City Commission Regular Meeting - Special Meeting

I have a motion on the floor made by Commissioner Stokes, seconded by Commissioner Petro, to reopen the road drainage district meeting. If there's nothing to that, please vote. Let's take 10 minutes and come back and finish up. I know I need a health break.

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.

We're back and we're going to do the City Commission Special Budget Meeting. Everybody's still here in staff wise, not as much in attendance wise, but I'm looking for a approval of the agenda.

So moved. Second.

I have a motion on the floor to approve the agenda by Vice Mayor, seconded by Commissioner Stokes. If there's nothing to that, please vote. It's getting late. And that passes five to zero. City Clerk, public comment? Jason White.

Good evening. My name is Jason white. I live at 5467 come quite Avenue in Northport. I have lived in this neighborhood for 22 years and I've been a Florida realtor for 11. I'm here to put the facts on the record on the 2024 and official zoning map. On August 6, 2024, this commission. Adopted ordinances 2024, 13 and 2024, 15. effective October 28th, 2024. They did not rezone one vacant track. They re-designated large, already built residential neighborhoods, including mine, to commercial, corridor, and corridor transitional. This was a city-initiated, citywide action. Notice ran in the newspaper. Hearings were held. Individual mailed notice was not sent to residents whose homes and vacant lots were rezoned. A motion that night to require mail notice failed four to one. Staff said that noticing more than 100,000 parcels was too costly and too slow. Many of us learned after the fact that our neighborhood was no longer zoned as the community we bought into. That is not a technicality, it's the record. The impact is not theoretical. Existing homes may remain as legal non-conforming uses. Vacant lots in the same neighborhoods can no longer be built on as single-family homes. Buyers, appraisers, and lenders look at the zoning, not only the house next door. That lowers the value of the homes we already own and cuts off the chance for our children to build there, which was a dream to have my children build in the same neighborhood that I lived in. Staff has since said that glitch fixes are needed and that belongs on the record too. Staff has cited flooding and Hurricane Ian. The houses in my neighborhood do not flood. Some of the roads do. That is a road and drainage problem. Raising the roads is the fix. Stripping residential zoning from a stable neighborhood is not. My neighborhood is not a blight. It is homes, families, and a tax base that this city already has. I do not see the same commercial overlay where the commissioners live. If a designation is good policy, it should be good policy everywhere, not just in older, plotted neighborhoods that did not get a letter in the mail. i ask you to put three answers on the record first identify every established residential neighborhood rezoned in 2024 to commercial corridor a corridor transitional without individual mail notice second restore residential zoning or a true residential comparable designation where people already live and vacant lots were expected to become homes. Third, stop treating road flooding as a reason to convert neighborhoods into commercial land. Fix the roads. Commercial growth belongs on the corridors planned for it. It does not belong, by surprise, in the neighborhoods that built this city. Thank you. Thank you, sir.

And I think we got another one. Come on up, sir, if you're speaking now. Greg Cooley.

I just really don't understand why we're even here tonight. We voted twice to say no to your bond, but yet you wanted to forge right ahead, and you wanted to put them taxes on us, and you tried to charge us with all these extra taxes, and now you're going to have a second thought. But if we weren't here beating you guys over the head with it tonight, I guarantee you would have all voted, and taxes would have come right on through to us people. Maybe you four, excluding Mr. Petro, which I appreciate you vote no against all this crap, can afford these four taxes since you four self-serving people gave yourselves big fat $10,000 plus annual raises in addition to the ridiculously huge raises you continue to hand out year after year to the overpaid city employees. But us citizens cannot continue to afford these skyrocketing city taxes, and I'm sick and tired of this city and you five taxing me out of my home. Yes, thanks to North Port taxes, you have left my wife and I with a whopping $13.58 of COLA money per month to pay for insurance, medical expenses, gas, groceries, property upkeep, living expenses, and finally electricity, of which you already hit me for 10% every month on my electric bill in city taxes. That'd be, and then, so I want, so thus, I want to challenge you. No, let me back up. Did you think it is fair you five in this city consumes 68% of my annual coal raise in added taxes, yet you give yourselves $800 plus per month raises? No, it's not fair and it's not justified. It is self-serving theft. Thus, I challenge you and I challenge Mr. Fletcher over there Let's see if you put your own money where your mouth's at. I want to see all six of you give your $10,000 plus raise back to the city. Then you should have plenty of money on your proposed projects, a good start on all of them, after you give your money back. After that, after you've paid all that back, you can pay the same one-time fees and all these other stuff you want to try to tackle me with with what's left in your bank account after it's done. Yet I'm willing to bet not a single one of you will give back even one nickel of your raise, will you? You five in Fletcher are really derelict in your duty and obligation to us citizens. And lastly, I will not vote for Stokes and I will not vote for Elaine Emmerich because I don't want any more of this from you. Have a good evening.

E-comment, Linda G. I am ready to formally object to the proposed non-advalorem assessment increases currently under consideration for the upcoming fiscal year, including the residential solid waste fees and the continuous expansions of our local infrastructure assessments as residents. I view these sharp sudden increases not as necessary operational adjustments but as a punitive preemptive financial maneuver designed to squeeze revenue from taxpayers ahead of the non November election. It is no coincidence that while the city claims a flat millage rate, it is simultaneously inflating flat fee non ad valorem assessments that bypass traditional property tax rules. This rapid restructuring of our financial burden appears to be a clear cynical anticipation of the passage of amendment three. By aggressively shifting the city's revenue generation onto non-advalorem fees, the Commission is attempting to insulate its budget from the expanded homestead exemptions and strict revenue caps that voters are poised to enact. Penalizing residents today because you fear loss of unrestricted property tax revenue tomorrow is an unacceptable governance strategy. The citizens explicitly exercise their right to deny the city borrowing power for the solid waste transfer station project, rather than respecting that mandate and restructuring city spending to fit within existing means. The commission has bypassed the voters, forcing a pay as you go, non ad valorem hike onto homeowners feels explicitly retaliatory. If Amendment 3 passes, it will be because Florida residents are demanding relief from the skyrocketing cost of living. Attempting to get ahead of this voter mandate by locking in higher non-advalorant base fees and pushing for a 10% annual increase authority is punitive to those who call Northport home. I urge the Commission to reject these assessment hikes, honor the spirit of the previous public referendum, and balance the City's budget through fiscal discipline rather than preemptive fee grab schemes. Next one is from Yassine Rozani. I'm a North Port property owner and want to raise a concern about fiscal discipline across the City's fiscal 2027 budget that deserves the Commission's attention before final adoption on September 24th. The City conducted a 5% reduction exercise this cycle, identifying $4,936,878 in potential cuts in the general fund alone, then restored $2 million $864,466 of those reductions, leaving only $2,072,412 in actual net savings. In other words, the city identified what it could cut and then chose not to cut most of it. That is not fiscal discipline. The September 10 tentative budget then added 12 new full-time equivalent positions citywide at a total cost of $1,285,745. $758, while only reducing 3.46 positions at $168,122 in savings. The net new personnel cost from the September tentative budget alone is over $1.1 million, added after the City already acknowledged significant fiscal pressure. New positions include Asset specialist security administrator records management specialist, digital forensic examiner, community service officer, a new police officer and a new school resource officer. The consequences of this approach are visible. The general fund reserve cushion shrank from 1.25% in July to just point. 83% in September, only $832,471 above required reserves, leaving almost no margin for unexpected costs. Citywide staffing has grown 27% in six years from 768 positions in fiscal year 2022 to 978 in fiscal year 2027. Yet in the same budget, yard waste and bulk pickup were eliminated citywide. Park events were canceled and community center and aquatic center houses were reduced. The government that grows its payroll while cutting resident service is not moving in a sustainable direction. Every position added carries not just salary but benefits, retirement contributions, and long-term obligations that compound over time. The answer cannot always be to raise assessments and add headcount. At some point this commission must ask not just how to divide the cost but how to actually reduce it. Next one is from Robin San Vicente. Good evening, commissioners. I am commenting on just some of the issues surrounding the solid waste transfer station one-time assessment. First, let me say that I support the need for a transfer station. However, I do not support nor do I think it is proper to change vacant parcels. I also have to state that not incorporate well in part into this methodology is outrageous. We are one city and all utilize the same services. The continued separation of Legacy Northport from Welland Park has to stop, especially when dealing with financial contributions. Additionally, what are the safeguards of this supposed one-time assessment if the transfer station winds up costing more than what is being projected? I urge you to reconsider the methodology that is being used to substantiate this assessment. Thank you. And last one is from Yulia Stastanosheva. Dear City Commission, I am a property owner in Northport with three parcels affected by the proposed fiscal year 2026 to 2027 solid waste fire rescue and road and drainage assessments. One, account number 0971133119, lot 19, block 1331, vacant lot. Two, account number 1141257207, 1863 Callahan Avenue Improved. Three, account number 09711331184239 Branham Street Homestead per my trim notices. Combined non-advalor charges rise about $594 total, about $211, 40% on the vacant lot, about $187, 19% on the Callahan Avenue, about $196, 19% on Braham Street. Vacant lot, no structure, no solid waste generated. Please clarify what the current benefit it receives from the proposed transfer station and why this is special assessment tied to future development rather than a different mechanism for such cost. Not alleging impropriety, requesting clarification. Two, road to drainage, identical $300, $80.74 charge on all three parcels regardless of value or improved status. Please explain this flat fee methodology. Three, fire rescue. Tier one rate reported rose from $187.28 to $206.01, about 10% per public reporting on the commission vote. Please confirm this and the structure based here on my improved parcels match the adopted methodology study for a solid waste. As reported by local media, the one-time transfer station fee was approved three to two with public concerns raised at the meeting. Please confirm the rate is fully supported by the adopted methodology study before final adoption. Five, please defer final adoption of the solid waste and rota drainage rates until methodology studies are made available to property owners and provide a written response before the final budget hearing. I am unable to attend in person today due to work. I respectfully request this and be entered into the official record. Thank you for your time and consideration. Yulia Stastanasheva, 4239 Braham Street, North Port, Florida 34291. That is all, Mr. Mayor.

Alright, moving on to public hearings. Ordinance number 2026-28. Need a motion to have City Clerk to read by title.

So moved. Second.

I have a motion on the floor made by Commissioner Stokes, seconded by Vice Mayor. Please vote. And that passes five to zero. City Clerk?

I was hoping it would fail. Only kidding. An ordinance of the City of North Port Florida adopting the ad valorem millage rate and rollback rate for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 2026 and ending September 30, 2027, providing for findings, providing for conflicts, providing for severability, and providing effective date. The general municipal millage rate and tax levy for the City of North Port Florida for the fiscal year is 3.7667 mills. which is $3.7667 cents per $1,000 of assessed property within the city. This millage rate is certified to the property appraiser and the tax collector of Sarasota County, Florida to be levied for the city's general government operating and capital purposes for the fiscal year. The general municipal millage rate is 1.61%, lower than the rollback rate of 3.8284 mills, which is $3.8284 cents per $1,000 of assessed property within the city.

Thank you.

City Manager, this is your item. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. To add on to that, the reason that loan revenues are increasing is due to the increase in growth taxable value of assessed properties. The city's initiative to keep the levy millage rate flat from previous years and the utilization of the city's fund balance policy, reserving funds for economic uncertainty. We're happy to answer any questions you may have, Mr. Mayor.

Commission, anything? City Clerk, public comment? We do not have any. Oh my. I'm going to close this public hearing and request a motion.

I move to continue ordinance number 2026-28, second reading of September 24th, 2026. Second.

I have a motion on the floor to continue ordinance number 2026-28 to second reading on September 24th, 2026. That was made by Commissioner Stokes. It was seconded by Commissioner Duvall. If there's nothing to that, please vote. And that passes five to zero. Moving on to ordinance number 2026-27, I need a motion to have them read by title only.

So moved. Second.

Clear the screen, please. I have a motion on the floor made by Commissioner Stokes, seconded by Vice Mayor because she was a little late, and to have the City Clerk to read by title only. Please vote. That passes five to zero. City Clerk?

In ordinance of the City of North Port Florida adopting the non-district budget for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 2026 and ending September 30, 2027, adopting the capital improvement budget and program prescribing the terms, conditions, and provisions for supplemental appropriations and reappropriations, providing for findings, providing for posting of the budget, providing for conflicts, providing for severability, and providing an effective date.

Thank you. City Manager, this is your item. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The city follows the Truth and Millage with Trim timeline for approving and advertising the budget so we do not risk loss of state shared revenues for not being compliant and also allowing for a continuity of operations by having the budget approved for the fiscal year of 26-27. We ask that you approve ordinance number 2026-27 on first reading and move to second reading on September 24th of 2026. Thank you, sir. Thank you, sir. Commissioners, anything?

Commissioner Stokes. Yeah, just a question. Based on what we discussed earlier tonight in the other meetings, does that have any impact on this ordinance? Because it mentions capital improvement budget and there were projects, there was at least one project we bounced out of here. So I just want to make sure we know what we're voting on. Yes.

Irina Koharenko, finance director. So there is no change to the total adopted budget because we are going, the reduction in solid waste peel off is going to be taken from use of fund balance. But there is change to the capital improvement budget in the program. So there is the recommended motion, if you're ready for me, is to approve the non-district budget as presented and amend capital improvement budget and program for fiscal year 26-27 by reducing project road rehab by $1,097,711 and project solid waste transfer station by $8,935,510 for changes to be made for second reading. Clerk, you got that? No, I missed it. Can you please say the numbers again?

Yes, road rehab by $1,097,711 and solid waste transfer station by $8,935,510.

Okay, got it.

I have a motion on the floor made by Commissioner Stokes. Do I have a second? Second. And that's seconded by Commissioner Petro. There's nothing to that. Let's vote. And that passes five to zero. All right. Any final public comment?

Greg Culey is gone. I think he left. Yeah, okay. We have one e-comment. Stephanie Delorier. Good evening, Commissioners. I read as a concerned Northport resident who has been quiet long enough. I own four properties here. I am not rich. I am a working class small landlord who poured every dollar of my life savings into these homes. Rents are softening, insurance is exploding, and valuation increases have already added $200 a month to one mortgage alone. This is the breaking point. If this commission keeps artificially inflating structural overhead, you will trigger foreclosures, short sales and community blight. Is that the fiscal legacy you want to illustrate the operational disconnect? I purchased an adjacent lot legally tied to my homestead when I requested the bulk yard. Waste pickup staff told me that I could not place debris on the new land. I had to drag it to the front of my home. I'm paying assessments on land I am restricted from using for the various services you're about to charge me more for. That is not service. That is a bureaucratic shakedown. Look at the numbers. A $331 million budget. Property values up 8.6% to over $10.8 billion. At 3.7667 mills, the organic growth hands you a roughly 2.8 to 3 million in new revenue, yet you want more fire assessments up 10%. Solid waste hikes for a new transfer station workshops called a want, not a pure need. Road and drainage NTE at 15% despite methodology reports recommending far less. These hikes disregard your own approved methodologies. Do you not own homes? Every basic cost of living has already skyrocketed. Values are flattening, yet you stack discretionary increases on top of what is recommended. It is brazen. If you believe the public is asleep, you are mistaken. We are watching. We are not your piggy bank. Stop spending on new logos, cups, and t-shirts while working families and mom and pop landlords tighten their belts. Stick to your approved methodologies. Reject these unnecessary increases. Start caring about the working families trying to stay afloat or admit you don't. Thank you. That is all, Mr. Mayor.

Thank you, sir. And one last thing before we leave. I want to invite everybody to our 9-11 ceremony tomorrow over at the Circle of Honor, 9 a.m. And I want to thank Sandy and the other one. I mean, Trish Sturgis. for all the work they put in today preparing that area. So thank you all very much, and I hope to see everybody there tomorrow. And it is 837, so I adjourn this meeting.