City Commission - workshop

is on the City of Deltona website under Finance, under Budget Documents, Fiscal Year 26-27 documents. So everything under Bridge Mayor is located there.

Thank you. Before we get started, just for the commission, we will pause after... The presentations that you do, we'll go through the whole overview on incision one and then when we get to two, we'll start pausing there for questions. So if everyone can just write down your questions and hold off on pushing the button when we get to that corner or to that part, I'll ask if anybody has questions and we'll continue that way. Mr. McKinney.

Yes, sir. So with that, I would first like to thank my staff, the finance budget team, the deputy finance director, and all of the financial business analysts that are behind us. I do appreciate everything that they've done, as well as all the departments, directors, and managers that have helped to put this together, along with the city manager.

Point of order, just for the record, Commissioner Caldwell's here.

Hello, sir. Okay, so you know how we did May 18th a little bit different? So I'm doing this a little bit different. As y'all are aware, finance staff, we kind of like to do everything in fund order. This year we've kind of done things by topic. So we've put the book together more so by topic and the PowerPoint is in that order as well. So today we're gonna go over the high level overview. Previously we spoke about capital, CIP, and special assessments at our workshops in May and June. This month we're speaking specifically on all the operational overview of all the major funds as well as all sub funds. We're gonna go over the fund review and operational budgets and then we're gonna talk about the next steps of what we have to do in the month of July, August, and September. The fiscal year 27 budget overview, the total budget as presented this evening request is $208,035,947. The general fund is $79,845,212. I'm happy to announce that your staff has put together a budget at the rollback rate as provided by the Volusia County Property Appraiser at 6.4948. Even at rollback mayor and commission, we're still able to fund $20,406,149 in capital improvements, $8,210,216 in fleet and equipment capital outlay. And as of 10-1-25, going into the current fiscal year, we still have an outstanding debt of $137,616,876. Every one of these items will be talked more in detail throughout the presentation. The adoption of the annual budget. We've gone through this every presentation that I've made, Mayor. I'm just gonna hit the final bullet point on this. The budget process is fluid right up until the final hearing on Monday, September 22nd. You have the opportunity to provide to the city manager and myself any changes that can be made right up to the final adoption as I stated at 6.30 on September 22nd. Budget parameters, the city manager met with all staff early March, March 5th to be exact. We were told at that time all operating budget requests are to be held at a 2% maximum increase. This was based on the February CPI index of 1.99% over the 12 month prior period. If you go and you look at the most recent data that was released on June 10th related to the May CPI, it was 3.9%. We did not waiver from the 2% max, Mayor. We also projected back in February that we would see a 5% increase in taxable value increase. That was almost 2% less than the average that we've had over the last 10 years. I will say that I'm very, as I've said before, I'm a very conservative individual. I'm glad I did because it actually came in at 3.93%, the lowest rate of increase that the city's seen in 13 years now. Putting this together, the fire CBA, we budgeted or plan to budget 5% increase. That's based on we're always one year behind on the fire CBA from that of the general employees. General employees for the current fiscal year received 5%, so that's why they are slated for the 5% for the upcoming fiscal year. And based on Volusia County and others around Flagler County and Seminole County, looking at the surveys that have been completed, the average increase across the board is 4%. So that is what we have budgeted as part of this request. In February, we were told to expect a 5% increase in property casualty insurance. We met with our broker last week and both property and casualty and health and benefits, we were told to look at a 10%. If you recall last year, we came in as I recall, just over under 3% on property casualty, and we came in flat for health benefits. So again, as we talked to some of y'all yesterday, because we made plan changes, et cetera, and we went out to our RFP against all carriers, we were able to bring that in last year. We're still taking it out and actually we're expanding it to other property and casualty carriers this year. that hopefully we can come in much lower than the 10%. But again, I don't wanna come back to the commission in October asking for fund balance. The mantra going into that workshop, revenue growth does not eliminate the need for discipline planning. Last year, we were zero-based, and as we go through this, you will see not only did your staff hit the target of planning, we actually in most cases reduced, hence why we were able to come in at a rollback millage rate. Part of the things that we did is we looked at all positions. The city manager's office met with us and said any position that's been open more than six months, why do you still need it? Every one of these positions that is before you has been open for six or more months. There are other positions that were opened, as discussed yesterday, that we've also planned to zero budget, not eliminating those positions, but in order to maintain the millage rate and the fees, whether it's solid waste, stormwater, water, sewer, we are planning to hold positions open for periods of six to 12 months to be able to fund other necessary items to maintain low millage rate and rates of service. This past 12 months, y'all provided to me during last year's budget workshop, y'all directed me to go out and do several studies. So as previously stated, I'm happy to state we completed over the last few months the updated water sewer rate study. This going into next fiscal year is year two of five on those rates. We just completed and brought to you June 22nd, the impact fee study, and that will be a two-year phase-in. The building in general fee study, which was also completed by Raffatilis, that was reviewed and confirmed January of this year, and we presented to you last commission meeting as well, the fire assessment, and we will talk about that in further slides, but that's a five-year study, if implemented. A couple of months ago, House Bill 1329 went into effect. We have six bullet points within House Bill 1329. I'm happy to announce that we were already compliant with pretty much all components of items two through six. So we were already as transparent as could be regarding the majority of the budget document and the budget process. This bill goes into effect January 1st of 2027. As stated, we're already compliant with it, but as part of this workshop this evening, you will see that I've already complied with the help of all the directors and managers, the 10% budget reduction. That is in the packet as presented to you on how we would get there. The statute specifically relays it to general fund. We didn't stop there. We did it the entire city wide. Unless it's a specialty fund such as SHIP or CDBG, which is an outside funding source, not part of a 10% reduction. I've already gone through what our overall budget is. We're gonna go through this in detail. I won't go through this anymore, but there is your summary by fund type for both sources and uses. Now that we've had time to go through the information as provided by the Volusia County Property Assessor's Office, not by your Deltona staff, we can only go through what were presented by other constitutional officers. We broke this down into, and this is just like previous years, We broke it down into the parcels that currently do not pay taxes, the individuals that pay when you look at the $50,000 exemptions, the 50 to 122,000, 122 to 193,000, the 194 to half a million, and the over half a million. As you can see, we have very few homes or other properties that exceed half a million dollars within a city of just under $100,000. So when we look at this, we have currently 8.99% of all parcels within the city pay no taxes, and we have 61.36% of our residential parcels fall below the average of $172,250. Again, as your finance team, we do not know who has what exemptions and there are a plethora of exemptions that are applicable to certain properties. I wanted to go through the historical millage rate. I did something a little different this year. Not only did I put the max millage for fiscal year 27, I wanted to also put what the staff recommended millage rate is, which is the rollback of 6.4948. But I think it's important to note that as taxable values have increased, the city has steadily decreased the millage rate every year over the last six years. I also wanted to take a look at the average taxable value and property taxes per household. So if we look at the average taxable value of 172,000 here within the city of Deltona, your estimated tax bill for next year, ad valorem only, not including assessments, is $793.99. So that is less than a $10 increase from last year to this year proposed. I think it's important to note that not only has Deltona heeded the increase in property tax values, but all taxing authorities within Volusia County and the other taxing authorities applicable to Volusia County, such as the St. Johns Water Management District, they have all steadily decreased their millage rates over the last 10 years. Your citywide debt, as I stated previously, we have outstanding debt of $137,616,876. I wanted to go a little step further this year.

Thank you.

And we broke it down into the four categories. If we look at stormwater of our applicable stormwater parcels within the city, each parcel currently has outstanding $33.63. Your water wastewater utility, we have just under $300,000 in outstanding debt per account. The center debt, which is per capita, all of Deltona, is $60.08. And transportation, which is also per capita, is 215,000, I'm sorry, $215.81. As a whole, Deltona has very minimal debt for the size population. Fund balance, we only look at the operating funds. We obviously have access to all of that information. It's available in the ACFER, but we look at the operating funds. These numbers as provided to you as an estimate as of September 30th of this year, and this does not include restricted or committed funds. The general fund has $26,449,471 available. The building fund has none. Water wastewater has $41,556,041. Solid waste, $459,674. And stormwater has $7,300,563. And when we look at restricted or committed, that would also include for those operating funds, the GASB GFOA recommended 17% for a reserve. Now we're going into our budget summaries. So we're starting on tab two.

After the second, after tab two, we're gonna start questions.

So we broke this down, Mayor, to all the major categories within the general fund. We have city commissions, city managers, support services, public safety, public works, parks and recreation, general government. The one thing that I wanna highlight here is if we look at general fund alone, we have a 5.84% increase in personnel costs. I stated previously, 4% for general, 5% for fire, and 10% for the health and benefit cost. Overall, the average operating increase was 2.32%, and the total expenditures, operating and salary and benefits, 3.98%. So as we go through this, if a department hit that 4%, we were very ecstatic in the finance department. We'll go through and hit a couple of items that if they exceeded that 4%, we have the ability to explain why if there's any questions. City Commission Summary. So why this is here, Mayor, and this is again, as I stated last year, as the Commission body, this is your budget. So this is the one time within the process that if there's any questions related to your City Commission budget and would like any changes, then we just need your input so that we can work on that over the next two weeks as we put together the proposed budget book that will be presented to you on August 12th So within this, over the last couple of commission budget processes, we were directed last year to set aside money for AHAC. So this year's budget includes $356,665 for that, a debt reduction of the same amount. We went through the formula that the commission approved by consensus last year and followed the same methodology. and stated we have a balanced budget at rollback, but with that says we still have $135,522 that can be obligated for other uses during this process. Whether you want more money towards stormwater projects, transportation, reduction in millage, whatever that case might be, I would need direction from the commission on how to use that money. When we go through this, you can see also we budgeted $507,000 in reductions. That was the forensic audit. That was the William S. Harvey scholarship program as well. So if there's any other detail related to this, we can provide it, but those were the same numbers that we used for the 10% reduction exercise. All departments utilize the adopted budget of 2526 when putting together that 10% reduction. Are there any questions specifically to the city commission budget, Mayor?

We're gonna wait till we're done with the whole tab and then we'll do all the questions.

The next thing that we will go through, if you might recall at the May meeting for the mid-year budget, y'all authorized $50,000 to be put into the mid-year budget for additional audit scope of services related to your ordinance 2-183.1 for additional scope of services. So my ask this evening by consensus, Mayor, is we would like to spend up to $10,000 to provide capital asset policy review and recommendations compliant with the new GASB statement 104. The other thing that we would like consensus on this evening, Mayor, is a review of the fund balance policy review and recommendations. We have a very, as stated previously in other budget workshops and commission meetings, we have a very convoluted fund balance that has been rewritten and rewritten On top of each other, we would like the assistance of Purvis Gray to go in and help rewrite all of those and bring that back with the benchmark of best practices of other clients that they serve. As stated, there's currently $50,000 available and our ask this evening is $17,500. I can bring that back for question under questions. City Manager Division is the City Manager Economic Development and Communications. Their overall budget increases by 3.38%. Support Services Summary, which is City Clerk, Finance, Accounting, Purchasing, City Attorney, Planning and Development, Human Resources, City Facilities slash Infrastructure and Community Events came in at 5.34%. Are there any questions? No, okay. Public safety, thank you. Sorry, Mayor, you know that's a habit. Public safety summary is our contracted law enforcement services, fire services, and code compliance. We have very little say when it comes to the law enforcement budget of the Sheriff's Office, as that is a, as a constitutional officer, they submit that to the county by June 1st, and it's certified by the state of Florida, so we have very little leeway. If there's anything that we would like to change in future years, now that we know all this information, then we would need to talk about that in the January timeframe of 2027 so that we can get with the Sheriff's Department so that we can make those changes if there was any required. Fire services, I wanna just note as we have this, the fire administration and operations are shown in both general fund and the fire assessment fund until final adoption of a fire assessment fee. The requested budget includes $14,502,903 in allowable expenditures applicable to a fire assessment fee. Public works summary is administration, traffic operations, engineering, and field operations. I applaud Glen and Phyllis for their 2.51% reduction in their operating budgets. Parks and Rec summary, that includes administration, parks operations, recreation programs, and the center, and previously also included park events, and as part of the next year budget, we've renamed it to be park events, has been renamed to community events, and it's part of support services, as it's specifically under the city manager and the deputy city manager's purview. General government summary, these are the items that are non-department specific, property casualty insurance, other supplies and expenditures, which would be transfers to other funds for capital projects, debt service, and capital outlay. These are items that also under insurance claims, as I stated to you on a previous slide, we budgeted 5% originally and we had to budget for 10% for increases in health insurance that is in here under contingencies. Special revenue funds, these are all the funds that are not a major operating, such as impact fees, grant funds, assessments, CRA, et cetera. They total, the request for next year, $35,216,295. And the new fund for this year would be the fire assessments, Fund 160. Enterprise funds, that's your water, wastewater department, solid waste, storm water. Overall, they have a decrease in their overall budgets from prior year of just over 40%. That's related to the CIP projects. Their request for next year is far less. They need to get caught up and complete the current projects that are in the pipeline. Overall, their average operating increased 6.4%. Their total expenditures are 4.35% increase. Every one of these funds, water, wastewater, stormwater, and solid waste, all fall under a guide of a rate study that the commission has already adopted in previous commission meetings, and they all three follow that guide. Water, wastewater summary. Overall, not including CIP, their operating expenditures decreased 4.43%. Solid waste, we have an overall increase of 12.97%. That's related to our contracts with both WastePro and Volusia County who provides all of our tipping and disposal costs. Stormwater utility overall, they have an increase of 1.3%. So an increase of $119,760 over the prior year. Question came up in a previous meeting, where's the fund balance related to stormwater? As we previously have stated, the CIP is scheduled over a few years, so Glen and Phyllis have put together that program that's part of the five-year CIP, and all of those, all fund balance, less the GASB 17% reserve, is slated to be completely spent by fiscal year 28. Then you have your internal service funds. These are all operations that act like independent businesses for city departments only. That's fleet, information technology, employee healthcare, and risk management, which is our property and casualty. That's $17,379,434. All of that money is already in another fund. So as a reminder, these departments are double counted.

Is there any questions from the commission at this time? Commissioner Howington, we'll start with you.

Thank you, Mayor. On page 12, are you excluding the 9% of properties that do not pay property taxes?

Page 12 on the average taxable value? Yes. Yes, ma'am. That $172,000, ma'am, that's average of all parcels within the city.

So it's all parcels, does not exclude the ones that are paying zero?

That is correct.

Okay, can we possibly get that of just the people who are actually paying?

Yes, ma'am, I can do that. We would just use slide 10 to calculate that for you.

Okay, yeah, because I mean, obviously 793 would be skewed if 9% of the population pays nothing.

That's the average citywide already.

Right, but I want to see what's the average of people who are actually paying taxes.

Understood, I'll do it based on page 10.

Thank you. And then on page 16, this morning, I don't know about anybody else, but I was kind of surprised by the FRS changes that are being requested. I'm not even sure if that's gonna come to us for a vote. Is that included in any of this information because the senior management change with FRS? How does that play into what we're being presented here?

Prior to the email that I saw this morning, ma'am, I was unaware when we met yesterday that that was on the website. I can tell you that the city has been part of the FRS program since the late 90s. That is not anything new. That was adopted by the commission when they went from a 401-457 program to FRS, and we're legally required if there's any changes within there which is administrative in nature, to add it. The only position that I saw on that posting, ma'am, that's different is the facility infrastructure director. All other positions that were shown on there are already FRS. We just have to show, because we're limited, we have a maximum number of positions for directors that can be within that class.

So I would like to still get the analysis that I had requested, because obviously that does impact the budget. If people are already part of FRS, and if they're already part of that senior management class, then it should be moot, but I would like to see that analysis on that. It's in the email that I sent today.

Yes, ma'am, I'll be quite honest with you. Other than a quick blurb, I've not left the conference room.

No, and I understand, so I didn't expect to have that tonight, but I would like to definitely see that.

Understood.

Thank you. And then on page 25... The capital outlay increased by almost 40%? Yes, ma'am. Are there any big projects in there or anything?

Ma'am, that's all capital outlay, and I can refer you to, if you go to tab five.

Okay.

I'm sorry, tab four. that is made up on those pages of fleet and equipment. These are all part of the vehicle replacement policy, so any vehicle that's on here has to either be a certain age, which our minimum age is seven, our maximum age is 15, or it has to have X amount of hours on it, or their expenditures for fleet repairs exceeds 50% of their purchase price. So there's three caveats in order to get replaced.

Makes sense.

I asked for a vehicle, and I was denied because it's not within that policy.

Gotcha. Okay, thank you so much. That's all I have for right now.

Any other commissioners? Vice Mayor Avila-Vasquez, and then Commissioner Harriot.

Thank you. On page 24, where you have the Parks and Recreation Summary.

Yes, ma'am.

So is that what is on the budget for all expenses to work on the parks?

Yes, ma'am.

Okay.

Yes, parks operations specifically.

Okay. So I went through the book that we were given, which is what I thought we were going to be reviewing tonight, but I didn't see anything in here about the boat ramp. Isn't that part of Parks and Recs?

That's already part of this year's.

Oh, it's part of Public Works? Okay, if it's part of Public Works, then I'll wait till we get to Public Works. Thank you. I always thought it was Parks and Recs. Thank you.

Commissioner Harriot.

Thank you, Mayor. I would, John, like to go back to, not a particular slide, but the section one, when you, there was a slide about the trim notification. And can you confirm that the trim notification is going out for a higher, the current millage rate, but we are still anticipating being presented a millage of 6.4948? Yes, sir. It's just standard to notify on trim the seven or the current millage rate.

Commissioner, you're taking away my thunder for Monday night. So Monday night, you have to set a maximum millage. My request tonight, which will be the same as next Monday night, is 6.7 mils. That's the current year millage rate. this budget has been built on the rollback rate of 6.4948. You must, in my opinion, go to the maximum that you want, because for some reason, if anything happens between today and September 22nd, state revenues come in half, whatever the case might be, if you set a maximum millage rate of 6.4948 Monday night, and we have to increase it September 9th or September 22nd, we would have to mail to every parcel owners within Deltona that intent to exceed what was in the trim notice.

Excellent, that's what I was wanting to confirm. Thank you for that. Do you want a motion or consensus now on those two items for the additional policy review?

Yes, sir.

Do you want to make it?

Well, it's just a simple consensus. It's just a simple consensus. Yeah. And we can just, so we're not picking speakers. All those in favor, just raise your hand, please. Can we just repeat it again for the residents? We're jumping back and forth in silence. Yes, I can. We're actually not jumping back and forth. It's still part of tab two.

So go ahead, John. Yep. Yes. Yes, ma'am. On page 18, I requested for two items. I request as part of to be compliant with code of ordinance section 2-183.1, additional scope of services for our external auditor. Item number one is permission to do a review and recommendation of capital assets to be compliant with Gatsby Statement 104 in an amount not to exceed $10,000. And item two was a fund balance policy review and recommendation for an amount not to exceed $7,500.

All right.

All in favor?

All those that are in favor, just raise your hand so we can see who has a simple majority or not. All those opposed, raise your hand. So it's four to two for the clerk.

It requires a super majority, and I do believe, sir, that that's a super majority. Thank you, Mayor.

Commissioner, did you have anything else?

I've got one more. The discussion on the change in FRS class, that change is reflected in the current budget that's being presented tonight.

That is correct.

Thank you.

Commissioner Knopik.

Thank you, Mayor. The $135,552 that's not obligated, I'd like to get consensus on that, that that be moved and designated to a transportation reserve as things come up through the TPO or other projects become available throughout the year regarding transportation. I'd like to be able to have some matching funds set aside. I think that's a perfect allocation for that. We could have consensus.

Would that also include for roads as well?

Anything for transportation that comes up that we might have.

All those in favor for that transfer, just raise your hand. All those opposed?

Okay, so that dies.

Anything else?

Yes. Mr. McKinney, can you explain on page 22... Yes, sir. Let me get there.

We're doing consensus.

The requested budget includes the $14.5 million. Can you explain the difference between that number and the $25,965 on page 26?

Yes, sir. As you will recall, it's a five-year smooth on the fire assessment, so we have to budget So here's our fees, here's our expenditures, and over the next five years, it hits right there, so that on the fifth year, our revenues and our expenditures will exceed the revenues for that year, but we will have set aside over that four-year prior period the monies to fund everything. The five-year smoothing. That is correct. Thank you, sir.

And where is the EMS component carved out?

Sir, that has to remain within the general fund. So if you go back to page 21 under fire services, the portion related, so the overall budget is $18,532,000. So that $4.1 million is not eligible towards the fire assessment fee. And if you go to page...

So what's the number for EMS?

Yeah, I'm going there, sir. If you go and you reference page 73, it's $4,004,843. And that's... That's all fire transport. And that is also four units.

And that's excluding the income from the billables?

That is correct. That cannot go into the fire assessment fee. We budgeted just under $3 million for next year. Thank you, sir. That's all I've got for right now. Yes, sir. Thank you.

All right, Mr. McKinney, in tab two, section 17, well, Commissioner Novick got that question answered, so that's fine. Page 20, we are reducing the city clerk's office. Yes, sir. With the new state laws that are coming into place for public records to be fulfilled a lot quicker, is that gonna affect our city clerk's ability to do her job?

So I will, let me just have you reference page. The reduction in the city clerk's budget, sir, is not personnel, it is a software. So as all are aware, we utilize Granicus, and Granicus is software. Therefore, as we talked about is this year, getting everything put within the proper department's divisions, and that should be IT, because these fine individuals over there in the non-general fund utilize it, so it gets allocated as part of the IT allocation. to all funds.

Understood. Page 24.

Yes, sir.

And you don't have to give me an answer on this now, but I'd like to get the information. For recreation programs, I see there's a decrease, so that's telling me that we're getting rid of some of the programs. Can I get, or can the commission get the details on what programs are being eliminated, please?

Yes, sir.

Thank you. And Commissioner Harry, you have another question?

I actually have two, Mayor, thank you. Follow up to your last question, is that actually an elimination of a program, or would that just be efficiencies that are within the, that were created within the department?

I apologize, sir, I was listening to my cohort here. Could you repeat?

No problem. The follow up to the Mayor's question, the reduction in recreational programs, is that an elimination of specific programming, or is that just due to efficiencies within the operation?

I will go right there and tell you. For operations, sir, it's a reduction in personnel cost.

Okay, and that's for the elimination of part-time positions? That is correct. Okay, so efficiency is within the operation?

That is correct.

Thank you.

Your parks director has managed very well with the staff that he has, and there is no need to fund those positions. Excellent.

Thank you, sir. The next question is more of a comment that came up during our briefing and it was pointing out that there through within the budget for the rest of the budget is I think where it was predominantly noticed that there are some shifts where there are significant reductions and significant increases and that's related to the reallocation or the relocation excuse me of budgets from areas where they have been in the past to areas where they are more accurately reflected, directly reflected. So when we get to those areas, can you just make note that this, you know, any of the significant increases or things that look out of place, can you just make note and confirm that that is a relocation of a budget from a previous place?

I can sum it up this pretty easily. Jim Parrish over there manages the engineering division. That engineering division supports stormwater, water, wastewater, and transportation projects. We always come in under budget for those projects because we put in within those budgets for staff time. We've not tracked it, and we're now tracking it, because knowing that we're having to tighten our belt with potential changes with ballot language to make sure that we're covering those costs where applicable. So that's the engineering division. The other section is within Jim's divisions and mine, we're co-shared customer service. We have two positions that sit and handle solid waste calls all day long, as well as code enforcement. of all their positions we have roughly one full fte that does nothing but solid waste reviews within the city so those three positions why should the general fund pay for them that's solid waste and that's why it's a enterprise fund and those are the only three employees that are charged to solid waste all other individuals was administration in nature. So as we went through and things change, we look at individuals that are between other departments. We have Ms. Phyllis, we have Ms. Higgins, a person in HR that, again, they support multiple departments, divisions, amongst different funds. So again, general funds shouldn't have a bigger burden than legally required.

We're just appropriately allocating staff time and resources to the funds that are benefiting from them.

We spent a lot of time recently going through every position citywide to make sure they're charged to the appropriate location.

Excellent, thank you guys, and thank you, staff. We haven't said that yet, but thank you very much.

All right, Mr. McKinney, you can continue to revenue estimates, please. Okay.

Okay, so tab three, annual assessments. Okay, this is just a regurgitation of what was discussed June 22nd, but again, it's part of your overall funds, and we discussed everything at the fund level with the commission. Street lighting assessment, the assessment needed for next year is $177,861, and that will be the amount that I asked for on Monday night per resolution. The Lake McGarrity annual assessment, as stated, we have over $100,000 in fund balance. We spend roughly five to $7,500 a year in the maintenance of Lake McGarrity. We cannot eliminate that assessment without the homeowners express permission. So we're gonna bring to you Monday night a zero assessment for next year. Does not mean that in two years from now, we have to bring it back and do a 10 or $15 assessment. and I put all of these in alphabetical order. So again, as I stated, we're going against the accounting way of numerical. The fire assessment is new per the study. We went in here and this has been a hot topic. What portion of the general fund pays for public safety? So slide 37 indicates both police and fire. So you can see if you go back to 2018, the public safety costs exceeded that of ad valorem. But over the last 10 years, we have pretty much stayed on par. So our total ad valorem that we collect goes 100% for fire and police services. So on the fire assessment impact comparison, so the way we did this, Mayor, is we had to look at three separate categories. We looked at the individuals that had been here long term, greater than five years, recent sales, so people that have bought a new home, was a resale home of five years or more, and then the citywide average. So the citywide average home value is 172,000. That number is if we implement a fire assessment fee for operating only, which was $433, it would allow for a reduction of the proposed, or sorry, requested millage rate of 6.4948, a reduction of 2.5139 mils, which would mean that the millage rate that we would adopt September 22nd would be 3.9809. That means that the average resident within deltona would see a two cent reduction in their overall tax bill above and below the line from the city of deltona and that is only for millage and the fire assessment that does not include any other assessments that are independent so so when we look to carve out fire operations and administration, which is the only two segments legally authorized within the state of Florida, it would be a two cent difference. If we add the capital component, so at the May 18th workshop, we talked about the need for either new or significant remodeled stations, because we only have one station that is 15 years or newer. we have another station i forget how old station 62 is right now but our other three stations are um you know either two of them are original and the third one is basically a modular building you know still metal building so this fee would then bring in the required monies over the next 10 years to replace all fire engines, all specialty apparatus excluding transport, and the replacement of the current five stations, four stations, the remodel of the fifth station, and the building of a sixth station. So all of that is built into that component. So if we go the full bore on the fire assessment fee, looking at the citywide average, their tax bill for those two items would increase to just under $146. But if we look at the recent sales, which is over 11,000 parcels within the city, their tax bill would decrease by over $300. but then the long-term individuals would see a increase in their bill of $361.85. So we have, again, looking at just scenario one, which is for operating components only, then you're looking at just under 19,000 residents would see their tax bill stay the same or go lower. And I guess to add to that, whether you're talking about FGFOA, the Florida League of Cities, the Florida Fire Chiefs Association, we're all looking at the proposal to the property tax changes in November. The city of Deltona started this process with you, the commission, last summer during the budget workshop. So this is nothing that we did as a reaction to current legislative changes. We've been in the works on this, okay? The maximum fire assessment fee that staff is recommending is $579. That does not mean that we're asking Monday night for you to implement 579. We're just coming to you asking this is the amount that we want to put on the trim notice. So we still have time to make changes if required on this fire assessment. So that's just the maximum. And that 579 is the amount required over a five-year period per the question, Commissioner, that you previously asked. But again, I wanna be very clear, Commission, that it is staff's recommendation that if the fire assessment fee is approved on September 9th, that there would be a corresponding reduction in the millage rate that we would adopt as part of the tentative budget of 2.5139 mills. So you have to approve this coming Monday night the maximum assessment that goes on the TRIM notice but you must pass all the assessments on September 9th, because it has to be approved prior to September 15th. That's not my rules, that is the tax collector, property appraiser deadline imposed by the state of Florida. The maximum solid waste annual assessment is $287.76. Again, that is being driven by the increases contractually under Waste Pro, as well as Volusia County itself. Those are our two main drivers to this increase. Our stormwater assessment, year three, $210. We've been increasing it last year and the next two years by the $20 so that by year five of the stormwater fee study, we would be at $250.

Is there any question from the commission? Vice Mayor Avila-Vasquez.

Thank you, Mayor. On the solid waste, What is the contract that we have right now? How many years is the current contract for?

10 years.

I believe that's a seven-year contract, which you all renewed last year.

Last year. So this $287.76, when does that start? That would go into effect October 1st. Of this year? Yes, ma'am. But if we have a contract for seven years, why are we increasing it before the contract is over?

If we go back and look at the contract, it had a set of increase for the first two years, and on the third year, it goes to a CPI plus. So we actually have a reduced increase for the first two years. Year three through seven could potentially have a higher increase, or it could actually have a decrease based on CPI.

Okay, my other question is with the fire assessment fee, the 579, is that for five years?

Yes, ma'am.

And then after five years, it'll increase again?

Yes, ma'am. We would be required to come back and with an updated study showing what that requirement would be for the next five years. So year four, we would come back to you with an updated study.

All right, thank you.

Yes, ma'am.

Commissioner Howington.

Thank you. So just from a high level, it looks like the non-ad valorem is going to be going up to about $1,100 per household. Is that correct?

Non-ad valorem? Yes, ma'am. And that will be on a presentation Monday night.

Right. But I just, I mean, I've kind of been very steadfast in the fact that our 100% disabled veterans, that our service-connected disabled veterans are going to be hit with this.

Mm-hmm.

And those people are on very limited income. I know that we've had millionaires paraded in front of us explaining that just because somebody is a disabled veteran doesn't mean they can't pay their fair share. But we have disabled veterans in this community that $1,100 a year when they're currently paying nothing is going to hurt them. And I can't support any increase without protecting them before we put this into effect.

So currently right now we have several non-Avalon assessments strictly because not everyone has Lake McGarrity or street lighting, but they're already paying the solid waste and stormwater. So the increase would be $579 to that. We are bringing to you September 9th a policy for basically a hardship program. of up to $250,000 for individuals that is a hardship. Within the SHIP programs, we already have methodology in place for qualifying for SHIP, and we've already looked at and we'll be proposing to use that same process for income verification. And within that, if you come in for SHIP, If you are a disabled veteran and you apply for SHIP, all income related to VA benefits, et cetera, have to be disclosed. So we would be able to verify very easily if someone has a true hardship that we would be able to, through utilization of the general fund, to pay them, reimburse them for that portion of their non-advalorum taxes.

that's still a very long process and in the meantime we have people that are dealing with getting a bill like that i know that i've seen people who got a bill that went up by twenty dollars and they cried that's what i'm seeing from my residents So I just can't stomach that, to look at a bill that's going from approximately $450 to saying, now you're gonna pay 1,100. We have people in this town who pay taxes and pay less than $800. I don't, mine's 7,000. But for those people who are paying 800, we're hitting them pretty hard. And that's unfathomable at this point.

Commissioner Novick.

So let's say we don't do the fire assessment fee. Yes, sir. What do we cut, and how do we fund it?

Are we talking today or December 1st?

I'm talking tonight.

Lower our voices just a little bit.

I'm talking tonight. What do we... Where does the revenue stream come from if we don't do the fire assessment fee? Or what do we cut... out of that budget so it's stated on slide whatever because what we're talking about is a shift in revenue stream yes sir we're not nobody's mentioned the budget so we're i'm i'm assuming it's a big assumption that we're okay with the budget portion we're talking about the revenue stream methodology so if we don't do the fire fee what does that do to the millage rate to fund the proposed budget

As stated on page 22, fire administration and operations are shown in both general fund and fire assessment until final adoption of fire assessment fees. So the current requested budget before you with the millage rate of 6.4948 includes fire operations and administration and the two vehicle, the two fire apparatus and the two administration vehicles. So we are 100%, funded for the current year as is. What would not be funded, sir, without coming back with a hard decision is how do we build the six fire station? How do we replace or remodel the existing stations? That's the money that we don't have. So if we go back to tab one, and we look at page 15, we have reserves within the general fund of $26,449,471. That could build one new fire station and potentially renovate two or three others. as well as improve parks, as well as use it for additional road resurfacing. But again, I would, as I've stated to you many a times, um, I would always suggest that we never use fund balance for one time expenditures, such as road resurfacing or something, or, or personnel that always should be used for CIP or capital outlay that have a multi-year use.

And then if the, exemption passes and we lose 17.7 million 17 million then what does that do to the millage rate to maintain the same level of service so i will go back to slide i should have brought my glasses i'll go back to slide eight sir house bill 1329

So if you go and look at all the detail that is behind tab seven, we've provided you with over $6.3 million in cuts. So if House Bill, if the ballot passes We've given you many items in here that could be cut, which would involve personnel across every department within the general fund. You could go in and increase the allocations that come from water, wastewater, storm water, solid waste. Your rate consultant would come here and tell you that you could legally transfer up to 19% of all revenues to the general fund without any issues with bond covenants as that's the acceptable level. I would come back to you as stated last meeting and with. additional assessments for parks, median maintenance, enhanced street lighting. And I would even come back and say, we have a utility tax for gas, communications, but we don't have it for water, which is legally authorized. So I would come back to you with that, which would allow for 10% of all water sales for the general fund to get a piece of that. So then that would impact water, wastewater, and that they wouldn't be able to maintain their infrastructure, et cetera, unless they had an even bigger increase. And as you'll recall, when we met a couple of months ago, They stood up here and said that we already have the highest water wastewater rates in this region. And that's why we held the wastewater increased to zero and only increased the water portion. So there will be a lot of hard topics that will go into play come December if the ballot initiative passes. I don't know how to answer it any other way. But I can tell you, I've been relied on the impacts of 2008 to 12 for the housing crisis, I had to deal with it for the 2005 stock market crash, as well as the effects of COVID in 2020 2021. So I won't, I won't I will provide you the best alternatives possible to the city manager to present to you. Thank you, sir.

Vice Mayor Avila Vasquez.

Thank you, Mayor. When you say cut, does it necessarily have to be staff? I mean, there's other things that we can cut in some of the areas, events, making our parks look much prettier than just making them safer. We need to prioritize our work around the city and concentrate on what's important and what we need to fix that is urgent. There's a lot of stuff in this budget right now that we're making look pretty. So when you say cut, I think cutting down on staff would be the last on the line. And we can go back and look at everything that we're doing right now, and there's a lot of stuff that we can cut that will not damage the city budget. And I can tell you that I, I listened to Governor DeSantis' speech recently. He mentioned that in 2019, and I forget the number that he used, versus 2026, there was about 36 million or billion profits And he, according to him, not his exact words, he finds it very hard to believe that a city in 2026 cannot meet their budget without cutting the necessary requirements and needs of the city. And this is the governor of the state of Florida. So I'm just sitting here listening to what you're saying about cutting this, cutting, cutting, cutting, but I never heard cutting. you know, whatever improvements we have to make in parks, in lighting. I mean, we have been without lighting for how long? So right now we should wait until what happens with this tax in November. Instead of putting all these fees and more money on our taxpayers, than to just come out and charge them because once we approve this, we can't take it back. It's gonna be there. So I think that we are just jumping the ball or the park or whatever you wanna call it a little bit. First of all, I mean, we can do with a lot of none of these improvements until this thing flies over in November. But I just don't think it's right just to say, well, you know, we're going to continue fixing this. That doesn't need to be fixed right away. But we're going to get rid of two staff people. I think that's not the way it should be looked at.

Commissioner Harriet.

Thank you, Mayor. I think we're confusing two different conversations here. I think you are.

All right, we're not gonna start this. Let's remain respectful to each other.

Ultimately, the conversation, the initial conversation was what if we don't do the assessment fee? If we don't do the assessment fee, we still balance the budget at a rollback rate. They've got a program in place ready to implement to help those that are financially disadvantaged But this assessment fee also significantly reduces the tax bill for a majority of the residents that are paying a significant amount. The other issue is a discussion centered around Amendment 3. I think it's disingenuous to associate the governor's comments on a statewide basis to a city that is primarily over 90% residential that doesn't have the commercial tax base. We don't have that kind of growth that a lot of the other areas of the state have seen. And so when we have this conversation, if we're having the conversation about the assessment fee, the budgets balanced at the millage rate or at the rollback rate, that's separate. We're just shifting to farther reduce the millage rate or adding, sorry, farther reducing the millage rate and adding an assessment fee or sticking with rollback. The conversation about Amendment 3 and I believe the impact to the city in year two would be about 17.7 million. That is correct. If we look at slide 16, just the general fund summary, and we have to remember that amendment three only affects and impacts the general fund. It only impacts the ad valorem revenue. That $17.7, almost $18 million would eliminate support services, parks and recreation, and a significant majority of public works if we don't make those cuts in other departments. You can't just cut capital projects that are one-time expenditures to make up for a reduction in revenue. You have to cut operating to right size operating to match the reduction in revenue. I think it's important to keep those two conversations separate, yes.

Mayor, may I just reference page nine?

That's sure, and then we'll just get started on tab four afterwards, please.

So if you look at tab nine, our total general fund budget, as stated, is $79,845,212. Of that, we transfer out $5.4 million for CIP programs. So that's whether it goes to municipal services, transportation, stormwater, parks, et cetera, that's there. Your next two biggest items are personnel, operating, and capital. I can tell you a prior city of mine went in and they eliminated the replacement of fire engines, police vehicles, et cetera. They didn't replace any vehicles for close to 10 years. They were putting two new engines or transmissions that they had spent three times the cost of a new vehicle. Operating costs, that's your FPL, that's your Duke, that's your fleet, your IT, et cetera. You cannot cut 17.7 million out of there It's just not there. So I wholeheartedly agree with everyone on the commission that the last thing that we wanna do is cut personnel. I can sit here and knock on this table and tell you that in every one of the situations, I've always been fortunate, never had to cut staff during any of these cycles. I can't say that that's always the case. But you cannot do it when out of all the parcels in this city, only 4.45% are commercial. So we're over 95% residential. We do not have the tax base of commercial industrial to smooth the effects of November ballot if passed. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. McKinney. Can we go to the next tab, please?

Yes, sir.

We're in fund and revenue budget.

Thank you. So going to capital outlay, Mayor, everything on here is per policy. So when we met May 18th, again.

Excuse me one minute. We're in capital outlay or are we in tab four? We should be in four.

Okay, yes sir.

I understand.

Sorry. When we met May 18th, we had that great workshop, great format. I look forward to doing it again. We presented all the capital outlay in compliance with our policy. Everything on here has to either be a certain age, a certain mileage or certain expense. So if you go back and reference the binder that was provided for that workshop, all of those items are in here, plus we had several items that were enhancements. We received no comments to exclude them, and those have been included as well. So we have 5.7 million in vehicle replacements, Of those, only one of those is outside the general fund and that is the three quarter ton truck for stormwater. All of the other items are within the general fund. Commissioner Novick, if we pass the assessment fee on September 9th, everything that's listed there under fire would be paid for by the fire assessment and would be removed as part of the millage, tentative millage. Those are prepaid, sir.

Let's hold off all the questions, please, until after.

On the equipment, everything in here on the first page is general fund related. We have very little items near the bottom that are outside the general fund in our water, wastewater, and stormwater. But again, everything that's presented to you in this book is balanced. Revenues cover everything that's in here. That's all I have on tab four, sir.

All right, Commissioner Robert, can you repeat that question just so we can hear? Okay, can you just repeat it? I actually didn't hear you.

Two ambulances were prepaid, so that's.

Yes, sir. As you approve that as part of this year's budget, we know that it doesn't come in, so that is an automatic carry forward on that. So one of the things that I do wanna just point out is if the maximum millage is approved next week, then we would be bringing back in August an agenda item per policy. It's part of the purchasing policy that anything that has a long lead time is considered an emergency. So we would get pre-authorization from the commission. to do the letter of intents for all of these so that we can get in the queue, because if we wait until October to do it, then I said this, we're a small fish in a big pond, and the Orlandos, the Seminoles, the Tampas, they put their hundreds of vehicles, we miss out. So, and not only that, by issuing the letter of intent prior to September 30th, the majority of our vehicles are done off of either the source well or sheriff's bid. And by getting it in there, we're able to hopefully beat the increase that goes into effect October 1st. So we have a huge advantageous reason to issue the notices of intent. That's all I have, Mayor.

Any other questions from the commission? All right.

Those other larger agencies are also doing the letters of intent. They're not waiting until October 1st either, so it's a smart move on our part.

Thank you. We're going to go ahead and move to special assessments.

Sir, we're on tab 5, CIP, if that's okay.

That is tab 5. I guess my book is different. Go ahead.

Okay, CIP, no change on this from previous. General CIP, capital improvements, $1.3 million. That will take care of the fuel depot, citywide broadband improvements, fire storage bays to be determined, fire training complex at Day Road. The funding sources are transfer from General Fund, CDBG, fire impact, and fire assessments. Again, as we go through tab five, as a reminder, by policy, every one of the items that are in this tab, if the budgets get approved, must come back before the city commission for final approval, as it is a construction in progress item. Fund 302, Parks Capital Improvements. I won't read through all of these, but this covers parks throughout the city. It's just over $4 million. The funding sources transfer from general funds, CDBG, and park impact fees. One of the things in all of these items, as you just approved the impact fees at the last meeting, So again, we have made sure as part of our five-year CIP process that we are utilizing 100% of all available impact fees by the fiscal year 28. Transportation capital improvements, fund 303, it's just over $5 billion. Again, not gonna go through all of these, but I just wanna highlight Rhode Island extension of $2 million for design and right-of-way and citywide road resurfacing of $2 million. This is funded by the local option gas tax, transportation impact fees, CDBG, and CRA. Fund 402 is just over $6 million. Whether it's a treatment for water sewer, distribution or collections or reclamation, it's citywide throughout the city. This also includes the grant that we were just approved as part of the state's fiscal year 26-27 budget of $1.25 million for water main replacements. So the funding sources is state grant impact fees and transfer from water to wastewater. Stormwater capital and improvements fund 422 is just under $4 million. This includes the Lake Paton Clearwater improvements. I wanna highlight Lake Windsor, because as a reminder from prior commission directives, any money that was remaining from the ARPA funds is to be moved over to Lake Windsor. So that money there is being paid by ARPA, the remaining funds, transfer of general fund, and a transfer from the stormwater fund. And again, we've talked about this repeatedly, and I'll just again put it on record, the stormwater fee of $210 for next year cannot sustain the capital improvements needed from the fund, so that's why we must transfer monies from the general fund to support the operations and improvements of stormwater. That's all I have on this tab, sir.

Commissioner Herriot, then Vice Mayor Villalobos.

Thank you, Mayor. On the discussion about Rhode Island extension, we had initially discussed or there was initially a question about the method in which that was going to be completed, whether it would be city only or a joint effort with the county. Has there been any additional movement on that plan?

I would need to defer to Jordan to answer that question, please.

We are currently working with the county to put together an MOU between the city and the county, and legal's working on that right now. Fantastic.

Thank you for that update. And then on the stormwater fund, when we approved the stormwater fee increases last year, if I remember correctly, When we made that increase, we knew that that wasn't going to cover the capital cost. We knew that the costs coming from all of the basin studies and the work that staff has been doing to determine what we need in terms of infrastructure to address a lot of our flooding concerns was going to exceed collection of that stormwater fee is that obviously that's still the case but that is my case i'm remembering that correctly that that was always the plan was that the stormwater fee would cover operating if we had additional funding above what was collected or what was spent for operating then we would put that towards capital but we knew that it wasn't going to cover capital that is correct and this year budget alone we have budgeted roughly two million dollars from the general fund to support stormwater thank you

Vice Mayor Villavasquez, and then Commissioner Novick.

Thank you. I have a question more in the lines of the Rhode Island extension, and maybe it answers it with the answer that Jordan gave it, but does this project also involve Orange City funds? Not this portion. So this is just city funds, the Autonomous City funds? Yes.

That is correct. You currently have $15 million set aside for Rhode Island, and that's coming from that money.

Okay, and is the city gonna be involved in this project, even though it was turned over more or less to the county.

If it's approved, I'll defer to the city attorney. So the interlocal agreement that is currently being drafted and negotiated with the county and will be coming back to you all for final approval and execution contemplates the county doing the construction and project administration, but the city having approval as to design alignment, aesthetics, all of the things that the city commission should provide input on.

Thank you.

Commissioner Nobby, then Commissioner Howington.

Just on water, wastewater on 402 fund, the Fisher plant chlorine relocation, did you get a chance to look at the swap out with using ozone? He broke it.

There we go. Yes, we did discuss it with our engineer of record. They're looking at that as an option. We've just received 60% plans. They had already had the 60% plans in the works, so that would be a change that we would go to from 60% to 90%. But that is something that we're currently very quickly looking at.

Is it likely we might have a cost savings there and an operational cost savings as well?

it would it would have a a increase in cost the the either uv or ozone is more expensive than bleach however you have additional savings in other areas uh so just the the straight swap it would have more but it also has some water quality improvements also okay all right so we're still looking at that absolutely yes thank you sir commissioner howington thank you

Going back to Rhode Island Extension. So we already have $15 million sitting there. We're going to throw another $2 million at it for the design. Is the design really going to cost $17 million?

Usually it's up to 20% of the estimated project cost.

And do we have any sort of a timeline on what the county is looking at? for the project and beginning the project?

No, ma'am, but I do want to point out one of the statements you made. It's not $2 million of new money, it's $2 million of prior year fund balance.

And then going back to 24-25 budget season, the commission had approved Campbell Park to receive fitness equipment.

Yes, ma'am.

And here we're going into 26-27, and I'd really like to know where the fitness equipment is for Campbell that was voted on as part of the 24-25 budget because I don't seem to be getting it, and my residents would like to have that.

I'll defer to Mr. Manning on that. We did discuss it with him immediately after yesterday's meeting.

Okay, thank you.

And it was fiscal year 24 budgeted, by the way.

Thank you.

Mayor? Good afternoon, Commission. Yes, that was a federally funded program. We had an issue with the funding. We are in process now getting the requisitions going for phase one and phase two. Based on the funding sources, we're going to have to do phase one, which will be the equipment itself. Phase two will be the canopy that covers the equipment. So that will be in process.

Thank you. I appreciate that. Commissioner Herriot?

Thank you, Mayor. I just want to clarify and confirm that the $2 million for Rhode Island is coming out of the $15 that we have, yeah, sorry, $15 million. Yes, sir. There was a capital M after that. You just couldn't see it. Out of the $15 million that's allocated and restricted to Rhode Island.

That is correct.

And then regardless of the outcome of the agreement, We would still be putting all of that 15 million towards Rhode Island extension. It would just be a matter of. Based off of the agreement, whether we give that money to the county, or we pay for vendors and contractors ourselves. So we're not I just want to make sure that we're not. We're not spending money that isn't going to benefit us. throughout the remainder of the project.

Based on the MOU that would be approved and the funding sources that would come from it, then the city would then be either giving the $15 million to the county or as bills come in, we would pay our pro rata share from the $15 million. One of the two. Yep. Thank you.

Really quick, can I get a, at some point, email to all of us how much, how many miles of roads, $2 million gets us in road resurfacing? And then the methodology that we're using. I know that you guys have one in place, so explain it to the rest of the commission so we can publicly put it out there as well.

Yes, sir. When we submit, we'll get all answers within the week.

Thank you, Vice Mayor Avila Vasquez.

Yeah, real quick. I'm guessing it'll be brought to us when it's finalized, the plans of which way the entrance and exit of Rhode Island is going to be taking, whether through the school street front or the back, because either way it's going to affect the school. So I guess we'll be getting... that plan ahead of time before it gets approved, right?

As they go through the design process, we would absolutely get input and be shared with us their design thoughts.

Thank you.

And that will be brought back to you through Jordan's office.

All right, we're gonna get a motion from Commissioner Howington, because I still want to give public time to speak, so Commissioner Howington.

I'd like to make a motion to extend the meeting for 30 minutes. Do we think that that would be enough to let people speak?

I only have one more tab.

Two hours on a workshop. Did we start?

We did start at 5.30.

Okay. All right.

All right. Can we move to the next tab? Budget recap. Yes, sir. Now I got the right.

Okay. Do I? No. Yes, sir. It increased to 142. So just to recap this evening, is the citywide budget is $208,035,947. The general fund is $79,845,212. We have balanced the requested budget at the rollback millage rate of 6.4948. We have $20,406,149 in capital improvements, $8.2 million in fleet and capital outlay. We have outstanding debt of $137,616,876. As a reminder, as we go through Monday night's, action items up to September 9th. If we approve the fire assessment fee, whether it's the $579 or 433 or somewhere in between, the staff will bring back to you as part of the tentative budget the offsetting millage rate. The current offsetting millage rate is 2.5139 mills that would reduce the balance rollback millage to balance the budget to 3.9809. So that would be a decrease for 19,000 homes within the city limits of Deltona. What are your next steps? Monday night, July 20th at 6.30 during the regular commission meetings, you will set the maximum millage that is required by law as part of the trim process. and you're approving the maximum limits of the special assessments for inclusion in the trim notice. That provides for the required legal notifications for all non-ad valorem assessments. That does not mean that Monday night that is the final amount. When the residents, the property owners receive their trim notice Legally, it's a 20-day window from when they mail it before we can have the final public hearing, and that is September 9th. That is 23 days after the mailing, so we're well within the legal requirements of notification. You will receive, based on tonight's action, a proposed budget book no later than August 12th. That is 16 days sooner than what is in the budget calendar that y'all gave us consensus on back in March. We are slated And this was a typo on my last budget workshop and that is my fault, I apologize for it. But the next slated workshop if needed is August 31st. I had said the prior Monday night. Your millage and public budget public hearings where you set your tentative and final budgets is slated for Wednesday September 9th at 6 30 p.m and Monday September 21st at 6 30 p.m let me just I'm going to look one last time because I'm pretty sure I said September 22nd before so let me just double check my calendar Thank you, it is Monday, September 21st. So I found two typos in my presentation. So again, making sure it's correct because that is what's in the resolution for Monday night's maximum millage resolution. Mayor, unless there's any other comments, I have no other items for this evening.

All right, if there's no other comments from the commission, I would like to go to our public. So city clerk, can we please call the public?

Tim Blodgett, please.

Can we give Mr. Blodgett a microphone instead of him trying to drive that all the way around? Oh, there he is, right there.

Green light, go. Let's see, where do I begin? John, 98% completely clear and concise. It wasn't hard to follow for me at all. Outstanding job. Zach, I'm glad to hear we don't have any more attorney fees being tacked on this year. I'm so proud of you. Public Works, holding the line, outstanding. I don't know what you guys are doing, but keep doing it. I wish someone could figure out what's going on with the sheriff's office. I mean, we keep pumping more and more technology into them. They have something new in their bat belt every year. And the prices just keep on going up astronomically. We've been taking criminals off the street. Hell, we got a super speeder off of Howland Avenue the other day. That's got to be worth something in dollars and cents. It's very nice to see our two commissioners who had the most fiscal background putting their input. Thank you, Maritza. Thank you, Ms. Harrington. And aside from that, your staff did a great job, John. There's not a whole lot that I could see with it other than I can't wait till Monday. Have a good night.

Thank you. Courtney Krosbergos, please.

And Mayor, while she's coming up there, I would also like to point out to you, we posted this afternoon the summary budget, but since we've been sitting in this room, we've posted the entire detailed budget presentation, which includes all the department's individual recaps, so that is available now for everybody.

Sorry, I wasn't laughing at you, I was laughing at Al. Hi, it's Courtney Cross Burgos. The paperwork, I know, Jonathan, that's why you said it, because you know I was going to ask. But I understand that it's online. But some of us are used to having the budget books printed. I get that it's kind of a waste. But instead of having a gazillion in one of the white papers there, maybe, I mean, there's like 11 of us here. Maybe we could have some books so that we can follow along. I personally can't see that thing very well with my sugar and stuff. But that's just me. With these fire assessment, our residents are gonna pay double this year, if I'm reading it correctly. You're shaking your head no, well, it's already with the other. Isn't there a way for us to wait to make these decisions after November and we see what happens with the property tax vote? How come, I've asked a couple of times here, I don't see the three minutes, so. I've asked a couple of times before, how come we haven't had anything like DeBarry that they have given their residents information and then different options to think about and see what we think, if it passes, if it doesn't pass. I know myself, I go every other week, oh, I should say yes, oh, I should say no. It would help, and they did a very great job of it. And I've been homesteaded almost 25 years here, between the land and here. And you guys are like just pricing me out of here. Maybe that's the purpose, but... you know, when we did the impact fees, it was all about, okay, well, it's only gonna be the new residents that are paying it, not the old ones, okay. Then for years we hear, we need commercial to lessen the taxes, tax burden for the residents. Okay, but now, this one is, let's make all the old, people that have been here for a long time pay more, and the new people will pay less. You guys are confusing me. What is it? It can't be all three, as far as I can tell. I don't know. I think we need more explanation of what could possibly happen in November with the property tax vote and to see what our options are for the city. If I'm having to tighten my belt and cut down on things in my household, I expect us to do it as a city as well. And I know you have done some. I'm not saying that you have not at all. But there is still fluff in there. I mean, we still got the darn scholarship that should have been gone with the... Thank you. Three minutes.

Pat Blodgett, please.

I applaud you. I agree with Courtney. We need to remove the fluff. Like Maurizio was saying, we need to stay within what we can afford. Celtic festivals. Okay, Doc, I'm sorry, but if we can't afford it, we can't afford it. Waste Pro. I don't understand why it went up so much. When do we get this dispute actually sit down and dispute the budget? There are a lot of things on there that I don't agree that we need. Theresa Mason study. Okay, it's on the budget, but where is it? The budget for Lakeshore. Okay, what's going on with Lakeshore? You know, we just need answers, and we're not getting answers. Okay, we have a workshop, but, okay, I'm sad to say that where is everybody that's going to say something? They're going to say it on Facebook. Okay.

That's it. Thank you. Mayor, that closes public comments.

All right. City Manager?

Mayor and Commissioner, I just want to let you know this was a surprise to John. Yesterday I brought it to his attention. uh john mckinney our finance director florida government finance officers association sent me this letter that states your director of finance jonathan mckinney serves as chair of the certification committee for the florida government finance officers association fgfoa in addition he has served as past president seminar leader at both the state and national levels through his service in these roles he brings honor and statewide recognition to the city of deltona The FGFOA consists of 3,300 members statewide. Professional finance officers' knowledge, integrity, and dedication ensures the funds are trusted to the government, are properly budgeted, dispersed, and accounted for. You and the city of Deltona should take great pride in Jonathan McKinney through his service. He demonstrates the city's commitment to good governance and exceptional public service. John McKinney, thank you.

Good job. All right, team, this meeting is adjourned.