City Council - Regular Meeting

evening we're going to call the city of orange city council meeting regular meeting tuesday june 23rd 2026 at 6 31 p.m to order roll call councilmember darms here councilmember knight is absent councilmember thompson here vice mayor grimm here councilmember stafford councilmember richardson here

Mayor Marks.

Here. And we have the invocation, pledge allegiance from Phyllis Bartle, St. Jude's Episcopal Church.

Let us pray. Heavenly Father, in your word, you have given us a vision of that holy city to which the nations of the world bring their glory. Behold and visit, we pray, the cities of the earth, especially the city of Orange City, Renew the ties of mutual regard which form our civic life. Send us honest and able leaders. Enable us to eliminate poverty and oppression. That peace may prevail with righteousness and justice with order. And that men and women from different cultures and with different talents may find with one another the fulfillment of their humanity.

Thank you Okay, moving on to number one absences we have none number two presentations and proclamations to a legislative update Paul waters and Devlin Moore are presenting I

Good evening, Devlin Moore, Finance Director. So over the last few weeks, I've had an opportunity to attend several webinars as well as the annual conference hosted by the Florida Government Association or the Florida Government Finance Officers Association. I've learned quite a bit about bills that may have a budgetary impact on the city or finance as a whole. So staff thought it would be a good idea to run through some of the major bills and initiatives From a finance perspective because I can kind of quantify hopefully some of the numbers that we are looking at Obviously that I'm going to go over tonight is not all-inclusive These are just the major actions that will either impact the revenue budget process or financial reporting going forward The first is property tax reform. I'm not going to belabor this one because we discussed this at the last meeting, but just to recap, the projected impact in 2027 should the property tax reform pass would be $1.3 million to the city. In tax year 2028, we're looking at $2 million. And then beyond that, the exemptions are going to increase pursuant to the consumer price index. Also as part of the legislation the legislature has been authorized to put in additional property tax reform going forward and it's important to note that Any future property tax reform would likely be passed through general law and would not require the vote Some key components of the property tax reform that I do want to touch on is, first, we've received clarification that there is no dedicated state trust fund or guaranteed backfill. The funding would continue to be available through the current legislative appropriations process, which, as you know, is a competitive process and is generally tied to capital outlay. The second is the non-homestead cap was reduced from 10% to 5%. That's not gonna have an immediate effect on the city, but should there be a downturn in property values, it's just gonna be a slower recovery process from that period. And then lastly, the bill does, indicate allowable uses for ad valorem revenue and there's still a lot of questions about that piece and what we were told at the conference by the florida league of cities is most likely there's going to be further clarification on this should the bill pass so we will monitor that The next bill is Property Tax Administration, or SB4F. And what this does is it changes how many votes will be required to pass a millage by using a rollback rate rather than the maximum millage to trigger the supermajority and unanimous votes. So in the past, the Department of Revenue would calculate the maximum millage. So for instance, last year, the maximum millage was seven-tenths higher than the rollback rate. And as you recall, the rollback rate is the revenue neutral rate that generates the same amount of revenue as the prior year, less new construction. What I've done here is I've illustrated the current baseline, new baseline, and the number of votes that would be required for each. And to illustrate the change, I've overlaid last year's voting requirements under the current baseline and then applied the new rules under the new baseline. And for context, last year's rollback rate was 6.5019. So what that indicates is Last year, if you were to adopt a millage rate of 7.1614 to 7.8775, you would need five votes. Under the new baseline, that millage rate would be 6.5020, which was the rollback rate. So that means in order to go above the rollback rate, you're going to need at least five votes. Then if you look down under 7.8775, so any millage rate above 7.8775, that requires seven votes. Under the new rule, if you apply it to last year's rollback rate, you would need a unanimous vote for anything above 7.1521. I know that's a lot. I apologize, but I just wanted to set the stage because we've got the budget process coming up. This has passed the legislature and is awaiting the governor's signature. Then we have taxation, House Bill 7031. The big one on this is the card room tax change. So the state card room operating tax has been reduced from 8% to 5%. now pursuant to florida statute the city receives twenty five percent of any monies that is deposited into the perry mutual wagering trust fund what i expect is that the city share will be reduced proportionately to compensate for that decrease from 8% to 5%. So I anticipate a loss of revenue of $82,000. So if you take what we're currently projected for fiscal year 26, 220,000, the new revenue will be 138,000. And this is one that we're going to monitor closely because we're still waiting to see how or if the city's proportionate share, if they increase that 25% to make us whole. I'm not sure that's going to happen. The second component is the mobile home park assessment cap. That creates a 3% annual assessment growth cap on qualifying mobile home parks, and on the slide I've indicated there what the requirements are to do that. We don't know what the implication is yet of this, According to the final bill analysis, the recurring loss is about 65.2 million to cities. Again, this is one that I don't think is gonna impact us immediately. It would be a situation where there's a downturn in property values and it's just gonna be a slow growth. So that one I'm not as worried about as with the pari-mutuel, that's unfortunate. This one has passed legislature and is awaiting the governor's signature. And that's as of this morning at 8.15, I think. next we have the traffic or civil traffic violation penalty distribution house bill nine two five this one reduces the city's share of certain civil traffic violation penalties occurring within the city limits so what they've done is they've reduced the city's share from fifty point eight percent to twenty eight point two percent and then the offset is being given to the clerk of court The estimated revenue loss on this bill is between $9,000 and $11,000. This one has been signed into law. Next we have the Local Government Financial Transparency and Accountability Act, House Bill 1329. This is more of a procedural impact and not a direct monetary impact. This is the one that was brought up at the last meeting where the city council will be required to go through a budget cutting workshop. uh... and we'll get into the weeds of all that when uh... we enter the new budget cycle we don't have to worry about this in this budget cycle uh... but you would be required to reduce the future few deep the proposed budget by ten percent Without compromising the central public services will need the definition on exactly what that is and we'll communicate that when we go through this process and Fortunately, you don't have to adopt it, but you do have to go through the exercise Then there's some ancillary things that finance department will have to do related to the budget calendar and some expanded reporting and public access which we're already working on and This one is on the governor's desk for signature and if it's signed it will go into effect January 1 of 2027 So that's all I have for the state legislation that impacts the finance and budget, but there are two other major initiatives that we must monitor. First, regardless of what happens in November, we're not out of the woods. The Taxation and Budget Reform Commission is scheduled to convene in 2027. This commission convenes every 20 years, and they're tasked with reviewing the state's tax structure, revenue needs, budget process, and constitutional tax limits. and then they can actually place proposed constitutional amendments directly on the ballot without having to go to the legislature. This is one we'll just have to monitor, but some potential revenue risks are the further property tax restrictions, new limits on local revenue authority, additional exemptions and assessment caps, and unfunded mandates or restricted revenue uses. So we'll have to see how that one goes. The last one is actually a federal initiative, and it is expected that it will be enacted by the Office of OMB and the federal government. It would go into effect on or before October 1. And what this one does, well, first let me define what 2 CFR 200 is. It's also known as uniform guidance, and it establishes the federal rules for managing federal grants. And what the OMB has proposed is first expanded federal discretion to terminate awards. So essentially if there's something that they don't like that's happening or if their goal or initiative has changed, they can terminate the award at any time. The second thing is they can put stop work authority or they have a new stop work authority that could pause projects midstream. There's greater compliance and documentation requirements that city staff will have to follow through with. And there's more uncertainty around whether awarded funds will be fully received. So if they would complete a project, they could technically terminate the award before paying us the full amount. Obviously, there's some potential risks with that higher cash flow risk and then of course any costs that may have been occurred prior to termination of the agreement or a stop order may be on the backs of the city So this is one that we're monitoring closely. It's our understanding that this is most likely going to pass but I'll be happy to report back what ends up happening with that so That concludes my section. If you don't mind, I'll turn it over to Mr. Waters to wrap it up.

You want to do questions at the end? Sure. Okay. Mr. Waters?

Council Paul water city attorney So yes, these are bills. These are legal issues, but the subject matter is finance and physical matter. So that's why the Finance director is presenting these issues As you know, each of these bills goes through committees in the House and the Senate there's always a house version of the bill and a Senate version of the bill and they always merge and become one bill and there's always a final bill analysis so if any of you have any questions we can provide you with the actual bill analysis that the legislative staff produces and there's a lot more to these bills than this is kind of a high-level overview I mean there's a lot of minutiae of detail so if you're interested I'd be happy to email you the bill analysis and then I could follow up with you if you have any questions As far as the Save Our Homes, that's the big one. That's the homestead tax exemption, the ballot amendment. There has been at least one lawsuit filed so far. It was filed last week, and it's challenging the constitutionality of the ballot language. And the allegation is that the ballot summary is unconstitutionally misleading. So if they're successful in that lawsuit, it's filed in Leon County, because that's where you sue the state. You sue them in Leon County. If they're successful, that means it doesn't even make it to the ballot in November. So it's still a salmon swimming upstream. So we don't know if it's even going to make it on the ballot. And there's also rumors of more lawsuits challenging the legislation for things such as equal protection violations and a few more constitutional issues. But it's kind of too early to guesstimate on where that's going to go. So other than that, this is more subject matter specific to finance and accounting stuff. So if you have any legal questions, I'm here.

Who's promoting the lawsuits?

Fran, you have to address the chair.

I'm sorry. Go ahead. Who's promoting the lawsuits?

So the plaintiffs in the lawsuit is a nonprofit organization. It's called Save Our Voters for Misleading Ballot Language. So you know the ballot initiative is Save Our Homes. So they've created Save Our Voters. um and there's also two individuals plaintiffs that have come forward so interesting council any questions or comments no any subject matter questions about finance and accounting that devlin could assist you with i don't think so thank you okay thank you thank you all right

Okay, moving on to 2B, finance budget presentation. Devlin Moore. I feel like we just saw this.

Hey, Devlin Moore, finance director. I promise you this is probably going to be the shortest presentation I've ever given to you. Yay! I knew you'd be excited.

It's important.

It is, but the finance department's not asking for anything. So I will show you what that looks like here. So you're familiar with this slide. First of all, the finance department's made up of 11 people. Seven are in the finance side, four are on the utility billing side. Utility billing is funded by the Utility Enterprise Fund. On the finance side, we're looking at a 1.6% increase. The increase in personnel services is just attributed to the placeholders that are in place for the different fringe benefits. We're still finalizing health, workers comp, and so that's what you're seeing in a lot of the other presentations as well. the operating expenses are increasing by little over fifty one hundred dollars that's because uh... We are required to bring on a consultant to help conduct what's called a GASB 75 valuation, and it's done every other year. So last year it was $750, this year it's more, but it's required and that information is put into our annual financial report. And for anybody who's interested, GASB 74 has to do with other post-employment benefits and how that's calculated. The department has two replacement computers that have met their useful life. Utility billing and analytics they actually have a net decrease Personnel services is a decrease of true up with salaries. We've had some personnel changes And in operating expenses the increase Twofold it is due to increases in fees for census metering software and our utility billing software And then we're also transferring some training costs from the water utility, which is a different cost center into this department. So it's a net transfer from water utility to utility billing. And that concludes my presentation.

Wow, that was quick.

Yeah.

Council, any questions, comments?

I do.

Go ahead.

So on your operating budget, the total that you're requesting for 2627 is 658,671. And then for the operating budget for utility building and analytics is 444,788. Those two added together, Tell me what your total budget overall is, like a bottom line number overall city budget. How much money does the budget have, both of those combined, and then how much of that is personal services? Because I know we had a percentage last year

meeting or meeting before of how much of the budget actually goes to personnel services so I'm winning dollar amounts do you have that off the top of your head I do not have it dangerous for me to do so because there's so many numbers in my head but if it would be okay I will be bringing that back at the next meeting in detail unfortunately you guys will be listening to me for an hour probably but I'll have all that information yeah overview of what our total budget is what we have this is our piggy bank

and this is how much of it goes to personal services.

Absolutely. Thank you. Yep, I'll do that analysis and I'll have a slide for you. Thank you. No problem. Anything else?

Thank you. Anybody else? Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you so much. Okay, moving on to 2C, Development Services Budget Presentation, Joe Ruiz.

Yes, thank you, Mayor, City Council, respective members of the public, Joe Ruiz, Development Services Director for the City of Orange City. Just like Devlin's presentation, this should be fairly short. So when looking at the Development Services budget, our department's comprised of two divisions, which is Planning and Zoning, and also the Building Division. When we look at this proposed fiscal year coming up what we're proposing here Actually is a net decrease of close to seven thousand dollars and personnel services Part of that is wages and adjustments on the turnovers and things like that We had very seasoned staff that was here that has retired and so Newer newer folks and not as experienced obviously the the dollar amounts for hourly has decreased so that's what you see there and operating expenses there is a net increase of $35,000 in that on those operating expenses and so we'll kind of go over what those the two affecting items for that currently are so one of those is an impact fee study that we're proposing which is we're averaging about $45,000 in the budget for that that study and OUR IMPACT FEES IN SEPTEMBER WILL BE FOUR YEARS SINCE WE LAST UPDATED THEM IN 2022. AND SO STATE STATUTES THAT CHANGED A FEW YEARS AGO AND FURTHER CLARIFIED IN SOME OF THE FINANCIAL REPORTING ITEMS THAT AFFECT FINANCE IN DEVLIN'S TEAM, THERE'S A CAP ON HOW MUCH WE CAN RAISE EVERY YEAR AND WE CANNOT UPDATE IMPACT FEES MORE THAN ONCE EVERY FOUR YEARS. And so being that we're coming up on that, staff has kind of evaluated that we believe our impact fees are fairly low compared to adjacent municipalities and kind of what those going rates should be for our city. So we think it'd be prudent to get an impact fee study going for next year as new construction continues to come in. The other item that we've looked at and we've put into the agenda because the city council has received some concerns about it is a land development review or land development code review from an arborist to look at our tree code, chapter 11, and also our tree planting code in chapter 10. So what staff did is we propose it to you for you to look at. We have looked at the code, we have done an analysis of adjacent municipalities of Florida-friendly planting lists with UF, which is essentially the regionally accepted standard for planting. And we found that we believe our code has no issues with street trees and things like that or planting requirements. However, it is all for your consideration should you all desire that. However, we do not recommend adding that to the budget. So yeah, it would be essentially a review for an arborist to look over those codes and consider that. So our stance today is we don't believe it's needed from a staff level. Also, there's $2,400 in computer workstations, so we've reached shelf life for one of our computers, and so we will need that replaced. One thing I do want to emphasize on, and one of the items that will be presented to you is a position request for a planning technician. As you can see at the bottom here, our department has remained at a level of five staff members for the planning division. As far back as 2021, and I can testify that as far back as 2017 when I first came on board with the city, and so permits continue to pour in, development applications continue to pour in. There is a need to provide assistance to our department As we continue to get demands from the state and requirements that the state requires, one of the items you'll be seeing in a little bit from me as well is that now the state pretty much as of July 1st states we must receive everything online, right? So it kind of makes us continue to work forward on our permitting process and our permitting updates and software updates. However, they're kind of, HAMSTRINGING US AND MAKING US EVEN TRY TO TRY TO BE MORE EFFICIENT RIGHT IN THEIR WORDS OF TRYING TO GET PERMITS PUSHED THROUGH AND PERMITS APPROVED CURRENTLY THE PLANNING TECHNICIAN POSITION THERE'S A A JOB DESCRIPTION FOR IT BUT IT DOESN'T EXIST BECAUSE WE HAD TO PLANT WE HAD TO GO BACK TO AN EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT BECAUSE OF ALL THE ADMIN WORK THAT OUR DEPARTMENT REQUIRES FOR ACCOUNTING FOR PO'S REQUISITIONS APPLICATION PROCESSING AND THINGS LIKE THAT So really the plan technician will provide big support for our department from the executive assistant level as well as also our planner one position who does essentially all of the building permit reviews from a zoning perspective and so really you know when you consider residential and commercial We average about 1,000 building permits per year. And if you remember from the state of the city, I think there was close to about 400 development applications that we received. And so those continue. The demand continues. And obviously, as you can see, our department has not grown. Also, with the new bills, we're required to, as I mentioned, expedite these permits and timeframes start to shrink and continue to shrink. So that'll definitely help with those over-the-counter permits, those permits that are under a certain threshold that the state has established that we must get out in a certain timeframe. And then also one of the things is mapping. We know that we have a utility mapping GIS analyst. However, for our development applications, our TRC agendas, our projects, our pre-application meetings, there's a lot of mapping that goes into place as applications come in. And so having in-house services, really our planner one is tied up with a lot of building permit reviews. And so it's sometimes hard to get her to be able to dedicate some time to mapping. And so our hope is that that position will also provide some mapping services. And then ultimately just allow for growth in our department as far as organic growth from a executive assistant can move up to a planning technician. And then also if they wanna venture into planning, they can become a planner. Building department as mentioned this one's fairly simple so fortunately we we have a third party right so a lot of the overhead Comes we don't have that overhead as far as paying staff however we do have the 80-20 agreement with our third party provider and actually in the personal services that we anticipate there's a decrease in about nine thousand dollars and there is operating expenses that will be going up by about sixty seven thousand and I'll kind of elaborate on some of that part of that is professional services so typically every year we budget a certain amount for what we anticipate we're going to have to pay our the eighty percent we have to pay to our building building team We have seen an uptick in fees that we've collected and new construction and things like that. And so what we wanna do is to anticipate what we're seeing coming in on the building side. We wanna just budget for what we're gonna have to pay our third party, right? And so that's why that increase has come in as we continue to see new construction and new permitting. And then also DigiPlan. So DigiPlan was the software upgrades, part of the software upgrades that you all approved back in April. And so essentially there's a yearly cost at maintaining that. And so that's where that 18,000, we'll be able to pull $18,000 out of that building fund to pay for those as most of the operations for online permitting and permitting itself come from the building department. Also, there's some computer workstations that need to be replaced in the building department. And pretty much that's it.

I had a couple questions for you.

Yeah.

How many people are in the third party? Yes. Yes.

So I failed to go over that. So yeah, currently we have our building official. We have three permit texts right now and two inspectors. So essentially six. And then they do have a part time plans reviewer that they that they send out for plans review as well to help out with the building official.

I saw the $450,000. I wanted to see how that was divvied out, how many people. Yeah. Because I know we had questions on that before.

Yeah, and I was talking to the building official today in the land. It's really hard to get certified inspectors and plan reviewers. So really having a third party, in my opinion, is a big benefit because they can attract those employees and types of trades.

I think that you definitely need another person because I see that you guys are always busy in there and we're building more and more. And so I'm glad that you asked for that. Thank you. I hope you get it. but it's up to the council but i wanted to say that you know that's one of our departments that i see always always busy so um thank you thank you any comments or questions from the council no quiet tonight okay thank you okay moving on to citizens comments number three Mark Dickinson. And this one is about the code violations.

Hey, good afternoon. Mark Dickinson, Addresses Confidential. I was gonna give you guys just a tip. I've had several people come to me about complaints about people filing code enforcement complaints against them. Everybody has to follow the law. Everybody has to accept those rules when the council votes on them. But I think it's time to vote to change the rules so that we can have absolutely no code violations. Make sure that everybody can do with their property what they want to. Because that is apparently what one of your members of the council here is doing, the mayor, has brought a motor home to her home and neighbors have come to me because I guess they don't know what the city's gonna do. But that's my suggestion, is just get rid of the code about having your motorhomes and RVs there at your house. I just watched a video of a white pickup truck backing into another person's property, which appears to be almost to their, what do they call that thing? I don't have one, a septic tank? Do you guys have septic tanks in Orange State? Okay. So the white pickup truck on video backs all the way up almost to what the neighbors claim in the septic tank. So just my recommendation. Further to that, there was a sign, I guess, that was put in front of the house. A neighbor sent me a picture of it. It says, warning, my neighbor is a Karen. And I was like, that's pretty funny. Because today from the city, I just got information that Kelly Marks filed a code complaint against Dana and Gary Knight for a motorhome. But Dana and Gary Knight corrected that problem instantly. Today I was sent a video about a motorhome at the property of the mayor's house. So as I'm saying, let's just get rid of the code. Let's get rid of that so people can do what they want at their property. We'll have this problem. I have an interview coming out. I know the city officials have slandered my business, said do not watch my videos, and publicly posted to say not watch my videos, but I got a video coming out with an interview with Mr. Knight, and I'll leave those details on there. It's some pretty bad allegations, so I'll let you guys watch that. Thank you. Oh, while we're doing this, I got 54 seconds. Can I address the tags and just get it done with? Sure. Okay.

Let's restart the clock. Okay. Get more time.

Thanks, three, okay. So Orange City, Mark Dickinson, same thing, address confidential. Orange City's been plagued with problems with the city with the tag readers. I think one of the officers was arrested for stalking his girlfriend or ex-girlfriend. That happened here. I think there was an admin that was demoted because maybe the investigation, I don't know. I don't know if that's the case, however, Orange City doesn't pay anything for tag readers. And there's a lot of people that have been cutting down tag readers. And I don't want to see property get damaged. But what I think the city could do is, since there's only, I think, four or five tag readers here, and there's only a few operators, is just suspend the use of the flock tag readers. It would be great. Because our society now has changed. You guys know everything about us, and we know hardly anything about you. I couldn't get any one of your addresses from the clerk, because it's all confidential and protected, just like mine is, because I'm former law enforcement. When I looked at the operators that were on the tag readers, the operators that were on the top five of the uses of those were those officers that I featured in videos for excessive force on an 80-year-old man, or 79-year-old man, unlawfully arresting a man when his kid has a warrant. And one of those officers was even terminated, I remember, or forced to resign for untruthfulness and lying. He was the top one. there you guys don't won't lose any monetary value of it and I don't think there's been any successful cases of it but I would recommend that just do it let's suspend the use of the tag readers because until we can get control of the police department because you got another officer on suspension right now we're on admin leave I've been told it's possibly for tag readers I don't know that's it's all suspicious because you keep everything quiet but let's just suspend them we don't need that anymore we don't need to be surveilled you know we don't need it so that's it thank you

Patrick Murphy. This one is... Why don't I start with the Oak Avenue one?

Okay.

That's what I had.

That's a shorter one, and I promise not to take my three minutes. Anyway, Patrick Murphy, 678 Swan Range Road in Orange City. We all know that the Oak Avenue crosswalk construction has started. That's great. Yes. And we're absolutely looking for the beautiful crosswalk and the safety features of that But I just wanted to point it out that that does have an impact to the local businesses right there particularly panty pan And I think there's a dentist right at that corner as well and my question would be can the city do more with signage and telling people how to get there. If you approach graves from the east side coming down, you really have to have local knowledge to know how to get to Panipat. I was able to get there yesterday, and I know Councilwoman Darms was as well, but if you're a first-time person, it would be difficult. So I wonder if there could be a sign saying, go this way, go that way, something that might help. I know it's short duration, I think that's a fairly short project, so that is my suggestion.

And I'm done. Can I go with my other one?

Okay, which is on the Fire Protection Assessment District, Patrick Murphy 678 Swan Range Road, Orange City. I am very much in support certainly of a continued dialogue about whether or not this is a tool that you might use in the future if we have the reduction in ad valorem taxes. It's revenue neutral, and I know it's a new tax. It's a new district, so a lot of us sitting out here say, I don't want new taxes. But it's designed for that $1.3 million reduction that's possible Probably likely to be replaced There's nothing more near and dear to all of us than fire protection if there was another one to be police, I wish we could enact a Police assessment district as well But the state won't allow us to do that There's also a piece of this and near and dear to my heart is money for the new fire station.

I

And this does allow you to have a mechanism where there might be some funding that does go into that. Again, you control this, you control the exemptions. which would be a big thing for the older population, fixed income, you can decide who's paying reduced or who's paying nothing. And I will point out that other cities have adopted this as a mechanism, and Anthony Pupelo, who is here, pointed out that 15 years ago the city talked about it. So it's not something new, but it's something that I recommend. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Okay, moving on to number four, the consent agenda. We just need a motion.

Madam Mayor, I'll make a motion to accept the consent agenda.

I second. We have a motion, we have a second. Any public comment on this? Seeing none, we'll bring it back for the question.

Council Member Thompson?

Yes.

Vice Mayor Graham?

Yes.

Councilmember Stafford Councilmember Richardson Yes, yes and the consent agenda passes Moving on to five ordinances first reading we have none six public hearing ordinances second and final reading we have none seven resolutions 7a resolution number four three eight dash two six. Mr. Waters. Would you mind reading that into the record? I

Certainly, Madam Mayor, this is resolution number 438-26, a resolution of the City Council of Orange City, Florida, adopting a revised fee schedule for development review and building permits, repealing all resolutions or parts of resolutions in conflict herewith, providing for severability and providing for an effective date. Thank you.

Go ahead, Joe Ruiz, please. Yes, good evening, Mayor, City Council, respective members of the public, Joe Ruiz. So before you today, as was right into the record, is a resolution to update our fee schedule and essentially in response to House Bill 803. So kind of like Devlin did earlier today, as far as giving you an update on some of these new laws and bills that have passed that affect local governments and how we operate and things we need to do. This one was actually passed in beginning of May, and it's made effective July 1st, 2027. So what staff did was we got together made sure worked with our attorney worked with our building department worked internally and did some Some think tanking and brainstorming with other municipalities and things that they're doing in response to this short fuse on House Bill 803 and so we've we've kind of put together both an update and a proposal for you all so that we make sure that we maintain compliance with this bill and as of July 1st of this year. And so just to kind of give you an overview of development applications and building permit fees, essentially applicants seeking to build or redevelop within the city for new homes, commercial industrial accessory structures, trades like HVAC, plumbing, electric, All require building permits right and so the building permit requirements are essentially to to ensure life safety Compliance with the Florida building code and to make sure that they meet our local ordinances and our local codes part of that is I Said the majority is public safety health and welfare So permit fees, what they do is they help offset some of the cost that is required for processing and reviewing building permits and development applications. They don't recoup all the costs, but they do recoup some of them. AND JUST TO KIND OF GIVE A SUMMARY ON SOME PREVIOUS ACTIONS THAT WERE TAKEN WITH OUR FEE SCHEDULE, BACK IN 1990 THERE WAS A MAJOR UPDATE TO THE PLANNING AND BUILDING FEE SCHEDULE ESSENTIALLY FOR OUR CITY. AND THEN BACK IN 2015 THERE WAS AN UPDATE TO UPDATE THE BUILDING PERMIT FEES SPECIFICALLY. ONE THAT'S NOT NOTED ON HERE WAS IN 2019 FOR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES WHICH IS FOR COLLECTION BINS AND SPECIAL EVENTS. And then in 2022, there was one to update the use permit fees specifically and bring those kind of up to date and more real time as far as what we were looking at for use permits. So House Bill 803 essentially has now required that we look at our fee schedules because there's certain criterias in the bill that are listed here. And so one is inspection fees for building permits must not be based on valuation or project cost. Fortunately, when we analyzed our fee structure, there was really only one fee that we charge inspection fees based on cost, which was actually not any of our building permits, but it was our use permits. Use permits had a 2% inspection fee based on the cost of the construction project. or a minimum of a hundred dollars so what's proposed before you and resolution 438 26 on the planning side for use permits is that we're removing the two percent requirement for cost um and we're leaving at a flat fee for a hundred dollars for use permit inspections um so we're essentially staying with that with that base fee um and and really what the bill emphasizes on is that the fees that we charge should be at cost right for inspection fees should it be based on valuation It should be at that cost so you know the hourly for public works inspector to go out and do a use permit or an engineer the hourly for a planner or one of planning staff to do Reviews of development applications and what what the hourly is for example for an inspector building inspector a building official THE OTHER ITEMS IS BUILDING PERMIT FEES MUST BE REDUCED WHEN A PRIVATE PROVIDER IS USED. AND THIS IS ONE OF THE BIGGEST IMPACTS THAT WE SEE TO BUILDING PERMIT REVENUES. SO THE STATE HAS HAD A BIG PUSH OVER THE LAST FOUR OR FIVE YEARS, PRIVATE PROVIDERS. AND ESSENTIALLY IF YOU ASK ME WHAT IS PRIVATE PROVIDER, IT'S A THIRD PARTY THAT A DEVELOPER OR A BUILDER CAN HIRE THAT ESSENTIALLY PROVIDES THE FUNCTION OF A CITY BUILDING DIVISION And so what happens is they can take it to the prior provider, prior provider will stamp and certify that these plans, right, per that third party provider, meet the Florida building code, essentially telling the building official, we've done your job for you. YOU SHOULD APPROVE THIS PERMIT. TECHNICALLY THEY'VE BEEN GIVEN AUTHORITY BY THE STATUTES TO PROVIDE THOSE SERVICES AND SAY YES, THIS IS CERTIFIED. AND SO THERE ARE NEW STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN FURTHER CODIFIED THAT ESSENTIALLY SAY IF SOMEONE COMES IN WITH PRIOR PROVIDER PLAN REVIEW WE MUST GIVE THEM A 25% DISCOUNT MINIMUM ON THEIR APPLICATION. IF THEY COME IN WITH PRIOR PROVIDER PLAN REVIEW AND INSPECTIONS, THEN THEY'RE REQUIRED TO GET A 50% DEDUCTION FROM THEIR PERMIT COST. SO JUST TO KIND OF GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT THAT COULD DO, WE'RE LOOKING AT NEW CONSTRUCTION BUILDINGS, FOR EXAMPLE, LIKE A BRISTOL MANOR THAT WAS UPWARD OF ABOUT $200,000 IN PERMIT COSTS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION. WITH PRIVATE PROVIDERS, THEY'RE PRETTY MUCH SAYING CUT THAT IN HALF, AND IF THEY DO PRIVATE PROVIDER FROM START TO FINISH, YOU CAN ONLY CHARGE THEM 50%, RIGHT? SO IT DEPENDS ON THE SERVICES THAT PRIVATE PROVIDERS ARE GIVING THEM AND WHAT THEY'RE ELECTING FOR AND ESSENTIALLY WHAT WE'RE REQUIRED TO GIVE THEM AS FAR AS A DISCOUNT. SO WE HAVE UPDATED THE FEE SCHEDULE TO ESSENTIALLY NOTE THAT IT'S 25% FOR PLAN REVIEW WITH PRIVATE PROVIDER AND 50% DEDUCTION FOR PLAN REVIEW AND INSPECTIONS. The other thing interesting thing in this bill is from and from a homeowners perspective Right. There's there's a building permit expense exemption Including right don't know permits that they're required to have for any work that's done under 7,500 valued at $7,500 and so there is exceptions to that right and so it has to be a single-family property or residential property and it cannot involve structural plumbing electrical or mechanical so the dilemma that that puts the zoning department in is when you look at those criteria what happens to fences that may be under the 7500 threshold what happens to accessory structures like a shed and things like that that our zoning code regulates however there's no building permit for us to do that how do we regulate that and So we've we've answered that question kind of two ways in our fee schedule update. One is for the determination by the building official. The building official may be able to charge or will be able to charge a $40 with the update $40 administrative fee to determine that right because there is some review that goes into that. THE BUILDING OFFICIAL WILL HAVE TO LOOK AT THE CONTRACT BECAUSE THEY SHOULD THEY MUST SUBMIT THE CONTRACT TO THE BUILDING OFFICIAL AND THEN THE BUILDING OFFICIAL HAS TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION INITIAL LETTER PRETTY MUCH SAYING YOU MEET THE EXEMPTION REQUIREMENT THERE ARE SOME CAVEATS TO THAT WHICH IS THE TRADES IF THEY REQUIRE ANY OF THOSE TRADES And then also if it's in a flood hazard area. If it's in a flood hazard area, they definitely need a building permit. They cannot meet that exemption. So just to kind of summarize some of the fee schedule updates that we've proposed to you all today. Use permit inspection fees, as mentioned, update to flat fee versus construction cost percentage. plan review resubmittal what we added was a fixed fee one fee for residential and one fee for commercial and part of that is we didn't have that but as since we're looking at at cost many times when people resubmit plans because their original plans weren't compliant what we're doing is essentially creating an admin right fee for us to be able to accept those plan plan review resubmittals and process those through the system And when we look at resubmittals, we're talking about review by our building official, by planning and zoning. We're talking about fire inspection reviews sometimes, or sorry, fire plan reviews and also utility and public works. We codified the 25% and 50% reductions on commercial permits for fire providers. So the prior provider deductions do not apply to single-family or residential. We also, for re-inspections, we revise to include after-hours fixed fee structure. And so a lot of the times we get people who want an inspection.

I just wanted to ask you before you went further. What did you say about the residential, that it doesn't apply? What part of that?

Yeah, so prior provider deductions don't apply to a residential construction. It's only for commercial. Yeah, they're the bill kind of favors the commercial developments And so with the reinspection fees what we've seen is people will request same-day inspections or after-hour inspections And so what we've done we established a fee in there for 150 an hour minimum two hours For that after-hours cost when you look at an inspector inspector goes out usually after hours is overtime and things like that and so we're accommodating for that at cost request with the permit exemptions as mentioned we're adding language for the admin fee which is which would be a it's a four dollar four dollar proposed admin fee and just to kind of give you a a benchmark as far as what a inspector per hour Contract the original contract where PDCS was and this is we're talking over seven years ago eight years ago now almost It was $75 for an inspector. So really or $78. I apologize So really a lot of the fees that we're structuring you're seeing a 70 file or increment per se Which is even under the the 78 that was part of that original contract and we're talking again doesn't account for upgrades and cost One of the other items we updated was the state surcharges. Some of the references have changed. So it used to be DCA, now it's BCAI, which is Building Code Administrators and Inspectors. So we're updating that to make sure that it meets state statutes. And other fee adjustments that we've made in consideration to act cost is our use permit Refundable security deposit so we have had an uptick in use permits as you can all see all the people working and doing a lot of the fiber optic work in our cities and cities Near us and all throughout the state and so what we found is sometimes we have compliance issues with inspections and permits getting closed out since they're busy and they're working and So what we're doing is we're proposing a security deposit. So they would essentially submit to us $1,000 that allows us to kind of hold that for compliance purposes. And then should they get everything done, they pay all their fees, that would just be returned to them per permit application. So really it's just protecting us, protecting our residents as we've gotten complaints from residents about the fiber optic works and things like that to make sure that we ensure compliance and obviously it's refundable. The other thing that we've put in is zoning permits for the permit exemptions. So we're putting in we're requesting a $150 zoning permit fee for those permits that don't require a building permit or don't require development application. So as mentioned the fences, the sheds, those items that kind of skirt the requirements for building permits just so that we're able to meet compliance and make sure it meets our codes. part of that will be what we found over the years is site improvements like paving and restriping for compliance with ADA and parking requirements a lot of times we coordinate staff coordinates both planning and public works will go out there but there's no permit for that right that's required or there's no fee established for that so we really want to kind of make sure that we we encompass that as well in those site zoning permits And that cost also we we've updated our zoning designation letter from 25 to $50 our average Planning staff of who does reviews is $60 average on our right So the $50 is actually lower than the cost and then we've updated the accessory structure cost in residential first to $75 to meet that $78 number BEFORE I MAKE OR GIVE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, OTHER ITEMS THAT I THOUGHT WERE VERY IMPORTANT TO NOTE FROM THE BILL THAT AREN'T NECESSARILY FEE SCHEDULE RELATED. THE BILL ALSO REQUIRES THE BUILDING OFFICIAL MAY NOT REVIEW PRIVATE PROVIDER REVIEWED PLANS. SO ESSENTIALLY IT'S ACCEPTED. MAKE SURE ALL THE PAPERWORK IS IN AND IT NEEDS TO BE ISSUED, RIGHT, FROM A BUILDING PERSPECTIVE. THAT COMPLETENESS BASED ON THE TYPE OF WORK, SO IF IT'S A NEW BUILDING, FULL TRADES, IT'S 10 BUSINESS DAYS. IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S A SINGLE TRADE, PLUMBING, JUST AN ELECTRIC PERMIT, HE ONLY HAS FIVE DAYS TO REVIEW THAT AND ISSUE THAT. the other thing which is a big thing and it was in two different bills and with two different deadline dates interestingly enough is mobile home structures mobile home structures or manufactured home structures by statute now as of july 1st or january 1st however however you you want to enforce that Must be allowed in single-family zoned areas. So that is a new statute. That's not something that Essentially we can stop they've given some things to where we can make regulations and and things like that However, if we apply it to mobile homes or manufactured homes we'd have to apply it to every single single-family home that comes in into our city and So we're looking at that and bringing you that update with the future bills and requirements that we have. As mentioned, reduced review timeframes. There also is a requirement for prior provider registration. So we've been working with our IT and working with building department to make sure that as of June for July 1st Sorry, we have a registration portal that they can go online and register as private providers So that they don't have to submit their paperwork for every permit right because we have a system that Essentially has them registered with our city and then as mentioned earlier to all of our submittals Must be accepted online So at this time, I know I gave you a mouthful, but staff recommends that the city council adopt resolution number 438-2026, amending the fee schedule and development for development permit applications and building permits for consistency with House Bill 803 and compliance by July 1st, 2026.

Thank you. I know this is going to be a big, I don't want to say learning curve, but a lot to change over to online. I know that over the years we've had many people ask for it, so I think it's an awesome accomplishment that we'll have for the people that are putting all these permits in and not have a lot of paperwork everywhere. So we're getting with the times, if you will. so i commend you for that i know that it's going to be a little bit hard to change over and a lot of work but also what i'm trying to understand is so the bill said that you wouldn't have to pull a permit because what caught my eyes the 7 500 anything under 7 500 and you know obviously people are putting sheds up and they're putting fences up like you said and that's the main things that we hear about all the time mostly um or at least i do as a council person so but so we're gonna add a $40 charge on top of that is there any other charges that we're gonna get from the resident if they want for example if they wanted to put a shed or a fence up is there gonna be other charges because that was a lot to digest there was a lot of different charges with commercial residential all that

Yeah, so what we're adding is the zoning permit, which is the 150. So if it falls under that requirement for a zoning permit, essentially if there's a zoning regulation for that type of structure, then there would be the $150 zoning permit. So there's no inspections for that. The inspections are accounted for in the permit price of 150. Okay.

So I understand the $40 because you want to make sure, bless you, that you're not, that they're doing what they say they're doing. You know, when you go into someone's yard and they're putting a shed in, you want to make sure that's what they're doing. And then the $150, does that go into like if they add electric and, you know, all those other things that could happen there that we need to keep an eye on? Because that's what I'm confused about with this bill.

YEAH SO THE BILL IS INTERESTING BECAUSE IT SAYS YOU CANNOT PICK APART A PROJECT AND KIND OF PUT IT ON THERE SO IT CAN'T BE PIECE MAILED SO THAT'S PART OF WHAT THE BUILDING OFFICIAL IS GOING TO BE LOOKING AT WHEN THEY SUBMIT THEIR EXEMPTION BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO SUBMIT THE CONTRACT AND SO THE CONTRACT SHOWS YOU KNOW IT'S OVERALL PROJECT IS FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS BUT WHAT THEY WANT TO GET EXEMPTED IS THE 75 THAT WOULDN'T QUALIFY SO IT WOULD HAVE TO BE SOMETHING LEGITIMATELY $7,500 OR LESS IN ORDER TO QUALIFY FOR THAT PERMIT EXEMPTION MEETING THE CRITERIA. SO, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE INTERIOR RENOVATIONS LIKE CABINETS, IF SOMEONE'S CHANGING OUT THEIR CABINETS IN THE $7,500, THERE WOULD BE NO ZONING PERMIT FOR THAT, RIGHT, BECAUSE THAT'S ALL INTERIOR, FOR EXAMPLE. SO THE $40 WOULD TAKE CARE OF THAT, FOR EXAMPLE. But yeah, if there's anything that falls within that that criteria then Obviously there wouldn't be any $40 fee They would just be told hey you have to submit a permit and then they would have to pay their permit fees so it's it's really a way to be able to look at that and say Comply or you don't comply and if you meet the exemption Zoning also will be able to have a mechanism to to verify And that at cost get back for review and inspection of any structures that get put up and is this and is this legal?

Mr. Waters as far as okay. Thank you Okay. Thanks council. Any comments or questions on this? I

The only question I had and I was seeing it on the actual agenda item it says the fee updates that are required by statute minimal impact on fee revenue at this time so it's kind of like one of those that you say later on we'll see if it kind of dwindles and it'll take some time for that to yeah yeah that's correct it's hard to guess engage if we were to get a ton of

Provider commercial permits that come in that that could definitely be a decrease in revenues at that time depending on what they what they elect If it stays where it's at then we believe that with some of these changes we can kind of balance it out But it all depends right on the how people use prior providers Anything else

So what is the difference between now and this proposal as far as money for something like that like if we're going to 150 and we're going to $40 let's just say out the door for an exemption What does it cost right now if there is no exemption approximately?

So I want to say by looking at the fee schedule, for example, for a residential permit currently right now, it's a $50 minimum for like a shed or a fence for a building permit. So it's actually gonna go up with the exemption Not quite sure it depends on also if they have inspections because they get charged if they have to do re inspections and things like that so then we're looking at inspection fees on top of that if it's something that You only have to get a zoning permit for then there's there's only one inspection fee which is built into the zoning permit So it all depends on case by case

Thank you.

Go ahead.

I did remember. The registration portal, is that something that we currently have in place or is it something that the state is going to, it's all kind of uniform across the state, pardon me?

So we've got to build it ourselves, but it's a uniform requirement across the state. So yeah, we're building. So there's a cost involved, probably, maybe. Well, we've done it internally. We were able to create the portal and we're working on the spreadsheet this morning for that registry. So we're able to do those and kind of keep those costs internal for that. so we don't have a program for that we're just kind of are you doing it like on excel or like so yeah it'll be a web form that they go on our website will be posted on our website they'll fill out the form application we'll get it via email and then we'll insert that information in our spreadsheet so we already had the program pretty much yeah okay great and uh mayor just to add to the fee question um it may not it may not be an accessory structure it may be a remodel or an addition or something like that to to their house and so those currently are at 75 or minimums so okay i was only asking because if the state's putting this on everybody right now for to take some burden off the permit fees for all the people that are trying to do things in their yards or their builders

because we hear that, you hear that all the time, right, from people to come in. I just want to make sure that we're not adding more, because then that doesn't make us look good up here if we're adding more of a burden when the state was trying to take off the burden of the residents.

Yeah, no, we spoke with a municipality that plans on charging $100 for them and fee for exemptions, so I kind of, when I saw the 40, I was like, well, well below what they're proposing, so. Okay, thank you.

Okay, so we just need a motion. So I believe that you read the entire what staff recommends and I would say so moved.

Okay, we got a motion. We need a second.

I'll second.

We have a motion. We have a second. Any public comment on this?

So Leah Brooks, so I'm trying to understand the $150. So just talk to me like I'm a child, like third grade. So if I hire ABC Fencing Company to come in and put a fence, that's $7,499. I don't need a permit to put that fence in, but I do need permission, I'm assuming, from the city to put the fence where I'm putting it. And for that, I have to pay $150? Is that correct?

If I may, Mayor. Yes. Yes. So if it's under the threshold, it would be determined by the building official at the $40 administrative fee that does not require a permit and meet statute based on the contract. And then the zoning permit would be for the review of the location and the proposal of the fence and then also the inspection because the building inspectors won't be doing those inspections. It'll be done by our either planning staff or if it involves public works like for parking lot improvements and things like that, those inspectors to go out and do those inspections. It is a zoning permit. We are proposing it as a zoning, yes. We have to be able to regulate what goes up and how it goes up based on our land development code because one thing is building code and then we have land development regulations. Okay.

so basically the state is saying no permit but the city is saying we're going to impose a permit and you'll pay 150 but it's just a permit in different language can i touch on that please so basically the state has imposed on all the cities that we have to do this you can correct me if i'm wrong but we have to pay employees to do this and so instead of the building inspectors doing it and caught and CHARGING YOU MORE, WE'LL HAVE OUR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES COME OUT AND VERIFY THAT EVERYTHING IS CORRECT OR SAFE. IS THAT RIGHT?

WELL, THAT IT MEETS OUR... MEETS THE CODE. ESSENTIALLY, A CONTRACTOR IS GOING TO HAVE TO DETERMINE THAT IT'S SAFE, RIGHT? BECAUSE THEY'RE EXEMPT FROM A PERMANENT, SO THEY'RE GOING TO BE LIABLE FOR THE WORK THEY DO. Staff, however, because we have our regulations, there's got to be a mechanism for us to be able to review that and approve that and inspect that.

And that's the other thing I want to point out, too. Sorry to interrupt you. The state will impose these things on all the cities, and then the city can do certain things to kind of keep home rule, if you will, and take care of some things here so it doesn't get out of hand. That's what I took from it, my take back from it.

Well, yeah, so, yes, it doesn't require a building permit, but it will require a zoning permit.

Because I'm not one to impose money on permits. I just don't believe in that. That's why I'm asking the questions, too, and I don't want to make it more of a burden on the residents, more money. But if it's to regulate what's going on, then I'm okay with it as long as it's not an astronomical fee. Because some of these permits that you pull, especially for commercial and things, it could be a lot of money. And so you took the percentage off of... you know on some of it and then the 7500 is just a whole different ball game obviously big commercial it's not going to do that but i think uh and that falls over on a lot of things with the state that they've put down on us recently that the city will do that you know come back and regulate just certain things to make sure that we're our neighbors are safe next to us they're not doing building something illegally if you will

Yeah, I think what we'll see too is we'll see people that won't necessarily read the bill completely and you'll see structures and things going up And so then we'll have to deal with Complaints and code enforcement cases and things like that. Absolutely. That is only permit would would take care of.

Okay any other questions comments from the No, okay All right.

We'll bring it back for the question Vice mayor Graham.

Yes

Councilmember Stafford? Yes. Councilmember Richardson? Yes. Councilmember D'Arms? Yes. Councilmember T. Onsen? Yes. Mayor Marx?

Yes. And resolution 438-26 passes. Moving on to number eight, discussions and action, 8A. discussion and direction regarding their proposed fire protection special assessment program we had brought this up in a workshop and it was asked to bring back under new business to discuss it and we're gonna discuss it with the council sure

So I would like to, and just hear me out, I'd like to move to postpone the consideration of the proposed fire assessment fee until the first regular city council meeting following certification of the results of the November 2026 Avaloram tax election. This motion is not intended to oppose funding for fire protection service. Rather, it recognizes that the voters may soon weigh in on a related funding mechanism. Before adopting a new assessment that will directly affect residences and businesses I believe the council should first consider the outcome of the election and Evaluate the city's long-term fire funding strategy as a whole and that's all I have to say Okay, so

what I was going to say is we don't we already talked about this last meeting for a while and it was a couple hours actually and we voted it down and Councilwoman Stafford asked to bring it back for discussion so What was your point in that?

Just to postpone consideration and discussion of this until we have the results of the ad valorem tax selection.

That would have to be a motion in order.

Move to postpone consideration, yes.

Madam Mayor. We got a motion on the floor. We need a second.

The motion dies for a lack of a second.

Okay, okay, go ahead. Okay, and Madam Mayor, the reason I brought it up at that time because we are on set deadlines we have certain things that we must have done before that and what um in reviewing this uh fire assessment plan i would like for the staff to bring it up and just i see the lady that did it for us before she's here now so we can fully understand the certain deadlines that we have to meet how important it is for us to be prepared in case just in case in november this bill does pass we need to be ready to hey our residents need to know that we are here, we are listening, we have their best interests at heart. It's not anything personal or anything like that, but our people, the majority of our people will suffer from this. And if we don't have a plan in place, if we wait till the ninth hour to try a plan out, I mean, hey, our poor planning doesn't make it anybody else's emergency. So we need to look out for our residents and how this fire assessment bill could really benefit the residents of Orange City. Because in the discussion before, they were saying what we would do, I mean, we paid for a person to come out and do this fire assessment plan for us. We've had staff to go over and over for hours, determine out how can we best prepare our people for this. Like they were saying, we reduce our millage rate, and what we reduce in millage rate, it would go into the fire assessment plan. Therefore, we had Devon, who's our finance director, our city manager, and we have competent staff to make competent decisions on what we need to do we really do this is why we pay them the bucks so that they can do what's best what's in the best interest for the city we up there on the city council what we do is make sure hey, once the city manager, the finance director bring it to us, they've talked it over, they've talked with staff, they did their due diligence to make sure that whatever decisions we make is the best decisions for the majority of the residents here in Orange City. And this is why I asked for this to be brought back so we can give them direction, because if I'm not mistaken, we have a July, We have a July deadline that we need to have it brought up. I can't find it now. I did have it, but sometime in July. And the young lady who presented it to us, she's in the audience now.

Okay, but before we get into all that, I'm sorry, are you finished? I don't want to interrupt if you're... Go ahead.

Okay. It's normal.

Mr. Waters already said that there's a lawsuit going on right now that may not, it may not even make the ballot. The sky is not falling. We don't even know what's gonna happen. We don't know until November what's gonna happen. And we had this conversation for a long time last meeting and it was, we're not saying don't do it, we're saying let's not move so fast until we know what the state's gonna do. It would not be a good look on us to do this, to assess a tax on the residents that we cannot take back without knowing what's gonna happen to our future budget. The state has not made their budget. We have not made our budget. This whole thing is, and if you talk about what the governor had said, which I had said last time, was that, They're still putting it together and there's and there's going to be The homestead exemption and all that we have 50% at least commercial here think about that so and then what the governor was saying was that the funding that was going to be from the homestead exemption or that we were going to lose and everything was in place for that but we don't know what's gonna happen it doesn't matter at this point because we don't know and what you were saying is absolutely the staff has worked on this there's no we have no question about that and as the as we should because our city should be proactive on what's gonna happen and I think that's where you're going we need to get ahead of this but but at the end of the day we are ahead of it we've they've looked into these things and they know what's coming um as far as as far as we can go right now but we're at a stopping point right now that we can't take we can't put the cart before the horse before the cart because we don't even know where the cart's going yet we don't know what's happening there's people challenging these built this bill there's um you know Don't want to I personally don't want to put another tax on the residents before we even know what's gonna happen because we can't take it back So and and the governor had said that he was gonna figure out a plan So that some of that money was going to be allocated towards core services fire police core services so until we know where that money is or how much money it's going to be it's the big question mark and for us to do that now to do a fire assessment would be not a good decision for our residents

I have a question for the city manager, honestly. So if the election outcome would not affect the need for or amount of the proposed assessment, explain what analysis has been performed demonstrating that the assessment would remain necessary and at the same level regardless of the election results. Yeah, go ahead. Sorry. No, no, making sure.

So unfortunately, this is where we kind of go right and left. So as presented by staff and to counsel, the we did a one-page document that was to help navigate what it was and why we were doing it so i'm going to highlight that really quickly it's a non-advalorum assessment collected on the annual tax bill it was to be based on a benefit and availability of fire protection and it was to dedicate for fire services only The primary benefits from the staff's perspective was number one, diversify available revenue, support replacement of the fire station, and fund future capital fire assessments and make it more equitable. So for staff, this isn't being presented because the property tax reform may or may not happen. It's being presented as a way to accomplish those objectives. And the only way that works is if council puts this in place and also lowers the millage rate. That's back to that revenue neutral situation. So the answer to that question is it's not applicable.

So I would venture to say that I don't agree, but I've heard things like should the bill pass, too early to tell, revenue neutral, money for a fire station. You had mentioned that a couple of the council, or maybe it was just you and then one other council member had gone and you're optimistic about funding requested for the fire station as well. think that going backwards I think there was something in some of our I wasn't here on staff or on the dais but that there was something put in place to start saving funding for that I thought that that was something that was going on did that go by the wayside we had ARPA funds that we dedicated to a capital fund okay and those monies are still there and But we're using the capital funds for other capital projects.

No, we're using the capital funds to pay for the 30% design. You've invested in 30% design for all three buildings. And right now we're waiting for the budget to finally get adopted to see if our projects for the fire and police appropriations make it. So if they make it into the budget, we move forward with the 30% design to 100% design for police and fire And we get that grant appropriated. It's basically an appropriation, but it's a grant. If not, we're going to be funded in the budget for us to look at moving forward either way with the design.

So we're kind of doing a, let's just go ahead and get the money ahead of time, just in case something falls through with the bill, and just in case we don't get as amount of money that we want for funding, we're still, well, we are. I mean, you can call it what you want, but it's going into a bank for the fire fund, right? That's what it's called. It's a fire assessment fee that every single person will pay.

It's a revenue diversification. You lower your millage and you levy this or you don't. Or you don't.

I would like to, are you finished? I'd like to touch on that. So the governor put this bill out there to help the residents because they've been paying taxes on their own property for years and years, right? And so it was to help. The whole point was to help the residents. And so when I look at our plan here, it's like, well, we're gonna lower your millage, but then we're gonna assess you on this side for fire. So we're, you know, I know you said it's evening out, but it's it's like we're being nice to you, but we're not being nice to you. And that's just it doesn't sit well with me because the bottom line is, he said that there's going to be grants available for cities. He's he specifically said the core services police and fire are not going to do without. They were going to be covered first. And the whole point was to hold cities accountable and be transparent about their funding so that they so if you're not doing good with your funding right now then you need to figure it out because um he's going to help the residents by taking that away and then the cities are going to have to figure it out and i know that's a hard thing to swallow for the cities but at the end of the day he's basically saying that we're all spending too much money on fluff i don't know i'm not the finance manager and i know it's not easy so i can't make that call but at the end of the day like i said that's his call what he's saying and we have to follow that when it comes we don't know where it's what's going to happen when it happens but but it's just it's too soon like i said the council has been making a lot of swift decisions lately without thinking them out when it comes to millions of dollars of the taxpayer money millions It's like, oh, let's buy this, let's buy that. No, it's time to cut it back and pinch on it because that's what he's saying. Stop doing that and think about what's most important. What's most important is our core services. We know that, that's first. Public safety, all that stuff. But he's saying we're not gonna do without that. He's gonna make sure that there's something available at the end of the day when they make that decision. we know that when the state comes down I said this earlier they don't always think everything out and then things end up on the city's end and then we got to cover it and we're like okay and that's scary for us I see all the cities at Florida League of Cities are like what are we gonna do because I went to Tallahassee too and rallied for that And I would rally for that too. But the thing is, is we're here to represent the people. And the people are not gonna want a fire assessment tax. Do they want a new fire station? Absolutely, we all want that. But there's gotta be another way to do that. We've been putting money away for years for capital funds, for police station, fire station, we've you know um when dale errington was here i think she had started to put money away for storms you know so smart planning in the past years of putting money away why can't we stay on that why do we have to rush this um we know we need it but i just don't think we should put the burden on the residents council any other comments yes mayor and taking to what you just said um

From what I'm hearing from some of the residents, and I'm talking about some of the residents here in the city is, okay, they heard about the assessment. At first, people thought it was good, but like they said, if we don't have that fire assessment and if the bill pass through, if it don't pass through, if it pass through, where is that gonna leave our residents? What other revenues are we gonna have to up the taxes on or whatever in order for us to meet, to give them the quality of service that they are receiving now? The fire assessment the fire assessment all that is doing is helping us to prepare prepare our residents so If we don't tax you now, we're gonna tax you later. And the taxes are gonna be much harder, much harder on them. So why are we sitting back waiting to see what they're gonna do when we have a deadline that we need to get it to the property appraisal's office by July 1? If I'm not mistaken, yeah property appraiser the office so they can put it so they can schedule it I mean so they can put it on On the tax bill that we're gonna be receiving. Why are we waiting? to but We're gonna have to do something. We're gonna have to do something for these residents. And the majority of the residents that I see in Orange City are residents that's on said incomes. We have a lot of young people coming into our city, yes, but they're not here to stay. They're here to make a living and move on. They come in, they rent an apartment, they rent a house or whatever. But our residents that stand here and not going anywhere, they've been here all their lives just about. And then if we don't do this now, and some of them, once they understand what it's all about, once they understand the fire assessment, because we all had a workshop individually with Sandy. We all, she sat us down individually. If there's any questions, I'll answer them for you now. If you don't quite understand, she did an excellent job. It was when we did our assessment workshop with them. And like you said, we talked this over at our last meeting and it took us two hours to, hey, say, but are we really thinking about the people or are we thinking about ourselves? And that's my whole thing. We need to think about our residents. It's really, really gonna affect. It's really gonna affect some residents hard. Real hard. At the end of the day.

So hold on a minute.

How? She's got the floor. Yeah. She asked the question, how? Because if we don't do this now and we have to do it later, we're going to have to get the money from somewhere. We're going to have to have revenue coming from somewhere, whether it be from utilities or whether it be from other different revenues in here. And people are going to say, well, why are you taxing me like this now? Hey. If we would have went along with it, if we would have planned for it, because, you know, some of us won't be up here after November. And those people aren't going to look at them. They're going to forget all about it. And they're not going to look at them. They're going to look at us sitting here and say that we were incompetent. We didn't make the right decisions for them. Hey, talk to your community. See what they want. See what they're doing. See how we can help them. And that's my biggest thing.

Okay, first of all you said what are we gonna do, what is this gonna do to the residents? Or what are we gonna do for our residents? This is about fire assessment. This is not helping our residents. This is helping the firehouse to build a firehouse and fire services. They have fire services now and we have a firehouse. We do not know, unless you have a crystal ball, we don't know what's gonna happen so we can't say that yet. That's the whole point is we're up here to represent and to take care of our residents, yes. We also need to take care of our staff, yes. But at the end of the day, we don't know what's gonna happen. And you're already saying that we're gonna have to raise taxes. Do you have a crystal ball? Because we don't know that yet. And like you said, we're not all gonna be up here in November. So the council decides whether we're gonna raise taxes or we're gonna lower taxes or anything like that. So at the end of the day, it is taking care of our residents that's what this whole conversation is about is to hold off on it do we want to do the fire assessment in the future probably probably so just not right now because times are tough and people are struggling but Let's see what the governor has to offer in the state of Florida and then we go from there. Why would we do that now? That's not helping the residents. That's hurting the residents. That's helping us to have more money to give to our fire services and they're paying for it. How does that help the residents?

No, I do not have a crystal ball, number one. How is it gonna help the residents? It's because when it all comes down to it, when it all comes down to it, we're gonna have to, we're gonna have to be there for the people, and how we're gonna help them is we're gonna do this assessment now, we're gonna do the fire assessment now, we're gonna, hey, hopefully in the near future, reduce the millage rate, have it go over to the fire assessment, and from my understanding, the fire assessment, won't only build a firehouse. If I'm not mistaken, can I ask the city manager, would this fire assessment, the only purpose for it is to build a firehouse? No. Okay, I didn't think so.

It's for fire services.

I'm trying to be proactive and do what's best for all residents. That's what I'm trying to do. And this is what's going to help them to better understand because they'll be already prepared to do all of this. When it comes down to the possibility of increasing the taxes on different things because we don't have the money available in our city, hey, we'll still have a kitty that could assist us with doing the things that we need to do in the city.

Before I call on Vice Mayor, I just want to say I appreciate your passion. I understand why you're doing it. I just think that you're just doing it too quickly, and we really need to think about that. After Mr. Waters said, there's a lawsuit going on right now. You don't jump into things without knowing what's happening. Vice Mayor?

I just want to say that I've been speaking to some of my neighbors too about this and every one of them doesn't have a problem with a fire assessment knowing that the house is on fire the fireman's coming if they got EMS they're coming that's number one number two you got 186 homestead of properties that pay no ad valorem taxes they would cut into that Number three, we'd be lowering our millerage rate. Right now, we've got a very high millerage rate. We would also be lowering our millerage rate. So that's basically it. I mean, if you look at the scenario that they put up here, the bottom line doesn't change. But actually, adding 186 people that have never paid into fire, they will be. So it'll be a little cheaper for everybody on a person-to-person basis.

Well two things I wanted to just touch base on was one They're not going to lose fire services or first responder that has been said that will not happen It's not going to change that that will not happen We would not do that to our residents. That would be derelict of the city to our cut times or make it longer or whatever the case may be because we didn't get this fire assessment fee that doesn't make sense secondly we don't know what the vote's going to be so we're not saying i'm not saying this motion is not intended to oppose it this motion is intended to postpone it until we have a so what happens let's say november rolls around all these lawsuits come through it didn't pass 40 people voted not 60 so now we're not going to get that reduction on our avalorum but we are going to already pay an additional fee on top of the regular taxes we have so how are we going to explain that you talk about being responsible and sitting up here and being accountable to the city and being accountable to your constituents how are you going to explain that it's okay for them Vice Mayor, did you want to say something?

I just want to say the bottom line is it's not going to change the bottom line because the Miller Drade is going to come down to offset it. But it would be guaranteed money set aside for the fire service. But we don't know. And I'm not saying the service is going to stop. But suppose we don't build that new firehouse. You're going to have a longer lag time to get to a scene. So this could be that. That's a possibility. You know with traffic and everything else that's just you know Did you want to say something back?

I do because that's why we built that second firehouse at Deberry to go across the tracks So now we've got that extra and we are bouncing back and forth with each other to assist right? They pay us a fee We utilize their services. We don't utilize Deberry. I

That station in Deberry does not respond unless there's a mutual aid call. We respond to that station's services Deberry. On the other side of the tracks. And they paid for it, not the city of Orange City.

Yes, they got a grant. And so my point is that we're not going to lose fire services. We're not going to allow that to happen. We don't know what's going to happen in November. What's the rush? Because you have to have a deadline because the sky is falling. It's July and we need to make a decision and put it on the tax bill before it goes away.

that's not that's not the way it works you don't have to worry about that well and the other thing is is that this wouldn't even this wouldn't even take place until 2028 i think the governor said if they did their if it if they passed it is that true mr waters it becomes effective january 1st 2027 27. you won't see the impact until 2020. correct that's what i meant to say right a whole year later So it's a whole year later. We're almost two years ahead here trying to make a decision.

I can do it by next July. I'm just saying. Vice Mayor, did you say something?

I just want to say, what you're looking at there is not telling the whole story. That's what the problem is. That's not very clear. If you read the bill, if you watch the things that are going on, that would change your mind. This is just what you're reading, what was given to you. like Councilwoman Tiamson was saying, we're gonna give services. The governor said he will always make sure we have services, core services, and it's not gonna change, and then you're gonna lower the millage rate. What if we get a big storm? You're gonna lower the millage rate? What are we gonna do then? Because we just raised the millage rate because we had such bad storms, and we didn't know how we were going to sustain. So now you're telling me, oh, we're just going to lower the millage rate. You don't know that. You don't know what's in the future. That's what I meant by the crystal ball thing. You don't know. And for you to sit up here and say that you do, that's not fair. Because we're responsible. We're responsible up here. Like you said, we don't want people to come back and go, you made bad decisions. I don't want that either, right? So all's I'm saying is just give it a little bit of time. The July, I don't understand the July 1st thing. Can you explain that, city manager?

What it is is if this was motioned to go forward tonight, pass the staff staff and the consultant would bring back an initial resolution on July 28th that if it passed would then put the notice on the trim notice to all of every taxpayer

commercial residential so this is a rush rush to get it on the tax bill for the next year which doesn't make sense when we don't know until 2027 what's happening anyway we've been proactive on everything else and like i said there's a lawsuit right now do you want to stick your hand in that lawsuit right now because you don't know what's going to happen there's our residents are still getting their services no matter what they're getting them and they're not paying more for it right now they're getting their services Right? So why would we change it now until we know? I've had this conversation with our attorney. It's just not a smart move, counsel. It's not.

Chair. And opinion, and all of us do have those. But, and it's not so much, yes, I do have a passion. I have a genuine love for my city because I have been here so long. And I do believe that this assessment, we're going to, hey, when we initially did the millage rate, the first thing we said, we're going to have it high so we can lower it. That was the initial why the majority approved the millage rate we had, because they wanted to have that play in it. Okay? It's... It's a, how can I say it? I'm trying to be politically correct here, okay? It's a strong, just like I said, if you go out and talk to your residents and people really understand it, and like a lot of people, even the legislators have said, even though you read that bill, you can't read that bill and get any, type of sense out of it. What Vice Mayor has there is sense. You see, the bottom line stays the same. The bottom line stays the same. We are doing something for our residents. We are doing something for the people. And you might not see it now and you keep saying, we're gonna do this, we're gonna do, hey, we are preparing them for the worst. We're preparing them for the worst and hopefully we don't have to go that route.

It sounds like you're preparing the government for the worst looking out for the government and not the people and I'm not for that and and You know we talk about these timelines and all that but The bottom line is is there's no rush to impose tax more tax We just did stormwater and we raised a millage. That's we're gonna do one more thing right now Bad timing bad timing council. I think that excuse me excuse me i got the floor i got the floor right now i'll give you a turn again i promise okay like i said it's not about it's not about feelings up here it's about your job your job is to take care of the residents you're elected in and so we we did this we did this two weeks ago a workshop i i'll say this over and over and we talked about this and we we voted on this that this is not what we want to do and and councilman stafford you wanted to bring it back to discuss it further but we already voted on it so why are we even talking about it again nothing's changed from two weeks ago as far as the situation except for that we found out there's a lawsuit you know i didn't know about that two weeks ago but and that just makes things harder so why are we doing this we're going to be here for two more hours going back and forth we're going to keep going because i'm not going to give up i'm here to fight for the residents and vice mayor no disrespect your neighbors want to pay that that's great doesn't mean that there is others that don't you know what i mean because i you know like she said i've talked to residents well so have we i've talked to residents too we all have and your neighbors might say yes and my neighbors might say no and you know everybody's going to have different opinions but at the end of the day It comes down on us. We got to make the decisions and we're gonna be the bad ones here No matter which way we go, so we're responsible for the money We're gonna have to cut the budget 10% next year too. Let's think about that, right? So we're gonna take away more And in the hurricane season, I think they said there's 11 hurricanes out there now. We don't even know what's gonna happen. We had a couple rains a couple weeks ago, and there was flooding everywhere. So let's talk about how much that's gonna cost. If we do a fire assessment, that money goes to fire services only. It does not go to anything else. If you wanna take care of your residents, let's talk about everything else that we're worried about we're not gonna be able to pay for if they do take that away, right? they're not taking away fire services it's been clear they're not going to do that and we're not going to do that as a council i knew that because everybody's passionate about public safety up here so before you make that decision on what you see on that tablet which was sent to you just remember that that is just more people are gonna have to pay, and you don't know what's happened, what's coming. Why not wait until we see what's coming, and then when it comes, are we gonna get penalized if we wait and do it later? No. We could say, okay, we're gonna do it then. We have to do it now. We have no choice. We don't have to do it right now. It's only because there's certain council members that wanna do it, okay? We don't have to. There's nobody saying we have to. I want you to know that.

um christine question for you i know you talked to other city managers how many cities are looking to impose something like this um well debary is going has awarded their contract and is evaluating it and then i know last night deltona moved forward to put it on the tax notice and then edgewater but every i'll be at the city manager's meeting tomorrow but we've been talking at the city manager level for a while and they are all moving toward it As mentioned by Councilwoman Stafford, your legislators such as Chase Tremont has recommended you go ahead and look at doing this. We're just ahead of everybody else. The fact that you're having this tough discussion today, we're just ahead. You saw back in 2025 when you approved the budget to fund it, you knew we wanted to look at it and that's what you're doing. But it's going to be a new tool in the toolbox for most agencies in Volusia County. That's moving forward for consideration.

And that's what you said. The key is we're ahead of it It's my exact point we didn't do it because of tax reform right did it for a diversification of and deltona has 90,000 plus residents so you can imagine what their ad valorem taxes are coming in and then what's the other one you said the berry the berry the berry has a The plant there they get taxes from all that we don't have that tax base and we're a whole different cat so when you just don't compare us to that if they're doing it it's because they can do it did they impose did they raise their millage I don't know did they give them a stormwater tax recently I have no idea most cities did I think but I know I know you're trying to figure this out what's you know what's the best fit and I appreciate that but you have to know all the variables it's not just let's do this now

Councilwoman Stafford. Yes, and I understand what you're trying to say or what you're saying and I will continue to fight for what I believe in and what I believe in what is best for the residents not the government Not the government. I believe the residents are the people that's important in all of this. I

Believe you and and I as I said, I know your passion, but if that is true, then why are you pushing this? Why can't you wait and let's see if it's if it's the right thing to do Why wait?

My question to why wait we just went through this for the second. Okay for the fifth time Yeah, hey, why wait because we are going ahead of schedule.

She just said we're ahead We don't know what's gonna happen.

The only reason we are ahead of the ballgame is It's because we prepared for it. We planned for it. And so it's not an emergency right now because of good planning. And this is what the staff is trying to continue to have us do, good planning so we can move forward and do what's best for everyone, the majority of the people.

Council I just I'll fight till the end of the night I will be here all night because I just don't I don't agree with you I think we've already made this decision and why would we go back and redo the decision it I feel like it's a little bit of bullying like we need to change this now why we already made this decision it's not gonna hurt anybody to wait and see what happens and it's not gonna hurt it's is it gonna hurt if we make this decision tonight and we can't take it back absolutely

absolutely why not wait and make sure it's not going to hurt councilwoman stafford okay it's it's not going to hurt it really isn't and just like you said and you quit a couple of people on this council's quick say i have a passion if you had eight generations here and you love this city and you're not coming in trying to change this city not trying to be literal and bully people around to get what you want, you would understand where I'm coming from. You would really understand. That's not a order, I believe.

Just stick to the facts. No, you can't tell me. Point of order. Point of order. Okay.

You want to state your point of order?

Yes, my point of order is we're not talking about generational, who's been here, who cares about the city more. It's not about that. It's about assessing taxes that don't need to be assessed until we get an actual clear-cut picture of what's going to happen on the November. Yeah, I'm doing that. November ballot. That's what I'm saying. Yeah.

Okay.

But you keep saying passion, passion, passion. I didn't say passion about anything.

You did. Okay, let me just intervene for a minute. I said you have passion, but that doesn't give you a right to make accusations on people of bullying and things like that. We're not going there. Let's not do that council, okay? Let's stay professional up here and let's make a decision. Let's make a decision on this. It doesn't matter how long you've been here. I've been here 10 years. I love Orange City too. That's why I ran for mayor, because I love Orange City. Okay? So don't question any of the council members. Obviously, they wouldn't have ran for their position if they didn't love Orange City, right? We all love it. No disrespect to your generations here, because I know you have many generations here. I respect that. But don't bring that up on the council. We're not here tonight to do that. We're here to make a decision about a fire assessment tax, which we've already made the decision. So this is a discussion tonight. And I would like to...

you know end this discussion so that we can move on to our next things on the agenda so we can get out of here before midnight okay so it doesn't mean that we bring it to a vote no because this is the reason they came back you you you agreed to bring it back so okay make a motion

I make a motion to not approve the fire assessment tax this early in the game and put it off until after the state makes their decisions. And then we can come back and discuss it again. And if it's needed, then we will do it for the needs of the fire services.

I second.

Any comment from the public? No, I second. I got her second.

Would you mind stating for the record that you passed the gavel that way there's I passed the gavel the vice mayor made the motion Is there any comment from the public on this matter Good evening, Anthony Papello 702 Montclair Terrace, Orange City, Florida

This is an important subject that obviously is widely seen. The opinions are, as expressed, diverse. I believe that this is a decision that we should move forward on. We should, as a council, as a citizen, I encourage the council to do the right thing and to vote for the fire assessment fee and structure. Be responsible. Be responsive. This is targeted. The funding is a diversification. It's not a increase in taxes. It is a separation. Advalorum goes down that funding for the fire fee is the representation that the ad valorem Fire fee You don't you're not increasing taxes you're diversifying it You're separating it you're targeting it you're utilizing it for a very specific reason The reason this was brought up in as expressed by staff is nothing to do with what the state has proposed that we will all decide on. It has to do with what we need to do to be responsible and responsive for our fire service needs. Please pass this. Why now? Because time matters. Time is a great tool. If you don't do it now, you won't be able to do it for another year. It doesn't have to do with what the state is doing. It has to do with what we choose to do. It's not an increase in taxes. The bottom line is that it's targeted for fire services. I understand the passion and difference. Do the right thing. You're taking and creating an opportunity for us to be ahead, not ahead of the state, ahead of time. We have needs that we are falling behind on. We have fire services that are in a trailer.

time thank you is there anybody else i'd like to speak leah

Leah Brooks, 313 West French. So from what I understand, since I'm a taxpayer, I would be neutral. Like, I wouldn't pay any more if you pass this. So it's not going to affect me at all. But we have 183 residents who do not pay into fire services right now. So this would make sure that the fire services are spread out. Am I correct?

Yes, 186. 186? Okay.

Go ahead.

So each person's impact to their tax bill is dependent on what your assessed value is. So depending on where you are, you may see a property or a tax decrease. You may stay neutral or you may pay more. So we'd have to look at your individual. Overall, you're correct, the 186. pay nothing into city taxes for any service, police, fire, or otherwise. By adding this, they would then pay a portion into that fire service line item. Along with commercial buildings that are currently 100% exempt from taxes, they would then pay for their fire services on the ready. So it is individual. I could look at your tax bill with you and give you an idea of what it would be. But the idea is that the revenue coming into the city Remains neutral and doesn't increase how much we are we are generating We would now generate some from the fire assessment some from ad valorem instead of all of it coming from ad valorem Okay, that's where the revenue and have you guys heard from the fire chief about what his needs are?

What is department is facing? Has he come up here and spoken on that? I

directly about the fire assessment. I don't recall our fire chief speaking about the fire assessment, but definitely he gave a lengthy presentation a couple weeks ago on his department budget.

Okay, thank you. I'll have to go back and watch that. Thank you.

Is there anyone else that would like to speak in the public?

I have one more observation.

Sure, go ahead.

So we charge $150 this year. We don't recognize taxes if it even happens until 2028 tax roll. So we've gotten that amount and now we decide that's not enough. We can increase it. It doesn't stay at 150 and it's locked in there. It can be increased. Just saying.

Yes, Kristine.

So the way it works is it's like every other special assessment that the city currently operates and annually when you set those special assessment rates, you determine what that rate is gonna be and just like the taxes. So every July, all of your special assessments come and this one will either be there on the 28th with the rest of them, the lighting districts, the solid waste, stormwater, it would be in there or it won't be.

Well, so just cursory glance, it says that several cities and counties across Florida have recently proposed or officially approved significant increases in their fire assessment fee. So it can happen. Oh, yeah. Right. That was my point.

You're at the pleasure of the council.

Madam Mayor.

so to answer your question yes when you were asking about would it would it go from both sides I guess what I was just trying to say is you would get taxed from the fire assessment you would get your your your Avalara or your you know like they're saying would even out but you never know when that side's gonna go up or that side's gonna go up I think she just said it about the fire assessment I was thinking about the millage rate because if the state starts taking things away from us we need to cover other services also which means we may have to raise the millage rate and that's that was my point is we just don't know right now like are we gonna have to raise it right now we're you're saying you're proposing that we just even it out it sounds like a great idea but it's the unknown and who's gonna pay for it in the end

The residents, all of us that live here, right?

Christine, you don't live here, right? You live in Pearson? I do. Right, so it doesn't affect you. But anybody that lives in Orange City, and I don't think Mr. Waters does either, but if you live in Orange City, it's going to affect us. And that's more money. I mean, $150 was proposed as one of the rates. There's different rates that was proposed, but I think the middle rate was $150, right, for residents. Yeah, but it can be it can be lowered it could be lower or it could be higher we didn't decide that yet, but that's $150 more a year that we didn't pay right now and It may not seem like a lot to some but it may seem like a lot to others at it that are Retired or you know on a fixed income. So I just wanted to be clear about that vice mayor that you know, I we're saying it's not gonna change, it's gonna be neutral, but we don't know that. And that's what scares me, we don't know. And once we know, we know what's gonna happen, because I think someone came up and spoke about it doesn't depend on the state. That is not true. Our whole livelihood, our budget, we are gonna have to make our budget on what the state does to us. So it's all gonna be proactive and reactive. We're gonna have to figure out how we're gonna take care of business here. And that's what I'm saying is just think about that. we all are responsible up here do you really want to do that without knowing would you i i mean if you don't know what your bill is for your electric are you just going to send them 500 bucks no you want to know what you're paying you want to know what's happening i'm personally like to plan things i want to know and so and then i don't want to put something out there and it could be raised it could you know that's another thing you get a new council here in november and they might say you know what we want that firehouse built tomorrow and we're gonna we're gonna raise it more you never know everybody's different everybody's personality is different so with so many unknowns i just ask that the council not make that decision tonight thank you matter mayor

Vice Mayor, this is actually to Madam Mayor. Can you restate your motion, please, for clarity?

My motion was to not assess the fire assessment, to hold off until after we find out what the state requirements or the state bill is going to be, what their decisions are going to be, and bring it back for further discussion after we know what our unknowns are.

okay good thank you madam mayor so kaylee we have a motion and we have a second you want to do a roll call yes councilmember richardson councilmember darms yes councilmember thompson yes

Mayor Marks. Yes. Sorry, I know that's odd that you weren't called last, but, you know, the reorder, sorry. Council Member Stafford.

No.

Vice Mayor Graham.

No.

So we have a tie, so how does that work?

Motion dies.

Motion dies. Oh, dies.

So the motion dies. Yes. so the motion dies so what happens at this point it can be brought up a month I'm gonna let mr.

Waters take her if you don't mind is there another motion does anyone have another motion no

Councilwoman Johnson, did you raise your hand?

I did, but no, I don't.

No, Councilwoman Stafford.

Yes, I'd like to make a motion that we move forward with the firefighters assessment fee. Okay.

Second. We have a motion, we have a second. Any public comment? Okay, we'll bring it back for the question. I got a public comment. Okay, we got a public comment.

Sharon Stafford, 461 South Clock Street, Orange City, Florida. As I sit back there, I wasn't gonna say anything, but I keep hearing our comments being made about we don't know, we don't know this, we don't know that. You know what? We don't know whether we gonna walk out of here. But we're planning to. We don't know whether we gonna get in a car accident before we get home. We be planning not. So planning, planning, planning. I've heard people say they plan this and they plan that, but one thing about it, we cannot plan what's gonna happen tomorrow. We are planning for the benefit, from what I'm hearing, of the residents and the city of Orange City. And I think if I'm hearing correctly, it's a couple of the cities around, some larger than we are, some are smaller than we are, that are already pushing this plan. So why are we sitting here? Why are we not wanting to plan? We plan our life, but we don't know whether we gonna be here today or tomorrow. But we are planning based on what we've heard and the best of our ability to look at what's been said and being done, I think that I'm gonna go, I'm not a vote, I can't make you all make a decision, but I think it's gonna be in our best interest to move forward with the plan. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other public comment? Okay, call to question. Before you call the question, let's make it clear, because it's getting late and we're flipping back and forth. Can you restate the motion just so we know what we're voting on? Sorry.

The motion was to move forward with the Friday assessment fee. Thank you.

Council Member T. Onsen?

No.

Vice Mayor Graham. Yes. Councilmember Stafford. Yes. Councilmember Richardson. Councilmember Darms. No. Mayor Marks.

No. Motion fails. We're going to be here all night, people. Any other motions on the floor?

I'd like to restate my original motion this motion was not intended to oppose fire funding it wasn't to shut it down it was to postpone it until after the election time when we see if we have 60% of Orange City vote yes or no on this ad valorem structure that the governor has proposed that's what I was asking to do the taxes aren't going to change until 2028 tax roll So if we change it for the first tax roll coming up in 2027 We are what banking that money for what reason and if they don't go through with the ad valorem tax change then we have that money now we have it on our bill and We don't have a change so you can say you're gonna up and down the ad valorem Taxes or the millage rate you can up and down that all you want, but we don't know that We can't plan for that as someone just stated. I we've got too much going on in this city that requires our ad valorem to our millage rate to i know it's i know so the motion is not intended to oppose it so i move to postpone consideration of the proposed fire assessment fee until the first regular city council meeting following certification of the results of the november 2026 ad valorem tax election second okay we have a motion we have a second any public comment

Okay, we'll bring it back for the question, and this is a motion to postpone. I have to say this, because it's getting much, go ahead.

All right, Vice Mayor Grimm.

Yes.

Council Member Stafford.

No.

Council Member Richardson. No. Council Member Darmes.

Yes.

Council Member Tiamson. Yes.

Mayor marks, yes, and the motion passes to postpone it until after the election in November. Okay, we're moving on to reports. Nine a city manager report.

The only thing I'm going to do tonight is hand out a draft report. the city's take-home vehicle policy the front page is the details of what was requested by councilmember Don Thompson and the request was further to provide it to all council so I'm going to distribute it real quick there might be more than seven we'll just retrieve whatever's left over at the other end So a highlight of this is the item number one was about a list of all individuals currently or previously assigned to take-home vehicles, and then it provided for details. The second is vehicle information, make model year, VIN, fleet number. And then the third on that second question was current status of the vehicle. That's pending. That's not included in this. The majority of the remaining requested items is there are no responsive records. And this is due to the fact that prior to this current budget year, we did not have funding, nor do we have software that allows us to track not only our fleet, but our infrastructure, the roofs, the ACs. that was funded in this year's budget and there is a draft RFP being drafted. I think I said draft-wise. So much of the information that was identified in this request doesn't exist but will exist at some point in the future once that software's purchased, once we program it and put in, either we start with a starting point and then build forward and we'll have a history Um because the reason you have to have a starting point is because we don't currently track much of this information So staff will continue to comb through it. This is an effort of um reaching out to the departments that currently operate a take-home vehicle Which is your fire department has sworn officers and admin that have our first responders and are on call 24 7. They have vehicles their take-home policy is Different than the the city policy that is included Your fire personnel have, I think, seven take-home vehicles for their first responding administration, and they fall under the city policy and the city policies in there. With regard to your public works and utilities, nobody takes home a vehicle unless they're on call, whether that's on call because the nature of the position or they're on call because they're the one who carry the phone and when somebody reports on Facebook that their water wasn't turned on today and the city manager reads that she can then call that person on call or their that department and they respond but not everybody utilizes that so it's it's they have an assigned vehicle if they're on calls for that day or that week they can elect to take it home they they don't and I'm told that we don't track it but not everybody does utilize it so that's a high overview of what we've gathered this request came in on June 15th and we've just this is what we've been able to bring together as of today And I expect if you have questions while we go through the budget process, we'll be able to work through the details.

I think we'll need time to read through all this. Oh, no, I'm just issuing it. I'm trying to listen and look at all this at the same time, and it's a lot.

The city manager's report is just to share the information, and then I'll wait for feedback or questions at a later date. And that is all I have. Are there any questions I can answer? Any questions for the city manager?

Yep, just a couple.

Just cursory glanced on this cursory report. The fire, I understand that. And then we've got public works, got that. And then we've got Orange City vehicles list. Some of this is probably... police I'm assuming it should have a redacted it'll say that yes and then each one has a heading of utilities public works for the utilities vehicle and then police and so no administrative offices have take-home vehicles

Well, I think previous ones might have, like your public services director, but that vehicle's been reassigned to a staff member.

Okay, so currently there are no other employees in the city besides fire, Orange City Public Works, Orange City Utilities, and police that have take-home vehicles.

To my knowledge, that is correct.

Okay, perfect. All right, so we'll see more later when we do budget.

I will update as we finish off that item highlighted in, because what this doesn't include is vehicles that might be sitting as a pool car. So when a fire or a police car breaks down, we have a car that we can then take down off the road and assign. because that's not assigned to somebody it may not be in here so when it said current status of the vehicle i took that as a wholesome and that means everything in the fleet not just the ones that are currently assigned because if we have vacant positions they may not be on there and so as a position uh we know we have at least four vacancies in police so i imagine there's four more vehicles

aren't assigned so therefore there may not be on this so we're gonna comb through it and see if there's things that need to be tweaked but in six days this is what we were able to pull together from those various departments and thank you any other questions for the manager I have a question I asked for the flowchart and I asked her to send it to the whole council so we could see as the positions change to see who's our department So in case anybody asked us as counsel questions We know the answers to that because a lot of times we don't even know half Half the employees because we don't know who's in what position and there's turnover as we talked about earlier So my one question was is I My understanding is that Chief Long is our fire chief, but he's also holding a position in public works. Can you tell me where it says, anywhere where it says that that's allowed to hold two positions in the city?

Oh, the only time we get concerned about two positions would be if it was a dual office. And he is also, while he is the acting public works head, his deputy, Sam Pilcher, is the acting deputy. so there is no dual anything.

So he's not fire chief right now?

Well, I mean, he's still in the... Because he's listed on that flow chart.

So does he only get one pay or two? One pay. I just had to ask. I just want to know.

One pay and out of class for your personnel policy.

Because, I mean, over the years, I've never seen one person hold two positions. That's why I asked. You got paid. You got a stipend, though, didn't you? Get a little extra for doing both?

yeah he does too well he gets five percent he just doesn't get two salaries your question was does he get two salaries no ma'am nobody's getting double paid so he is getting a stipend for doing two positions i got 10 as a charter officer okay that's what i wanted to know thank you you're welcome okay moving on to the city clerk's report um

I just have an election update as all. So after qualifying for district four and district five, both of those candidates have qualified unopposed and will be elected come November. District four will be Anthony Papillo and district five will be Fran Darms. We do have two races on the ballot come November. It would be District 3, and those two candidates are Sherry Pugh and Brett Marquez. And then we will also have the at-large seat on the ballot with Dana Knight and Steven Jensel. And that is all I have.

Any questions for the clerk? Okay, thank you. City Attorney, you got anything tonight?

Nothing for the group.

Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you.

Any new business council And we've already done the approval minutes council and mayor's comments we'll start with council on Stafford You have any comments Council

yes i do and what i'm asking from from my residence is to just please be patient with us we're learning a lot we're doing a lot and i know we have a lot of Unhappy residents right this time. But what I'm asking is for them to trust us and Even though it's been said we're trying to be transparent and you're saying not all of us are trying to be transparent we want to be conscious of what we do with the city's monies and I mean I'm getting a whole lot of complaints about and what I'm asking for the resident of the residents is please be patient with us we're working through some things and And it's one thing that I would hope for, and like Mel said, I don't think it's going to happen, is that the dice that's here now, the council that's here now, that we can agree to disagree without attitudes or whatever, whatever, move forward. We're here to serve the people. That's all I want. Let's come on one accord and represent our people.

Councilwoman Richardson?

No?

Councilwoman Thompson?

I don't have anything. No?

Vice Mayor?

No, I said nothing.

All right, well, I got one thing to say. I'm sorry, I'll go fast. I just wanted to put it on the record that there was an ethics charge that was put before me for... allegedly trying to pay a kid off for having him speak highly of me at a meeting and I just wanted to let you know that I received a letter today that the Ethics Commission found it in hearsay and the case is closed and it was not factual so I wanted everybody to know on the record that I did not do that and they investigated and it's closed so we'll just keep fighting the fight here and i agree with councilwoman stafford that we're here for the residents we're not here to have personal things up here let's just keep getting the work done let's try to get through these meetings with getting some progress done instead of holding progress up and and make it a better city for everybody thank you And I just need a motion to adjourn.

Motion to adjourn.

Second.

Got a motion, we got a second. All in favor, say aye.

Aye.

Meeting adjourned. That was good news, right?

That was good news. Bring that, baby. Good night. Right? Wow. What you got planned for the rest of the week? I think I'm gonna bring the grandkids with me. Good idea.

Yeah.

Thank you.