City Commission Regular Meeting - workshop

To have a good time, we have safety covered. Lifeguards here, staff, all day, every day when we're open for you to enjoy. Concession is open. Pizza, pretzels, nachos, ice cream, we got it all. My crib is your crib. Looking forward to seeing you here. Duty calls.

Hello, my name is Jerome Fletcher, City Manager of the City of Northport. I'm at the Northport Aquatic Center. I'm on the job today. Let's go.

Good morning, Jesse. Good morning, sir. Nice to see you. Thanks for having me today. Of course, we're going to go through our opening checklist for this morning to make sure that the facility is safe and operational. All right. Sounds good.

Let's do it. Before anything else, the team walks the entire area to make sure everything is clean and in good shape.

Our next part of our task is to make sure that our body of water is one, clear. The water must remain clean. We must identify any possible materials that shouldn't be in the water. Then it was time to check the surge tanks. You can see the glistening of the water down there. Right. If the water is too deep and you hear a rushing of water, that means that this needs to be filled before we can begin operations for this. Okay.

It's part science, part intuition. At the Relaxahatchee River, Jesse showed me the digital checklist system, the Hydro app.

As soon as I click yes on this checklist, that let's say the water is clear, and I do not identify that the water is cloudy or any sense, that yes goes directly to my manager and lets them know that at this exact time, I checked that water to make sure it was safe and clear.

This technology being used at its best. Oh, yeah.

Now our rotations, we have evolved to having our lifeguards into a more of a roving position. With the competition pool, we still maintain the chairs for the height eligibility. But here we have to have a minimum of five lifeguards just to run this body of water. Wow. And we actually have a lifeguard positioned in our catch pool over there to help our guests that are coming out of the slides at a barracuda tarp and twister. I've seen that person there. Then Jesse brought up something that most people might not think about. Pool skimming. Pool skimming is the sounds of the water being properly flowed. So with those drains, all the water has to constantly filter throughout our pool at least three to four times a day. So not only is the water continuously being pumped in, continuously flowing out, being cleansed through our sand filters, then being pumped back into the pool. It's a very long process, but it makes sure the water stays together.

Morning. Today is Wednesday, June 10th, 2026. It's 9 a.m. We're in the City Chambers and I call the City Commission Budget Workshop meeting to order. Commissioners present are Commissioner Duvall, Commissioner Stokes, Mayor Emmerich, Vice Mayor Langdon, and Commissioner Petro. There is a quorum present for this meeting. Also present are City Manager Fletcher, City Attorney Fuino, Deputy City Clerk Powell, Board Specialist Linder, we have Police Chief Garrison, and Deputy Chief Herlihy in the back. I am requesting that all commissioners, public participants, and staff maintain order in decorum throughout this meeting. City Commission Policy 2021-03 states that attendees shall refrain from engaging in personal attacks, boisterous, immaterial, inflammatory, obscene, profane, or disorderly conduct. Additionally, meeting attendees must refrain from obscene, profane, or disorderly conduct, including hand clapping, yelling, and similar demonstrations, all of which disturbs the peace and good order of the meeting. Thank you. I'm gonna call on Ms. Sarah Lane. Will you lead us in the pledge this morning? City Court, public comment. Baldy Oleander.

Good morning. I am Baldy Oleander. I come here in peace and I am not a criminal. And I have a dignity. I am instructing you, Emmerich et al., to respect my dignity. Emmerich et al., I am instructing you to remove policewoman off my back. Move her over here, 90 degrees. Fiscal year 2027 budget is up 30 millions. It is bad. Population grew only 1.69%. 12 employees less, I would consider this good. Each school district in Florida receives $9,400 per student. I wonder what has been taught there, maybe a criminality, since Norfolk Police Department wants now and in the future 181 plus millions more. Why? People rejected by voting new police concentration camp. What I will say now, taken with grain of salt. Question, who said this and what does it mean? Number one, all in. Number two, nothing out. Number three, nothing against. Answer, it was Benito Mussolini, called and he defined fascism. What I observe here, we do not have a republican form or representative government or democracy. We resemble dictatorship. Votes don't matter. What is written means something else. Ask the manager. Oh, he's got, he can take the loans without the people approve or you approve. In Germany, Fuhrer, there was a Hitler, have a private security called Gestapo. Are any private security here? Who have private security here? Why so many policemen around here? Is it a concentration camp? Any policemen give you comfort to steal my money. This is fleecing me, make you make me poor. You are masters of the poverty.

That is all, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. Moving on to general business, item 26-0846. Mr. Fletcher, this is your item, sir.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. We appreciate the opportunity to further discuss our budget for fiscal year 27. With you on the board today, you should have a packet of the slide deck that was recently completed for us to walk through today. With your permission, I'll go through the slide deck, and as you have questions, we'll answer them as we transition from one area to the next so that questions don't get too far behind but we're happy to answer any questions as we go. First of all let me thank the finance team for all the work that they've done not only in the last few months but I believe this process began last fall as we got out in front of this budget process a little bit so that we could make that five percent cut that we've all talked about so that we could have that money approximately 2.7 to 9 million dollars for of the potential of a borrowing opportunity. So a lot of work has gone into this and I thank Director Kukarenko for her and her staff and their time. And then also Jason Barlone and his team for putting it together in this way so that we could hopefully see it, understand it and answer questions that will help move the city forward faster. As we start with our mission and vision, nothing in that has changed. And even though we have the conversations about what may happen on the horizon with things that we can't control, such as the property tax, we talk about that and we keep hearing about it often, but what we've done in this budget is the same thing we've done in other budgets, which was to leave several million dollars out of it because we couldn't pay for everything that we wanted in order to take the city to where we want it to go. Well, if the property tax changes, then this city will adapt and do the same exact thing. We will provide the highest level of services with the highest level of quality with the money that we have to do it. It sounds easy to say, it's more difficult to do, but it doesn't change as far as the mission and how we conduct ourselves as professionals. When we look at the commissioner's strategic pillars, these are the pillars that you adopted and they have priorities that are attached to them. So when we made the budget changes in this year's submittal, we wanted to make sure that we kept in alignment with what you said your priorities were. We did not do just a flat cut across all of our departments because that's not the most efficient way to actually balance your budget. We took away things that were on the lower end of the spectrum of priorities and we kept things at the higher end as you would have preferred us to do. So when we look at our staffing versus population growth, one thing that we did when we talked to you in March was we showed you how when we applied the DOGE techniques to ourselves, the staffing levels and the population growth need to be in some set of symmetry. And as you can see, as our population growth rises, then you're gonna see our staffing levels rise accordingly. and they are in alignment to where they should be and knowing that if we do have some tax reform, we will have to adjust our staffing levels because we are about 80% personnel throughout our organization and that is just a reality that we will have to live with. When you look at our employees per thousand residents compared to our peer communities, we're right in the middle. I think that it's safe to say that we always try to be right in the middle. We never try to be too far up or down. And I know that we've talked about this in the past, and it's not in this particular slide deck, but it's the same way that we, We do and you have agreed to with our salaries. Our salaries are in the middle of where they are related to our peers. Our salaries are comparable to people who do what we do. So when you hear and you see people questioning our salaries, you know that they're validated by independent third parties because we bring you that information through compensation and pay studies. you know that we're going through one right now. And that will be very challenging to see how we implement what the results are as we go into next year, because again, a lot of things that we don't know. But for the people who say that our salaries are too high, I don't know what they're comparing them to, but they're not comparing them to the people who do the work that we do. And so for the team that we have and the salaries that we all have, they are validated by a third party. I just want to remind everyone who is not sitting on the dais that who might be listening. Our government spending per resident, again, right in the middle again of pure comparable cities through population, land size, and other metrics that we use to compare ourselves to. Everything that we compare ourselves to can't be in our region because we are very unique here in Southwest Florida. The millage rate has been steady for seven years and that is a testament to the ability to balance this budget in that the growth that this city has experienced has been the strongest contributor to that. We have raised other fees and assessments in the time that the millage rate has stayed the same, but this is the main the main amount of revenue that we get in our general fund is determined by this rate. And the proposed tax reform would allow us to only rise our millage rate 10% above the rollback rate on an annual basis. And that would take approximately 30 years to make up the revenue that we're going to lose based on what the tax reform is going to cause. So we are going to have to look at this military, but we've been talking about looking at it for the years that I've been here, and there's never been a good time, and I don't think there ever will be a good time. But it's one of the things that we need to talk about as we move forward and decide how do you backfill for revenue that may be lost if the tax reform does go through, which I firmly believe that it will. When you look at our ad valorem tax on this slide, you can see that we had a 3% estimated growth in there because of course we wanted to be conservative. I believe our fiscal year 26 growth number was in the 8% range, and now we have a 5.67% growth for our budget that we're creating for the one that you're looking at. The taxable value increase was mainly due to new construction. Had we not had our new construction as a city, then we would have been in the negative range like some of our partners in Sarasota County. When you look at what we're doing, we are experiencing our growth. Our growth is going to help us. Our growth is going to bring revenue in this city, and I do want to make sure people understand that regardless of tax reform, the benefit of being one of the fastest growing cities in the country is showing to you right here. We are going to be better protected than others around us. It doesn't mean we will not have to adjust what we do, how we do it, and how often we do it. It just means that Help is on the way for us because we're still building ourselves out. Our taxable value in history is still rising. When you see our taxable value, that is due to a lot of the new construction and people are still coming here. And that combination shows you that revenue is going to continue to come into Northport. We just have to now wait for a lot of it to come in in a way that will be significant, and we have to manage ourselves accordingly during that period of transition. If you look at our major general fund revenues, property tax, we can talk about that all day long, but the one that's highlighted in the middle is the electric utility tax. That was discussed and approved by the Board to show that even though FP&L were raising their rates, we wanted to keep our rate at a net neutral, so it went down slightly by approximately half a percent and saved approximately half a million dollars. When you look at our general fund, as far as the budget overview, as I said, so $78 million of the $99 million in our general fund is for personnel. And that's personnel across all of the departments that are funded through the general fund. And that's a lot when we're talking about roughly 80% of that, that's a lot. When you look at the main users of this fund, you're looking at fire rescue and police, which make up 60% of the spending out of the $99 million. So if you do some math that some people would like you to just, well, just cut all your departments in half, and not touch public safety, you're still gonna have a challenge and a problem. And you know that your government cannot work with half of the staff that it has right now. What you would do in that situation, as we talk about how to strategically plan for in the future, what you would do is you would make sure that you keep the right level of people who are paid at the right level for the market value of their job, and then that's how you remove the staff in order to keep the work going and providing the services that we provide as a city. I'm sure we'll get into some more of those conversations as the year goes on. When you look at the source of the 99 million, it's easy to see right from the top that 40% of that number is coming out of property taxes. There's no way to avoid a property tax conversation. So I hope people understand the impact of the property tax and what it means. And while we understand that everyone is struggling with affordability, your government has those same challenges as well. one of the questions that we got and the feedback that we received is, well, how can our budget this year look like the same bottom line as last year? And that was the goal. The goal is to offset the annual increases that we know must happen, whether they're contractual from the CBA, whether they're non-merit increases, whether it's inflation, the ability to offset that expense and to still have $2.7 million saved for you for your decision on if you want to have borrowing projects is a tremendous success. This is what we set out to do and this is what we said we would do. We said that we would cut it by 5% and when we cut the 5%, every department head, every leader in our organization participated in in the project and exercise and it was painful. It did come down to how do we keep the people that we have employed while still meeting the merit of the assignment and they did it and we did it and we're happy that we did. And this was 5%, 5%, which is, it was roughly, I think, $5 million and some change of that number. The first number that we're talking about with this proposed property tax reform is over $8 million on top of this that came out of your budget already. The next year will be $14 million out of your budget. There's no way for us not to say honestly to our residents that services would not look differently. And I don't think that that means we need to have scare tactics or putting fear into people, but we need them to start planning now. We need people to have good ideas and bring them forward and have great conversations now, as opposed to later. And if we get a jump on this as fast as we can and start having some serious conversations, I think that we can come up with some serious solutions. When you look at the total budget by department, our total budget is nearly $350 million. Police and fire lead the way, as you can imagine. Public safety is important there at the top. But then we also talked about the infrastructure and some of the other things that the city has to do that go unnoticed. And I'm thinking about our public works, our utilities and others that create a huge impact on this city. Those are the ones when you look at this chart that shows them broken out by funds. But this next chart right here shows you exactly where all the funds are for this $350 million. So starting from the general fund to your top left, you're going to see the $99 million that we've been talking about. Every other fund after that, of course, is lower because it's going in numerical dissension. And what you're going to notice is when you start talking about property tax, and I know that people say that we talk about property tax a lot. And the reason why we do is because it's so important to everything that we do. So the people who are going to say, well, you're going to have to figure out what life looks like after the property tax proposal goes to ballot. That is true, we will have to do that, and we will do that. We just want to make sure that we're all on the same page, that we understand, we empathize, and we support the effort of trying to make sure that citizens have a better quality of life. We will just have to do the same thing as we put all of that into our calculations and situations going forward to conduct business. We are always going to, and since I've been here, we've gotten nearly $39 million. We thank our grants manager, Val Malinowski. She has created a good team, and they are always reaching out for more money. We have to thank our friends at the state level, whether it was Jane Buchanan or Joe Gruters. They helped us get, I think, $500,000 for our EOC project that is being built right now. They also got us $2.5 million for the transfer station that is being done as well. So Hayden Dempsey, our lobbyist, we all know him. He's out there fighting for us hard in Tallahassee as well. Those people help bring in revenue to this city in ways that we cannot do, in ways that help support our citizens so that they know that we are not just leaning on them for the revenue that we need, but we're trying to make sure that we explore all avenues, all buckets of funding. And at the state level, the people who I referenced are all very strong champions and supporters of the city of Northport. And we want to be thankful and very grateful for them and their efforts. These next few slides, Mr. Mayor, they kind of show where the different districts and different funds are as it relates to their budgets and their proposals. What you're going to see is as everyone participated in the exercise, they do have some negative proposals. And when we get to the slides on the departments, we're gonna talk more about what our reductions mean to what you will see. I think that's the biggest thing that you're going to get from the conversation today is, we all know what the bottom line is. We all know why we got there and we all know the intent of the method of getting there, but we all need to make sure we understand what it means and the impact of those changes. Because this year's budget, we are talking about reducing certain items or eliminating other items. And this is what it looks like when you cut a government that is not already bloated by 5% in order to get to a goal that you're trying to accomplish. So the solid waste district, you can see as well, base budget, $20 million, budget proposals, negative 1.1, building fund, again, negative 75, utility fund, which has their own revenue source, which is great, and fleet fund is a negative 568 as well. So when you look at, well, what did we actually do as the budget reduction efforts apply to this fiscal year budget? The city leadership, they were able to prioritize the services. They are the subject matter experts. They know what they need and they know what they don't need better than anyone. and they had to make some very tough decisions. We do want to make sure that our goal is always to make sure that the long-term financial stability of the city is kept intact. We cannot say anymore how important that is in this day and age. We have to make sure that we are building a city with a vision and implementing that vision for not just today, tomorrow, but many more years to come. When you look at the general fund reductions in the budget, you total $2.9 million. Budget reductions that were proposed but not included were $2 million. And again, we had to preserve critical resources and there's no department head that's gonna come before you that says that they did not struggle with how they were able to balance their budget this year. We've included you along in the process, whether it was when we began our first meeting back in March, all the way up to the one-on-one conversations that we've had with you recently, we want to make sure that we are continuously in contact with you all because you have a lot of questions and rightfully so we should be answering those questions so we try to make the process as efficient as possible and give you as much information um but you know we are making sure that you have the opportunity to ask all of your questions and just because today is here on june the 10th doesn't mean your questions will stop before you pass the budget in september so we're going to continue to update information and give it to you so that by the time you get to your final budget, you'll know exactly what is and what isn't in your budget document that you're accepting. As I talked about, property tax updates, if the reform were to continue on the pathway that it is, it's going to rise the exemption from $50,000 to $150,000 in the first year, then it escalates to $250,000 in the second year. First year cost is approximately $8.8 million. Second year is approximately $14.5 million, and it will come from our property tax. This is a tool that will be used to undoubtedly help reduce the amount of funding in our police department, as well as our fire department. as well as parks and recs department. They are all going to be affected. Even if you say, well, we're not going to reduce the police department, it will hurt their staff growth structure to not have that revenue there. So there is no way to avoid that. And I do believe schools were exempted out of this process and public safety was not. So now we are looking at a situation where we went five years ago to protecting public safety at all costs and now we're looking at tax relief that has been proposed that could and will affect our public safety staffing levels and their abilities to perform their services. When you look at the positions that we talked to you about, that we've been talking about for several months, the goal in the budget that we created was to keep our full-time positions at a net neutral number. The positions that are normally added in our our year's budget. The main ones that we all think have to happen come from our public safety, police and fire to the tune of let's just say 15 or 20 positions. We are still collecting ones in our pool this year of jobs that we are not going to rehire. The goal remains the same is to make sure that we offset whatever needs those departments have with positions that we have kept vacant and unfilled so that we can not ask you for any more FTEs. The goal should be Remain FTEs the same as we have stated. And then next year, if the reform goes through, we will talk about what a reduction would look like in order to accomplish that goal as well. departmental and divisional details. This is our great HR department who, they have done extremely well. I would say that they do a lot for 14 people there and we're grateful for how they service all of our 1,000 employees on such a small team. You're gonna see some of the performance metrics of each department as we get in here. I believe you might remember that we share these on our transparency page for NorthportFL.gov. That's where you can see all of the benchmarks, all the performance metrics, how we tie what we do in a very data-driven way so that what we produce to you is not based on our opinions or our emotion. Either we're meeting the targets or we're not, and then we evaluate why we're not meeting the targets. We meet quarterly, internally, so that we can share information solutions and techniques so that we can make our city the best place and we can prove it via data, not via our opinions, as I said. You look at Human Resources and their budget, their salaries are basically the same and then, of course, they have our benefit package in their budget as well. You'll see slides like this where we talk about the proposals or what was approved, what wasn't approved and reductions, not approved and approved. This is a quick and easy way to show you and to show people how everyone participated in the exercise. And we're happy to answer any questions as we go through them to describe some of the service level changes in detail. You're gonna see a slide like this where we talk about the impacts of the changes and this is where I talk about making sure that we understand what was actually sacrificed in this budget in order to get to that number. Reduced training and development capacity, you're gonna see deferring of conferences or professional development. There are mandatory professional developments that must happen and those are the ones that we focused on so that we kept people in their licenses and their certifications. I know there has been questions about the need for accreditation officers and what they do and how they do it, but again, those officers and those staff members are there to ensure that we are doing things to the highest and best quality of how we can do it. The certifications that we get that show that we are accredited show a great value to this city and what we do and how we care about doing it. In their level changes, you're gonna see the elimination of the annual holiday luncheon for us, which we felt was more of a duplicate area. Anyway, we don't feel like there's gonna be too much loss there, but we also, They removed some funding for related supplies for non-essential spending and also major employee recognition and morale building tradition. And there was some deferral of non-critical certifications and conferences. As you can imagine, travel and professional development is somewhere that you'd never want to completely eliminate, but you do want to make sure the right number of people are going to the right places based on what we can afford. Our police department, starting them where they left off from last year, you might remember that I did not fund them, I think it was about 30 positions in this current year's budget, and that was based on us balancing our budget last year, and here we are in June, and they're still moving along with most of the same team. I know that there's one position in particular that the madam clerk has shared to me that must get filled because it is a position related back to public records requests and now you're talking about something that might be getting jeopardized at a legal level and we can't have that so there are positions that we feel must be filled in police at certain points in time so you're going to continue to see them grow through that area but not in the way that they would tell you is optimal for the best level of service. I think we're looking at, we're already looking at for the budget year that we're currently sitting in, sub-optimal levels, and the chief would tell you that that's where we're at. So we're trying to maintain that level of service. And then when this upcoming budget is produced and we have the vacancies to add to what them and fire will need for next year, we will have those positions ready. Because again, FTE net neutral is the goal of the project. And when you see their organization chart, we actually broke them down based on the finance director's decision. They had one department, which was the largest department in our general fund, I think it was like $43 million, into one bucket. That's a lot to put into one bucket without having the divisions or the separation that allows someone to better navigate through all of that funding and all of those people. So we are... working on getting them better organized. This has been probably a two-year effort at this point. You know, we've given the chief a lot of good support, whether it was from finance or HR, to get his, we're trying to get his internal operations working as smoothly as his external operations work when they're out doing their business of public safety. So we've dedicated a lot of attention to the police in rightsizing how their operations are reflected financially. When you look at their performance measures, we're talking about being on target for response calls and property clearance rates and making sure that people believe that this is a safe place to live. If the tax reform happens, people aren't going to magically overnight say, well, now it's not a safe place to live. That's just not going to happen. We just have to be more mindful and we have to look differently on how we deploy our resources, how our police department are visible throughout the city, and they still are able to remain at a high level of feeling safe in our community. I don't think it's lost on anyone in this room that if we lose the level of safety or the confidence in the community, then that means that this city will go in a direction that none of us want to go in. When you look at this page right here, you're going to see just how much of their department is personnel. Once again, I'm going to have to keep saying that, but it is personnel. We're a city. We're a city that provides services, so we're in the service industry. AFFECTING PEOPLE AFFECTS SERVICES. IT'S THAT SIMPLE. BUT THERE'S ALWAYS GOING TO BE A WAY FOR US TO GET IT DONE AND MAKE SURE THAT WE KEEP PROVIDING A HIGH LEVEL OF SERVICE. BUT AS YOU CAN SEE, THEIR FISCAL YEAR 25 ACTUAL WAS 49 MILLION AND LOOK AT THEIR FISCAL YEAR 27 RECOMMENDED IS 43 MILLION. So they are doing what they're supposed to do. They are tightening up to make sure that they are not being a drag financially on the city while providing one of the most highest services we provide every single day, that we can never take that for granted. There were $2 million in proposals that were not approved, and we did approve over 1.5, so there was a good balance there. They submitted some reductions that were not approved, and then they submitted 245 that was approved. So as we went through the exercise, they had to make priorities and tough choices, and then we had to come back on top of that and make some even tougher choices. So, but the collaboration together have led to some of the impacts that you're going to see. And some of their impacts were reduced operational readiness, you know, tool replacement, food supplies, diagnostic systems, the elimination of community engagement events from the 5%. We're talking about the autism awareness, shop with the cop, explorer program, the ice cream truck, These are things that we enjoy being out in the community and showing. Now, some of these events might be offset by us and their ability to work with some of the sponsors in our community who I think are going to stand up and help some of our departments, and I think police is going to be one of the main recipients of that. When they see and hear that our property tax and things are being affected, I think the city will step up. And so I don't want to say that everything that we say is gone is gone forever. It just means we might need to take a different approach to see if we can find a better or a different partner with us to help provide a continuing satisfying service to our community. Delays or gaps in staffing and service delivery, key positions unfulfilled, it weakens recruitment and heightens long-term staffing and safety risk. That is real. but it's real for everyone. It's everyone essentially saying that same thing. Constraints on critical equipment and emergency response capabilities. We always make sure and we want to make sure that we maintain fleet availability for our police to be out in the field. You know, they work with the fleet very closely to make sure that the vehicles are operational. We're not going to put bad equipment out in the field, but we do look at different life cycles, times, how we can use vehicles and equipment so that we can get the most out of them while also making sure that the job is being performed itself. Here you have a deeper breakdown of the police. We're talking about the Investigations Bureau specifically. Specifically, their proposals of not being approved was $814,000. So we didn't give them what they asked for and then we took $122,000 from the Investigation Bureau is the easiest way to say that. And what they did was they eliminated vacant positions. We know that when you're asking for new positions, the first question is, well, how are you doing in the current positions that you have? And how long have they been vacant? And can you live without them? And it's the same thought tree that happens in every department. And because you don't want to sit on a lot of vacancies knowing that you have needs to fill. The first thing first has to be to fill the vacancies that you have. And we have to show that once they're filled, not only with police specifically, where space is always a challenge, do they have the space for those officers and do they have the space for the equipment and the needs of what the actual request entails? You also see reduced investigative quality here, which of course could help but could face delays and heavier workloads and it hurts with oversight, which of course leads to human error, which we always are trying to avoid. The weakened digital evidence capacity, that is one that is huge because we talk about the quality and the preservation of evidence and how it leads to the successful defense of what our police team is doing, which is why you decided, and thankfully so, in the borrowing effort of the $2.7 million of putting that aside so that we could help one of the projects, which was the phase in, and the first phase was an evidence room, which we know that is needed. Based on the property tax reform that we keep talking about, excuse me, that I keep talking about, It would be very hard for you to take that 2.7 now and say, yes, I have the confidence that we're gonna use that towards a borrowing effort. More than likely you'll decide that, hey, let's put that to the side, but not use it. But the first thing first is we still need to know to get clarification of what and how we can borrow in the first place. And then once you get the money based on what happens in the near future, you will make the decision on how you want to use that money or how to go forward. So a couple of things are up in the air based on things outside of our control at this point. All right, patrol division, they submitted $2.6 million. We didn't approve reductions, $366,000. Eliminated vacant control positions. That means reduced patrol efficiency and fewer pathways for future staffing. It says that, you know, not adding part-time community service removes an entry level pipeline for youth and reduces support. for field and administrative tasks. Oh, I'm sorry. One of the main things that we encourage our police department is their connection to our youth and how they can be that role model and be that entry level, open first door to our community and getting and building a relationship with our law enforcement that not only helps them navigate through the community in the world today that they're in, but they also create opportunities for those who want to join law enforcement at a later point in time. Operations, see the same thing, not approved versus approved is 122, not approved was 983. And here are the impacts of those changes in our operations. Again, we're eliminating positions. This is a special op position, fewer officers, fewer phone calls. Makes perfect sense. Reduce operational oversight, a loss of community engagement and prevention programs. And you see the theme here where they had to dial back from some of the non-essential services that they provide, but they're the intangibles that we all are used to at this point. But this is what re-imagining and looking at your public safety and what it provides and how it provides it looks like. And I'll remind everyone that we did an actual 5% reduction this year based on our goals. The state has said next year you shall do a 10% reduction and put it online to show what that looks like to the people. It doesn't mean you will adopt it, but they did say that we have to perform the exercise at 10%. percent next year and put it online you add that with some of the private tax reform and you can we can all see where this is going you're really gonna have to prove to the world that you are using the funding that you're getting in the way that it was designed to be used whether you're looking at core services and how you define core services or not Everything is structured so that you now have to show your work and prove that the funding that you have is going to the places that people believe it should. And again, I don't think it's anyone picking on the city of Northport. We're just a city in a large state that has to do the same accountability drills as everyone else. And we should be able to defend ourselves in what we do. If we can't defend ourselves in what we do, then we shouldn't be doing it. And I don't think that's the case for Northport. I think we have a very strong story to tell that we will keep telling. So I am taking a breath right now in case someone wants to talk about human resources or police.

All right. Any questions from commissioners at this time? Just put in the queue if you're going to speak, please. Vice Mayor.

Thank you, Mayor. This is really painful. And to see the service reductions certainly does not make me happy. But just a couple of general observations. As we... put the squeeze on hiring. We just really need to keep an eye on overtime. And this goes across the board, I think, for all the departments. We're really going to need to control outsourcing and that type of thing. The other thing we might have to look at when I look at the police detail is community outreach. Now, it breaks my heart because I do believe that having that kind of visibility in the community and with kids with our police is a very effective crime prevention strategy, but we at some point may have to look at, for example, and I'm making this up, I see Chief is joining us and he really, he appreciates the impact of these things, but at some point we might have to think about shifting some of those assets to patrol, for example, to continue to keep the community safe. So I don't like anything of what I'm saying, but I think as a community, that's what we're looking at.

Yes, Madam Vice Mayor, I totally agree with you. And you might remember back from our conversation in March, we will be doing an agency-wide deep dive into overtime. I am not a fan of it. I know that some of it is structured into whether it's contractually or obligation that we have to do, and that has to be done. But then there's discretionary overtime that I think has to have some sort of structure around it. And I don't know. that we don't have that, I just need to be sure that we have it across the board. Now, another thing that I'm looking at are take-home vehicles, which is not gonna make me a fan of police vehicles. It's not going to make me a fan.

Remember city manager, he's armed.

Right. But it's something that we need to look at. And I know, we know, you know, before we even say this, and he knows that we know this. If we alter that structure, we are going to be way behind everybody else because everyone else offers that as a benefit for those who are traveling throughout our community from where they live to get there to have the best response time. I don't think that's a easy or a light thing to touch. It's just a matter of doing your due diligence. We should be able to answer the question if someone says, is your take-home policy solid and strong, and do you stand by what you do? And the answer should be yes, and here are the reasons why. And right now, we can't do that, and I can't do that with overtime because I don't have the scrubbing of the data to tell you that with confidence. But we need to do those things. We have to turn over every stone. I know they are going, if they aren't already there, starting to feel like we just can't catch a break. You know, we can't get a new building. We're running out of space. You know, now, you know, our money is on the line and we weren't protected as, you know, we've been protected all this time and we're doing, you know, jobs that are putting our lives on line every single day. We cannot minimize that at all. But at some point, this team is going to say enough is enough. And you're putting us in a point where you're jeopardizing our ability to do our job.

I mean, one of the things I do like about the take-at-home policy, the minute that vehicle leaves the person's driveway, they're at work. So I like the visibility. I have a couple in my neighborhood, and I like seeing them. All right. So yeah, I mean, but we're going to have to give up things that bring us comfort and all of that.

And what I like to think of it, as we thought about this, you know, probably for like the last year, is it's not all or nothing. That's what we tend to think. It's either all of it or none of it. There are ways that as we, and when I say we, the collective, regional we, as we talk to the county administrator, we talk to the other city managers, we talk to other police chiefs and the sheriff, you know, these conversations and relationships that you've had and talk about how to do things differently are going to come in very valuable when it's time to figure out, well, what does this look like now or what can we do? I think that's where the true value is going to happen.

And my last comment, if I may, Mayor, is we're really going to have to use our COGS meetings coming up because we're not the only municipality in the county or in the area who are facing this. if we can band together and do some things unilaterally. So if Northport makes a certain kind of change, then they all make that change so that we remain on a level playing field if people are willing to do that.

Yes, I totally agree. I love those meetings. I love seeing our peer group. but I'm just more about problem solving as opposed to what kind of parade you're going to throw next week. We need to talk about real problems. And the thought capital in that room is tremendous. We should be picking people's brains and figuring out what's working and learning from their experiences. And it can be a stronger meeting.

Just one more that occurred to me. I'm sorry, Commissioner Duvall, I know you've been on the Board. Oh, and I lost my thought. Must not have been that good.

It'll come back.

It'll come back.

Commissioner Duvall.

Thank you, Mayor. Before I get into the police department, my first comment was health insurance for 2027, no rate increase for 2027. I'm looking at my health costs that I pay for and they're all going up. What is that? What is the reasoning for them to predict no increase? Is it because of our community health center?

Good morning.

Good morning, Commissioner. Sandy Knowles, Assistant Director for HR. So there was a two-fold, yes. Part of us opening up the Employee Health Center is definitely something that they're factoring in. But we did have some restrictions put on some of the medications, which has also helped with the 0% increase for the GLP-1s.

Okay, thank you for that.

You're welcome.

And so normally when there's an increase, I think the city has absorbed it, I think since I've been here, and this year for neither the employee nor the employer to have anything to absorb is a first.

Absolutely.

So there are a few bright spots in this budget, and thanks for highlighting that one.

Okay, thank you for that. Okay, now on to the police department. At the beginning of the presentation, one of the first slides showed, you know, like seven pillars, and the very first one is safety.

Yes, then that rank in any order, but as I have said, and I will always continue to say, I can make a very strong argument that public safety is the very first pillar. If you don't feel safe in your home or your city, no one's gonna wanna be here. Yes.

So, from that, really bothers me to even consider any kind of cuts to our police and fire and what I will call our boots on the ground utilities. The people that are out there doing the work. I noticed the difference between police department requests of plus 28 positions and CM recommended minus seven. And I'm not criticizing either one, I'm just saying it's really hard for me, looking at my world that I see every day, even with our budget constraints, to consider any kind of reduction. Now maybe a shifting, like the community outreach, Maybe, you know, shifting those into patrol-type things, you know, but if anything, I just want to see an increase in our number of officers out on the roads. And then I had one question. There was a mention about, you know, reducing vehicle replacements. Are we doing that? Again, you know, that's, to me, that's, you know, boots on the pavement, okay? Those patrol cars are needed. You know, really overall, you know, my comments are when it comes to, you know, public safety, Those are the cuts that I want to see made last.

Do you want to comment or? No. Okay. I got a comment. So if you think about when we had the CPSM study that came in and looked at us externally and they, one of the things they said was, you know, you need to decide which kind of model of a department that you want to have. Do you want to have a Cadillac model or do you want to have a Camry model? And in order to keep up with the cost of what you're talking about, we need money coming into this fund, not going out of this fund. We are headed in a different direction than what we want or what we want to see. But unless we figure out a way to let me say it a different way, because we're talking about this year's budget. This year's budget, there was no way that was determined to bring more money into this situation of our property tax, our general fund amount, it's money going out of it. So we have to find ways to be able to do that. And then when you say, well, just cut everything else other than public safety, I hope that it showed you on the chart that when you take out public safety into 60%, you're looking at departments and things you could cut in half and steal not be there to where we want to be. I think we all need to get very serious about understanding that we were on a trajectory based on a study that they brought us that said we needed to keep X number of officers going every single year to keep up with our growing population. Well, now they're about to sort of intersect and collide that they haven't to show that it already has. That's showing that the staffing of our police is no longer keeping up with the population of our city. We are going the wrong way. But the fund that pays them and supports them is not being discussed to be raised. It's discussed to be lowered.

Thank you for that. Not related to the police department, I noted one thing about FEMA disaster relief funds reimbursement of over $7.6 million. Do we have any kind of a projection or plan for moving that up to get that money?

I can hear Val's footsteps, but what I would say before she gets here is I think FEMA's going in the other direction. I think FEMA's gonna give it to the state and then the state's gonna say, you know, I just don't think that the money that we've gotten in disaster recovery is going to continue under the thought process of, well, they have to find money in order to pay for new obligations on their end. So they're going to push that down and say, well, I'm not going to give you as much money coming back from your financial distress from the disaster. But maybe I didn't hear about that.

Oh, wow.

I'm sorry. She didn't move.

These ladies over here. Thank you.

For the record, Valerie Malangowski, grants division manager. The short answer is we don't know yet. There's some federal laws and things like that that need to be changed before we can even see what those changes are yet.

There's policies.

It just remains to be seen. There's a lot of talk about possibly doing like a block grant type method for reimbursement. My concern is just at the end of a disaster that we're getting reimbursed as much as possible. There's a way to true up those costs at the end. But at the current moment, this upcoming hurricane season for the summer, right now, there's no change. There's nothing in writing that's changed.

Thank you. This goes, go right back up there, Chief. This is coming to you, sir. This goes hand in hand with Commissioner Duvall's statement about the safety and the officers, and we're going the wrong way according to our population. If we're not going to keep the optimal staffing, you know, and we're not keeping up with the population, then that just loosens our ground on public safety out there, in my opinion. But when we cut officers, that, that's enhancing that. But what I'm getting at here too, because overtime was brought up, when you cut the officers, the work burden goes on to the officers that are still here, which creates overtime. So, you're going to pay time and a half for an individual to work rather than regular time or straight time when they're regularly employed. So we're actually paying more without filling those positions, in my opinion, in the long run, because you're not going to be able to control overtime on a daily basis because who knows what the situation is. So in my opinion, it's best to staff the police department with the proper staff. Then you can sort of keep the overtime under control because you have the optimal staffing. So that's something that I think we definitely need to look at to see... we're putting away $2 million in the savings. How much of that savings would it cost us to be able to put the PD on optimal staffing and keep our citizens safe, in my opinion? Because if that is our number one pillar, That's where we need to put our money at and maybe take it away from the other pillars as we move forward. That's just what I've come up with to think about. And we can discuss that further if you choose and give us numbers on how much of that 2Million would it cost us? Because we may not want to put that 2Million into savings. We may want to spend a little bit.

Yes, thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think that there has to be an analysis done to prove one way or the other how much staffing full-time versus overtime staffing is being used. I'm sure that there is a strong correlation in there, but I can't say that hiring these X number of officers are gonna reduce X number of overtime. In theory, it sounds like it's straightforward and it's very linear, but I would need to do some analysis to confirm that.

Well, I understand that and I appreciate that.

Go ahead, Chief.

I'm sorry. Sometimes with more cops, you have more overtime too. So, I, you know, I don't want to correlate that just because you're putting those cops on, you're going to reduce overtime. I didn't say reduce, but you would definitely have more with less, with less officers. Well, the other thing you have to look at is, is burnout, um, fatigue, um, morale. Those are all big issues. Those, all these issues that we're talking about is everything that we've spent the last eight years building and working on and, you know, that is a struggle. Yeah. I'm on your side here, Chief, so. I, I'm sure you are, sir. Just so you know, I got purple socks on.

Yeah.

Commissioner Petro.

Thank you, Mayor. First, I want to thank the Finance Department specifically for the work they have done crunching the numbers. Most of it they had no control over. They were just giving the numbers, so they had to adjust and work the best they could. It's a lot of work. This budget is not easy to prepare. I have a question regarding overtime policy. And it can be, as far as the personnel for overtime for police department, sometimes it can be, it could be the largest controllable personnel expense, or it can be uncontrollable if there's no policy. Do you have internal policy? And I know you have your own finance director, if you will. I think it's called business... Manager, do you have any policy that controls or specifies the overtime? And that would include pre-authorization, staffing, minimum requirement of staff, court, whatever court. call time, do you have that in place so you can determine if it's validated? Because I know it can be the biggest driver of your expense.

All of our overtime is identified. We can go back and backtrack how every dollar was spent and why it was spent, whether it was correlated to a case, a call out, court, whatever. So all that is correlated. You've got to remember law enforcement and public safety is very fluid. It's hard to predict overtime. It's hard to predict that you're going to have a homicide on a holiday and you have to call in an entire team to work that homicide. You have CBA requirements that we have to pay more for the overtime on holidays. Can't predict a lot of that stuff, especially in law enforcement. I can't predict when an officer on the way home sees a DUI and stops the DUI and makes an arrest and spends the next four hours on overtime at the jail. It's a very fluid operation. We keep very strict guidance on our overtime. all overtime has to be approved and it goes through the chain. So it's not just arbitrarily people just out there making on overtime. We have very strict guidelines on how the overtime is used and it's monitored very, very strictly.

So there's some type of a policy that internally implemented and adhered to? Right. Okay, that's all I wanted to know. Thank you, Chief.

I'm gonna go with Commissioner Stokes since you've already went, give him a chance and then you can. Commissioner Stokes.

Thank you, Mayor. First, thanks very much for the hard work that went into this budget because I appreciate how hard it was to make this work from the standpoint of the direction this commission gave you all. We tasked you with reducing The budget 5% covering increases and setting aside enough money so that in the event we're allowed to borrow, we would have the funds available to service that debt. Additionally, we addressed some fee reduction. So in terms of the tasking, you know, you're there. I mean, for most departments, the costs are flat. I mean, there was a lot of work department by department that went into this budget, and it should not be unappreciated by anybody, not by us, nor by the citizens in this city. This was a real tough exercise. I appreciate that. The 1 general statement I'd say is, you know, and I'll concur with what city manager and others have said. While all pillars are necessary in this city. If you're not safe, if people don't feel safe, you don't really have anything. And, um, you know, I said it the 1st year I was a commissioner. What happens when we planned our strategic planning? What happens. if there isn't sufficient dollars to fund the top one or two priorities under each pillar, then pillars start to feed on each other. And that's where we are. And if you think this year was tough, you ain't needing nothing yet when you see what's coming with what the state's done. And I'll be the first to say it, this state tax reform Is just another way to say we're defunding police and public safety and first responders. That is what is happening here. Whether anybody wants to have the guts to stand up and say it and somebody should tell the state that we tried a lot of people did and it fell on deaf ears. So now we're all going to suffer with it. I would suggest between now and when we finally adopt this budget. If there was any way we could shift some dollars out of other pillars into PD, I would be supportive of that. I truly believe we are doing the citizens in this city a great disservice as commissioner Duvall has has intimated. By not keeping up, I don't think we can fully. Get back to where our studies show we should be, but we can make a dent. And if it means our other pillars are gonna have to feel a bit more pain in order to do that, I think that's the right direction to go. There are two things that people care about from a citizen standpoint, affordability and infrastructure. But that's only because they haven't felt the impact of a lack of public safety in this city. And they're gonna feel it. They're gonna feel it not just here in Northport, but all over the state if this thing passes in November and they actually enact this kind of property tax reform. So I would suggest if there's a way to do it, I would shift some of those dollars over to public safety first responders so we can cushion this blow. Because once this changes, okay, it's gonna be that much harder to do anything.

Thank you, Commissioner. And what we do as our practice is the numbers that you see in front of you are the best numbers that we have today. As they change and improve, public safety is always the first place that we are putting money back in, whether it's for people, plans or outreach, whatever it is, that's where you have to start. So we will continue to do that. And as we go from June till September, you'll see some changes that'll happen and it'll hopefully be better before we get to you adopting your budget. For both police and fire.

Vice Mayor. Thank you, Mayor. I'll be quick. I remembered my thought. And to sort of reiterate some of what Philip, I'm sorry, Commissioner Stokes had to say. We need to push back on the state. in a variety of ways. And some of the ways, well, let me back up. Certainly facing the removal of property tax as a way to fund a number of services, we will have to make cuts. But part of the job will also be figuring out how do we fund certain things. And the state in the past has precluded some things and just a couple that pop into my mind is why don't we take our emts and rescue for fire and push it back into the fire district now i believe there are state statutes that limit or prohibit that I respectfully say we give the state the bird and say we've got to do this. We have to fund this, and one of the ways is pushing some of this funding into districts. My only reluctance in doing that is we need to understand that our districts are regressive taxation. So the beauty of property tax is if you have a million dollar home, You pay more than someone who has a $200,000 home. With our districts, everybody pays the same. So we need to understand the impact of some of these movements and shifts and what it's really going to mean for the community. So we certainly can't do that lightly. But when it comes to public safety and first responders, we may have to do some of those things. And again, if we can team up with other municipalities, and if they have half the state pushing back on some of this stuff, The other thing is impact fees. So growth should pay for growth and infrastructure utilities certainly you would want impact fees supporting growth. But I get concerned particularly with parks. We have to use impact fees to build new parks, but we're unable to maintain the ones we have. So why can we not use some impact fees in certain situations to maintain what we have? And parks is one of those areas. where we desperately need the money. I mean, I think we have about a million, some hundred million dollars in CIP projects, most of which are unfunded in parks. I think I read that somewhere. We gotta figure that out. So anyhow, just some thoughts in terms of creative financing. And I know there are all kinds of restrictions, but we're gonna have to push back on the state.

Thank you, Vice Mayor. And I would think that as we go through this process, there are gonna be several, whether they're state statutes or restrictions that are on us now that will need to be loosened to give us a little bit more flexibility to manage within the funding that we have since they are directly restricting what we can do now or what will come into what we have right now. I don't think that you're gonna find the state too opposed to that, but that's gotta be one of the, the channels that we try to get through as we work through our partners at the state.

Right, right, thank you.

Moving on, sir. All right, thank you, yep. All right, next we have, oh. The clerk's office. You can skip that one. If Madam Clerk were here, she would tell you that she has the best budget in the entire city. That's one of the lowest compared to the commission, of course. Right. She says she's the best. So when you look at her org chart, I think we're all familiar with her team of eight people. We talk about the performance metrics for her department. As you can see, she is on target for just about everything for 100%, and that's due to the due diligence, I would say, that she takes in her job and how she tries to make and maintain her team to be the best and meet all of their goals. When you look at her budget, as we talked about, you're not going to find much difference here. You know, she's very consistent in how she proposes her budget. It's scary consistent how it is, but she hasn't changed very much from fiscal year 25. Her service levels, there was no need for her to add anything, and she did have a reduction of $35,000, which if I remember correctly was moving a staff member from full-time to part-time, which was very well done. The impact, managed records and public requests and meeting preparation, this is what puts additional pressure on her remaining staff by her not adding any new staff to her team. All right, I will keep going to the City Commission as Mr. Mayor just mentioned, and when you look at your budget summary, your budget summary is $755,000 now for fiscal year 27. We did not make any, I don't believe, substantial reductions or recommendations for your budget. You guys only have salaries and travel, and I think you tightened up your travel. in the past, so I think that that is probably in alignment with what you expect for it to be right now, but we don't have any questions or feedback on that unless you do, Mr. Mayor. Well, the one thing that

I had suggested and we had talked about was on the travel and stuff like that is, you know, not too many of us has been to D.C., you know, and all of our representatives are down here. Yes. So, there really is no need to travel to D.C. to meet with them when we can meet with them in person down here. Yes, sir. So, and the other one was the Florida League of Cities. Instead of all of the commissioners going and attending, maybe just start with the mayor and vice mayor as representatives. And if either one of them didn't want to go or didn't want to participate or couldn't, then you open it up to another fellow commissioner, you know, down the line to where you're not spending for five people. And we're driving up there. Gas is horrendous when we get paid for our gas. So, I mean, that's a big key of the situation. So those have been discussed.

to go ahead and do as a commission. Yes, Mr. Mayor. And I believe the National League of Cities is what took you to D.C.? Yes. And I think, if I'm not, I could be wrong, but I thought you guys ended your membership with the National League of Cities. And we probably have through the clerk. If I remember correctly. And the Florida League of City for the Legislative Action Days, yes, I don't go every single year, but I believe that every year that I've gone, we've all sort of been there together. And the vice mayor and the mayor or two, as you just said, I think would be enough. That's just...

I'm just talking about Tallahassee. I'm not talking about the committees, which are... Nope, nope. You're talking about Tallahassee, the legislative action days. And they could have a meeting prior to going and get their talking points, just like we always do. But it is a great expense.

Well, and we do have a strong lobbyist there. Having Hayden there to represent us goes a long way because he's building and maintaining those relationships on a daily basis, whereas we just go up there once a year. Yeah. Vice Mayor.

Thank you, Mayor. Those two things were on my list as well as potential cuts for us to consider. I also would like to suggest that we forego our cost of living raise for this year. It's not a lot of money. I think it's about $10,000 if everyone else agrees. Also in line with travel, It's been our practice that whenever a commissioner leaves the city on certain events, we get mileage. Some of the events, and I'll just talk about myself, I have in the past done some things outside the city that were not part of my assignment. as a city commissioner, and I put in for mileage. Personally, I'm not gonna do that anymore. Now I'm assigned to team court and the EDC, and I have to go up to Sarasota for meetings, I will put in for mileage for those. But if I wanna do something that isn't a direct assignment of mine, where I'm representing the city at something, then I'm not gonna put in for mileage. And I don't know if we all chose to do that, how that would impact our travel budget. But maybe that's something that city clerk could look at. But those would be two additional areas of cuts that I certainly would be willing to make in addition to the suggestions the mayor made.

That's it? Okay. Commissioner Pedro.

Thank you, ma'am. I'll be strongly opposed to. Cutting telling acid trip to other commissioners. Florida League of cities, they present a lot of. Programs at which I've attended. On both occasions, both years, especially an ethics course. I did my ethics course at the beginning of the year in Tallahassee. which would satisfy me for this year. And I did the prior online at the end of the last year. But those programs are invaluable. They are giving a lot of insights and presenting the advocacy and a lot of connections between municipalities. I would be strongly opposed to cutting If I'm not mistaking, the travel is not too expensive. There was mileage and hotel. That's the most expense we have as individual commissioners for the entire year, as opposed to Florida League of Cities going to conferences on two committees, I think. Some of us are, so we have to, we cannot cut those expenses. As far as the travel mileage, I go to a couple committees every two months, and it's pennies, if you will. It's like $30 every two months, so that's, I don't think we should cut that either. I'm not in favor of that, so... As opposed to other departments, the commission budget is the lowest. And I'm not in favor of cutting much for the commissioners as far as all those programs, because it would benefit the commission substantially and greatly. And I don't think we should cut any of that. Thank you, ma'am.

Commissioner Stokes. Thank you, Mayor. Yeah, with regard to the City Commission budget, you know, I would be supportive of foregoing increase this year for this coming year for any increase for commissioners' salaries. I have no problem with that. I take a little different perspective on Florida League of Cities. While I appreciate that their mission in life is to advocate Local government, they get an F in my book. They've done nothing but. Talk and the state is steadily preempted. All our rights, and every year they seem to be even more outrageous. So, I see no value quite frankly, and don't intend to participate in anything that Florida legal cities has to offer up as for ethics. That's a state requirement. And, um. I have taken my ethics training locally this past year in Sarasota. Longboat key us local municipalities offer this, they bring in each of their city attorneys at the city of Sarasota. They actually brought in a fellow who did my 1st ethics training years ago. Actually, his general counsel, I believe, or city attorney for a city here in Florida does a great job. He's been doing this for years. So, it avoids having to hike up to Tallahassee to take an ethics course, you know, through Florida League of Cities. So, you know, I would slash everywhere. We can, like, I say, I, you know, I appreciate that that the Florida League of Cities mission is to advocate for us, but, um. You know, they sure have lost their way, or at least have, as far as I'm concerned, are 1 of the most important organizations I've seen. Um, if it were me, and I had the druthers, I'd be suing the state of Florida left, right and sideways for all the preemptions that have gone on. We fight very hard on a local level to be fiscally responsible for our citizens here, even though there is at times people who don't feel that's the case. But to have a state that makes it more and more difficult, and now after one arm being tied behind our back, they attempting to tie both hands behind our back. I would say that we need to find another way to advocate and to fight against what the state has been doing on a regular basis. So, thank you, Mayor. That's all I have to say.

Yeah, the one thing I was going to add, when it's online, it's like 25 to 50 bucks, you know, to do it online. Right. And compared to 700 in mileage, a few hundred in hotel for Tallahassee, 50 bucks, a thousand bucks. You know, what's And it still works. You get a certificate that you've completed it. Go ahead, Vice Mayor.

My point, exactly. I did it online. I think it was about, Sarah, $75, I think, to take it online. And I think the mileage to Longboat Key was probably in the same ballpark. So yeah, there are a lot cheaper ways to get your ethics training than hiking up to Tallahassee. That's it.

Commissioner Duvall. Thank you, Mayor. Could I have that slide put back up on the commission numbers? Sure. Yeah. Is that one there? Yeah. If I look at under personnel, that's the five of us, I presume. Projected for 2026, $483,000. Recommended for 2027, $605,000. Difference of $122,000. With our SAP, you know, I presume that that must include health, some health care costs, retirement, if I divide that difference, that $122,000 difference, it comes up to over $24,000 a piece. I can't picture us giving ourselves raises to account for that. So how do we account for that from 26 to 27, that $122,000 difference?

Well, actually, I think we might need to look to see why that number of the projected personnel is 483. I think that's a typo. It looks like the amended was 583.

Our legislative aid was in our budget.

You would want to look at the amended personnel budget of 583,000. The projected, that was something that departments had to provide and that might have been an error or mistakenly calculated because it's most likely it's going to be about 583.

Right. So I think 735 to 755 is what you're comparing, you should be comparing to Commissioner Duvall.

So just for the record, 2027, there is about $5,500 in COLA adjustments. So if you're interested to know what would that look like, that's about $5,500. That sounds right.

Right. Along with my fellow commissioners, you know, travel expenses, you know, If I had to go out of town for a weekend or two or three days, there is the option. There are some city vehicles that are unused, and we could use those instead of. It is. It's like an extra paycheck when I travel out of town, and then I get the mileage on my vehicle. That's costing the taxpayers. The other thing, and usually I go the other way on this, but I'm going to give you some reasoning. As far as foregoing any salary increase this year, I just want to remind my fellow commissioners that one of the reasons given for the pay raises, the recent pay raises, was that kept up, okay, and, you know, we need to be real. Well, now the pay is real. I just, you know, for one year to say, okay, we're not going to get any raise, you know, I don't have any objection to that, but to keep in mind that, you know, something along the CPI and you know each year so that we never get to that point again where the salaries you know where the commissioners aren't being compensated the way they should just something to keep in mind but as far as you know giving up any pay raise this year you know with things we're looking at you know I have no objection to that at all. Thank you.

Commissioner Stokes. Yeah I did the I happened to miss one point I had here. you know, there are certain parties that believe being commissioners part-time job. So perhaps we might want to think about dependent health coverage and the thought that perhaps that's a cost that should be incurred by commissioners themselves rather than city paying for it. You know, that's a possibility. It would be a way to save some money. You know, I don't advocate for that. For city employees at large, because they're full time people, they work, you know. very hard and it is a nice perk that helps balance out the fact that typically civil servants, public service people don't get paid what private enterprise does. But when it comes to commissioners, like I say, commissioners decide how hard or not how hard they're going to work, how much time they put in. There might be some consideration there that perhaps. You know, they should bear the cost of their own dependent self care coverage if that's legally allowable. I mean, as a part time classification, I don't know, you know, maybe it's allowed maybe it's not, but it's food for thought. Anyway, if we're trying to save, you know, I want people out there to understand in the city that, you know. We we are facing some very, very, very serious times and everybody better look at the fact that we're going to have to give up on every level. And I don't want anybody to think out there that we're not willing to sacrifice too.

So. Thanks, Mary. Well, can I understand what you're saying? You're saying dependents health care correct? Okay. They cover our health care. But our dependence, we have to pay for ourselves, but it's kept. I just wanted you to be clarified on what you were talking about, but it's capped. Commissioner Duvall.

Yeah, this is what Commissioner Stokes just brought up, but this is tough. You know, it's hard for me to say to the other commissioners, you know, you shouldn't be, you know, maybe this is, people say it's a part-time position, you know, maybe the city shouldn't be paying for your health care. It's hard for me to talk about that because already I do pay for my own health care. I do not use the city's health care services. You know, but that's my personal situation. I just don't know what to say about that. Healthcare is a cost. I know there's between 2024 and 2025, healthcare costs for the commission went down by $11,000 just because I don't use the city's healthcare. That's something I guess each commissioner would have to situation is the same. My situation, you know, I'm so old.

All of this stuff was taken care of years ago.

I'm sorry. That's it. Vice Mayor.

Yeah, just a comment on that. I'm in the same boat as you. Being a fossil myself, I pay for my own health care through the typical ways, not the city. But I think the issue of is it a full-time position or a part-time position is a good one to have, maybe not for today, maybe for another time. And if we agree it is a part-time position, then our benefits should, you know, any part-time employee of the city, what do they get? And that's what we ought to get.

Well, there was part-time positions with benefits.

Yes, yes. So fair is fair. And it's a big expense. And yeah, I mean, it's a fair conversation to have. Maybe for another day we can make it an agenda topic.

All right, I see nothing else. Are you done with this section, sir? I am. All right, we're going to take a 10-minute break. Let's do it.

All right. Then Jesse taught me about the zones. It helps maintain that their body of water is theirs to protect anybody that's in their zone. So lifeguard Brandon right now is actually... All right, we're back at it.

We have a quorum. Commissioner Petro and Vice Mayor are still indisposed at this point, but they'll be right back. Carry on, city manager.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So next we have the city attorney's office, very tight office, very tight budget. As you can see, they have nine positions in their office. They are not requesting or asking for any new positions in the next fiscal year. They are on target with their goal of making sure that they minimize the risk and exposure of the city's operations. I can attest to that as he guides me daily on how to stay away from risk, and I'm grateful. When you look at their budget, their budget is very in line and consistent with what it has been and what was submitted. They are very close to the fiscal year 26 amended number, just barely, with a barely small increase. No proposals or reductions due to their office, and no impact. They will keep on with their services as usual. So I'll go right on to IT. IT is one of the departments that we have already met with you individually to go over some of their major issues for this upcoming year. As you can see, we talk about people and what that means to IT. staying very stable with 32 individuals in their division. They do very well with their metrics. The goals that you see here are all on target for maintaining the uptime of our equipment, maintaining the information systems uptime, and service level agreements as well. When you look at their budget as it relates to their personnel, you can tell, I mean, their personnel operating Capital and Fairfax, they do have a strong mix, but the bottom line is you can see that their fiscal year 25 actual, were five million, six million for their 26, and the 27 recommended is seven, And it does include, as you can see, capital in there of $1.3 million. And I believe we've talked about the equipment needed to keep us safe, whether it's through cybersecurity or the operations of our IT department that we're grateful for. When you look at their proposals, we did approve $335,000 in approvals for them, but we also approved $171,800 in reduction. And here are some of the impacts of their service levels. And they, again, like everyone else, is trying to do reducing discretionary and non-essential spending for travel and professional development. They are reallocating existing expenditures, shifting Starlink costs to benefiting departments and sort of taking out of their budget. That cost allocation is important. Maintaining the operational continuity and security by preserving all core IT services cannot be stressed enough, because at the end of the day, we have to make sure that IT is running sound and solid based on what they provide. Next, Mr. Mayor, I'm gonna transition to the non-departmental department, which is a small collection of funds that does not change very often. One of the things that we had in here, you might remember, oh, I'm sorry, oops, oops. you might remember was where we had the contingency accounts where we were trying to prepare for things that we didn't foresee before the budget was done. And we've sort of removed that because again, when you're looking at everything to take out of your budget, you wanna make sure that you don't have anything there. And if we do run into those challenges that happen in the non-departmental, we figure those out within the other departments so that it doesn't make a huge impact on our organization. And as you can see, the $50,000 was removed out of this from last year to this year. And this amount reduces the plan non-emergency transfer, as I'm saying, from the general fund to meet our budget constraints, which again, shows everyone is participating. Parks and Rec Department, quality of life pillar number one. As you can see, they had a 76 position budget amended for fiscal year 26, and now it's 74 through two reductions, as we can see right there. It also talked about submitting two part-time positions for reduction and the reclass of one FTE to part-time as well, which is how they are helping to manage their current staff load. As you can see by some of their performance metrics being on target for cost recovery, they're going to exceed the 25% as we've outlined with them. briefly in the past. We met with this department, if you remember, a few weeks ago as we were trying to answer questions for parks, communications, and social services. So some of this information you've already seen and we've already discussed, but as you know and as we talk about, parks is our biggest quality of life pillar as it relates to how they provide the amenities that draw people into the city. there's a direct correlation between drawing people to the city through parks and recs, since we don't have other opportunities and activities for people to want to be here, and the economic development impact that is provided to the city overall. So I don't want that to go unnoticed, but as again, I can't, I can't mention parks without saying that the tax reform would have an impact on what we do and how we do it. And we would have to have those discussions as to what's the priorities and the will of the commission as we sort of reimagine what our parks providing to our community would look like. They did participate in the service level changes. They did get approved for 204, and they were reduced by 97,200. When you talk about, well, what impact does parks reductions will have, we're talking about some events that we provide, some of which we scale back, some of which were eliminated. When we think about The ones that were eliminated, we're talking about Movies on the Green, Concerts in the Park, the Egg Hunt, and the Rock and Roll. And this goes back to the conversation that we've already had, which says, should we be doing these events? Is there another community partner who could do some of these events? We scaled back only on the ones that we knew we would not remove. And those are three of your biggest ones right there. But they also happen to be probably three of the biggest cost drivers, too, non-personnel or non-aquatic center related expenses. So, you know, the multiple programs would shift to lower cost operating models, relying more on community partners, nonprofits, and local performers, as I mentioned. The facility operations and staffing would be adjusted to align with usage patterns, resulting in reduced operating hours and the reclassification of certain positions. And targeted investments would address aging equipment and expand services, such as the fitness center. So they always do a very good job with their budget, and this year was no different. But they are very well aware that reform and adjustments will mean that parks will have reform and adjustments as well. The Aquatic Center specifically approved reductions of $87,032. And when you look at the Aquatic Center and what its level of changes means, we're talking about reduced operating hours, We're also talking about decreased staffing flexibility for the part-time staff that I mentioned. And there's also gonna be strain on supervisors who might be pulled into frontline coverage. One of the things that I feel we need to mention right here is, you know, with the reform, you may want to redesign our model for the Aquatic Center. You might want to expand the hours, charge more for cost recovery, or you might say, you know what, we want to close it during the months where it's not as heavily used, but there's all kinds of conversations for you to have in the very near future on this. One of the other conversations that we're exploring is we are exploring special districts out in Activity Center 6 and 10, and we're adding the exploration of a parks and recs district to that conversation to bring back to you at a future point in time to see if it's something that you would consider. It's my understanding that Sarasota, I think Sarasota City, created a model for a special district. They went through a lot of the processes, they just didn't get it over the finish line. So there might be something out there that kind of shows us that this can be done in the city. If we're thinking this, you gotta believe that the other are thinking the same thing about this. So it would not be a effort that the City of Northport be on its own. We would be with our partners as we continue to all go through the same journey together. Parks maintenance, approved reductions were $145,000. Some of the impacts of the parks maintenance changes are the reduced capacity for repairs and field maintenance. And that means that we are talking about just reducing the repairs and the ability to handle some of the routine services, whether it's addressing vandalism and leaving sports and park equipment unrepaired or unreplaced. There will be a decline in the park amenity conditions. We're talking about reductions for benches and picnic tables and other amenities. Mean aging or damaged items will be removed without replacement. Lower landscaping and court maintenance standards. This is talking about reducing mulch and tree work and other things that we see around our city there will be a visible impact when you talk about parks and sort of changing their budget construction because they're every they're they're everywhere that people see and that's what they notice and they're going to notice that grass is higher this looks differently and we've got to be able to answer those questions and say that this is what it looks like now based on what we're trying to do now We can't expect us to react in a way with the level of service that we are doing now if we make the changes that I refer to as potentially on the way. Parks Administration, they lowered their budget by $30,575. They reduced some of their advertising for their marketing reach, and that could affect our event attendance and program enrollment. They will have a lower community visibility. That means cutting some of the promotional items for outreach opportunities. shifting to digital only communication. So that means less printing of brochures and physical paper that would still give residents, oops, requiring access to what we have to offer just in a different format. And we do know that through our older population in the city, they do like the physical printed items, but again, the world is changing and we have to make our changes with it. War Middle Springs. We talked about this as well when we had our conversation with Parks and we talked about $22,900. The biggest thing that I'm going to mention here with War Middle Springs is that you will have the opportunity to talk about a budget amendment that's coming forward for the repairs and The renovations that you have already approved as a board, you have put us on that pathway, but now there is approximately almost $10 million in surtax that is attached to that renovation and repair of this project. You might just want to stop and take a second look at that and say, hey, let's make sure we're all on the same page. Or is there a middle point somewhere where we could not spend all that $10 million on this project? Or does this project rise to the level of due to the age and the community input and how important the asset is, do we continue on that path and then we still handle what's coming after that? The only reason why I would stress that you pause on it just for another conversation is because the surtax that is being used is not restricted to Bournemouth Springs. You can use it anywhere within the city. And based on everything that we know today that we didn't know when this project started, I think that it's valuable just for you to have a conversation just to make sure you're all on the majority of one page. All right, I am going to continue on this. Yes, Mr. Mayor.

Well, we've got some questions. Go right ahead. The one thing that I was going to bring up was when we get to the park maintenance, there's a couple different types of maintenance. Now, if we have a... that's one type of maintenance but when we have a playground with equipment and families are going there that maintenance needs to be up kept and I'll tell you why because if you let the grass grow let's say for a foot you're not going to be able to see the 40,000 red ant mounds that are out there to be able to take care of them And then you have children out there, they get stung, they get bit, and it becomes a miserable trip for them. So we need to really take a deep dive on what type of maintenance and where. And, you know, and when it comes down to Wormell Springs, since you brought that up real quick, maybe we can have an agenda item brought back to discuss. the exact parameters on where we want to go because what I'm hearing from the citizens out there is all they want is a place to change with some showers and we're going to have to have an admin building up there. So maybe in the time that we're looking at it is demolish buildings, clean up that area and have just small amenities there. Going forward until we can actually look into the rebuilding of it. I know we wanted to keep it for historical purposes, but we did have that option to remove the buildings and rebuild. We can remove the buildings now rebuild later. Just to clean it up and make it more safe and secure and more.

I appeal. Yes, Mr. Mayor. So when we, there's a budget amendment that's going to be on your agenda upcoming. That's going to allow us to have this conversation and we'll bring back some of that historical information that parks and the consultant, I believe developed so that you can sort of see what are the other options and some of the prices that were attached to those? Because it's been a while since you've looked at it as a board, but it'll be, I still think it'll be healthy for us just to take a good little pause on that item just to make sure that let's realize how we got here, what are the options as you just outlined them, and what is the current GMP that's in front of you as a proposal to make a decision on? and we'll have that discussion with you at that time. I just wanted to bring that up as options.

Commissioner Stokes.

Yeah, thank you, Mayor, and thank you for touching on War Memorial Springs. My mind was going in that same general direction, and we'll be able to revisit that. With regard to... to the events that are cutting back. I like the ones that I think we're cutting out, Trick or Treat, the Freedom Festival Point Service. I assume the cutbacks we're talking about are in the area of the bounce houses and some of the amenities that are on the green. That take place, you know, those kinds of things I would just encourage parts and Rex to try to maintain by outreach to nonprofits private businesses that might want to sponsor these things. You know, I don't disagree that we need to save them, but I would hope that, you know, there would be organizations out and around the community that might be willing to fill some of those gaps. So that these, you know, some of these, you know. things can hopefully be, you know, still be perpetuated, but not at the taxpayer's expense. I'm going to say it because, you know, I've been 1 of the greatest advocates for the aquatic center. I love the aquatic center. I said it before I ran all during while I ran. I think for the folks in our community who do. Not have their own pools who do not live in gated communities or where there's all kinds of amenities. You know, the people most in need in the city get to enjoy the aquatic center, but. It's unmistakable. It loses over half a million dollars a year. It is just that simple. If we're facing what we're going to face, and I don't say for this budget cycle, but if we're going to face what we're going to face in November, if this passes, nothing is not on the table. And I think we need to start thinking about whether or not this city should be operating anything that loses that kind of money. And whether it's sell it and let someone else operate it, I have to say, if this thing passes in November, there is nothing in this city that isn't subject to scrutiny, except in my opinion, public safety and infrastructure. Thanks, Mayor.

Commissioner Duvall. Thank you, Mayor. I just have one simple question. On the slides there, it made mention of replacement or maintenance of a sand pro. Just exactly what is a sand pro?

That is used for field grooming and leveling of the field. Fall fields. Fall fields.

Thank you. That's all I have right now, sir.

So if I can address the special event. Absolutely. Sandy Von Heller, Parks and Recreation Director. For the Freedom Festival and the Poinsettia Parade and Festival, those reductions are getting rid of the entertainment, so the live band, the sound services that go with that and the kids inflatables activity area still offering those things but they would be through organizations clubs local performers that will do that at no cost so that's what we propose there but still having the rest of the event format with the trick-or-treat signature event that is removing the provision of candy. We were very successful this past year in having, I believe, 50 different businesses that signed on to provide booths there that also provided candy. So this would be removing that from the city providing it, letting the businesses, expanding that option for businesses to participate and also removing the funding for the staff provided displays and booths there.

I would think that hopefully there would be some outside groups from the chamber and the businesses throughout this area that might be willing to step up and contribute even more as well as like the candy and that sort of stuff. I mean, I think, you know, I certainly personally am going to advocate for it with all those folks that I know, because I think that it's going to take everybody stepping up and helping. when it comes to this so we can minimize the impacts.

And for the Aquatic Center, I just want to remind Commission that when the pricing was set, when we first opened that building, there was a business plan that was put together, and Commission was presented with the cost, you know, what the fee would need to be, and a decision was made to keep it an affordable rate, knowing that it was going to lose money. So it is... Yeah, and it is, we certainly can look at the seasons and tightening up, not being open on shoulder seasons like we are now. We're one of the only facilities that's open year round. Certainly would impact our ability to staff the facility, but there are options on how to not only reduce the hours, but also we can look at those price, the price points for that as well.

There's nothing we, you know, we're just going to have to take a fresh look at everything.

Thanks very much. Are you back in there, Commissioner Duvall, or did they not erase it?

I'm done. Thank you.

No, thank you. You know, when you cut down the candy and stuff like that, that's going to be a very disappointing time for the kids, especially along the parade route. Just a suggestion is everybody can go out and buy it the day after Halloween and put it in totes and let it all melt together and then we can separate it at Christmas time.

So, we'll sacrifice our cups of candy at the concert. Thank you.

All right, thank you. Moving on, sir. All right, thank you, Mr. Mayor. Our next topic is social services. They were also part of the group that we talked to you about a few weeks ago. We did not get to go over their full conversation because we had another meeting that was butting up against our time, but we have met with you individually and shared with you the information that our team has gathered, the Innovative Housing Solution slide deck, if you remember. Part of what we're trying to look at is what does the future of social services look like? And we talk about affordable housing, we talk about transition housing, we talk about what does the county do, how do we quantify that, and we still have not gotten, you can put that one up there if you can. We have not gotten the information in the way that I think that we should that shows exactly how much of the contract is social services from the county is coming to North Forest. I mean, it's just, we just have not been able to get those solid numbers yet, but we're gonna keep trying. But as we look through and go through what the staff presented to you, what they did was propose, okay, when you look at how we address our people who are experiencing homelessness. And that's been a topic of conversation with the commission since I've been here for four plus years. And there are some models out there, as we shared with you, that shows and talks about those people who are experiencing the hardship of still working, but yet still not being able to use as much discretionary income for things that are not sort of rent burdened on our population, and not only our population, when you look at the population of the entire county, I believe it's like upwards of 35% that are in the ALICE category for the asset limited income constrained employed households in our entire county. That's a huge number. So based on models and information that we share with you, I'm not gonna go into this extremely deeply because we've already talked about it, but you've seen some of the different shelters and sort of the different kinds of programs that are being offered in this state. that if we say, you say, at some point in the near future, we want to rework and redesign how our social services team works, this is something for you to definitely digest as we move forward. It's a great program. Our team, a team led by Manager Janet Grill, did a great job of gathering this information. It was gathered, of course, pre property tax reform where we are right now, but it was still our obligation to give you this information so that you could have it and see it. And I know we met with you all one on one and went over it with you. So we did want to make sure that the public had it as well, which is why it's included in this information so that they can see it. knowing that we are a provider of social services and we do want to help those in need. So maybe it just doesn't look the same way that it has traditionally and maybe now it's time for a change and then we will have this discussion with you in a deeper in the future, but it's a lot of great information. She went and saw the actual location in Tampa and was very impressed with it. I think that we've talked about small and tiny homes here in our community and done, I think done the right way, we could make an impact on those people who are experiencing homelessness in our city. But I'll stop right there and When I say stop, I mean stop going through slides, but I'm still going through them. Anyway, I'm going to stop right there. But thank you. I appreciate it. And you got a copy of that. We've got a copy for the clerk so they can put it into the record. And we'll go from conversation from that as well. But as they are currently constructed, you'll see six employees here on their org chart. That six is actually now five. They had a vacancy come open lately, and we did not refill that vacancy. So now they're at five positions as we move forward in the budget process. That's an example of rearranging their work schedule and how they engage with the public so that they could keep that vacancy and put it towards the pool that we talked about earlier. As you can see, these are some of the goals and targets, dispersing the 100% of the MP squared funds. We're always looking for people to make sure that those funds can be dispersed. We have lowered that amount, if you remember, to a different level, but we know that nonprofits are out there that need our help. We try to advertise and try to engage as many as possible. We also wanted them to participate in 24 outreach activities and they're on track to do that. And providing life skills to 25 residents, they are anticipated to exceed that as well. When you look at their actual department, their total of fiscal year 25 was just more than $677,000. And when you look at this year that we're recommending, it's closer to $753,000. As you can see right here, some of the reductions that were approved, the 35,875 was a lot for their department because they are truly personnel and don't have a lot of operating and maintenance costs. So there is a going, there would be an impact on their reductions, you know, cut into the NP squared, the closet and youth scholarships will limit assistance to nonprofits. They won't remove them. We did not remove those services. they just were adjusted in the process. The removal of some programs for the community baby shower and the preschool expo, lower engagement through fewer printed materials, same way as with parks, less brochures and more digital contact, and the loss of emergency housing assistance, You know, we are a last resort funding for a housing crisis where we do provide those in need. And again, it's part of what we've always provided. When I say always provided, since I've been here. And now, like the mayor said, you know, everything has to be looked at. And, you know, we're going to make sure that we do. And social service is a big part of that.

Yeah, before you move on, with the social services, and I see where you're cutting certain programs, this, that, and the other, what I would suggest is... having a meeting together with all of the nonprofits out there and see what we're doing away with, see if they wish to pick up on it, because I've seen that there were youth scholarships, this, that, and the other. You know, maybe a Rotary Club would pick that up and say, hey, we can give this out. And that's because right now a lot of the nonprofits out there are just going and repeating and performing this could be new activities that they could be focusing on with their groups which gives them a little bit more excitement and more continuity within their groups to where hey we got something that we can work on and move forward with and have a meeting with them all of them and just say hey this is where we're at this is what we're looking at what do you think y'all could pick up and take off of our hands and help us out with? Because there is that need still out there in the community, but we just may have to pawn it off and allow somebody else to take over and say, hey, thank you very much, partnership, whatever the case may be, and go that route.

Okay. Hi, I'm Jackie, a social services manager for the record. We've actually already had those discussions prior to the budget reductions. because we do highly rely on our partnerships with our nonprofits. So we've actually had that meeting specifically with the community baby shower. We partner with the North Port Kiwanis group. And so we've already reached out and said, our grant prices are going to be limited. We will be looking for more donations or support in that area. So yes.

And that's awesome. And again, back with the city as well, if it is a true partnership, because they're going to hold the event, you know, maybe through, you know, our facilities out there that could be handed over from the city with no charge or whatever the case may be to where it is a true partnership to still have this event. We own the building. We're paying here for it anyways. So we just wouldn't have staff involved except for letting them in, letting them out. stuff like that, and just work through it. It can be done.

Yes, those would be events where there's no out-of-pocket cost for the city. Just like you said, the building is your building, and your lights are your lights on anyway, so there's no harm to the city in those partnerships.

Right, and it just makes it easier on the nonprofits as well to be able to help the city with what we're not going to be able to do anymore. So it works out. Yes, sir. Vice Mayor.

Oh, I'm sorry, I meant to remove that.

Well, Commissioner Stokes. Yeah, just a brief comment with regard to what city manager said about the county seemingly inability to tell us What dollars flow down to Northport with regard to social services, perhaps a public. Op ed in the paper, um, making an appeal might catch their attention a little more. I think we need to ratchet it up a little bit with our friends at the county while we certainly value our relationships to county and all they've done for us. There's certainly a number of areas where they fall short and seeing as they've got their own set of problems right now. The last thing I'd want to see is them showing even less attention towards the largest city in the county that helps support them. So I say we ratchet up the pressure because I sure would love to know exactly what our citizens are getting for their money.

Yes, I appreciate the strength of that approach. Very, very strong. What I would say is you have an upcoming joint meeting with them, I believe it's in October, and we're creating a list of items that would be mutually beneficial. Hopefully by then we'll have some actual information that we can put in front of you. I think what the direction that we may end up proposing is it might be time for the model that they use to change. Because when it was established, I don't think that we were the size that we are. I don't think that the relationships are what they are. And so having that conversation with them publicly, because I am almost 100% sure that they want to have the same impact of their services in Northport than in the entire county.

You know, generally speaking, I would say that's true and certainly with regard to our South County. County representatives, I certainly think that commissioner has shown over the years. He said that he is clearly focused on trying to help South County. I also appreciate that commissioner night who has a piece of North port. Primarily well, in park area, but nevertheless, but because of their single district thing, there are 3 members. The majority of that commission. That quite frankly, couldn't give a hoot about South county. It's not in their interest. We don't vote for them. And frankly, I don't see that they care about us and it's time. They heard that I intend to tell them that if you don't so choose to do that, that's your. You know, that that's you're entitled to, but I certainly intend to. Because I'm quite tired of our citizens paying 2 thirds of their dollars to the county. And I don't see a whole lot coming back our way. And we are the largest county. We make the largest contribution. So when you got here, there wasn't the greatest relationships between the county and the city, nor were there between Venice and the county. And when we got dumped on with our parks and had to incur a million and a half dollars worth overhead to maintain those parks that the county were, we did nothing as a city, okay? Venice sued. And they're building new parks for fans, new pickleball courts. I see all kinds of new stuff and we got the short straw. So I intend to voice my opinion and, you know, maybe those 3 who sit up there and worry more about North County than South County will pay some attention.

And maybe they'll actually listen to our meeting here and hear what I have to say. And just to add on to that, I thought he was quite subtle, city manager. I tried to be. I did try to be. Yes. Vice mayor?

Yeah. You sort of stole my thought. I really do think social services and maybe a broader conversation about how the county supports the city of Northport, maybe where we have experienced really good collaboration, I think the SRQ, resilient SRQ funding, I'm very happy with the allocations to both the city of Northport and some of the nonprofits here. But at the very least, yes, I agree, the social services conversation needs to happen, and perhaps a little broader conversation. Again, I think people, aren't really aware of the fact that we pay almost as much in county taxes as we do in city taxes. And I do think collectively it's our responsibility to make sure we get our fair share for that. Done. Thank you. You're welcome.

Carry on, sir. Thank you, ma'am. Yeah.

All right. Let's talk about the money. Finance department, this is another tight department. They actually have 24 positions with none being requested for this particular year. Now, I won't go into the overall finance philosophy, but a lot of you do know that we have a decentralized system where we have business managers that represent the financial obligations of the departments located outside of finance. While that physical issue is not needing to be changed, I do want them all to have a stronger connection to our finance director because she is putting processes in place that we want to be consistent throughout the entire city. So she's been wrapping her arms around that. And I think police is a very good example of how it has been going well. and identifying areas of improvement and then helping get Chief Garrison in this example what he needs to make sure that his team gets up to speed and then of course they will be right there working underneath him which is the ultimate goal because he needs them in a close proximity and we respect that. Performance measures for finance, these three goals are all in alignment of preparing documents and submitting invoices, monthly reporting by the ninth business day of the next month, as well as purchasing requisitions processed or submitted within three days of time. When you look at their budget, as you can see, they are very, very heavy in personnel because because that's what they provide. They provide services and they provide them the best way they can through the system that we have and we've already talked to you about that system and what it means and how it needs to be updated and we're working on a plan for that so that we can have a new system that is not 30 years old, but at the same time does not put a undue financial burden on the city. That is a tricky sort of situation, but we're gonna keep working on it and we will keep you updated to our progress on that. When you see their service level changes, they didn't have any proposals that were approved, but they did have $24,080 in reductions that were approved as well. So the impacts, when you talk about finance and what they're doing, so they're scaling back again on trainings and conferences and making sure that the certifications that they have to do are still being done. But it is a reduction to access to industry resources and we know we're trying to make sure we find that proper balance. And the custom software subscriptions and supplies and communication tools and uniforms are also part of what they contributed to to make sure that their service level request was met. All right, now I will transition to the city manager's office. Handsome guy. And now we have 26 positions in our current office.

The one that was requested, I believe that was through our EMT, if I'm not mistaken.

Yes, and I do support that position because as they get their ELC, which is under current construction, as they get stronger and, you know, better with their team, we want to make sure that Stacy has, excuse me, Ms. Alicio has what she needs in order to keep us safe during those times of need. We have been in some blue skies for a while, but let's not forget what it means to have herself and her team ready and able when needed under those times. So we're always very careful about how we do that. So I don't want us to lose track of that. But the performance metrics, the timely and complete agendas, I will tell you that I, have a regular conversation with the Bantam clerk and I promise her that we are trying to meet those as much as we can but I'll use today as an example when you talk about the power deck that you're looking at now there's a lot that goes in there and we never want to have something slide to two weeks later just because we didn't get you a deck that could have been given to you a few days in advance so we We are trying to limit the amendments that I know you see all too often, so you know what I'm talking about. The city manager's office, you'll see 25 actual, 1.9 million, the recommended for 27. You're looking at a small increase to 2.046 million. Again, I think we've talked about what the main concern I would say that you probably hear about, which are salaries and how they are They are created and not just poured out of the air, but they are created through third party comp studies and pay structures. And we should be able to defend how our philosophy of paying in the middle of the road is still in the middle of the road. What I'll also say right here is one thing I didn't mention earlier was that our merit structure for next year changed where we cut it almost in half. and that was a big part of what we did to lower and make the budget work as well. There's a balance between paying it too low, which I think a 3% across the board is where we ended up on, in this budget package that you're looking at, which was half, but you also have contracted rates that are gonna go up, and you don't wanna have your non-contracted staff see the contracted staff get rates that they're not getting, so there's always, a careful balance there that we tried to make sure that we adhere to. You can see that we provided reductions of $113 million for those service level, oh, I'm sorry, what did I say? You said nine. Oh, I'm sorry, I could use another $13 million. Yes, I'm sorry, $113,950 in service reductions. And this was, we eliminated some of the appreciation activities with the holiday luncheon and we also implemented data reductions supporting leadership and prioritizing core services and other budget and maintaining city long-term financial stability.

Before we move on, are you moving on?

Yes, sir. Commissioner Petro. Yep.

Thank you. Mayor, we skipped the discussion on finance.

Oh, yes. Do you want me to go back to finance?

Yeah, well, that's what I want to talk about. Yeah, go. And this is primarily, and I pointed out vividly that last year, that how do we justify this cost allocation into general fund? from special districts? Do you have a methodology? How is it done? And I've noticed some of them have consistently been driving. For example, from fire department, fire, we do a 20% hike. Road and Drainage 57. I know and I'm well aware of all of those special district rely on general fund operating expenses. My concern is how do we allocate? Is there a specific formula or policy or how do you do that? And I'll have more questions depending on how you're gonna answer that.

Yeah, and you're referring to administrative allocation.

Well, in general, if I look at road and drainage, it's 57. Solid waste, 56. Utilities pilot, 83. My question to you is how do we do that? logic behind that.

There is a methodology.

Yes, so the districts collect the money to support themselves and then yet a majority of that money goes into general fund. So basically it's siphoning money from the actual district or whatever you want to call it, but can you explain the logic?

Yeah, so the methodology is based on past budgets. So there's a percentage allocation to each district utilities and all those other funds that you're talking about based on their past budgets. So all of our administrative costs are collected and then gets distributed based on the percentage. The general fund, of course, still gets a portion of it because it is being utilized as well in the general fund. But then every single fund gets a portion based on their budget.

So you're saying that it's being put back to general fund and then general fund kind of give them back based on their budget. Is that what you're saying?

There is an allocation based on their budget, budgeted expenditures.

And your methodology is really their methodology because what they request, that's how much they get from general fund. Is that correct?

They're not getting it from general fund. The general fund is receiving funds from those districts and utilities as a reimbursement, you can kind of view it as a reimbursement for administrative services that are currently in the general fund.

You're talking about PLOT and PLOF?

No, I think it's the administrative allocation. Oh, almost all of it.

My question is, it's a lot of money that going to general fund, and that's why we can say, hey, we're not raising a millage rate, but those districts are supporting the city through the general fund, through those districts, and districts are basically contributing a lot of money. I don't suppose they're using that much money that they are, TRANSFERRING TO GENERAL FUND.

YEAH, NO, BUT THERE'S A METHODOLOGY IN TERMS OF THE PROPORTION OF SHARE. IF YOU DON'T DO THAT, THAT MEANS YOUR PROPERTY TAXES ARE ACTUALLY SUBSIDIZING YOUR DISTRICTS AND UTILITIES BECAUSE ALL OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS ARE IN THE GENERAL FUND. SO YOU DO NEED TO ALLOCATE THOSE COSTS, OTHERWISE YOUR TAX PAYERS ARE ACTUALLY PAYING FOR ALL OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS.

OKAY. And what is, how do you, so your methodology is strictly, is based on the budgets?

Yeah, and that's been in the past and we followed that methodology, but we are going to be looking at that methodology this year to make sure that that is still the best methodology. So we will be reviewing it. I know prior to my time there was like a complex allocation was done where we actually hired a consultant to actually calculate. We don't want to go that extreme, but I think we can find a balance.

Okay. That's it for now. Thank you.

Go ahead, sir.

All right, thank you, Mr. Mayor. We will move on now to communications. Communications has a team of 12. They were also part of the discussion we had a few weeks ago where we outlined how we got to that 12, not 12 new positions, but many of those positions came from departments that were pre-existing. As you look at their targets and their measures, we've talked about some of their awards they received recently, but being just on target with their percentage of calls handled through the call center, whether we're talking about the North Port University, which is gathered a lot of good attention. Community engagement hours and our social media followers, I think they're doing excellent as they have increased our communication outreach for the entire city. When you look at their total budget, their 2025 actual was 1.2 and amended this year was 1.3 and their recommended next year is slightly more than that at 1.38. Okay. They did have actually one proposal or proposals that totaled $38,500 approved, and they had reductions of $39,930. And the impact of those service level changes reduce back to the printed outreach capacity. We talk about that in some other places as well. Here we're talking about postcard mailings, internal printing, internal printing and binding services, decreasing advertising and public visibility, print, radio, and digital. It will lower some of the public awareness of our services, but we will use some other channels to keep information going out. and the need for vehicle replacement maintenance operation, replacing the aging vehicle, they received a vehicle that was actually passed down to them, so that vehicle does have a certain life cycle to it that's probably coming up for review here in the very near future. All right, we will now transition to the emergency management division. Again, in our office, thank you, Ms. Stacy Alicio, for her leadership of this division. This division is very exciting, I'll just say that. Just building the new EOC is going to give us a new outlook on how we actually approach emergency management. I'm talking about hurricanes, not earthquakes. So when the hurricanes do come, we will be prepared for those. I cannot prepare you for an earthquake. I'm sorry. But the goals that they have, when we talk about having the training courses, they are preparing our staff right now. The worst thing that we can think of is if we think that, well, they only are there or they only react during the emergency. There's so much that goes into getting us all ready before then that takes up a lot of their time and they're a small but mighty team. They are looking at conducting five emergency exercises instead of two, and they are on target for four external outreach events for disaster preparedness awareness. As you can imagine, the biggest thing in their cost right now is that little ELC project, and we do have it funded, and again, we wanna thank our partners from the states and our lobbyists that found us some money to help pay for some of the final cost needs for the project. They did have one proposal that was approved for $4,000 and they actually reduced their budget by $47,000 and the impact of that were to, again, cost of training and travel funding for certain courses and conferences. There's a 50% decrease in uniform and materials, elimination of health and readiness screening, removing life scan, and advanced medical evaluations that help ensure emergency management personnel can safely meet the physical and cognitive demands, and the operational tools in the EOC that may limit the acquisition of a copier and Starlink terminal, reducing the ability to for critical documents, but we will figure that out, I promise you. All right.

All right, we got Commissioner Stokes. Okay. Very brief on this one, but I just want to beat my drum one more time. Emergency operations, yeah, had the county been providing the services that should have been provided during Ian, we wouldn't, after that hurricane, have come up with the realization that we're pretty much on our own when it comes to that. So I'm fully supportive of this group. I'm supportive of the building we built or building. I'm supportive of the team. I mean, you know, when it comes to public safety, especially after an emergency like a hurricane, we need to be able to take care of our citizens. And for that, I am proud to see we're doing what we're doing. But I would love to see the county remit back to us some of the money that they spend on EOC at the county level that we don't seem to be the recipient of. So once again, another item I'll be happy to talk to them about when the time comes and we sit face to face. Thank you, Mayor. Vice Mayor.

Basically, a pile on. If you look at any of the other counties, their county EOCs takes care of the county. And yet we have legitimately felt a need to invest in our own. And I'm not going to rehash that. But I also agree with Commissioner Stokes. It's one of those things that I would expect to get for the 3.2 millage we we pay to the county that we're not getting so at the risk of being redundant and boring i do want to say that this is part of the conversation we need to have with the county we're spending a boatload of money to protect the citizens in this city well allocated I support it all 100%, but I look at it as redundancy with the county and we need to have the conversation. Some offset of operating expenses, I don't know what form it takes, but we need to have the conversation. Thank you.

Go ahead, sir. All right. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Next, we have Public Works. And there is a lot to unpack here because it is such a big department. But as we begin, we're going to start showing you the org chart. And as you can see, there's 107 positions in the Road and Drainage Division. There are 54 with two being requested in our Solid Waste Division. Public Works and Facilities Maintenance has 18 positions with requesting no new positions. Fleet has 22 positions with no new increases in it as well. Their performance metrics look very good. They are on target with their work orders with the fleet. as immediate replacement, keeping it below 20%, which is something that we did look at and we continue to sort of stretch our vehicles as long as we can, as much as we can. That is another area that we, is a continual place of conversation and Kenny Rapone and that team do a great job with our fleet, with the volume of vehicles that we have in this city and the specialized people that we have to take care of them. It's a lot harder than it looks. The maintenance of the work orders, they seem to be on target with that, as well as serving at least 800 cars at the annual waste collection event, which we believe that this year's anticipated number will be over 1,000. When you look at the total budget overall, you can see that there is some fluctuation. And when you look at the capital in the actual department, it does sort of go up and down based on the annual needs. But I would like to highlight that fiscal year 27 is one of the lower years as compared to fiscal year 25. So it's going back in the right direction of spending, knowing that they do have other places that get in revenue, not just from our general fund at all. So, Road and Drainage Division, they had approvals of $3 million, but they also had reductions of $2.4 million within their budget submittal. And the impact to those service level changes, we're talking about removing the, reducing the lower mowing frequency, reducing roadside weed control and cuts to non-core services. replacing aging high priority vehicles and equipment needed to support stormwater and strategic additions to support additional Essential operations, adding a traffic control technician and a project engineer addresses growing demands in traffic system maintenance. And position eliminations and operational constraints, removing two positions within the engineering and operation divisions staffing for that particular division. Solid waste, you will see that we approved proposals of $680,000 and we approved reductions of $1.48 million. And some of those impacts are delayed replacement of critical equipment, staffing addition to support growth and collection services. We added two solid waste to address to address increasing garbage and recycling service needs driven by our growth, which is very logical. Service reductions for yard waste and bulk pickup. This is eliminating the equipment operators and removing citywide yard waste and bulk pickup services will shift to to waste disposal to a resident paid drop-off model and discontinue our bulk pickup, which we're currently providing two per year per household. We are also reducing future service capacity due to capital deferrals, and we are cutting capital purchases for vehicles, equipment, disrupts the commission approved multi-year replacement plan, which is something that you have seen. So we are making some adjustments to solid waste. You go to the facilities maintenance division and you see that there were no proposals to be considered and reductions were $628,000. Some of the impacts of this are limiting non-emergency repairs and deferring routine maintenance. and eliminating new holiday decorations and will reduce the overall facility upkeep, requiring staff to focus resources on the most essential and safety-related needs. We are prioritizing the critical repairs over routine work with fewer resources. This division will reduce a total amount of volume of work completed each year, concentrating efforts on core building systems and urgent repairs. And there's also a suspension of long-term facility renewal funding. We are pausing the annual $500,000 transfer to the R&R that's just focused from future capital rehab and replacement planning to immediate operational sustainability. It slows the city's long-term ability to build reserve for major facility needs. The fleet, I'm sorry, I'm showing you that. Now I'm showing it to you. Fleet is our next division, and you can see that they were approved for $156,000 in proposals, and reductions amounted to $568,000. And the impacts of those level changes are reducing preventative and non-essential fleet maintenance, deferring replacement of high priority equipment, and decreasing staff development and training capacity. That's in the public works, I know that was a lot in public works, so I'm gonna pause right there, Mr. Mayor. Is yours new? No, not, there you go.

Yeah, thank you, Mayor. Public solid waste, I have some questions and observations. When I was sort of thinking what can we do for efficiency here, two things I looked at was reducing the recycling. I think we talked about that in public before, you know, picking up paper once a month versus twice a month, and I didn't see that. I'd like to suggest that you still consider that. I also said, gee, we do these two free bulk pickups per year. What percent is that utilized? So two free bulk pickups per house, if What percent, if everyone did two a year, like what percent do we really, oh boy, the purple shirt, both purple shirts.

I thought Frankie had loaned it to Chuck, but now they're the dream team.

I think the mayor should abstain with his purple shirt.

Because I have to tell you, the two free bulk pickups were like my first thing, and then I thought, You know, we have so many rental units in the city. And my observation, empirical data, my observation in my neighborhood is every time someone moves out, there's a pile of household debris. And so I backed off it. And I said, gee, maybe we need to keep those two free bulk pickups. But I see it was on your list, and I'm concerned about it. Just a little bit of conversation and what you think the impact of that is gonna be.

I'm gonna touch the first one.

Okay.

So, Chuck Spieg, Public Works Director. In order to reduce our recycling to once a month pickups, we would have to provide more totes. People would overflow their recycling containers, which means they're gonna put it in the garbage, and then we're not paying 30 or, you know, $20 to $40 a ton, we're paying $60 a ton to get rid of it. So you're not going to find a savings there, just because it's either going to cost us more in totes or disposal.

Yeah. You know, it's interesting, again, just empirical data. In my neighborhood, I never see the recycle bins overflowing. I do see the trash bins overflowing. So that's why I kind of thought, just based on observation, we could cut it back and not have some overflow costs. But you're closer to the data.

Yes, ma'am. Those containers get pretty full in that time frame. It doesn't weigh much, but it's there.

OK, trust your data versus my sort of observations of my neighborhood.

And I'll let Frank speak to the other. Frank Long was always manager. Recycling doesn't weigh much, so it doesn't look like it's so full. But when it compacts in the trunk, you get a lot more than that.

Yeah, OK. So the bulk pickups, I'm worried.

So the bulk pickups, about 65%.

Percent of people utilize our households.

Is that both or just one? It's both.

For both. OK. And so we're recommending having people bring their bulk pickups to a certain area? Help me understand what the recommendation was.

Sure, so your free bulk pickups would go away, but what we would do is we would then, you would pay for that service. And it would be by the yard. So we would recover our costs.

Right. What would we save? Okay.

And you're still gonna need those trucks and those operators, right? Because the bulk is still gonna be there. It's still gonna be a service that we're providing. It's just gonna be a paid service.

So, I'm concerned. Again, because I see a lot of household piles of household debris in front of homes. I lack confidence that people are going to pay for it. So, again, you guys have the data, but my request would be I really want to monitor that closely and see what happens. And I'm going to be keeping my eyes open as I drive around the city. You know, are those piles disappearing? Are they staying there for long periods of time? Are the owners of rental properties really going to take care of that debris? Big question marks in my mind. So so long as we monitor that closely and we have a conversation after a year or so to see how it's going, I'm really concerned about that.

So, Vice Mayor, there's a few things that we looked at regarding that. It looks like the savings are about $387,000 to solid waste. Now, the other solid waste drivers on the routes, they report those piles back to the office. So we're aware of those piles as soon as they go out. We typically then will make contact with the property owner and try to arrange that pickup. That's our normal procedure. If this was adopted, there would be a cost to that. We would do an estimate, provide them an estimate, and then they would have to pay for that pickup. One of the other things that we're going to monitor closely will be illegal dumping. If people can't get rid of it on a free bulk pickup, they may decide to take it other places and dump it, which we've had to deal with in the past. that will affect the road drainage district because when it's dumped in the right of way they're required to pick that up so we will address that if it happens we also work very closely with pd to find where those come from and make sure the right people pay for them and again my concern isn't with city staff i know you guys are on top of your stuff my concern is more the community response and what that's going to look like

And you're monitoring it. We'll talk about it again in a year and see how it's going. But I have big concerns about that. And then just one comment. I'm really looking forward to the transfer station because I think overall this is really going to help us contain our costs in this area. So I just want to make that statement so that the community is aware that that's going to have a huge impact on our costs for solid waste and recycling and all that good stuff. Sure.

But we'll keep an eye on it, so thank you.

Thank you, Vice Chair. Yeah, just adding on to that, when you're talking about getting rid of the bulk pickups and going to a pay-as-you-go type thing, what if somebody doesn't pay for their bulk pickup? The thing about it is, is now you're going to create a situation for code enforcement then it gets into the lead process so basically you're not collecting any money for 20 30 years so i'm not seeing the real savings when it becomes a hassle going from one department to another department it's just like circumventing itself So have you got plans for that, if that were to take place? Because the homeowner of the LSA, she was talking about rental people. They dump everything out of their home, falls back to the home. They're out of state. They have no clue what's going on. The stuff sits there and sits there and sits there. You send them a bill, maybe they'll pay it, maybe they won't. But it's still sitting there until code enforcement gets involved. Or like you said, the illegal dumping happens, this, that, and the other. I just think it's just going to get get into a whole window.

Shifting costs.

Well, yeah, from one department to another. And I'm not seeing a savings there. You had mentioned the transfer station. Now, would that be open to the public to come out and dump that stuff at a cost at the transfer station? It'd be just like up north. They'd go to the dump. They'd take it. So if I have a recliner that I want to get rid of, rather than putting it out front, can I roll that down to the transfer station, pay $5, $10, whatever to get rid of it, and then be done with it? Or whatever the cost is.

Yes, sir, Mayor. And that's something that we're going to work through from now until it's built. because we would like to be able to take that. We will have a scale house there, so we'll be able to charge and bill them accordingly, but that's definitely something we're looking at when the transfer stations opens. We wouldn't do it at a commercial level just yet, but it would be for residents for household.

And that would be awesome, but then again, then I wouldn't look at getting rid of the bulk pickups until you have that option available because I'm, you know, and I know you're trying to cut your budgets and I know you're trying to do this, that, and the other, but some of this just I don't think is in the wheelhouse right now because one, the citizens are already accustomed to it. You change it automatically. They're still going to put the stuff out there. and they're going to say, well, why did they pick it up? What do you mean that's going to cost me $300 this time? It didn't last year. So an education process definitely needs to take place along with all of these cuts and changes and services that we're doing. So I just wanted to bring that up. Commissioner Duvall, you're up.

Thank you, Mayor. Yard loose. Briefly, I saw on the slide citizens paid option. Does that mean citizens call and say come and get it and now the public works comes and gets it or is it like the transfer station thing where A facility will be open five days a week, six days a week, and a citizen can bring their yard waste anytime.

Correct. Five days a week, they can bring it anytime.

That works for me.

Or they can call for a bulk pickup for yard waste, and we'll go out there and pick it up, and we charge them.

Commissioner Petro.

Thank you, Mayor. Yes, the bulk pickup, I was going to touch on that because at first it seemed a very great idea. And I have not used my bulk pickup for years. And that's a savings to the city, even though they do budget it for. But as more I was thinking and trying to figure out how it's going to be solved, the more problems started to come up. Well, first of all, if it's a paid service, you're still going to have, like you just said, paid operators and all that stuff. I'm not sure if it was taken into account to cut that cost because there is a cost still. But another thing is the shifting of a cost. Well, first of all, some people are gonna put it up, move out if it's a rental, then there's a dispute, then there's a process. The homeowner will say, this is not mine, I shouldn't be paying, and on and on, even though it was, you know, legally, it was not really the homeowners, because you can really identify who's who. But then another shift of cost, next door empty lot. They're just gonna toss it over at night or a dark time and it's gonna rot. Then there's a safety issue, you know, rats and all that stuff. So that creates community broken window theory, if you will. So it's gonna create more unintended, unforeseen consequences, then there would be, you know, eliminating of recycling. Same thing, and this is good that you said, it's going to be, garbage is going to be overflowing. But especially with a bulk pickup, I don't think we should mess with that now because it is going to be a big issue. and rolling drainage, people are gonna toss left and right, you know, pack up the neighbor's garbage totes. I can see that people would be doing that. Creates all sorts of legal issues, operational issues, and safety issues. I would be very opposed to that. And if it's 65% used, we're already saving 35% off of it. So we're not really using to the fullest extent. But I think our citizens should feel appreciated that solid waste and public works, we raise their fees. And when I say we as a city, I think this should be left alone without any... amendments as of right now, for sure.

If I can, yeah. Just to let you know, the 35% is mostly well in part because they're all new homes, so they don't have much to put out, so don't let that number fool you.

Okay, there is a 35% of not being the funds that are not being used, but I see a lot of problems from a practical standpoint, and I'm really against it. And I don't know if we have to say it now with consensus or what, but I'm against it because We didn't get calls. And the similar issue arose that I forwarded the email to the city manager's office. Very similar situation. There was a house for sale, and the woman closed on the house at the lunchtime. But the bulk pickup was picked up in the morning. So technically, she's not responsible for that. And they put a lien on her house because it's attached to the lien. And this is just a shadow of what might come up. And this is a real straightforward situation. I'm gonna predict there's gonna be a lot of issues with this elimination of the bulk pickup. Just my two cents, thank you.

And commissioners, as you're evaluating this, we would ask that you provide input on yard waste, that is budget proposal 3226, and the elimination of bulk pickup, which is a separate budget proposal of 3485, just so we're clear as to what the direction would be going forward.

The one thing, too, is you're cutting out two, maybe cut out one. As far as bulks? Yeah, as far as bulks. That's a happy median to where you will have some savings, but it's just an option. Go ahead, Vice Mayor.

Yeah, just two quick comments. One is with the recycles, what we do in our household now, because we don't fill our recycle bins. If they're half full, we don't put them out. We put them out when they're full to try to save a little bit. And the other thing that tends to happen in my neighborhood, and I don't think we're unique, so this is why I'm sharing it. When it comes to those bulk pickups, it's the three cubic foot thing. Sometimes we might have one or two items, and so I kind of get in touch with my neighbors and say, look, I'm putting out a couple items, and I'm going to call for a bulk pickup. If you have some small things to throw in, here's your chance. And so that happens, too, as sort of a way that just in a neighborhood way we try to Be efficient.

We also do donations too. We have so far 100 have been completed. So.

You don't need to pick up.

So, like, say, Mr. Commissioner Peter, I wanted to give 5 or 10 yards to yourself. He could do that.

Right? Right. Yes. Yes. Donating the pickups. That's it for me.

Do you want to go again?

Yes, sir. Quick question while the public works is here. When we retire trucks, who is our buyer? How do we sell those trucks?

Are you talking solid waste vehicles?

Solid waste trucks.

So we have an auction company that picks up all our vehicles and they auction them off.

So primarily auction?

They're all auctioned, yes, sir.

Okay, thank you.

That's all we have up here, sir. Were you ready to move on? Yes, sir. Thank you. So we're ready to do lunch? Yes, sir. Because it's an issue. Yes, sir. Let's do it. All right. Well, yeah, it's exactly noon. We'll be back at 1230. Works for me.

Thank you, sir. Any kind of branches, trees, plants, anything like that does not...

All right, it's 12.30, it's back at it. Come to find out, the city manager or myself had no clue that we were done with the presentations before we took lunch. So I'm gonna turn this over to the city manager. I know you had some stuff that you wanted answered, so go right ahead.

Absolutely, thank you, Mr. Mayor. So the information that we provided to you today, we did hear a lot of good feedback, and yes, so we are done with where we wanted to stop the program for today, and the feedback that we've heard, that I've heard, that we want to make sure that everyone's on the same page, We stated in the book, as you read it, that the zero percent for the health increase was received after the information was created. The amount of the extra funding for the general fund that came in over our budget was after the document had been created. So that leaves a small pool of funding that, as I mentioned before, naturally the number one source going back to be would be public safety because that's at the top of the ladder. So the negative positions that you saw in there where you all made a comment on, that would be the very first place that we would put that funding back. So we would scratch that one off for the Board. You also have not seen yet, but we're gonna talk about fire tomorrow, where we didn't fund their ask for this coming fiscal year, and we would put that in there as well. They were not affected as a reduction in their budget, but they do have needs for next year based on Chief Titus, Deputy Chief Herlihy's projection of their opening of their stations. I'm telling you now that you would see that one addressed as well. And then we also heard about the bulk pickup. I think you all collectively have expressed a concern that that would be something that might be more harmful than good. We would put that one back in as well. The other conversation that you all had was regarding your own budget, whether that's FLC, whether it's travel, COLA, and that's something that, that's the only other thing that you might want to have a little bit more conversation on to get to maybe some, closer sense of a consensus that we can address. Again, I think you all know and agree your budget is not that big. We can handle it any way that you want, but seeing you all go through the process is a lot of what we go through the process on, but you only have one time to do it because you're in a public meeting for the first time. So if you want to talk about it some more, fine. If not, we can take care of it on our end to make sure that you're not wanting or missing anything and take those precautions, but happy to follow whatever the board direction is, Mr. Mayor, on your own budget.

Right, so would you suggest that we put that as a regular agenda item in a meeting, or rather than just having consensus, this way we can have a vote, we can have motions, votes, and lock it in place on what we wanted to do with our own budget?

Yeah, that would be fine to us. That amount that we're talking about that's in question is not going to stop us from moving forward. But if you do want to have some more conversation about it so that you can make it official, I think that that would be a great idea.

Well, I know that we were a little divided up here on the different topics and what we may want to say, what we may want to cut, what we may want to... you know do without so if we could go ahead and put that on the agenda between now and the next presentation not tomorrow but the next presentation of the budget this way you may have more clarity on what we're looking at

else? Well, aside from the things that I mentioned, was there anything else that the board wanted us to look at between now and the next time we meet? Otherwise, we'll make the changes that I just discussed. We'll keep moving forward with getting more accurate and updated information and we'll keep, as we said earlier, we're open if and when you want to meet one-on-one with myself and finance so that we can answer more questions. I think the cost allocation question from Commissioner Petro needs some more affinity as we move to the methodology study that will defend what we do or raise changes in what we do. But if there's anything else that we're missing as a team, I'd love to know.

And also, we still have tomorrow's presentation that may have some adverse or whatever effects at the end of that day, too. So whatever monies have come in may dwindle even more tomorrow. Yes. And I have Commissioner Petro. Okay. That has... Questions or comments?

Okay. Conclusion speech. Thank you, Mayor. But in conclusion, I want to say this. Last year's budget was increased by, I believe, 25%, if I'm not mistaken, with our amendments. And even though the Mayor Stokes then, when he was a mayor, he did suggest that we supported three million cuts, $3 million cuts, or cut, which was not, was followed up. We did not do many cuts. But this is a good start as an exercise on this.

Wait a minute. Are you saying that we didn't do cuts this year? No, no, last year's. Oh, last year's budget. Last year's budget cycle. Okay.

Which is this year's budget, right?

It is, but the exercise last year, ma'am, was the $3 million in We did not do that the way that the exercise was proposed. But we did it this year. I thought it was something.

This is a good start that we did this year. Because we'll have to do it again with 10%, which would be interesting to see. In last year's budget cycle discussion, I did warn about this tax reform that seemed far off, but yet it's one step closer to the reality and from talking to many people that have some say in this, and I mean politicians. they thinking that it will be passed with the vote, which is a reality. And we have not, we have not forecasted that and kind of dismissed. I was dismissed when I first brought it up. I was told that we'll worry about this later once we get there and that we're not gonna be the only city affected, which is true. But each city is unique and I, consider our city to be exceptional city because, well, first of all, I'm part of the city, and I do believe the city of Northport is very exceptional in many ways, because we want to be an example. But I do believe we need to do more in this budget, and I know it's very hard to do that. Go ahead.

What would you like us to do? We need more, no, no, no. We need specific areas that you would like us to cut in this budget if you want us to do more. We need, it can't be that broad. You have to drill down and say, I want to cut The city manager's job. I want to cut this. This is what I think needs to be cut. It can't be this broad cut. We've outlined and explained that we all, I think we all collectively believe that if this ballot question makes it to November the way that it's written, it is going to pass. And it is going to have an impact on us in the upcoming years. This budget is... tighter than it's ever been and you have $3 million almost over to the side in this budget that you can put in the fund balance if you choose to do so. But if you want more cut out of this budget that is currently presented to you, I need to know where.

Sure, sure. But what I want to say is, we did receive a notification from health benefits that it's going to be flat. So that's a big plus. So in reality, we're gaining revenue of 6%, if I'm not mistaken, the difference in ad valorem tax alone.

So the difference in tax and the difference in those items are just over $2 million. And putting back what we're talking about for public safety that I just mentioned is going to eat up a lot of that. The bulk pickup going back is going to eat up a portion of that. I appreciate you being able to follow the math of what we're doing, but Your focus and what we're trying to get you to tell us is where do you believe the areas that should be cut? We know where we're going to put the money back to in addition to keeping the $2.7 million, but you said you thought the budget needed to be cut more. Where do you think those cuts should come from?

Well, I like this discussion that we can be very sincere about this. When I read your introduction in the budget book, you're saying that we're preserving $2.7 million. But from the addition, because the market values that were assessed, you projected at 3%. They came back at 5 point whatever, 6, 7%. Right, 5, 6, 7. Yeah. So if the city took in 5.67, an increase of taxable values, and we cut 5%, I do understand what We are really cutting, but what exactly are we cutting? Because our revenue has gone up, so has our expenses. I understand that. But what I'm trying to say is, maybe we should be doing more cuts and the commission budget came up for the discussion. And we're not going to take that inflationary. Whatever it is, 1 to 2%. Increase from the consensus I've heard.

Well, we haven't voted.

Right. That's the agenda. Right, right. That's part of the later conversation. And I understand what you're saying. And the reason why the extra money that you're talking about, your point is, why is that extra money not going into the fund balance as well with the $2.7 million? And what we're telling you is that when we cut the 5%, it includes people. It includes not giving public safety people. So the first step is to make police hold back to the way they were so you don't see the negative in there like you saw in the book. And tomorrow you're going to see that we didn't fund seven firefighters going forward. And I think that You're all going to say, give them those firefighters so that they can service those fire stations that are coming on board. And then, like we talked about, we'll pick up, we'll take a little piece of it, and there'll be another little piece of it left for however we balance this $350 million budget. But you said you think more things should be cut. Do you need to tell us what they are so that your colleagues can say yes or no? It can't just be... go cut. How much do you want cut, and where do you think it should come from?

I understand any cut or any savings is painful because it affects our comfort. I completely understand. It's like a diet, and that's what I said last time. It's not a very pleasant process to be on the diet. It depends which diet you're talking about. But overall, I think what we're gonna face, and this is my, just the reality of what I see and foresee, when we, and I was told many times, you know, balance is the key to life. If we don't do a little bit more now, when we're gonna face this 18 million shortage, I do believe it was budget session when we had, you said that we're gonna have to lay off people, and it will be hundreds of people. Now, we know at this level, and I'm not asking to lay off anybody, But if that reality comes, we will have to do that. That's going to be much more painful to be done in a big step as opposed to small steps. And always small steps are important. What I'm proposing, maybe we should take a deeper look. And you are very fair in asking where would you like to cut. I'm thinking maybe salaries. If we do our salary freeze, and we have not voted on it, but if we do it, which is very minimal, to say the least, and last year I said it as well, our salaries are the least salaries in the city. And we represent the city. And again, it's better to take a cut of a salary than to lay people off.

True.

So, and this is, to be honest, this is not my job and say cut this salary and that salary. This is the job of the staff. So I'm turning that question back to you and maybe you can identify where we can cut.

Well, as I stated to you earlier, I would not cut the salaries of our staff because we're having a compensation and pay study done right now to say whether they're not or they are not in alignment with the market. I would not cut them before doing that.

I'm not even asking to cut. I'm asking to look at the salaries and maybe we can freeze the salaries.

No, wait a minute. We are looking at the salaries through a third party independent study that will verify if they're right or they're wrong. That is looking at the salaries.

Correct. It's just, you know, it is what it is. We're going to face that reality in six months or less. And then it's going to be very hard. And it's not just salary section where we can look. I'm asking maybe where you can identify and maybe doing a deeper dive of where we can say. That's all I'm saying. You know, I'm saying and painting a picture of reality. Because once that... reform passes and there's a chance, a big chance that they will pass. What do we do then?

Well, that's what my question to you is. We need to start planning for that now and that's a commission choice, not a staff choice. You have to look at your priorities as they are stated right now and that's what we balance our budget to on those priorities. You are going to have to come back and say our priorities have now shifted based on this tax reform and now These are our priorities of our pillars in our plan. I can't do that. I follow what you tell me to do as your priorities. And that's why we need to start that planning now. But you say that you think we need to look at our salaries because I know that the people out there are saying the same thing. And I say our salaries are made up and composed of, and it's just not mine, it's all of our salaries are based on market and comparable salaries, they're not just high salaries just because they're higher than the people who are reading them or compare themselves to. You need to compare them to the people who have the education and experience to get those salaries. Now, when you say look at salaries, how much money in the budget are you looking to cut that is displeasing you right now? Are we talking about 2 million? Are we talking about 10 million? What's your number? If you can't tell me where to get it from, at least you can tell me how much you're trying to make this budget What number would make you happy with this budget?

Are you getting me into operational? I'm just laying out the... No, no, no.

You said that you couldn't tell me where to get it from and I respect that and I understand that. What's the number you're trying to get to that's too high in this budget?

I'll turn this question back to you and maybe consult with the staff and... identify the areas where are... No, sir.

We've already done that. That's how we got here today. I think you have a very... sincere lack of appreciation of what it took to get to this point today. We've explained to you that the 5% cut actually cut into people who are in their jobs right now. And I told you, and I will tell everyone, our number one priority is to protect everyone who has a job in this city to keep that job in the city. Knowing that if the reform happens the way that it happens, we are not going to be able to do that. We're not. But in this year's budget, based on what we know now and what the assignment was, we were able to cut 5% out of this budget, where that was the target, and create a pot of $2.7 million for you to borrow for something that we needed as a city. And now you're saying that you want us to go cut more than that when we explain department by department for what we did today on how painful that was. In addition to the normal natural increases of contract increases, we cut our merit raises in half, pension, inflation, and everything that we deal with. And you want us to go cut from somewhere that you can't name in a number you don't know?

Sir, with all due respect, I just feel I'm going to feel terrible when we're going to get to next budget cycle or when that reform comes that we have to lay people out.

Sir, the state is going to feel terrible. We're all going to feel terrible. It won't just be you. It's going to be all of us are going to feel terrible. But guess what? It's going to pass. The main problem in this world is affordability. And the hand that's been dealt to us is the state says that we believe that the tax relief is something that is going to help that. The unintended, because I do believe it's unintended, I do not believe our state officials think that defunding the police or the fire is the right thing to do, but it's a reality. They're too big of our general fund unless we're going to backfill that money with other revenue sources. Your mills rate is only going to be so much based on what they put in there as well. You can assess fees and assessments, but we don't know what those will be or what those look like. And I think the public deserves us to put a more thoughtful approach to it and just saying, well, we're gonna, they're taking our money, so we're just gonna raise fees on assessments to you. That's not the right way to do it. It's gonna take a lot of thoughtful conversation, but for you to say that we need to cut this budget more than what it's been done based on the effort that went into this is not very reflective to us as a staff.

As a conclusion statement, I just want to say that it's better to do it in small steps. And just to make a comment, I do realize and appreciate how much effort it took being an accountant. You know that. And I do happen to have accounting and finance degrees. I understand it's not easy, especially being in finance. to do this. What I'm talking about is more an operational. But thank you for your report and for your budget. This is just a rhetorical question, if you will, if we can do anything more. Thank you, Mayor.

I just wanted to add something, too, just for the record. When you're discussing salaries, it's not an even playing field across the board. You have unions involved. You have people that are already contracted for this, that, and the other. When you freeze salaries, the only ones you can actually freeze are non-union employees, which is a very small percentage of staff here. And you're really not going to do anything but decrease morale, because three-quarters of the workers would get compensation, and a quarter of them may not. So you've got to take that into mind, too, when you're talking about freezing salaries. So, go ahead, Vice Mayor.

Yeah, just a couple of quick thoughts. In my mind, this commission asked staff to really dig deep and cut. And we did challenge you with 5%, but we also said no layoffs as part of that. And so we got to 2.8 or 3%. So staff did what we asked. Thank you very much. I, for one, would never consider a layoff or any tampering with salaries until it was absolutely necessary and there was no other path forward. To do it in advance is just not sound business practice and I would never support it. I'm done.

All right. City Manager. I don't see anybody else up here. Was there any final thoughts that you may want to put forward?

See you tomorrow. Yes, sir. It's 12 o'clock.

Mr. Mayor, we do have a public comment. Oh, sorry. So this one's an e-comment. Yassine Rosani. I own two Burger King locations in Northport, 1071 South Tweedo Blade Boulevard and 14928 South Tame Amy Trail. and five comparable properties in Pasco, Charlotte, and Volusia counties. I have raised these concerns with staff since August 2025 with no resolution. As this commission adopts the fiscal year 2026-27 budget, I urge you not to approve another road and drainage rate increase until the methodology is reviewed. Four issues. One, rate escalation compounds on commercial properties. Enhanced road rates rose 80%. $40. 74 cents to $73.42 ERU in three years. Tertiary drainage more than double. Residential homeowners absorb one unit of each increase. My commercial parcels absorb it many times over. The Stantec report projected 0% increases after fiscal year 26 through fiscal year 33. Rates have not held flat. Two, the 2014 methodology changed, created this problem before 2014. Residential and non-residential drainage rates were separate. The 2014 consolidation into uniform EDUs shifted disproportionate burden onto commercial properties. A specific origin this commission can fix. Three, all QSR is not equal. Same ITE trip rate applied to all fast food regardless of volume. A McDonald's at $3.9 million generates double the trips of a Burger King at $1.6 million, yet both pay the same ERU rate. Lower volume QSR operators are overcharged. Four, NCAP structural inequality within Northport. Duncan, 4915 White Ibis Drive pays $3,117. Starbucks, 1595 Grand Venture Drive pays $4,968. My standalone burger company is $16,965 and $19,021. Same use, same city, five times difference. NCAP ERUs split across the center. Standalone parcels bear the full count. The result, my North Port properties pay $42,000 plus versus $17,133 for my Charlotte County Burger King. Staff confirmed next review is not until 2027. Florida law requires fair apportionment. The current methodology fails that standard. I ask the Commission to, one, accelerate the review to fiscal year 2026, two, freeze rate increases until complete, and three, allow actual traffic counts in lieu of ITE estimates. Next e-comment is from Debbie McDowell. Commissioners, you really have your work cut out for you this budget cycle. The email I sent each commissioner goes into greater detail than I could during public comment. Yes, you made my day when I saw the extensive budget cuts. It's definitely a step in the right direction and overdue. You won't be surprised when I say you can find more, a lot more. Where is the methodology to justify charges for services? Line item number 349.01. $0.6 million chargeback from road and drainage into the general fund. That's a 57% increase year over year. Maybe that's why the road and drainage assessment is increasing 15%. Other funds have shocking chargebacks too. All total over $18 million. PILOT and PILF contributions continue to soar too. All to benefit the general fund so the city can continue to say we didn't raise the millage rate. Don't you see the taxpayers still pay regardless What fund you take the money from and put the money into last year, the North port police department asked for many new positions because studies show the department staffing levels were behind industry standards. It was agreed to revisit the North port police department staffing levels every quarter that never happened in the days. Here we are another year has gone by. Our city continues to grow and staffing levels continue in a downward trajectory with more cuts this year in North Port Police Department staffing levels. The mandated 5% general fund budget cut equals about $2.7 million. The savings is slated to build the CEC and Cultural Center. Just stop. Those buildings are not a priority. Those buildings are one. A taxpayer expense. Use that savings for the needs of the city and taxpayers. Here's an idea. Use the money to bring relief to the taxpayers' wallets. Double-dog the area. Good luck today and tomorrow. That is all, Mr. Mayor. We have no general public comment.

And none in-house.

Correct.

All right. Thank you. It's 1257. See you tomorrow.