Local Planning Agency - Special Meeting

directed us to do. Father, we ask you in the middle of this meeting, God, even though we're in the midst of disagreement, God, but we ask that we can at least love one another. We don't have to like, but God, you say love one another in spite of. And Father, we ask that we move forward, that we be able to bless and support one another, whether they're ones that we want to be, God, but whoever that you have chosen to be, God, we ask that you just touch our hearts and humble us. We need to be together, not divided. And Father, when you are in the middle, God, we are together. And bless each and every one of all our commissioners, our leaders of this city, this county, God, that we action to be the best county in the United States. And Father, right now, without you, we can't be. But we bless each and every one that, Lord, that they will hold on. to the journey that we are traveling through, this plan as a pilgrim, God, just stopping by for a little while, but that we be able to touch somebody's lives, that we'll hold each other in our arms in a time of need. So bless this city commission of me, God, in the name of Jesus, we pray, amen.

Thank you, Mr. Smith. Comments by commissioner will start at the left end. Commissioner Matheson.

Thank you, Mayor. At the August 25th Board of County Commissioners meeting, the commissioners approved eight projects to move forward with potential acquisition through the Martin County Forever Program. Altogether, these properties total over 2,700 acres. I want to be clear, the properties have not closed. But this vote by the BOCC is one step closer to putting that much more land into conservation. Martin County Forever Program has already acquired over 3,000 acres in Martin County to put in conservation. This is an additional 2,700 acres. I bring this up because I'd like to see the city of Stuart make significantly more progress with using the funds generated by Martin County Forever as the voters intended with their approval in November 2024 to put environmentally sensitive land into conservation. I'm proposing a discussion of the use of the Martin County funds to be placed on the September 28th agenda. I understand Mrs. Holmes has already presented on this topic to the commission. I would like to see that presentation again with some expansion. On that agenda item, I'd like it to be discussed the establishment of a citizens oversight committee. The pros and cons of bonding the 10-year funds going out for acquisition of land at current market rate. And a discussion of ways to rank the remaining undeveloped parcels in the city of Stewart and how to prioritize which ones for staff to move forward with in acquisition for conservation.

Is that it?

That is all my comments, but I would make that in the form of a motion to put that topic for discussion on the September 28th agenda and a presentation by Mrs. Holmes.

So that's your motion. Is there any second to that motion?

I'll second that.

Second. Any discussion on the motion by commissioners? I have something to say with regard to that. I've seen the agenda for the 14th, and I know that it's a long agenda, and you're talking about a discussion and deliberation, and I don't think that there's anything that's at hand that needs to absolutely be done. So can it be, say, put on another agenda, not specifically the agenda for the 28th? I mean, not the 28th. I see the 14th agenda. Sorry. Yes.

The 28th hopefully would be a little calmer meeting or not as packed of an agenda. Okay.

All right. And I think that we can bring that up with our city management. So there's a motion. There's a second. Any other discussion for more commissioners?

The sooner the better.

Okay, any members of the public on this motion that was just brought up by Commissioner Matheson? Please come up if you have a comment on the motion that was brought up by Mr. Matheson.

Yeah, I have grave concerns.

Will you just say your name, Ms. Jeanine?

Jeanine Alexander. Yes, ma'am. I'm here tonight to present on another matter, but I have grave concerns that I submitted a request to be placed on the agenda after comments that were made on January 26th of 2026, and I have not been allowed any time to rebut those comments that were made by Lee Baguette at this time before something else is placed on the agenda in advance. of mine that has been waiting for the agenda for seven months, I would like consideration to be placed on the agenda.

Thank you for your comment. Thank you. Any other comments? No other comments? on this motion. Clerk, could you please read the motion that Mr. Matheson made?

I have to bring back a D&D on September 28th and everything about Martin County Forever and the land acquisition, presentation with expansion and discuss an oversight committee, ways to remain under, I'm sorry, to have underdeveloped parcels and how to move forward into conservation land.

Senator Manager, you're, hold on.

You want me to clarify, yes.

Presentation by Ms. Holmes with discussion to include an oversight committee, possibility of bonding, pros and cons of that, and discussion on ways to rank the current undeveloped land in the city of Stewart for acquisition for conservation.

You have that, clerk, city manager, and... City Attorney, do you have that?

I do, yes.

I do too, and I have no questions on it. It's clear to me.

Okay, it's clear to you. Commissioner Jobe? I just had a question for Commissioner Matheson. Could you just elaborate on the oversight committee? Is it for the conservation purchase or?

Yes, so I mean, we can get into further discussions, but so What I envision is a smaller version of what is happening at the county level. And I can give you an update. There will be another oversight committee meeting on the 17th. The oversight committee reviews all the land moving forward at the county level to make sure it complies with the ordinance that the voters approved, as in environmentally sensitive land for acquisition, whether it's fee simple or conservation easement. And then it goes to the next step, which is county commission votes on it to move forward with acquisition. The main job of the oversight committee, though, is to review it and make sure that it's the will of the intent the voters passed with the resolution. But also more than that, you know, it's the public alarm that they can see if something, a parcel comes before them that doesn't comply, basically. So it'd be a citizen's oversight committee, but obviously we'd have to discuss that a little more on the 28th.

Thank you. Thank you. So there's a motion, and it's clear the clerk knows what it is. Any other public comments or any comments from? Okay, clerk, call the roll.

Commissioner Rich?

Yes.

Commissioner Reed? Yes. Commissioner Matheson? Yes. Commissioner Giobbe? Yes. Mayor Clark?

Yes. Are you finished with your comments, Mr. Matheson?

Those conclude my comments.

Okay, Commissioner Reed.

Yes, I have two speeches and stuff. I do have a question for legal. Am I allowed to do public record requests against other elected officials?

The answer is yes, but there's also probably some issues when you do a public records request to another commissioner who's on the same board as you. So there could be certain documents that might violate Sunshine that we would have to go through, barring any other exemption.

Okay, so I was denied a public record request that I had put in from the city clerk's office in regard to Commissioner Rich's personal commission meeting notepad, and they were unable to provide that for me. So what I did was I sent a letter to the attorney general, and I'm requesting assistance from the attorney general's office of open government mediation program concerning a dispute with the city of Stewart regarding access to public records. the city denied the request on the basis that they are personal notes and therefore or not public records and i respectfully dispute that determination the issue is not simply whether commissioner rich characterizes the notes as personal The notes at issue are notes that Commissioner Rich reads from and relies upon while participating in city commission meetings and conducting official city business. Florida's definition of a public record encompasses materials made or received in connection with the transaction of official business. Florida courts have repeatedly recognized that the determining consideration is the nature and purpose of the material and whether it was intended to perpetuate, communicate, or formalize knowledge concerning official business. The facts here warrant particular consideration because the notes I requested are not merely private thoughts kept exclusively for Commissioner Rich's personal recollection. Commissioner Rich reads from and relies upon these notes while participating in city commission meetings and conducting official city business. So I'm seeking mediation and good faith and I would appreciate the Attorney General's assistance in resolving this dispute. I also have commissioner comments regarding an agenda item this evening. In order to avoid any kind of allegations or accusations for liability reasons that could put the city in harm's way financially, there needs to be some strict rules on what Mr. Mortel's contract allows and how we go about approving it and enforcing it. If you want to continue to follow tradition, as Commissioner Rich likes to state, this should be an agenda item at a regular commission meeting so the public is well aware and properly noticed instead of rushed through last minute for political reasons and retaliation towards myself as an elected official. The city majority violated their own ordinance on the August 24th, 2026 meeting. It's interesting that we don't follow our own precedents when Mortel was let go last October and everyone was up in arms about no due process or no public notice for action being taken as well as accusations of sunshine violations. In fact, state representatives made it a point and local business leaders made it a point to suggest that some of us should be removed for exactly what this new commission majority just did to Mr. Giordino. I want to point out the fact that our new board member, Commissioner Matheson, prior to being elected, decided to go onto Facebook and make accusations regarding sunshine violations and the lack of transparency when Mr. Mortel was let go in October of 2025. If you recall, Commissioner Matheson, we had a conversation about it not being publicly noticed when I brought up the motion to fire Mike, yet you supported just that at the last meeting. Fast forward to 2026, Commissioner Rich admitted he was speaking to Mr. Mortel since October of 2025 about him coming back. And Commissioner Rich admitted to the local media that he was speaking to candidate Matheson about bringing Mr. Mortel back. rather than putting it on the record when the motion was made. I also want to point out the fact that Commissioner Clark went out of her way, according to Mr. Mortel, as he was quoted in a local paper, stating Commissioner Clark paid a visit to his residence and had discussion about the rehiring of Mr. Mortel. If we're being transparent up here, when did all of this transpire, Commissioner Clark? And that concludes my comments. I'll save the rest for the contract and the agenda item. Thank you.

Thank you, nothing else?

Nothing else, thanks.

Okay, Commissioner Rich.

So one of the most powerful authorities any government possesses is the one that allows us to take our money, specifically in the form of taxes. You will be glad to know that the state of Florida takes this responsibility very seriously. And therefore, the laws which regulate this authority are very precise and strictly enforced. And this is where the series of events that led to the necessary dismissal of the former city manager began. In late August, just like all of you, I received my trim notice. sent out by the Martin County property appraiser as required by law. As I'm looking at it, I realize that the Stewart City Commission had not voted on the not to exceed millage as required by law. No millage shall be levied until a resolution or ordinance has been approved by the governing board of the taxing authority. You'll be glad to know that the elected officials have the affirmative duty by a majority vote to approve the rate at which you will be taxed. This is not to be decided by the city manager on a whim. The penalties for failing to do this are severe. If the municipality fails to provide in a timely manner the required proposed rate information for the trim notice, it may be prohibited from levying more than the rollback rate for that upcoming fiscal year. The rollback rate for the city of Stewart would blow approximately $800,000 whole in our budget. People, that's jobs. That's livelihoods. That's families. That is normally the immediate practical penalty. The municipality loses its ability to lever the higher proposed rate for that year, even if it later wishes to do so. Additional compliance penalties are forfeiture of state funds otherwise available for 12 months after Department of Revenue finding of noncompliance. And escrow of tax revenues above the rollback rate while the Department of Revenue cure process is completed. Except for certain voted or state required levies. Notice the difference there. One is a forfeiture, it means we don't get them back. The other is escrow, which means we can get them back. Concerned about the severity of these penalties, I went back and looked at the minutes of that first budget meeting. And they show that a quote consensus was reached with two votes for one rate and two votes for another rate. That is not what a consensus is. A consensus is a majority of opinion. By definition, the commission took no action on this statutory requirement. I double checked our own code of ordinances and it clearly states, all actions taken by the city commission shall be by three affirmative votes. So I was now faced with the knowledge that our city staff was not familiar with state law, not familiar with our own code of ordinances. And didn't know the simple meaning of a very important word. This is normally where you say this is the tip of the iceberg, but this is the iceberg in what will turn out to be a field of icebergs. I started asking what other problems might exist in the finance department and found out the city had not reconciled its accounts since February. This is a breathtaking revelation of incompetence and irresponsibility. This is not ignorance of state law. This is basic fiscal responsibility when it comes to running a $100 million business. Accounts are normally reconciled weekly, biweekly, and at the very least, monthly. Leaving accounts unreconciled for seven months creates a massive blind spot. We could literally be out $2 million and not know it, and that is not hyperbole. It renders our city highly vulnerable to undetected employee theft, fraud, or cyber attack. This makes it impossible to know our true cash flow and can mask significant deficits of fund balances. When I learned about this failure, I then realized that at the same budget meeting where no action was taken, I had been lied to. At that meeting, I asked a simple question, do you anticipate the need for any budget amendments? Budget amendments occur every year in almost every municipality. State law forbids the city manager from spending $1 more than is budgeted. There is zero leniency. When this inevitably occurs, an amendment is brought forward to the commission. This has occurred every year for decades in the city of Stewart, except for 2026. Back to my question, do you anticipate the need for any budget amendments? There are three possible answers. The first is the truthful answer. I have no idea since we haven't reconciled the city's accounts since February, so I have no idea what the actual fund balances are, because you can't possibly know what they are. The second answer is the safest answer, yes. This is safe because we always have budget amendments, and yet you don't have to admit to not doing your job. Only the third answer reveals the lie, and that is no. And this is a lie based either on ignorance of the fact the accounts haven't been reconciled or a lie meant to conceal that fact. Either way, this is completely unacceptable and therefore disqualifying. Finally, we get to the audit. This is mandated by the state of Florida and is due at the end of June. The city of Stuart has never failed to submit the audit on time since 2001. When I was down at the annual meeting for the Florida League of Cities in late August and asked how serious is it that we are two months late on the audit, people looked at me like we were standing in front of my house burning and asking, do you think it's a bad thing my house is on fire? Remember, all they are doing is handing the auditors numbers from fiscal year 2025, which ended 11 and a half months ago. Again, the penalties can be severe. The real penalty is not a fixed dollar fine, but the potential loss of access to recurring state revenue and grant money. And some of this money may not be recoverable even after the city finally files. So now I'm faced with the knowledge we are having to make budget decisions based on numbers presented by a staff that hasn't completed the audit for the first time in 25 years, doesn't know state law regarding decisions and reporting requirements, doesn't know our own code of ordinances, and has no idea what the current fiscal year looks like because they haven't reconciled the accounts in over half a year. And knowing if we fail to act properly and in a timely manner, the city could be facing substantial fines and penalties for two different sets of violations, the millage and the audit. There was no time for a notice on the agenda. I only came to this knowledge in early September. And I was not reelected until the Thursday before the Monday meeting. We could not wait three weeks for the meeting this upcoming Monday to make the decision to hire someone new and then begin the hiring process. The budget is due on the 24th. We had to put in place someone who could straighten this out immediately. And luckily that person was willing to take the job, and was available, and is in fact the best person for the job.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Thank you. Commissioner Jovi?

Yes, hi everyone. How are you this evening? I find it interesting that you've had this information, even for a short time, and chose to only elaborate about it now. So that's interesting. Also interesting is that I received an email from Mr. Mortel. And I'm going to read the email to you. And I received this email on Friday the 4th. I know this is an unusual circumstance and you may not support the decisions made at the last meeting, but I wanted to tell you that if I return, I believe we can put the past behind us and work together to serve the city. I wanted to let you know that I'm available to discuss the proposed budget as well as other comments or questions that you might have. Please let me know if you have any questions and you want to schedule a meeting. Well, I find it interesting because this is a September 4th, and as of today's date, I'm not saying that he won't be hired because we do have a contract on the agenda. But he's reaching out to a commissioner to discuss the budget, and he's not the city manager as of yet. So I find that hard, but kudos to him. He probably made it appear that he was reaching out in good faith and wanting to work well for the benefit of the city. The thing that most people don't know, I haven't worked with the city manager since January of 2025. When I first came to this position, I was a new commissioner, unknown to politics. I relied heavily on the city manager. He had all the credentials. He was on the LPA. He was a commissioner. He was a city attorney and then the city manager. A plethora of knowledge to be able to share that with his commissioners for the good of the city. But that isn't what I came to find out, and I made judgment calls and I voted on certain items based on the information I was provided by the city manager. And not always truthful, it was half truths and whatnot, but I made those decisions based on that. so shortly after i realized i wasn't being given the whole picture when i needed to vote on something i decided not to have those monthly meetings if i had any questions i could certainly email mister mortel and then he could send back the information in an email which would at least allow me to have written proof of what he did say or didn't say. So I haven't had those meetings with him. I did take up meetings with the city manager. When we had the new city manager, I found Mike so competent and so wonderful to talk to. It was a breath of fresh air and going over those meetings and learning what was going to be on the next agenda. So I just want everyone to know that while Mr. Martell makes it seem like we had this relationship, we did not. And I just want everyone to be aware of that. A few other things I have to say. And basically, the events of August 24th commission meeting. I understand that elections have consequences. A majority commission was seated and despite all of their rhetoric of returning to normal order of things and the tradition they managed to do the exact opposite of normal order and tradition. If they truly wanted to return to the normal order of things, they would have had the reorganization meeting in December, as it's stated in our city charter. In December, they would have proposed that Commissioner Clark be put in a rotation as vice mayor at that point, because that would have been the normal rotation. Even Commissioner Clark, who's now the mayor, questioned why we were not doing this at the reorganization meeting, as I did myself, and so did Commissioner Reid. You can go to the video and replay and hear it. But forgetting the hypocrisy by several commissioners, it was the words and the mean spirited manner in which one commissioner spoke as he decided to exercise their right as a majority. That commissioner made a motion and these were his exact words. I make a motion that Mayor Reid be forced to resign. There were so many other ways to do that. And that was not what was done. I could no longer be part of that hypocrisy. When I arrived home later that evening, I sent an email to the city clerk stating that I wanted to resign as the vice mayor. I just wanted to remain as a commissioner on the dais. There were many falsehoods that went across the dais that evening by the same commissioner. He would lead you to believe that the city had no allocations for the last three years. Do the math, that would put no allocations in the city during Mr. Mortel's tenure, just saying. Now, on to the commissioner that said commissioner's buddy, Mr. Not-So-Friendly Neighbor and his weekly online rag. Your side won the election. You removed a sitting mayor. You put Commissioner Clark in as mayor. You removed a city manager and made motion to rehire a previous manager. That wasn't enough, so my question to Mr. Not-So-Friendly Neighbor is why did you see the need to malign the reputation of the previous city manager that just lost his position? And he used my words from a reporter that I spoke to where I said, speaking of the city manager at the time, Mr. Giardino, he was finding his way. He was finding his way to get to know city staff, department heads, and the deep-seated culture that permeates through Town Hall. He has more credentials than you and your cronies put together, and shame on you. I want to end it with, you may have the right to do something, but that doesn't always mean it's the right thing to do.

I don't really have any comments, but I have one thing on road work that's going on on Palm Beach Road, and I did talk to our city engineer. These are commissioner's comments, and please do not disturb the meeting. Okay, so I said I had one thing. I did talk to Mr. Uchin, and he did contact the county. Palm Beach Road is a county road, and they're building a trail which is a part of the eastern United States. greenway path and um... that's what they're working on on palm beach road and it's a county project so if people have any questions on that the other thing which like i said i didn't have any comments but something has been brought up with regard to the um... selection of the mayor and so on and I did talk to the city attorney and I don't know if this is a time where you can enlighten people as to any process to say that if there was an election or I guess a nomination of someone, whether it was considered, and I could ask you to, if you were asking if this was considered a reorganization or just the fact that you were nominated to be the vice mayor, I was nominated to be the mayor, because I did get the answers to that and I did talk to the city attorney on that. If the city attorney, if you need to get a response, he can provide you with that response.

You yourself on tape even asked, wasn't this going to be done during the reorganization?

And I think we can do both. Did you need your response now? No.

Mr. Baggett can provide you with that information. No, thank you.

Okay, thanks. All right, I have nothing else. City Manager.

Thank you, Mayor. I hope you are all reading my weekly summaries to keep you all informed during this interim period. And as by default, I'm actually serving as your budget director as well as your interim city manager. And I have one, actually two items to bring to your attention. I'm requesting an emergency purchase authorization. Our situation is that our lift station at station number four, the generator, the emergency generator was being repaired on and it failed, it caught on fire. The kind of generator that we need is a 125 KW, due to the rarity, staff couldn't find an exact piggyback contract. And the anticipated purchase price exceeds my $35,000 purchasing authority under interim city manager. My limit is $50,000. How much? 50. And then this is, the staff found a replacement for a generator for 52,000, 38,51. and I'm requiring of the utilities and engineering director, Peter Cunin, to provide me with how this will cause an emergency situation that could be a threat to public welfare. I'm also requiring three competitive quotes. So I am asking for your authorization to make that purchase under the emergency purchases under chapter 26 of the city code of ordinances.

Thank you. If you want to sit.

I'll make a motion. I'll make a motion that the interim city manager be granted the emergency fund budget. 52K was the amount? It was.

I would like to see if you can make it for 52,500 just in case there's some things. Sure.

Why don't we just make it, yeah, 52,500. 52,500. Okay. Can we amend that in a motion? Is there a second?

I just want to finish the motion. Okay.

Because I had to correct the amount. I want to make a motion that the commission provide the emergency funds needed to purchase this equipment, $52,500 to the interim manager, and if I could have a second on that.

Is there a second? I'll second. Second motion made by Commissioner Giobbe, seconded by Commissioner Campbell-Rich. Any comments from more commissioners on that?

You should take public comment.

All right, I'll get, okay then. Let's get some public comment. This motion was just made. Do you want to say the motion, clerk?

Yes. Did the commissioner provide emergency funds needed to purchase an emergency generator? $52,500. Thank you.

Thanks. Any public comments on that motion?

Yes, ma'am. I've attended meetings for the past eight months and listened to ordinances, rules, regulations, SIRB bylaws that were never represented properly. And tonight I'm hearing about a generator. I'm in favor of this kind of expenditure, but I don't live in the city anymore. In 2019, I presented settlement letters to Michael Martel while I was being incarcerated in Martin County Jail for four months during a period of time when I had filed a federal litigation for civil rights violations. And Michael Martel, I did not receive that public record until spring of this year when I did an intensive public record search. Now the reason that I'm bringing this up is we can approve generators as emergencies. I want you to understand My situation was a life emergency, and it was made by the Stewart police on the evening of February 20, sorry, March 11th, when my house was surrounded by officers Zernudo, Vo, Heitfeldt, and Ocinga, knowing... that there was a seven-minute video outstanding. I just want to say one last thing. Tonight, I have served a lawsuit adding Michael Mortel to a lawsuit I received August 25th from my former domestic partner for extortion and coercion.

Ms. Alexander, this is not general comment.

I understand. I'm addressing what he said, and I think I'm on point with this. At the point in time that I submitted my settlement letters, my damages were – MY DAMAGES NOW EXCEED $3 MILLION. OKAY.

THANK YOU, MS. ALEXANDER.

I JUST WANTED YOU TO KNOW, I APPROVE OF THINGS LIKE THIS, BUT YOU LET SOMETHING GO FOR EIGHT YEARS.

SHE'S MADE HER COMMENT. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENTS WITH REGARD TO THIS PARTICULAR MOTION? You said your name for the record, your address?

Walter Lloyd. I just wanted to make a comment that maybe you're saying 52-5. I would up it and give him a not to exceed of something that gives him some comfort and ability to get his job done.

Thank you for your comment. Any other comments? Commissioners?

Yes, Commissioner Jobe. Can I amend the motion? That is a very good suggestion, not to exceed. You've sent it out for three bids, so what would your guess be? If you want to do- Not to exceed. Not to exceed 60,000, that would be plenty for- I'm going to amend the motion that we provide emergency funds to the interim manager for the generator that needs to be purchased in an amount not to exceed $60,000. Thank you.

The seconder, would you like to second the same?

I will second it, the amended motion.

Motion has been made and seconded. Are there any public comments on the new motion not to exceed $60,000? No comments. Any comments from the commissioners?

I have one.

Yes, Commissioner Reed.

This is for the interim city manager. Do you, when it comes to this stuff, I understand the public comment. Are you able to get even bids beforehand? Because part of it is it's the lowest responsible bidder. So if we're going up to 60,000 not to exceed, wouldn't the lowest bidder be 60,000? What if it really costs 30,000?

Commissioner, that's a very good point, and we found a replacement for 52,038.51. So despite any that was given to me verbally, I would like to actually see the quote myself before I feel comfortable with that number, which provides me a little bit.

But going back to it, are you able to receive quotes on something like this before even getting a consensus?

Yes, and I'm requiring that. As a matter of fact, I'm requiring three quotes and Utilities and Engineering Director that qualifies this as an emergency.

Okay, but you could have done, I'm just making sure like legally you can get those quotes before coming to us for a budget amendment for those.

Under emergency purchases under Chapter 26 of the City Steward Code of Ordinances, Managers shall publicly report the facts given rise to any emergency valued in excess of $50,000 and the necessity for emergency purchases at the next regular city commission meeting following the date of purchase, which I'm doing early, within 15 days of emergency purchase. Since I just learned about it today out of courtesy to the board, I wanted to bring it to your attention now as opposed to later.

Okay, but yeah, you can get the bids before coming to us. Okay, thanks.

Any other questions from the staff?

There is one more thing that I have to add. Oh, they need to vote.

Let's leave the vote on this first.

Clerk? Commissioner Giobbe? Yes. Commissioner Reed?

Yes.

Commissioner Matheson? Yes. Commissioner Rich? Yes. Mayor Clark?

Yes. Continue, please, City Manager.

Thank you. And finally, before we get started tonight, this is a requirement under the agenda item of tentative millage. Under 1A purpose of the meeting, by Florida law, two public hearings must be held to ultimately adopt the final millage rates and annual budget for the City of Stuart, Florida. The purpose of tonight's meeting The purpose of tonight's first public hearing or tentative is to hear public comments regarding the proposed millage rates and budget. Amend the budget if necessary and tentatively adopt the millage rate and city budget for fiscal year 2027. The first public hearing has been advertised via the notice of proposed property taxes mailed by the property appraiser's office. So that's just something that we do before we enter into these agreements and I wanted to make sure that you were aware of that. following our budget and presentation, I'll have something else to add to that.

Thank you, City Manager. No other comment? Okay. All right, let's move to the approval of the agenda. Is there a motion to approve the agenda as published?

I move approval of the agenda as published.

Moved by Commissioner Rich, is there a second?

Second.

Second by Commissioner Matheson. Any comments on that motion or should we just go unanimous?

I have one.

Do you have a comment? Do you have a comment?

Yeah, I just want to state for the record that at the August 24th, 2026 meeting, the city majority violated their own ordinance regarding approval of the agendas. Thanks.

Thank you, Commissioner Reed. Is there anything else that we need to do before we approve the agenda discussion for today?

Public comment, and then we'll.

Public comment, please.

All in favor is fair.

Any public comment on the motion to approve the agenda as published? No comments. Clerk? You just want to all in favor?

We don't need a roll call for the approval.

Okay, just all in favor?

Aye.

Aye. Aye. Thank you.

I want to raise a point of order as well, Mayor Clark. Okay. If commissioners up here have something to say, could you say it into the mic, please? Because there's a lot of whispering going on up here, and I don't think it's fair to our constituents.

Thank you, Commissioner.

You're welcome.

Okay, now we get to the comments from the public. Do we have any green cards?

I do.

Okay, they're all in your hands. You call the names, please.

Yes, David Kelman.

David Kelman.

You're the first to hand it in.

Good evening, Commissioners. David Kelman, you all know me. I haven't seen that one of you smile up here. Is there a reason for it? You're all divided. It's like watching a Senate hearing. Red versus the blue, it's terrible. You all need to just, you represent the city of Stuart. And what you're doing right now, you watch TC Palm? They got you all over it, the horrible things they say about you. I mean, it's pretty terrible. Facebook, Instagram, the things that they're posting about this commission is terrible. We're being mocked by other cities, other counties. You all might not want to hear it. You don't like the truth. I don't know what to tell you. But it's pretty bad. It's to the point where videos are being posted about illegal dredging from a commissioner, sitting commissioner up here. I don't know, allegedly. Whether it is true or not, we'll find that out in the near future. We're waiting on documentation on that. But you all represent this city. Okay? You need to step back and unite. Because what you're doing ain't going to work. It's three for us two here. You should all be... equals here and make this city run the way it should be. You have employees that show up to work, okay? They're losing their hair because they don't know if they're going to walk into being fired. That should not be like that. That's disgusting. It's embarrassing. Okay? This is coming from me. It's coming from a lot of residents here that regret decisions that were made here a couple weeks ago. It's pretty bad. So those are my thoughts to you. I hope At some point, it will sink in at some point. And as far as that illegal dredging video, we're going to definitely be investigating that and see where that brings us. And then further take action on that matter. I don't know. It's like I said, it's alleged.

I would also like to congratulate Mr. Giordano and his future over there. Congratulations to you. It was really nice to meet you. Can you address us?

Okay, thank you. And, oh, I was congratulating the man on his future.

Thank you.

With that being said, thank you. And I hope you, the five of you, sit up there and do something. Because, like I said, Commissioner Rich, you used to smile. I haven't seen one smile out of that man. And the comments from Giobi over here. It's just, it shouldn't be this way.

Thank you, Mr. Caldwin. You're right.

Madam Clerk? I have Steven Potts. Steve Potts, okay.

Hi, my name is Steven Potts. I'm a third-generation resident of Stewart, and I've been a homeowner in East Stewart for several years. I just want to talk about the upcoming construction of the skate park and an organization that represents East Stewart, which is called the East Stewart Heritage and Opportunity Alliance, or East Stewart HOA for short. The East Stewart HOA is a champion of giving the voice to the residents of East Stewart, empowering them with knowledge, and initiating public discourse with their community members. At least that's what I thought when I decided to voice my concerns about their opposition to the skate park in East Stewart. I first questioned their notion of preserving the historical value of property that has never had buildings. Then I questioned the belief that other smaller projects in Guy Davis were being neglected. I finally questioned the negative impact of adding another layer of government to an already delayed project that was generally approved by the community and our elected official a couple years ago. I was expecting a detailed and thought-provoking response from the leaders of East Stewart Heritage and Opportunity Alliance. Instead, I was blocked. Because of this interaction, I don't believe they are good faith representatives of the residents of East Stewart and what they actually want. Any organization that feels like they don't need to explain their viewpoint to the people they claim to be representing is not a reputable community organization in my opinion. The unelected, unofficial Heritage and Opportunity Alliance of East Stewart's opinions do not represent all of the residents of East Stewart. They only represent themselves and their opinions, regardless of residents' input. Based on my interaction with them and the lack of transparency from them, To defend their position leads me to believe they're only looking to add further Administrative burden delay and cost to taxpayers with little value to the residents of East Stewart I came here to voice my wholehearted support of the current County Commission that was elected by the majority of voters to continue pursuing the best interests of East Stewart community and Completing the already approved skate park without further delay. Thank you.

Thank you, sir Janice Giardino

Janice Giardino, Martin County. I'm here to set the record straight with the truth. Campani, whatever his name is, has bad mouth and tried to smear my husband's name since Mike took the position as city manager here. And he has no clue who my husband is. What he has done in his career are the things he was making happen in City Hall. My husband always tends to take jobs where things need to be cleaned up. He is a fixer and don't doubt that. When I tell you the city lost a great asset with Mike being released, I'm not saying that lightly. I live with him. He gives 24-7 to any place he has been employed. To clear things up for anyone who has said he is inexperienced or needs training wheels, let me give a little background on my husband. Mike has been trained and working in finance his entire professional career. He was a budget analyst at the Pentagon with billion dollar budgets. He was running LaGuardia Airport, voted best airport in the U.S. in managing its over a half a billion annual operating budget. Prior to his time at LaGuardia, he was in charge of the entire Port Authority Aviation Department's operation, strategy, and finance budget and execution divisions for JFK, Newark, LGA, Teterboro, and New York Stewart International Airports. Aviation total operating budget are over $2 billion. Yeah, that's B for billion. I'd say it's a little more than Stewart's $100 million. Mike did not get sworn in until the end of April, and the new finance director was working remotely. I'm not sure she even knew what she was walking into, and I know Mike didn't, and he was not happy when he found out about the audit being late. The city audit situation was inherited by Mike and the new, now former, finance director. It was being fixed. And it has been said in public meetings the audit started late and the audit firm and interim administration blamed staff turnover, which Mike publicly expressed as inexcusable. The record also shows that the state was informed and allowed for the delay of August 31st, 26th without penalty. As recent as Monday, August 24th, 26th, the commission heard an update that the fiscal year 25 audit will be completed by the deadline with no repercussions. Mike had no control over the situation, yet put the audit firm on notice as soon as he knew of the situation. The First Amendment is a beautiful thing, and defamation of a public figure is hard to prove. But when the facts are out there and people continue to lie, A case can be made. Fiscal year 25 books were closed on September 30th, 25. If anything is found in the finance audit of fiscal year 25, that's on the city manager at the time, not my husband. I have no explanation for the spinning of a web of deceit. What I do know is my husband is as outstanding as the day is long, and he knows his business. Playing with people's lives is never a good look. And I'll leave you with something I always told my children. There are consequences for every action, good consequences for good actions and bad consequences for bad actions. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Mike Giardino. Mike Giardino, 3642 Vauxhall Court, Martin County. I find it suspect that the public is aware of my time card information while employed with the city. I have nothing against anyone knowing, I just find it odd that it's out there. According to your own records, there have been no public records requests even asking for it. Yes, I checked. It appears you have insiders and beware, they may be after you too. As to paid time off, I took paid time off and I negotiated with you all. There was not one moment in time and they did. I've always had an open door policy. To say otherwise is a lie. Again, who has access to my emails, phone records, stacks of paper, phone messages that were on my former desk even the day after my termination? Are those people sharing those records? Again, I have nothing to hide, but I placed a public records request to find out who's out to smear my name and my reputation. On July 13th, the city finance director briefed the commission on the 27 budget timeline and process. That presentation was in a board packet that was posted available to the public on July 3rd. I'm pleased to see that this commission is following the city's budget process and it's moving along exactly along the same lawful timelines that my administration orchestrated. Remember that difficult situation about funding emergency vehicles? It was awkward, to say the least. In my professional opinion, with decades of local government finance experience and judgment, and in collaboration with the former finance director and current budget manager, we were moving the city's finances into a new age of transparency. Again, I'm happy to see the budget process moving along exactly the way we presented it in early July. For the record, I've been successful in securing grant funding. I did find it odd that the city of Stuart had a longstanding and unnecessary practice of requiring staff to seek permission from the commission to even submitting a grant application for funds the city may be eligible for. In my decades of experience in grant writing, submission, execution at the federal, state, and local level, I had never seen such a thing. If grant funding is available and the city is eligible for it, submitting the paperwork is the obligation of the city manager without having to ask permission. Lastly, a 3% chance, probability, or impact of or on anything is not a, quote, existential threat, unquote. Training wheels, seriously? And quoting the statute out of order, seriously? Thank you. Thank you, sir.

Clerk, Madam Clerk. Next, I have Walter Lloyd. Walter Lloyd.

Good evening, Commission. Walter Lloyd. I want to start by thanking Commissioners Reed and Giobbe for their tenure thus far and conducting themselves with full transparency while exhibiting the utmost professionalism. Why do we step up to make our voices heard? There's a reason for the apparent division in our community, and it is our civic duty to be honest about those differences. We have a community culture, a legacy established over the many years of history. The Martin County difference, recognition of the best small coastal town, these are some of the terms we've heard. There have been significant efforts to establish that culture and deliberate efforts to maintain it. Despite the results of the most recent election, I am quite sure that if a referendum were initiated to continue with our long-established culture or change it to a more pro-growth model, the slow growth movement would prevail overwhelmingly. It would be a noble goal to prove this in the coming months ahead. The commission of the past few years have worked to restore our guiding documents to reflect our legacy culture. Our community's guiding documents supported the above premise until somewhere around 2017 when they were modified, resulting in a record of unprecedented growth for the next several years and which is still in progress today, adversely affecting our quality of life. These changes were implemented in part by the three newly elected commissioners, which by all appearances have been hired to continue the same. Now this should not be recognized as a judgment of persons, but a discernment of actions to provide contrast in this division. For this contrast, let's look at the history for examples of representation of community at large versus representation of special interest. For example, history of voting, where the record demonstrates overwhelming support of special interest against established community culture, against overdevelopment and changes in comprehensive plan and land use codes. The history of contributions, where the record demonstrates a support of special interest money and be sure that those same special interests expect something in return. A history of campaign ethics, claiming to be slow growth with voting records to the contrary. CPAC special interest representation and financing, avoiding participation in public debate, thereby avoiding visibility and accountability. Stealing opponents' signs and lying about it. History of commission ethics. Sean Reed's removal as mayor during midterm outside of the normal city policy, while the irony is that Campbell Rich was previously extended grace by Sean Reed, the very commissioner who voted to allow him to retain his seat. History of dismissal of Mike Mortel versus Michael Giordino. What a hypocrisy. Candidates Campbell, Rich, and Merritt Matheson outcry of ambush, lack of transparency, without cause versus no reason. Even city attorneys stated ambush during Michael Mortel's removal. But during the last removal of this mayor, said it was perfectly fine. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Lloyd. Next. Next, I have Janine Alexander. Janine Alexander.

Thank you for tolerating me this evening, folks.

I'm going to go ahead and tell the audience. Ms. Alexander, could you look towards us?

I'm going to go ahead and address the audience. I was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder and put on a social security disability the year after I was arrested multiple times because of a domestic incident on February 27, 2015. When I was made aware of a seven-minute video that my ex-domestic partner withheld and concealed from the state attorney in order for charges to be brought, I brought the attention to Chief of Police Diaz and Michael Mortel in citizens' complaints and INOI investigative reports, both of which I suspect at this point in time that Michael Mortel worded, organized, and passed off and let somebody else sign. Why do I suspect that? Common language. Some things are black and white. Some things are gray. Michael Martel persistently operates in the gray zone. I know the truth. Seven minutes is seven minutes, folks. Any way you look at it, it's not. Do you know how much they brought into evidence? 55 seconds. Somebody's hiding something. Michael Martel has known this for years. I filed a federal lawsuit in 2019. I was arrested 10 days after I served the city. I was barricaded in HR with Rod Johnson calling Michael Martel. Four law enforcement officers barricaded me and Officer Morse. I got the CAD report. What I'm here tonight to tell you is you assigned Lee Baguette to report on January 26th, and what he did was a smear campaign, just like he did with Mike Giordano. How indignant. The city attorney shall be legal advisor to the SIRB board. Michael Martel denied a hearing that was entitled to me, and this was in one of my lawsuits, well stated. And Michael Martel continued to perpetuate fraud. He showed up at a court hearing on May 25th with a flash drive after I asked for public records. Hard copy identified as exhibits because courts don't take flash drives. Neither do clemency boards. And folks, I have to file for clemency because the charges that were coerced out of me based on a 55-second video can't be reversed for another four years. Fifteen years of my life will be consumed by what Michael Mattel calls delusions. Seven minutes is seven minutes. I live what I experienced. That's the beauty of post-trauma. The blessing, the curse. Black or white is not a racist statement. It's the truth is the truth. And the truth will set you free. Every time we have a meeting, you have an invocation. My father was a 30-year-old. Sergeant Major U.S. Army, his name went down when I went down. Thank you, Ms. Alexander. It's time you corrected the situation. Michael Martel was served with a civil action jury at 4 o'clock.

Thank you for your comments.

I don't blame him for not showing up tonight.

Ms. Cody Johnson. Cody Johnson.

Sorry.

Let's take a second after that, you know, just breathe a little bit, everybody. All right.

Mr. Johnson, could you please speak into the microphone so we can hear you? Okay, okay. I just wanted to take a second.

I just wanted to take a second, you know, to let it be less tense. But I'll start now. Good afternoon, everybody. My name is Cody Johnson. founder and lead organizer of Heritage and Opportunity Alliance. First, I want to thank the CRA board and the staff for investing and being a part of the East Stewart community, including neighborhood improvements, historic preservation, housing assistance, cultural programming. Heritage and Opportunity was created to connect those investments to the residents they are intended to serve. Our mission is to organize residents, preserve community and opportunity, help ensure that public and private investments create measurable benefits for historically impacted communities, especially East Stewart. Been born and raised there all my life. I invite anybody, any resident that wants to be a part of the community of East Stewart to come to some of the meetings. You know what I mean? The door is always open to anybody that's community-minded. We do not want to duplicate the work of the city or the CRA or existing community organizations. We want to work collaboratively. Today I am not asking the board to approve anything or any amount of money. I'm respectfully asking for You guys to preserve the flexibility within the fiscal year 2027 budget to fund pilot programs and other things inside of the East Door community through the CRA and the Redevelopment Board. We're prepared to start documenting and start getting things done in the community. Heritage is what we protect. Opportunity is what we build. And alliances, that's how we're gonna do it together. So thank you guys. Have a good day. I'll pass the mic.

Thank you. Do we have anyone else? I do. I have Jimmy Smith. Okay, so please remember when you come up, give your name and give your address, please, for the record. And also make sure you fill out a green card. Mr. Smith?

My name is Jimmy Smith, President of NAACP, local business owner, been here all my life. I look back in- Arapaho? I look back here in 1963. I take a deep breath. Lord, I believe I just want to pray again. Yes, I'm allowed to do that in my three minutes.

It'll be part of your three minutes, sir.

Yes, that's fine. That's fine.

I just want to take a second.

Being here all these years and seeing the dirt roads and rattlesnakes, people working hard in the fields and trying to make Martin County a great place. We want Martin County to be the greatest county in the United States. And we don't all agree. We don't all like each other. We don't all like each other's opinion. But I believe that we should love one another. I don't like all of me, but I love me. And you don't have to like me either, but I love you. But all I want to say that I know the tension here. I know all the things that take place. I know the voters vote. We got new commissioners. I love all of you all. And that man that said something at the beginning about their smile and their laughter, we, listen, I just want to let you know, Cedar Stewart is the most wanted-to-watch county city in the state of Florida. Right now, all across the high action now, and Lord, they're each and every one of our hearts tonight. Lord, let our head, our mind, and our ears hear something good for each other. God, I know that we ain't all perfect. We don't all have the same idea. We know our ways are not your. But, God, let your way work in this place today. Let the sitter steward be recognized what the people decided to vote for. Father, regardless of who coming up next and who going to be on the board the next time, but, God, let's support one another. Even though that we don't agree, but we know we can get it done. Look at our city, God. you have gave us the wisdom to know how to lead and how to love one another. I don't like everything, but God, I thank you for the love you've given in my heart. And Lord, I know that we can work hard together. And Father, I look forward that you touch these commissioners tonight, God. And everyone in this order, Lord, touch their heart. When they go to their own sacred place, their own quiet place, God, touch them and just talk to them a little bit. through your Holy Spirit. And Father, when we leave this place tonight, let's not leave with bitterness, hateful, because that don't get us anywhere. You said that a person that hate one another is a murderer. In your word. We believe in your word, God. We all believe in Christ Jesus. In Jesus' name I pray. Amen.

Thank you, Mr. Smith. Madam Clerk. Robin Cartwright.

MS. Good evening, Commissioners. I was kind of hoping I would go right after Commission comments, but I'm grateful that the Giardino spoke because, like the candidate forums, I feel like we also need to have an opportunity for fact-checking while Commissioners are speaking. So regarding Commissioner Campbell Rich's comments, I would like to address the following. He said that it was in reference to trim notices. Trim notices were sent out on or around August 13th. And I want to give some timeline before the trim notices were sent out for the audience and those who are watching at home. In March 2026, Louis Jolie Boglioli resigned. The audit is for the time that he was the finance director. In April of 2026, I believe, give or take, Collins resigned. And in May of 2026, this commission had an opportunity to replace that open seat, and two commissioners voted not to. So it was a two to two deadlock at that time. And at that point, you have to question, was that vote intentional so nothing could pass? You had a budget that Commissioner Rich is stating had to be approved by majority, a three to two, but there was no three to two because the existing commission at that time voted to not replace the open seat. So who is truly at fault for the lack of oversight for any budget that was or was not approved? Who is responsible for any lack of oversight for seeing what a city manager was responsible for? According to the charter, you as the commission are responsible for the oversight of the city manager position as well as those who fall underneath him. However, you actively chose to not replace that seat, leaving everything at a two to two deadlock. So regarding Mr. Giardino's comments as well as that of his wife, I thank them for sharing with everybody exactly what happened because it is very unfair that yet again half-truths and propaganda are being portrayed from the dais with absolutely no consideration for the total statement. Yes, a majority was needed at three-two, but statistically it could not happen because you would not allow it to happen. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO ADDRESS THAT IT'S INTERESTING BECAUSE IT FEELS LIKE NONE OF THIS WAS BEING DONE FOR THE OPPORTUNITY FOR ANYBODY IN THIS CITY STAFF TO SUCCEED. WHEN YOU DECIDED TO VOTE TWO TO TWO TO NOT REPLACE THE OPEN SEAT, THINGS STALLED. WE WERE AT A STALEMATE CONTINUOUSLY, CONTINUOUSLY. MR. GIARDINO GOT HIRED AND WAS STRUGGLING WITH THE STALEMATE THAT THIS COMMISSION OR THE FORMER COMMISSION PRESENTED. So for any commissioner up here to say that somebody failed at their job, I would say you failed at your jobs. It was your responsibility to make sure that the city manager, God forbid something happened to him or her and they were unable to attend their business. This city should have been able to run with or without them. And yet you're assigning blame to people like it is their fault when they came in late in the process and they were doing their job and you take no accountability for it. This is absolutely ridiculous, and I have some very definitive thoughts about Mr. Mortel being rehired, which I look forward to sharing with the group here, because it's already been predetermined based on what we know about the conversations that were shared publicly with the news article about which way this vote is going to go. It is predetermined. Talk about collusion. Everything you accused the previous commission of when Mr. Mortel was let go the first time.

Thank you, Ms. Cartwright. Thank you. Clerk, Madam Clerk. Gwendolyn Hall Brinkley. Could you, okay, Gwendolyn Hall Brinkley, thank you.

Good evening. My name is Gwendolyn Hall Brinkley and I live in the city of Stewart. I'm here to address transparency, accountability, and the decision-making process surrounding the removal of city manager Michael Giordino, I hope I'm pronouncing his name right, and the proposed return of former city manager Michael Mortel. Three commissioners campaigned on transparency, accountability, and listening to the residents. Commissioner one, and I hope I'm calling the right numbers, Commissioner three, and Commissioner five. Each campaign on principles such as transparency, professionalism, accountability, responsible leadership, and listening to residents. However, on August the 24th, one of the most significant decisions the commission can make, the removal of the city manager was introduced and acted upon without being clearly listed on the meeting agenda. This raised serious questions about whether the process reflected the promises made to Stewart voters. Commissioner One, you campaigned on transparency and responsible leadership. What information did you receive before voting to terminate the city manager, and when did you receive it? Will you support a policy requiring advanced public's notice before future votes involving senior city employees? Commissioner number five. You campaigned on professionalism, stability, accountability, and respect for governmental process. When did you first consider replacing the center manager? Whom did you discuss it with? And why was this position not disclosed to voters during the campaign? Period between introducing a major personnel proposal and voting on it. Commissioner 3. You promised to listen to the residents and said significant decisions should not be made casually or behind closed doors. If replacing the city manager had already been discussed before the meeting, why was the matter not clearly placed on the agenda so residents could review and respond before the vote? Accountability must be more than explanations. I'm asking each of you to release our relevant public records, including emails, text messages, calendars, meeting notes, and communication concerning Mr. Gerardino, Mr. Mortel, and the city manager position. I'm also asking this commission to adopt written safeguards requiring clear advance notice of major personnel matters regarding public comment before a final decision and waiting period before introducing and voting on major executive changes and public disclosures of the process selected, used to select and replace a city manager.

Thank you, Ms. Brinkley. Thank you.

I have Robert Hamilton. Robert Hamilton.

Good evening. Robert Hamilton, 311 Southwest 3rd Street, 1895 Church of Stewart. Here we are, years later, looking at the mayor who had the subgrant agreement where it states the city is responsible for the damage to the church. He never corrected Mr. Mortel. but he's being brought back in. The ringmaster comes back in. Wanted to raise the church, destroy it, take it to the ground. Engineer said no. Now we're heading knee deep in litigation. That's gonna cost. Depots will be taken. I look at what you've done and what you've not done. You got your sister, your relative's house fixed under the same program. The same program that the big fuss was about whether she was supposed to have gotten it or not. I have two honest people sitting there, Commissioner Reed and Commissioner Giobbe. Commissioner Reed brought the truth into the room and caught Guardian Lyon, called him on the carpet, standing next to Mr. Mortel, lying. Damage my reputation. Go after my wife. Go after my family. I'm 67 years of age. I haven't run. I haven't run. You were going to get to the bottom of it. Did you? You didn't. He asked for extensions and didn't tell us. Ms. Giovi, honorable woman, you're not a fugazi. I got three funuks up here. Fugazis. You all know what that means. It's my heritage. We got the bag man on the end who has not one time ever wanted to sit down and resolve it. You've always been nice to me. You get a pass tonight. You're okay. But the reality of it is, I make a little joke. 131-year-old destroyed. Nobody cares. All you guys care about, steamroller Ford. Get more tax dollars. Get more tax dollars. We need more money. What about taking care of the job you did? Pranav Gandhi Sabda sitting back there. The state of Florida has told her multiple times, do not let this damage happen to this historical building. But I suggest the new board give her another, you know, pat on the back, give her another award. You guys are good at that, especially you. But you don't give it up to people. The people. We make the community. We all get along or not. That's not for me. I'll wait. Give me my time.

It's because you keep touching the mic, Mayor Clark.

What's that? Oh, we playing games up there.

No, no.

Leave it alone.

Just put your little hand down. Hold on.

All right.

Go on. You have your time, Mr. Thank you.

But the reality is you're the mayor of the city. Go forward, please. You have an opportunity to do something. I don't think. We need to turn around and discuss ethics because there was nothing ethical shown to Mr. and Mrs. Hamilton. She still works, still does her tours. People still come by. It's just terrible. Grown people allow this to happen to somebody in the community and to fix it for what? For a couple hundred thousand dollars? Can you imagine after years of litigation what the lawyers are going to do? You're going to be going, holy Jesus, oh, my God, we should have paid it. But, no, they wanted to kick the can down the road. So you bring the ringmaster back in, the don, if you want to put it that way. I'm not afraid of him. It doesn't matter what people in this room think. What matters is what God thinks. What matters is who we are. Who are you tonight, Mayor? Do your job.

Thank you. Joseph Cooper. Joseph Cooper.

Good evening, good evening. Joseph Cooper, 906 Southeast 9th Street. I just come to talk about a few things about what we, we live in a democracy and there are a few tenets of a democracy. There's two types of democracies. If we go back to civics class, that's what we call a direct democracy where the people vote and the laws directly. And there's representative type of democracy. That's what we govern by. That's when the people vote for representatives to to govern based on their wishes we had an election a few weeks ago and The people spoke and they elected to the dais three Commissioners to join the two that was not for re-election and so I think it does a lot of emotions running high but the people voted so that the commissioners can lead the city and And so it's not a perfect approach, but it's a approach where the people who had the most votes got their candidate in. And so we may not like that, but we should respect the tenets of a representative democracy, and that is people are elected to represent and govern the people that voted in the majority for those people now it does not cancel out the people that didn't win it simply says that a majority of the people voted for that representative to go and speak and create laws and ordinances on their behalf and that's what we're charged with. We live in this society. This is what was created. And we go through this election cycle, and it occurs every four, every two years, depending on when people are elected. But there's always going to be a disagreement on who got elected. The problem is when there's a saying, when the rabbit has the gun, it's no longer fun. So then the hunter becomes the hunted. I don't think that's the case here. What I think is that people are upset and disheveled about what the commissioners have to do in their pain of what's best for the city. And so that's what we need to be respecting, the elected officials doing what's best. They're not perfect. No one's perfect up here. They can shoot, whether they bring Michael Motel back or whether they sat one down, Mr. Giordano, that's a decision that we entrusted by voting for him. It's not a perfect approach. It is a democratic approach that we pledge to govern ourselves by, by going to the polls and voting. We all know that sometimes we win, our candidate wins, sometimes our candidate does not win. So we oughta, look, Smith said, come together, take the guard down and allow the people who came to the polls, whether it was 20% or 30%, and had their say. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. Next. I have no further public comment.

No further comments. Is there anyone in the public who has something to say or didn't submit a card? No further cards? Okay, thank you. We have the approval of the consent agenda.

Madam Mayor, I move approval of the consent calendar.

Okay, so on the consent calendar, there's a motion from Commissioner Campbell-Rich. Is there a second?

Although, I'm sorry, I do need to correct the minutes of the first. It doesn't say one. We do need to correct the minutes of the first budget workshop.

It says consensus. Go on. Go on, Commissioner Rich.

Because it says, where it records the two to do vote as a consensus. Mr. Baggett, how should that correctly be described? On page two. of the job one meetings, the 810 meeting?

I think this is the minutes of the meeting and I thought the consensus was sought and that was the result. A consensus?

You cannot have a consensus with a split vote.

I'm not saying that, sir. I am saying that a consensus was requested and this is the result.

Fine. If you're happy with that.

I'll second the motion to approve, but I'd like to be noted for the record, I think this should be split. I was not at the first budget workshop, and so I have a hard time voting to approve those minutes since I didn't partake in the meeting.

Do we have a... I mean, it's called a split vote. Could you go back to the language, and did you want the language to be amended? If Mr. Baggett is happy with it, then that's fine.

Just so it's on the record that it was not a consensus.

I can make a note that the consensus, you know, a request for consensus was taken, and then what the vote was, if you'd like.

If that's more accurate, that's fine. Thank you, Senator.

Okay, there's a motion. Is there a second on that motion, Commissioner Matheson, even though you are not at that meeting? Are you, did you just make a comment, or were you gonna?

Well, I'll second the motion, but I think it'd be noted for the record that I was not at the first budget workshop, so I have a hard time approving minutes of a meeting that I wasn't there for.

Okay. That's a good point.

I will second the motion.

Thank you, Commissioner Jobe. Okay, so there's a motion and a second on the approval of the consent agenda. Is there any comment from the public? No public comment, are there any further comments from any of the commissioners? So Commissioner Giobbe, are you seconding it with the note that's gonna be making the change in that?

Yes, the city clerk had already put that in, making that motion. Thank you. I'm seconding that motion.

Thank you, city clerk, let's vote on it.

Commissioner Giobbe? Yes. Commissioner Matheson?

Yes.

Commissioner Rich? Yes. Commissioner Reed? Yes. Mayor Clark?

Yes. Yes for workshop two minutes, abstain for workshop one minute. Interesting question.

Did we need to have a separate vote, legal? We're fine? Okay, thank you. Thanks, okay. We have our commission action items, and I'd like for both legal and our city manager to introduce these items at this time. Item number two, fiscal year 2027 tentative millage.

Resolution number 64-2026, a resolution of the City Commission of the City of Stuart, Florida, adopting the tentative millage rate for fiscal year 2027, providing an effective date and for other purposes.

Thank you. City Manager, a budget?

Mayor, I would like to introduce our finance team for you this evening. They're going to be handling most of the items that are here on the agenda. It's Mr. Anthony Cooling and Mr. William Perez.

Yes, sir. Thank you, gentlemen. Thank you, Mr. Cooling. It's your turn. Item number two.

You want the presentation? Yes, sir. I thought it was...

No, you don't do the presentation until item number R66 comes up.

Whatever you have for item number two.

Our proposed tentative millage, you can go ahead and explain what that is, please.

Tentative millage rate put together for the budget is 5.0 mils. The rollback rate was 4.7499. The maximum rate is 5.22. The total levy would be 21 million, but Florida law requires we budget at 95% of the actual millage. That comes down to basically $19.1 million plus an additional roughly $479,000 for debt millage, which is separately.

Okay. Is there any further information, city manager?

No, ma'am. You have the decision before you as to accept the tentative millage rate as presented by the finance department.

And finance, that is set out in section number one of the proposed ordinance that Mr. Baggett read the title to ordinance number 64-2026, section one summarizes exactly what you just said. Commissioners, is there any discussion? I move approval of resolution number 64-2026. Okay, so we have a motion before we can discuss this. Is there a second?

Second for discussion.

Okay, motion by Commissioner Rich, second by Commissioner Matheson. Let's have public comment on this, please. Did you have any specific public comment on this? I do. Item number two? I do. Dina Peterson? Let's get the motion fully put on the floor. We only have... Okay, so she's gonna... Okay, we'll have discussion on it.

Dina Peterson? I have no further public comment, ma'am.

No further comment. We have a motion and a second. Commissioners, do you have any comments on the tentative millage rate? And before you make any comments, City Manager, do you mention the next date when this is going to be heard if we do anything?

Yes, ma'am. That next date is going to be September the 14th at 515 here in City Chambers.

Okay, depending on what happens today. Any comments from our commissioners on the tentative millage rate of 5.0?

I do, my light's switched on.

Okay, yes, Mr. Reid.

Yeah, my comments are simple. I don't support increasing the taxes on our constituents that we represent. If us as public officials could at least justify why the tax increase and why it's necessary. Speaking with the prior city manager and potentially maybe even the new city manager, I think some of our departments might be bloated. I can go into details if you'd like, but I don't see any justification to increase taxes.

Thank you Commissioner Reed. Any other comments?

Yes.

Commissioner Matheson.

So for me coming in you know kind of late in the game to the second budget workshop hearing my other commissioners I think it's important to discuss what should be cut. The 5.0 millage is the recommendation by city staff for us to move forward with the balanced adopted budget. It's my understanding that this budget has nine new positions, three fire, and six city employees, but we could go into a lot further detail, and I guess what I would like to hear is how should the budget be trimmed if we don't wanna hit the recommendation by city staff? Is it the recommendation by my fellow commissioners to remove these positions? Or what other items should be recommended to be removed? For me, I'd like to hear that. I mean, we have to make these tough choices and that the recommendation of the five mills is how our city staff is proposing to balance the budget. It's been a kind of a, tough entire year, I would say, for the city of Stewart. But one of the things I always do look at and compare is us sitting to the county. And I'll always probably do that as far as city residents, hopefully paying less in millage than the county. And the county is, I believe, at 6.5614 mills right now. So with a lot of uncertainty of where we are, and again, we're hearing Differences of opinion, but I think it'd be helpful for us as commissioners to state specific items that need to be cut from staff if we want a lower millage rate. Or I would have a tendency to lean on the accounting departments and their recommendation of the millage rate that's needed with the proposal of city staff for such things as the new positions. One of the other ones, I have it later in the notes for the actual budget though, is for the next upcoming two fiscal years, we have over a million dollars of unfunded capital improvement projects. So those in a way are just kicking the can down the road if we continue to unfund capital improvement projects. I guess, Perhaps our other commissioners wanna shed light on what we should be cutting from the budget. But I'll end those comments there.

Thank you, sir. Commissioner Reed.

yeah um well we're the city of stewart merit i respect you um i also agree with you on the capital improvement stuff and uh i agree with you on all the unfunded stormwater management projects i think we need to go after the beautification projects and set them aside if we have a backlog of stormwater management issues why are we doing complete streetscapes then why are we doing trees if we have roads that are flooding roads that are unfinished sidewalks that are broken Stop with the beautification. That's my suggestion for this board majority. That's all I have to say.

Thank you. Do you have a comment on that?

Commissioner Reed, I agree with you to an extent, but I will argue that Properly placed trees can actually significantly help with flooding. They can increase evapotranspiration and really can control flooding. So the shade tree program can actually help with a lot of these and defer capital improvement pressure. But I certainly agree. I mean, I guess what I'm saying though is what should we be cutting and removing? And if we wanna seek, You know, a lower rate.

Yeah, I mean, can I give you an example? Do we really need to spend $500,000 for designing and reengineering Confusion Corner? How many times can you go back there and continually waste? It's taxpayer money. It's not my money. It's taxpayer money. But there's $500,000 right there alone. Increasing the millage is $300,000. I mean, I was part of this board majority when Michael Mortel was removed, and I cost taxpayers $100,000. This board majority cost taxpayers probably the tune of that as well with hiring it. Maybe we shouldn't get paid for four years up here. That'll pay the taxpayers back.

So should we remove the... I agree with you. I don't know why we're examining Confusion Corner for $500,000, but I also... In a way, we are at crunch time to adopt a millage rate, and some of this should have been brought up during the workshops, but I certainly agree. I have a question for, I mean, why are we spending the 500 grand on Confusion Corner? It's confusing.

I mean, honestly, like you have, you got 2.1 million into a Bayou pedestrian bridge connecting Bayou to MLK, I believe. That's $2.1 million. Is that necessary right now? I don't know. I mean, I see Pinal coming up, but yeah, there's so many capital improvement projects for beautification. Like I see Stittman on here. That's a drainage and sidewalk improvement, but...

They're CRA funds.

Those are CRA funds, but some of these unfunded projects could potentially be in the CRA?

So it's actually $250,000 for the confusion corner.

Why does it say $500,000 then?

at the last meeting, I did say that we corrected that in the CIP. It was not reflected in the CIP.

It's not corrected here even this evening.

Oh, I'm not sure why that would be corrected.

It still says $500,000, yeah.

I know when the CRA budget comes before the board next Monday, it's corrected in that CRA budget. That's going to be approved and adopted at the CRA meeting. Again, CRA has enough funding to do the capital improvement projects. So even if you reduce the millage, I still have the funding to do the projects. And then the projects that you mentioned, the Bayou Bridge, those are all future projects. Those are not even budgeted right now in this fiscal year.

Thank you. Thanks. Commissioner Reid, are you finished?

I'm done. I agree with Commissioner Matheson when it comes to this stuff. If they're unfunded, reappropriate the funds. I know we agreed with having a ranking system like we have on the MPO board where we can have safety improvements, capital improvement projects, and at least we get to rank them on priority and where we should be putting it.

So I agree and then if we move past the capital improvement project some of what I'm hearing from City staff and then my next line item in the budget or thought process is all right Three new firefighters There is justification and a clear argument that our fire department would like three people on an engine to compare us to the county and we are not at that point now and then When I hear about the other six positions that are needed and I speak to residents around town There's a basic need for the built infrastructure in the city of Stuart to be brought up, whether it's broken sidewalks, drainage, and I'm not talking about the capital improvement projects. Those are projects over 50 grand. I'm talking about the under $50,000 maintenance projects for the city of Stuart, and that is the thought process to where are those other six positions come into play. Those are, that's what we have to sit up here and consider. Do we want our staff to be able to have the ability to keep up with the day-to-day maintenance of the city and our fire department to have the employees that, you know, at budget workshop number two, we had Felicione come up here and state that he's requesting. And I mean, I certainly agree with you, Commissioner Reid. I don't like this, and one of my biggest indicators, as I said, is comparing us to the county. I think we always should. It should be less expensive and better quality to live in the city of Stewart than the county. And our millage rate is below that right now. And I'd like, if we do adopt this moving forward, that perhaps we take a stronger look as a commission on the capital improvement projects. But as Ms. Gondek's opposite, we might want to break them out from CRA to general fund and examine those capital improvement projects a little more and try and rank them. So I'm just explaining some of my thought process for seconding the motion. I hear you and this is, it is tough to be an incoming commissioner, but I'd like us hopefully to work together for the future year. And maybe we can all agree on a goal that we want to hit the rollback rate next year. And the way we do that is probably examining these capital improvement projects. But the other way we do that is examining city staff and the amount of employees we need. But if we're gonna do that, we need to sit up here and say to our city staff, cut some more positions. Those are all my comments.

Thank you, sir. Commissioner Giobbi? Yeah, first one correction, Commissioner Matheson, you made it seem like this was a staff recommendation. If I remember correctly, we voted for them or some of us voted against doing the 5% millage rate. So there was a vote for that. That's what they based their figures on, what was expected at the last meeting.

We had a not to exceed millage rate or they would come back and cut some more of the budget. And they could hit the rate with five. This is the first vote right now. This is the first official vote on the military.

Well, that's how they were directed. I'm sorry, I agreed. They were directed to do the 5%. That's number one. And as far as the unfunded capital projects, that's been almost forever. They always seem to be unfunded. So maybe at some point, I think we all could work together to make those unfunded capital projects going into the future. Let's fund some of them so that they actually take place. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other commissioners have any comments right now?

I'm sorry, I have one last thing. Okay, yes, Commissioner Jobe. Okay, and there's a lot of talk about the budget and the CRA.

Excuse me, just hold on. Just hold on, we can't have so much conversation. Are you asking for a break, Commissioner Reed?

No, he's just getting some water. Okay, all right, thank you.

Don't touch your mic, please. Continue, Commissioner Jobe.

We sit up here and we talk and talk, and we talk about CRA money and budget money. The reality is this is the taxpayer's money, and I think sometimes it's a forgotten issue. I mean, it's our money, we pay taxes too, but we're here representing the city, the residents here who pay taxes. So it is their money, and sometimes we forget as we talk about it, We make it seem like it's some magic money or it's our money. It's their money. Just wanted to make that point.

Thank you so much. City Manager?

Madam Mayor, I've always been waiting for an opportunity to go ahead and share this presentation or this sound bite, really, that's required. I was going to do it. after the PowerPoint presentation that Anthony has got ready to go on item resolution 66-2026. However, this is a good enough time for me to be able to go ahead and read it into the record. And it is... Tentative millage. The City of Stuart, Florida rollback rate for the fiscal year 2027 is 4.7499 mills. The City is proposing a millage rate for the fiscal year 2027 which exceeds the rollback rate by 5.27%. The city is proposing a millage rate of 5.0 mills. The purpose of this increase is to fund current operations and accommodate normal increases in the cost of those operations. And then of course, as I mentioned before, the final millage and budget will be on September 14th, 2026 at 5.15 p.m. Thank you.

Thank you so much. You have a comment, Commissioner Reed? Commissioner Rich?

Yes. So the budget proposed to us is for fiscal year 27, which begins October 1st, is 113 million. Versus the adopted budget of 2026, which we don't know how close we are to that, is 103 million. That's just under a 10% increase. And if we're accepting those obligations, including that additional staff, then when we're told we need the millage of five to balance the budget, then as Commissioner Matheson said, either come up with the cuts or accept the responsibility. We have to balance the budget. We can't go forward, hopefully. And so. either cut that 113 million or accept the fact that that's what it's gonna cost to run the city.

Thank you. Since we had the budget workshops, I know Mr. Kulin had, they made a presentation, actually our previous budget director made a presentation. Is there anything, I know you gave us the numbers that is in the resolution, item number one that states the amount of the millage. Can you give us a very high level summary of why the budget that we have is set out at the five mills? And if we do make some cuts or changes from the presentation that you gave us at the budget workshop, what would that be? And I know that we had Mr. Felicione come in and others, but could you just give us again so that the public knows exactly where the fine line is? I think we had notice about the the expensive insurance changes, and there was a COLA, and there were some other things. So could you, maybe everybody hasn't been a part of the budget process, or people may have forgotten. So just give us a summary again, please, sir.

The short, short version of why the budget for the general fund, right, that's where the property taxes cover the majority of, is the same costs that are affecting citizens' wallets are affecting the city. Our insurance costs went up, and we have new positions to fund operations as well. Our operations costs overall went down. Our revenue by 11%, overall our revenues went up by 6%, but staffing and benefits went up by 10%. The Florida retirement benefits increased, there was a 5% increase on police and fire salaries that went up by 7% and 7.5% based upon the union contracts, and those are our largest departments. So there's some serious headwinds based upon the same inflation that's affecting citizens is affecting the city budget.

Okay, so you're saying that the inflation is built into...

Our consultants came to us and said, you have to fund an 8.8% increase to the self insurance for our, the city is self insured for medical, for our employees. And so we had to come up with 8.8%, which a portion of which was passed on to the employees. The employees are paying 8.8% more, but the city as the employer has to pay 8.8% more to cover the health insurance for our employees, so things like this.

And do you have any response as to the question that was asked with regard to the difference in using, sorry, in using public CRA funds and if things are taken from the CRA budget projects, how that would affect the millage rate?

There are transfers from the CRA, which is a TIF, a tax incrementing district, that only work done inside the geographic boundary of the TIF, expenses can only be expended for that. There are some limited transfers to the general fund from the CRA to pay for public works doing the work in the TIF, our public works department doing that work. But there really isn't a conceivable way to increase those transfers to a general fund other than doing the work that is in the CRA. So the tax dollars from the CRA have to be spent on the CRA even though sometimes They give us some money for doing the work basically for them because they don't have a public works department. The rest of the city general fund does.

Thank you. Any other comments from any other commissioners? Commissioner Reed?

Thanks, Anthony. I got a question for you. What retirement contribution do non-union employees receive? What percentage?

Off the top of my head, the employer contribution for Florida Retirement System is something like 13%. For police and fire, because of the line of duty dangers, it's about 5% higher than that. That's the employer contribution. The employee contribution is another percent. If you really need to get into the weeds on that, I'm sure Roz could maybe help with that, the HR director. Roughly, it's about 13% for non-union employees.

Thank you.

Thanks. That is Commissioner Reed. Commissioner Matheson?

Yeah, I think it's important to note, too, so you said roughly a 7% raise for union. A 7% and 7.5% for police and fire.

But that...

is based on contract negotiations.

The third year of their contracts.

A few years ago. So that's another increase that we have to accept that's not even this past year. Same as the Trico insurance going up. These are some of the reasons, sounds like, why staff has recommended the budget that it is.

Well, the reason staff recommended it is because we gave them that consensus. Correct me if I'm wrong, Anthony, but it's easy to balance a budget just by increasing millage. That's always the easy way. But the reason that it is this way, Commissioner Matheson, is because this board majority directed them for that.

Thank you, Commissioner Reid. Anthony, while you're responding to Commissioner Reid, if you choose to respond, I want to ask you, what is the reality of the 5% millage rate, the 5 point millage rate for A household or a homeowner who probably has a property tax rate of maybe 250,000, maybe even up to 400,000. What is that going to cost that property owner at the five and then at the 4.9?

Okay, rather than recreate the wheel, I'm just going to pull over a slide from the second budget presentation.

Budget workshop, okay, thank you.

This is a separate side that Anthony produced for this purpose.

So for the average person, the top left corner, that $250,000 at a 4.9% millage, they would be paying roughly $1,200. Property tax values across the whole city went up roughly 3%. So even if we kept the millage the same at 4.9, people would be paying more because the assessed value went up. So that $250,000 house now becomes a $257,500 house. If we took that same $257,500 house down on the bottom table there and put a 5.0 millage on it, now they're paying close to $1,300 instead of $1,267 because, again, 3% increases just in the assessed value. The difference basically between 4.9% millage and 5 mils per month, assuming the 3% increase to property values, comes out to about $5.21 per month for a person with a $260, $250,000 home. This was pointed out that it's less than the Starbucks venti orange cream cold brew at $5.65 each. I drink tea not coffee so I'm going to trust that number.

Thank you. Was that particular example published on our website?

It was published with the agenda for the second buddy study session. For the workshop, yes. For the workshop, but it was not published on the website.

Thank you, I remember that.

Madam Mayor, this is something that Anthony did on his own, just to illustrate this point.

Thank you. Thank you for that. Any other commissions? I don't see any lights. uh... i'd like to go back even though we have commissioners i'd just like to make sure that we go back to the public or staff as anything else to clarify with regard to the millage rate and i'd also like to ask the city attorney i know that you read the title of the ordinance would you like to read the it's a very short ordinance just for the public so that they're

The entire ordinance?

Yeah, the resolution, yes, it's very short, fairly short.

Whereas the City Commission has this date held a properly advertised public hearing pursuant to the requirements of section 200.065 Florida statutes to adopt a tentative millage rate for the 2026-2027 fiscal year. And whereas the City Commission has discussed the percentage increase in millage over the rollback rate necessary to fund the budget, if any, and the specific purposes for which ad valorem tax revenues are being increased. And whereas the city commission has proposed to increase the millage and whereas the public has been allowed to speak and ask questions regarding the tentative millage rate prior to its adoption. the City Commission has explained the reasons for the lower rollback rate and whereas the City Commission has amended the proposed budget for fiscal year 2026 2027 and Recomputed the proposed millage rate and announced Publicly the percent if any by which the recomputed proposed millage rate exceeds the rollback rate now therefore be it resolved by the City Commission of the City of Stuart, Florida that the Section one, the tentative millage rate for the 26-27 fiscal year of the City of Stuart, Florida shall be $5 per $1,000 of assessed property value as certified by the Martin County Property Appraiser. This rate is also expressed as 5.0 mils. The tentative millage rate exceeds the tentative rollback rate by 5.27%. This is an increase in the property tax rate as tentatively adopted. Therefore, according to the law. Section 3, this resolution shall take effect upon adoption. And then it goes on to the motion in the voting.

Thanks, and I'd like to say that it says 5.15 p.m. And legal and Mr. Anthony, if you would just explain to the public the third whereas clause, legal department, and the second half of that paragraph, and the city commission has explained the reasons for lower rollback rate. IF YOU'D EXPLAIN THAT IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE NEXT PARAGRAPH AT THE END OF THAT THAT TALKS ABOUT EXCEEDING THE ROLLBACK RATE. SO MAYBE JUST A VERY SHORT EXPLANATION.

The rollback rate is calculated by the amount of taxes that were collected last year times the increase in the assessed value. So regardless of whether we take 4.9 or 5 mils or anything, the rollback rate does go up because it's calculated basically on the taxes we got last year. So the rollback rate is always going to go up every year unless taxes are reduced in one year.

Thank you. And your recommendation is as stated item number section one of this proposed resolution number 64-2026, which has been up for consideration and has received comments from our commissioners as well as the public. Is there any further comment before I go to the clerk for a vote on this motion?

I do have a public comment. Yes. Robin Cartwright.

Yes, Ms. Cartwright.

Good evening, commissioners. I would like to address the comment that fire rescue is part of the problem, and we should be doing better for less than what the county is doing. Based on a 4.9 millage for what the city is doing, and I know where this information came from. It was from the previous finance director that was shared by Mr. Campeni in one of his newsletters. The city's millage rate, based on 4.9, includes fire rescue. What it also does not show you are the contracts with Sewell's Point, ambulance fees, inspection fees, and false fire alarm fees. Credit for those actually brings the millage rate for fire rescue to two point three eight percent And then if you actually include what every property owner pays towards the fire assessments in excess of one point seven million dollars the millage rate is then one point nine one one percent so the adjusted rate for a homeowner depending on if you use that calculation or not is either two point three eight or one point nine if the county they charge an MSTU for fire rescue specifically at two point six three seven six and By math, those two numbers that the city is providing services for are definitely lower than what the county does. You should also know that the county takes money from the general fund this year in excess of $9 million for fire rescue to supplement their budget. So I'm not 100% sure how a comment can be made that we need to look at positions to do it better and for less when we are doing it better and for less. I'm not sure that we should put public safety at risk because of something that was perpetuated by the previous finance director for something that is mathematically proven to be incorrect. So if you're going to look at positions, I recommend that you look at all of the positions. It should not be exclusively fire rescue because they're asking for three more positions when what they're doing is providing a service. If you need to look at something and you want to compare it to the county, let's truly look at apples to apples. The county is doing it for more money, based on their express mstu and the general fund which everybody pays into and the fact that they need my nine million dollars this year to balance their budget should tell you everything that the city departments both the police and fire rescue are doing right that the county is not thank you miss cartwright any other comments yes i have bonnie moser bonnie moser

I'm not gonna get to be here on Monday.

So I wanted to make sure I got this comment in since it was brought up Oh, sure. In reference to the comment about beautification projects, specifically the Complete Streets and the Street Tree programs, beautification is a benefit, but the goal is safety, comfort, stormwater treatment, and a positive environmental impact on the city. I wanted to dig into that just a little bit. Complete Streets do address stormwater treatment. They always should. They do that by providing more pervious surfaces to a street, by treating stormwater and by retaining stormwater. Trees also address stormwater that was mentioned by Commissioner Matheson. I want to challenge you all when we're talking about how we're spending our taxpayer dollars. These are what I want my taxpayer dollars spent on. I want trees and I haven't met a single person in the city who doesn't want more trees in our city. I want to challenge you all to wake up sometime this week or early next week You're all within the distance, I believe, of a student in our city. We need to walk, bike, or drive to school. They're not eligible for bus, depending on the distance that they live. Wake up and walk to school. Walk to JD Parker. Walk to Stewart Middle School at 7.30, 8 o'clock, 9 in the morning. Tell me how comfortable you feel. Tell me how uncomfortable it is to be next to traffic, to feel unsafe, and to be sweating because there are no trees in our streets to keep our kids cool.

um that's all i got thank you miss mosher any other comments from the public i have jimmy smith mr smith i just want to say this real quick um i know i really want to say something to the budget but i just want to say this uh i hope we don't cut nothing uh we need more workers in the city I tell you the truth, we need more workers. I look at our streets, our sidewalks. I know that we need more maintenance workers. Our lights on the streets is out. There's a lot of things can be improved. So if we keep cutting these workers that provide in this city, we gonna be in trouble. We can beautify one area, but then we look at the overall area. We have some work to do. And you know what's so dangerous? I know I mentioned to some of you, Commissioner, listen, what's dangerous, if you ever pull out to an intersection at a stop sign and you have the sidewalk, we have hedges you can't see around the sidewalk, and you pull out a little bit and someone's coming on a little bicycle. I got ran in the side of my car because I can't see. And you know who got the right of way to put that back? We got to come with some kind of idea and make it where that you're not allowed to put a hedge that close to the edge of a sidewalk because we can't see. It's so endangered. So you got to keep creeping out to be able to see. And by the time you're out there, you block the sidewalk. That part. And then on the side of our streets, and I know Mr. Miller do the best he can. He need more help. I believe we need more workers because the strip of grass on our side of the sidewalk by the road, they belong to the city, okay? I can take you over there to an area over there, and I took some pictures, and listen, this old man can't afford to cut his grass. I've been paying my guys to cut his grass in front of how it belongs to the city. We got to do a little better there for our improvement in some of these communities. And we just came to the lake and say that we got Palm Beach Road, the only one that we do. We got these certain streets that we want to do. Man, we need some help. So what we can do as a commission is that figure out how we can hire more workers to improve the city and plus license out in an area. Especially on my street of our 16th Avenue. They're so dark there. I mean you can't even see them down the street So it's very endangered if you want to walk your dog or walk down the street You can't see cars can't see you at the last minute. So I think that and we can work together as a commission and and improve some of these areas where these people live, and also where I live, I think we can work out, I don't know the military might have to go up a little bit for its tax or whatever, but I believe we can do it. We can do it, and we need it bad. If not, we're gonna have some more accidents, gonna cause somebody to be sued, And then the sidewalk, I think Mr. Sean brought up about our broken sidewalk. We got to be very careful. The city is responsible. Someone hit a pothole in the sidewalk, a broken sidewalk, that's a legal lawsuit. So I just want, I don't want us to be caught in something like that as a city. And then we can help fix some of these things. And we don't need to get rid of no firemen. We don't need to get rid of no policemen. We need everybody we can to work together. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Any other comments? I have no further public comment, Mayor.

No further. Any comments from our commissioners? Commissioner Matheson?

Madam Mayor, just to clarify to my fellow commissioners on the board, when we talk about the three fire recommended by our fire chief, I support that. And when we talk about the six other employees recommended by our city manager, I support that. But they're recommending those at a proposed budget of five mils. And that's where I'm wondering if we don't support that, the other side is to recommend to our city staff to cut some of those or find ways to cut the budget. And that's what I mean. I think our fire is amazing, but I think all of our city staff is amazing. If they're telling us they need these more employees to do the job better, You know, when I use the example of our fire wanting three people on a truck. So if we're gonna support them and we're listening to our finance department say it's balanced at five mils, then I have a hard time, it's contradictory to say no, we don't have that, but then say, well, we support all the new employees. We have to pick one or the other. So that's where we're going to vote on.

Thank you for your comment. Any other comments from any commissioners? Have we heard all the comments that were put in comment cards? Is that a voice?

No. Okay. All right, thank you.

So we have a motion and a second on resolution number 64-2026. And we've had comment and we've had the reading of the resolution. And apparently there's no change to the language of the resolution. Madam Clerk?

Mayor Clark? Yes. Commissioner Giobbe? Yes. Commissioner Rich? Yes. Commissioner Reed?

No.

Commissioner Matheson?

Yes. Thank you. Our next item is number three is the adoption of the assessment for the fire protection services.

Resolution number 65-2026, a resolution of the City Commission of the City of Stuart, Florida, approving the fiscal year 2026-2027 non-ad valorem assessment role for fire protection services, facilities, and programs. Directing certification of the assessment role to the Martin County Tax Collector and providing an effective date.

Thank you, sir. City Manager?

Madam Mayor, this is our annual fire assessment, and I again asked Anthony to provide some support information that he's gonna be able to go ahead and actually show, but also explain how the properties were identified for the assessment.

Those are new properties that were added in this year?

Yes, ma'am.

Okay, yes, could you please make a presentation?

Yes. So there were 71 new properties added to this fire assessment. Most of them come from, according to our contractors that help us ID this for the $1.8 million additional fire assessment fee, come from parcels that are split or combined. You can see some of these ones at 737 Central Parkway, the builders D.R. Horton Incorporated. Yeah, so they... The 71 new properties, mostly from subdivided, because the city of Stewart's mostly built out, they get their notices and the assessment is allocated to them separate from the rest of the ad valorem taxes.

Thank you. Senate manager and budget, were these notices sent out by certified mail from the contractor who sent them out to these new

Yes, ma'am.

And you have those on the record?

Yes, we have the list and it was given to the, yeah, we've used these same people for several years. They're very familiar with the process. And they sent out the letters after identifying the new parcels after looking at the assessor's tax rolls. And they were sent the letters. NOTIFYING THEM IF THEY WANT TO COME HERE TODAY TO TALK ABOUT THIS FIRE ASSESSMENT FEE THAT'S ADDED TO THEIR PROPERTY TAXES.

ANTHONY, HOW MUCH WERE THOSE CHARGES AGAIN?

FOR ALMOST EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM, IT'S $108.35.

THANK YOU. THERE IS A RESOLUTION NUMBER 65-2026 THAT WE NEED TO DISCUSS. Motion and a second so that we can bring this onto the table.

Madam Mayor, motion to approve resolution 65-2026.

Motion by Commissioner Matheson. Is there a second?

I'll second it.

Second by Commissioner Reid. Let's have some public comment before we go any further. Is there any public comment on item number three, adopt assessment for fire protection services? I have no public comment. No public comment? Board members, do you have any comments?

I have one.

Commissioner Reed.

Anthony, historically, has this fee always been the same since its inception? Or has there been changes throughout the years?

We held it flat for fiscal year 26 to fiscal year 27. I'd have to research historically how far back it went.

All right, no worries.

And for the public, I think that Maginot had asked you a question, but for the public, could you tell us the total along with the new properties that have come on board, how much will be raised by the fire assessment fee?

The total for the 71 new properties? Yes.

Well- Or just the-

All right, I mean, I'm just gonna do this real fast. Let's see here, scroll all the way down. We have a two-team process. And that's $7,790.35 is what these 71 new properties would be paying.

Okay, thank you. And this is an annual fire assessment fee. And for history's sake, do you have the timeframe for when we first adopted the fire assessment? Unless the clerk has that, just for the public.

2013.

Okay, thank you. Thank you so much. Any other comments by any commissioners? Okay, and there's no public comment. Okay.

I have a green card. I was going to save it for seven, but I'll just say. I just want to remind everybody that we call it a fire assessment. It is a tax, and it was a tax that we had no recourse against. It was when Mike Mortel was here, and it was spent $68,000 to be able to do this. And Mr. Nicoletti said, oh, it's been done in a couple other counties. I've always felt Martin County residents, we love our first responders, we love our firemen, we love our policemen. We don't need to be forced to be taxed. We keep calling an assessment, and when Kelly Glass-Leaton ran and lost, that was one thing that they caught her on. She didn't even know, you guys called an assessment. I just want to say it was a tax, it was extortion, and it still is, but we love our firemen, but we don't, Martin County residents don't need to be extorted and sued to take care of their firemen and their policemen and their first responders. We love them.

Thank you. Any other, okay, you have your green card in. Any other comments? Nothing from our staff or from the commissioners? City Clerk?

Commissioner Rich? Yes. Commissioner Reed? Yes. Commissioner Giobbe? Yes. Mayor Clark? Yes. Commissioner Matheson? Yes.

Thank you. Next item is item number four, the capital improvement plan.

Resolute.

Go on.

Resolution number 72-2026, a resolution of the City Commission of the City of Stuart, Florida, appropriating capital budget for fiscal year 2027 and providing for a three-year capital improvement plan for projects within the city, providing an effective date and for other purposes.

Thank you. Let's... I have a motion on this so that we can discuss it or if you guys would like to discuss it.

I'll make a motion for resolution number 72-2026. One caveat, I think these capital improvement projects should be ranked by priority though.

I agree.

There's a motion. I will second the motion. I agree with Commissioner Reed. They should have a priority listing within that capital budget. Thank you.

Thank you. There's a motion and a second. Let's go to the public. You have a presentation for us?

On this one, I do not. I just want to point out it's on page 143 of the tentative budget book where we have it. All the capital improvement projects listed out by the funding source and by department, noting which ones are unfunded.

And these were presented by staff by based on their priority when we were doing the budget. Workshops on consideration.

They were prioritized to the extent that the, um. The highest priority ones were included in the fiscal year. 26 or 27 budget and ones that were already, like, in process with the over multiple years were included because they were already basically passed by previous budget authorities. But they were not. ranked holistically and then separated out based upon funding source, general funds, CRA, things like that.

City Manager?

Madam Mayor, that many of the times the priorities are based upon grants available. So as staff goes for grants, those go up in the list.

Okay. Thank you.

Mayor Clark, I have a comment. Yes, Commissioner Reed. I think on this spreadsheet too, I think it would help if maybe there was a column one for the ranking and then also a column for when the capital improvement project, I guess, became known or became an issue. So we're well aware because some of these might be 10 years old and I don't know that unless we went line item by line item to determine that. So that's my suggestions though to the board.

Thank you, Commissioner Reid. Any other comments?

I'll just say, Madam Mayor, sorry.

Sorry.

I'll just say I agree. I think we could delve into this a little deeper in a workshop in the coming year. One way is to rank them priority-wise, but by different departments. And it would certainly help to know, like it is on the MPO, when it was conceptualized or when it was figured out it was needed. And I'd certainly agree with our city manager that, obviously, if it's grant-eligible, that should bump it up higher if we can get grant funding for it. But once it's funded in the process, it should continue to move forward at that point. We don't want to remove something that's funded each year. But this is something we can certainly look at over the upcoming fiscal year and probably find a way to come to a consensus. That's a key word we're using a lot tonight, to come to a consensus on hitting a rollback rate or something.

Thank you. Any other commissioners have any comments? Commissioner Rich.

I have no problem with that suggestion.

It's just how do you want to rank it?

We have to come up with that matrix. Do you want to do it by age? Do you want to do it by additional funding available? So I just think we have to make that matrix, those matrix decisions. But there's nothing wrong with having that additional information available.

Thank you, and that's something that probably our city manager can work with staff to develop a process so that we have a better way to approach a budget next time around. Any other comments by the commissioners? Nothing. Let's go to the public on the green cards. We have Cody Johnson. Thank you.

Good afternoon. Again, my name is Cody Johnson Stewart, Florida. I'm a resident, president of a nonprofit for East Stewart. I just want to bring up that we're trying to build back trust on both ends of the city, and a lot of things have been misleading in the past, and I believe we have a very good chance now to correct one of the things that has been misled and pretty much forced upon the community of East Stewart. 2003, we did a charrette about what we do want in East Stewart. Funding now is coming through the CRA to redevelop Guy Davis Park, a part of the Guy Davis Park. They're forcing upon the community that we've already did a workshop in It was pretty, it was pretty thorough and we came up with what we wanted as a community. And I'm asking the commissioners, you know, at least one commissioner tonight to make a motion under the capital improvement item directing that no additional skate park specific funding contracts or construction commitments be authorized until the commission holds a proper notice Properly notice vote upon restoring the resident-informed Guy Davis Park plan, not the amended Guy Davis plan. Preserve the Guy Davis Park funding, but place the skate park proportion on hold until we get more sense of what actually happened and how we can amend that, I would say, a blemish. on the relationship between the community and the city. Because me doing a lot of talking throughout the community at workshops, meetings, nobody wants, nobody in this community wants the skate park. It was forced upon us. I mean, I understand maybe on the other side of Palm Beach Road or somewhere on the other side of East Ocean, it might be appetizing. We don't have no appetite for it. I mean, if anybody wants to come out, I could set up something at the 10th Street Rec Center, and we could do a workshop or something to get a better consensus of what's going on in the community rather than what individuals want. outside of the community and are trying to inject into the community. I mean, we have to go by the, I'm not gonna say we're mandated to go by the charrettes, but we have invested money, time, sweat, blood, and tears into that community and that charrettes. We should start going by the charrettes and figuring out how we can make things better with us at the table and working together as a community and not just I don't even want to say my opinion about the situation, but I pass the mic or whatever.

Thank you, sir. Any other comments on the capital improvement plan?

I had one.

Commissioner Reed?

Yes, to give you some backstory on that, Cody. what happened was from what i understand there was there was a grant available it was appropriated for the skate park and commissioner collins at the time wanted to prioritize the skate park over the rest of guy davis as far as the design and the implementation of it i believe commissioner rich and myself were the only no votes on that doesn't mean i'm against the skate park it didn't make sense to design the skate park before the entire park i guess you could say i didn't think that was fiscally responsible of us now the entire park is 100% designed. I'm sure Pinal can attest to that. I don't know, Pinal, if you want to come and give some backstory, if that did happen, how would that look for the taxpayers? I wasn't here in 2021. Thank you.

Director yeah the hundred percent plans are completed but I did check with the engineer who designed the project we can remove the skate park and so we'll go out for bid with a package that includes a skate park and without skate park so we can get bids for skate park and without skate park and then the board can decide whether they want to award the contract with the skate park or without. So we don't need to make that decision now.

It won't mess with any of the civil engineering or any of the site work plans? Right.

I was concerned, but I checked with them, and it doesn't affect it.

All right. Hopefully that helps then, Cody. All right.

Thank you, Commissioner Jobe. Yes, one question. The grant that was connected with that skate park, how does that affect the overall numbers?

So that grant is specifically for the overall parking- It's for the overall park. Right, so it's not specifically for the skate park.

Okay, thank you.

Madam Mayor, for the record, it wasn't a grant, it was a legislative appropriation.

I got one more question. How much did we spend on the design of the skate park? and changing all of this specifically, $50,000, $100,000, more?

We had to subcontract for the skate park. It was about $50,000, but we had money in the contingency that we had already contracted with the primary contractor, so it was already in the budget.

All right. Thanks, Pinal.

Thank you. Any other question? You've done three minutes already, Mr. Johnson. Will you stand into? Yeah, I'll do it. Okay, thank you, thanks. Any other comments?

On the motion.

On the motion that we have here. No members of the public, no members of the board. I'm sorry, who made the motion?

I did.

And I second the motion.

So would you accept the amendment to remove the funding for the skate park at this time?

Are you making out?

I'm asking the maker of the motion if he would accept that.

My opinion is we've already wasted $50,000. I'm not necessarily, like I said, I'm not necessarily against a skate park. I was against the design of it from the beginning. But when it comes to these capital improvement projects for the city, it's not just specifically for one neighborhood. We're all taxpayers in the city, so it's like, where do you go with the capital improvement projects, right? Everybody's entitled to go to Downtown Stewart, everybody's entitled to go to Kiwanis Park, everybody's entitled to go to Guy Davis Park. My opinion is it's not necessarily for one specific neighborhood when it's a park for the entire city. So it's like, you're damned if you do, damned if you don't, depending on how we vote up here.

May I ask, Mayor? Yes, sir. I think we've had very good comments on this. And listening to Ms. Gandhi-Sabros, this isn't what we need to decide right now. That $50,000, the designs are there. She's going out, and we gave her direction of that at the budget workshop. She's going to come back to us with an assessment of doing it basically in phases or not. It seemed to me, my memory during the workshop, we all had consensus to prioritize the original plans of Guy Davis. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that was my memory. That's one of the things I would like to see is to prioritize the original plans of guy davis not proposing to change any of the plans at all but let's move forward as fast as we can on those plans for guy davis for for that community and assess as we go with the new information miss gandhi sabras gives us on the different bids she gets back thank you commissioner jovi i just want to reiterate what commissioner reed said

These parks belong to everyone in the city of Stuart. They're not just for one neighborhood, and I understand that most neighborhoods try and take, you know, that's their park, but it is for everyone in the city. I just wanted to make that clear to everyone. Thank you.

Thank you. Staff, do you have anything else to say before we vote on this motion? Any other comments? City Manager, anyone has any comment? Madam Clerk?

Commissioner Matheson? Yes. Commissioner Giobbe? Yes. Commissioner Reid?

Yes.

Commissioner Rich? Yes. Mayor Clark?

Yes. Thank you. We have item number five, which is the general welfare increase. Resolution 63-2026.

A resolution of the City Commission of the City of Stuart, Florida, approving cost of living increases and merit raises for the City's non-bargaining unit employees for fiscal year 2026-2027, providing an effective date and for other purposes.

Thank you. We have resolution number 63-2026. Can we have a motion and a second so we can put it on the table for discussion? I'll make a motion.

Resolution 63-2026, a resolution of the City Commission of the City of Stuart, Florida, approving the cost of living increase in merit raises for the city non-bargaining unit employees for fiscal year 26-27, providing an effective date and for other purposes.

Thank you. Is there a second? Second. Commissioner Matheson?

Yes.

Thank you. There's a motion and a second. I'm going to go to the public first. Is there any public comment on item number five, general wage increase? Did you have a card in for this item?

No, you said public comment. I had a card in. Do I have to do one every time?

Yes, for this item.

Can I take pause and fill one out?

As long as it relates to this item, three minutes.

Just when you completed Philadelphia.

Formalities. Okay. I'm all for wage increases. I'm all for cost of living increases. But I haven't had one in 11 years. I was a teacher. I had an advanced degree, nine hours shy of a PhD in school administration. People, my salary would have been $120,000 a year had I been allowed to pursue my dream. I'm all for cost of living increases. What I was asking for. it would have been earned by my degree, my intellect. I have not been paid any kind of damages for what cost me, not a dime. Well, we have had, I have three minutes.

I just wanna make sure it relates to this item specifically.

It does, it does, it does. Well, we are voting in wage increases and cost of living, and we're gonna have an item at the end of this agenda to give Michael Martel $80,000 over what Mike Giardino was making. I just have a real hard time with the fact the city has not addressed settlement letters from 2019 that Michael Martel had in his possession and hid them from the purview of the commission. So cost of living increase is 3%. I gave myself one. Three years ago, I made six figures for the first time in my life being a realtor. I bought a home on tax auction, and it's worth 300 grand. So what I'm telling you is my cost of living came by my own virtue. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Are there any relevant comments with regard to this agenda item? And please fill out the card, Ms. Alexander.

I have no further public comment.

No further public comment. Staff, do you have any comments for us? If we need to deliberate again?

I do, Madam Mayor. I just wanted to bring one thing to your attention, and that is resolution 63-2026. Since the commission asked us to make this a separate item, it is a separate item. However, it's subject to the approval of the city budget itself.

Yes, thank you.

Mayor, I do have someone interested in giving public comment if you want to open it back up.

I'll open it back up.

Who's the person? Robert Hamilton.

Mr. Hamilton, please come forward.

Good evening, Robert Hamilton, 1895 Church of Stuart. I agree, people should get a rate increase. But what about bad behavior? So we're going to give people. wage increase that do bad behavior, participate in fraud and cover up for the city. So we give them an increase. Taxpayer money, not your money, not yours, the people behind me, the people around the state. You have to fulfill the job you came to do. That means if something's wrong, you have to fix it. If you notice something, you stand up. like Mr. Reid did and Ms. Giobbe did. Why do we have to continually to pay for your mistakes, your greed, your awards you give out? Did you ever give out an award for who screwed up the worst for the year? Think about that. It's not a joke. Did you ever go talk to them? Say, hey man, you got three letters about this place. They got trashed and you want a rate increase, taxpayer money. They work hard, like the lady and other people and all the people behind me, even the retired people. We only get so much in our retirement. But yet, you're supposed to represent we, the people, and you want more money to represent us. Then you say you don't have enough money. You need more money from the state of Florida. Why? Why does Americans have to, in our community, have to budget themselves? Mom, dad, the kids, school, soccer moms, the whole nine yards. We have to budget ourselves. But then when the budget comes in here, we have to be like a dentist and pull teeth, say, well, what does that mean? Well, it really didn't mean it was demolition. It's like, when you start acting like that, and we're perceiving this coming to us, the taxpayer, And we're not supposed to be annoyed? You know, you really need to think about what you're doing here. Again, I have no issues with getting paid what you're worth. Getting paid a tax increase for the cost of living. We all know gas went up. Everybody's telling us the news. Everything's great. It ain't great. It ain't great in this room. Go look at my church. 131 years old. Hell of a way to treat a church. That's what you did to me and my wife. You destroyed our lives. but we're still here and again i don't have a problem but you need to not give everybody an increase across the board have you sat down with the public and said to you do they understand how much money these people are getting how much miss gandhi gets for what she did to me what mr martell gets for what he did to me destroyed a home a historical pinnacle of your community With that said, have a great night.

Thank you, Mr. Hamilton. Any other public comments on this specific item?

I have no further public comment, Mayor.

Board members, do you have any comments before you ask the clerk for the vote?

Yeah, I had one. I was going to address Mr. Hamilton's. We can't target specific employees based off of this wage increase. That wouldn't be fair. I'm sure Roz Johnson could attest to that. That would come down to the city manager. whether or not someone worked here or not. But if we were looking at anything, and this might be more budget-related as well, it's what costs the taxpayers. It's their retirement contributions, the health insurance, the benefit packages. That's really where a lot of the money goes to when it comes to government employees. But that's all I had to say for this one.

Thank you, Commissioner Reed. No other comments? Madam Clerk?

Mayor Clark?

Yes.

Commissioner Matheson?

Yes.

Commissioner Reed?

Yes.

Commissioner Rich? Yes. Commissioner Giobbe? Yes.

Thank you. Item number six.

Resolution number 66-2026. A resolution of the City Commission of the City of Stuart, Florida, adopting the tentative budgets of the City of Stuart, Florida for fiscal year beginning October 1st, 2026 and ending September 30th, 2027. Providing an effective date and for other purposes.

Thank you for that 1 before we even ask for it to come. To the floor I'd like for you to please read the. And do we have it, Mr., can we put the actual word into the resolution up? Did you have that prepared, City Manager?

I have a presentation prepared for you right now.

Okay, and you will talk about the general fund and the landfill and all the different categories that are listed in here. Can I just ask, Mr., if you could summarize it? Mr. Baggett, it's item, it's a long list of the different special revenues that are included.

Ma'am, I don't think I'm qualified to summarize the finance stuff.

Madam Mayor, if I could, let's go to the presentation and I think most of your questions will be answered.

Okay, let's do it because we have all these categories that are included. Thank you.

Yes, thank you. The actual resolution that has the numbers spelled out, like 59,989, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, right? So that's because your budget authority is per fund on that top line budget number. And then all the rest of that is just details underneath about salaries and everything like that. So the resolution itself just has those top line numbers. That's what you're actually voting on. and then everything else in this budget book is just the detail. As for the presentation, let me shift. Okay, so thank you very much for doing the lights. So we're following Florida statutes and commission guidance, and right here we're voting on the tentative budget, tentative millage, fire protection, non-ad valorem tax. We just voted on the general wage increase and the capital improvement plan. So the next step, as the interim city manager said, the final hearing is September 14th in this lovely room at 5.15 p.m. There's the rollback rate, the consensus rate, and the maximum rate on the right that we're obliged to notify the public about. So putting together a budget of five mills, what does that mean for the city? That means 50.9 million in revenues for the general fund, where most city operations are, police and fire. The rest of the ad malorum revenues, roughly 479 million in debt millage that was voted in the past. So these property taxes cover about 39% of the general fund, powering 50.9 million for the city services. These charts may look familiar to people who've been here for a while. This is the history of the millage rates on the left. And you can see, go up and down the 2008 crash, and then we get to about five mills for the last several years. This bar graph on the right is the assessed value of all the properties in the city of Stewart. And once again, you can see 2008 boom, crash, and then going up every year since then. The current assessed value for the property in the city of Stewart is 4.2 billion. So the general fund is not just powered by property taxes. There are other taxes that come in to fund services. Roughly 8%, 4.15 million comes in from utility taxes. These are taxes that are put in place for the privilege of gas, propane, electricity within the city limits. It's collected by Florida Light and Power and others and remitted to the city. And then another large portion of revenue comes in from overhead charges to our utilities and franchise fees, about 4.9 million. Together, these two are the primary sources of revenue for the general fund, accounting for 57% of general fund revenues. Just a little historical data on utility taxes. In 2025, actual collections were 4.89 million. So the more people use electricity, water, sewer, that sort of thing, the more our taxes for both franchise fees on our utilities and utility fees go up. Franchise fees for our water, sewer, storm water, 2.34 million in 2025 actual numbers. Okay, so what changed from the study session budget that was presented and this budget? There were several minor amendments of less than 50,000 to accommodate last minute circumstances. Hey, I'm gonna get this grant. Can I squeeze it in? Yeah, sure, no problem. We also added $6,422 to miscellaneous revenue for rounding purposes at a general fund. There's no programmatic changes from what was presented at the study sessions. There was one major change that the decision was made to use $400,000 to fund a second replacement fire ambulance that needs to be replaced. It's being built at the same time as the the ambulance that is going to be delivered soon that we already that we already ordered. So because they're both being built at the same time, rather than take out a note, we decided to the decision was made to increase the budget by 400,000 to just pay cash for this second fire ambulance. The general fund, right? How is it spent? General government, that top line number of 15.1, that's human resources, finance, city manager's office. The 29.1, right down below on the fiscal year 27 column, that is public safety, police and fire. Those are, you know, Over half the budget is the police and fire services that keep our city safe. Transportation services, maintaining our streets and roads, 3.1 million. And culture, recreation, maintaining our parks, athletic facilities, 3.6 million. All coming up to that 5.9 million. A 6% increase over the adopted budget for fiscal year 2026. As per some of the comments that were made earlier, 69% of the general fund is dedicated to salaries and benefits. Police and fire are the majority of the budget, and police and fire are mostly policemen and firemen. So what's driving our increase from fiscal year 26 to 27? The state mandated FRS rate for police and fire went up by 5%. That's the employer portion. The union wage increases, the third year of the negotiated contract. There was three new fire positions, but as was pointed out, there were nine positions in total. Some of those were from, two of those for the utility were utility trainees in an enterprise fund, which is basically like a business fund. And one was a storm water team leader in the storm water fund, separately from property taxes. Additional to those three fire positions was one's ground maintenance position to help maintain our athletic field. One code enforcement officer and one maintenance mechanic in public works to help keep up with the additional amount of both code enforcement work, maintaining our athletic fields, and maintaining the city's fleet. Also software maintenance, right? This affects everybody, but Microsoft Office, everything like that across the board, roughly eight to 10% increases for software maintenance. We pay roughly $300,000 for the software to help run all purchase orders and everything like that. And all these softwares are going up about eight to 10%. And then lastly, healthcare inflation at 8.8%. We're doing very good with our health and wellness, but we're just subject to the inflation costs on everybody else. Workforce trends over the past three years. Since 2023, we've gone from 270 to 315 employees, and that's also pushing our costs upwards. So how do we balance 50.9 million in expenditures with 50.9 million in revenues? We're using one-time use of capital improvement plan reserves, the fiscal year 26 loan revenue for one of those ambulances. We took out the note this year for the ambulance. We got the cash, it's sitting in the bank. the builder of the ambulance said, I'm sorry, we're not gonna be able to get it to you till fiscal year 27. That money is sitting in the bank and then when the ambulance is delivered, with the second ambulance they're building at the same time, we're gonna spend one time money, not operating, but one time capital improvement money of 800,000. 400,000 we already have in the bank and 400,000 of reserves. Our general fund balance is roughly 21.6 million, so 50.9 million in expenses, 50.1 million in revenues. We have zero operating deficit, but a capital improvement plan of one-time use of cash of 0.8 million. So what makes up our fund balance in the general fund? Most of it is money that we can't touch without using it for a specific purpose, impact fees, building permit revenue, that it can only be used for things related to that. Money set aside for health insurance, contractual obligations. Unassigned as per the fiscal year 25 audit is About $6 million of a $21.6 million fund reserve of which we'll be spending down. Again, this is 25 numbers. We haven't got the full revenues and expenses yet for fiscal year 26. But we'll be spending down that fund balance by 400,000 for that second ambulance rather than taking out a loan. This is a pretty busy chart, but here's all the city divisions. The first column is 25 actuals, 26 adopted budget, and fiscal year 27 recommended budget that's in front of you. And the total number down on the bottom right is that 3.064 million, 6% increase, again, driven by some of these headwinds that we have. There are other funds besides the general fund, and I know that gets the lion's share of attention because of property taxes, but the water and sewer fund. That's one of our big enterprise funds, basically run like a business. The water and sewer fund is stable right now, but our reserves in that fund are declining because we are losing some revenue. There is a change in state law that a surcharge that we can charge to residents that are outside the city limits, but still hooked up to our water and sewer. That is going away in the last quarter of fiscal year 27. We are the last year of a five-year rate study and the amount of funds that we have to spend to keep up with PFAS remediation and such are such that we're dipping into a roughly 20 plus million fund reserve next year in order to provide water and sewer for our city residents and we're going to come back to you later with another rate study and rate increases to help deal with the surcharge going away. The sanitation fund is stable right now. Not much to say on that. Our charges for services are meeting our expenses. The stormwater fund, think of it like an insurance policy, right? Milton put together these performance measures for us. You can see that we're having an increased amount of work in debris removal and things like that, catch basins clearing. The stormwater fund is stable, but because stormwater rates haven't increased in a period of years, there's limited funds to pay for capital improvement projects. The last fund I want to go over is the lease property fund. These are properties that the city owns or leases. The revenue comes in, basically is operating, and then we pay that out in order to maintain the properties. And it has to be a specialized separate fund due to Gadsby rules. Citywide budget, general fund is that column on the left. That's where most city obligations are. Landfill property fund, the CRA, the lease property fund, police special revenue funds. Those are special funds basically like drug seizures and things like that that have to be accounted for separately. So we have to report those separately. Water, sewer, and storm water fund totaling the whole city budget. This concludes my presentation, and let me know if you have any questions. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you. So that was the staff report on Resolution 666-2025. Did the clerk remind me if we had any? We didn't have a motion yet at all.

I do not have a motion. Okay.

Can we have a motion or something so we can get this up for discussion, please?

I'll move approval of resolution number 66-2026, tentative budget for fiscal year 2027.

Thank you for saying that. I know you just made the motion. So the version that I'm looking at says 2025. So it should be 2026 or 2026.

The attached proposed resolution does have 2025 and that can be corrected.

Okay, thank you. So that's your motion. Is there a second to your motion?

Second.

Commissioner Matheson has seconded the motion. The motion is up for discussion. Let's hear from the public on this fiscal 2027 tentative budget.

I have no public comments.

No public comment? Ms. Alexander, I'm going to caution you before you come out. It must be with regarding the items on the budget.

I understand. I needed clarification on one thing. You passed through that screen very quickly.

City attorney, but for this year and next, can you speak into the microphone, please?

Yes. Sorry. Could you please, if you don't mind, put that screen back up? Is that permissible? Yes, staff. You passed through it very quickly. It was like I wrote it down, but I may not have gotten the numbers correct. No, no, no. Okay.

Not that one?

This would be the one that has the city attorney's budget.

All right, but there was an increase to 1.2 mil or something. Did I misread that?

The highlighted row is the city attorney's budget for the past three years.

Okay, thank you. So in 2025, the city attorney's budget was $827,000. All right, I just needed to clarify.

Also, start clock.

I see there was something about a $800,000 gap and it was taken from the reserve. Michael Martel has been texting me for months, emailing me for months. Yesterday I engaged in text messages for over four hours with him. And he suggested that the city had an $800,000 deficit, and I think this is what he was referring to in email. You all may not be aware because they were his personal emails that he was sending since the time of his termination. He has not stopped communicating with me. He has not stopped calling me delusional. He has not stopped calling me crazy lady. I find offense to that, but part of it is in the budget where I think that $800,000 gap was created during his tenure as city manager. And Mike Giardino was handed that to try to resolve. Maybe I'm off here, but it seems to me that that's exactly what that was saying, that the gap is being reconciled through a reserve account. Now correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not a mathematician. I was just a master level science teacher that taught physics, physical science, and biology before my license was revoked. I do have grave concerns over a budget. where some things were hidden from the public purview, including a scam that occurred from 2021 through 2023 during Michael Martel's tenure in that time. I think there's been some misuse of public funds. Make sure it's related to the current budget. Current budget? Well, when your leadership starts here and it carries through to 2025 and it's been allowed, there's a word for that. It's called inadequate oversight. and it definitely deals with the commission's responsibility.

Thank you, Ms. Alexander.

Thank you.

Do you have any other public comments? I do not. Any other commissioner comments or any staff? Commissioner Reed?

I do, I've had my light on for like half an hour. I have a question for you, Anthony. Do we have any below market leases on city-owned property? Because I think that's something we should go after.

I can't speak to that without research.

Okay. I know I brought it up in the past probably 60 days about it. I know I don't support the millage increase. So I don't support the motion regarding that. But I think this board should look at below market leases. So specific individuals shouldn't be getting sweetheart deals that regular taxpayers don't receive. And that concludes my comment.

Thank you. Commission read. Is there a commercial job?

And Anthony, when you provide that information, could I have it also? I'm sorry about the subsidized leases.

Yes, thank you. We will make sure all commissioners get the information.

Thank you. Any other comments on the tentative budget and on resolution number 66 dash 2026. Thank you. City Clerk, hearing none, could you please call the roll?

Commissioner Giobbe?

Yes.

Commissioner Matheson? Yes. Commissioner Reed?

No.

Commissioner Rich? Yes. Mayor Clark?

Yes. I'd like to take a bio break for five minutes, please.

Everybody agree?

Aye. Bio break, five minutes. We'll return at 8.20. Thank you. City of Stewart recall the meeting to order. And we are on item number seven, confirming appointment of Michael J. Mortel as city manager and authorizing an employment contract. Resolution number 75-2026, city attorney.

A resolution of the City Commission of the City of Stewart, Florida authorizing, I'm sorry, let me repeat this. A resolution of the City Commission of the City of Stewart, Florida confirming the appointment of Michael J. Mortel as city manager and authorizing an employment contract with the city manager and providing for an effective date and for other purposes. On August 24th, 2026, the City Commission removed City Manager Michael Giardino. The City Commission also instructed City staff to contact former City Manager Michael J. Mortel and to negotiate terms of re-employment for his return as the City Manager. Specifically, you had asked both myself and Roz Johnson, the HR Director, to reach out and contact him. We did that with the interim city manager, Jim Krolski, and we engaged in a discussion with Mr. Mortel, and we had come up with, we went back and forth a couple of times on the terms that you'll see in the proposed contract. I think a couple of things worth noting is that when Mr. Mortel's employment terminated in 2025, his salary at that time was a little over $265,000. He has agreed to start at $225,000. In addition, since we're about to go into the new fiscal year and we will be getting 3% COLA raises for the year, he also agreed to forego the first COLA raise for the next fiscal year. So he would not be entitled to any cost of living raise or a merit increase until the 2007, or sorry, 2027, 2028 fiscal year. The proposed contract is in there. It's very similar to my contract and Ms. Holmes' contract as other charter employees, and also it's very similar to Mr. Giardino's former contract and also Mr. Mortel's former contract. I've made certain revisions to his former contract to put that language in there about not having a raise for the first fiscal year coming up next month. And I'm happy to answer any questions that you may have on the contract. I don't want to anticipate what contract or questions you might have, but I'm here to answer what I can.

Thank you, City Attorney. So this is item number seven, resolution number 75-2026. Can we bring that on the floor with a motion and a second?

Madam Mayor, I move approval of resolution number 75-2026.

Commissioner Rich has made a motion. Is there a second?

Second.

Commissioner Matheson has made a second. As the city attorney has said, the contract was published. Do we have any comments from the public or do the commissioners want to make comments now? Okay, you have your light on. You want to make your comment now before the public?

If the public doesn't mind, I'd like to make a comment. I'd rather hear from the public first. Okay. Okay. Go ahead.

Thank you.

We can address their comments. Yep.

Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Reed. You're welcome. Thank you, Commissioner. City Clerk, do you have any green cards for this item?

I do. Dina Peterson?

I have one question. Is the actual potential city manager even here for questioning?

No, in fact, the term of this proposed contract, he would be starting at the next meeting on the 14th.

How are we going to hire someone when we can't even question them? All right, it's on the record.

Thank you.

You're very welcome.

You're going to have to excuse me in this long meeting. My glasses broke, so I'm going to hold on to them and talk to you all at the same time. But thank you very much for burying this at the very end when half the room's gone home. Way to avoid half the comments. I would like to compare and contrast the treatment of the last two city managers using the commissioner's own words. In a Facebook post dated October 18, 2025, the commissioner wrote, and I quote, three commissioners ambushed city manager Mike Mortel and called for his resignation. I use the word ambush because the action was not publicly noticed on the agenda, a fact that the city attorney had to point out. proper public notice of action like this is state law which the ambushers seem to be completely ignorant of these actions are at minimum a blatant lack of transparency and reek of sunshine law violations without giving any reasoning commissioner reed called for mortel's resignation and he was immediately supported by commissioners collins and giovi no questions asked mayor rich commissioner clark myself and many others in the audience asked for justification yet all three commissioners stated and acknowledged they were not being transparent would give no reason Reasoning and were in agreement to fire the city manager. Let's now fast forward to August 24th 2026 and three commissioners including the one who made the above Facebook post truly ambushed the current city and manager for the former city manager. Mr Giordino without warning or cause Mr. Mortel's contract was on the agenda back in 2025 and Mr. Giordino's contract was not on the agenda in 2026. To add further transparency, they continued the discussion of Mr. Mortel's contract to the next meeting. Mr. Giordino's contract discussions were not continued until the next meeting. In the interim between meetings, the commissioners spoke with Mr. Mortel and staff individually. Mr. Giordino was not given the opportunity to discuss his contract individually with commissioners, and staff was not interviewed. The original Facebook poster called the former commission's actions deceptive, without justification, blatantly ignorant, and an ambush. Yet, so much more transparency and notice was given by the previous commission, and none of this was afforded to Mr. Giordino. And more importantly, the transparency was not given to the citizens of Stewart. This amounts to nothing more than petty cronyism and hypocrisy. All of you who supported Mr. Giordino's firing should be ashamed of yourselves. On the topic of Mr. Reid being asked to step down as mayor, this was also done not according to custom or tradition. Mr. Reid should have been allowed to continue in his role as mayor until the new board was organized in January. Taking this step now shows more pettiness and more cronyism, especially since two of the three commissioners who orchestrated this coup were lucky to win re-election by the narrowest of margins. The third commissioner won based on low voter turnout and a recognizable family name, as he certainly did not run on his previous voting record. With all the talk of chaos and restoring civility, this majority commission seems hell-bent on giving prime examples of what incivility and chaos truly look like. Thank you.

Any other public comments? I do. I have Robin Cartwright. Robin.

Good evening, commissioners. Orchestrated unison. This is my new favorite term. It begs the question, was all of this coordinated by two commissioners before and during the campaign? What about a third party? Did they participate? Third party or not, it does not alleviate the responsibility of those we know who were part of the conversation. Maybe some state rep would like to chime in here like they did previously when Mr. Mortel was let go because they sure had a lot to say then. Some of you even called on the state reps and other community members to reach out to the governor to remove certain commissioners from office for these exact actions that you did on the 24th and that you're doing now. Yet here we are. Some concerns about misuse of public resources, using his position to make allowances for his friends like the one on Isla Street, refurbishing a building for an employee to reside while in town to the exclusion of all other employees, as well as many other items. These are the things you're choosing to ignore. I love that Mr. Giordino's contract was all in public and it was negotiated in public, but none of this has been publicly discussed until tonight. All of the concerns about his behaviors have been well documented, and you are choosing to give him permission. Admit that your outrage about him being dismissed was selective, and your willingness to look past the documented concerns that many of us in the community have is hypocritical at best. Commissioner Matheson stated, as just stated now, in 2025, no backroom deals are ever okay. That's the whole point. That's an actual quote. And yet, based on the comments made by Commissioner Rich, confirmed by Mr. Mortel in a TC Palm article about how long this has been in the works, this is exactly what this is, a backroom deal. It reeks of it. Shame on you.

Thank you. Any other comments?

Yes, I have Karen Hall-Yost-Rudge.

Okay, Karen Hall, Yes Red, 1701 Southwest Palm City Road. Thank you. I loved what Jimmy did about the loving, and Ollie felt like he just wanted to pray, because that's how I feel. I have continually, especially with group one, and five, and three, whatever. It's the new, it's, I have been up here for many years and giving you the evidence, leaving it in your boxes about the defrauding the court and Mr. Mortel when he was attorney. And it's never seemed to matter. When Matheson was mayor, when Eula was mayor, I would send you guys things and say, hey, can we just sit down? Can we do this? But you just ignored me and continue to ignore me. And so I'm expecting you to ignore me now. But I would be remiss if I didn't come and tell you. This man, Mortel, God love him. I don't have anger towards him, but I am concerned about residents. He has already harmed many residents. He has harmed our family irrevocably. I can't even tell you all his. And you have the evidence of it. And I've been continuing to give you the evidence. that he defrauds the court, that he lies to the judges, that he uses a little smoke and mirrors. But for some reason, you guys want someone that committed criminal acts in office to come back here. We all say, well, Mike has been here so long. How long has Kowalski been here? There's been no scandals with this man. How long have you been here, sir? Many years. So why don't we go with some, I don't know, why is he not good for the job? Why can't we give him a chance? He's been here a long time and he hasn't committed crimes. So all I'm saying, let's use common sense. We all love Mike, but we know what he does, and you guys each know what he does, especially the bad stuff he does. You know all about it. I've given it to you. I've given it to you in your boxes, but you don't care. You like criminal behavior. Makes no sense. Okay, so I say let's get someone in here like we had Giordino with a great background, with a great record. Can't we find somebody with a good clean record? Why do you want a criminal? Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Raj.

Any other comments, please? I do. Robert Hamilton.