City Commission - workshop

madam mayor it is 9 50 and we are live thank you very much madam clerk good morning everyone and welcome welcome to the uh city of lake worth beach budget workshop number three august 11th 2026 on tuesday may i have the roll call mayor betty rash here vice mayor mimi may present

Commissioner Sarah Maliga. Present. Commissioner Christopher McVoy.

Here.

Commissioner Anthony Segrich.

Present. Ms. May will lead us in the pledge.

I pledge 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.

I know.

Yeah, right. You'll get to say the pledge at least as many times. All right. So this may be the final all-day hearing for the budget. And we pretty much turn it over to staff to present and let us know what's going on and give us a chance to ask a few questions and see what's going, see what happens. No questions for you. So Where do we, what book are we, always identify, we have so many books. So let's just really be clear about what book we're looking in. Because once we start looking through them, our latest book.

Good morning. Yes. We're looking at the presentation slides that I just handed out this morning. I will start off with that. Okay, great. Thank you. Okay. And good morning, Madam Mayor and commissioners and welcome to budget workshop number three. Thank you. My name is Candace Dale. I am the senior budget analyst here in the finance department. One second. I'd like to begin by acknowledging our budget team, which consists of myself, Yannick, and Hector. As always, I'd like to extend my appreciation to the interim city manager, Mr. Troy Perry, and his office for their leadership and guidance and preparation for today's workshop. I'd also like to thank all of the department directors and their team for their continued hard work and support. In today's workshop, we will cover several key areas. We'll begin with the significant changes since workshop number two, followed by additional supplemental requests. We will then move into the proposed schedule of fees and CIP, followed by a Stantec financial analysis and forecast update, which will cover the general fund, enterprise funds, and special revenue funds. We will conclude with the Commission direction i'm sorry direction and discussion for the first public hearing, and with that let's get started you're all that's a role. Yes. Okay, here on this side, we see approximately 1.2 million and supplemental requests were approved during budget workshop number 277% of that amount was attributable to the electric fun which 21% affordable to the general fine. The next slide. This provides a recap of budget workshop number one, where approximately 6.1 million in supplemental requests were approved. Total approved supplementals combined from budget workshop one and two resulted in approximately 7.4 million in approved requests. I'm sorry.

I'm sorry, Candace. Can we make the presentation full screen? It's a little small on the YouTube video.

Okay, one second.

Madam Clerk, you're able to hear? Okay.

I can hear fine. I just wanted them to make the presentation full screen so that everyone could see it clearly.

Thank you.

Is that better?

Yes, that's better. Okay. Mr. Segrich has his light on.

Quick question. So are these supplementals already included in the workbook three?

Those are supplementals that were already approved? Yes, they are incorporated into this budget book. Thanks. You're welcome. Okay, so this slide here shows total approved supplementals combined from workshop one and two resulting in approximately 7.4 million. The electric fund accounts for about 75% of that total and the general fund about 12% of that total.

Those electrical people are so greedy. They do have their own money.

Now that we've reviewed the approved supplemental request, I'd like to highlight the significant changes that have occurred since workshop number two. First is the proposed PBSO contract. Right now it's about approximately 15.8 million. 96% of that is allocated to the general fund, with the remaining portion allocated between the beach and electric fund, about 2% each.

Oh, I'm sorry. Ms. Malega and then Mr. McBoy.

Thank you. Does that include the additional park rangers?

I believe it includes five park rangers. Okay. Thank you.

Mr. McBoy.

um and i believe the increase from last year is around 600 or 650 roughly 100 000 and could you tell me could somebody tell me about what percentage of that 650 if that's the right number is for the park rangers i think 500 000 we have budgeted for the park rangers and a one percent increase for the next fiscal year so the if the 650 is about the right number 500 of that is for the five park rangers and about 150 for a one percent salary increase it's one percent yeah miss um miss may oh i was gonna ask one question okay okay thank you

Next, we have the CRA property tax revenue that has been updated to reflect the county's updated projections, which is approximately $4.7 million, and that's an increase of $485,000.

The CRA proposed tax revenue.

Number two? I'm sorry.

On that same slide. Mr. Segrich?

When you reference the page number here, page 37, which book?

I'm just going to ask the same thing. The budget book. The big one? Okay.

So these page numbers reference the big one. Perfect.

This one. The big book.

Okay.

And thank you for the page reference. That's helpful.

You're welcome. Now the related budget adjustments.

Okay, just take a little, yeah, we're gonna have questions, just like, just chill it down a little bit. But go ahead. Oh, I'm sorry, Ms. Mulligan has a question.

We're on page 37.

Is the- It's where it's the top?

Yeah. Got it. Okay, thank you. Okay. Could we make this any faster?

Ms. May? This is assuming that we don't change the millage rate.

Correct. We didn't do that.

No, we did not. We set it at the highest it could be, but we did not vote if we were going to lower it or not.

Yeah, we decided to keep it.

Yeah, we did that already. We're not lowering it or raising it. We can't really.

Those bills had to go out a month ago. Yeah. They want to.

That's not what you told us last time.

Hold on. As for the millage rate, that's why we have a first hearing and a second public hearing. So the vote for the millage rate will be on the first and second public hearing. There has to be two hearings for that. But in the workshop, there was just a consensus that you do not intend to increase it or lower it, whatever the case is. It's the same as last year's, basically.

You mean for next year?

Yeah, no, I'm going to go on record and say that I did not agree to keep it the same. I wanted to go to the rollback rate. So I will go on record with that. Because I remember specifically saying, is this final? And he said, no, this is not final. Yes. Correct.

I think what I was referring to was more like the assessment for the refuse and stormwater.

You said the refuse rate was set. Exactly. But you said the millage rate was not set.

That's in the public hearing.

What I'm asking is, are these numbers for the CRA and all the Alvalerum stuff, is this based on the current rate rolling over? Not the rollback rate, the current rate rolling over.

Yes, the current rate.

which is uh 5.49 yes 5.495 i believe 495. and what was the rollback rate just if you can remind me 5.17 yeah

okay and do we have any calculations based on that or do we not so basically the rollback rates will generate the same exact revenues as last year's right yes so okay so that means like if you look at your avalon revenues you won't see any increase if we were to use the same rollback rates i mean if we were to use the rollback rates we could generate you know approximately the same amount of revenues as last year's

Okay, so if you look at the line, it says 26. 4.2. Proposed in budget workshop 2 is 4.2. And now we're up at 4.7. so if it. If we did the role, I don't understand how did it go from proposed to proposed and went up 500,000 dollars.

that's because in budget workshop two we we had not uh received the latest figures for the cra so technically that and budget workshop two that figure should have been 4.7 yeah we and again this is a wash as you know because we collected on behalf for cra and then we transferred all the funds to them okay so let's just put that on record right now that you all of the rest of you guys are okay with leaving the texas as it is as they are the military

andy because i am not i think we should do the rollback rate and i just wanted on record i thought yeah i just said we were going to discuss it and decide in the public hearing there's no way we're going to wait until the first public hearing and then change all these numbers i'll tell you right now so unless we talk about it it ain't gonna happen i'm i'm open to talking about it well not if we're three to two or us

So for the record, I just looked it up in the e-tron file, the rollback rate is 5.175.

Correct, you just said that.

Yes, I was just confirming.

Yes, thank you. So we... All right. I mean, I just want to put it on record that I am not okay with that.

Should we lower our income? Lower the revenues for the city?

Yes.

Mr. Zegers?

So just for the record, if you look at on the same page, you'll see that the property taxes with using the current rates will increase our revenues by approximately $1 million. So just to if you're going to discuss it, that will be the $1 million. Not the million number. Pretty much, yes. That's just FYI.

And then when you guys gave directions to the directors, what did you direct them to cut? How much?

I believe the target was 5%, and obviously with the bill that could potentially harm us even further, they were instructed to be prepared to cut 7% one year after the other. So a total of 13%, 13%, 14% in total over the next two years.

Three years.

Yeah, three years. You're right.

Okay.

Because it will be fiscal year 28 and 29 impact.

Okay.

Yes.

Mr. Sick?

So I'm on page 26, just for reference. And the general fund looks like it's projected to basically have an excess of 4.5 million. Is that accurate?

That is accurate, but that does not include CIP.

Yes. That's without using a CIP. Yeah.

And then which would increase the fund balance to approximately 30 million and so on. I think if you're comfortable with it, after discussing CIP and understanding what those numbers, then we could have a more substantive discussion on the rate. And I'm very much in favor of having that discussion. so um but i think we're missing a key piece of information which is those cip numbers absolutely um and that could drastically change it in one direction or the other so personally i'd rather that maybe we get through the cip and then definitely have this particular discussion at the end of the meeting yes that's fine mr mcvoy then miss mulligan i love the books

I love the layout, the organization, but some of us are getting to small print, paint, black difficulties. And I include myself in that category. In terms of, I've got one question for our finance director. Is it true that we sent our millage rate or proposed millage rate to the county already because they need to send it out?

Yeah, we're required to send a preliminary rates back in, I believe, end of June. Right.

So we have already had a discussion of what we, as a commission, think about that. um i think it is very interesting that we have had from some of the members who are now suggesting that we should roll reduce our millage rate reduce the rate that we collect taxes i think it's very interesting that is coming from people we're making all sorts of alarm about how this property tax thing might come get voted in and we should be prepared and we shouldn't overspend and so on so it's nutty to me that we would now be talking about hey there that's potentially on the horizon and we should reduce our taxes I think it's even more, I guess I'm going to have to use the word reprehensible, that the same folks have said it's so important that we work on our roads, and it's very important that we get a good idea of what the cost of that is, which we have been provided, that if we want to catch up on the roads and bring them into good shape, you're looking at about $6 million a year. So which is it, guys? Are you committed to working on the roads, which clearly costs money? Or are you committed to just pat ourselves on the back so we charge our community less taxes? Government takes money to run and to do things. And when you say you want to reduce the taxes, of course, I'd like cheaper beer too. But that's not very deep thinking. Either you're for fixing the roads or various other things that we do, or you're not. And if you don't want to fund it, then you're basically not for it.

Just for clarity, I never said it.

We're not going to get into an argument. Thank you, Madam Mayor. I don't think it was capricious for what the Vice Mayor is saying. I think that the bottom line is that looking forward to the future, if this doesn't pass in November, could we possibly look toward the future of saying, hey, maybe we can lower that and put a better plan together? I don't think that's a bad conversation, although it has been already set for this budget workshop. I don't think that we have to sit here and and kick the can down the road. It's something that's already been done. So we're not ignoring it. I hear the concern of everybody up here and we do need more investment in our roads and CIP. But today is not the time to have that conversation. Honestly, I honestly feel that that conversation should happen after the November election because it doesn't matter what we sit here and talk about. We're all going to be... hypothesizing on what could happen. So I think that we need to put a pin in it just until the November decisions by the residents. And if the residents, if it fails, then we come back and say, okay, it failed. Now what can we do to help the residents? So it's just food for thought.

Thank you. Mr. Segrich.

just to adjust mr mcboy i never said i was for or against lowering it i was for having the discussion once we had all the data as you keenly pointed out there's things in the cip there's the roads and everything and at the end of that having an informed discussion it's a little bit not productive this early to get discontentious on this i mean i could list many projects that you voted for sir that i think are an absolute waste of taxpayer money i think it's best madam mayor please don't interrupt because right now it's it's going is devolving into a discussion between the two of you we have a all our staff here we have a budget to go through so our personal feelings should be sort of removed from it this has nothing to do with personal feelings if we want to talk about numbers and and it was brought up you know there's two million dollars in moving a house structure that's probably a waste of money i would rather spend that on roads we all have disagreements as to how best to govern and what our constituents want and it's not productive to attack each other for putting that stuff forward you know um i think it's a valid conversation on on both sides of the spectrum so i'm all for having a conversation on it um thank you commissioner malega for your insight on on that as well thinking about november i would agree um but like i said before after we have all the data we can spend five minutes on it because there probably won't be much of an excess left as far as i can see from the cip so

But as far as the finances concern, we have said what it's going to be for next year. We had that discussion, correct?

Yeah, we had that discussion, and it was said that it was a preliminary, and it was also said that it could be adjusted. Yes. So it's worth having a presentation.

This May. so point of order we we had the discussion for going forward i mean we did not decide on the actual rate we did not have a conversation about whether or not we would lower so all we said was this is the maximum we're going to charge and there will be no higher taxes

that's why it's called preliminary it's because by statute i believe we were required to make the vote on it first public hearing and second public hearing commissioner maliga i mean that makes sense obviously to wait until the november thing and i just wanted

my goal is to have residents get the services at the rates but if we keep having increased property value and we keep having increased funding which i think is wonderful but at some point i i want to make sure that we're matching service with increase and i don't see that 100 at this point So I just want to put it on record that I am looking to save the taxpayer money and make sure that they get the most bang for their buck. You know, if we're going to charge a million dollars more every year, we need to give a million dollars more of service or explain why we can't because of increasing costs in labor, increasing costs in products, increasing costs in something. But we need to make it clear. We need to be transparent. We can't just continue to say, thanks for another million bucks. you know that's not and i don't think that that's what you're saying but i think it's very important that we clarify we didn't go with the rollback because of xyz and if xyz is roads and cip and deferred maintenance that previous administrations did not fund then that makes sense my point is that we didn't have the discussion and i just wanted to make that clear okay and i don't think anyone up here disagrees with that concept at all okay

I didn't see that. Go ahead.

Okay, moving on to the related budget adjustments that I have listed. So we had, we made the related budget adjustments, and they result from changes such as increases in departmental budgets, if there was an increase in personnel costs or any changes, those associated costs, changes, administrative fees, fund contributions, FICA taxes, and so forth. So you're going to see those changes throughout the budget. And they went up. Some went up, some went down. It depends. Okay.

I think it depended too on some of the supplementals that we approved. Right.

Correct. Yes. Okay. Okay. The next item I wanted to point out is the special pay incentive, and that is the certifications and the one-time lump sum. We created a separate GL account within each fund and department where that money is stored. And so it can only be used for certification only and nothing more. Thank you. Okay.

Mr. Segrich.

Thank you. That's awesome. Is that reflected in the book? Could you just wave an example, just point one of those out?

If you look on page 53 of your book.

The big book.

I'm sorry, 84. What? 84, page 84. If you come down to the middle of the page, you see where it says special pay incentive. And so we move the money there. So you see the certification pay there is $2,483. And then the one-time performance pay shows $750.

Mr. and Ms. Segrich?

No, thank you very much. That's great.

Oh, I'm sorry. Okay, go ahead.

Okay, and the last item that I wanted to go over is the special assessment revenue. As discussed during our individual meetings with commissions, we updated the special assessment revenue projections for refuse residential, along with adjusting the commercial portion. We originally projected approximately 3.9 million in the residential assessment, and after receiving the county's certified assessment role, that projection was revised to approximately 3.6 million. And then on the commercial side, we previously projected about 3.7 million in revenues, but based on current year's actuals, we had to revise that projection to about 4.1 million. And that's the overall increase of 355,000 in commercial.

Now you're not looking, we're looking at that, you know, we have our books in front of us and there's a lot of numbers on these books.

Okay.

In very fine print. Can you just on the page show, you're, you're seeing numbers and we're just, we're trying to follow along. Okay.

So I have, I have the, well, it was. So refuse is page four 75 to four 76 of your budget book.

Yeah. Right.

Okay.

Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Good.

I did bring up the fact that on the commercial, I think it's important that going in the forward year, I spoke with Mr. Perry last week that we do a cost of service study on the commercial. Because if you're getting a regular can picked up versus the dumpsters that we have, what is the tipping fee? What is the cost of fuel? What is the cost of staffing? And to make sure that we're recouping the actual cost, because some commercial people get their garbage picked up three times a week, some once a week. I also think that we need to look at having any apartment that's over five units charged as commercial, not residential. Going back to the same thing with the mobile homes, you know, mobile homes are treated as residential, not commercial, but it's the we we bill the person who owns the land of the mobile home. And I feel that we may be losing. And that's why I think a cost of services study for that department and those that commercial especially is important for the year going forward. yeah commercial refuse and then looking at right now we we consider anything over eight units to be commercial when technically in the real estate world i think it's four or five i i'm not in the real estate world but i think that's what it is um and i i believe like in lantana i i get charged for commercial and there's three bays but we get charged each bay for how many persons each can gets picked up right so i get my cam picked up twice somebody else gets theirs picked up once so just making sure that we're we're we're getting our our our revenue back but we're not overcharging commercial at the same time because we're already overcharging commercial on the electric we're trying to work on but i really think that we've been doing these these you know cost of service studies with electric and water i think that refuse for commercial should be next next year i have no problem ms may

my just quick question is have we done the cost of service for um residential are we covering residential okay right okay i remember that okay mr segwitch yeah it was before me but after you

I would agree with Commissioner Malega on both points. Are you asking for consensus now to give direction to do that?

I know it's not in the budget for next year. I'm just trying to because Mr. Brown is like, here she goes throwing stuff at me. But I don't know if there's I think that it's something that we should talk about and give consensus for staff to look at putting in the plan for the next year. A cost of service study on the commercial end.

Yeah.

Okay. I would support that. I consent.

Thank you, McVoy.

i i hear the arguments for cost of service studies and pointing out that we've done them for water and electric remember that those are orders of magnitude bigger programs and costs that are orders of magnitude bigger and we uh and uh so i don't know i suspect that with the waste refuge we can probably we sort of i imagine the director is continually aware of the cost of service and is that's why they come to us with a budget so i'm not sure that that is a needed extra expense but i also very specifically want to be on record again that i firmly oppose charging residents of trailer parks um a commercial rate we know that many of the trailer parks are seniors we know that probably all of the trailer parks are folks are not the highest of incomes and it's in my book perverse to charge them a commercial rate just because they happen to have the misfortune that they that the land is owned by somebody else so you don't consent I do not consent to anything that would lead to charging. When we pick up from mobile homes and we allow seniors, which we've allowed for a long time, we allow them to have a normal garbage can just like any other residential area. We pick it up. as we do any other residential area i see no reason to penalize the least fortunate in our community by charging the commercial purely because the trailer park is owned by some business that's not the relevant thing if if you want to have a cause to service ask the question, which we've already asked and established the answer, that it does not cost more. It does not cost a commercial rate to pick up those residential cans from seniors in a trailer park. So there's no reason to charge them more. So aside from the trailer park issue, though, I don't think it's a bad idea to take a look at what if our... What I would do is I would approach the director of that department and say, do they feel like they have a pretty good handle on what it costs to do the services that they provide? We've already asked them to make a variety of changes. We just got an email about that either yesterday or this morning to improve what the community looks like, which I think is great. do I want to spend outside consultant money for a study? Cost of service study sounds like an outside study. If you mean, should the department look at how efficiently they're providing it? Sure.

Well, yeah, because you've got to remember the cost of trucks comes into play, the cost of fuel, the cost of the oil, the cost of maintaining. No, but I'm saying it's not just the tipping fee.

There's major capital improvements that go with this. I totally understand that. I've approved a number of those trucks.

I... i like the cute little one i finally saw it recently i know little blue yeah um yeah i mean as far as the electric i i have a different feeling about electric than um yes then the garbage it's a hugely right you know and there are a lot of other issues with them oh okay oh if i had my photo if i had my camera i would have taken a picture yeah

I just want to make sure that everyone recalls, and you'll see it when we get to the fee schedule later. But the mobile and park fee, that's not commercial or residential. That's a separate fee altogether. So I just want to make sure that people aren't going, well, the statement was made that it was charged residential for mobile and park, and it's not. It's in between.

Sort of in the middle?

Yes.

Thank you. Okay. Moving right along.

Moving along. Okay, so now we're going to look at page 459 to 460 in your budget book.

These books are great, though, if they just had a little darker print. 459.

And this is about the stormwater assessments, because we also had to make an adjustment on that as well. We projected overall 3.3 million. And with the county's assessment roll, the projection was revised to 3.1 million.

Ms. Maliga.

I just want to say I'm actually really impressed of the delinquent number.

Of the what?

The delinquent on page 459, the property tax delinquents. Yeah. I'm really impressed by that because in the state of what's happening in the world and the cost of everything, I'm surprised that that number's not a lot larger.

Yep. Yeah, it's interesting.

It's on page 460. 459. Like to the top. Oh. If you look at the top.

Yeah, delinquent only $8,000. Special assessment delinquent. Okay.

Okay. And one thing that I do want to point out is we have a upcoming care ATC proposal that is scheduled for August 25. Just do.

Yeah.

And I asked Human Resources directly to come forward, but while she's coming, there's a company that came in and made a presentation to staff. I'm just trying to give up until she gets it. Made a presentation to staff of providing a program that will help lower our current insurance rates, or maybe help avoid having to . For the employee.

Correct.

And is ACT the acronym you used?

There you go. Is it on? Yep. Okay. Sorry. Morning.

Morning.

Okay. What I'm coming to you with is a proposal from a company. You'll see a lot of cities right now have an employee health center. So your bigger cities like a Boca or a West Palm have an employee center where employees can go get a prescription, you know, quick, that kind of stuff. Well, obviously, we can't afford anything along those lines. But what we can do is we can join a group. They have these private kind of like urgent care centers kind of where you have to be a member. So what it would do, it would allow anybody, any of our employees or their dependents, anybody that's on our insurance, including you guys, to go to these clinics for free. So you'd be able to go if you have, and a lot of prescriptions would be free to the employee or to their dependents.

So they would pay in.

Yeah, so the city would be like kind of like subsidizing it in front, but this would also encourage people to go to the doctor because what is never ever going to go down? Taxes and insurance. So medical insurance keeps going up. How do you keep it from like going up as quickly? I can't say we'll ever take it down. But, you know, it's the same thing as a car insurance. If you get into a bunch of accidents, your car insurance goes up. Ask my husband about them. Yeah. What's that?

Maybe no copay?

No.

No. So what doctors there?

Yeah, there'll be a PA on site always. You can go anytime you want to go, just like any kind of urgent care center. We would share it with a couple of different cities, but it would be for us. It's not open to the general public. But this is what we need people to go to the doctor before they get sick or right when they start to get sick. We need people to start going to get their annual physicals and doing their mammograms and all that kind of stuff. So this is encouraging them. A lot of thing what keeps people from going is the cost. And I know that the copays are expensive, but insurance itself is expensive. And so I know the employees think this is a lot, but they don't realize how much the city is paying, too. But this would be an opportunity for our employees and their dependents, hopefully, to start going to the doctor more regularly, develop a relationship with the PA in that clinic. I know now, like I go to the Cleveland Clinic, I never know who my doctor is going to be. They keep switching out. But this way, there should be a PA there. They've been there for a while. We'd establish relationships with them. And hopefully, people start going to the doctor. And I don't say it's going to bring our claims down, but it's going to keep those catastrophic claims from coming, hopefully. Yeah.

Yes. I mean, last week when you had that, you know, the wellness. Yeah.

Very, very important. So I'm going to have them come and explain the whole program. They work closely with our insurance provider, which is Cigna, and they'll work closely with the city. We'll have a strong relationship with them. But I think this is a really good opportunity to try and get our employees to start going.

And the fiscal effect on the city is...

It's going to be, I want to say it's about 360,000 a year. But keep in mind, what do our insurance rates go up every year? So I know it is a lot of money, but I think it's a really worthwhile investment to our employees. And I think this really hits them in their pocketbooks. And I know even myself, going to a dermatologist is $75. That's a lot of money. So let's get people starting to go. So like I said, what's that?

Regardless, we're going to talk about this.

Yeah, I'm going to have them come present it. I don't have all the details in front of me, but I think it's a great program. We've been thinking about it for years, and I think it will really help long term on our insurance costs. Is it in your budget for this? um it will be if you approve it on the 25th so we're waiting it this is a separate budget item I've been working with Yannick on this one so I I know it's a big ticket item and I know it's so and I wanted it to have its own workshop so you guys could really ask all your questions and get all the details from the experts the more that we can do for employees that we can't do other things for them yep I think this is a huge one and it hits every single employee and their family matter how long or short they've been here which is another issue yeah no it's any employee yeah our benefits start the first month after you start no matter if you started like two days before or you know two weeks before so after that first a month they and their dependents are eligible for this program and we'll be campaigning and trying it you know if you guys approve it and i know it's a lot of money but i just think our employers are such a good investment and it's a really good opportunity to show them that we we hear you about the benefits and this is what we can do thank you okay

Okay, so now we're on to review the additional supplementals.

mr mcvoy uh i i apologize i didn't get to before we leave all together the um stormwater one uh i just want to make sure that our water director is confident because we know that we have flooding issues in various places in the city are we funding that adequately to be proactive for both dealing with the existing flooding issues various places and proactive for, at this point, known difficulties that are coming, both from sea level rise, getting the water out of here, and rainfall intensity, which dumps it on us faster and does not make our life easier.

At this point, I would say we are still reactive, but working towards becoming proactive. As far as the budget for fiscal year 27 and the CIP, I do believe that that is as much as we could physically spend in a year. So any more projects than that, and we simply wouldn't be able to manage. So there will certainly be more coming in fiscal year 28, but yes, I am confident in what we've proposed. Thank you.

Okay, so now we're on to the additional supplementals, which is this packet here in front of you. And I will have the departments come up and present theirs, but I will go ahead and do the one that was submitted for the city manager's office. That is on page two of 53. We got it.

um this book here is in our office so this is supplementals to the supplementals to the supplementals supplementals just so i stand on top of things

madam mayor yes should we wait until the commission's uh sure yeah they should have their books yeah it's quite a schlep

Hey, we should okay so if you go to page two of your supplemental book this supplemental was presented on so at commission request there was a supplemental submitted for a citywide construction project manager to oversee all the projects in each department and it will be housed in the city manager department so we're looking at approximately 156 339 what page is that in the big book do we have the funding for it It's not in the big book. It's presented as a supplemental. This is housed in the general fund. No, this is not for us to look at it.

We're approving them now, right?

At the last budget hearing, hearing number two, the commission gave consensus for staff to go back, take a look at that division of construction project manager, went back and did the research based on input from HR and the resources in the public department, and we're visiting this as such.

Let me ask you a question.

a couple like i know the motor project has mr brett as their how would that work i think it's talking about internal just well we're going to get a grant um but i mean that's it's public money so well based on staff and guys we haven't worked on it it would impact all departments so there's a project internal project going on within the city this position would head up that position you can have that those projects

take a look at them make sure it's you know so renovations of project properties like the gymnasium or like the osborne center new buildings all of that i think it's efficient i think it's very important and it shows that we have 3.9 right now in surplus on the general fund so they're correct on page one it says we have uh 3.9

Yes, so we currently have 4.5, but if we were to approve all the supplementary, then we'll be down to 3.9.

So we're working on 4.5 right now?

Correct.

Okay, thank you.

So that would be an additional... Again, that's without the... Oh, okay. So it's still good.

3.9, and obviously that's without the CIP.

Yeah.

Right.

your charming smile i almost wish we were doing cip first before supplementals because we've already approved so many supplementals for each department and we haven't even gotten to cip yet that's the commission wish we can i'm just speaking for me personally we haven't even cracked open the cip book in the first two budget work sessions and if we're looking at only 4.5 And we've already done two rounds of supplementals for the departments. And we still have 3-9.

What's the total of the supplementals? 500,000. It's on page one. Okay.

Which brings us down to 3.9.

You're going to see how much each fund has remaining if you approve the supplementals.

Okay. I'm not trying to throw a wrench in the process. I know that we have not even looked at the CIP books as a whole. I mean, as a team, I've looked at them, obviously, individually. But we keep going back to the supplementals, and I feel like that we've avoided the CIP, which is big. That's what the residents see. The residents don't see...

all the stuff we're doing internally with promotions and hr and new funding um i don't know what the rest of the commission feel so the cip um mr mcgoy um in sort of the same direction if i i just want to make sure i understand the 4.5 commissioner mcgoy can you speak into your mic please

i do but i got to turn it on um the 4.5 in the general fund of available the cip comes out of that whatever we choose to approve for cip would be attacking that i mean attack is not the right word but would be dipping into that 4.5 correct and and you know just to think about this example okay a construction project manager Sounds like a pretty good thing. But I think we've heard a lot over the last months that our response time in community sustainability isn't what we all would like. And I've heard, I seem to recall hearing repeatedly from Mr. Waters that they are short staff. Now, whether that's because they don't have the money to pay them or whether they don't have somebody who's applying for the job, that might be some of both. i agree with the proposal let's look at the cip first maybe we don't make the final decisions i don't maybe we do but let's figure that out before we look at these and then we'll need some sort of i think i would need some sort of a pitch do we need a construction manager more than we need a whatever whatever we kind of need to see, rather than going through them sequentially, we kind of need to see what's the big picture so that we can thoughtfully evaluate how to allocate limited resources.

I mean, as far as this position in general, I think it pays for itself in the overall.

But how do you feel about going to CIP?

Yeah, I can do CIP first. Is all of CIP comes out of the General Fund?

Not necessarily, but I was going to suggest we look at, if you would prefer, we could look at the supplemental alongside with the CIP for the general fund.

Do you think we can look at two things at once?

I mean- CIP for general fund first? Sure.

That's what I'm saying. Then we go back to the supplemental. We could start with a CIP for the general fund and then go back to the supplemental and then vice versa. Yeah.

i don't but it's okay i'm you know okay but anyhow it's fine okay everyone's need phrase i think it was commissioner yeah but whatever it's a good one let's do it so on the cip which which page do we go to she'll get us started go ahead and kick start work hard okay I'm going to go see if Anthony can come because he needs somebody.

So we would first turn on, should we wait? So just to prep you guys, we would first turn to page 12 and 13.

12 and 13. For those following along. This book. Yes. This book here.

All right, so you want $6.7 million out of the $4.5 million we have?

Actually, the total request was $6.7 million, and what's not funded, it's approximately $3 million. So you see where we have on the first column, project title, you have the list of all the projects. and what staff recommended as the funding source. So in total, we could definitely fund approximately 3.2 using PAYGO funds. Should I continue?

Yes. Can you explain what PAYGO funds is?

Just- Spend on revenues.

Spend on revenues. Money we have.

Yes. So in this case, it will be the 4.5 or the 3.9. Okay.

So if it was in my own budget, it would be the money I have in my checking. Correct. Yes. Okay.

Yes, that's PAYGO funds, which we're recommending using 3.4 million if you do approve the projects. So 3.4 million will come out of the current funds. So in the previous slide that you had seen, it was 4.5 minus the supplemental, which brought it down to 3.9. So the 3.4 will also be taken out of the 3.9, so we'll be left with only $500,000. Yes, if you do approve all the products.

And then as you do budget amendments throughout the year, we would only have $500,000 to work with.

Yes, to work with. But then again, you still have excess fund balance. Because remember, we have that threshold of 25, the minimum threshold of 25% of our general. Now, we're still above it. We're still above that. Yes. That's the cushion that we still have cushion on that. If we have to use.

Well, we just want to do that.

No, not until.

Sorry. When we toured the fire station, I see under fire, we have fire station number one, bathroom number two. Is that two different stations? So that's station one and then the Detroit station. I don't, we had talked about possibly putting the big fans over here at this. I always forget what district. 93. Thank you. 93. 91. Is that something that.

I've made several requests and no one has responded.

In regards to the cost.

I guess they have a play that they developed years ago.

and it's pretty much standard across all the fire stations and they were going to provide me with that information but i guess they're still working okay thank you for looking and thank you for touring that i think that the bathrooms are a definite need um especially at the detroit station street um detroit street station there's a lot of need for that firehouse and i'm happy to see that on the cip this year

also if i if i may just add on on on those pages that we're looking at you'll you'll see a page reference number so if you need to go back to that page and see the detail in the same book same book yes um so i guess we'll give you guys time to go through these i don't know if you want to discuss each item individually or

Well, let's go down them and see what we have. Yeah, I have a couple of questions about each one. So if we went through them.

So the first one is a citywide facility master plan. We are suggesting it's on page 47, the details. And we're suggesting using PAYGO funds.

So what is it?

Page 47?

Right, to have a developed master plan.

Citywide facility master plan.

i'm in favor of that i just my concern is like you know we did the green space master plan and i don't know where we are moving forward with that project and updates on that and i hate paying for plans the only thing i like about this is that it does tell us an actual picture of where our buildings stand right um and then we can then take that and use that towards the next cip of the the infrastructure improvements we need yeah and I mean it's not a very large cost to know what's happening with all of our buildings and this is they're they're static they're not going to change it's well they're not going to get better and then this would be an external study I'll let the director speak on it Mr Brown

Yeah, preferably an external study because this also includes programming. You're looking at the departments, their current needs, their future needs, position counts. So it's not just the physical buildings. Correct. Also city-owned property, possibilities for future use just across the board. Oh, this is huge. We have to do it. So it's a little more than we have staffing to do in-house with all the other stuff. So it'd be something we would be looking to push forward.

Do you think that 115 is adequate, though, for that kind of study?

we believe so based on uh what some other cities have paid as of recently recently okay again that sort of uh they did not do um some type of consultant firm yeah they would go ahead and do that yeah I did too Mr Mcboy Mr Mcboy is sighing yeah um

You love studies.

Well, no, I was very unhappy with the green space.

Well, then we won't use 10 more.

What's that?

We don't use 10 more.

Well, they might be fine for this, but I was not happy with the results of that one or the quality of the work. And we're sure we can't do this within, say, the city managers. Oh, I didn't have to get started. And Mr. Perry says, no, we can't fit this in.

Snap.

uh reluctant but okay you're going on the naughty list for christmas gifts just so you know he can't stay off it um i mean yes keep on top of our buildings and so on that seems reasonable i i'm hesitant about 115 000 but fine

Is this not something that if we approve the project manager, that that person, I mean, how many projects? I mean, is that a full-time job? Is that something that they could work on?

I'm probably the wrong person to speak about that position. We have no use for it in public works. So I'm not sure what all that position would be doing citywide. But in public works, we already have a project manager. You have a project manager. Correct. For like all of our roads and stuff.

Who just does project managing for public works.

Correct. road sidewalk stuff like that what about the um building construction so our uh architect uh serves as basically our they're the ones who are going to be doing a lot of the uh the cei portion of it as well because they designed the project so they're the ones who are actually doing a lot of that that portion of it and then the recipe covered by myself amina that's actually my background So that's actually my background as well. So I'll be heavily involved in that process as well, as well as my assistant director with the roads and stuff. No, not just the roads, but also for the facility itself. Correct.

But I think if we have this facilities master plan and we have the project manager kind of overseeing the facilities master plan thing, I think it all kind of works together in order to get a better view of what we have, what we need, what we could. what can we do with some of the access properties some of the ideas you know about putting everything together into one big master plan as opposed to this is what's happening in public works and this is what's happening in electric and this is what's happening in um community sustainability that's what i'm looking for an overall charging plan where we can kind of intertwine some of these departments into a more financially feasible so that they're not all separate silos in different places all over the city.

I struggled when I was putting that job description together because I was trying to figure out how do we tie this together based on the comments I've heard from all of you on the dais. typically the person who's gonna be highly skilled at like the 1900 project, like an actual renovation or a brand new construction project like the Upwork Fleet Facility is not gonna be the person who's highly skilled at doing roadways and being out there and understanding how you're going to uh be checking subgrade and base and florida bearing ratio and all this other stuff they're different people um as well as something that's an expert in this and this and this so just the construction in general project manager i was struggling to kind of come up with a description for that so i'm not really sure where the focus is going to be or how we're going to kind of nail that down so we know exactly who we're looking for exactly what they're going to be doing but for public works in general wouldn't have a need for them which is why we did the the actual supplemental and i did the job description that as candace mentioned it actually would reside in the city manager's office because i really have the space so this would not this person would not put your project manager out of work because they're separate yeah our project manager they came from the asphalt industry she actually worked for um so she that that's her bread and butter she understands roadway construction and all that so that's that's what she does deals with all of our contractors all of our roadway projects she knows concrete asphalt and everything else so that's what she does um sidewalks she knows a lot of sidewalks uh so it's so that's why it resides in the manager's office and then just trying to figure out city-wide yeah what what all they're going to be doing so but miss may has her light on in advance

Um, I guess we're kind of going back and forth between CIP because they, the city wise facility master plan, it does seem reasonable that that would sort of relate to the construction. And I guess the question that I'm trying to get a sense of is. Do we have kind of, if we, you know, maybe a little bit cobbled together, but do we have enough in-house expertise and knowledge and so on that maybe we don't need to add another position for that, that we can oversee the various things well enough with what we have? with the master plan to get somebody outside to you know figure out all what we got and so on kind of like what we did with this yeah those guys at the beach that we said well dig out all the stuff on it yeah um And I know there may be other departments that have different views, but to help us decide, do we need to add 150,000 for that position? Or would the master plan get us quite a bit of the way there and we can string along with what we have for the rest?

I think they're two different things.

They are. The other thing, because if we're going to say that this position would then be in charge of the facility's master plan, again, different skill set than someone who would be doing roads, than someone who's skilled at doing- But wouldn't their expertise be in project management? Well, project management of what? Because there are project managements in the financial field, in the construction field, in all different fields, you have project management. Right. And you can be a PMP, project management professional. So it really depends on what field are we talking about and are they skilled at project management in multiple fields that we would be looking for.

Okay, but it seems like we're saying, and I'm not, it seems like we're saying a project manager for everything but the roads and sidewalks. Okay. So they would have to be able to... would have to be able to talk to building zoning they would have to talk to well i mean everybody so even though there's different you're saying there's different skills for different things they would have to be sort of a problem okay um i wish we had more i wish we had more city facilities to actually inventory that's one of our i mean i think that's one of our shortcomings is that well i get questions of where can this person go or work in that department go we don't know how many places which is why we need a new city hall

But we're not going to get one until we get this facilities master plan. We need to know what, like, for example, when I went over to look at 1900 the other day, they were saying, okay, well, here's 1900. And here's maybe we're going to put the electric customer service right here. And then maybe we'll build a building back here and maybe we'll do this. Maybe, maybe, maybe. But if we have overall facilities master plan, And then we have somebody that's in charge of putting all of those projects, making sure that they're all meeting their deadlines and budget and everything else. I think it's an overall thing. I don't think you need to have... They're not doing any of the work. They're not overseeing all of it. So for me, I just think it's kind of an... almost an auditing position, just trying to make sure that all of these projects are on track, which because my point is you may have your silo mastered, but when you start to put electric in this building with public works, with this, with that, it becomes somebody needs to oversee all of it, in my opinion. That's what I'm seeing.

And obviously, and I can't speak for Ed and electric, but obviously they have their vision for their building back. They're basically where the poll yard is right now. And I've been really talking to you as far as what his process is, or what he's thinking about as far as.

Right and I know the management of that project, so budget workshop 3 is the time to get into what do we want to do? Where do we want to because we could be here all day, but I think that's the point of these 2. the one cip and the one supplemental is to get to that conversation that's my opinion is that what you're saying city manager what we envisioned we hired uh facilities uh man i mean uh construction management

and we still need to conduct this master plan regardless so hopefully we get someone on board that can assist this person in gathering information doing what it needs to be doing going around specific facilities jamie also has a facilities manager in his department that would also insist so probably all those routines combined with maybe less than the scope of work that that person might be able to do, but clearly we still need a plan that's going out five, 10 years where the kids might be. So my point is that they can work together in order to get this plan in place.

And there's enough internal projects to keep that person busy. Yeah. I agree with both. Question for the public. Okay. Thank you. Yep. Go ahead.

I guess my question is overall cost. We're looking at almost $300,000 for the combination. My question is, if you hired the position, could that person do most of the content of the master plan as part of their work? Or alternatively, could you do the master plan with an external outfit and then we do the project management either in-house or possibly what we've done in the past is have an owner's rep that we hire on a contract basis to kind of, okay, we got this project, look out for our interest, make sure everything's going. would a combination in terms of cost and effectiveness and getting done what we need done, could a master plan plus owner's rep be a less expensive way to go? Or could a hiring the construction person and not do the master plan but do that in-house through them primarily through them is that an option is either one of those pathways reasonable that's a good question commissioner but i think from the beginning the overall purpose of the

project manager was to ongoing managing of projects so i'm i believe that that person can work alongside someone trying to do that master plan but there's no right or wrong answer with that's that's a decision that we as a group decide to find but i believe ongoing that project manager would be

because the inventory master plan is finite it's done and there's a thing but now we still need a person to I think that's the difference yeah it's a one-shot deal so we have consensus for that item yes sorry for both of them I yeah I give consensus for both for the for the new position and the master plan correct together correct I'm not convinced that we need to do both but

i will be teaming defer to my colleagues deferring thank you for your deferral so we have consensus for that yep anthony just so you know we just made we just did consensus for the facilities master plan and the city project manager i would consent to both oh really shocker

the next one would be the landscape turf now the complex um complex building well that's that's yeah we already approved that yeah so landscape turf let's talk turf let's talk to her i i i'm not loving this one mr midboy no this is a hard no for me yeah

That's not the look that people want in the community for that. I understand the practicality and so on, but it's not the look that people want.

Thank you. I happen to agree with Mr. McCoy. It's not that big of a place to do it. 12 to 13. Page 12, yeah. Hi there.

Hello again. Um, so given the cost of irrigation, they were spending like around the city. Um, I think we were over then in my book back there over $400,000 as of right now.

How much is it for this one per year?

By the way, these are all the locations in the city that we have irrigation that we're using. And we're over $440,000 right now.

Is that broken down by area?

It's broken down by area. 414. There's a lot of these on here.

And this is per year?

This is year to date.

year to 400 000 for the first half of the year first eight months yeah up through now so basically what you're seeing here is in an effort to

lower some of our costs because as you mentioned the beginning of the meeting um looking at ways to with the potential of what might happen in November lower some costs for us so we looked at two of the locations where we do spend a lot of money for irrigation um the cultural Plaza and then the courtyard up at the casino building behind the uh the restaurant shops which is always hard to keep green up there so we're constantly having to water more water more water more Investing in turf in those two locations would eliminate the need to put so much water into it. So again, it would be something different, something new, but wanted to at least bring it to you guys for discussion and see if this is something that makes sense financially to save some money on the irrigation costs and water costs. Just want to bring it forward. We want to make sure we're at least addressing issues and just giving you guys options.

Where's the cost for the one at the casino?

That'd be inner beach.

Okay. Do you know offhand? Oh, here it is. 94. Yeah, 94.3.

my only concern is how hot it is good idea i mean i understand that i think we have to weigh um cost with the i mean we talk about our citizens and our citizens are not really in favor of this sort of thing i mean i just can't i i would be a no on this one i think that um

i know that i see you brought some turf samples i know that a couple of cips in here involve some of our fields um obviously a lot of the counties moving that way and a lot of their fields course brings a lot of the municipalities are doing that and a lot of that is because of play time you know we get complaints about like sunset by where you are as far as why we have to restrict the amount the play time because It's grass and it wears out. So the people who are actually coming there and paying for, you know, do a league or something like that, they can't be on dirt. So we have to make sure that we're monitoring how much time.

The pause is really the center of the city. And I think that's not the place where we want to be having artificial turf. And it's not used that heavily the way the field is. So from my perspective, this would be a no. Mr. Secretary.

Thank you. Um, so I went went three G's. Do you know the what the actual maintenance cost is on the cultural plaza?

That's what I was looking for on here.

Um, you had it on some of the others. It just wasn't on this. And I'm on page 52.

You got to have to actually pull these out because we have basically you've got the cemetery broken out for the water annually, and then you've got basically the entire rest of the city. And that was the total amount I was looking at. But I did not. I should have gone through and pulled out individually what each location was.

And do you know approximately what's the cost of maintenance on artificial turf?

That would be more of a. the experts with artificial turf.

I know you have to brush it and vacuum it. Yeah.

Stewart Sword Leisure Services. So we spent the day with the county, Mr. Bob Hamilton, his team, just to kind of get some best practices, lessons learned from them. Now the conception is it's completely maintenance free. Now that's true for irrigation right obviously we don't need to water artificial engineered turf but you still have to rake it almost culminate like you comb your hair to kind of stand it back up and there's also another device that's a magnet that you roll across it just to pick up any debris that shouldn't be true to the turf so in terms of you know an employee being on the field there's still going to be that requirement to to go by and make sure it's in its best condition and what about um dog waste it'd come back to that that person the grounds person just kind of trooping the line so because

The concern in the cultural plaza would be some of those things, because we're not going to stop people from walking their dog in downtown.

Has that been a big problem, dog waste in the cultural plaza?

Well, it's fenced off right now. What? It's fenced off.

And you can't actually get in it, though.

So would this allow us to unfence it and have it be open for people's use?

currently so there's decorative fencing up there right now um it can be removed but it's open on all sides so you can walk in actually the east side that actually faces the the stage and the actual building itself that's all open that whole sidewalk back there and stage so you can access that that courtyard that's kind of nice because it makes a little bit of a visual We had initially, when we put new sod in, we had to fence it off until we established it. And then once it was established, we actually got a lot of good comments that it looked good. So we just kind of left it up. Initially, it wasn't the intention to put it up, but there's nothing that says you can't be on there. But yeah, so it's open on all sides, but...

for safety if you go other little kid it's less watching that you have to do where you know where the kid's going to run off so i mean the way it is now i mean i don't mind the white fence i don't i know that you can go on the grass and i think if we're talking about the cultural plaza of the city the culture of the city really has never been our official turf so that's just my feelings are you done no um and what was the cost to resolve that

Oh, gosh.

30,000.

It was less than 30. It was like 21 or so. It was like low to mid 20s.

So here's kind of how I'm looking at these different projects from the artificial turf side. They've got an 8 to 10 year lifespan or 12 to 15, depending on kind of usage. everywhere my research said you know yeah the manufacturer says it's it can last up to 15 but that's like an ideal scenario and we're also in south florida where we've got this thing called the sun which causes a lot of damage to anything synthetic um so i ran my numbers with with uh your timeline on it and looking at that roughly we'd be looking at essentially having to set aside once you put it in right you got to plan for replacement right so we have the initial um 60 something thousand dollar outlay um that avoids us having to do three turf replacements let's say And I compared them that way. But then on top of it, we got a budget for the eventual replacement of this asset. And that was one thing that I saw just as a general comment. And I apologize for being missing in the early part of this. But as a general comment, We have a lot of assets. We don't kind of put money in the piggy bank for later knowing that we have to replace these assets. So we're doing a lot of roofs. We should learn our lesson and plan for the future and make sure we set aside monies as we're going along for those roofs. This would be one of those kind of assets, right? So we know we have to replace it in 10 or 12 years. So it would be an additional $7,500 a year. Now, So the cultural plaza, these aren't huge costs. I can see the benefit of having the artificial turf there from a maintenance perspective and so on. But costing it out, I don't see the cost savings. Every calculation I did, it ended up being a little bit more expensive.

I think you missed the part before you came in where you were talking about irrigation. No, I used those numbers.

Where we were provided numbers, I used those numbers.

We're at like 600,000 total.

No, we're at like 440 right now. That was citywide for our irrigation costs.

But in some of these other projects, they did give an estimated savings. One of them was like $25,000 a year and so on. So based on the size of this and those calculations, I kind of guesstimated $15,000 as a cost savings for it. It doesn't actually yield a cost savings. We could replace that sod every three years, and we'd still be ahead of the game financially. So I'd be interested in just understanding the overall arguments, or maybe we don't have those numbers quite yet here to make that decision. But as far as actual numbers go and the math behind it, Artificial turf in this case seems to be a little bit more expensive. So I would be interested in are there other auxiliary benefits we're going to get out of it? Can we have more concerts there? Can we trample the so if we end up having, let's say, weekly concerts or whatever, or weekly events there, is that going to destroy the sod at such a rate? that it almost mandates we do this. And in the back of my head, I think if we are doing that, it does. And I understand the point about a lot of people don't like it, but people also don't like walking around in mud and putting their blanket out in mud to sit in front of the stage. And I can see arguments for both. Even though financially, to me, this works out to be a little bit more. In this particular project instance, I can see the benefit if we are going to really up the usage of that space. The last concern with it is, this is on the flip side of the coin is it premature based on what we want to do with the annex building which means construction equipment which will tear it up immediately so i guess long way to come around it but i just wanted to explain how i was thinking about these things um i'd be in favor of tabling this until after we figure out what's going to go on with the annex um i do appreciate that this was brought forward because i can see some benefits that will allow us to utilize that space a lot more um and i think if we are utilizing it to the maximum potential that sod is going to get worn down pretty damn quick um so i i'd be in favor of tabling this until after we decide what's going on with the annex and who knows it might get included in that right you know what i'm saying okay um mr mcvoy um let's let's i would be a no in any case but i'm fine with tabling

Okay, great. Me too.

I'd say let's move on.

Yeah, and when you talk about weekly concerts, I wonder what the recreation staff says to that, but that's another story.

Well, there's lots of businesses that would like to see that. We'd be willing to organize.

It's never happened, but it could happen.

Okay, so next down is code compliance vehicles. So wait, can I just ask a question? Are we tabling just the one at the cultural plaza, or are we tabling the one at the casino too? No. i'd like to table both of them because we don't know what's happening at both properties i agree i mean we might as well yeah thank you and i don't know that the citizens have x i mean i've never been out in that place behind the casino to hang out so i don't know that that's a real citizen draw right it's a wasted space actually unfortunately i did a wedding there once oh yeah but an impromptu wedding um oh yeah so the city made no money on that

Four people.

So I would consent to tabling the casino as well.

Yeah. Okay. So we've got consent to do that. So just cross those off your list. No, forever. I wrote a table. Okay. Next time.

I mean, if we're on turf, we might as well talk about the field. Well, hold on.

Let's just go down to the fund. Okay. Okay. So the next one is the compliance vehicles and service expansion, but that also coincides with the...

the supplemental that they had submitted that we already approved previously no this and the new one it's in the new one so page 62 in the cip vehicles yeah can i ask just a quick question about that sure miss may so when you look at the um

the sheet with the different colors talking about priorities this one was given all zeros and i don't understand why it didn't seem like it would be an all zero thing because we didn't score it i mean it says it has no safety no value no nothing it's like well okay well why are you putting it in there then but i because we've asked for more code this is page 62 yeah

where um page 40 page 40 yeah 1162. we're the ones who've asked for more code and more people and more so i don't i agree with you on the scorecard but this was a directive from us as a commission that we wanted more code com code combines officers so but what is the seventy thousand dollars paying for i guess that's my question as you recall at the last i believe this code enforcement yes the workshop of the commission

uh director staff to go back and take a look at how can we expand our services to include evenings and weekends as a part of that community sustainability staff took a look at it and this is their recommendation in order to expand that service again on the evenings and uh staffing on the weekend and you only need seventy thousand dollars to do that so these are for cars just for the vehicles but the directors here you know why can't they use the vehicles that they use on wednesday on saturday

I think you're confusing refuse with code.

Yes.

William Waters, Community Sustainability Director. The amount of time that you all requested to be covered is 44 hours a week, which is more than the 40 hours a week that our current nine officers cover. And they will be overlapping in time because most officers only work an eight-hour day. So if we're going to hire two new officers to work on the nights and weekends, we need two new cars to provide them something to drive.

Why can't, because they're overlapping. By how much?

As much as four or five hours a day.

So we asked to have the, and what time would they end?

Well, that will need to be negotiated, but we're proposing that they would work until nine o'clock at night and possibly 10. So they would start at one o'clock in the afternoon and work until nine, or they would start at work at two o'clock in the afternoon and work until 10.

So double code enforcement officers during the day?

Sometimes, yes.

Okay.

I like to keep in mind too that if we were to hire two new officers, we would have a co-compliant staff exactly the same size as the entire city of West Palm Beach.

Well,

And I would like to keep in mind too that we may need another budget amendment depending on how many cases they're able to generate. There are other services within the department that may be impacted. We have no way to actually assess that impact until we actually have the officers on the street, but likely building and planning and preservation may need additional staff people to support the code cases that are generated because many code cases involve a necessity to collaborate with the building division and the planning and preservation division.

Okay, does this overall budget include the extra personnel for code?

If you go to page 64, you will see the breakdown of that, and then it's also included in your supplemental book on page 28 and 29. It's not included.

Okay, so the $70,000 is vehicles. And then what was the other page? I'm sorry.

It says what is the code for vehicles and the addition of two code compliance officer positions.

The total is like $307,000 for everything.

Page 64 shows it. Because we wanted to show you the breakdown of the cost in its entirety. But in your supplemental book, you will see the supplemental for the additional positions and the operating expenses. Okay. Right. And what page was that again? I'm sorry. Page 28 and 29. Thank you. You're welcome.

I consent to this.

Oh, I do too. Absolutely.

Okay.

I just wanted to make sure. I thought the 70 was for both the people and the cars. I was like, what? Guys.

You get paid in fees.

No, I mean, we've made this a priority. We said we want this to happen. And if we want something to happen, we need to pay for it.

Fine.

um so i'm struggling quite a bit with this and i'm trying to think about the bigger context and for me part of that bigger context is how is city government viewed in our city And a big chunk of how city government is viewed relates to code enforcement. and we actually had a couple of meetings workshops and special sessions and i don't remember what all but but various flavors of meetings because there was a lot of concern that code was kind of out of hand and doing things that didn't make a whole lot of sense to people um including to some of us on the commission and the feedback that i've been hearing is yeah it's cool that you guys met that's great I don't really see anything. I mean, residents don't or business owners don't really see anything great that came out of that. That gives me confidence that the things that we were many in the community and business community were concerned about are in fact being changed. So I have that context in the back of my head, and I recognize that who I hear from may be different than who other people hear from and other concerns and other views may be heard. But those are the views that I'm hearing that we had a problem. We raised some level. You guys met and did something, but it didn't really give much confidence that it was going to improve things. And now you're we're being requested to vote to spend more money on code where there's not really much indication that the concerns are in fact be have been addressed or will be addressed it's it to me the perception that i could see a lot of people having is geez you guys sure didn't listen to us we said there was a problem and now you're making the problem worse that's kind of the perception that i am concerned about and i have been out talking to people not particularly about the city but i tell them i'm a commissioner so tell me about whatever your concerns are and

that's kind of where what i'm hearing okay i'm just gonna make a comment before i call you mr segrich and conversely on the flip side of that one is how many people do i hear why have these things gone unaddressed into why here with more code enforcement people will have more eyes on the streets is my understanding i see miss bryant shaking your head yes nodding her head yes um you know that with more people there will be more eyes oh there's a pile I have more time to call it in so there's a perception there are multiple percent there are correct right and there are Corrections that need to be made that we've addressed that we're talking that's that's why we had the workshop but that's has nothing to do with really how many people are out there I understand what you're saying but I see it a bit of a different way Mr sagrange thank you um coming back to the original question why was it scored all zeros

And who did the scoring?

Well, we can. Yeah, I mean, it was we were the ones that said.

I want an answer from staff. Who scored this?

i believe the scores are not reflective of what staff believes i mean i think the staff just put it together and never because so what are these scores sorry what are these scores like well it wasn't or say scored commissioner we put it together as a result

Understood. I'm reading the capital improvement scorecard by which things are giving a weight. And based on that weight, it's given a scale of highest priority versus lowest priority. So if you're telling me these scores are useless, great, I'll rip it out of the book and not pay attention. And we did a useless thing. If you're telling me these scores have value, I would like to know who scored it and why.

Mr. Segrist, I understand what you're saying, but I think that this is because after being here for six years, it's because it was a directive from the commission.

I understand that, but I would like an answer to my question. I would like an answer from staff, please.

I don't know that we need to put staff on the spot. If you want to inquire into this, it is now 1123. Right. Everything, that's the only thing that was zero.

There are other things on here that we asked for that are scored.

Are you approving it or not, Mr. Stankridge?

I would like an answer, Madam Mayor. I gave you full respect, didn't interrupt you once. All you keep doing is interrupting me. I'm asking a simple question. Who scored it and why?

it was a score commissioner so it wasn't scored it was not scored okay um that's not that's not reflective of staff was against it it was just not scored because it was a directive that was given by the commission okay so we put it together so none of these other were directives given by the commission you say others the other ones that got scores none of none of the others were directed by the commission i'm not sure none of the others i'm not sure

When I went through this, just from Commissioner Segrich, when I went through this, everything that, because we got the books, I think it was Thursday or Friday, everything in the score was stuff that we had given consensus to. But the only thing that I saw that was a directive from us was what came out of the code workshop. And that's why when I had inquired, it was because it was a directive from us.

So, Mr. Waters, your comment that we will have more code enforcement staff than this whole city of West Palm Beach, are you- Same number. Same number, okay. Are you trying to say we have too much staff, too little staff, that you think this is a ridiculous idea?

saying either i'm just that the number of code staff generating cases does have an impact on other staff as an example west palm beach has 21 staff members in co-compliance and 23 in development services which is equivalent to planning and preservation so we have 21 here at the city or 19 we have 19 now okay so

Is it your concern that we're adding extra, or do you happen to think that we could get the job done with existing staff just changing schedules?

We have a very ripe community with a lot of code challenges. As I said earlier, the more code staff we have, the more cases that are going to get generated, and likely there will be necessary for other departments to provide support in resolving those code cases. Code compliance will be the biggest division in the department, which is perfectly okay with where we're at. I'm just saying that we might have to come back and bring a budget amendment later once those staff are on board as we assess the impact of their generating additional cases. Because right now we're carrying about 70 cases per staff.

Yolanda?

About 70 times nine people. Well, you add another 100. That's why there's expenses that are going to go up based on postage, special magistrate hearings, other things that are in the supplemental. But also there are other staff that help resolve code cases, people in the building division. possibly even in other departments. And so I don't have an ability to assess what that might be.

Do you feel we can adjust the schedules with existing staff to cover the actual request of the commission, which was to have code compliance available at the extended hours?

Based on our union contracts and having to negotiate a change in work schedule, I do not believe any of our current staff

are open and willing to work on nights and weekends at less it's a special project that will happen infrequently okay so we're left with the choice of replacing current staff or hiring new because current staff do not want to adjust their schedule

didn't i some of them can't i mean if we have people who have children we have people that other responsibilities they are not really they came to here to lake worth beach knowing the job would be eight to five monday through friday and we do ask them to work special details like for the street painting festival to have them change that and then say oh we need you to work every other weekend is a change in working conditions and has to be negotiated understood i completely understand that

What I'm trying to ascertain is, do we need to spend this money? If we have almost the amount of code officers as the entire city of West Palm Beach, it tells me we have a scheduling issue or an efficiency issue if we're not able to handle this.

Or we have more code issues than West Palm Beach. And we have a huge turnover in code. We have a huge turnover in our code department.

And also our... you know we have this the commission has identified a problem with street junk uh curb appeal that sort of thing which code would then i'm asking would address that more proactively than what's happening now

some of it but some of the right-of-way issues fall with without outside the parameters of what co-compliance can do dumping and they will make a call they can make a call yes and that's a lot of times that's what we're asking yep i do want to ask if if it's the is it the commission's desire to have someone every weekend or maybe twice twice a month or something like that that's working downtown or in that area I mean, that makes a difference on how we go about scheduling as it relates to the bargaining contract.

So from my perspective, I look at this and I see a scheduling problem. And I understand that this has implications with contracts and with how current people, but as things change, you have to change, right? Keeping the existing schedule and bolting this on is highly inefficient. Highly inefficient. Looking at moving to a schedule of four tens or three eights in a weekend, that kind of thing. There are other scheduling models that would better suit be a lot more efficient for our city given that our city is open right for business and the desire is to have coverage up to 10 o'clock at night i believe that nine was the number um other than having nine to five plus plus right and that's the point i'm trying to make because mr waters opening comment to me the only way of taking that comment is we got too much too many staff For me, there's no other way to take that comment. Maybe that's how it was intended or not intended. If our department is the same size as the entire city of West Palm Beach and what Mr. Waters is saying about the additional stress on other departments, I believe that this is a scheduling problem. problem, less a resource problem. And I understand that changing the schedule is going to have impact on resources, but we've been asking for this now for at least a year, and I've not seen a scheduling plan or a plan. We asked Refuse and Solid Waste to do something similar, to come up with a way of fixing gaps in the schedule. And they came up with a plan with fixing the gaps in the schedule and so on.

not that i don't want to spend the money on this i just i just see this as a scheduling problem not not a resource problem thank you madam mayor what we can do let's go back and um meet with a human resource director and um the director and we can come up with a schedule it's a bargaining unit issue that i believe that we probably work through But we'll go back and take a look at it and bring you a schedule. But keep it in mind, you don't want to change. We have only so many changes that you've made as a source of the bargaining agreement to make sure we have coverage. What we brought you back was a plan to make sure that every weekend or those additional duties were covered. If we're flexible in how we can manage downtown on the weekends, that's fine.

Well, before you do that, can we, there's a rest of the board. I'm just saying, can the rest of us have consensus or not before the city manager?

Mr. McVoy has his light on.

um i i think a little bit in the direction that the city manager i would imagine that one way you know there are a lot of ways to do enforcement things once is to have a massive number of people at all hours of the day going after whatever evil that you're trying to get at another way is to do it in a spot sort of way that people don't know hey is there somebody that's going to be out this weekend and you periodically once or not periodically but sort of randomly put somebody out on a weekend and people eventually the word gets around that look if you're doing something on the weekend you have a chance that you get caught that might be a fairly efficient way to get most of the objective that you're looking at um you know i think it it in terms of resources and again in terms of how we're perceived we're trying to fix a problem problem that there is stuff done that's you know probably shouldn't be done how you know is it the end of the world stuff that's happening that's happening that way that i don't know i don't have any data on that is it a you know is it a massive thing that's happening all over the place and we're building whole apartment buildings when nobody's looking on the weekend or is it relatively minor um i would say it should concern us a little bit and i think it's just a number that mr waters has presented is just be aware of two things one if you increase the staff we're about the same size as a city that is much bigger than us and you're probably going to generate some other costs and staff needs so is the problem that we're trying to fix can it be fixed in other ways or at least partially fixed in other ways with perhaps some randomly scheduled staff so i support uh the manager's suggestion hey let us noodle around with some options we get all of this has to go through the union contracts anyhow so uh let's i would say let's let them do that and let's table it for the moment on this particular

My response to that would just be if it's not every weekend, people, they're not going to get the message that we're serious about it. I might not get caught this weekend, but I know that if there's somebody coming around every Saturday or every Sunday or whatever, I better be careful because that would be the weekend that I'm not going to put stuff out. But you know.

Ms. Malega? OK, I'm not going to continue this conversation. We have a CRA meeting at six o'clock. We are going down the rabbit hole. And I say this every workshop. We're not up here to belabor everything. We're up here to say yes or no and move on. And to sit here and belittle staff when they're bringing back things that we asked for during a budget workshop has me beyond upset with this commission. We gave direction. We want a level of service. We've asked them to make it happen. They've brought us budget amendments. Either it's a yes or no. You don't have to belittle staff for what we've asked them to do. OK, six o'clock is the CRA meeting. We have got to stay focused and get this done. We have an entire room of employees sitting here waiting for us to give direction, not give them dissertations or or call them to the carpet. We have got to show a level of respect for what these people have done. Now, I support this. I'm giving consensus. Move forward and bring the level of service that we need. I alone sent nine requests into code this week. Okay, so in terms of... I sent this item. I am too.

Me too.

That's three to two. Next up.

Next up is the public safety complex fencing, page 93 of CIP.

Where is that?

police department around the outside where all the the police cars are behind compass we own that home why does the police department need a fence

This is a request. This is a request that came through the Sheriff's Department. What's happening? They have a public mingling through cars, walking around and bothering vehicles, whatever the case might be. So they're requesting if the city could assist them with putting a gate around it.

I'd say do it within their own contract. Thanks.

Yeah.

No.

Okay, Mr. Segrist, let's really try. It's 1130. We're going to have another day if this keeps going. Mr. Segrist?

Keep interrupting. I'll make it go longer.

Not interrupting.

You just did it again. What is the reason they're saying people are messing with their equipment and so forth?

Yeah, there have been a few incidents where some of their office doors back right up to that parking lot. There have been some uh, individuals that kind of hang in there and they've got people going through the park a lot. And when you look throughout the county, uh, most, I think pretty much all, but ours, um, stations are secure where they park all their vehicles.

My feeling on this is we have business owners in our city and residents who complain about the same exact thing and also complain that PBSO doesn't really do much about it. It's kind of rich that they want us to pay for a fence to go around their place because of the things that they're not necessarily enforcing in our own downtown. so um i'm gonna know on this um if they do decide to do it on their own i think it needs to be done in a tasteful manner not a chain-link fence or something of that nature what we would recommend is basically what you see around both cemeteries um like that type of material like the the illumiguard where we're going to get like at least a 25-year warranty but basically double the height and no no no no

um multi-purpose uh field Memorial no fire department fires next the bathrooms I thought we did the bathrooms no no the fires with the fire department on the bottom of page 12. fire station one fire station two oh sorry the bathroom on the other page I think we did say we were the bathrooms we approved the bathrooms we can ask again do we approve the bathrooms yes consenting yes

Yeah.

Okay. We're in. We're looking at page 13. Yeah, that's what I'm on. It's page 13.

I had one thing on fire. I do approve of the bathrooms.

You need a fire extinguisher?

Yeah. When we were at the fire station, one of their big asks was fans.

We talked about that while you were in your meeting.

So is that approved?

Mr. Perry said he's waiting for them to give an update on what they want.

Thank you. Okay, keep moving.

Memorial purpose.

Okay, next up is 100. What page are you dealing with?

We're on page 13 right now. And I'm assuming this artificial turf. Right, that's the top of the page. On 100. Page 13.

Right. Page one, yeah. We're on page 13. Memorial multi-purpose field artificial turf.

good morning stuart sword leisure services i've got some uh demos here that i'll pass around i'll start with commissioner malega so you're wearing the bandit shirt so one of them is uh is a like premium turf where you'd use on an active park a park designed for like cardiovascular activity and the other is is a lower end kind of a good model of engineered turf that would be used in a passive park where it's not like actively playing it does look like a shag carpet like the 1960s for those of us that remember shag park i do have a Now, just a couple opening comments on this here. So Chris Hanna and myself spent the day with the county over at Buttonwood Park, Mr. Bob Hamilton, and he shared probably about 20 best practices with us in terms of their lessons learned because they've been going through all of their active parks, replacing those at a price tag of about $1.7 to $2 million per field. Now, they have been doing some upgrades in terms of shade cells, bleachers, solar scoreboards, stuff like that. So that's the difference in the cost there. now the the cost that we have here is a running estimate is 1.5 million dollars now i know that is that is a high uh price tag for artificial turf and that is just memorial field now memorial field is approximately a 57 000 square foot lot so that is you know if we kind of put it in a scale of a regular lot to a house you know it's quite sizable in terms of what we would be turfing uh the fields typically are lined for three sports football soccer and the third could be you know the city's choice lacrosse possibly or whichever we'd like to to roll out uh and a lot of the cost comes with the prep work where they have to prepare the ground for the drainage with uh subsurface membrane stuff like that so uh commissioner segrich mentioned earlier the life cycle is approximately 12 years we could go perhaps 15 years the uh So initially the cost, we wouldn't see the savings until about that 10 year bell curve, right? Because with what we pay in landscaping, what we pay in irrigation, there's approximately about $10,000 a month just on Memorial. So we spread that out over 10 years, it pays for that capital asset investment in that field. When we come back to resurface it, it's kind of the same logic, the concept you'd use on a house. You eventually gonna have to replace your windows and your roof, but you don't have to replace the foundation and perhaps all the studs if done properly. so when we come back at that 12-year mark it would be about 50 of the original price so to rehab that surface it'd be about 700 000 so in terms of the cost saving we really won't see until about that 10-year mark but then you'll really start to see it as a city the 10-year or 12-year mark whatever it is doesn't the subsurface have to be i mean isn't it pounded down so hard that it has done it would be redone about every two to three times really based off the field usage. So it'd be too hard to call, but the subsurface could go at least one more iteration.

Because I know, you know, and maybe it's just what's underneath this. I mean, a lot of professional teams have gone away from artificial turf after doing it for a few years. I forget which ones, but my husband could tell you. Lou knows it. that they're not doing it. They had it and they didn't like it. The injuries were increased and things like that. So how do you respond to that if you can?

Well, the in terms of the best practice, it's really just, you know, how much sunlight exposure is there? What's the irrigation cost? Some of the professional teams have their own sod farm, which is under contract with. So they're bringing in fresh sod at a higher rate. We pay for engineered turf. So it's really just what's palatable with the community needs and the overall quality of life and, you know, the field condition.

Is the field used 12 months a year?

It's definitely open and available. In terms of like active sports, it'd probably be more like eight or nine.

Thank you.

I got a few lights. Who was first? Ms. Nalega. I want to say thank you for bringing this forward. Memorial Park has been loved on greatly over the last couple of years from the pavilion to the bathrooms to the sod. I do know that we consistently have to close the field to repurpose it. During rainy season, it becomes a mud ball. I'm in favor of this. My only concern, and one of the reasons I'm in favor is because CDBG will not be here forever. We know that it's been on the chopping block many times, and that's how we have funded redoing this park as well as a lot of our other parks. Short of turning, when you said sod farm, it made me think, why shouldn't we turn the rest of the solar field into a sod farm? That's a whole other conversation. I'm not a scientist, but I don't know if it's possible. I'm in favor of this. My concern is the temperature. What does it do when it is in exposed full sun like it is? What does that do to players when they hit the field, when they're out there practicing and they're not completely padded up? I'd be concerned about, you know, welts or burn marks. So I'd want some more information on the safety factor of it. I understand the longevity and the return on the investment and all that. My concern is the safety factor for our kids playing on it and making sure that nobody gets injured or burned from it. well, heat burn, plastic burns, whatever. That's my biggest concern. Or if somebody decides to go out there and let their dog run and it's a plastic field, what does that do to dog spas? So those are my only concerns. So I would approve this, but with more information coming back on the safety information. Thank you, Mr. McCoy.

First of all, whatever the manufacturer says for expected life, Commissioner Segrist correctly referred to that. I think I may have mentioned it other times. There are two companies actually in Homestead who are national level companies that test stuff for field durability. So you're designing something, you're going to put it outside of finish or the product itself. They put it out there and if it makes it there, yeah, they may be okay. We are an extremely harsh environment. So if the manufacturer says 15, I would prorate that by a factor of 50. It's going to turn brittle. It's going to break down. It's going to decolor. It's going to do who knows what. Forget the 15. So in your calculations of the finances, knock off half. Easy, easy. It's just not going to make it. the heat concern it's a well-known concern and as the mayor pointed out some of the professional folks have said no we don't like this stuff for that partly for that reason um the concern about how long will the unders preparation last can you get away with it's a field that you're playing on so you have compaction so infiltration is getting worse turf grass in general is a real problem for soils. It kills everything underneath it. We had a lengthy discussion. I gave a little free soil physics lecture because I have a master's and a PhD in soil physics, and it's exactly about this kind of thing. How do things behave in the environment? How do they behave in the soil? I'm a definite no on this.

Okay, Mr. Segrich.

I'm talking about the maintenance cost. You mentioned at 100,000 a year, but that description, it's saying we would achieve a savings around 28,000. Are we saving 100 or saving 28 a year?

the 28 figure is from the landscaping cost but we pay monthly for that field i'm not calculating there's some fluctuations in the irrigation based off the you know rainy season not rainy season stuff like that so the initial cost savings just off the landscaping correct mowing and fertilizer

But if we went for the artificial turf, would the savings be more like $100,000 a year? Because you said we're spending $100,000 a year maintaining it.

Correct. In terms of irrigation and landscaping fertilizer, in the range of the aggregate we used for planting was $120,000 per year.

So this 28 number, that would actually be much higher. We would be saving a lot more. Correct. Okay. Thank you for talking about the replacement being at about 50% of the value. In this case, it seems like the artificial turf will actually save the city a lot of money over the long term, especially with that replacement value. I would like to see this field get a lot more use, so I would be a yes for this. I am concerned about the temperatures. having lived next to a very large artificial turf field at one point, it was brutal in the summer. It could not be used. They had to irrigate the field twice a day. If that becomes the case here, then for me, it would be a no. So there are more data points. My only last point on this is that if we decide not to go with the artificial turf, I would like my colleagues commitment to re-sodding this field periodically i think it's a shame that it's been what since 2018 it's an absolute crying shame this is yeah yeah so i i would if if we're not going to commit to working with the artificial turf i would like to see us commit to a more periodic and budgeted again that was one of my main concerns with seeing the five-year cip plan there really wasn't

five-year plan so if we're not doing this i think every three years at least this field should be resorted um so thank you um i mean it's 15 1.5 million that's if it lasts for 10 that's 100 000 a year i mean so it seems like a watch to me um and that's if it lasts the 12th of the last thing which it won't it just may has your light on thank you i just wanted to put in my two cents i think at this point

this is a want not a need in my opinion and i think it would be great to have i really do i just i'm not there i think we have to commit to um other priorities in the city at this point yeah so i'm gonna know so um are we knowing this one no okay thank you that would be a no

What is your last segment, Mr. White?

So to replace this, can we commit to resodding this field this year and each three years?

Well, I'm not going to commit to the three years, but I will commit to at least this year if it hasn't been done since 2018.

And is there a better sod that we could purchase that might last longer than going with, I mean, maybe... i mean if we're going to spend 1.5 if we spent an extra and this is just me thinking we spent an extra 30 000 on a better side that would last us four or five years i think that that's an important conversation to have don't bring us just residing and what the cheapest is but i think if there's something out there that's a better product so i agree so and here they have an estimate of 135 if we said you can spend up to 175 to get the best we had would that be something you would agree to

i'd go up to 200 000 up to 200 yeah and i would say i i don't know i'm not a sports field guy but reseeding uh mixed species on it and things that grow yeah um what shape is it in right now i know

the the field is in good shape there are some definite positions one being about 12 foot by 12 foot which is a bridge that correct with sod well it's challenging when there's play on it eight nine months out of the year because you got to let it set and reset and you know set its roots and and grow slow time or if you move them they do with the feet move them around that's what we had conceptually already talked about with Chris Hannah is doing it outside the soccer season when we start getting into the winter is when it would be done

I can send up to 200,000 for a complete good residing. If we need it.

Send up to 200,000.

I'm sorry, we got four people talking. Folks, Mr. Segrist.

Send up to 200,000.

And I would consent to that if staff determines that we actually need that full sod. Mr. Perry.

I do have staff if the commission allows me. Sure. I want to make sure that the sprinkler system or the watering system is up to par. They tell me they have some breaks. Can we also bring you back an estimate to make sure that system is okay? and maybe add that to the $200,000.

Is it not working? Yeah, I mean, if you're going to take the grass off, you might as well fix the sprinklers.

We want to make sure that the work is checked out, so we might want to add a little addition.

But the sprinklers are working correctly. You want more?

No, we've got to fix them. Oh, yeah, of course you have to fix them. We're going to have some bricks occasionally.

Oh, gotcha. Yeah, I consent to that.

That's sort of common sense, but who knows where that goes.

Okay, all right, so next up. I'm going to say the same thing for the other sodding of the other field. Sunset Ridge? Yes, same thing.

I would agree with that. Do we have consensus on that?

And it looks great right now.

And you live there. Yeah. Mr. Segwidge? Consent. consent okay so we're going to take memorial field park lighting so next that's where we're going memorial park field lighting upgrade memorial park okay um what was the what's the upgrade what what's

So the current lights that we have there that's used for nighttime play, the wiring harness is about 15 years. I know we've talked about the life cycle of a lot of mechanical and engineering things. In Florida, 10 to 15 years is a good planning factor. So the wiring harness, which we have had outages out there, has cost us at any time $12,000 to bring someone out, bring the crane out, and do those repairs if we have to source it out. So it's not a dire need at the current moment, but it is something to be aware of.

I thought that was the Bald Hills.

Not the Memorial. Mr. Seger?

Can we not CDBG this for next year?

CDBG for next year is Compass. We already approved that. That'd be 28. So it'd be two years from now. Mr. Seger?

What's the remaining life on these?

The life cycle is really about 15 years and we're there. So really every year we're kind of operating on borrowed time in terms of the wiring harness.

So they're all 15 years. Perfect. So I would consent to this, but also I think we need to be budgeting for this asset replacement. So, there would have to be an allocation set aside each year for the next 10 to 15 years, but that's not in here. So, I would consent if we add to have that allocation.

And the safer and the better conditions, the more people we have that want to rent the fields and use the fields. This won't make it brighter, it'll just make it safer.

Conduce it to nighttime play and then any events in the low-lit evening.

Change. Daylight savings time. It'll be light till ever. Mr. McVoy.

You mentioned wiring harnesses and durability in Florida, which obviously I'm very aware of and concerned about, except I assume that on any sort of lighting fixtures, all of the wiring is inside metal conduit of some sort. We don't have wiring harnesses hanging out in the breeze and exposed to sun. um so i'm a little bit concerned you know do we need do we just need to see have somebody go out there once in a while and check see if anything is you know something corrode and replace a couple corroded parts and replace the conduit or do we you know i i know that that i hear this from electric from time to time something is 60 years old well there are roman aqueducts that are 2 000 years old that still work pretty well this the age of something is doesn't mean necessarily some of us thank you um some of us are not necessarily useless just because of a certain age it depends on the actual what it is and the condition plastic certain other things exposed to florida sun yeah they go past metals depends but uh seems to me do we i guess my pushback would be we got a lot of things that need money could this really just have be a service contract somebody goes in and fixes replaces a few parts and and we're good to go for another couple years

No, conceptually, it could be. We all know when we start doing patch and repair work, eventually the contractors will be like, it's better to just replace versus repair. And we're at that threshold now.

we've had them out there quite significantly when i first started to write it a year ago the lights were out and i do recognize you know it's not you know this thing is not at five feet above ground and i can reach it it's you know it's some equipment so i get that but i'm looking for you know you're pretty convinced that that we're at that stage where yeah we're not fixing too much i was out there at a game two weeks ago watching the game in the evening and some of the lights were out and that's with doing continued maintenance

That's the challenge of the game.

Or do we just need to replace a bulb for less than $300,000? Those are also rather pricey. I don't have the price in front of me. We've replaced some and it's quite expensive.

And do make sure that they meet because it's actually part of our code that they are dark sky compliant when you replace them.

have to tell them that of course they're going to do that well i also want to i also want to remind us that when we have people looking to move to the city they look at your parks programs the conditions of your parks green spaces and your school we can't do anything about our school grading this is something that we can do something about how do we attract new people to want to move into lakewood beach put money into your parks and our rec programs let's wrap this up we this is this is

this is an investment this isn't an expense this is an investment in the future so i say yes you're yes i'm yes mr uh segrich uh i was yes but also i wanted to ask my colleagues are you okay putting an asset allocation for the eventual replacement for these we don't we don't currently so i want to make sure staff had specific instructions to do so

yes we have four we have four yeah i mean yes in the lights i just have a question how come we don't capitalize these projects huh okay okay next up osborne center hvac units capital letters didn't we just do the osborne center did we just completely refurbish the osborne center

It didn't include the four HVACs that service the Osborne side and the Head Start side.

Are they not working?

No, they work. Just the frequency of maintenance that has been required over the last year would warrant it of being considered for capital improvement.

The one middle unit in the big room, the middle unit is usually running at a higher temperature than the other two units in one room.

yes all right so it's yes from the lego big boy yeah yes okay so that's yes go on that all right we've eliminated sunset park um howard park there's nothing in there um moving right along installation of removable followers get a vessel explanation page 148. tell us about removable models

Before we go to the ballers, let's look at the $3 million in roadway assessment management. This one.

Before the ballers.

Yeah, we should look at that.

Oh, the first one. I'm sorry. What is roadway assessment management? $3 million. it's fixing it's a it's a fancy name for it we'll call it ram or do okay so let's are are we okay with the um roadway three million dollars for the roadways i wish it was more it's yes mr well i mean we just saved two million dollars on

I was going to say, can we, once they calculate, well, no, because we don't know what the sod's going to cost us, even though we said no to 1.5. True. So I think that we could look at whatever savings there is allocating that towards additional. I would give consensus to allocate that towards more roadway projects.

what about the three million that's on the book here yes to that and i'm saying whatever yeah whatever we've saved and said no to moving that right into rhodes as well let's um let's take it in three million the public works no no okay we got the ucla batman mr brown mr brown you're up that's so insulting

Yeah, so if you recall our conversation, I'd kind of done a 10-year layout to kind of get our PCI from the 69 it currently is up to an 80, and I kind of laid out what we should be allocating per year. It's just a matter of we had talked about the 3 million for this year, so possibly starting in FY28. I know, Commissioner Steggert, you mentioned starting this year, so it's really just a matter of the conversation of what do we want to allocate and when do we want to start this program, and are you guys okay with a 10-year layout

should we look at a 15 should we condense it and really get crazy into a five it's just a matter of what what is the appetite well it's more expensive at five I'm guessing uh yes is that how that works I mean I'm telling you right page 143 says 50 57.3 million of deferred work um that's what's no no I'm just I mean that but if we had if somebody said here's 60 million dollars we could fix all the roads

could get it i'd burn through it i'm sorry i'd burn right through it well i know you would i know you would but um would that where would that let me just um the goal is to get to an overall payment condition index of 80 because that means it's now attainable and if we're budgeting properly each year we can now actually maintain our roads the way we should be doesn't mean these are the same roads that people were complaining about in the 90s that's right so this 10-year program would basically catch us up and get us to where we need to be so then we can budget properly each year moving forward so this is a catch-up as well as maintenance so the three million would sort of get us started on that on that project the three million get us started but that's still half of what we could be budgeting for this year and as you kind of look at each year it goes from basically six all the way up to like nine eight points do we have anywhere else in this budget

Sorry, that we have more money in there.

Mr. Segrich has his light on.

I don't like the light.

As does everybody else.

I just want to talk when I want to talk.

I live that, yes. So who's next? Mr. Segridge?

I believe Mr. Segridge.

I think Mr. Segridge is next. Real quick, Jamie. On page 143, you've got the backlog as 29% under PCI 65. And then in your 10-year plan, you've got in year one, we've got 48.3% under 65. Which one of those is the right figure?

so that would be out of the year one projects so each year would have certain products in it so you're looking at the percentage of those under the 65 pci in that year one would be that 48.3 percent just keep in mind each year you want to have You want to have not only the construction and budget, but you also want to have a preservation budget as well.

So that's 48.3% means 48.3% of the budget that we do goes towards the under 65s.

That is correct. In that particular year, correct.

so you know my only comment to my colleagues is every every time we talk about this i hear over and over again we've been promising this for years um now's your chance i i want us to fund it fully six million well who's out of your chance did you bring your checkpoint yeah

uh we actually have access budgets i'm not sure which one do you remember who's next go ahead um so i'm fully in on the three thousand two million three million three million sorry um yeah A foot of sidewalk. I would say encourage what you already are doing is make sure that we're coordinating it with known underground problems and we're working away at mapping all that, the water-related, drainage-related. And I am in support of Commissioner Malega's suggestion that as we see savings, for instance, from the 1.5 million turf minus whatever we're putting in facade, can we move some of that into the roads? I'm down with that.

because apparently we have the money to do if if we approved all of these things we would still have we're not going into our 25 reserves we would still have money correct i'm not quite ready to go to six because i need to know what other things we wouldn't be funding but at least you know the the 1.5 minus the sod let's throw that at the end of the day if we find out if we can figure out how much we're saving over doing well and we also have the 315 from not doing the fence right so that's you're almost at 2 million right there so that's

600 but we still have to pay for the side so we have to bet that yeah 5.5 so you still have 2 million yeah 2.1 so i would go up to 5 million and feel comfortable just using as long as these are things that if we approved everything here we could afford everything here right i would go up to 5 million considering our our nose so would you do five i'm in at five That's fine.

At least based on what I know so far.

Would you do $5 million?

We have $9.5 million of unassigned funds in our general fund above the 25% that we need to have in the general fund budget, which means we have ample room to cover the six. There's also some funds that Oh, where is that one? The Park of Commerce Fund. I know we didn't completely deplete that. So I understand the want to be cautious on this, and I want to be fiscally responsible. But we actually have this money. And then my one quick question to Jamie is, is this $6 million inclusive of our maintenance? Because I know you said that's about $2.5 to $3 million a year we need just to keep the roads the way they are. will be separate this is separate so so that money you're talking about actually resides in streets perfect yeah yep so um i i really would like to fully fund this um i will certainly be supportive of five but um it's time guys well we have to put in my question is to finance just how does that affect everything else

So with the turf, so with the savings of $2 million, and I also believe we have excess funds in the general fund, and I predicted that this year, The end of fiscal year, 2026 will be at a surplus for the general fund as another surplus. So we will have sufficient funds to cover the property. Well, that's for fiscal year 26 that means September end of September, which budget amendments that come before us quite often.

Make sure that we're not.

squeeze into the dark.

So I'm comfortable with $5 million right now. And then if there's a budget amendment four, five, six months from now, and we have extra funds, we can always put more into the roads. But I would commit to the $5 million, which is $4 million more than we've committed in the last five years.

Correct. So we will have sufficient funds to fund the whole $6 million. I mean, I want to commit. Yes, we could confidently say.

Confidently $6 million. $6 million. that's fine it's great if we can do it even in the coming year if we get further than that that something comes up that we need money right we'll still have sufficient funds for that my logistically jamie can you spend all six million in one year i mean i'm just making sure remember who you're talking to here he knows a lady okay leaving lady the paving the paving lady is gonna love us let's give her a call to hire some more people

My only concern is just the following years. I don't think we'll be able to do it for the remaining 10 years. One year, we could definitely do it, but the following years, that's when we're talking about general obligation bonds, where we have to go for referendum and et cetera. If you want to have a good start, we can definitely do it.