City Commission - Special Meeting

Thank you.

So we just have the fiscal year 2027 budget presentation from Kate. Thanks, Kate.

Thank you, Mayor. commissioners this presentation is going to look a little bit different than what you saw last time so last time we focused on the budget overall looking at general fund but then looking at all the other funds associated with it this time we're going to focus more on the ad valorem and the millage and kind of what that looks like for our budget and how we can determine what's the final millage that the commission wants to go with for this year's tax season So starting off, just a quick review of where we started for our FY27 initial budget highlights. We started with five mills as our assumption for our highest millage that we would need to balance our budget. That brought us general fund revenues at 50.1 million, correspondingly expenses at 50.1 million. Our ad valorem with that five mills is 19.1 million, giving about 3.3 million to the CRA, netting 15.7 million or 870,000 of new money. Opportunities with this millage is that we have the potential to include some departmental cuts if the state revenues are higher than projected. We also have the potential to reduce fund balance usage and needs for the FY27 ambulance that we're currently planning to use reserves for. In this budget, we included things that we know. Cigna insurance increases about 8.8%. This part is just a recap of what we saw last time. Our union obligations between 7% and 7.5%. Our non-union obligations for non-union employees at 3%. FRS rate increases at 5%. Our staffing updates are included, which includes five new employees, as well as unfreezing four positions. This does include the departmental operating reduction of 5%, which, as a reminder, included overtime, small capital items, planned capital improvements, programmatic expenses, supplies, training, and conferences. Since the last meeting, we did receive some state revenues. We are within about 70,000 of where we assumed to be, but that is 70,000 that we are less than what we needed to be when we expected from the state. So as of last meeting, the board was split whether to go 4.9 mils or 5 mils. So we did an exercise in both, assuming that 4.9 mils, what would change? So we know it would be about $316,000 less that we would receive in revenue. Therefore, the expenses would be reduced as well. That would bring our revenue and expenses in general fund down to 49.8 million. Ad valorem would be about $18.7 million, giving approximately 3.2 to the CRA, netting about $15.5 million, or about $550,000 of new money. Since the last meeting, with the direction of getting a plan for the 4.9 mills, Anthony and I did refine and adjust revenues and expense assumptions to get within the limits that we needed to be. The risks of going with this option is that we have no option to bring back any of those departmental cuts if state revenues are higher. We have no option to minimize fund balance for uses of the ambulance and the potential for staff expenses to exceed projections based on the timing of the hire. So the initial budget was planned based on a 12-month estimate of having those positions available for the entire year, understanding that we may not hire every single staff member and they may not take our full insurance for starting October 1st. We did some adjustments to these insurance lines, also assuming that we don't have a terrible claims year, so there's definitely some risks going with this method, but it is possible for us to balance with 4.9 mils. One thing I wanted to highlight for the commission this time a little bit differently is a little bit of a different view on a capital improvement plan. Along with staffing and benefits, capital improvements are our largest expense. So I wanted to kind of provide it in a different format. So this chart, although it's very small, it provides a lot of great information. So the left column is the department. The column to the right of that describes the project or capital improvement that's planned. Now showing a three-year estimate of what those projects look like. So instead of just looking at it in one year, we do know that capital projects can take more than one year. So this is you being able to see what it looks like over time, at least for this three-year period, and then how we plan to fund some of those sources. So whether we're using fund balances, reserves, loans, it kind of creates a more solidified plan for our capital projects as we move forward. So some things that I wanted to highlight on here are for FIRE, which is the first block of three red lines. In FY27, we're estimating about $1.1 million of capital improvements, and FY28, about $875,000. Below that is the CRA. For CRA and FY27 in total, we're planning about $8.7 million of projects, $20.7 million in FY28, and $9 million in FY29. The bottom kind of lighter gray section towards the bottom is Public Works Stormwater. So about $2.2 million of projects planned in FY27, 550,000 in 28 and 21. five hundred and twenty nine one thing i think it's important to note so this is the remainder of the public works stormwater section one thing i think is important to note in this section is there is unfunded projects so towards the right again that funding source you see some are unfunded so those are projects that are being delayed or not able to complete them in the year that we really would plan to due to reduced funding and not having the General ability to fund them on a regular basis. So in terms of being unfunded, it's about a million dollars in FY 27 As well as FY 28 and then about 1.6 million unfunded in FY 29 The next lighter gray section is going to be public works general which is about nine hundred and fifty five thousand in total for FY 27 four hundred thousand for each of 28 and 29 and Kind of that little lighter orange section there towards the bottom is police. There's about 20,000 planned for FY27. And that bottom section is utilities and water. There's about 5.8 million planned in FY27, 19.7 million planned in 28, and 20.1 million planned in FY29. So again, this is another full detail of the utility stormwater and kind of breaking out all those projects for that department over those three years. The last section is just a final review for the last few projects. So a little bit of water and sanitation, 100,000 in FY27 for water, and then about 45,000 for sanitation at the very bottom there. And of course, a picture of one of our nice fire trucks since we've been talking about them so much, I wanted to highlight that. So the biggest point of this whole exercise is to determine what millage makes sense for our residents for the commission to finalize. So I think it's important to look at some different home values and see what that looks like for our residents overall. So in this exercise, what you're going to see in that top chart, which is pink is the 2025 ad valorem. So in this chart on the left side is the taxable value. And I just chose different taxable values to do the calculations for. So assuming a taxable value for a house that's 250,000, $500,000, $1 million, $5 million, and $10 million, for an example. In FY25, our millage was $4.9 in that center column, and then the tax amount, again, taking the taxable value, dividing it by $1,000, times the $4.9, is getting that tax amount for our residents in each of those value categories. So if we were to go down to that center chart, this is just for the residents that have homesteaded to increase the 3%. The taxable value is going to increase 3%. Again, in that left column, you see that value increase. So now that $500,000 house is now valued at $515,000. If we maintain the same 4.9 mils, you see that tax amount increase a little bit in that middle column. So for that $515,000 valued house, the difference with just the homestead exemption of that 3% is about $73.50 per year. And again, you can see the variances for the different values in the remainder of the chart. This is if we were to do just the homestead exemption at 4.9 mils. If you go one step farther and you go to that bottom chart in green, this is now an assumption at five mils. So if we take that homesteaded value at 515,000, we calculate five mils, you get a tax amount of about 25.75. So compared to that homesteaded value at 4.9, it's an increase of 51.50 in this example. And compared to the prior year without the homestead exemption, as an example, it's an increase of $125 from the prior year total, which is about $10.42 per month in this example. So you can see the different values and how that 5% millage rate increases per month, ranging between $5.21 per month for a home value of about $250,000, going up to $208 per month estimate for a home that's worth $10 million. So definitely a difference in what the change is per month based on the value of the home or the taxable value of the home. But overall, the amount per month is not a significant increase to our residents, whether we go with the 4.9 or the 5. As an example, I just put a quick little note up there. So Starbucks coffee is expensive these days, $5.65 for a Starbucks, as well as Xfinity. So we pay $40 a month for Wi-Fi in our homes. So on that $500,000 house, we're paying less per month in the tax increase than we're paying for Wi-Fi in our home. So just a little bit of a good exercise for the commission to consider as we look to see which one makes the most sense for us as a city and our needs, as well as making sure that we're being fiscally responsible for our residents as well. Is there any questions on that stuff before I move forward? No, okay, so I'll continue. We'll come back if you have questions. So next steps, what do we plan for next? So obviously part of the millage present or the tentative and the final millage as well as budget presentations in process is the resolutions. So the next board meeting will have tentative resolutions. Some you've seen before, some will be new. So I wanted to make sure to highlight that. So the tentative millage, you'll see a resolution next time for the tentative millage for FY27 based on the final rate the board decides today. You'll also see the 2027 non-anvalarm assessment rule for fire protection services. That resolution will have language that is the exact same as FY26, so it'll keep the same tiered rates, 108.35 for Tier 1 and $1.30 per EBU for Tier 2. with the potential that it may increase, which is the language that was in the FY26 language. I did not recommend an increase this year, but obviously with the unknowns of the property tax things moving forward, I think it's good that we keep that language and we can continue to evaluate our needs long term, but I wanted to preserve that in the resolution. You'll also see a resolution for the capital improvement plan. Again, just the board acknowledging the plan that we have in place for FY27. Our natural procurement process will still take place for those projects, but it's a good acknowledgement of the board and that plan. Again, newly, you will see the cost of living increase for non-bargaining employees. So that was the direction of the commission from prior meetings earlier in the spring that they wanted to see that as a separate vote. So there is a 3% cost of living increase for non-bargaining employees as part of the budget. So that will be a new resolution you'll see this year. And then finally, the tentative budget for FY27 in total. So when is all that good stuff going to happen? Where and when? So the tentative millage and budget hearing will be on September 9th at 515 here in City Hall at 121 Southwest Flagler. The final millage and budget hearing will occur on September 14th at 515 also here in City Hall at 121 Southwest Flagler. Our rollback rate, just as a reminder for the commission, our rollback rate was 4.7499. Our max rate can be 5.249. So with that, the recommendation of the 4.9 or the five mils is both in between those. With two-thirds vote, we can select either one. And I will leave that to the commission then to have discussion and provide a recommendation on what they wanna see moving forward.

Do any other commissioners have any questions for Kate? I had one question. It was $500,000 for confusion corner, but then the CRB meeting coming up, it's $200,000. I wasn't sure.

That was an error in my CIP because initially we had talked about doing much larger improvements and then when we had the CRA meeting a couple of months ago the direction was just wanted some signage just minor improvements it just wasn't reflected in the CIP and I did make that change in the CIP to reflect the new number No worries thanks Manal Any other commissioners have questions for staff or Kate or Anthony or a direction to give them?

a couple questions I'm trying to get caught up here everyone let's see they might not be in any particular when was the last time a comp and class study was done for non bargaining employees So we're voting on in the future a 3 percent COLA for non bargaining employees correct.

DIRECTOR HARRIS We are. And we have done a statewide study and it looks like the average is somewhere from three to five two and a half to five. Statewide. Last class in comp. me on that one I want to say it was 23 we did the big one in 19 and we had a refresher in either 23 24 somewhere around there a few years so it would be safe to say they're comparable with statewide yes because of that class and comms study we restored our competitive landing at the 50th percentile okay

So the unfunded projects, I guess this is a general assessment for capital improvement projects, but it would be safe to say, as a general statement, those projects aren't going away. And would it be a safe assumption to say that generally the cost of those projects historically increases over years? Is that a correct statement?

You're referring to this stormwater project specifically that where it was listed as unfunded?

Yes, most of them, any of those, you know,

yeah um inflation three to five percent those stormwater projects are going to be more than the study that was done a couple years ago and that's where they uh they had a capital improvement plan they had a consultant come in and that's where those projects came from and then you'd have to add after a couple years you're going to have to basically have somebody come in and redo it again because you can't just add an inflation percent to it okay but three to five percent a year would be a safe assumption for a couple years yes sir

So that's concerning to me when we start thinking about unfunded capital improvement projects in the future. That cost isn't going away. We're just deferring it, but also compounding that cost per year. It's something just that I will be thinking about. I guess, is the presentation over? Because I had just a few questions, basically on the general budget, not specifically to this presentation.

Sure, go ahead.

So there seem to be some big changes. I'm going to go, my question would start on page 15, general fund revenue. One of them has to do with police and off-duty detail. And again, I'm trying to dive into these numbers as quickly as I can over the past few days. Fiscal year 2025, $154,000 or so, off-duty detail. Fiscal year 2026, $160,000. So, you know, a $16,000 increase. And then we jump next year, this coming year, and propose this $200,000. So we go from a $15,000 increase, one fiscal year to it, $40,000 fiscal increase. And I'm just wondering where does that increase come from? Again, I'm not a numbers guy, but I would more likely be thinking and assuming it would be closer to the prior fiscal year.

in answer to that question sir the the budget of fiscal year 26 the adopted budget was 150,000 the actuals revenue through the through the period was 160,000 through the middle of July So the actuals were coming in more than the budget for fiscal year 26. And based upon the increased charges, based upon the pay is going up, FRS is going up for police, we do a corresponding increase. Even if they're not utilized anymore, the cost for the off-duty detail goes up, so there would be a natural increase of the charges passed on to those who do the services.

cost increase and we're not jumping too high with that increase.

Yeah, I made that estimate of $200,000 based upon getting to roughly $160,000 through July, maybe two-thirds of the year, and then the costs that we're going to pass on to the consumer, if that's the right word, will go up next year as our charges, as our costs go up.

I saw that with some of the others And that's, again, I just want to make sure we're going to hit these numbers with the recreational fees, same page. It looks like roughly a 10K increase year over year from the prior years. And the interest, a few line items down. The 4.1 million in... Yes, that seemed like a significant increase in the interest rate.

It is. We did check that number with the investment manager that we have for our investments. And based upon their analysis of the current trend of interest rates and the amount of money that we have basically sitting in the bank, that was a conservative estimate.

So one of the big numbers that jumped out at me, page 16, general fund expenses by division. Environmental attorney goes from $300,000 to $450,000 for the prior fiscal year.

Do you want me to go as you list them off or kind of wait to the?

I guess go as you list them all. I'm open to any other comments by commissioners on some of these.

The environmental attorneys was not budgeted for the entirety of the budget in fiscal year 25 because she came in mid-year. And for fiscal year 26, it was sort of an estimate of how much it would take her to do her job as it was basically a new role. but myself and the city manager work closely with her to make sure that for fiscal year 27, the budget request that she has in there is a reasonable estimate of what she needs to do to hire consultants and do her job. So we don't really have much history in that division to come to a more historical average of expenses.

yes i definitely understand as far as that's almost a newly created position it's hard to compare that to others um yeah sure yep just make sure you uh speak into the microphone and commissioner rich joined us at 3 20 this afternoon okay um

Good to see you here Commissioner Matheson I agree I share your concerns with this dramatic increase in her budget I know you want to get your arms around what resources we can bring to bear on this issue and that perhaps there should be money spent on scientists or engineer so that we can get I have no problem doing a budget amendment sometime during the fiscal year if Ms. Holmes can show a good reason why she needs those additional monies. I imagine she wants these monies for the same two consultants she hired last year. Do you want to speak to that, Ms. Holmes?

So last year when I came on board City of Stuart I was able to use already allocated money from the previous year to hire consultants as I as I said to each one of the commissioners who I interviewed with and when I accepted the city's offer that what the city needs in an environmental type department is much more than one person can provide and there's not the type of expertise in-house in the city that's needed. And so the consultants that I was able to hire last year were using funds allocated from the previous year. So there just wasn't enough initially allocated for the cost. You know, consultants, water resource engineers, And scientific consultants are expensive when you hire them as contractors, like lawyers, like accountants. When you hire on the outside, you get what you pay for. And so going forward, what I did for the fiscal year 27 was based on how much it costs to hire the consultants that I hired, plus looking at other areas of expertise that we might need, especially if LOSM or another iteration of another LOSM type Army Corps of Engineer planning event comes around, that's the kind of expenses that are going to be, that are anticipated. And it's, you know, like, and also, You know, when I started here with the City of Stuart, this is not my first time hiring consultants or anything like that. I worked years and years with South Florida and Martin County doing similar type stuff. So it's based on my experiences and going forward. And just so you know, some of the things that we have encountered in the last year have been items where I've had to do purchase orders with these consultants to do certain analysis right now, or that's something that's due within a month. I mean, in order to do a budget amendment, and another contract or another, that will be cutting a lot of timeframes very close, just so you know. And it's, especially if we have to go out for bid on anything like that, then the city's just gonna be losing out on its position to comment and participate.

One of the people you hired was a lobbyist, correct?

Right.

Are there allocations in here for a lobbyist again?

Yes and through that lobbyist that's how that I made connections with our local congressman's office that's how we got at least one letter of support for the EPA grant and that's how we got information about the EPA grant That group forwarded our application to both Senator's office and the Congressman's office, and we got at least one letter of support out of that. So it's a valuable contract to have in this type of unique position.

Well, I'd appreciate it if Commissioner Matheson would take the time to review those expenditures and whether he feels they're the most valuable for the city at this time.

I will certainly be digging into them. I am curious, your intro and the budget, did you get responses from all three, both our state senators? I mean, both our US senators and congressmen? You were reaching out to them?

reaching out to them for the grant. I got a response from Brian Mast. And so for Senator Scott's office, they require a lot more lead time. So when we found out the need for letters of support, it was cutting it too close for them to respond.

Was it the same with Moody?

Well, Senator Moody's office apparently didn't have a big staff to address some of these issues. So maybe in the next six years or so, it'll be better.

Well, it's good to know Congressman Mass responded.

Yes, and he was pretty quick about that.

Thank you. Yes, I will. I intend to be working closely with Ms. Holmes on these issues. Playing a bit of catch up. But I do understand when you are commenting on these issues having been an active role in LOSEM that the comments need to happen rapidly. And a lot of times there's not time to wait the two weeks for a city commission meeting and then wait going on then. So I certainly do see your point. But again, one of my biggest concerns looking at this is just wanting to make sure that we're not doing anything to overestimate our revenues in the coming fiscal year. And that's, at the 2,000 foot glance, one of the things that I saw looking at all the numbers. Just some of them seemed like large increases compared to the couple prior fiscal years. But thank you, thank you.

Anyone else have anything? Does that conclude your comment, or you have to ask them all away?

Yeah, this one's more of an educational, well, there's two more, but, Police and fire saw some increases going from, again, 12.8 million and 12 million respectively to 14.2 million and 14.1 million. So each department, you know, a million to a million and a half increase. And is that comparable to prior fiscal years?

Or some of that have to do with the truck The biggest piece of that's going to be the union obligations so the seven seven and a half percent increases in total for both of those is about 1.2 million so Historically how that compares I would have to check back unless Anthony knows off offhand We can yeah, I have to look up over historical increases and then one final question I

So page 18, under the city commission, the last line, aids to private organizations, 2024 was 830,000, 2025 is 313,000. Is this just how the accounting is done for, Main Street, BDB, grants, is that, or can you explain those?

Off the top of my head, I believe those were ARP-related funds that were given out as rescue funds. Yeah, COVID money, basically, one-time COVID money. I could look into that and provide a more thorough answer about what those aides were, but I'm almost positive it's one-time COVID money.

Okay, yeah, I'd like to know, if you can get back to me, they seem like large numbers that weren't there in some of the other fiscal years and obviously aren't here this last fiscal year. I think those are all my questions.

Thanks, Commissioner Matheson. City Manager Mike?

Mayor, on the final question, there were allocations made. There were ARPA money received, CARES Act. I mean, there's three slugs of COVID money. didn't have the experience here at Stuart, but I had the experience at my previous employment. And since then, coming to Stuart and looking into that, yes, the commission received some ARPA grants, could be others. I haven't looked back to CARES Act, which was the original slug, and then the commission did allocate to other organizations via that grant process. and I have those resolutions on my desk, but we can provide the detail on that. I think there was one question I addressed to a single commissioner about ARPA money in particular, so we'll have that detail and background, but you could pretty much look at that and come to that conclusion.

Thank you.

Commissioner Giovin.

just want to address Commissioner Rich and Commissioner Matheson in regards to our environmental attorney number one we are unique in the fact that we have an environmental attorney actually I don't believe any other city or county nearby has one so we're that's not true okay I was just told it's not true but we're unique in having our own and having said that we all live here and enjoy and prosper from the St. Lucie River, which is why we have an environmental attorney to protect that. So budget, the additional budgets in needing to have consultants lobbyists are so important to us it has put Ruth in the mainstream where she's now being involved in those communities getting information which helps us to be able to submit for these grants not at the last minute hopefully that gets better but we're learning and I think anyone Commissioner Matheson who's been involved with the River Coalition for over, I don't know how many years, would appreciate what is being done here and how much is involved to get that done.

Oh, I absolutely appreciate it. Okay, thank you. But part of our job is to analyze the budget and point out any numbers and ask questions. I certainly appreciate it. One of the reasons I bring it up is because at a certain point, it might be more fiscally prudent to bring someone in-house, just like we did Ms. Holmes. than to pay consultants. I intend to closely work with Ruth on some of these grants and see what do we need as far as applying for them because we certainly need more than what we have in the city now. But there are certainly a lot of nonprofits that might be able to assist us that agree with our same mission. So I have plenty of ideas on that issue.

And I mentioned it because I know that you appreciate it. You've been so involved. And you know that we try to meet with Ruth weekly. So as a commissioner, you would meet with her and possibly look into that. That might be something to look down the road. Thank you. Rather than doing consultants that we hire an additional person in that environmental attorney's office. Thank you.

Absolutely. I met with her Friday.

Any other comments from commissioners? Commissioner Rich Thank you.

Yes One issue which I'd like to see us attending to which we've grossly ignored over all the years is Dealing with our waterways specifically Poppleton Creek I'd like to remove the funding for the skate park At Guy Davis not wanted by the community and I think that expenditure would be much better spent beginning work on cleaning up our creeks and I'm not saying that could never happen there but that is not the most pressing need there's no human cry from the community and yet if you walk around and look at these waterways. It's really disgraceful what we've allowed to take place. And we need to start studying them, providing analysis, and with a specific way forward on cleaning them up. So I would hope we could pull that money out of there for now and apply it to our waterway.

Does that conclude your comments, Commissioner Rich? Yes, it does, thank you. Commissioner Giobbi?

Is Pinal still in the, oh hi, I have a question. And I don't expect you to answer it now, but what would be the cost to undo that portion of the skate park, which has already been, yeah. I mean, we have plans. We have the consultants we've paid for. So the loss, what we would deal with at Guy Davis Park in removing that skate park, what would that gain be to using it toward Popleton Creek?

Right now we're at almost 100% designed and we're ready to get our South Florida Water Management District permits with the skate park included in the plans so now you're talking about going back to the drawing board to remove it and then also we have to work with South Florida Water Management District to adjust the plans and apply for the permit again so we're ready we're planning to meet with building department and other departments in the next few weeks to go over the hundred percent plans we expect to get the South Florida water management district permit approved by next week so we're very close to going out for bid now so now to change it at this late in the game you're talking about additional cost to make revisions plus additional time to go out for construction and with the increase in cost in construction you're delaying the project and that'll increase the cost so technically we would not be gaining anything and Poplarton Creek is very important and it is you're rightfully so neglected and should be addressed but to have to undo a project that is 98% done

in the planning stage would not be cost-effective for the city, so what monies would be gained to put it toward Poplar Creek?

When you, Commissioner Rich, when you're talking about undoing it.

If you could, Merritt, if you could, with all due respect, flip your card up. Oh, yeah. It makes it so much easier. Does that conclude your comments, Commissioner Jovie? Thank you. Commissioner Mapp. Thank you.

Ms. Gandhi-Sabdas, I think if... I like trying to come up with funding in this budget for city-funded creek cleanup. If putting the skate park into a phase two, but leaving the plans the same, would that allocate, not changing the plans at all, but doing a phase one and phase two, Would that change the budget at all. Is there room for that discussion because.

ELLIE WILSON- You could phase the project and we could get an alternate bid for the skate park so at least have a bid. should we decide to move forward to include the skate park but we don't have to include it as part of phase one it could be moved to phase two but it would be included as part of our South Florida water management permit leaving all the plans the same not changing any of the plans having a phase one and phase two and then so one of the things that's on top of my head was the email

Ms. Holmes sent us pertaining to the bid for muck removal. And that email seemed to allude for a need for us to be much further along in preparing for applications for that grant. Things like studying the muck, getting a good analysis of it, and perhaps seeking out an intern or something that can do that so that next grant cycle, we check all our T's and dot all our I's. Because this is kind of new territory, but I see Fraser Creek muck removal as wide open. It's in the CRA and... a lot of potential there, and I know I'm hitting the ground running, but I do like the idea of figuring out a way to add that into the budget.

if we were to put this into stage two you'd still have to hold money in the budget for it otherwise it would be similar to the capital fund where we might be in years unfunded so

so the way I've done the budget in the CIP is over two years because we don't expect to spend all of it in fiscal year 2027 so I've budgeted some funds for the entire project in fiscal year 2027 and then fiscal year 2028 we'll have additional budget for the project finish it out. And then if we want to do, but again, it's going to be additional cost to do it as phase two because we're already going to be mobilized and now to finish out the project, the construction, and then do phase two later on, it's going to cost us more money to do that as a separate phase because now we have to mobilize again.

And that was the point I was going to get to. If we do it two years down the road, the cost will be more and so you still have to budget for it the following year I just don't see it as this cost savings but it is important that we do obtain other grants and monies to correct situations at Fraser and Popleton Creek I can always do an alternate bid so at least you can see what the cost looks like for

skate park and if it's not going to be it's not going to work with our budget we can always remove it so at least when we go out for bid we get the cost for the skate park and then you and the commission can decide how we're going to award the contract at that point thank you thank you commissioner rich

Commissioner Matheson's point is a good one we're not going to throw the design away we still have purchased it it will still be valid and usable but Yes, it will be more expensive two years to build the skate park It'll be more expensive two years to start work on Willoughby and on muck removal It'll be more expensive to do it everything in the future, but it's what's our priority? And it just This for that community for that project. It is not that skate park. That was the pet project of a former commissioner But what everybody wants is to see these waterways cleaned up, to be able to paddleboard up Fraser Creek, up Poppleton Creek, even get to the shoreline, just the mangroves. Can we get to the mangroves on these creeks? And we have got to get to it, and I think this is the perfect opportunity.

Thanks, Commissioner Rich. Commissioner Clark?

I agree with everything that's been said, and I know that I've talked to Ms. Holmes, I haven't talked to her very recently, but it's always very tough to get funds to do these things, and we know that the funds had been basically diverted from the state when we got those original funds, the $500,000. So I think that's important. I just know that all of the considerations that have been stated, when you put something in, you put something back, then the stage where we are, it does make a big difference. I don't think that... Ms. Holmes has the wherewithal, seeing what she has in her budget, and any potential grant coming in to do some of the things that we really wanted to do, which we're not getting the money for. But I would like, I guess what I'm trying to get at is to see if there's some way that we could get some kind of a defined plan from our environmental attorney as to some of the things that she's going to be seeking and working towards. I know that she worked hard on pushing with the grant, the muck removal grant, but maybe if we could just get something in the near future, probably it won't work for this budget session, but at least we'll have something that we know are some of the priorities, because when I met, especially with some of the residents from Papatian Creek, There was a lot of ideas and we've talked about possibly doing things with health organizations and other people and it takes a lot of time to figure out these things that are affecting our community and the needs that we have not just for clearance and for Navigability of the waterways what the actual quality of the water is and all the work and the testing and clearing and even just basic clearing and cutting that needs to be done. So that takes time and inventory but I think that if we can get some kind of a clear plan that will let us know possibly if she needs help in the future from Somebody from FAU or whatever it takes to help to get some things going in that area I do have concerns and I think that we do need to to do push some things and Get some put some we're not getting the money that we that we thought we'd get well We could try to turn some things around here and I don't know if our budget person will be able to work something out, but I think we see what we have and I'm glad that Commissioner Rich kind of figured out if we could jump on that money that was put in the plan, but we also know that that will really make a big difference and we really want to get that project at guy davis going um so i think we just need to find some balance and hope that um miss holmes will try to find some money to do something soon so that we can see at least some progress in the area, especially in the Poppleton Creek area. I think we just need to probably get a better plan from her. The other question that I have, I just wanted to make my commentary on that whole thing, is in the city commission where it says aids to private organization, in the past, in the past fifteen years that i've been here every time that i brought up something it's something that will cost and usually the budget is already pretty much set and it's like well where are we going to find the money from to do this new thing But I just want to bring it up in this budget session and I don't know if something could be done for this year or it would be another time or we can just figure out a procedure on how to do something. But I know and this I don't see Mr. Oh, yeah, you're here. Mr. Right from Peter. No, no, not Peter behind Peter come into services. No, not well both of you I guess Mike Mike Mike and Jim Yeah Yeah, so we get from the 10th Street. Yeah come into services so I've had people from different groups who say that they want to Do a program at 10th Street, but they'd like to get some kind of a seed funding or some kind of a Basic sponsorship through the city to help them do this program with youth. We had a situation this summer where somebody wanted to do something, and I've told people, yes, you can rent, yes, you can bring a program or bring a project, whether it's a cooking project or a sports project or whatever you need to do, you can do that there, and it's your project, and you have to meet all the requirements that we have but these particular folks have been asking why can't we work along with the city and sponsor with the city if it's anywhere from 500 to thousands to help them so that they can get some youth-focused program that they're interested in that they think would be good for the community. I don't know if Mr. Redmond has talked to these people. And again, I'm just bringing it up because I think I've sent a few of these people to the city manager to talk to him about their ideas. And, um, some of them have had programs here at the 10th street, but people are looking for something in the budget. And I know that in the past we've done, um, like Martin Luther King and a couple of the programs where the, the city has donated monies to help with, uh. An annual parade or whatever the situation is, but it's been asked and I just wanted to figure out for a budget person. We're at a time when we're have less money, property taxes, or we're going to be getting less. But I just wanted to see if anything in that. It's a private organization, has any type of realistic ability for somebody to participate and partner with the city, especially to do youth programs. So that's my question. Yeah, are you looking for a consensus from the board or I just want to find out what we're doing between my manager Wasn't sure if you wanted me to answer.

Yeah With with regard to working with community. I had the community in my office on Friday, which was great great meeting with some folks over in East Stewart and talked about things like this and my concern with something like you just described the last thing that you described would be insurance requirements and programmatic kind of things technicalities legal issues that who is responsible who who's actually technically responsible who has the liability, et cetera. So I think those are concerns, but certainly we could open up anything. We could do a process, a lottery, a request for interest, or even an RFP for the best idea. that would serve the community and host. But I think all the rule sets would have to be in place. The funding is up to the commission. It's up to the citizens. You fund the program, you tell us what to do, we're gonna execute it the best way possible. So those are my thoughts on that. And even with what was brought to the commission most recently about historical designations and things, one of the thoughts that I had after that presentation, it was three minutes at the podium, was to bring somebody on to help us with that. Because Pinal answered the constituent who came to the podium. with an email and there was a bit of a rebuttal on our response. And our response was a courteous response to just tell the status of where we are today with regard to historical property, building, sites. And that it could require more resources to go further. And those resources are totally up to the commission and the citizens. You give us the resources, we're going to execute. So there was a conversation about that, which led to my thoughts about would I want to ask the commission, may I bring on a part-time equivalent or such? And this could apply to environmental issues as well. you give us the task and give us the resources we're going to execute so i'm not trying to get off track here but to your point commissioner um we're happy to do the work 10th street is a fabulous resource and our staff is top-notch professionals who would be willing to work with anybody i think but i think we have to have the rule sets in place mayor while i'm speaking um same same kind of subject environmental plan same thing may I may I get to a place maybe by the next meeting where we'll add one two three whatever Ruth and and the rest of the team Milton Peter may have thoughts about it as well anybody just and commissioners we could add a few line items that regard Poppleton and Frazier with regard to muck whatever the subject matter we could put those and program it just the way Kate showed you not too long ago and course we'll have to find the funding so for fiscal year 27 you'll all have to make a decision do you want to allocate funds to for whatever projects we show you and where do you want it to come from some of it could come from Kate's professional services because those are consultants and whatnot and we do need the studies some could be non-appropriated funds like grants that we will apply for in the future I'm not going to sign up for anything in fiscal year 27 that I can't pay for and that you don't want to pay for but I can show you fiscal year 28 and 29 so but we can get it started just as you described uh commissioner matheson described we there there are things commissioner rich there are things that you pointed out that we know about that we can do something about mangrove muck and we could get to task. And it'll be up to me to recommend the funding resources to you, and if that means it's gonna come out of the general fund, we obviously have to make some decisions and trades, but if it's coming from non-appropriated funds, like fund balance, which we have 4.1 million in interest per year, And I only presented a plan to use $400,000 of that $4.1 million in interest. per year to be used. So there's a little bit of money in fund balance and just an interest alone that you could decide to allocate to give to staff to do work like that. So I'll come back in the next meeting. We'll put that in the capital budget. Those things that come top of mind, which are Poppleton and Frayser, mangrove cutting and muck study or maybe not removal because we have to have the studies first get the engineering and science behind us and um you know so i've got a little experience with this capital budget stuff and and everything else um and getting stuff done so we just need the resources to do it we got a great team and we'll bring on the consultants and engineers and architects and scientists that we need to do the rest of the work so thank you i wanted to address both of those thank you mayor

Commissioner Rich I just wanted to respond to Commissioner Clark's concerns because I have been despite the remarkable contribution of the Boys and Girls Club and those programs which are available for free which many people still don't understand that they're available for free but there is just tremendous loyalty for those programs that took place at 10th Street and credit goes to the staff there and Mr. Trollski what has happened is they've replaced many of those programs with adult programs and if you put children in the building it creates logistical problems so it's a topic worthy of discussion but it's more complicated than it might appear on the surface but if we can assess a need I certainly think we should try to you know provide a service there for that community so I don't know how we proceed I'm sure Mr. Cholsky will be in a position to provide us guidance Thanks Commissioner Ridge my comments would be with the the CIP plan for the city sitting on the NPO board we rank

capital improvement projects as a board and we have a priority list just so we're kind of aware on what direction because now we're changing the Guy Davis Park that's a hundred percent designed And as far as the private organizations, I believe that was line itemed out for $25,000 for the BDB board again. And it was for an MOU with the city and UF and IFAS for $24,000. So that's how you get the $49,000 of private aides. and as far as the unfunded projects I agree with Commissioner Matheson there's quite a bit so if we're really going to look at unfunded projects especially for stormwater management maybe we should be looking at some of the beautification projects that are in the CIP plan for the CRA whether or not they're necessary if we're going to be moving funds for stuff like that those are my comments and then just looking at things like is it necessary for police to have a $10,000 drone potentially for I saw it in here just just things like that even like the scuba tank like you know is there a way to put the funds somewhere else and then going back to fire rescue I know at the last meeting you had mentioned we were way behind on staffing for the city of Stewart for providing a level of service to the residents that live here How long has this been an issue in the city? I've been here for two years chief Vince with all due respect But some of these board members have been up here for either many years or years in the past I don't know if they were aware of the understaffing from your department or if it's a new thing because I've asked the questions How many years you've been understaffed for the apartment So

I'm going on 29 years here and nine years as the chief. So when I started, we were number X, and where we are now is almost double. So we have come a long way. That's how behind we were. But what we have done over the past nine years is incrementally increased staffing our equipment to try to do it in the most responsible way right which is what we're doing again this year there's still positions that are not staffed like we talked about with the safety officer you know the EMS supervisors that we need to provide we're the only department that does not have those we are a class one department everybody should be proud of that so but we're not we're getting to the point now where we are we're getting close to where we should be where every other department around us did it quicker than us right so it's it may seem like hey every year you know when people have commented you know why Why do we need more equipment? Why do we need more people? Because that's how behind we were. And we, again, not to keep saying it, but we incrementally increase it. So I can't just come in and say, hey, I need to hire 35 people, right, and get laughed out of the room. Just like I can't say, oh, I want to buy 10 fire trucks or 10 ambulances, right? So then we just incrementally did it. So that's how we do it. So this year, if we can add those three positions, that would bring us to a level where we need to be. And where we are still lacking is the number of personnel per apparatus. That's where we're still behind. We are a lot better than where we were, but we're not 100%. So again, the standard is to have X amount of people on a call, on a truck, and we're almost there, but we're not there yet. The ambulances, I know we were talking about that. We have apparatus that's 30 years old. We have a fire truck today in service running calls that's 30 years old. Our backup fire truck is 30 years old. so to say why is it so long well because we had so many other things to do and I can't just come in every single budget year because as you know there's a lot of different commissioners and they have to cut things and prioritize things so we did it as we could and we did it in a responsible way that's why we are where we are and our city is is better because of that how many personnel are we short as of today um you know offhand for the three three per truck we're not we're not that far off what's that mean is it three six nine twelve eight because of the daily because of our daily staffing it will fluctuate right but when i say the goal is you know you're supposed to have three people on a fire engine to say that we still have two people on a fire engine that's remember i said it last that's mayberry yep right there isn't a fire department around that does that And we're a class one department. So we need to bring that up. We have brought it up. So a lot of the days out of the month, as we track the data, we can do it. But we have people that are out, FMLA, people that have babies, all of this stuff. And our level drops over time comes into play. So I don't want to give you a concrete number. Hey, this number right now would solve all of our problems. I don't know that. I know that the priority for this year is those three people, and that's why I did it. I do the budget. I know people say, hey, you should ask for 20 people. That makes no sense, right? So the three this year would be responsible. Next year, we would probably look to add two or three people, and that may get us to where we can do our staffing. But then I know we have capital items too. So I have to balance that with the manager and finance to do the right thing.

And the only reason why I'm asking is I understand where you're coming from being fiscally responsible, but like you said, it's a level of service that you're providing as well. I just want to know, I'm up here for two more years, so I want to be aware of what's going on. And I think coming up with a ranking system, like I said, for the capital improvement projects will help as well. So if things get continually shifted, at least that you're aware that it's on the priority list, just the ranking might have moved. And to further address it, I was asking because I guess the rhetoric out in the public is that City of Stewart Fire Rescue currently costs more to operate than Martin County so asking for three six nine or eight staff as Commissioner Clark had mentioned is there any comparisons being done then from the city to find out if that's true or not

I mean, that's not in my scope. That's not what I do. I run the City of Sewer Fire Rescue and brought us to be a class one department. And all the equipment and staffing that I ask for is standard. You could bring the entire department in here right now, the union, everybody. The union's here. You can ask them. And am I doing less or more than what I should be doing to be responsible for the city of Stewart and provide the level of service? I keep saying it, but we wouldn't be a class one if we didn't provide a high level of service. And we do it every day. But everybody that's been with the city of Stewart for a long time, like me, he's going on 20 years. We've always done more with less. That's our MO. That's what we've done our whole career, right? And I vowed when I became the chief, I'll fix it. I'll try to bring us up to the modern days. And we've done that. And I'm not up here crying saying that we're providing bad service. We obviously are doing the opposite, right? But we need to keep going. We have a brand new ladder truck just got here 10 minutes ago. So everybody gets to see that. That's replacing a 21-year-old truck. right so that's something we need but the ambulance that's in the budget that's replacing a twenty something year old ambulance we don't just have one truck one of each you know so these these things we're incrementally trying to do i think we've done a great job thanks chief commissioner madison chief thank you and i appreciate that

Thank you for being ISO number one. That's something every city resident should be proud of, every staff member along the entire fire department, but every one of us. And we thank you for that, and that was a great explanation. Every department is constantly improving and making progress, and that sounds like exactly what Stewart Fire has been doing. And Mayor, I think you bring a good point up. A lot of what we're doing here today is just prioritizing and trying to figure out how we can move forward and what our priorities are on behalf of the residents. And I think that's a good point when we look at it, how it's done at the MPO with the capital improvements project. So some of my priorities from the 2,000 foot perspective would be when I left office, the 10th Street Community Center's original plans were basically shovel-ready. And I would prioritize that. I certainly agree I don't want to scrap the skate park, but I'm very interested in Pinal coming back with two options and what that would cost if it would free up money in the CRA and we could potentially look at using stormwater and capital improvement projects that are in the bounds of the CRA and allocating some CRA funding for those projects so they're not deferred. I know that's an opening and then if there's any money freed up, I would clearly prioritize tributaries of the st. Lucie estuary and innovative ways that we can clean those up you know as far as my priority and you know I would also just prioritize keeping city of Stewart ISO number one and that would really I don't want a fire department so that's your job my job would be the priority for city and commission would be that we remain iso number one that dictates the level of service that we're providing and that insurance rebate that it gives to our businesses and residents is a wonderful thing that we as commissioners and everyone can be proud of but i think you know it may be helpful for staff if we all touch on those priorities because you make a very good point about the capital improvements projects and that's That is a slippery slope if those are continued to defer and perhaps There is some funding in the CRA for where those projects The ones that are in the CRA can can lie Thank you, by the way, we're the only class one fire department from Orlando to Palm Beach and

So we're the only one in between.

Saves taxpayers a lot. Yes. Thank you. And we thank you.

Commissioner Giobbe and Commissioner Rich I don't know who was first I wasn't you guys can decide yeah Commissioner Rich yeah that's a very good point that's been made here is so that ISO 1 rating that is the highest rating the highest rating and the insurance companies look at that to determine their rates absolutely for the city for the municipality as well as the resident and how long has the city of Stewart's fire department had that highest rating since 2019

A year after I got in.

Good job.

And by the way, the town of Sewell.

We have not been chronically short of a capable fire department.

We have done the responsible thing over the years, and that's why we are what we are. And just as a note, the town of Sewell's Point is under contract with us for fire rescue. And because they're under contract, they get the benefits of us. So every house and business in Sewell's Point is a class one as well. And that's a lot of money. So it's a great thing.

Thank you, Chief. Commissioner Giobbi?

yes and I want to thank the mayor for bringing up I was going to bring it up eventually in regards to the monies that are in the budget for not-for-profits I sit on the Martin County Business Development Board and I will tell you that probably four or five months ago the city the county addressed this issue with them as you may or may not know we did not fund the Martin County Business Development and I was surprised to see it in the budget I thought we weren't funding them going forward. Does that require a vote each year?

We just carried forward the status quo amount from fiscal year 26 to 27 for aid to private organizations and the commission funding. So just because it's itemized as an amount historically doesn't mean we're obligated to do that donation to the business development board.

Well, I just wanted to state that the county has basically notified them that they had a five-year plan to be self-sufficient I worked for not-for-profit that is your goal your goal is not to allow to rely on municipalities and states for your funding and running of your business you have to be going out there to private entities to get the funding so and just as a note when the city no longer I think was a $10,000 amount in 2025 the Martin County Business Development Center went to the county for the difference and the county refused. So I just want everyone to be aware we're doing what is fiscally responsible. We did help them in many years past, but it's at the point where they need to be funding their own. So I just didn't see why it was in the budget. Thank you.

so there's been a lot of things said I don't know for staff and for you Mike I don't know if you want to go through each one and look for a consensus because there's there's as far as like what our priorities are right so we're all going in five different directions I feel like at some point and it's a little confusing I could see it in staff's faces and eyes as well so I'm not really sure where to go from here

So most of what I've heard today is either an enterprise fund separate from the general and I mean general fund for everyone and or some type of non-appropriated funding source to do certain things if they're so really what we're asking is primarily is consensus on millage, not today, not today, and the general fund, appropriated fund. So the non-appropriated stuff and enterprise funds These can be adjusted throughout the year and allocated based upon how well, and I'm pretty confident that I know the status of each one of these funds, including our own bank account. So I think the prioritization, if you're looking for recommendation guidance, Mayor, is that the Commission think about the general fund, so primarily salaries, compensation, those consumable items, those line items that are in question, or things that do, like the last item that is a legacy issue that needs to be lined out. those things that affect the general fund and the millage those we're asking the other stuff like capital and I'm not talking something immediate you know and early 27 and I couldn't even speak right now on what those are but I know that Peter knows and I know that Milton knows exactly what they need to do you know to let a contract on october first so they'll let me hear it but that that's really where we are the other stuff that has been discussed most of it that i wrote down is again an enterprise fund issue a long-term issue um i think i already gave you my thoughts on environmental and creek i mean we're happy to come back and if you want to put some money or keep the money the same in in the environmental line under professional services under the attorney then we could come back with a if if we do have something valid to bring to the table that we know what the costs are and we're ready to issue an rfp or whatever that is whatever procurement process we're going to choose that we come to you with a specific project with a number and a funding source happy to do that throughout the year that's going to happen but really for October 1st I think we just need to decide what's the general fund going to look like What's the millage look like? Because that is the law. We have to put that in writing and have that passed for our citizens. So there's where we are. And we keep the conversation moving. This doesn't end. The only deadline we have is to pass the general fund and the enterprise funds as well so that the constituents know what their tax bills are going to be beginning October 1st.

All right, so I'll get a consensus from that. I'll go down the line. And then, like I said, Commissioner Matheson agreed with ranking, Commissioner Giobbe, and the unfunded projects, and that's just set in priorities. What's more important, the beautification stuff or the unfunded projects for stormwater management or dredging of the creeks? So I guess, Commissioner Rich, where would you like to see the millage rate so the staff knows? Five. Commissioner Giovi.

Would like to see it stay at four point.

Commissioner Clark.

I think we can work with five because that middle thing that she had put up, I see it as being somewhat of a sweet spot where we're getting maximum benefits and that extra cup of Starbucks coffee price is paying for itself.

Commissioner Matheson?

Yeah, having, you know, just jumped in here today, I believe everything I've heard so far, it's a tough one having not been part of anything last year, but I'm okay with it at five.

I'd like to see it at four or nine, but at least staff knows what direction to go in. So thank you, Kate.

Thank you.

Mr. Mayor, I do have one more question for the city managers. Who's conducting our audit, and what is the status?

I just got an email today, and I'm gonna refer to the email, but Kate and I discussed it this morning, and we discuss it maybe twice a week. Well, Kate, why don't you discuss the firm, where we are, because I just got an email from the lead at the audit firm today, sir. Because Kate has been engaged with them now on a daily basis, I'll let her take it from here.

Yeah, our audits completed through Forbes Mars and we are in the final stages. We gave them a good portion of all the last minute items they were asking for on Friday. The financials are under review. Everything that we provided is under review. I did get an email this afternoon for a few additional follow up items and verifications. So we'll send that as soon as we can. But essentially we're as best as we can be to be on track for the August 31st deadline that we worked for.

Thank you.

Because what?

August 31st.

Does that conclude your comments, Commissioner Madison? Yeah. Commissioner Clark?

This is a Ros question. We probably know where we are, except that I probably have forgotten. With the insurance and the years that we have this Cigna, since the prices are going up so much, when is the next time that we can find somebody else or do something else? We're talking about Dublin here.

We've been with Cigna since 2010. We did put out an RFP in 2020. And there were four, I believe, who responded. And Cigna, once again, came through as the one that provided the best benefit overall and cost pricing.

That's through the Gehring Group, right?

Gehring is our broker. They're now Brown and Brown. So they're the ones who analyze, receive, the information and analyze the info and provide it to us in a comparison Cigna has over time repeatedly come back as one of the best in fact several other cities and counties are now moving to Cigna our increase could have been significantly worse around the country we're seeing 15 to 30 percent increases locally we're seeing 12 to 20 percent increases So our 8.8 was pretty nominal in the scheme of things.

Thank you.

You're welcome. I conclude your comments. Okay.

I wanted to address the previous issue with the audit just to catch everybody up if online or people weren't aware that normally the audit is due on 30 June of every year and because of circumstances out of Anthony, Kate, my control, Roz's control. It didn't start until late. And Roz was the interim city manager at the time. That's why I bring it up. Totally out of our control that the audit firm chose not to begin. But once they started, they gave us a deadline of August 31st. I'm holding their feet to the fire. That is the issue that we are with the 2025 audit. The books have been closed since September 30th, 2025, and we don't see anything, but certainly their testing is taking place. Roz, on the issue of the health insurance, could you, just off the top of your head, describe the incremental cost to the employee versus, the slide that you showed to the employees, do you know which one I'm talking about? I do. Thank you.

I do we presented to the employees a week prior to open enrollment so it was two weeks ago an informational and educational session on how benefits work how self-insurance programs work and we took a look at the cost of an increase of 8.8 percent on someone who had basic coverage we have two different medical plans we have basic and buy up and we took the single coverage plus a spouse and took that times 8.8% and it was about $30 a month in the difference total that was the $30 a month it's about 30 I think was about actually was a little less than that it was a little less than that yeah it was less than that the actual numbers not coming to my head I could pulled up if needed but we're paid every two weeks and those deductions occur every two weeks so the actual cost of it was very nominal similar to the Starbucks cup of coffee experience versus if the city employees receive an increase in their base pay if there is a COLA if that is granted that is significantly more when you do the math than an 8.8% of an insurance premium it's really quite nominal

So the point being that a 3% COLA increase on your salary is much larger than an 8.8% increase on what you had been paying for health care, and that should you get a 3% COLA increase in your paycheck, that that 8.8% will not be as painful to that increase. And that was the gap that Roz showed. I found that very helpful to explain to staff an apples to apples comparison of what, again, 3.0 increase is on your salary compared to 8.8 on what you were already paying for health insurance. So thank you for that.

And that $30 was on a family plan, as it came to mind, on a family plan with heavier coverage. So yeah, it was nominal in the scheme.

Thank you. Just on that, I know that we have the ISO rating for the fire department. How are we doing health-wise on our savings and the programs that we do for employees to encourage them to, you know, we have the wellness things.

I appreciate you bringing that up the health insurance overall is a combination of the Cigna as our ASO and then we have the Employee Health Center and we have the wellness program and in fact I made a point to thank the employees for being so responsible in using the Employee Health Center and participating in the wellness programming to minimize the impact to our health insurance the insurance is wonderful it's a gift we all need it thank goodness we have it but if we can avoid going to say the emergency room if it isn't necessary and going to an urgent care facility or waiting until we can get to the health center we don't have a hit to the insurance that's what keeps our increases down at 8.8 versus the 12 or 15 or 20 percent that is being seen around the country so it's important for us to thank the employees for being so responsible in taking care of our Cigna health insurance it all works if we can practice a healthier lifestyle we use the insurance less and we have less impact which means lower increases

Thank you. You're welcome.

So what you're saying is even though with the 3% cola and the 8% increase, we might, even though we can afford it, not want to splurge for the Vente Grande Frappuccino with double caramel and whipped cream?

Maybe not every day. Maybe not every day.

That would be adding cholesterol.

It just makes it an unhealthy lifestyle.

Thank you.

Does any other commissioners have any comments for staff? I know Commissioner Rich, when you weren't here, I went to comments by city commissioners. I didn't know if you had any. I had none, thank you. You're welcome. All right, so this might sound a little awkward for the public, but can I get an approval of the agenda? Motion for approval.

Approval of the agenda is published. I'll second the motion.

We have a motion for approval of the agenda by Commissioner Clark and seconded by Commissioner Giobbi. there any public comments on this motion I know it might sound weird but it's how it's posted so seeing no public comment all of those in favor motion passes unanimously now comments from the public on non agenda items

yes the skateboard park nobody wants it so why are we still discussing it here at this at this budget meeting I I didn't catch her name I I didn't hear it but I just heard her mention $200,000 for signs over at Confusion Corner. I've owned in the city of Stewart for over 30 years. I own multiple properties here, my LLC and my personal. How many times is this place gonna be remodeled? What else needs to be done there? And as far as the skateboard park, do we have the true number of what it's actually going to cost? Because there's so many different numbers out there. I heard $500,000, $700,000. We all know that's not the correct number. By the time you have change orders and everything else, they've been in construction for 35 years. So if nobody wants the skateboard park, why is everybody pushing for it? There's a lot of other things that could be utilized with that space. I've walked East Stewart. I've spoke to the residents there during all your campaigning and everything else. I spoke to these people. They don't want it. Who from Palm City, Port St. Lucie, Jupiter, or anywhere else is going to the skateboard park? You all know it's going to be a disaster for the city of Stewart. It's going to take up the resources of the police department. You got kids hanging out there all night long drinking or doing whatever the hell they do these days. it's going to turn into a wheat factory. I'm not trying to take away projects to people that worked hard to do this, but if you had to take a $50,000 or $100,000 loss, opposed to almost a million, million and a half, I mean, think about the real numbers on this. Nobody wants to skateboard park. I suggest that you all make a decision. Put a splash park there for these kids. Who in East Stewart has pools? Nobody has pools over there. It would benefit the community. I don't know if you all walked out there and you actually talked to the people and the residents of East Stewart. They don't want it. They don't need it. How many kids are skateboarding these days? How many people are you going to see skateboarding in 105 degree real time at 3 o'clock in the afternoon when they get out of school? You all know it's a mistake. The previous commissioner wanted it. It was his baby. And we all know that. You all know it. And that's fact and that's fiction. And as far as the fire department, I've never heard of an engine running on two people. Who runs an engine or a truck on two firemen? That's absurd. So if he needs three men, he should be getting his three men. I just don't get it. And as far as Ruth, Ruth is extremely a wonderful asset to this community. And on top of that, if she needs in-house, like you said, and in-house instead of hiring all these different consultants and all these other people that cost a fortune, if you put somebody on the payroll in-house, it would help. And you all really, really seriously need to save this skateboard park. Thank you. Because it's over.

Thanks, Dave, for your comments. Any other public comments? Seeing no further public comments or discussion from the commissioners, I'm going to adjourn this meeting at 438.