Planning Board - Regular Meeting

We'll call this meeting to order. This is the regular meeting of the City of Callaway Board of Commissioners. It is Tuesday, July 14th, 2026. It's 6 p.m. If y'all will please stand with me. Commissioner Bergsell will give the invocation. Commissioner Briggs, please lead us in the pledge.

Thank you, God, so much for the opportunity for us to meet tonight and discuss the business of our city. I pray, God, that you I thank you, God, for all the blessings you've given us in this state and in this city throughout all the many years. Continue to bless us and watch over us. In Jesus' name, amen. Amen. With the allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Yes. Security clerk, please do a roll call. Commissioner Birdsell. Here. Commissioner Griggs. Here. Commissioner Pelletier. Here. Commissioner Ayers. Here, ma'am. Mayor Henderson.

Here. Okay, we have a presentation tonight, or we have a couple presentations, but the first one is a Bay County Sheriff's Office June 2020 statistics, and I see Deputy Martin is not here, so we have somebody filling in for her. I'm sorry I don't have your name.

Your favorite fill-in. So for the month of June, the Sheriff's Office responded to 1,060 calls for service. We patrolled 23,623 miles within the city limits of Callaway. We've had 48 arrests, conducted 126 traffic stops from 106 citations of those 126 stops. And Sheriff's Office worked 23 reported crashes. Out of those reported crashes, seven of them were in the parking lot. Five of those was as a result of improper backing. One of them was a result of just careless or negligent operation of a motor vehicle. And the other one is classified as other, which means within the DMV form that fit the action of that fault driver. Sixteen of those were non-parking lot crashes. Four of them occurred at the intersection of Tender Parkway and 7th Street, which that has always been an issue there at that light. And three of those occurred at Tender Parkway and Highway 22, which we all know that's also another constant there between those two. I don't know what it's going to take to rectify those situations, but... there seemed to be two major places that all these working crashes at. Out of those, nine of those was as a result to yield the right of way. Three of them was falling too closely. One of them was improper banking, and one of those was ran off the roadway. So that is everything that the sheriff's office has done for the city for the month of June.

We appreciate it. Anybody have any questions? No. Appreciate everything you're doing. OK. Thank you.

Tell me about Parkway and 7th. What's going on? There's plenty of visibility there. Is it just people jumping?

There's plenty of it. I'll tell you what it is. It's impatience. One, that light for east and west traffic on 7th is a very short cycle, which is understandable. Because the majority of your traffic is going north and south on that. But you have people that get impatient because they have other important things to do, like whatever it is that they're doing that's more important than what other people have going on. So a lot of it's impatience. is what it really boils down to.

There's no left turn signal there either if you're going east-west, and I think that helps contribute.

Absolutely. There's not enough room on the east side of that intersection for 7th Street because you have the pumping station there at the corner. There's no way that you'd be able to factor in a turn lane for that side to be able to turn south. I think if there would be a way that you can make a turn lane on that side of the intersection to go south and put in an arrow, a left turn arrow on that light, you may end up curbing a lot of that that is there. But I don't know logistically how you'd be able to squeeze in an extra lane, especially with the rehab place on one side and then you've got that pumping station right there. To me, that would be the only way that you might be able to curb some of that.

Well, we have some things coming up in the future that potentially involve 7th Street. So we can be looking potentially at the south side there to do something, possibly get another lane in. Because there'd be more traffic with what we're planning in the future.

Yeah, you already have the left turn section. on the Walmart side of 7th Street. So you do have that provision already built in. It's just on the other side of that intersection, there's not one that's already there. There just isn't the room at this point.

I think the most dangerous is that right turn off 7th Street, the far side by Walmart. That's where that young gentleman was killed because he took a right in front of someone.

And it's not only that. It's whenever you have... people that are trying, from the Whataburger side, they're trying to go and make that left turn to go south. And whenever they make that left turn, you have traffic that's coming straight across. And they inevitably always turn into the vehicle that's coming straight across at them.

Is that where we're getting our accidents?

There's a lot of that. And then you have people that are making, they're going north onto the parkway to make the left-hand turn to go into Walmart. And they inevitably always pull out in front of somebody traveling southbound. Yeah. And a lot of that is due to patience. There is a lot of traffic. Traffic is going to increase along to the parkway. That's going to be inevitable.

We appreciate what you do and appreciate the information because We can take that, and we do take that back to the TPO where we can do some, and that's all long-range planning. Yes. So the statistics help us in formulating, say, a little bit of awareness that everybody on the TPO can participate in.

Yes. But you as a council have seen these numbers and It's always been those two intersections.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And now our second presentation, the Youth Alliance Matters Foundation, they canceled. So we'll not have that presentation tonight. But we do have a presentation for Yard of the Month. The gentleman who received that is not able to be with us. But it is Mr. Michael Noyes. I guess, I don't know how you pronounce it, N-O-Y-E-S, at 201 South Charlene, received the Yard of the Month Award for this month. And he is going to pick it up tomorrow, is what I was told. So thank you to Mr. Noyes for keeping his yard looking great. OK, we'll go on to mayor's instructions. Do we have any additions or deviations to the agenda?

We want to add seven more items.

Do we have a vote on that?

Just so you know, we took four off. We did shorten it.

OK, so we have no additions or deletions. As far as public participation rules, I think most of you know, but just kind of real quick review. Audience member can speak on any of our items or all of our items if you so choose. When we call for public participation, just indicate you want to speak. Once you're recognized, come up to the podium. You can state your name and address for the record if you so choose. Then your three minutes will begin. So you have three minutes to speak on that item. Then if you want to speak on every other item, the process is the same. If there's something you wanted to speak about that is not an agenda item, at the end of the meeting, we have public participation for non-agenda. So the process is the same. Just when you're recognized, come up to the podium. And then you will have your three minutes to speak about non-agenda items. So we will go on and get started. We'll go to our first item, approval of minutes. We've got the minutes of the June 23, 2026 regular meeting. Did anybody have any comments, changes to those minutes? And if not, I would entertain a motion.

Motion to approve minutes. Second.

OK, we've got a motion and a second. So if there's no further discussion, all in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? OK, motion carries. And we will go on to our next item, Ordinance Number 1145, Small Scale Comprehensive Amendment, 6122 Harvey Street.

OK. This is the first reading of Ordinance Number 1145, an ordinance amending the comprehensive plan of the City of Calloway acting upon the application of need Chakot designating for high density residential future land use a certain parcel of land lying within the city of Calloway Florida consisting of approximately 0.344 more or less acres said parcel is located at 6122 Harvey Street Calloway Florida parcel ID 060620400000 as more particularly described in the body of the ordinance, amending the city's future land use map for high density residential designation for the parcel, repealing parts of ordinances in conflict herewith, and providing that this ordinance shall take effect as provided by law.

Okay, city manager.

Mr. Frax.

Good evening. So this property is on the corner of Harvey and North Kimball Avenue. Mr. S, the applicant, came to me and was requesting an additional multi-family unit, which is possible. And then he mentioned the fact that it was a modular or a prefab building of some kind. And I told him, well, we're going to have to get it rezoned and change the future land use map. And as you're aware, first item, changing the future land use map. Second, rezoning. Two separate items, but kind of go hand in hand. Mr. S is here tonight with us looking to change the future land use map designation from low density residential to high density residential. It's not a very large parcel. So changing the density requires the future land use map change as well. If you have any questions, myself and Mr. Isser will do our best to answer for you.

Anybody got questions?

I don't have any questions.

I would have been down here and looked at it.

And you have questions? No questions.

Well, we did, if I recall on this, it was zoned residential M and we went ahead and went to the medium density at that time. And this was, what, two or three years ago that we did this, if I recall.

Not this parcel. Not that parcel? No. There's one down the road just a little ways that was changed from, I'm not sure what it was, but it did get a designation of multifamily high density.

Right.

This was several years ago. About four, about four or so. This is out on the corner.

Marjola Holmes. What is our position on modular homes?

Well, so the current zoning is multifamily. Now we're kind of going into item number two, but to answer your question, the current zoning is residential multifamily. But it doesn't allow the M. It doesn't allow the mobile home or the modular home. The only designation we have for multifamily is high density multifamily with the M specifically. So the request is to change it from medium density to high density and attach that M on item number two.

Which the M would cover the modular. Basically. Okay. I don't have any more questions.

Anybody else have?

How many units?

We haven't gotten there yet. We would have to go through a development order process. But he does not have a whole lot of land to work with. An engineer is going to have to get creative to allow more than one for sure.

Nobody else has anything? Would anybody in the audience like to comment on this, ma'am?

Karen Custer, 216 Landy Road Drive. Mayor Henderson, before they go through the trouble to do land development and all that, I looked at the documents that were included for this for the capsule homes. And the company that would be providing the capsule homes is this MSPprefab.com. So I looked on their website, and this company is in Shenzhen, China. And Florida law, it heavily restricts doing business with Chinese-owned companies. It restricts dealings with foreign principals and company based in foreign countries of concern. And so I think I'm definitely concerned about considering bringing all this product manufactured in China here to Florida. There are also building codes that it needs to meet. When I look through the documentation, it doesn't say anything about meeting Florida building codes. One is modular buildings must comply with wind speed and flood hazard requirements. That's 102.7 number 3. Building plans must be approved pursuant to Section 553.77 Florida statutes. That's not in there. Modular inspectors performing in-plan inspections have to be licensed in accordance with Florida statute. That's not in the documents. And also, applicable code for manufactured buildings is Florida Building Code 105.3.7. That's also not mentioned in these documents. In the context of prefab or modular buildings, you cannot place imported foreign-made manufactured units on Florida properties to bypass strict compliance standards. That's part of the Florida Building Code. I recommend Chapter 692 of the Florida statutes prohibits a lot of things having to do with the People's Republic of China or the CCP. So please think about this before you go down this path because I think in the end somehow you all can be held liable for approving a development that's going to bring product from China to the state of Florida. Thank you. Thank you.

Anybody else want to comment?

We're not being asked for approving a development. This is Laney's change. So there's probably way too much information.

Well, I'm glad you said that because that's what I was going to say. This is not even a development order, so whatever she said has zero to do with this agenda item. But at any rate... This is not doing business with a Chinese company, is it? This is doing business with the property owner, and he's getting materials maybe from somewhere else, which I think that's common for a lot of things, just in general, just in living. We get a lot of things from other countries as well.

We have all these ports on either side of the United States.

Also, I don't I think that's a good fit, though, just in general. I don't think it's a good fit for that location. And the planning board also mentioned, again, this is not a development order, so it's not. Just never mind, it's not a development order.

That's not it. Thank you. Anybody else want to comment?

Mr. Volker.

Yes, sir.

The requested variance for small-scale comprehensive plan amendment 6122 Harvey Street came before the planning board on May 19, 2022. It failed on the tie vote. The subsequent request for rezoning of 6122 Harvey Street was also discussed at the same planning board meeting. The resigning request failed on a unanimous vote. The LDR references mobile homes, not modular homes, and has specific space requirements single-sided mobile homes as well as mobile home parks. Neither the individual dimensions referenced in the brochure regarding the mobile structures nor the space available in the rezoning request comply with the LDR's current requirements for mobile homes. While the idea of modular homes in this time of high costs associated with both home ownership and high rent payments is appealing, an LDL revision is needed as well as a different site selection to accommodate modular homes. Thank you.

Thank you. Yes, sir.

Martin Vossler, 6303 Voss Road. I would like to acknowledge that Walmart is the largest employer in our area. But I think if we're going to go down that route, I'm going to have to go one more. I don't know where my wife got my shirt from, but it might be from Walmart. So I'm not getting naked in front of everybody. But if I was to look at my pants, I think my shorts are made in China, too, and sold places. So I don't know if we want to beat something into the ground because it's made there. And we have a person who lives here in our city that wants to have these things. Obviously, there's going to be people that live in this area that are going to be putting those things in and all that stuff. And it's going to be hooked up to all of our utilities and everything. So I don't know if we should nitpick where stuff's built. I get the whole CCP thing. But I'll take my Chinese nature off right now in front of everybody. I have absolutely no shame.

Thank you. Yes, sir. Did you want to speak?

These are not mobile homes. They are mobile in the sense that they come from China, and they are put up here. But these are some of the very luxurious homes. They're tiny in size, but they offer a lot of modern facilities in them. And these are going to be popular because there are two stages in a person's life where he needs a smaller home and not a big home. And those are when people are young and just starting in life, and when they're old, as old as we are. So these are a perfect fit. I'm just trying to introduce these houses here. If anybody has any specific concern over them, I'm here to answer the questions. I think this will be a very good addition to what we have here. And I think they look good. They are modern. They are comfortable. They are stronger. And as far as the codes go, I think we can meet all the local codes. It's just that when we apply those codes, we are about to build the house. Here in this case, the house is already built. And it's small because it comes in a container. But they look beautiful. I have the catalogs. Anybody can take a look at those catalogs. They're a new concept, absolutely. And I believe they are comfortable. And they will add to what we have. They will not be, in any case, these are not homes that look bad, tardy. And they have all the modern concepts that anybody can think of.

Thank you. I think we've gotten a little ahead of ourselves anyway because what we're talking about tonight really doesn't have anything to do with these modular homes. We're just talking about do we want to change this model? Do we want to make it a small-scale plan amendment? And then do we want to rezone? And, I mean, what would go there will come further down the line. So I think we've gotten a little bit ahead. Off topic, but I do appreciate what you had to say.

If anybody has any concerns, I'll be able to answer whatever concerns anybody has.

Did you have something you wanted to?

Yeah, it's kind of getting off a little bit, but is that big building going to be removed and then you add the tiny homes in its place?

No, my objective at this point is just to do an experiment, add one home, and figure out what it costs. Is it worth it? Can we import more? But we'll take care of the environment. We'll take care of how it looks at that place. But I have no intentions of taking down that. OK, sir.

Anything else?

We're going from this item is low density to high density. Presently low density and that's what we've approved before and that's where I'm sticking with the low density.

It's going to be just one or two houses, that's it. At the most two, because it's a tiny lot. Given the setbacks, it's going to be addition of at the most probably two hours.

I think we're good. Thank you, sir.

Thank you.

Was there anybody else that wanted to speak? Okay, it's back to us, gentlemen. Would anybody like to make a motion or bring up any other issue?

Motion to approve ordinance number 1145, small scare cop plan amendment 6122 Harvey Street, parcel ID 06062-0400000, first reading.

Second. Okay, so we've got a motion and a second. Is there any other discussion? If not, city clerk.

Commissioner Birdsall?

Yes.

Commissioner Griggs?

No.

Commissioner Pelletier?

No.

Commissioner Ayers? No. Mayor Henderson.

No. Okay, so we can go on to item two, which is the rezoning of the same parcel.

Just correct me if I'm wrong on this. This zoning request, unless we went from low to high, it would not meet the consistency task. We can't change the zoning without changing the future land use map. So item two is what's going on.

So item two is.

You can vote. Or you can vote on it. It's not.

Can you vote?

to even consider the zoning because they're done concurrently. We just move on.

So we just move on.

Right.

Nothing in item two, so we go to item three, which is ordinance number 1147, camping restrictions, first reading. I'll let the city attorney do his part. I know. Get through all those pages.

Okay, this is first reading of ordinance number 1147, an ordinance of the city of Callaway, Florida, amending article 1, section 10-12 of the city's code of ordinances, repealing all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict, providing for severability, scrivener's errors, liberal interpretation, modifications, codification, and providing for an effective date. And this is, if you remember, maybe about a year ago, we took a stab at this, and I think the sheriff's office didn't like it at the time, so we did another stab. Eddie sent it to the sheriff's office. They were okay with it, and we'll see where it goes.

Bonnie was very involved in this as well. Yeah, yeah. First off, we're not trying to restrict people from camping in their backyards with their children. That is not what this is about. What this is about is people saying, giving permission to people to camp and live in their backyard. And we have some issues like this. And we can't touch them right now. And it just becomes, you end up with kind of a homeless camp in the back of somebody's house. And they're allowing it to happen. And so while it may look a little restrictive, we're trying to do the best that we can. so that if somebody has their children down or if somebody has a family member down and they want to stay in their backyard or camp in their backyard, that's fine. We're not looking to go out. This is where we have blatant misuse of the law and that we're trying to prevent some of these blight issues that are happening. So know that we're not sending the sheriff out to go look at every tent in every backyard and go in there and try to throw kids which was brought up at the last meeting. That is not what this is about. This is just about we've got to get some sort of restrictions in place to stop these permanent encampments that are happening in our city.

We have like five days every six months. You've got to break it down. in the backyard.

And the sheriff's not going to be tracking that. That's what I said. You can look at it in terms of it's almost like an unenforceable ordinance or the sheriff's office is going to have to be tracking every time they see a tent in somebody's backyard. That's not it. Nine times out of ten, you see a tent in somebody's backyard if you can see the tent. It's just a tent in somebody's backyard. And that's not what this is about. I want to make sure everybody understands it. We need some regulations to prevent the permanent encampments that are going on in the backyards. We're open to modifying any of this language. If y'all want to extend some of the dates and times, that's perfectly fine. Because we're going after the people that are permanently doing this. And we do have some guests.

And they're not using tents. They're doing lean-to use the tarps. They're literally using lean-to. And that's why we call it playground. Everything else is.

I want everybody to understand we're not here to over-regulate by any means. That is not what this is about. This is just about putting some sort of regulation in so that we can stop these permanent encampments.

So this time this is going to pass the legal test? It's a challenge that was on this road before.

Sheriff? You said to the sheriff's office they were good with it?

Yeah. Oh, you're talking about the legal test from the sheriff's office? Yeah. Okay. has reviewed it, and I believe the sheriff reviewed it also.

This gives it clarity. Yeah. And it really gives clarity to understanding what we had as comments before, particularly as it related to children. This is certainly good, actually, the way it's worded. I didn't see anything on it that I would even change the wording on it.

I just had one problem with some of the wording. It was 5E. where it said one tote or suitcase per individual. I like to delete that totally and just put one backpack. Because if you're camping in your backyard, you're not carrying a tote out there or a suitcase. I think a backpack is more reasonable, which is camping equipment.

Do we want to change that or leave it as is?

Tote or backpack? Tote bag could be a small canvas bag too. I get you with the suitcase.

It's a big piece of plastic. It could be as big as they want. They sell huge ones at Walmart.

Like a gym bag is a tote bag.

When you're talking about the sheriff's office going into somebody's backyard, let me see your totes. It's just not going to happen.

All of this is the same way. And I... We need something in here, but when you say tote, that means one of those plastic tubs that you put stuff in to meet. And then a suitcase is a suitcase because a suitcase kind of relates to a tub. So you can just clarify it.

Do you want to put a bag in? I like tote.

I still think tote works. Even if it is a big one, you and the kids want to go to camp for the night, Can we get rid of the suitcase? The kids bring all their toys. Yeah, you don't put it in the suitcase. I have a seven-year-old. She does. She wants the biggest suitcase.

She thinks she's gone someplace.

She's got her suitcase. And we're trying to limit the... But we limit it by saying five days every six months. Right, yeah. And you're only bringing one.

Mm-hmm. One tote or suitcase. All right.

I didn't interpret that as being an issue.

I'm just trying to get it a little more restrictive so they can't abuse that. Because when you go from site to site, you carry a tote or a suitcase.

I'd say, Bill, if you're the one on the commission who has young kids that might want to camp in the backyard, I'll kind of defer to what you think.

Yeah, when we camp with the family, I bring way more stuff than you absolutely need for a two-day thing.

Amen.

I don't want to, but thank you.

I've hit every state park in Florida with our four children, and very honestly, one of our items when we went, was a big blue suitcase. It had various camping items in it. It's just easier to carry, nice handle, et cetera.

I do understand your point. I just think we've cleaned up other restrictions that that one is an unnecessary restriction.

And I've only made my comment because that's my reason for not interpreting anything other than what I did when I sold the word suitcase.

Anything else up here?

Nope.

Anybody in the audience want to comment? Yes, ma'am.

Karen Custer, 216 Laney Road Drive. I hope that you'll also repeal Ordinance 1045 so that we don't have two ordinances sitting out there that conflict with each other so that the deputy doesn't know which one to look at when they go out to enforce something. Another thing I'd suggest, where it says restrictions on camping, is there some wording that you could add to say It excludes camping on your own property or something like that so that we know. It really means you can camp in your backyard and all these rules don't apply to you there. Otherwise, I mean, I can just see all kinds of weird things happening. So that's why I suggest that. And then we don't have to worry about if the kids want to build a little fort. They can because it doesn't apply to their home. If you want to sleep in a sleeping bag in your tent in your backyard, you can do that and you're not violating the law if we say that this doesn't apply to your own backyard. Let's see. One thing that's kind of funny is camping includes storing camping gear, according to this. You can store an RV in your side yard, but you can't store your camping gear in your side yard or your front yard. That kind of doesn't go together, that you can store your RV, but not your camping gear. Let's see if there's anything else. I thought, well, maybe the owner of the house is letting me use They're toilet facilities, so you don't need to say you have to bring your own. That was another thought. But another thing you could consider, if you're going to limit the amount of stuff they bring, can you make it like, I don't know, five square feet or something, instead of just saying it can only be a bag, but it has to be a little bag or something like that. And I do have to say there have been a couple of people who are commissioners that have been to some meetings of really conservative people, and I'm surprised to see a lot of this feels like overreach to me, so I'm really kind of surprised if you would vote to pass something that says you can only bring one suitcase or tape or tote. You have to bring a toilet. This is getting to be a little bit or maybe very much into violating your personal rights. So anyway, thank you. Thank you, Ms. Koster.

Yes, sir. Well, let this gentleman and then you'll be next, Mr. Bostic.

I got a neighbor.

I need you to get to the microphone, please.

My name's Pete Tool. I live at 6311 Lois. I got a neighbor that story. He had no water for over a year, no lights. He's throwing all his household trash out in the front yard. I called everybody. They said there ain't nothing they could do about it. He got five or six homeless people living with him. Got five or six pool dogs eat up with manes and fleas. And I asked him about trash. He's like, I ain't worried about it. I'm like, yeah, but calls and blow flies and mosquitoes and everything else. How about cleaning it up? He's like, I ain't doing nothing. He's like, they can't make me do it. So I called health department, code enforcement, sheriff's department. They said, ain't nothing you can do about it. I got pictures of it. What's the address? 6319 Rose. They done pulled all the water pipes and electric out from under house, went and sold it for junk. I got pictures of it on my phone.

We'll definitely go back and take a look. Yeah, it's fake. We have a place on boat race also.

That's what you're dealing with.

And just now he's even letting the neighbors come up and dump their trash out there. You don't want to see this. He can't do that.

He's got it.

I don't know. We think that that's in Cal. We had code enforcement. Yeah, I see.

I don't.

That makes no sense to me.

No. That doesn't make sense.

That doesn't make sense.

That makes no sense to me. None.

No.

First of all, I think one of us would have seen it since we drive the city.

Would you show the city manager, please, show him the picture? OK, he'll check in, too. Thank you for bringing that to our attention. Does anybody else want to speak? Yes, ma'am.

Tony.

I'm sorry.

Are we overlooking you, Tony?

Donald Trump, 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

Oh, I'm sorry, wrong place.

It happened right there. Tony Bostick, 159 North Kimball. I understand what you're trying to do here. And for those that don't have any idea of how bad this can get, how quick, all you need to do is go back to Panama City about 15 years ago. They had a guy named The Engineer. He engineered homeless camps. Started off in backyards. He tapped into the city's water, gut-powered electric, And he just created chaos. And he went from spot to spot in Bay County. Finally, the sheriff at the time put him on a bus with a one-way ticket to Texas. That's how they got rid of him. They couldn't legislate it out of him. They couldn't put him in jail enough. But he'd go from one homeless camp to another homeless camp, and he did this. And it all started in a guy's backyard that gave him permission to be there for a weekend. And so I understand what you're trying to do, and I support it. The only thing that I would say is, like in paragraph C, it says, occur for no longer than five days within a six-month period. I think you could do what you're trying to do and say, for instance, like Commissioner Birdsell here talking about his daughter, his seven-year-old daughter. If you go anywhere with a seven-year-old, you know what kind of baggage they come up with. They've got all kinds of things that they don't need, but you're going to carry to keep them from crying. And some people during the summer, some of the grandkids come in. So I would say two or three days per month versus five days in a six-month period. Maybe you have to come back and revisit that at a later date. But that's to accommodate grandkids, nieces, nephews that come down and spend time. And so that was the only thing that I would say that I would kind of recommend you take a five days and a six month period. If you average it out, that's less than one day per month. And unless you've got a six-year-old, seven-year-old that just wanted to do it to be out with Moana or whoever for one night, then that satisfies that. But if they're going to do it for any longer period of time, especially when you've got 10 or 12 over at the same time, I would say two to three days per month. But I do agree you have to stop this, because if you don't, it'll get out of hand real quick. And next thing you know, you've got what the young man was talking about, that guy that lives next to him. Like I said, that's the only thing I would change is maybe two to three days per month. Now, you're going to have to make an example out of somebody, so you might as well go ahead and get ready to do it. Start out early, and then we can lighten up from there.

Thank you. Thank you. Did you have a suggestion?

I would say three consecutive days in a month. that the grand camp. One every two or three weeks. You're going to hit the five days.

I mean, it's too hot. I'm not camping in my backyard now, but someone might.

When I become homeless, I'm going to come over and camp out.

So what are you suggesting?

I'll come up with a time. I would insert the word consecutive, and then if you guys want to change it from. a different number of days or different months, that's up to you. But I get what he's saying. In six months, you're saying the way it reads, five days in a six-month period, it could be every two weeks, one day. That's not what we're intending, really. You're looking at the encampments is what we're really trying to get rid of. So you can leave it five consecutive days in six months, or you can do three consecutive days per month. I mean, that's up to you all. This is the first reading, right?

That's true. I left it three days.

So it's perfect. Yeah, we can approve the first reading, advertise it, and you can, on final reading, if you guys want to focus on that and digest it, you can make that amendment at that final approval.

That sounds good. Did anybody else want to speak? Ms. Langston, I know you come on up, and then we'll come back.

Ms. Langston, 6031 Lang Street. I just want to say that I don't see a problem with this ordinance. I don't think it's overreach. I think it's trying to control the problem of a homeowner giving permission to live in their backyard. It's not even made clear that you're not gonna be hunting down people and their children who want to camp out. And I really don't know where the overreach, I mean, I guess people are just so suspicious of the government about doing things, and I get that, but the whole point, and especially if you've come to meetings and you've heard the discussions previously when y'all tried to do this, about doing homeless encampments, about homeowners giving homeless people permission to live in their backyard. So we've got to be able to pass something to allow law enforcement to do something to stop this because of the hazard of the garbage, the waste, because you know they're not going in people's houses to go to the bathroom. They're just making a whole mess for the environment outside. So I totally agree with it, and I hope you do pass it. Thank you.

Ms. Delatier? There was a comment about conflict with other ordinances, but I do see that you have in Section 2 addressing those conflicts and allowing VCSO to use what's necessary to handle the homeless encampments. At least that's how I'm reading it. If I'm right, I don't need any clarification. If I'm not, you can clarify, but it

Yeah, Section 2. Yeah, there's always a repeals, conflicts, and ordinances in conflict here with you.

I don't think there's a conflict of ordinances here going on, and I appreciate the board trying to clean up our homeless encampments. Thank you. Anybody else?

Yes, sir.

Martin Foster, 6303 Wall Street. So before we decided to go in debt and buy a very expensive motorhome, we did a lot of camping. And where I would go camping was out in the boonies, in the primitive campsites on Icofina. If you're in this area and you don't know where the water from Icofina goes, Then come look at my coniche in my front yard and my water leak. That's where the water from Ecofinite goes. It goes to Deer Point Lake. It goes to the water supply. And when you camp in perennial campsites out there, you do your business just like the Bay. I don't want somebody living next to me in my house on Wallace and going to the bathroom. I don't want a bunch of homeless people camped across the street from me. But there has to be some kind of way that we can have freedom that if I'm in the dog house and my wife says I got to go live in the backyard, I drink a lot of water. And she won't let me in the door. I'm not trying to be facetious, horrible word to say. But I'm just saying from a standpoint of we should be allowed to have freedom. Not that I'm going to camp in my front yard and just do whatever. And my kid's grown. She's 20. If she wants to go camp, we'll take the motor home somewhere. But the overreach. is what we don't want. I know that we obviously don't want a homeless camp. And it's a disaster. And I feel that I'm on the fence with this one, too. But we do need something in writing that they can go when they have to go out. And unfortunately, it has to be black and white. Because otherwise, somebody's going to be like, well, I'm living out here, and my 30 kids are camping with me. Next thing you know, we'll have a situation like he was talking about. I don't know. Good luck.

Thank you.

Anybody else?

Yeah, I think you covered both sides.

I think you had something to say, Commissioner Graves.

Yeah, well, a few years ago, and Tony will probably remember this, but 4th Street was a major encampment out there that the Sheriff's Department eventually were able to get that taken care of. But this helps now. This is the first reading. But if we want to make some changes on the days and this kind of thing, we should give some guidance to what it will look like on the second reading rather than get to the second reading and do that. So I'm suggesting we have the discussion now about what we want to see on the second reading. Is that?

As long as you're not substantively changing the ordinance, which that would not be. Okay. You guys can think about it for two weeks and discuss it.

So we can get by with making the change on the dates and all that? Yeah.

That's the only thing I've heard about is just whether you want five and six months.

I'd like to get some feedback on it, you know.

You might as well talk about it a little.

Okay. But that's not going to be a substantive change to the titles we still advertise. All right.

I just didn't want to kick it to another revision to another ordinance in another week of another meeting or two meetings.

Unless in two weeks you guys go some total different direction, that would be the only way that would happen.

I'd be curious just to know what everybody's thinking.

I'm thinking three days a month. That way if you have a three-day weekend, you're just fine. And if the kids want to do it once a month, they're fine. I think in reality they're going to be fine anyway.

Just from staff's standpoint, it doesn't matter. We're not looking and counting days and going, oh, we saw our tent here on this day. We don't care. If you're in your backyard and it's nice and clean and your kids are camping back there, nobody's going to walk up and knock on your door. It's easy to see the blatant disregard for the camping in the backyard. That's what we're after. Job change a day is all you want. We'll do the best we can. But like I said, whether you do consecutive here, It's not like in three weeks if somebody's back out camping again and their kids are out there having a good time or whatever, we're going to be like, wait, wasn't that there two weeks ago?

And you're going to be able to tell if it's an encampment or not.

We will be able to tell easily.

But I think we should be a little less restrictive.

I will also say 6319 Lois has been foreclosed on by the bank. So it's in no man's land right now. And they're trying to evict the squatters that are in there now.

And how about the owner that's still hanging out?

I don't think there's... If it's an owner, the bank is foreclosed, so they're taking it back. So it's in the legal process right now. Kevin, you know this one. In foreclosure? In foreclosure.

Okay. The bank doesn't own it yet? The bank doesn't own it yet.

Yeah, he was supposed to go to court.

During the foreclosure, they'll start eviction.

They'll get rid of possession and the sheriff will go out there once the foreclosure order is final.

An emblem of a 90-day eviction.

They eventually will. The sheriff will eventually get him off of there.

So we can do an abatement on that, couldn't we?

We can. You want me to go clean it up? I'll go clean it up. I mean, we'd have to do an emergency abatement.

Our abatements go against the tax rules.

Yeah, the foreclosures will be, yeah, wait for the bank to own it, and then they'll do it.

The bank owns it differently.

So it just has to run its course. It has to run the legal process.

Okay, well to get back to our camping ordinance. Anybody else want to speak on the camping ordinance? Okay, if not, would somebody up here, do you have anything else to say or would someone like to make a motion on this first reading?

Second.

Okay, we've got a motion and a second. Is there any other discussion? If not, city clerk.

Commissioner Pelletier? Yes. Commissioner Ayers? Yes. Commissioner Birdsall? Yes.

Okay, we will go on now to item number four, ordinance number 1148, petition for voluntary annexation of 6305 Highway 22.

This is ordinance number 1148, first reading of an ordinance annexing the following unincorporated area of Bay County, which is contiguous to the city of Callaway, Florida. Upon petition of the owner of said property, property containing approximately 2.095 acres and located at 6305 Highway 22, property ID 06290000000, as more particularly described in the body of the ordinance, redefining the boundary lines of the city, providing for repeal of ordinances in conflict herewith, providing for severability, and providing that this ordinance shall take effect immediately upon passage.

This property is located just to the west of Waste Management Incorporated, the big garbage company there on Highway 22. They're requesting it to be annexed in, subsequently given a future land use map designation and rezone it. Next two items. The applicants are here. If you have any questions, myself or them, we'll do our best to answer them.

Anyone have questions?

I have one question concerning the pond. It does have fish in it.

Pardon? I asked that myself. It does have fish in it.

What was the answer you got?

Mostly turtles. Now, what is your question? He wants to know what's going to do with the pond. Oh, well, I mean, whatever they do with the I would imagine you'll have some kind of pond. Their engineer would probably start with using that as their retention as long as it makes sense. Right. I would assume it's in the low spot of the property now since it's been there since I remember.

Well, also one of the reasons I was interested in that is Highway 22. Yes, sir. Retention ponds on Highway 22. Do the engineers already know whether or not that particular pond area is going to be part of the retention ponds that will be necessary on Highway 22?

Those ponds are on private property, so I'm sure they were not equated into the expansion of Highway 22 at all.

They're not? No. They're not? Yes, sir. Because there'd be properties that actually be purchased.

Those properties were downhill from this property, closer to the natural waterway right there by Naju Kennel.

Okay. Forget my question.

I'm good.

Well, once again, this is a multi-part piece of property.

Anybody else have any questions?

No, ma'am.

OK. Thank you. Did anybody in the audience want to comment on the annexation? Not seeing anybody. Would someone like to make a motion?

Motion to approve ordinance number 1148, petition for voluntary annexation of 6305 Highway 22, parcel IDs 06290-000-000. First reading.

Second. Okay, we've got a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion?

If not, Ms. City Clerk? Commissioner Ayers?

Yes, ma'am.

Commissioner Birdsall? Yes. Commissioner Griggs? Yes. Commissioner Pelletier? Yes. Mayor Henderson?

Yes. We will go on to item number five, ordinance number 1149, small-scale comp plan amendment 6305, highway 22.

Okay, so along with the annexation ordinance, we'll have first reading of ordinance number 1149 relating to the same parcel, an ordinance amending the comprehensive plan of the city of Actually, you can find the application of North Bay Property Management LLC designating for commercial future land use a certain parcel of land lying within the city of Callaway, Florida, consisting of approximately 2.095 more or less acres. Said parcel is located at 6305 Highway 22, Callaway, Florida. Parcel ID 06290000. as more particularly described in the body of the ordinance, amending the city's future land use map for commercial designation for the parcel, repealing ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith, and providing that this ordinance shall take effect as provided by law.

City Manager? Mr. Fry? So this will give it a future land use map designation, changing it from Bay County Residential to City of Callaway Commercial. which is where it belongs on Highway 22.

Anybody have any questions? No. Anybody in the audience have any comment? I just need a motion.

Motion to approve Ordinance Number 1149, Small Scale Comp Plan Amendment 6305, Highway 22, Parcel ID 06290000000. First reading. Second.

I'm glad you're reading the numbers. Yes, sir.

OK. We've got a motion and a second. Any other discussion? If not.

Commissioner Burnsall? Yes. Commissioner Griggs? Yes. Commissioner Pelletier? Yes. Commissioner Ayers? Yes. Mayor Henderson?

Yes. Okay, we're on a roll. Item number six, ordinance number 1150, rezoning of the property located at 6305 Highway 22.

Okay, this is Ordinance Number 1150, an ordinance rezoning from Bay County R2 Duplex Manufactured Housing to City of Callaway Highway Commercial, a certain parcel of land lying within the City of Callaway, Florida, consisting of approximately 2.095 more or less acres. Said parcel is located at 6305 Highway 22, Callaway, Florida. Parcel ID 06290000000. All is more particularly described in the body of the ordinance. Repealing all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith. And providing this, this ordinance shall take effect immediately upon passing.

As Kevin mentioned, we're removing that R2 Reflexes and Manufactured Homes Allowed Bay County designation to the City of Callaway Highway Commercial. On Highway 22, where it belongs.

Did anybody in the audience want to speak on the rezoning?

Mr. Bohack.

Paul Bohack, 7010 Mark Lane. The rezoning request will allow that piece of property to fall within the Central District Overlay. So it will have to abide by the requirements within the overlay ordinances, which is a good thing. I just want that known. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Belay. Anybody else? I'm not seeing anybody. It's back to us, gentlemen.

Motion to approve ordinance number 1150, rezoning of property located at 6305 Highway 22, parcel ID number 06290-000000, first reading. Second.

Okay, we've got a motion and a second. Any other discussion? No. City Clerk?

Commissioner Griggs?

Yes.

Commissioner Pelletier?

Yes.

Commissioner Ayers?

Yes, ma'am.

Commissioner Birdsell? Yes. Mayor Henderson?

Yes. This is to item number seven, resolution number 26-07, fiscal year 25-26, budget amendment.

OK, resolution number 26-07, a resolution of the City of Callaway Bay County, Florida. Well, it should be amending, not adopting. Amending the final budget for fiscal year 2025-26 and providing for an effective date.

Well, thanks to our new finance director, we're catching up on all the projects that we've already approved. These are just budget amendments in our current budget to reflect items that we've already passed.

Anybody have any question about any of them?

No.

Okay. Anybody in the audience have any comment on these budget amendments? As you said, they're things we talked about at previous meetings. This is just cleaning everything up. Is there any comment? We could use a motion.

Motion to approve resolution number 26-07 for the fiscal year 2025-26 budget amendment. Second.

Okay, we've got a motion and a second. Is there any other comment? If not, city clerk?

Commissioner Pelletier? Yes. Commissioner Ayers? Yes, ma'am. Commissioner Birdsell? Yes. Commissioner Griggs? Yes. Commissioner Henderson?

Yes. That brings us to the budget hearing setting of workshops and hearing dates. So, city manager. Ashley. You didn't have Ashley do this? Her name wasn't there. Why is my name on there? I don't know. It's you and Adam.

Because that's what it has always been. I mean, I don't mind doing it. I got the information from Bay County. As you know, we cannot schedule our hearings. on the same date as the county or the school board. All of these seem to work with it. It's up to you guys if those work for everybody, those dates and times. We can go ahead and schedule those.

I'm good.

I can tell you July 29th I have a conflict. I could do it in the morning, but I can't do the afternoon of July 29th.

We can also do... I believe we can do that 30th. I'm doing these dates. I tried to give him enough time to make any adjustments to the budget and be able to get that to you guys, you know, within a decent amount of time. Um, so those, you know, they can be adjusted if needed. So what a Thursday work, or we can do the morning.

Morning's fine with me too.

Okay.

Morning's fine. Morning is harder for me. Um,

This is discussion. We just work it out.

Tuesday, Wednesday is fine with me. Tuesday?

Yeah, because I started a job that week, so I have to be there in the morning. You've got a meeting Tuesday, right?

Yeah, but I mean that's not until 6.

We've had budget meetings in the morning.

Can you do Tuesday afternoon, or does that work?

I can make the afternoon work, yeah.

I mean, would that Tuesday afternoon, the 28th?

We're going to say, okay, go on the following week, too.

We need to commission meeting.

Yeah, I mean.

We've done it before. Yeah.

I mean, does that work if we do it Tuesday, the 28th? Yeah.

Do you want to start later so it can run into the regular?

Well, we just cut it off last time because this is going to be on anyways. I remember last year when we had our budget meeting, at a certain point we cut it off, took a break, and continued on the second workshop.

That's right. So, I mean, we could take a break.

The first day is going to be on page anyways. We're probably not going to get through the first page.

I do remember that last year we cut it off at 5 o'clock that day and then continued on the next.

I've made a commitment to at least get to page five.

You know, if we could do from like one to four to take a break so everybody can go get something to eat or whatever. So is everybody good with Tuesday the 28th? Pizza's on me. Out of my personal account, by the way. So Tuesday the 28th from 1 to 4.

Yeah.

Everybody good with that?

Yes.

And then come back at 6 for the commission meeting.

Right.

What day is that? Tuesday. Instead of Wednesday the 29th, Tuesday the 28th. Yeah. Maybe just get it all over in one day.

Yeah. That's what we did last year. It was a long, long day.

How about Wednesday the 12th? Is everybody good with Wednesday the 12th at 1? Yeah.

Yeah, that's pretty far out.

Okay. So I think we're all good with that.

Yeah.

Wednesday the 26th. That's August. Yeah. So we're good. July 28th, August 12th. August 26th we have an issue because we've got TPO. So that's not good. So we're on the 25th again.

Well, yeah, that depends on how long the meeting is. But we've got to be out of that meeting because we've got a 3.30. 3.30, keep going in.

Right. Yeah, and I hate that. That's not going to work?

No. No, that day's not going to work. We're about the 25th before the commission meeting again.

Most of the time, we don't have it.

Yeah, I mean, we could go ahead and say Tuesday afternoon at 1, if we don't need it, then we don't need it.

Last year, we didn't need the third day.

So the 25th? Yeah. So Tuesday the 25th at 1? Are we good on schedule for that?

Yeah. I'm talking about with the other, the county and the school and all that? Those are September days. These are just workshops. Yeah, workshops.

Is everybody good with the September dates?

Absolutely. Well, we don't have a choice in September.

No, well, and I mean those are at 5 o'clock.

Right, yeah.

So it sounds like we've got it set. September 17th. So July 28th, August 12th, August 25th, and then September 3rd and September 17th, we're all good?

Yeah. Yes, ma'am.

Yes, anybody in the audience want to comment on the budget, the dates for our budget meetings? Not a whole lot to talk about. Yeah. If nobody wants to comment on that, we will go on to item number.

Are you okay? Are you there?

Are you fine with that? Do we need a table?

Maybe cater? Who wants to number nine? This is the one that will require a little more discussion. So item number nine, certification of maximum ad valorem tax millage rate fiscal year 26-27.

I would love to say Mr. Fry right now. Okay, we'll do education for the public first. We are required to set our maximum millage. This is not the setting of the actual millage rate for the city. This is the most that we could ask for that we could eventually go up to. So we're not setting the millage. We're just setting the maximum millage. However, the governor has made some adjustments as to what we can do. And so me and Adam, we've been looking through the budgets. We're talking about everybody knows the property tax issue is going to be on the ballot. We won't make any assumptions as to how it's going to go, but from staff standpoint, We are taking the position that we do not want to increase ad valorem at all. So we're requesting that the max millage be set at the same as this year at 2.7.

John, it's taken you eight years to do that. Without arguing on what our millage is going to be.

Well, we've got hurricane issues right now. That's not to say that ain't going to change.

It can't change once you approve it.

So, yeah, we're recommending 2.7 now.

We may go lower then.

We did last year. Yeah, I'd like to see it go. I know some people in here want to go higher.

But we can't go higher. We'd have to re-advertise. Yeah, we'd have to re-add, send letters to 10,000, 15,000.

So because of the governor's new rules, the way it works is that 2.68, which is the rollback, for us to go to that would take a majority vote. For us to go above that to what the maximum that the state says we can go to, the maximum we can go to is 2.95. But because we're asking for larger than the rollback rate, then it will require a two-thirds vote for you all to set it at 2.7. Yep. So we're just asking. We're thinking ahead. That's all we're doing. It doesn't, but it has to do with us prepping for the future. And I have to think out at least five years on how our budgets look. So let's just keep it the same. We'll move forward. And that's what we're planning our budget sets at right now. That is at 2.7.

You know, when I saw the agenda, I almost fell off my chair. I said, we don't have to argue.

Right now, Adam is new, and so he doesn't fight a lot right now. He doesn't fight a lot.

Like I've had to fight in the past with some. David had some different ideas. Anybody have anything else to say? I'm good. Everybody OK with 2.7? Yeah, I'm good.

Yeah. Yeah.

Anybody else?

Somebody's not OK.

Anybody in the audience want to comment?

Uh-oh.

Mr. Bostick? Now, he's the one that's telling us.

Tony, I'll take five.

This is not going to be a popular opinion like it wasn't last time. But here, let's look at this thing. You guys have done an awesome job of keeping Callaway on a steady growth pace. You haven't over-billed or over-sold or over-legislated. You've done an excellent job, thanks to your city manager, Mr. Cook, of keeping yourself solvent instead of operating in the red from year to year. But with this property tax thing coming up, let's be real. Everybody out here wants to pay less property taxes or more property taxes. When they take all that money away, they're going to do it because people are greedy. People are self-centered. And I'm included. So I'm not saying it's everybody but me. I'm the same way. I want to save money too. But the reality is... The only way you can fund public services, public works, and keep the city going is with property taxes, because that makes up the majority of your budget right now. And that's the same for every municipality in Bay County. Now, I'm not saying that you should raise it to, what would you say, Mr. Cook? 2.953. I'm not saying raise it to 2.95, but if you leave it at 2.7, When you lose more than you anticipate from the property taxes, then you're going to be in the quagmire of what do we do in order to regain that money. So instead of raising it catastrophically, just raise it 2.71, just a little bit. Because the simple fact is you can pay the piper now or you can pay the piper later. And guess what happens when you pay him later? The same people that's patting you on the back now is going to be the same ones that's going to kick you in the butt then. So you might want to take it while the kicking is easy. Because when it gets rough, everybody's going to say, you know, I didn't vote for that. I didn't think that was right. But I had to do it because there was no other way to do this. Let's be real. Everything costs money in America. This is not some free land. Yeah, we free to say what we want to and feel how we please. But at the end of the day, the bottom line is about them dead presidents. And you guys need money in order to keep us living the kind of life that we live. And we live in a pretty good life over in this side of the county, over in Callaway. I appreciate what you're doing, but is the juice worth the squeeze? Is the juice worth the squeeze? Again, 2.71 is not going to break anybody in Callaway. If that's going to break you or break me, we need to find a new job or something else to do. But we're still going to hold you responsible for how we live anyway. So I think we should be willing to help y'all help us to maintain that lifestyle. With losing this much property tax, there's no way that you're not going to be able to ask for something. You can call it a tax or whatever you want to call it. It's like in the commissary. We don't pay taxes on the commissary, but we pay a price, a surcharge. You can get on base.

Thank you. Thank you.

For the last time, Tony, it was about four years ago, I believe. And what you were looking for then was a 4.2 back then. And we didn't do that. But here again, you see what we've done in the last four years that we've kept it down. And we appreciate your support if we had to go up. But actually, by going up beyond the rollback rate, we're 16,000 better. We're sticking with what we had before. And if we went up to what you were talking about, it'd be approximately another $32,000 on that. So we're comfortable with what we've been doing. Now, next budget year, it's going to be interesting. So this budget year is kind of easy.

Well, we're assuming this is going to pass, and you're talking about 60%. And obviously, we'll address that issue next year.

We have to.

But we'll think about it. We'll think about, between now and next year, what we're going to do. don't run for freedom.

Yeah. And at that time, Tony, we'd definitely be listening to what you may be thinking then. So 4.2.

Anybody else in the audience want to speak on the millage rate?

But the fact is we're leaving it the same because it's a little easier for us to manage going forward. So if we add one point or two points right now, we know what we're losing. But if you add more to it, you're just losing more money. So if we leave it the same and we can roll with it like that, that's what we're going to do. And, you know, again, we're not in the business of trying to, you know, take it to as high as we can. where we should be losing millions of dollars. We're only losing a fraction of that. But you look over at Lynn Haven, Lynn Haven's going to lose a lot more than we are because they're so high. But we're leaving it at 2.7 because it's manageable for us to try to work out next year and stuff like that. We know what we're going to lose, and we can kind of build it like that way. And we feel like we can plug those holes where it needs to be to get us to where we're going. But yes, come back next time when we're talking about it, and we'll raise it.

But this is our new finance director. Cool, cool. Anybody else want to speak? Ms. Custer?

Somebody mentioned how much money we would lose if the amendment passes. I thought you said we'd lose about $850,000 the second year. $600,000. Is it $600,000? The first year, $600,000. The first year, and then like $850,000 or something the second year. So that's about 2% of the budget. Is that right?

Depends on how you look at the budget. OK. Because if you look at our total budget, we're, what, $50-something million.

Right.

Right. Majority of that's grants.

OK.

What, 25 million, maybe? Something like that.

OK, so 4%, maybe? Don't hold me to any of those numbers.

I'm going to go to my head.

Right, I'm just talking, Rob. Yeah. OK, so that doesn't seem as hard as I was imagining a really big cut to the budget. And you're talking about maybe cutting 4% or 5% out. Some of that comes from you just stretch some of the projects longer. And so it takes longer to do them. And so it's less each year. And then it doesn't really hurt. So anyway, OK, I just wanted to clarify that.

And you're exactly right. And I just want to mention something. The ad valorms is a portion of our budget. But the portion we're looking at, it's about 1 third of the total ad valorem. And we have a lot more revenue sources and taxes than just the ad valorem. So I think we'll be fine. I have a lot of confidence in our city manager.

Not involving this budget, this next budget. That's the one I'm talking about. I have a lot of confidence in it.

Anybody else want to speak? Mr. Shaner.

But I still have confidence in it.

Okay, that's a little bit better.

I don't know what you're talking about. I totally agree with it. And that $600,000 is worth it.

Well, I'm going to pitch in love with Kevin Circle. I can... Oh, but there was all kinds of squabbling and squealing and saying the world was going to come to an end back whenever they gave us that $50,000 or $50 deduction, you know, that we now have. I'm sure there's all kinds of tears shed and groaned. I mean, it's just, you know, we need some relief. I mean, this is ridiculous. There's more ways than one to get to where you want to go or need to go. So, I mean, it's just... Yeah, well, it was a problem with the first time, you know, when we got to 50,000 or whatever, you know, back when. I don't remember exactly when it was, and I don't remember all the crying and squealing and all of that, but, you know, we got through it. So why not give us a break? I don't like the tax of being tied to my home. I don't have a problem with what I'm paying, but I get all kind of ticked off when it's tied to my home. I mean, tied to something else, not my home. There should be a way that if you absolutely can't pay your taxes on your home, they should not be able to take it. You should be able to go to court or something, and there should be a relief. I mean, that's just my thoughts on it. But, I mean, you know, you hear all these stories of old ladies losing their home or throwing her out or whatever. You know, that's ridiculous. There ought to be a relief valve there someplace that can absolutely prove that they can't pay it. But, you know, like I say, this $50,000, you know, that we're getting now, well, you know. I'm sure there was plenty of complaining and squealing and what are we going to do and all that back then. So, you know, there's going to be more crying and squealing, so let it be. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Schanger. Anybody else?

Mayor, let me, I want to throw something in here. So me and Adams, we've been going through the budget, and we don't look at the year we're looking ahead. And kind of what me and Adam are looking at is we want to maintain that 2.7. Even if the tax passes, hold it at 2.7. Because what this is going to do and what you're going to see other communities do, and actually I've been asked by two different organizations to come and talk about impacts. And so it's not a position, but it's the way it is. You're going to see communities do what we call the tax shift. If you raise... then your properties are going to end up paying more. That's going to be your renters. Your renters are going to then, they're going to feel it because they're going to raise the rent. I've heard that businesses that have their taxes increased because commercial property is not going to be included in this, then you're going to see price increases. We want to try to maintain a position of we've got our ad valorem, we're going to keep it where it's at, we'll take the hit. We've got money in reserves. We have long-term plans on how we don't want to touch them. I don't want anybody to think that, but we do have ample reserves that if we had a first-year issue, we could go into some of those if we had to. But the goal here is we want to just maintain that. Callaway is going to sit in a position to where we're going to try to maintain our ad valorem where it's at. There will be no tax shifts so that people have – Increases in rent increases in products and services. We want to maintain that and that's kind of what me and Adam are doing So unless the Commission and we can talk about this at budget time because we are trying to look ahead I know we're only talking about next year's budget, but we have to look ahead because we are going to end up over When if it passes over two years, we're going to lose about nine hundred thousand out of our budget And that does take we can survive the hit. And you're right. We're going to do project scheduling. We're looking at our equipment schedules and stuff like that because we do not want to drop our services in any way to the public. And we think we can maintain it at 2.7 and we're going to just try to smile and bite the bullet. And we'll bring you budgets that are going to be balanced and we'll make it work. I don't foresee some of the other cities having Our ad valorem compared to the other cities is half.

Right.

Exactly. So we're not taking a $2 million into our budget.

People don't realize that.

They don't. That's right. But we're going to try to maintain the attitude of let's maintain what we've got. That way we take a position early, and that way we don't have the knee-jerk reactions that we're going to have later on by just saying, oh, well.

I'm in total support of what Eddie said. And I think the $900,000 he's talking about is worst case. Because in the meantime, let's say it is $900,000, but in the meantime, we're increasing our tax base too. So that $900,000 will decrease because of that. Because all the new houses are worth way more than $250,000, and all the homes sold will be over $250,000, so that will increase the tax base a marginal amount.

Okay, to get us back to the trim notice. I think everybody wanted to comment.

Adam, did I speak on anything? You okay with everything I said? Yeah, everything's good. Okay.

So would somebody like to make a motion regarding the trim notice? And the rate, the max rate?

I'd like the motion to approve the certificate of maximum ad valorem tax millage rate for the fiscal 26-27 at 2.7000. Second. Okay, we've got a motion and a second.

Is there anybody We don't need a roll call on this. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed?

OK. Motion carries. You're right, Commissioner Bellator. That wasn't as bad as it has been in the past. OK. No argument, Sister.

I love it.

Let's go on to agenda item number 10, city plus recreational management software. This is the item that was tabled at the last meeting. So city manager, would you like to?

Take this one. I did put out an email requesting information. We did not receive any additional questions. But I'm going to let Tim come up. And we actually want to go through and talk about what the software does. And so Tim is going to give a wonderful PowerPoint presentation for everybody. It's only 73 pages long.

I've been trying to do this very quickly, but would like to just show the PowerPoints.

It's only four.

Kind of the goals that we've set to try to accomplish with this software is to move facility reservations online and reduce manual work, to centralize all the field and facility rentals across all the major assets, to create a fair reservation process for high demand courts, to keep staff control through pending approval workflows, to handle overlapping facility rules automatically, such as pavilion with the football field. There are things that we rent out that we always have to think about what's connected to it that we don't rent the pavilion to someone else that we're renting football field. But we'll have control over that. To improve the payment, deposit, and refund workflows, which is a big one, and I'll get more into that later, replace the Excel-based field scheduling with the shared calendars. It would all be on one calendar on the city website. This would improve reporting communications and ADA accessibility. Right now, sort of the current state of how our Parks and Recreation works, managing the rentals and facility usage across 18 sports fields, two buildings, and 11 pavilions. It's mostly a manual process, with residents having to contact the department for availability, then sending forms to them, or they come in and fill out in person. Court demands is becoming higher with tennis, pickleball, sand volleyball, and basketball courts. And this is something that we don't currently reserve, but we're looking at doing that. Youth sports are handled mainly through our volunteer and recreational leagues. The city's providing the field space and the oversight to make sure that our leagues are run safely and function effectively for the benefits of all participants. The conference center room rentals have many add-ons and discounts from multi-room rentals. And these are all things that would be addressed. We're using multiple calendars right now to manage what's going on across all our different facilities. We have many events that people would like to be able to pre-register online. And that would also be covered under this software. So the current challenges for our recreation department is manual availability checks. Right now, everybody calls in and kind of finds out if something's available. And if they wait a few days, then we have to recheck. And residents cannot see what's available on their own. They have to call. The staff checks calendar forms. are completed, taking up a large portion of time for staff that could be used elsewhere. Staff time is being pulled away from higher value department work. There are many things staff could be working on instead of checking availability. Every phone call takes away from operating and maintaining the parks, the fields, the buildings, and preparing for events. High demand courts need a fair reservation system. Court demand is increasing and without structured reservation process, the city has no easy way to prevent court hogging or reduce disputes or create a fair experience for residents. No-shows and unpaid holds create revenue and availability limits. We have experienced situations where people complete paperwork but do not pay. This creates possible revenue risk and can block another resident or organization that's ready to move forward. The city needs approval, control, not completely automatic booking. Self-service is important, but staff control is equally as important. The city still needs to review who is renting, what the event is, whether it fits the venue, and whether additional fees or requirements may apply. Deposit refund cancellation and damage workflows are very manual right now. Deposits create work both on the front and back end. Staff must inspect, calculate deductions, explain deductions, and then coordinate with finance and do a direct pay for the customer. And then, of course, managing the customer expectations around refund timing. Currently, we have to do a check request, and it could take two to three weeks for someone to get their deposit back with the online system. It would be automatic within the day after they have their event. If everything's cleared, it would be credited back to them. Report. Reporting, communication, and accessibility is currently kind of fragmented. Department has operational data, but it's not centralized in a way that makes reporting, outreach, surveys, grant support, and leadership visibly easy. kind of the current situation as on Callaway Recreation Department. If nothing changes, staff will continue spending time on low-value administrative work. Interruptions will remain a part of the daily workflow. Scheduling will remain somewhat fragmented. Double-broking or operational conflicts remain more likely. On-court frustrations could increase, and residents continue having to contact staff before they can act. With the modern system we're looking at, we would move the rental experience online while keeping staff control. reduce phone calls and walk-ins, and repetitive availability questions. It would centralize all major rental assets into one system, create a fair and enforceable court reservation process, improve payment deposits and cancellations, and fund transparencies. It would support accessibility needs while improving resident communication and strengthening report for finance, leadership, and grants. A couple of the things there, you know, we're trying to solve a problem with our courts. Tennis, pickleball, and basketball, we get a lot of use there at certain hours. It's not all the time, but it's in the evenings and on the weekends. And there's people that show up quite regularly, and the courts are taking. So we want to be able to set up time limits, and we would be able to do that with this system. They could do that online. Another thing is all of our GL codes for the budget would be attached to this. So we wouldn't be manually bringing paperwork to City Hall with payments. Everything would automatically go right into the system. And of course, some people aren't good with the online stuff. And we get that. And we'll still be able to help those customers in the office. But this would kind of, one of the things, especially on the buildings and the pavilions, it would be like as if you were going to rent a hotel room. When you go online and see it's available, you can immediately go ahead and get it reserved. And we'd get notified. It would simplify the process quite a bit. That's kind of what we're trying to look at working a little smarter and not harder, and make it not only easier on staff, but easier on the users of all our facilities. Any other questions I can answer?

It would seem like this might even increase rentals, just because it would be so much easier for people to do it.

Other cities in the area that are currently using systems?

Yeah, and right now, Panama City uses this same program. Panama City Beach uses the same program. Lynn Haven has a program. It's not this program. Community Pass is the one that they're using. So we don't have a program. I mean, we can do what we do. It's working. I don't feel like it's the best. We were looking for a solution for our courts and started realizing there's solutions for a lot of the other things.

Is the Lynn Haven one compatible with ours? Can we use it? Is that software compatible?

Community Pass, well, it's a separate, whereas this is part of Civic Plus, so it's compatible with our current website system.

I know ours is, but the Lynn Haven one, we could use it separately?

Possibly, but it wouldn't be like 100% compatible like this is.

What's the cost of the Lynn Haven?

They're all in the same ballpark areas, around $10,000, $7,000 to $10,000. For the first year? To get it set up.

And then $7,500 for the second year, plus a 5% increase from that point on?

Right, that's what the price is for this.

I don't like that 5% increase every year.

Yeah, and that's what's attached to our current website. I'm not sure that they have done that full 5%.

Tim, a couple of questions. You said that the city will still have control over it, so if a citizen wanted to reserve something, they're not fully reserved? It's like a soft reserve until you've had time to review it?

Right, until, you know, and we would get an alert immediately, and, you know, between, there's three of us that kind of handle those things that, you know, we would... be able to approve it or if we needed to contact them and ask more questions. We have some events that want to come to the conference center that wouldn't necessarily be appropriate. We kind of want to make sure we know exactly what they're booking it for and what kind of event. And if there's going to be alcohol, we need to make sure we can line up security and all the different things like that.

And then you mentioned the courts and things like that. So I want to go play pickleball with my son. I got to reserve something or can I show up early?

And that's one thing is all of our recreational facilities are basically first come, first serve. But if you want to be sure that you're going to have a pavilion, say for a birthday party on Saturday, you can reserve it. And that way we go out after it's reserved and we put a sign out that would... that this person with their name has the pavilion reserved. But it would be sort of the same thing with the pickleball or tennis or basketball. And it would be that also you would get an email and there would be an app where they could show that, hey, we have it reserved. Yeah, but that's the only way you could guarantee. And with the reservations, there'd be like a one hour limit for pickleball and one hour limit for basketball, unless it's some kind of tournament or something. And then we'd work on that.

Mayor, I have about 10 or 12 items on this subject. Tim, explain to me when you say staff, who is staff? Who is staff that's doing this? You're talking about your assistant?

Okay, the deals with the rentals and that kind of stuff is either my staff assistant or Caleb, our athletic coordinator.

Okay, and she was hired for that, right?

Yes.

Yeah, okay. And two is that last All of a sudden, he's maintaining all that. Why do we have to have software to manage that?

It's a tool to use. It's not taking place of a person. It's kind of like the robot that we bought. I understand. We're going to do away with the sports director? No. That's not his main focus. His main focus is helping all of our recreational leagues be successful.

But this software... In reality, first, you've got a long-term liability. You're going to have a 5% increase every year. And if they advertise it on there, it's on the contract, they can cite our sheriff department. He tells us ahead of time every year we're going to have an increase. Two is our facilities have always been free to all of our citizens. It's always first come, first served. Who's going to enforce that? I made a reservation. a play, whatever, and somebody is there, who's going to enforce it? We're going to call the Sheriff's Department.

Well, we typically do with park rangers. And you're going to run people off? Well, if someone has a reservation, yes.

Do the same thing with pavilions.

Yeah, same thing with all the pavilions. Well, pavilions are not charged for right now, and you just put a sign out.

People know that's there.

We do charge for pavilions.

Yeah, we charge for a pavilion. For a reservation. That's just because they're going to have a group that's going to show up. They want to make sure they have their spot. So yes, we do rent pavilions.

But to go to a system where you're going to have a policing of the facilities, I don't see how you're going to... You're going to have staff to be the police. Is that what you're saying?

We have to now.

That's what we do now, right?

Yeah.

We're not doing that now in Pickleball and all those others. They just show up and play.

And we're looking for a solution for that because they get phone calls regularly from people that do use the clubs.

Well, in the 10 years I've been on commission, I haven't had a complaint one. I don't know about the rest of the commissioners, but I haven't had a complaint one on it.

Can we find out how much the Landhaven software is?

Before we... Well, we've got to do something with this because it's already been tabled once.

Well, it can be pulled until we find out what... Yeah, I honestly don't think it would make sense with our current website. You know, we're looking for something that's going to function well with our current website and with the financial side of it. All the GL codes are already attached. I kind of think it makes sense, but...

We're already happy with the Civic Plus. This is just an addition to this. It's a module.

It's just an additional module to our current website.

Actually, are we going to have an update coming to Civic Plus? Or are we having a budget for that, the ADA stuff?

I got it requested in the budget.

And the ADA thing is another thing that this addresses. And every form, every calendar will have translation of multiple languages. It will have the Google Translate attached to it. Right now we're getting a lot more Hispanic reservations than we ever have. I struggle when I get on the phone with some of them. And when we have a website that they can go to and it'll automatically translate. Right now our staff assistant currently is bilingual and it's been a big help. And she gets some of them from utility billing. And I know when they get ready to renew the one for the main website that I'm sure they'll be looking at. I think it's in 2028. There's some ADA things that have to be met by 2028 anyway. So we're kind of a little bit ahead if we go forward with this.

Sounds like this will help a multitude of situations.

I think it would. I really wouldn't bring it if I didn't think it was going to really help the city in the long run.

So we're only obligated the first year, right?

We're only obligated for two years on this.

Are we obligated for two? Yeah. Signed up a two-year contract. Can we make it one so we can have a trial period?

The first, yeah. spend a couple months getting everything completely set up with them. They'll do training and we'll be sending them all our forms and they'll be making all the work and doing all the, you know, a lot of this has to be created. They do this statewide. They have a lot of, well, countrywide basically. Civic Plus is one of the largest. Civic Plus. Flipside Provider Shrew. A huge percentage of the cities.

With us voting on the software, we're not setting fees for any of the stuff. Of course you are. Right now, we're setting this is how much we're going to charge for each thing.

I don't think we are. We currently have fee schedules for rentals and stuff like that. The only thing I don't think we have the fee schedules for would be if we look.

Yeah, we would have to come back with an amended fee schedule.

Yeah, we would have to come back with an amended fee schedule.

Yeah, I don't know if we want a fee schedule for those courts. Right, but that's a future issue.

That's right.

Yeah, that'd be a MSD schedule that we look at every year.

And kind of the way we were looking at it, if we did pickleball, it would be at a very minimal, just enough that people weren't reserving it and not necessarily going to use it. I've been here long enough to when I first started here, they actually weren't charging residents for the community center. And we did have certain ones that reserved dates and didn't show up. And yeah, that was one of the things.

If the pickleball courts and the basketball courts are an issue, we don't have to put them on there.

You know, I can understand the community center, and I can understand up here, you know.

Well, we already are the police for the pavilions. Pavilions and also the volleyball court for special events and stuff.

But that can also, you know, you're basically talking about the basketball and tennis slash pickleball courts. That's, you know, I mean, if we choose not to even include those in the rental, in this reservation-style process, the overall impact of being able to monitor and take care of all of our rentals in one place and all the pavilions and everything is still going to be way outweigh just two cores. So, I mean, that's something that we can discuss at a later date.

The only place where we have issues with pavilions up at Gold Park, correct? We're not having issues at Veterans Park. As far as? Pavilions.

Yeah, we've read that out.

I know, but we're not having issues. Well, what kind of issues? As far as conflicts.

I don't think we're really having conflicts too much as far as. running people out and so on. No.

And typically when we put a sign out, I mean, we really haven't had a problem. There's been times that someone has had to say, hey, I have this reserved. But we haven't had where they refuse to leave. We've not had that problem. And that's what any of this, they would be able to pull out their phone and show they have the reservation.

Anybody else have any questions for Tim?

Well, you said you had about 15 questions. I did.

I'm losing my time. Obviously, you all agree with it. I don't support it for simple fact that we hired staff to do some of this stuff. In my mind, we're worried about up here and down at Gold Park. So now we're going to have a long-term liability on software people we hired to manage to start off with and when he says staff we're talking about a person that he hired to do that okay and y'all are losing that track you know it's that what we did with the last years or so when he comes in front of us said well we need this this and that and two is that as you said last meeting it's not in the budget yeah right so every every year I look at it as what we're trying to do is add a liability to the city forever. So if we start talking about cutting in the out years, we're stuck with this for two years.

And what would you cut? One of the things I'm looking at on this, and as you went through your presentation, it's improving our efficiency in managing Yes. Leisure services, basically. Everything we have in leisure services. I would like some clarification. First of all, on this particular Civic Plus, and I'm using round numbers right now, about 18,000 is what we have annually involved with Civic Plus. And here it's $17,942. Is that correct, Ashley? Yes. Yes. That's the total.

That's the total for our website right now that we pay.

Right. And that's why I count with the 18. I'm rounding off numbers rather than all that. So for the first year of adding this, we're going to be about $28,000 involved with it. No. For all of Civic Plus. For all of Civic Plus.

We're going to pay the $18,000 period. Right. If we want to see the website.

So I'm just getting a number. So we add this to it. That comes up to $28,000. Then in the second year, it's going to be $24,000 because it drops down in the second year. But then by contract after the second year, We can go up 5% a year, and that's what y'all were talking about on that.

That would bring it up to about $8,000 a third year.

Right. Now, going into the budget, does this come under contractor services in the budget? Civic Plus?

It would be other contractual services. And one thing this year, we wouldn't necessarily be asking for more money in the budget. We do have funds available in salaries. We've had vacancies.

Different line items. That's correct. We're having to move money again. Yeah.

Well, what I was looking at under contractor services, we're budgeted now for $52,000 in contractor services. So this comes out of that contractor services budget.

They want it to come out of payroll. They're going to come in front of us after this and say we want to move money from this line item to that line item.

No, we don't do that. We move money interdepartmentally all the time.

I know, but it's not going to come out of contract services.

We're not increasing this year's budget. We will find it in other line items and we'll move over to cover it.

That's what I'm saying. We're still going to move money from one line item to another.

Have you got other contractual services in your line item? Yes. Does it say it in there? What's that? But the website's not in your budget, is it? No, it's not. No, it's in...

I'd have to check. It's either mine or general government.

Okay, it's probably under general government. It's in general government? It's in general government. Okay. But we will put this into Tim's budget. Right.

It'll go into his budget. You'll be putting the $10,000 and then the $7,500... Second year, that goes into your budget? Correct. The rest of it, the $18,000 for Civic Plus?

Is that right, or is it going to fall under other contractual services for general government period?

Okay, for this one, okay. So the $18,000 currently for Civic Plus is not in your budget to begin with? No, that's correct. Okay, all right. See, I was unclear about that.

Did you pull the budget? What do we get on rentals per year?

I've got that figure. It's $74,000, almost $75,000.

We're currently on our rentals at $71,464 for this year.

Is that for all rentals?

And that doesn't include everything that falls under the miscellaneous, and then we have about another $60,000 there. We're around $130,000.

We've got 42 so far this year. OK. I'm good. I'm actually good with doing this. Because I look at the efficiency that's involved. We've got the same number of people. We're not losing any people. We've got the same number of people, but we're making those people more efficient. and the people that are using our systems, giving them an opportunity to personally be more efficient.

And currently the staff assistant helps a whole lot with the rentals on this building. And we rent a lot of tablecloths, chair covers, things like that. And so a lot of times she's over here at this building ironing tablecloths and chair covers and putting them on and trying to deal with phone calls. people want to know about dates that are available and things like that. So it would just make it more efficient where there wouldn't be as many interruptions. We'll always have phone calls and people that just show up, and we're fine with that. We're glad to help people, but we're also trying to accomplish a lot of other things all the time.

Anybody else up here? Anybody in the audience want to comment on this?

My first question is, there's going to be a merchant fee for payment online. Who's going to get that merchant fee? Two, You know, you're pitting citizens against each other, and that's a terrible attitude to take. Somebody's playing basketball or tennis or pickleball, whatever. A citizen goes up there and shows their phone, oh, I got a reservation. Now you've got to fight. Now you've got citizens saying, well, sorry, we were here. We've been here. You're pitting people against each other. Some people are going to be able to go online and reserve this. Some people don't want to do that. They want to call. And he said they're still going to be able to take the calls. So now you're doing two things but paying more. You're doing the same thing plus extra, paying more. Now you're saying you're going to use vacant salaries to pay for this. How many times have I been up here and said, we want trees? How many times do you hear that? We want a tree giveaway. And what's the answer? We never have any money for that. Well, got vacant salaries for this. And now we hear, oh, well, we want to do this. We want to potentially charge people to use the courts so somebody can iron freaking tablecloths. I mean, are you listening to yourselves? Are you listening to what's even happening here? This is insane. This is really insane.

Anybody else want to comment? Yes, ma'am.

Teresa Langston, 6031 Wing Street. I'm trying not to duplicate because I know you all have some of the questions I have. My thing is about the vacant positions. What vacant positions are we going to be using? Why are they vacant? Why are we not filling them? Because it seems like more than once, we wanted to do something, I think the scoreboards or something. And oh, we've got vacant positions. We can just go ahead and use that fee for. So my question is, is these vacant positions that we're using the money for, for the setup fee for the first year? Are these empty positions going to appear in the budget next year for more vacant positions just to hang out until we need something? Because, I mean, I find it highly suspect that the budget for salaries and stuff, but we don't hire people. We just talk about how overwhelmed the workers are because they've got so much to handle, yet we have vacant positions and we're not hiring anybody. And like Commissioner Pelletier said, we hired people for these positions to handle this stuff. And now, like it was expressed, we hear ironing tablecloths and other things when really we were supposed to hire them to be the assistant to handle the reservations and stuff like that. And unless somebody is physically on site, you're not going to stop somebody hogging the courts. I mean, what? Is somebody going to be there? We're going to call the number, and somebody from the city is going to run up there and settle the dispute? But then what are we paying in salary for people to do that after hours or during different times, policing the courts, per se, for this? And should we be slowing our spending down, knowing what is coming around, or not even sure what is coming up the pipeline as far as the property tax thing, instead of just dialing out money like, We constantly do meeting after meeting after meeting for, oh, we're in their budget on this, or, oh, we misquoted that, or, oh, my God, we got this extra expense. And we're just doling out extra money constantly. And so I think we should be here. But I would like to know how many positions we are using for this. And if they're going to appear in the budget for salaries next year, since we've been getting ready to have our budget meeting for next year.

Would you like to address that?

That's a bunch. All right, I've already said the pickleball courts, which everybody is all upset about pickleball and tennis. I've already told you, those can be removed if you don't want to get into that. We don't have to deal with those. That is very minor. It's just staff discussion that we feel like we see that there can be, that we're already starting to see conflicts of people wanting to use multiple courts, and they're there for long periods of time, and other people don't. So if we don't want to put the courts in there, those can be removed. That's very simple. Now, as for vacant positions, we have huge turnovers in these lower level positions. The $17 an hour positions, Tim, I just threw that out. I don't even know what starting is. But we have turnover. And so when somebody quits, we start advertising. We fill these positions. But when you have lots of turnover during the year, and how many staff members have you got? I just don't even get into that. But no one's asking for additional positions. But every time you have a turnover in any position, that's going to create a deficit in that budget. Because that might be three weeks before we get it advertised, get somebody in, do interviews, bring background checks, and then hire them, and then they start the following week. So you may have a 30-day lag in there from one position. Do that across multiple positions in a year. There's going to be a surplus in that budget. No one's asking for new positions. We're asking to be more efficient. Tim just said in this year's budget, he's had a lot of deficiencies. We've had lots of turnover. Some people don't even give us notice. They just quit and walk off the job. And then we hadn't even prepared. We haven't even advertised. So Tim just said in this year's budget, there is extra that he's not going to use in his budget. And that's how we could fund it this year and not have to ask for anything additional. And you're not going to see some major increase in the city's expenses next year over, in my opinion, a software issue that we're just trying to be more efficient with. and we're talking about efficiency from the public's point of view that they can go on and do a lot of these things that's tying up somebody's time they do more than iron they do a multitude of things in fact Tim's assistant like he said she does a lot of correspondence with utility billing when they come across somebody and they have a translation issue they get her on the phone because she is our only bilingual person I think that we have in the city that we utilize for this so When it comes down to the court thing, if the commission doesn't want to put the basketball and the pickleball court in there, that's fine. We can just let it be the way it is now and be a free-for-all. And if at some point people do start complaining to the commissioners, hey, we need to look at something, we can just add those in. It's just a matter of adding a couple of locations in. So that's just originally right now we're starting to see these increases. We're trying to prep and be ahead of them. But this is just an efficiency issue for us because, yeah, we don't have a lot of extra people sitting in our budget that does nothing. We are stretched across the board. We try to maximize the amount of stuff that we can get out of everybody. And does Tim need an assistant? I'm right. He does. I mean, he needs somebody to help answer phone calls and do everything. She does more than just this. And it's like Tim said, who handles it now? Her. him and Caleb, depending on who's next to the phone and who can get it and, you know. next year. We've tried to run as lean as we can across the board with personnel. And we have, what, 90 people in our city? 90 employees across multiple... And that may include commission. Yeah, and that includes the commission, yeah. So it's, you know, it would be in next year's budget, but no, it's not a deficit in salaries. I mean, every department has, well, not every, Water departments got a deficit in their salaries budget because we've had turnover. Sewer has the same thing. Solid waste, we went for a long time advertising a position that we could not fill. They were down two people for multiple months. They have a deficit in their salaries. But any time we do something like this, We come before y'all. Y'all have to approve it. And then we'll figure out where to put it in the budget and where to take it out of. Because we're not asking for more money. We'll just redistribute if we have a deficiency somewhere or if we're under budget. Our goal is always to be under budget. We've never planned to be over budget. We haven't come back to y'all. In the nine years that I've been here, I've not came to y'all and said, hey, we're over budget. We need more money. We need to take out of reserves. No, our goal is always zero budget. We do the best that we can. And then at the end of the year, and all during the year, I stay on these guys all the time saying, hey, bid these out. You can do better than that. We got to do better. We got to do better. And they always had performed and came in and were always under budget. And guess what? You don't budget for reserves. Why are we at 30% reserves? It's because these guys are cutting their budgets every year the best places they can. And that money rolls over into our reserves. And so Tim is asking for just something to be a little bit more efficient. And we haven't went through Tim's budget yet, so I can't see what kind of an increase we have. if there is going to be any, because we are thinking ahead. We are looking at next year's budget. Even though it's not going to be affected by the property tax, in November we're going to know. And I hate to say it, I'm planning worst case scenario that it's going to pass. I know a lot of people are going, oh, it's 60%. You better plan for it. And you've already seen the other cities. They're already knee-jerking, and we're trying to take a stance up here saying we're staying 2.7. I don't want the city to go, oh, my God, we're bankrupt. No. It's going to hurt? Yes. We'll make it work. And we can make it work with his $7,000 software. Sorry. Didn't mean to get too passionate.

Anybody else want to?

Me.

Come on, Tony. What you got to say? Can I say something real quick?

OK, go ahead. You said go ahead.

The efficiencies. The part I don't like is we're paying $10,000 for software this year, and we haven't purchased it. And then next year, we're paying $7,500 for the same software. We still haven't purchased it. And we still haven't purchased it. And year after, it's almost $8,000 for this, and we still haven't purchased it. guy since I was 19. My biggest complaint with these software companies is that they used to sell you the software, but now they only rent it to you. And if you want to renew the software, then OK. We should pay a fee. But what if we are satisfied with the way it is? So I disagree with us doing a continual basis on this. So I'm with Bob.

Well, you've stated your own argument on that. That's the way software works these days, whether it be Microsoft Windows or any of that.

I'm telling you that it's not right to do it that way. They operate our whole website. for 50% more for something that doesn't do even close to what the website does. And they actually manage the website. They're not going to manage crap on this software. What they're doing with it, they're going to turn it over to our people. They have to manage it. They have to train our people to do their work. So I disagree. Well, we're looking at two years.

for the city of Springbrook. We used to own the software. And then Springbrook quit supporting it. Now it's a semi-cloud-based. When we log into Springbrook, it actually downloads into our system and it opens a window. That's going away within the next 18 months. And we're going to another version of this called Cirrus. This isn't our choice. It's already there. It's not going to be an increase or anything. But it will be completely cloud-based. There will be more stuff having to be done on Tim's system than will have to be done with our website. Our website, we just, that's, I mean, what do you do on that, on our website? What do you have to do daily?

They manage the website.

Well, they don't change anything on the website. If you add something to the website, that's my department. If we put notices out, that's me.

But they manage the software and they make it work properly. And then if you have a problem, you tell them and they adjust it. But it's the software.

I mean, this is just a module added on to it.