City Commission - Regular Meeting

It is now six o'clock. We're going to call our meeting to order. Again, it's now six o'clock. We're going to call our meeting to order. Can you do a call, please?

Brenda?

Here.

Vice Mayor Jeff?

Here.

Commissioner Brandon Smith? Here. Commissioner Touchstone?

Here.

Commissioner Ebiard?

Here.

Jeff Corum?

Can we all stand for an invocation and a pledge of allegiance? Yes.

Heavenly Father, we thank you first and foremost for our being here. We ask that you will continue to help us govern and guide this city according to your own will and purpose. In Jesus' name, amen.

Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Amen. Like to thank everyone for coming up to our September 3rd first budget hearing for this year. As soon as the screen comes down, we will. Start so before we go, we do have. And public comment. One opportunity for the public to address the Commission just OK. Can you please give your name and your address please? Oh excuse me for record. Our attorney is on the way. Miss Hardy, can you please give your name and address please?

Carolyn Hardy, 4430 Southwest, 18th Street, 561719, Southwest 27th Street. I just want to come before the commissioners and the mayor to thank you for... maintaining the millage rate as to what it has been for the past two years and I Sincerely hope you will keep it at that rate although I do the stress although the military has been The same I'm sure everyone has noticed that our property tax bills are still They are not the same. They have increased due to the fact, as it has been stated so many times, our property taxes are not just based on what we are taxed by the city of West Park, but every tax is based on the property values, and we have no control of property values. In a way, it is a good thing that our property is valued as such. because it encouraged other people to want to live in our area and if you have no plans of selling it certainly is great but if you have plans on selling with increase with your property value being increased you will be able to ask for a higher amount if you're selling but again i just want to reiterate and thank you all for maintaining the millage rate that you have in the past two years, and hopefully you will keep it to the same amount, not lower. You can't afford to go lower, but at least keep it at status quo. I just got my tax payment bill today, and my tax have increased due to the property values. Remember, property value drives our property taxes. Thank you.

Thank you. Um, Mr clerk, we forgot the decorum statement. You read it into record, please.

When speaking before the city commission, please make sure to give your full name and address for the record. There's a 3 minute time limit for permits. Please adhere to the cities. The core must include article 2 section 2 24 of the city of West parks called ordinances. The city's charter provides the city commission may determine its own rules of procedure. Those rules in part specify that persons participating in any regular or special meeting shall abide by standards of conduct or may not continue to participate in that particular meeting. Speakers will be called in the order in which they are received. The city clerk is charged with notifying each speaker of the time limit. It is unlawful for any individual to disturb or disrupt a meeting of the city commission or refuse to obey the orders of the mayor or presiding officer during the meeting. Any comments or questions by the public shall be directed to the mayor or presiding officer. The mayor is empowered by the laws of the city to order from the room any speaker who refuses to comply with the quorum rules and regulations of the city.

Thank you. At this time, we will have our budget presentation.

Okay. Good evening, mayor, vice and commissioners. We will be presenting to you today the summary of of what is in the budget book. And Chris will be joining me in the process and will go tag team on the presentation. What you have before you now is the undesignated fund balance, which we would call reserve. And just so you know, this is the amount from the final audit. from 24 to 25. The amount is not quite what it is. It's quite less now because some of it was used to balance last year and the current year's budget. Next slide. Thank you. In the budget message, I indicated that this year the city realized The city realized positive percent change in taxable value of 10% concerned with what the resident was saying, which is what created the slight change for homestead properties, for properties. And then we realized the highest net percentage change in taxable value among all cities in the county at 9.2%. Next slide. The chart in this slide represents the 10-year report of percentage change in taxable value and the next change in taxable value. This shows remarkable accomplishment during that when the negative back in 2008 through 2012 during the downturn in economy. Next slide is the proposed millage rate. The proposed millage rate indicated in the budget book appeared with a tentative millage rate of 7.9. Next slide. I'm going to pause at this point and let Chris present the next slide and then I'll take over after when it gets to slide 10.

Good evening, Chris Wall, Finance Director for the city. This slide just goes over the fact that the city does not set your property tax values done by the Broward County Property Appraiser, which is an elected office, and they're overseen by the Florida Department of Revenue. So market values are determined for residential properties, usually just recent sales, similar properties. Properties are a little bit more complicated than that. So you have market value, which is what your house is worth, or the value is sometimes how it's referred to a trim notice. And the assessed value is what the base value of your property is before the Save Our Homes Amendment. Save Our Homes Amendment limits your annual assessment to no more than 3% a year increase, or less inflation is less, and in many years it is less 3%. So over time, the longer you're in your house, the assessed value is markedly different than what your market value is. And so from the assessed value, you take away some other exemptions. Usually there's two $25,000 exemptions that are set by the Florida Constitution. So that's $50,000 off your assessed value. There are other exemptions for totally disabled veterans, widowers, and some minor exemptions. once you take the dust value and less the exemption then you are left with the taxable value and the taxable value is how this generates its revenue so we apply a millage rate that the commission levies annually against taxable value of your house so you start with the market value or the just value then for most people who've lived in their home many years you have a much less Assessed value to save our homes amendment and then you have exemptions that are also guaranteed a Florida Constitution leaving you a taxable value which in many cases is substantially less than The market value of your home and key to some disparities for instance I pay one-fifth the property taxes that my member pays on the exact same type of property I've lived in my home for many years and lived in his home for only four or five years and So you see that of inequity over time. So this just illustrates what I was just saying. We start off with the market value, and then you have the save our homes assessed value, then the exemption of $50,000, leaving a taxable value of $84,000, to which we apply a millage rate. So the millage rate, yeah, in this example is 8.2, so you can see that you would be living a lesser millage rate than the 8.2. But in this example, you'd be paying $688.80 if the millage rate were 8.2 on that taxable value.

And this slide just shows the millage rate comparison table. Next slide. It shows the milligrate comparison table, which represents last year we passed a milligrate of 7.9 on 25-26, which is what was adopted. We generated a value of one mill of 1.1. approximately, for a total 95% of our ad valorem of approximately $8.9 million. This year, with the 2026-27 tenancy 77.9 mills, the value of a mill is approximately $1.2 million. and 95% of one meal, which is what we're required to set the budget for, at $9.5 million. The difference between last year and this year, obviously, with the proposed millage rate of being the same, it'll be zero, and the value of one meal only changed by $101,163. The value of... 95% of one meal from last year to this year generated $799,182. By keeping the millage rate, we will achieve that amount in this year. Next slide. This is just an illustration that we show every year to illustrate that we do not charge the entire tax that is in the trim notice or in the bill is not from the city. It comes from Broward County as part of their millage rate. and their services are of approximately 21 cents to a dollar, and the schools, state law and local law are also at a total of .42 cents of a dollar. And from the state, which South Florida Water Management, Evaluate, Construction, Inland Navigation, all of that is one cent of a dollar. And the Children's Services Council at $0.02 of a dollar. And the cities are always fluctuating at approximately $0.33 of a dollar. They fluctuate by property, but it never goes beyond an average of $0.33 of a dollar. Of course, South Brow Hospital at $0.01 of a dollar for $1.00. As we do every year, we did an illustration, an example of about 12 properties in the city with a trim notice that was out. You would realize that the first four properties, for example, on Ronald Road, the taxable value last year was $153,408. The tax they paid to the city was $1,211.92 this year. The property appreciating value $252,229 for proposed tax of $1,202, a difference of $38. On 32nd Street, we had last year a property at $131,768 in taxable value. paid $1,040.97. This year, again, the property appreciated in value to $135,999 for a proper tax to be paid at $1,074.39 for a difference of $33.42. On 33rd Street, we picked the property also there that the value appeared to be last year, taxable value $58,868, and they paid $465. This year, the property appreciated in value at $61,129. Proposed tax for that property will be $482.92, difference of 17.84 cents. Requires on 24th Street, a property at 50, tax value of 58,068 cents at $68. And the tax they paid last year is $458.72 and 72.4 cents. This year, the property appreciated in value to 70 for a taxable value of $60,449. They'll be paying $477.55 for a total, for a difference of $18.81. The same happened on the next sets of properties. However, I want to point out the very first one, on 59 terrace. Last year, the taxable value was $73,368, and they paid $579.61. This year, the taxable value is now $423,000. And you notice in the bottom, it shows the asterisk. When we see a change like that, we survey it and find out what happened. This property was sold. in June of 20, June 24, 2026. The property is now, piggybacking on what Chris said earlier, the property is now in the tax row with a taxable value of $423,000 because the property does not have an exemption. Last year, the taxable value of the property was $73,000 because it had a safer homes exemption of $393,000. $5,480, an additional home sale exemption of $50,000, which made the taxable value last year less. So that's the difference in that property. The next property, $301,898 in taxable value, and they paid $2,384.99. The property appreciated in value to $319,849 for a property tax of $250,000. $2,526.81 for a difference of $141. The next two properties, just the same. The difference in those two is an average of approximately $22.68, and the next one, $26.02, and the difference in property tax I would pay. Next slide. So the next four of the, the last four of the 12 recognize the same differences that we saw. But again, in this one, I want to point out another property that will be paying less because it took so much exemption that they will be paying the same amount as last year because of all the exemptions that were taken. With the property on 22nd Street, a taxable value of $25,000, same taxable value states, no difference in property tax from last year to this year. They will be paying a total of $150,000. $97.50. Next slide. So those are some examples we give for the ad valorem property. As you know, some of our revenue comes from non-ad valorem tax revenue. And I wanted to give an overview of some of those. The source of revenue represents 64% of the city's total general fund revenue. EXCEPT FOR A COUPLE OF MAJOR REVENUE SOURCES, WE ARE PROJECTED TO RECEIVE A SLIGHT INCREASE IN REVENUE FROM THESE NON-ADVALORANT REVENUE SOURCES. I'LL START WITH THE FIRST ONE BEING COMMUNICATION SERVICE TAX. We are projected to realize a slight increase for 26-27 from 208,000, a slight decrease, I'm sorry, from $208,286,000. Next slide. For electric utility tax, the chart below shows the revenue trend over the past few years, where forecast realized increase of approximately $89,000 for upcoming year. So you see that they do fluctuate from one to the other depending on the types of utilities, the type of non-LRM it is. Electric franchise, this relies so much on the weather and the rate changes primarily by FPL, Florida Power and Light. This year, we were forced to realize a slight increase of approximately $31,000. This one is absent sales tax. The state of Florida collects money from the taxable sales throughout the state. Part of the collections are remit back to local government based on FOLA that they use, largely relies on population base. This, for the upcoming year, will forecast to receive a slight decrease of approximately $47,000 from prior year. Those are some of the ones from the state level and the county level that we collect, we receive. But these next ones are ones that we created in the city. For example, the Code Enforcement Lean Amnesty Program. Since the program started in 2012, we have been able to achieve compliance, which is really what It relies more on and serve public benefit by increasing property values for everyone that surrounds the property. The program generated approximately $1.4 million over the last 13 years while placing property back on tax hold, keeping our communities clean and increasing property value. Last year, we were able to generate in the slight percent that we get from the program, generate $64,000 approximately. The next slide will show You see that since the program started, to date we have helped 174 properties through the Lean and Fine Amnesty Program. This represents a total of $593,000 increase in average market value after the amnesty program. program and growing uh the chart shows that just from last year the the market value change market value average of about twenty thousand dollars uh property that increased in value so it's no while it generates less money it also appreciates people's investment next slide new construction BUILD RE-APPLICATION AND NEW DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES CONTINUE TO INCREASE. HOWEVER, THIS YEAR WE REALIZED THAT THE VOLUME ON CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES, WHILE IT INCREASES, THE VALUE OF CONSTRUCTION DECREASED AT APPROXIMATELY 20%. SO WHICH SOMETIMES MEANS WHILE A LOT OF APARTMENT ACTIVITIES ARE HAPPENING, THEY'RE DOING VERY LITTLE It's a huge development that is mainly the projections. And so by bringing new developments in, which through the planning process, that would help with that. Business tax receipt, we realize the right increase in that of approximately 8.45% in business taxes in the city for a total of $1. THE TOTAL GENERATED FROM THAT DECREASE SLIGHTLY BY .15%. WE PLAN TO CONTINUE TO ENSURE MAXIMUM COMPLAINTS IN BUSINESS TAX RECEIVED. HOWEVER, FROM THE TIME THAT WE STARTED THIS BTR, 2007 TO 2008, WE'VE GENERATED, WE'VE REALIZED 6.7% IN increase in the program. The next few slides now, I will Chris will go over.

So the next slides deal with the non-advalorant special assessments that we collect on the property tax bill. These aren't based upon the value of the property, rather they're based upon the special benefit a property receives. The first one is the fire services assessment. The fire department is composed of two main operations, fire and EMS. You can't assess for EMS services because they inure two people. So there's no property benefit to EMS as the courts have held. This rate remains unchanged and it's remained unchanged I think for the last three or four years, maybe longer than that. So these rates are static. Second one is a solid waste assessment. This is levied on residential properties of 10 units or less per parcel. It's the same rate for each unit, so if you have two houses you pay, or if you have a duplex you pay twice the cost of a single family home because that's just how garbage works. This rate actually increased, as you're aware, mostly because of the rebidding process. Our contract with the former company had expired. And we went with the low bid, which was waste management. Unfortunately, the cost of collections and disposal for every city has gone up. And I don't know what to tell you about that. So this rate actually increased from $677, or it's going up to $700. which you'll pay 96% of that because you take a 4% discount on your property tax bill. So even though it says 706, you're going to wind up paying, if you pay in November, $678, which is about $10 more per month than the bill had been previously. So we did choose the cheapest of all the alternatives that we did on the residential side. We had to modify our bulk waste collection schedule because of that. As you recall, that was a pretty substantial change to go with the cheapest for residents. I think the commission was good in trying to find the most cost-effective solution to that, and that's what was chosen. Level of service and pricing were very important to the city. The level of service was consistent across all vendors. But at the end of the day, it came down to pricing, and the cheapest vendor was selected. The city has a dependent special district, Twin Lakes Water Control District. It affects an portion of the city. The assessment is not expected to change this year. It's $80. It's been $80 for decades. It's not expected to change. This will be adopted by the Twin Lakes Advisory Board, which happens to also be the city commission acting as the board.

So the next set of slides I'll take over. Thanks, Chris. For the past 16 years revenue from GRANTS HAVE BEEN VERY IMPORTANT FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS AND SERVICE PROGRAMS. THIS YEAR WE HAVE PROJECTED FUNDING OF $7,192,004 ALL FROM GRANTS. 633,812 IS FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AND THE TOTAL GRANT FUND OF $7,825,812 FOR APPROXIMATELY 23% OF THE TOTAL BUDGET. THIS PROGRAM, THIS FUND FOR FIVE YEAR PROJECTS. And these are the tables that shows the projects and also the list of projects as shown with a capital improvement project, some of it from a total of 14 capital improvement projects that are listed. And also they're also listed in the budget book as well. Next slide shows the investment in public safety. Like Chris mentioned earlier on, EMS and police services do not count towards assessment. The police and EMS services are considered in this presentation as public safety expenses at approximately 45% or $11,930,103 of the general fund budget. This basically shows the highlight of the expenses, and some of these budget expenses also provide for the following free events and activities for the residents, which would include the Halloween spectacular event, Thanksgiving turkey giveaway event, holiday tree lighting event. the MLK event, the toy giveaway event, the Mother's Day brunch event, the Father's Day event, a back-to-school program, and Easter egg and cheerleading program, fitness programs, tennis programs, youth basketball, a bike safety event, a youth football program, and also youth council programs. But it also provides us with the following activities, which is intended with the after school programs, elementary, middle, SENIOR PROGRAM, ANNUAL COLLEGE SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM, AND HOLIDAY HOME DECORATING PROGRAM. WE ALSO HAVE SERVICES THAT ARE CONTINUING TO BE OBJECTED FOR IN THE BUDGET, WHICH IS A FREE PAINT GIVEAWAY PROGRAM, THE HOME HOUSEHOLD ELECTRONICS PROGRAM, WHERE RESIDENTS do additional dumping and we pay for it at a transfer station. That's actually budgeted for outside of the schedule of PICA. They can always not only dispose of household hazard waste and electronics, but also bulk trash at a transfer station. And we are billed for that and we pay for that in addition to the bulk trash service that they have monthly. Free fresh food, big giveaway, we plan to continue that as well. And in budget, you will find that prior years, we plan to continue cross training with employees. thus ensuring staff's flexibility to perform multi-functions as a small city. Some group training will be included, team building and all other training activities. The budget allows for, across the board, cost of living of 2% for an up to 3% additional performance and merit increase for a total of 5%. In the summary, we recommend proposed millage rate of 7.9% that generates an average tax of $9,504,227 based on 95% of warm-up with the following budget values per fund. The general under $26,259,000 $26,259,834. Twin Lakes Special Revenue Fund of approximately $16,000. Tom Waters Special Revenue Fund of $560,000. General fund, grant fund, multiple sources, which are defined under the grant, will be performed over the period of approximately five years, $4,679,590. And we have some transportation surtax projects at $2,508,000. $2,508,502 for a total of $24,224,962. That kind of concludes the presentation. And for cause of making sure that we address any questions, if there are any, we will be able to write them down and make sure we prepare for the next meeting.

Any questions?

Yes. I would like for you to provide us with a breakdown of how you're calculating for the solid waste. You just showed us that it was $711 for a residential home, but can you give us line-by-line entry how you came about the $611?

We want to make sure we get up, take all the questions and have all written down.

And also you mentioned about the free paint, but right now there is no free paint giveaway at the moment.

Okay, we'll address that as well.

Any other questions, Commissioner?

Yeah, last year we had requested a breakdown of what Each staff member makes a salary. We were never provided that. We were provided a percentage, which I have here and still don't understand. We need this in dollar amount. We also need to identify who are these employees that we have here on staff. There's a lot of people that seems to come and go and there's no introduction or anything of that nature. In addition to that, I am very concerned about the increased cost of BSO. It's projected on this to be over $10 million. So I need to understand how and why that is. We are trying to cut costs and not increase costs for services, especially when BSO is not living up to the standards of the residents and the business owners throughout the community. I've also wanted to find out what is the language within that contract to be able to terminate if need be, how much written notice is needed, and will we be able to put out an RFP for services for that. That was something that I also echoed last year. In addition to that There's a lot of questionable expenditures particularly on the city managers Reporting I'm trying to flip through here really quickly So it says particularly for your office city manager and That is over 500 or half a million dollars per year I see on the city Organizational structure that you have administrative assistant and assistant to the city manager I would like to understand the roles specifically for each of those particular roles On here It says specifically that regular salaries are going to be proposed at $340,000. It would help to know who is directly under the office of the city administrator and what's the breakdown of each individual salary. Because I know last time that I checked that majority of this as far as salary is going to you. how many other employees are underneath the Office of the City Administrator. It also has on here a special pay of $8,100. I need to understand what it's that. It also has allotted for retirement for $107,000 annually. It also says that over $3,900 for communication and freight I would like to understand that. And then it says other operating expense, $750. So the grand total for your office manager is $630,513. Additionally, I know that there has been some changes with the city clerk. which I appreciate the reduction in the regular salary, but I would like to know what is the standard starting salary for a city clerk, because currently it says it's $74,000 annually. In addition to that, we as a mission did ask for an analysis of what the other seats are paying their staff in all respective roles that we have here at the city. We never received that information that was requested by the Commission The parameters that was supposed to be utilized were the same parameters that you did the study on concerning the Commission salary What I what I did miss in this is the fact that it was purported yesterday that the city is paying $70,000 and legal fees, however It's not indicated in the budget where the city is being assessed $70,000 in legal fees and which it was my understanding at the time that those fees was going to be paid by the Broward League of City Insurance. So I need it stated on the record exactly where is that $70,000 coming from and that shouldn't be something that had to be researched since there was a whole presentation on that yesterday. So I would think that you guys have information. And I would think if it was a expense to us and the residents, they'd be on the budget. And we don't see a line item for that. The other concern that I have is with the senior citizen program. The senior citizen program, it says that our budgetary amount is going to be $435,000. It seems like there's some overlapping as far as expense allocation. I'm not understanding why there's a set line item for Mary Sands Park, McTier Park. It's talking about the most program. It's talking about the summer program. And it's talking about the senior program in the projections here that's before us. So it seems like I would need a clearer understanding as far as why is that broken down like that? Is there a separate fence for Metier Park and Mary Sanders Park that is not inclusive in the programs that are administered out of those respective facilities? Additionally, I'm sorry, I have to flip through pages. The Commission had budgeted for specific events last year, which I don't know if you can point in the direction to where that is included in the budget for this year. I've been flipping and flipping, and I can't find the location of those events, nor is there accountability as far as because we did not have those set, budgetary items, where has that money gone? So we have respectfully allocated money for Juneteenth, Goon May, Fourth of July, cultural festivities that didn't occur, a whole gamut of what we budgeted for for this fiscal year, yet there was no fruits of that, right? Uh, you, a city manager did not ensure that the will and the pleasure of the commission was followed. Um, and there needs to be a count as to where those monies are and where it is in the budget that I can see it moving forward. Um, also I see that there's a line item here about waste management contribution of, uh, $10,000 for our scholarship. But then in another area on the budget, it says that we only have a total of $7,000 for scholarships. As indicated in the previous meeting, I wanted to advocate for an increase in the contribution on an annual basis because if we are issuing out a $4-plus million contract for over an eight-year period, we definitely can get a community benefit that's greater than $10,000 annually. So I think that that should be something that we revisit with the vendor to ensure that. Also, I don't see the line items for our community benefit programs as far as our small home repair grant, our childhood assistance grant, our... Tree trimming grant. I don't see the line items for that. So if you can direct me to where those are in the budget, I would love to review at this time. I'm still waiting to find out what pages that is so that I can review that while another commissioner has to say. I don't think that it's robbery for you guys to provide that information. That's not something that has to come back. I would like that information now.

I don't see anything for the business. The business is a small business grant that we normally give and actually the home repair grants. I don't see anything in the budget for that. Yeah, that's why I'm asking him to provide the page. And I noticed that the cultural festival and the Gumbe Festival, there's nothing there for that, even though we budgeted.

What page is that?

This is page 103. Thank you. Yes, and... Oh. The... Veterans Day. I've seen that. We didn't do anything. We didn't put anything. We haven't done anything for that. So therefore, it's Goombay Festival, Cultural Festival, and then what was the other one? Halloween. Okay. Where is it?

Well, vice may I think anyone have any?

Yeah, I also wanted to say that we had recommended and actually to not have a $25,000 budget for a tree lighting ceremony that is poorly attended. And so I think that's something that we should consider from the budget. I think that it would be better allocated towards community events that are already underway and also to help increase the budget so that we can have a better holiday giveaway for our kids. I even have some type of program where I can participate in holiday festivities. I just think that that's just with taxpayers' dollars to spend $25,000 on a tree lighting ceremony. And then when we do the toy driveway, right, it's a drive-through experience. We don't even get an atmosphere where they can enjoy the tree and the tree lighting. We don't have a Santa Claus there to buy toys, nothing. We are not in the cold era, right? COVID has been long gone. It's time out for us to stop doing drive-through events, especially on special occasions. I mean, it's just so impersonal for us to be operating in that fashion. And we could have had something very festive for the holidays to be able to give back to our youth and our community with the toy giveaway. and make it something that was fun, festive, and family-orientated. They're just driving through while we have this big tree of lawn that families can participate and take pictures on, pictures at or whatnot, and we're not utilizing it, so I really think that it's just a waste, a waste of money, a waste of time, a waste of everything. In addition to that, I noticed that on the contingency fund line item, It says they have utilized $180,598 up until July and it's projected to go to $234,000. We need an itemization as far as what the contingency funds have been utilized for. I never saw where that was brought towards the commission. to even advise about us going into the contingency fund for anything. What was the contingency and why the commission doesn't know about it? Historically, there has not been too much money spent from our contingency fund, so that's a great amount that should be questioned.

Okay. Can I?

Vice Mayor?

Yes. Okay. I'M STILL SEARCHING THE BUDGET TO SEE WHERE AND HOW MUCH WAS SPENT ON THESE NEW TECHNOLOGIES THAT WE HAVE HERE. I DON'T SEE ANYTHING FOR THE NEW MICROPHONES OR STUFF LIKE THAT. WE DON'T SEE ANY ACCOUNTABILITY WHERE THAT IS CONCERNED. SO I NEED TO BE IN THE BUDGET TO those money was located and how much to help that service.

Now, I would say that I did my advice, Mayor, where the community support benefit may be and it might be on page 102. However, it's only budgeted for $30,000, which only takes care of 10 small home repair grants. I think that we should try to invest more funding into that. I wonder, too, about that city manager. Are outside entities or vendors or businesses, are they able to help to contribute to this community support?

Is that with, that's included the... The $30,000.

No, this $30,000 would, yeah, this $30,000 will only cover the 10 homes that we committed to for the small home repair grant up to $3,000. So I'm not seeing anything for the tree trimming. I'm not seeing anything for the childcare assistance. And then what happened to the small mom and pop grant? I'm not seeing anything. in regard to that give-back initiative that we have historically had.

Commissioner, any other questions?

Yeah.

Can we allow some other folks?

Yeah. I'm just letting you know that I will have other questions.

Do you have something?

Yeah.

Go ahead.

In regards to the senior program, where are the fundings coming from? And also I have a question on page 34. It talks about the... What was the page number? Page 34. But the first question is for the senior program. Where are the fundings coming from? That's one question. And then the second question is on page 34. You make a reference to the sort of Department of Elders regarding the LSP. which is the state local service program. And it says that the LAP provides funding to expand long-term care alternative, enabling elders to maintain an acceptable quality of life in your own homes.

Right.

And it says here that it has been, the city has funded allocated increase to $400,000. So I never heard of this before. So can you, if you can explain if this is into one with our senior program, Or is this an additional grant for other seniors at our homes? That's what that's what it says. This is for for the SP and if so, what are the avenues for our seniors resident to be able to tap into this? This resource right here because I never heard of it before. I'm just noticing it now.

Well, Commissioner Everlard, this information seems to have been forwarded from last year because we did not get an allocation of $400,000 this year. But it has always historically been that type of program, and this is why I have alleged that we have not really used the grant funding the way that it was intended contractually. So this is what I was speaking to, what you see here. So when we got the state appropriations historically down throughout those years, it was through this elder affairs, the Florida Department of Elder Affairs. And it was intended to be for all of the things that are listed here, but it was never used in that fashion. The only thing that I've ever known it to be utilized for is for our senior program. And they have admittedly said that they just use it for recreation and transportation, which is not what we signed the contract and that we will be utilizing it for.

I want the senior manager to give me his statement because if that's the case, you know, it's not appropriate because From what I understand is that, like you said, for the seniors to benefit, they have to be enrolled at the senior center. But here, this one says it's home-based.

Right.

So you're supposed to be able to provide services to other seniors who are not able to attend school. the program in the senior center. That's the reason why I wanted some clarification. Yeah.

Any other questions? I think the manager's gathering all the questions. Anything else? Commissioner Smith, do you have anything? Anybody else have any other questions?

I do have some other things that I'm looking through. If you can circle back to me because there's a lot of stuff to go through and disseminate. I would like to know also what would be the projected revenue, right? I see where the line I know about the red light camera, how we're not receiving any more revenue for the red light camera. You know, it's reported that we will have to cut services and it will be a detriment to get rid of the red light camera system. But it's evident in the budget that we have an increase, have an increase in revenue. And it doesn't seem as though that we're lacking, right? The projection is almost at $1 million in revenue, even though we reduced the millage rate last year to 7.9 from 8.2. So it's not that the millage rate has been the same for two years, as the resident has purportedly said. We actually reduced that from 8.2 to 7.9 this year, and I'm looking forward to even reducing that further. I think that we can do that. and still be sustainable if we are practicing fiscal responsibility with our vendors such as BSO. So I really want to really explain how we're going from $8.3 million for BSO to $10.1 million. We haven't seen an improvement in services or any of that to even warrant an increase. So is there some form of calculation that has been done to indicate what 5% increase is supposed to look like? Because I know contractually we have agreed to a 5% annual increase. for the cost of the professional services for BSL. But it seems like from 8.3 to 10.1 is not 5% of what we paid last year. So I want to know what actual percentage difference is. And if it's somewhere within this budget book that I'm missing, please let me know. It says that it's a 38.71% increase from last year. page 44. So I wonder how we jumping from our contractual obligation of 5% to now paying 38.71% increase overlap here for police services. We need to keep it as minimal as possible. And I also did find the page that I was talking about what I need the explanation of on where it says parts and recs for, I guess this is MSP is McSanders Park, that the expenses are $622,594. It says parts and recs for JCP, which is, what is JCP? Is that the juvenile crime prevention program? Okay, so that is something that's administered at Mary Sanders Park as well, but it has an additional expense of $359,582. So if you combine those two programs, they are both at Mary Sanders Park. So why is there a separate line item for Mary Sanders Park expenses and then JCP expenses? Is it fair to assume that the total expenses at Mary Sanders Park is a million dollars? Other thing is is that for parks and recs for McTeer Park, MTP delineated on page 44, It says that it's $587,000. And then it says the senior program is at $435,000. So that's, again, the park is over a million dollars in expenses. So we need a breakdown towards that because I didn't see that anywhere else in the budget where it breaks down those expenses. If I overlooked it, please let me know what page number that was. The other concern that I have is the fact that when we signed the contract with Waste Management, it was reported that we are supposed to be having call safes for the residents for solid services. But our non-alarm assessment is going up over $100 to our residents. I don't want to miss what I think that it was like $589 per resident home last year. It's like $200 increase.

I'm sorry? It's approximately close to $200 increase.

So what was the figure? It was $783 and now it's $79 or something like that. What page is it on? Commissioner, if you can tell me.

I don't have the exact page.

So that's a $200 assessment increase for... something that was indicated was supposed to be cost savings to residents. If it's cost savings to residents, that means that it should be going down from $589 per household and not going up to almost $800 per household. So I need that explained because we're going to need to do some twerking there because I'm not very agreeable for us to be increasing our avalon assessment when it was sold to us that Solid waste was going to be cheaper than our previous vendor Also, I see as a budgetary item says that we used to get street lighting revenue It says we haven't got anything here today, but it's budgeted for $26,000 How would the city accumulate street lighting revenue? I Also, it's in the budget that we're getting ADRC grant for $400,000 for fiscal year 2027. I don't know if that's an error because we was not granted, as far as I know, the appropriations request this year for that program. Also, I see that we've got an EMS transport revenue, which I think is great, of $580,000. I would like an explanation as far as how to generate that. Is it that whenever our EMS services services individual, do they bill the insurance and then send us the money directly as a form of revenue? So I would like to know that. There's also a line item that says we are projected to get $600,000 in interest. Where is the interest coming from? Is it coming from our undesignated fund, our reserves? And it looks like it's put back into our budget. So I would like that explained where the interest is coming from. And if it is coming from our... our reserve, why aren't we recycling it back into the reserve? Any interest that we are bearing off an interest-bearing account should help to increase the cost or the amount that we have in the funding so that we can get additional interest on top of that. Also, there's a line here that says about donations and community benefit. It says that year-to-date, we've gotten $500. It's not a rolling line item in the budget either. So I would like to know what avenues do we receive donations. We have another line item for donations for the holiday holiday toy. And I can see now why it is that we don't have that much quality toys to hand out because we are only budgeting for thirty one hundred dollars. With the residential population that we have, I would think that we would need more to have quality gifts to give out to our kids during the holiday season. There's also a line item that says other sources, fund balance carried forward. I would like that explained. It says that last year we carried forward a fund balance of almost 1.5 million. So that seems as though we have some sort of pluses somewhere that we can be using to give back as a community benefit. We have over 100 and something residents on the waiting list to receive a $3,000 small home repair grant. If we have any additional fund balances that we can carry, why don't we carry it forward to help our residents and been into our community benefits so that we can knock down a great amount of the people who have expressed that they have need for home repair grants. Additionally, it says that for public works, it says that we have the budget for public works over $4 million for public works. I just want to ensure that Public Works does not include the solid waste contract and that this is just for our Public Works Department. And if so, I think that that's a lot of money for our Public Works Department. So I want to understand how it is that those monies are being allocated for Public Works because it's a chief complaint with our residents that our city's looking blighted. There's not a lot of beautification and maintenance going on throughout thoroughfales of our community. So I want to know how are we having such an expense of almost $4.5 million for BlitWorks and the people who are not getting their paying for. So that needs to be understood. Then there's another departmental aspect of it that says that We have budgeted over $2.3 billion for non-departmental. I need that explained very detail-orientated to understand what kinds of non-departmental and why are we spending over $2 million for a non-departmental purpose. The other conversation that I think that we should have is what will be like we're projecting what it is that we will have a budget for for 2027. But if Amendment 3 passes, I think that we should have a backup and we should be discussing how much money will we potentially be losing from our general revenue and how we are going to make up for that loss, not just make up for that loss, but plan for that loss. So we need to have a plan to say, hey, if everything stays normal, this is going to be our budget. But if things don't stay normal and go into effect January of 2027, I don't think we should be reactionary. I think that we should be proactive. So we need to be putting the plan in place and say, hey, If we know potentially in year one of the institution of the save our homes from excessive taxation goes into play, our city is going to lose $1.8 million in revenue that first year. We're going to lose $3 million in revenue that second year. What is going to be our contingency plan as a city to address and make sure that our essential services are able to maintain? I think that while we're speaking of this budget that we need to be having a discussion around contingencies if in fact Amendment 3 passes.

Does anybody else have any questions? I have a recommendation.

Instead of the tree lighting, I would rather to see that during the holiday season we we spread the lights around the city, like on main corridors of the city where we put up the lights on the actual palm trees on the main corridors instead of having that one tree sitting in the front lawn of somebody's property. So that is one thing that I'm recommending that we look into for this year where we have some lights around the city. instead of one tree sitting in the parking lot.

I wanted to recommend in reference to the holiday celebration for Christmas. Back a couple years ago when Mayor Jones was the mayor, the celebration used to be at Mary Sanders Park. I would like to see for for it to go back. We just have a Christmas tree and we have someone acting as Santa and have the toys giveaway at Mary Sanders Park. And that would be a way to be less expensive and more rewarding for the community. And there is something else. Let's see. I'll come back to it.

Anyone else?

Oh, yes, I remember. For the senior program, if you can give a deal breakdown with the names, vendors that you're paying, like the personnel that comes out to do the exercise, the ones that come and provide meals, the one that do the other programs for the senior, shows line by line entry, the name of those organizations, How much are they getting paid? As opposed to just giving us a general account.

All right. Mr. Bell, don't you have everything? Yes.

Yes, as always, we want to capture everything, so I have a book to write, and we'll come out with detailed responses.

Okay. We'll move on to item number seven, resolution. And this is a public hearing. Mr. Clerk.

A resolution of the City Commission of the City of Westbrook, Florida adopting a tentative millage rate for the fiscal year commencing October 2026 through September 30th, 2027 pursuant to section 200-05 Florida Statutes providing for adoption of reputations providing for an effective date.

Yes, I'm sorry, public hearing.

Yeah, there's a public hearing. Anyone from the public have any questions? Comments, please come forward. Give us your name, your address.

I'm asking that you maintain the current military. I would ask that you do not decrease it nor increase it, but allow it to remain status quo. Thank you. Anyone else?

Opportunity for the public is now closed. Commission, what's your pleasure?

Madam Mayor.

Yes. Commissioner Smith.

Motion approved.

Is there a second? Even for a discussion? No. Mayor?

Second for discussion.

Thank you. Mayor? Yes. I'd like to find out what is the recommended rollback rate?

Chris or Mr Ballard, as indicated, if you look in the resolution. Section 2. In the bottom there says the rollback rate of what the rollback rate is. Again, it's just. If you look at Section 2, the last sentence says This measure represents 9.2% increase over the rollback rate of 7.2344. As you know, this is the first reading, so you still have a second.

Can you elaborate more on the rollback rate? What is it compared to the regular 7.9 or whatever rate that was set?

So the rollback rate is the rate that is calculated that would generate the same dollar amount that you would generate this year. So, for instance, if you're generating a dollar this year in property taxes, the rollback rate, because basically property values increase, the rollback rate would come down to generate the same dollar. So that's what the rollback rate is. It's designed to say this is the millage rate that generates the same dollar amount that you had the prior year. So the rollback rate is 7.2344 mils. That would generate the exact same dollars that you have for the current budget, which predicated on 7.92 mils. The problem with the rollback rate is with inflation, nothing ever stays the same. So the rollback rate is just designed to generate the same dollar amount. It would have the effect for many people of actually lowering what they paid in property taxes.

Does that mean that there won't be any net increase if you set the reward rate?

Well, okay. This will sound like I'm talking out of both sides of my mouth, but it's somewhat complicated. But it's hard to say. We speak in averages. So you have however many thousands of properties you have in West Park. Not everyone is going to be affected in the same way no matter what you do. Like you saw earlier, someone had bought a piece of property this year, and they don't have a homestead exemption, so they're going to be paying a lot more than the prior property owner. So, you know, there's an example, an extreme example, where someone last year paid $500 and the new property owned $3,000. So I can't say categorically you or me or anyone would pay $1,000. Plus or minus percent? We just have to speak in averages.

Yeah, I'm speaking in average.

Okay, so in averages, if you kept the millage rate the same, then that's a tax increase under Florida law because it generates more dollar amounts. That's not to say that you're going to pay any more or less. You'd probably pay, if I had to guess, if you lived in your house, you're going to pay 3% more because that's the most your assessment would have gone up. I think most people will fall into that category that They're taxes just from the city. I can't speak for Brown County or the school board or any of the other taxing authorities. But just for the city, they'll probably pay the same thing plus 3% more than they did last year on the property tax.

Oh, okay.

The other thing you have to keep in mind is people get a bill with property taxes and the garbage and fire assessments. Assessments are not based upon the value of property. Those are fees, essentially.

No, I understand. I'm just referring to the... The city tax.

Right. So the other thing you need to keep in mind is on the process, and I should have explained this during the budget presentation, but at any point, and this is for the assessments too, at any point you can always lower the assessment during the public hearings, but you cannot later raise them. So it's like burning a bridge. If you lower a rate at that point in time, then you've set the ceiling. You can lower it again, but you can't raise it. And you technically could do that if you simply sent out all new notices to all the property owners, but no one ever does that because that's, you know, it just irritates people to no end, I'm sure. It's expensive, too. So what I usually encourage cities to do is you've given a number of directions and questions. I wouldn't lower the millage rate at this point. People have already been noticed that. We have to take out an advertisement in the paper, and there's going to be another public hearing on this later in this month. And at that point, you can burn the bridge then. But if you burn it now, you may regret it at the next meeting. I've seen that happen a number of times in my life. And it's like, well, it's too late. You already lowered it. YOU KNOW, I'LL TELL YOU ABOUT THAT.

BUDGET WORKSHOPS. THAT'S WHAT WE DO IN THE BUDGET WORKSHOPS, BUT WE DON'T HAVE THAT, DON'T WE? WE'RE SUPPOSED TO HAVE BUDGET WORKSHOPS IN JUNE, BEFORE THE BUDGET COMES TO US. SO WE HAVE NO SAY IN WHAT WE DO WITH THE BUDGET UNTIL WE'RE HERE FOR THE FIRST READING. THAT'S RIDICULOUS. So, I mean, for you to say that at this point we can't do nothing, that's great.

I don't think that's what Chris is saying.

You couldn't do that. It happens if you do it. It would just be detrimental to do it because you can't come back from that decision.

Well, I think the purpose of this meeting is for us to be able to gather the information so that we can share with the city manager what our desires are so that they know, can I finish speaking? The purpose of public hearing today is that we can hear what could possibly be and make a decision which direction we want to go, provide information to the manager as well as Chris to bring back different options for us to look at. So that is the purpose of tonight.

Well, Mayor, I disagree because for the last four years, the commission has stated that we wanted to have budget workshops and to have a non-binding conversation before we get to the point where there's a point no return. Right now, this is not a workshop capacity. We should have already had these conversations with the city manager so that everything that we desired would have been in the proposed budget already, not to have to go back and do that. Throughout the year, there should be conversations had about what it is that we would like to see. That's the whole issue all together. there is a lack of communication, there is a lack of transparency, and there is a lack of accountability in regards to that. How many years does your colleague have to sit up here and say we needed to have a workshop prior to this date? It shouldn't get to a public hearing where we're giving the feedback to the manager, presumably for the first time, for him to be prepared to come back in two weeks And we are able to be assured that everything that we have recommended or suggested is in the budget, right? Before this is even printed, a conversation should have been had with all of us as a body to ask what it is that we want to see as budgetary, our proposed budget, so that we wouldn't have to be doing all of this last-minute adjustments to a proposed budget that's already typed and been published. All of the input should have been received for now so that in the proposed budget, we could have just checked to see, hey, are those recommendations that we agreed on in this budget, where are they located? Okay, great. And then we could have been able to vote on this. I'm not willing to even vote on this proposed budget tonight because there's nothing that the commission has proposed that's in budget.

Okay, so let me just say this. None of you all sitting up here, this is your first rodeo and doing a budget. So this has been the process. So if you've had specific questions, let's be clear. You've had an opportunity. You could have spoken with the manager, emailed the manager, communicated with the manager.

What are you not listening to, Mayor?

Every time we give the same grievance and tell you that the city manager has a derelict of duties and does not correspond with the whole body. Again, because you're stating something that's not factual.

Every year, we say the same thing to you. We say the same thing to the city manager. As I indicated, you're not telling the truth.

Be factual and govern with integrity, Mayor.

As I mentioned, as I was saying, We all have the same opportunity. This is not anyone sitting up here first rodeo as it relates to the budget. So this is a process that we go through every year. We know that the process is coming. All I am suggesting to my colleagues is we go through this process every year. We know it's coming. We've been talking about budget for months now. We've been talking about property tax, through all these issues that are coming up. I need you to not call me a liar.

You are lying, though. Where did we speak about budget for months when we don't have an agenda ended for a whole year?

Again, I am speaking. Come on.

Tell the truth, please.

Again, I am speaking. As I say to my colleagues, you have not just started this process. If there are issues, if there are questions and things that you have, you know that the budget comes every time, the same time every year. All I'm saying is we also can be prepared and give the manager questions advance. Also, that's all I was saying to you all. You all have been about part of this process for several years now. So you know the process. So all I'm saying is have some grace. You all can't complain about everything.

Mayor.

You do something also to make the process easier.

Mayor. Yes. So what I just indicated was year after year after year that I've sit on this day is I've had the same complaint. The same complaint. You refuse to address the situation. It's a collective effort that we should be having a workshop We have not had a budget workshop for months.

Every city does that.

Every municipality, every county government, everybody has a workshop except the City of West Park. We have indicated to you time and time and time and time and time and time again that there's a lack of transparency with our city manager. We have indicated that there is a lack of him communicating via email, being responsive to emails and phone calls and text messages. Okay, but yet you all refuse to address the core issue here. And we have a member of our staff that's not listening to the body and we're supposed to be listening to. And hearing that every year we're saying that we want a workshop, we want the information beforehand. Every time that we ask something about a budgetary thing, he says, oh, we have got the numbers. It's not that time. We just got this budget two weeks ago. We just got this proposal two weeks ago. So what it is that we were supposed to question? Now granted, when we see things such as the city manager arbitrarily combining events and not being transparent about budgetary items that we have, yes, we have brought up on the commission to discuss those disparities, right? But that doesn't mean that we're addressing the total annual budget. No. That meant we're calling out things that are done that are improperly done and not done to the satisfactory of the commission. So two weeks ago, the budget doesn't give a whole lot of opportunity to have any conversation. I have stated at meetings after meetings after meetings, I don't know when the last time I've had a one-on-one with the city manager. He hasn't scheduled one. He hasn't abided by when my availability has been prior to that. But nobody wants to address elephant in the room. Why is it that the city manager is only having conversations with two out of the five commissioners? You have three commissioners that are saying the same thing. The same thing. Vice Mayor is saying it. Commissioner Everlake is saying it. Commissioner Dr. Touchstone is saying it. But yet you want to be up here. You want to grandstand and make like everything is petri when the house is burning down. Right. It's a situation that need to be addressed. And this is specifically why the commission gave a no vote of comments on the city manager because he's not doing the job as it is outlined per our charter and what we have voted for as far as resolutions and so forth.

Any other questions on the budget presentation?

Yes. Yes, in the height of amendment, where there's a projection of a lot of revenue.

Just point of order, because we had a motion on the floor for a second.

She still had questions about- Mayor, can I take my point of order? This is discussion. Go ahead and finish, and then we'll come back.

Out of order, Mayor.

If I call for a point of- What do you want to say?

It's a point of order. What I'm saying is that we have a motion on the floor and a second. You asked whether or not she has any other questions for the city manager, which is not discussion.

What question do you have? Do you have any other questions that you want to add to the discussion?

Yes, as part of the discussion, in height of Amendment 3, which is predicted to provide less revenue to most cities and There is a tall contradiction that's saying that most cities are going to do away because there's going to be so much revenue that's going to be that we're not going to be receiving. And I don't see that we're having any discussion about that. And we have to be prepared for that because we have to look at it as they only need 60% of the voters. And most people that are hurting the property tax They're not thinking about police and not thinking about these other services. They're just worrying about saving their homes from property taxes. And I just feel like we should start thinking about preparing for that scenario, what's going to happen. if that happens to West Park. So for us to start exercising that, I am proposing for us to set the millage rate to 7.6 and see how can we work with that. Because what's going to happen if it goes down to where we don't have any of those revenues coming in. So for that, I am proposing for a 7.6 millage rate to bring back the budget You propose the proposal with a 7.6 rate to see.

What's going to be like on the floor? Can I finish speaking? There's already a motion on the floor, so are you trying to now come back and revise the original motion?

Yes, I'd like to amend the motion for 7.6 second. Yes.

You've got to prepare for Amendment 3. You're contradicting yourself. You said preparing, but even with some of the things that we were discussing or that you guys were discussing about maybe adding or accounting for, we're not doing ourselves any justice by not hardening our expenditures in terms of the things that have already been allocated. And just to go back just briefly to what the nature and even the purpose of having multiple hearings is for, just like what the mayor said. If you look at the charter in section three, under the administrator's duties, letter E it says is his job to prepare, admit to the commission, a proposed annual budget and capital plan plan. So that's what he did in this process contended upon the projected revenues and project expenses. And now it's up to us to deliberate and to decide, okay, how those things will be allocated, but within the budget of anticipated revenues and expenses. And to what the commissioners were just speaking of in reference to, especially when it comes to the proposed tax reform amendment that could potentially pass, you're talking about taking the millage rate from 7.9 to now 7.6. When our ad valorem, which is the portion of our taxes that we collect from residents is considered a revenue and which is one of our biggest forms of revenue. So that's what I'm saying. You're double talking when you're saying that you try to prepare for a loss in income, but you're actually losing income in the process by decision that you're willing to make. If you look at the budget now, our expenses, when it comes to specialists, we'll take public safety with our biggest expense. Our avalon doesn't even meet that. So we're already starting in the negative. And we make up for those certain things through grants and through other sources of revenue through the city, but you're not doing any justice by bringing the millage right down. We need to stabilize ourselves. And it's been not only the common practice, For the last few years, we've been on an uptick in terms of property value increase. It's been advisable and it's proven to be effective if we stabilize us and not change the millage rate every year. It's always been at least a couple years. That way we can get a good footing, get hold of what the... projected expenses will look like, what the projected revenues will look like, and whatever may happen when it comes to inflation. These are things that you don't want to change the miller's rate every single year because what would happen in the event that we don't have that revenue coming in from property taxes and then now we all of a sudden decide to, you know, make up the different costs somewhere else to the residents. It costs us more to to cement that loss somewhere else, whether it be a service, a program, or whatever it is to the rest. We have to be forward thinking in a manner to not say, let's not chop and chop and chopping, but you at least have to stabilize yourself at one place first before you chop every single year. It has never been a practice since this city been established to decrease or lower those rates every single year. And I'm telling you now, it'd be travesty if we start that practice and make that decision to do so because that's gonna hurt the city in the long run. That's gonna hurt the city in the long run and it's not gonna be beneficial to our residents. It's not gonna be feasible operationally. nor will it benefit our residents by the services and the program there. They're going to be able to receive at least at the same level. They're going to be able to receive it at.

Mayor. Do you realize that amendment just corner commissioner commissioner what's happening?

Um, commissioner touchdowns has a comment.

Um, so I just wanted to speak to what commissioner Smith is saying. Last year when we took the stand to reduce the millage rate from 8.2 to 7.9, which is the same reduction that is proposed now of 0.3 mills, it was projected that the loss in revenue was going to be less than $200,000. So are we really arguing about less than $200,000 from revenue here? You know, it was so, it was minimalized by a lot of individuals in our community that that only equated to $25 in per household savings. So are we saying that we can't do without that amount of revenue? Because it's not like we're saying drop it a whole meal. We're talking about .3 meals, right, .3. from 7.9 to 7.6. So we have accumulated, even with the 7.9, additional revenue where we still have over a million dollars going into our reserve. I think that we're recouping those fees by all the other avenues in which our residents are being taxed at. They got franchise fees, putting franchise fees upon franchise fees, that they're also being taxed that as well. Through non-Avalon assessments and so forth. So Commissioner Smith, do you not think that our residents deserve a relief and In fact, that the cost of living is so high, a lot of residents are unable to meet their daily needs. Inflation is so high, right? And we really don't have a say on inflation, but we do have a say on giving a little bit back to our residents in the form of reducing our millage rate, right? I don't foresee this being a detriment to our budget, right? I think that we need to think of savvy, fiscally sound solutions to reduce how much our BSO is costing us. Right. As I indicated before, the expense of what we paid over last year is over 38 percent increase when that should not be. We should only be seeing at most a five percent increase according to the contract. So why don't we reduce the expenses that should not be so exorbitantly high? We should not have went from eight point. $38.5 million to BSO to now 10.1. That's the areas that we need to red flag and hone in on to see how we can accomplish giving our residents a 0.3 millage rate decrease in their millage. I think that you're taking the information that has been disseminated here out of context because we still have to prepare for what if this does not pass, right? We still want to have a good faith effort of showing the residents that we're trying to pass along any potential cost savings that we can in the way of reducing the billage rate and reducing what we are assessing them in non-Avalorum taxation. And I'm tired of seeing our loved ones and people we grew up with in our community losing their homes to not being able to property taxes, right? I'm not happy about the current gentrification that's going on because people are not able to retain their generational properties and generational wealth. We need to focus on creating more programs and initiatives that help with that financial piece to help our residents understand what are healthy investments and what are healthy spending habits and sports so that we can keep them in their home and really truly help them save their homes. So I think that this is a small good faith effort to show that we have heard their cries. We have heard their woe. We have heard their frustration behind high property taxes in our community that has been historically the second and third highest in Broward County for the longest period of time. I think what we should be also looking at is the fact that we have had economic and development personnel here since 2018. And there's not a whole lot of economic and development going on. We have created this TOC, a mixed-use development plan, and it's not a great return on the investment in that TOC. We don't have a whole lot of individuals trying to flock to do business here in West Park. Our BTR rate, when you look in the book, has been declining year to year, right? That is true. Year after year, it's been declining according to the chart that's on the page. It went up. It went up this year. But prior to that, year after year that we've had economic and development personnel here, we should be trying to task them with doing more to help with Apprenticeship internship programs gearing our youth and adolescents into more. Sustainable G initiatives right and provide them entrepreneurship opportunities. After that that would help to steer up economy as well and get our residents a hand up in this so. I think that, yes, we need to play for the worse and we need to have, like I said originally, a secondary proposed budget to account for what our budget would look like if we lose the projected revenue in the first and the second year so that we can have a proactive secondary plan. We also need to make sure, again, we're doing a good faith effort to say, hey, If MA3 does not pass, then we still want to be able to pass on cost savings to our residents. And that's something that we should be trying to put the community first with.

So let me just mention real quick. So Steven, I'm not Steven. Chris, one of the things they did say is that. You would rather for us to stay at the military and you can always go down. But if we start off going down, we can go back up, correct?

That's correct. Plus, I mean, you don't. The process is design public input at the end of the day, and it is the public. So a lot of times, like with workshops, particularly where there's no votes going on, people don't really have the ability to be noticed that the village rate is going to be this or that. Here, you may find that people come to you and say, you know, I'd rather have a higher village rate and pay more, or I would rather have had less. But if you wanted it less, you can do that. But if you wanted to stay more, so far you've only got one public comment on that, and they wanted it to stay the same. That's not unusual as the thing progresses. So that would remain my recommendation. But at the end of the day, it's the commission's decision on what the tenant will set the millage rate at. I would not burn a bridge myself, but you can do that later. You consider everything because you've given us a lot of stuff to talk about for coming back with a lot of responses. And some of these comments, I think we can easily address. But at the end of the day, it always comes down to this. You know, whether it's franchise fees, property taxes, manna from heaven, it's a way of managing the means of which you finance everything you do. And the comments, you all know how much the BSO contracts go up every year. We got hammered twice this year because the legislature actually late in the game increased public safety pension contributions. We have no control over that. BSO has no control over that. The contract actually allows them to pass that through beyond the maximum cost. We'll tell you, not just here in Westport, but obviously everywhere in South Florida and probably throughout the state, public safety costs, both police and fire, have increased substantially over the last several years. And pension costs are a big part of that. I mean, be thankful that you're in FRS because if you were in a local plan, you'd see those contributions being 40, 50, 60 percent of payroll, which is really unsustainable in the long run. But it's tough. I mean, you have a lot of expenses. You know, this Amendment 3, keep in mind, Amendment 3 would hammer you. You're a largely residential community. Absolutely. We've previously given you in the backup of the agendas the impact to you on that. It's going to be very difficult to make your city work with that because not only are they going to limit your taxes on homestead properties, but the Non-homes properties are going to be capped at 5%, which is half of what they're capped at now. And they're also going to cap your expenses on public safety. They will not let you lower what you're spending on public safety currently. So you're like, well, okay, we can't cut the biggest expense in our budget matter if we wanted to. And now you take away the biggest part of our revenue.

And so that was going to be my next question to you. Is it best, in your professional opinion, because we have an opportunity to come back and lower it, right? But again, I say if we lower now and we come back with a budget, we're not going to be able to raise it back again. So in your professional opinion, it makes sense. Keep it where it is. Have the next conversation when you bring back dollars Because we can always go down if need be, but we won't be able to come back up. So I'm just cautioning any decision that we make about this because once you change it and go down, we are stuck.

Well, you're limited. I mean, I would phrase it that way. And my professional opinion will always be don't burn a bridge if you don't have to. And you don't have to, but it's also your decision to do that. What we can do, you've given us a number of things to come back, and if you want to lower the millage rate, for instance, to 7.6, then afford us the opportunity to come back and say, okay, here's our recommendation I want you to do if you cut it by that amount of revenue. The current budget that we're in for fiscal year 26 is predicated on using reserves from the city. Fiscal year 27 almost doubles the use of those reserves, so you will see that the fund balance that the city has Diminishing and it's kind of been met over the last couple of years because you got tremendous amount of money from the federal government in the form of ARPA funds and which has helped basically mask what's really going on with the increase in expenses, particularly for public safety. And it's not your fault. I mean, it's aggravating for everybody that you see these costs go up. Even if you had your own department or relied upon it some other way, they would still be expensive. I haven't seen a city yet that hasn't been hammered by public safety costs, both lease, fire, and EMS. It's really... really tough and pension costs too but you like i said your frs will just be thankful as expensive as that seems some people it's not nearly as expensive as some other plans that i've seen

Madam Mayor, once again, this is why.

Vice Mayor is supposed to go first because she hasn't spoken and she has to be recognized.

He has his hand up, so continue.

Prior to you, Mayor, point of order.

Commissioner Smith, can you finish? Vice Mayor Smith, you're next. Commissioner Smith, can you finish?

That's out of order, Mayor. Like I said, and this is exactly why. I would caution us not to destabilize ourselves. And the comment Commissioner touched on May was, oh, well, is it really going to hurt us to lose projected $200,000? We shouldn't be trying to lose anything, any form of revenue. I don't care how much it is. And then, like I said, not only that, because what we ultimately have realized, you're not just... in this position, you, you, you have to think like a business owner and no business owner is going to say, well, I can do just do without $200,000. I can just do without this, you know, this, this, this revenue, because the goal is to operate effectively and efficiently. You need every dollar that you have. And to say you could do away with a couple of thousand, a couple of hundred thousand dollars is ridiculous because it's not showing fiscal responsibility. And then to the point that we're all talking about now about this proposed tax reform, if the residents are potentially going to get a big break later on, which is following year, why are we doing it now to ourselves? operationally when we don't have to because we're gonna have to harden ourselves now and stabilize ourselves now and secure ourselves in anticipation for that big revenue cut that we're projected to lose if that passes. So why are we slashing our budget now, slashing our revenue now when we don't have to? Let's sure ourselves up, let's save every penny we can for the moment see what this is going to do November 3rd, this amendment, and then we can address it accordingly. But it's unwise and it is illogized to be moving the goalposts and be, you know, kind of shifting things around when things are uncertain in this near future.

Mayor, point of information for the commissioner.

No, Vice Mayor is next.

What point of information takes precedence?

Vice Mayor.

the point of information takes precedence.

Can you make a comment and then Vice Mayor, you're taking her time, so.

Well, you never did recognize.

Vice Mayor, are you going to go or are you going to allow her?

No, it's a point of information. Okay.

So, Commissioner Smith.

So,

Even when you have a business structure, right, for all these 400 and 500 companies and so forth, they consider their stakeholders, and they ensure that their stakeholders have a return on their investment, right? So it's not that I'm being irresponsible, It's just that I believe that the residents are our ultimate stakeholder in this business. And if they're crying and indicating that they have a need for some financial relief, then I think that it's our responsibility to see in what ways we can pass on those cost savings to our stakeholders. Because they are the ones in whose shoulder this city is being funded upon. So I want to know from you as far as business is concerned do believe that the stakeholders do not deserve a return on investment because you're trying to Make it here is though. I just want to cut hundred thousand. No, it's called a return on investment to the stakeholders Okay, this information here is we're

Chris, you stated that there's no way you can raise the millage rate. You can decrease but not raise. My point is this, and based on what I've seen and heard and what I've interacted with other cities, all the cities, if this amendment passes, will have to eventually raise their village rate. It has to be raised. So how you come by, we can't raise it.

He's talking about in this particular budget.

I'm not talking to you, Commissioner Smith.

I'm talking to Mr. Wallace.

Chris, can you respond, please?

Sure, I understand.

He stated that it can be increased. It has to be decreased. Let me clear it up. You're really talking about two different things. So the first thing is an annual budget process. If you notice the public on what the proposed millage would be, which we've done, which is 7.9 mills, during this annual process, You can only lower it from that point forward, not raise it. Now, the second thing you're talking about is, and it's very likely to happen, in fact, I'll guarantee you it will happen, the very first thing cities will do if Amendment 3 passes is raise their millage rate. In the Florida Constitution, you restrict your millage rate cap to 10 mills. So you can raise, as an elected body, your property taxes up to 10 mills as an elected body. You can go up to 12 mills for two years consecutively if the voters approve it, and good luck with that, but they may, and it's happened actually before in Florida. So the overall cap is 10 mils, but you'd have to start at 10 mils this year. Like if we had notified the property or property that the proposed millage rate was 10 mils, then you could do that, and you lower it from that point forward. You wouldn't be able to raise it because you'd be at the maximum. But on the annual basis, whatever you initially tell the property owners is what you're limited at at any point in time. And from that process, which will end this month, you can lower it but not raise it. you'll have another chance at this later in the month on this and on your assessments to lower. But once you lower it, you're not able to raise it on an annual basis. And overall, you have a 10% cap. So I think that's the confusion on that.

OK, so my question is, OK, if we lowered it now, today, and Amendment 3 passed, what, November, right, what happens next year?

Well, you'll have to, you'll be sitting here and trying to make a decision on like, okay.

Right.

Well, all right.

You'd say otherwise we can't, well, you're out going to be out providing services is either we're going to cut services or we raise, right?

That's the other side of the coin. Okay. You got a coin of, you know, dollars that you raise on the flip side of it. It's the dollars that you provide services with. So if, if amendment three passed, you're going to lose a lot of money. And your only your only real option in West Park is to raise your millage rate. But I guarantee you every other city is going to do that, too. The effect of raising the millage rate is I got all these people who don't pay property taxes except for the school board paid a very diminished property tax. Now that burden has been shifted over to people who are homestead exempted. which is going to be the businesses and rental properties for apartments and whatever they will, you know, they're going to get large tax bills and they're going to pass that along to their tenants. So those are the people who are going to get slammed initially. And, but from your decision-making purposes, like I just lost all this money. I don't really have a lot of avenues of raising money. We're kind of limited here in West park because of that. And you're going to say, well, the easy low hanging fruit, the easiest thing, the only thing I really have available to me since I can't cut public safety expenditures is is going to raise the millage rate. And it's 7.9 now, and you could raise it another 2.1 mills to get it 10% or 10 mills. That's likely to happen across the state, particularly in communities that have a low tax base like West Park has, or are largely residential like West Park is. You're 85% residential. Most of that, or at least half of that, is homestead exemption. It's going to hit you really hard. If you're on the beach, like Golden Shores or beach or whatever, you're not, you know, you're, You have a low millage rate in those kind of cities. Commissioner Touchstone, you noticed that West Park has a high millage rate, but it's a direct correlation between high millage rates and low tax bases. You know, Lauderdale Lakes is kind of in a similar situation. It's a low tax base, very heavily residential, so you've got two things. You've got the base and the rate. If you've got a low base, you're going to have a high rate. If you've got a big base like a beach community, you can have a low rate, but you're still generating a ton of money. So they have more options on the beach. They also don't have a lot of homestead properties because a lot of that stuff on the beach is people who are absentee landowners, second, third homes, or whatever. You know, we don't have that luxury. And you're going to get slammed with that.

So if we keep the 7.9 today, it would be... what would it be beneficial if the, um, the amendment three don't pass?

Uh, if it doesn't pass, then you're right where you are today. You're not going to, you're not going to be losing a lot of money. You're going to have, Whatever it increases per year, like this year, West Park increased by 10%. But keep in mind, when you've done that, you've been very fortunate that for the last few years, you've been number one in the king on existing properties increasing in value because you have your residential property as a price point that's very attractive for a lot of people. That is, Commissioner touched on it, People see that and they say, man, I can make $400,000 or $500,000 selling my property, and they do. The next person who's in pays a lot, and that's why your tax base is going up. But existing residents, really, every spring I give a notice of analysis of people being taxed and tax certificates being sold. It's very static. People are not being taxed out of their homes as a general rule. I'm not saying there aren't people who generally redeem their tax certificates. What is happening is you know, insurance is killing people, you know, and killing the city too. I mean, you know, the city, it's health, not health insurance, it's going up as well, but It's property insurance has gone up a lot, just like yours has, and it's continued to do so. That's what's hit people, the property taxes. If you live in your home, like I do, your property taxes are, you know, my property taxes went up for $30. I'm not going to go to City Hall and complain about $30 and sit through this. But, I mean, that's what's going on. Wait one second.

You said that you issued a report to us on?

I never finished.

Well, yeah, I think.

Let him in.

Yeah, I'm going to do it.

You said that you issued a report to us on what?

Well, the commission historically has asked us in the spring, I don't know why we continue to do it because it's the same report year after year, but they wanted to look at certificates, basically the issue of who's being taxed for their homes. And the report's the same everywhere. It's a very small percentage of homestead properties that have taxes issued because people have not paid their property taxes. Those people who have not paid their properties are people who probably do not also have a mortgage because a mortgage company would be escrowing that money. So these certificates are usually redeemed within the two-year period that they're issued. So people aren't, like, they do eventually cover the money to pay their delinquent property taxes. But my big concern, their property taxes, my big concern is people who aren't paying their property taxes probably do not have insurance on their homes. They're going to pay their taxes before the insurance. And after a hurricane... You're going to have a big problem with people who do not have insurance. That's my big concern, not the property taxes.

Sorry, Mayor. Can you finish and then Commissioner Smith, Commissioner Evelard?

Okay, so I'm not saying that I don't want relief for the residents to have relief or something back. I'm looking at the longer picture here. and the big picture of November, what the voters will decide. And I do believe that the voters, they want a relief on their taxes. And I could be wrong, but I believe that that momentary will pass. So my thing is this. Instead of decreasing let us stay at where we are right now because the fact about the matter is when it passes we're gonna have to increase to survive as a city and that is i mean god forbid we don't have to go to pinpoint whatever it is so um i understand that you know i've run on it, that we decreasing the taxes and everything. This here is a big thing come down on us, everybody. Everybody, especially, I don't know, whoever is here who own a home. I'm a home owner myself. So therefore, I can say that, because I know that that passes, gonna have to raise the taxes. No doubt about it. So let's stick this year as is at this point. And then we see where we go from there after November.

Commissioner.

Thank you. And vice mayor Smith, that's all I was saying because you anticipating this big change is going to, you know, we don't know what to prepare for. We don't know what to expect. We don't know how hard it's going to hit us. So it is not advisable for us to move this millage rate. And, you know, even to answer, uh, commissioner touched on question about, do I think the residents, deserve a return. They do get a return because the taxable portion that they pay to the city is returned in services, is returned in programs, is returned in those things. And so, yes, they are getting a return on their investment in the city because it pays for things of that nature. It pays for public safety. Those are the things that they get a return on. So it's not like, you know, no one is benefiting because we have plenty of programs in the city that are absolutely free. We have plenty of things that we do in the city that is absolutely free. So it's free. It's no charge to them. It's a charge to them.

They paying for it in taxes. My point. Exactly.

And you asked for a return. So that's free. Listen, I have the right now.

I have the floor right now. Can you finish?

And then I'll finish when I'm making my point. It is it is this that they that is you just think that is a return on their investment. They are paying for it. They're getting something back in return. So it is, you know, crazy to say that they're not in return because certain services they are getting at no cost to them. At no cost to them. We've had all kinds of programs and services that are at no charge to the residents. No charge whatsoever. And even if it's being done by grants or other sources that subsidize these different services, avenues that we, you know, display or give to our residents. But not only that, but we seem to be so concerned about, you know, now being able to lose a couple of hundred thousand dollars or, you know, what is it going to hurt or let it be a return on investment. I can recall even throughout this year or even going back to last year where we had opportunities to have resources or add forms of revenue. like property that is owned being sold for development. And it was disallowed by this commission. So if you want to say return on investment, that's also, that's also, no, we're talking about finances. If we want to talk about finances, let's talk about finances.

The finances that we could have had.

This is budget. So we're talking about finances. So let's not, let's not, you know, parcel out on the topic. That is the topic.

We're talking about finances. Exactly.

Which, which those of us who are, who are business sound say, listen, we need to hold off and we need to steady the ship right now. We need to sit the ship and buckle down what could happen. And that's maintaining the millage rate at current rate, which is 7.9.

Commissioner Eberle.

Chris, the finance director, he mentioned that the rollback rate is the 7.0%. And the dollar amount, he says, it equivalent to the same. But when it's at a higher than the 7.2%, basically what we're getting we're getting a net average increase, okay, when you increase the amount. He just stated that the 7.9 percentage rate, the city of Westport is one of the cities that has the highest increase, and so far it was at a 10% net increase. If we were to drop the millage rate to 7.6%, we're still going to be getting an increase. It won't be 10%, but it could be probably like, I'm just estimating roughly, it'll still be at 8%, so we're still getting an increase. The next thing too, Vice Mayor, that you have to understand is that when Amendment 3 passes, as well as estimates, they're still going to raise the millage rate. So when it's at 7.9, it's still going to be raised higher than 7.9% because if we're at 7.9% millage rate and we're not getting that same amount of revenue, it's not going to be the same revenue that we're going to be getting. So the first instinct is to put the burden on the property owner just by raising the millage rate. But keep in mind, it's still going to be raised whether you keep it at 7.6% or at 7.9%. So my recommendations, since we have a high net average increase, why not give our residents a tax break? Because even though in their head, They vote on Amendment 3 thinking that they're getting that tax break. Well, guess what? We're going to hit them back with a high rate. So therefore, they're not going to be getting no tax break. Because the first thing the city does, they think, is to raise the millage rate to put it back on the resident. So that's really what I'm saying. Let's give our residents that break now so it is a true break, which really is not a whole lot. And then when Amendment 3 passes, if you have to raise it, which they're predicting that they're going to raise it, so it's still going to be raised. 7.9% or not, or 7.6% is still going to be raised. So don't think that our revenue is going to still stay the same at 7.9% when Amendment 3 passes. And also, the first thing the city are thinking is to raise on the city to the resident. There's a lot of other ways that they can think to relieve additional revenues. For example, they never thought about sales tax. That's another way. Instead of the residents only responsible, what about the tourists? Everyone that comes to our city, whether they own a home or not own a home, you can raise part of the sales tax revenue. Okay, we have a lot of churches in our city which compromise a whole lot. They're not paying no type of, there is no charge to churches for occupying the space. I'm not even saying property tax, but What about if you implement something like that where anyone that occupies a space in the city, they pay occupational tax. It don't have to be a whole lot, but even if it's $100, that's not a whole lot. For example, I'm just throwing out other ideas. The churches, they pay some type of occupational tax. That's additional revenue coming in.

Not taxes, but payment in lieu of taxes. Other cities.

No, I mean, doesn't the whole of the business have to pay occupational taxes?

No, it's called PILOT, payment in lieu of taxes. You can look at it on your own time. But there are other municipalities that do an assessment that's called payment in lieu of taxes.

Yeah, so I'm just throwing out a whole lot of things that we can start brainstorming instead of just really to raise the taxes on the residents. Okay, just like how we have the utility tax for the light. Maybe they can raise the tax on part of that too and give it back to the city instead of just, oh, let's increase the city tax rates to our residents. So I'm just figuring out how there's different ways that we can think of increasing the revenue so as not to having to raise the taxes when amendment previses. But the whole point I want to make TO THE COMMISSION IS THAT WHETHER YOU'RE AT 7.6, 7.9, THAT IS THE MENTALITY THAT THE CITIES ARE THINKING IS THE TAXES. SO MINUS THIS, LET'S GIVE THE RESIDENTS THE 7.6% NOW BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE A TRUE MINOR, NOT A WHOLE LOT TAX BREAK BECAUSE THE CITIES an increase in percentage rate in the tax revenue.

Before I let Chris respond, anybody have anything?

Yeah, I wanted to respond to what Commissioner Averlough was talking about. I think that it's important to offer the cost savings to the residents. I think some of the things that we're missing in this discussion is the fact that We're setting our fiscal year budget that goes from October to September, right? And this three passes on November 3rd, it's going to go into effect three, four months after anything anyway, right? So whether we are at the 7.9 or the 7.6, We're not going to be able to raise any millage rate in January. We're going to have to be cutting in January if that pass. It's not going to be no adjustment to the millage rate to increase anything. We're going to have to be adjusting. But mine is the contingency of what if it doesn't pass. This is the only thing I'm stuck on. If it doesn't pass and things stay as normal, I would like for our residents to have cost savings from the burden of the taxes. So right now, there's nothing that has passed with Amendment 3. If it does pass, whether we're at 7.9 or 7.6, we're going to be in a fiscal pickle where we're not going to be able to say we can increase the millage rate in January. We're not going to be able to do that. it will go into effect, if voted in favor of, it's gonna go into effect January of 2027, which is four months into our fiscal year. So regardless, we are still gonna have to come up with over a million dollars in revenue sources. So either way, if we wanna be of the mindset of this is gonna pass, then 7.9 is probably a smart way to go. But if we are going to be in the mindset that potentially this isn't going to pass and we're going to be stuck with the 7.9 or 7.6 in January, 7.6 will probably be the best way to go if it doesn't pass. But I think that it will be important for us to have that information, and this is why I highlight the fact that we don't need to just have one budget projection. We need to have two. We need to have a plan of action now as far as this will be what we enact if it does pass. This is going to be what we enact if it doesn't. And I think that that's doable for us to come up with some type of premeditated solution.

Chris.

Okay. I'm about to unpack there. I don't want to belabor the point. First thing is if Amendment 3 passes, the A couple of things. It affects people differently. So homestead property is going to save money. There's no if, ands, or buts about that. They're not going to pay taxes except for school board eventually. And it's implemented and phased in over a few years. Ultimately, you've got to lose most of the money from homesteaded properties. It's going to be shifted to non-homesteaded properties. So you've got winners and losers in Amendment 3. And to go off a tangent for that, I would say Amendment 3 passing is not a fait accompli. You have the last opinion poll I saw this was a little over 61% of the people were favoring the amendment. However, Once people found out that it was going to affect local budgets, that percentage dropped to 40-something percent. So this is an educational opportunity that I think all of you can agree on, that if you tell the community, look, yeah, you're going to save money, and it's going to be shifted off to renters and whoever else, but it's also going to impact the services that your city provides, and there's no two ways around that. The second thing is you're at your maximum on most of your other levies anyway. The utility service tax is capped by 10% under Florida law. Your franchise fees for electric, which is a large source of revenue, is capped under your agreement of 5.9%. That's what every city pays. Sales taxes are governed by the state of Florida, as are tourism taxes. In Broward County, if you were allowed to levy a resort tax... which wouldn't make sense in West Park in any event, but if you were allowed to do it, it would go to Broward County and not you. Sales tax is, you know, if this passes, I think you would expect the sales tax to be levied at the state because they're going to have to come up with money that cities have lost. And about the only thing in their arsenal is the sales tax, which is already at 7% in the county. So that, you know, that shifts the burden basically to, you know, people of lower income as far as I'm concerned. But those are the predictable outcomes for that. And I'm sorry, I've been doing this for so many years, I just know intuitively what's going to happen. I'm not saying that you're going to go up to 10 mils, but you're going to lose that much money. You're going to go to 10 mils, and you're still not going to be able to recover as much money as you lost. The only real hope is if your tax base increases. And honestly, in the long run, your transit-oriented curve probably if developers came in as they have in Davie and Hollywood, along State Road 7 and in Lauderdale to some extent, and Plantation for sure. Those tax bases have helped a lot. You know, growing your tax base with the vertical tax like you see on those areas are very important. So the county has encouraged you to do a transit-oriented corridor, but it takes years for that to develop. And I have no doubt that it will happen in West Park, but it's not going to happen overnight. But, you know, growing your tax base is a way. of avoiding tax increases because the new development does, in fact, pay for a lot of that kind of stuff because every level of development of a floor is another tax base. So your tax base on one house and two houses, it's very important to do that. That's not overnight. And you're going to be held to very bad hand with Amendment 3 if it passes. I'm just not going to sugarcoat it because that's, you know, you're going to be faced with some tough choices because keep in mind, like I said before, not only are they taking your money away, But not your money, but the money the taxpayers can give you to provide services. But they can't cut public safety. If you're spending a dollar on public safety now, you're going to be spending a dollar next year. To your point, Commissioner Touchstone, the levy property, it's kind of strange. Property taxes in Florida are actually retroactive to the values that exist on January 1st. So when you pay your property tax bill, you're paying for the calendar year. from January to December. When you close on property, they prorate it or whatever. But from the city's point of view, even though it's reactive to January, from our budget point, it goes from October 1 to September 30, as you noted. So when we levy a millage rate, we're going to get that for the fiscal year. It's the following fiscal year that you should be worried about, and I think that's what you're saying. It's the year after that to be prepared for. If an amendment passes, you will have some tough choices to make. Let's just say it doesn't pass, but it stands a very good chance that it will, and nothing good awaits you on the other end. There's just no two ways around it.

What I wanted to say, Mayor, what I wanted to say in response to that is that If it passes in November, and I know that what our fiscal year span is, if we don't get that assessed value, and it's cut in January, and you indicated that for a property appraiser, they assess for January, right? So if it passes in November, they're going to assess based on the new approval from the voters, right? Which is for January. No, it's going to be for... No, they have to project January.

Well, right, but okay, so the values that we have... Do you understand what I'm asking? Yeah, I do. No, I'm talking about...

It's going to be effective on the next... No, it's not.

No, it's not. It's going to... January within our fiscal year.

Right, and we go from one year to the other. It's going to be projected because our season is from October 1st September 30th of 2027.

This law, no, it kicks in January of 2027 if it has, Vice Mayor. This is what I'm trying to get you to understand. It kicks in January of 2027, correct? Chris, can you clarify this?

Well, yeah, it's correct as far as it goes. The values in the property appraiser under Florida's Constitution has to value property as the property substantially exists as of January 1. So let's add a property that was got a new property that was CO on January 4th. They're probably going to say, OK, that was substantially complete on January 1. So it goes on the tax rolls as of January 1. But that tax isn't retroactive or payable during that fiscal year. It's going to be for the next fiscal year that it's levied. See what you pay for your property. That's where it gets confusing. And I get this all the time. When you pay your property, you're paying them for the calendar year. We have a fiscal year basis, so it's like it doesn't match up. So you're going to be, even though it goes in fact on January 1, it's for the tax roll that's for fiscal year 28. Even though in calendar year 27, it's going to be for fiscal year 28. Just like fiscal year 27, is that that tax roll was done in 26. And that confuses people all the time. I get that from real estate people all the time about, well, we should have prorated it. Madam Mayor. Madam Mayor.

Commissioner of the Lord and then Commissioner Smith.

Yes, I wanted to know if the city wanted to impose like city tax on cigarettes, alcohol, and Does it have to be approved by the state?

Yeah, you don't have the authority to do that. That's a state power. You don't have powers that the state hasn't taken for themselves, and all that taxation power they have taken for themselves. You have certain local option sales tax that voters have to approve, and you have that in Broward County, like with the surtax for transportation.

Mm-hmm.

And then you have a local option tourism tax, but that's collected countywide on tourist areas. So you don't even, you wouldn't even get that money anyway. So the state, you know, everything that you have in your arsenal, you've used.

Commissioner Smith.

No. Just one last comment. Okay. What I'm proposing is that We lowered the taxes while we can. And I don't see a big difference going from 0.3% difference. It's not like a whole, it's like 97, less than 97%. So I don't see a difference, you know, from 7.9 to 7.6, just 0.3 of a difference. Okay.

Madam Mayor.

Yes, I move to call the question. Well.

I didn't hear you. I'm sorry.

I said I moved to call the question.

Do you want it to speak?

No. I'm exhausted measuring on what I wanted to say.

Mayor, so there's a motion on the floor. Was it a motion? Yeah, the second motion.

The second motion for 7.6. Okay.

So can we call roll? No. Okay. It's a motion and a second.

You wanted to say something? Yes, I did.

It's a motion and a second on floor, though. Mayor, Commissioner Torsten wanted to speak. I don't need you to tell me what to do. Thank you. There's a motion and a second on floor. Who motioned it, Ola? Me.

For the second amendment motion? Yes. Motion by Commissioner Eviar and seconded by Commissioner Teston.

Okay.

No, ma'am. Just because a commissioner motioned for a question to be called, parliamentary procedure means that to be voted on and it gets two of the vote. So we're getting ready to vote? No, because we did not vote to end the discussion.

Just because one commissioner asked for it to be ended. Go ahead. Speak.

What I wanted to say to Commissioner Everlar is that I agree that we should reduce the millage to 7.6, but I do want staff to come back with a proposed budget as far as what that would look like for The 7.6 as well as a projected budget for F that measures passes. So what I am going to ask for us to do as a body is to withdraw the motion right now or the 7.6 so that we can vote on the main motion, keep it at 7.9. in mind that at the second budget hearing, we will have the final step on whether or not that millage rate is reduced and finalized. But hearing that we won't be able to increase it if we had decided to do that after seeing all of the numbers, I think what it would be prudent for us to do, even though we would like to advocate and pass those cost savings on now, I think what would be for us to do is to wait for them bring back all of the information that were requested and clues of what the budget would look like if we do go to the military 7.6 and what it would look like if we are not successful in not passing the amendment 3 what will look like as well so that we can total picture before us now and then we want to be able to pass on those savings to the residents. I'm a stock advocate for that. But once we review the numbers, I think that we can make a final decision at that time. But I don't want us to get into a situation where we're in 7.6 now and Chris is saying that if we see some numbers that indicate that it might be best for us to go to 7.9, we won't be able to legally do that. We will only be able to go lower than the 7.6. I am in agreement with you. There should be 7.6. Don't get it to it. But I think that we should look at all of the information first before we make that final determination. So if you are amicable to withdrawing the motion...

So a lot so quick question Chris is is this because I know that there's a process in this is this are we able to do it this way as it is just drawing the motion and then you go to the next. No, I'm talking about the process that having 2 different options presented as of course, I'm just asking a question.

What we're doing is adding into the list of questions and then we'll bring something back.

Thank you. I just wanted that clarified on the record. So there was already an existing motion on the floor. Mayor. And can you let me finish, please? There was already existing motion on the floor. Then there was another motion made. So the... Mayor. The...

No, it's no calling of a road. Y'all out of order.

I'm out of order because nobody, if you, if the person who made the motion wanted to withdraw it.

First of all, we have to discuss that. We have to discuss that. You made your statement on it. And the mayor went and did not allow her to respond. She asked the question of the finance director and did not allow her to respond whether or not she's amicable to withdrawing the motion.

So, Ola, can you, just for clarification, so that everyone understands where we are, can you read the last motion, or do you know what, can you just clarify what the last motion is?

The last motion was from Christina Avalard to propose the mill rate at 7.6.

So, I just want to clear, the last motion was 7.6, and now by Avalard, and seconded by Commissioner Smith.

Commissioner Touchstone.

I'm sorry, Commissioner Touchstone. So again, what is the pleasure of the commission?

Okay, I move to withdraw the motion of proposing the 7.6 millage rate. Second.

Back to the original motion.

The original motion.

Olaf.

No, the original.

The original motion is for the 7.9. Yeah.

And there was a second.

Correct. Yes.

Can you call the roll?

Commissioner Everard?

Yes.

Commissioner Brandon Smith? Yes. Vice Mayor Joyce Smith?

Yes.

Commissioner Tuchton? Yes. Mayor Brunson?

Yes.

Motion passes.

All right. So we have next item number, I'm sorry, my computer went dead. Item number 81.

An ordinance of the City Commission of the City of West Park, Florida adopting an operating budget for the fiscal year commencing October 1st, 2026 through September 30th, 2027 pursuant to Florida Statute Section 200-065. TRIM BILL, AUTHORIZING EXPENDITURES OF FUNDS ESTABLISHED BY THE BUDGET, AUTHORIZING INCUMBRANCES, PROVIDING FOR GRANTS AND GIFTS, PROVIDING FOR POST-AUTIT, PROVIDING FOR ADOPTION OF REPRESENTATION, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT APPEALER, PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

COMMISSIONER, WHAT'S YOUR PLEASURE?

MADAM MAYOR.

GO AHEAD. WHAT'S THE PLEASURE?

MOTION TO APPROVE.

IS THERE A SECOND? FOR DISCUSSION, IS THERE A SECOND? And it is a public hearing, but is there a second for a discussion?

Second for a discussion.

Thank you. We need to open it up for public hearing, and then we'll come. Are there any questions from the public? Okay. Commission, what's your pleasure?

Mayor. I call the motion second. I'm not in agreement with approving this first reading because all of the things that the commission has opined on provided feedback is not included in the budget. There's a lot of questions that we have provided to staff that are still outstanding that has not been addressed So I don't think that it was appropriate to vote in favor of something that is not complete and not accurate and a lot of different questions that we as a body have provided has not been counted for.

So Chris, did you?

Well, it's a first reading and typically we've come back with the changes and questions answered, but In the first and second reading, we have to advertise the millage rate, a tax increase ad, and also a summary of the budget. And if you don't adopt a budget, we can't process the ad, and we won't be in compliance with the law. But typically, we do come up with changes and recommendations, and you debate it again and make changes. So the budget was predicated on 7.9 mills. There's the number of questions. Basically, you wanted us to come back with two main things, which was If we adopt it at seven points mills, what the recommended changes to the budget would be, and also if Amendment 3 passes, what would that look like if it were implemented now for the budget, as I understood. So I think you do need to adopt the budget somehow, some way, and give us a chance to come back and make, you know, with each of you and find out if it answered your questions and what our recommendations are. Now, you may not like those recommendations at the end of the day and at the second meeting after you hear from public comments again, because there will be hearings on both these items again. If you take the public comments, you can, once in the debate budget, make changes and adopt it based upon the millage rate. The reason the millage rate comes first is it basically sets the budget. So once you adopt a millage rate, that tells you the dollars you have to work with. And the state law requires you to adopt a millage rate first because of that dynamic. and then the budget second. So there is a process under state law for adopting the budget, notifying the public, and placing advertisements in paper.

Right, but this is why it would be important and prudent for us to have workshops so that we can review a preliminary budget, make any recommendations at that time before it comes to a vote. I don't feel, I guess, comfortable or at ease Voting on something that we have so many outstanding questions about. I'm not satisfied with the budget as it is because there's a lot of uncertainties as far as what I'm seeing in the budget. There's not a whole lot of transparency. The budget doesn't make sense. These are comments that I made year after year. The budget should be simplistic to understand and it's very cumbersome to even really understand and comprehend all of the moving parts of it. You have duplications of things that can be confusing, and that's why it would have been better handled at a workshop, you know, preliminarily before we even got to this point, because then it wouldn't be a whole lot of back and forth. We would have already provided input as far as what we would like to see in the budget. and we would have gotten the transparency on some of the things that we had questions on today. This should not have been the first meeting where we're being able to discuss budgetary concerns at the point of when it's due. That's asking on me. Every other municipality is starting conversations before they go on recess in June, and we were not given that opportunity. So, you know, yeah, I don't like the fact that every time the city administrator is trying to give us an assignment that has so much time constraint when we had so much time to be able to opine on what it was that we would like to see in the budget before now.

I hear you and I understand your concern. I'm just telling you what the legal ramifications of not adopting a budget tonight will be.

Right, but we're always faced with this. If you go back historically, year after year, I've raised the same concern. So then that means that our concerns are being ignored, right? Because why should I have to bring up the same concern year after year after year? Like, I still haven't even got my cost savings analysis that I asked for two years ago. There's not been a presentation of the cost savings analysis that the city manager agreed to buy to see where it is in that we can cut things so that we can make those decisions as a body. Still haven't gotten that. That's been two years ago that he promised to have that, and we still haven't gotten that. We still haven't gotten the things that we asked for as far as the breakdown, but what our staff is being paid and all of that in comparison to what is done in other cities that's comparable to our city. So it's a lot of different variables that we have not gotten that we should have gotten before it came to this juncture. And so to me, that's like a level of ill plan and mismanagement.

You had a question?

Yes, go ahead. My thing is since the manager has all those questions that needs to be answered and to get back to us, I'm asking for a commitment from the manager to meet with either one of us before the next budget hearing. With that where this is concerned, need a commitment from the manager to meet with everyone, all of individually. Yeah, the in person, yes.

He's quite over there.

I didn't hear you commissioners.

I said nobody has any more discussion. That's not discussion. No, it's not. That's not a part of the item. Who determines what discussion is the item?

Are you serious right now? The item determines it. And she's talking about the budget. She's talking about the budget and getting a commitment. Why is it that you do not want to hold the city manager accountable to be able to provide information to the commission? Madam Mayor, that has nothing to do with the vote.

No, it doesn't. No, it does not. No, it does not. It doesn't have to do with the vote.

Okay, Brenda, I'll call him.

There was a motion on the floor. That has nothing to do with the vote. So there was a motion on the floor, correct? And there was again?

Yes, ma'am.

Okay, we call the roll.

Mayor?

Yes.

The vice mayor asks for commitment from the city manager to meet with us prior to the next budget meeting. Yes, ma'am. based on all of the changes, all of the questions that we had, and so forth. I think that that's something that can be amicable.

And Madam Mayor, point of order, that has nothing to do with calling the roll to vote.

It has to do with the budget. We're voting on the adopted budget and we're discussing the budget. So manager has heard your, you're having a temp temper tantrum up here. Like a little two year old.

You're unable to sit still and be able to conduct business. Can you call the roll? No mayor. Can we call the roll please? It's the motion in a second. Please call the roll.

Vice mayor Joy Smith. No. Y'all heard the legal ramifications. Commissioner Eviar? No. Commissioner Touchstone? No. Commissioner Brandon Smith? Yes. Mayor Brinson?

Yes.

Motion failed.

Item number nine, there are no announcements. Anything else?

Here are the legal ramifications.

No, you want to rest the process and want to have a temper tantrum. It doesn't want us to hold the city manager accountable to be accountable to the commission.

We are done with the meeting. We're not going to approve a budget. Good evening. Mayor, I'm sorry, Mr. Manager, did you want to? No, the meeting is adjourned.

The meeting is adjourned. You adjourned the meeting.

So, Chris, was there something else you needed to say? Mayor, point of order, you adjourned the meeting.

So, Chris, can we... You adjourned the meeting, Mayor. I am talking to Chris. The meeting is over.

Chris, I can talk to you. The meeting is over. Chris, what I need... The meeting is over.

Whatever the information is... No, because it's still recording, and it's improper to be still recording when the meeting is over.

I understand the meeting's over.

Yes. The meeting is over, Chris. You cannot continue to conduct business.

If she wants to speak to you, she can do so in the office.

I'm talking to you, Chris.

So when you don't adopt, when you don't... Our budget just rolls over.

Okay. Thank you for putting the...