING AT HOW TO MANAGE WHAT I SEE COMING, WHICH IS GOING TO BE PRETTY STEEP. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO HAVE US. LOOK AT OUR NUMBERS AND WHERE WE ARE ASKING FOR THE MONEY TO COVER OUR COST AND SEE WHAT THE REAL COSTS IS GOING TO BE WITH OUR CITIZENS. WHO'S GOING TO HURT AND WHO'S NOT? SO THAT'S MY THOUGHTS. I CONCUR WITH EVERYTHING YOU'RE SAYING. ALL THREE OF YOU HAVE SAID, BY THE WAY, IT'S JUST TO ME, IT'S ALWAYS LOOKED AT TRYING TO FIND OUT WHO CAN AFFORD IT AND WHO CAN'T. SO. PLEASE. KIND OF A SEGUE OFF OF WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, COMMISSIONER VALDEZ. WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT INCREASING PARKING FEES IN THE PARKING GARAGE BEFORE. AND WHERE ARE WE WITH THAT ANALYSIS AND WOULD THAT PROVIDE SOME BENEFIT? I KNOW YOU PROJECTING THAT TOURISM MAY FALL OFF, BUT WE IT IS A BIG REVENUE GENERATOR FOR US, RIGHT? ABSOLUTELY. AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT I KNOW REUBEN FRANKLIN IN PUBLIC WORKS IS STILL LOOKING AT. I DID GO OVER AN ANALYSIS DONE AND PRESENTED TO THE COMMISSION IN THE SUMMER OF 2019 WHERE WE TALKED ABOUT PEAK PRICING, WHEN WE HAVE SHUTTLES IN PLAY AND GOING FROM A $15 RATE TO A $20 RATE. THERE'S ALSO DISCUSSION OF A REDUCED RATE IN THE EVENINGS FOR FOLKS WHO WANT TO COME DOWN AND JUST GO TO DINNER BUT DON'T WANT TO PAY $15. AND, YOU KNOW, THE DEMAND ISN'T HIGH THEN. SO COULD WE INCREASE OUR REVENUE WITH WITH SOMETHING LESS EXPENSIVE AND ENTICE MORE PEOPLE TO COME DOWNTOWN AND EAT IN OUR RESTAURANTS? THE ACTUAL DATA ON WHAT THAT MIGHT YIELD IS NOT COMPLETE, BUT IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE ARE DISCUSSING. I JUST DID NOT INCLUDE IT IN TODAY'S PRESENTATION. THE VISITOR INFORMATION CENTER FUND IS CURRENTLY BUDGETED FOR THE SAME $15 PAY ON ENTRY WITH A DISCOUNT FOR THOSE FOLKS WITH THE PARK NOW CARD. BUT I PERSONALLY WOULD WOULD LIKE TO SEE TOURISM HELP PAY FOR A LOT OF OUR EXPENSES THAT ARE THE RESULT OF TOURISM. AND I THINK I'VE HAD THAT CONVERSATION WITH A COUPLE OF YOU BEFORE THAT THAT WOULD BE OUTSTANDING FOR THE RATEPAYER AND OUR UTILITIES AND THE AD VALOREM TAXPAYER. OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE? I WOULD JUST SAY THAT I RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE WITH YOU ON THE STORMWATER FUND, BUT WOULD BE MORE THAN BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE WE CAN'T GET BEHIND ON THAT AND THAT WE RISK DOING THAT IF WE DON'T MAKE THOSE INCREASES. BUT IF THE TIMING WORKS OUT WITH THE STORMWATER MASTER PLAN, I WOULD BE WILLING TO WAIT AND SEE WHERE THAT WHERE THAT GUIDES US AND MAKE SOME CHANGES IN RESPONSE TO THAT. AND TO BE CLEAR, I'M I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THE INCREASE IN THE STORMWATER FEE. IT WAS JUST NOT THAT ROUNDING UP THAT HE WAS SUGGESTING. OKAY. THAT I WAS THAT'S WHAT I WAS MISUNDERSTANDING. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANYTHING FURTHER? THIS IS A LOT OF WORK. IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO US. AND WE JUST REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR LEADERSHIP ON THESE MATTERS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. WE NOW HAVE A MOMENT FOR ADDITIONAL PUBLIC COMMENT IF THERE'S ANYBODY IN THE PUBLIC. [2. General Public Comments.] I SEE ONE SPEAKER COMING FORWARD. WELCOME, MS. KALAIDI. THANK YOU. BJ KALAIDI. WEST CITY OF SAINT AUGUSTINE. THANK YOU FOR AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK AFTER YOU ALL HAD A CHANCE TO GO OVER ALL THIS. WHETHER YOU DO IT OR NOT, I REALLY THINK THE TAXPAYERS ARE THE ONES THAT ARE GOING TO HAVE TO BEAR THE BRUNT. AND I THINK THERE'S A WAY TO GET AROUND THAT. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE MILLAGE RATE, WHICH IS REALLY PROPERTY TAXES DOWN TO 7.0 AND BECAUSE T HE INFORMATION THAT THERE'S BEEN AN INCREASE IN HOME VALUES AND THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN ANNEXED INTO THE CITY, AND ALL EMPLOYEES WERE RECENTLY GIVEN [00:50:03] $500 BECAUSE OF INFLATION. NOW, I UNDERSTAND THE EMPLOYEES HAVE THE SAME PROBLEMS THAT CITY TAXPAYERS HAVE. AND I DON'T HEAR ANYTHING ABOUT HOW THE CITY TAXPAYERS CAN BE HELPED ON THIS. AND A 9.1% INCREASE ACROSS THE BOARD, BASICALLY ON ALL SERVICES IS GOING TO HIT A LOT OF PEOPLE. SO I WILL CONTINUE TO ASK THAT THE ONES OFF THE TAX ROLL, WHICH IS 25%, WHICH ARE NON PROFITS AND I KEEP BRINGING IT UP AND EVERYONE IGNORES IT. I'M GOING TO KEEP ON BRINGING IT UP THE PAYMENT IN LIEU OF TAXES FOR THE SCHOOL ACROSS THE STREET AND COMING TO THE WATER AND AT THE IN THE SERVICE AREA WEST AUGUSTINE WHICH YOU'RE TAKING CARE OF THAT. WOULD YOU WANT TO CONSIDER LOWERING THAT? WE NEED TO REMEMBER WHEN WE'RE DOING WATER OUTSIDE THE SERVICE AREA, NOT JUST THERE, BUT OTHER PLACES IN THE COUNTY, THAT THESE PEOPLE DO NOT PAY DOUBLE TAXES AND PEOPLE LIVING IN THE CITY. SO MOST OF THE EMPLOYEES DO NOT WHO WORK FOR THE CITY PAY BOTH COUNTY AND CITY TAXES. AND I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT THAT BURDEN. AND IT IS A BURDEN, BUT WE DO WANT THE SERVICES AND I DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEMS WITH THE SOLID WASTE, BUT I THINK THOSE WHO ARE REALLY USING IT AND OVERUSING IT, INCLUDING RESIDENTS, SOMEHOW THAT SHOULD BE TAKEN CARE OF AND INCREASE ON THEM. AND I KNOW IT'S HARD TO DO THAT KIND OF STUFF, BUT I THINK THOSE WHO ARE REALLY ABUSING SOLID WASTE ARE THE ONES WHO ARE PUTTING THE BURDEN ON THE CITY. AND IF THAT CAN BE LOOKED AT, NOT ONLY THE COMMERCIAL, BUT OUR RESIDENTS TOO, THEY CAN RECYCLE. BUT WHEN YOU'VE GOT OVERFLOWING BINS ALL THE TIME, SOMETHING'S GOING ON AT THE RESIDENCE. SO I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK AFTER YOU ALL HAD A CHANCE TO LISTEN TO MR. SIMPSON. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE WHO WISHES TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION AT THIS TIME. SEEING NO ONE, THE PUBLIC COMMENT SECTION IS CLOSED AND WE WILL CONSIDER OURSELVES ADJOURNED FOR THIS SPECIAL MEETING. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.