City Commission - Regular Meeting

Test, test one, two.

Welcome, welcome. Thank you very, very much. Oh, we need a couple more minutes.

Hold on.

We don't have all the materials yet. Hey, welcome everyone. Today is August 31st. It is 317 p.m. And we're here for a budget workshop discussion. Mr. City Clerk, if you would, please call the roll.

Commissioner Good?

Yeah.

Vice Mayor Hernandez?

Here.

Commissioner Rodriguez? Here. Commissioner Schwartz? Here. Mayor Castillo? Here. City Manager Dodge? Here. City Attorney Gorin?

I'm here. Thank you very much. And also on the dais with us is Lisa Truong, our Chief Financial Officer and Assistant City Manager. Thank you so much for joining us. Today we're going to review the budget for fiscal year 2026. 2027 is recommended by staff. And we also have a package of information regarding Amendment 3. Mr. City Attorney, if we could, Let's start off the meeting. We've never had one quite like this before. We've had many budget workshops before, but we've never had one quite like this one. Could you please begin the discussion and issue the special rules that we have for today's meeting?

With your permission, Mayor, I'd be happy to try. There's a statute which governs the issues regarding advocacy versus education versus facts and circumstances. The statute which we've referred to before in recent days is section 106.113 of the Florida statutes, the title of which, it's in the state election code in chapter 106, references expenditures by local governments. And what it tells us is that a local government essentially may not expend or authorize the expenditure of, and a person or group may not accept public funds. for a political advertisement or any other communication sent to electors concerning an issue, referendum, or amendment, including any state question that is subject to a vote of the electors. This subsection applies to a communication initiated by local government or a person acting on behalf of a local government, irrespective of whether the communication is limited to a factual information or advocates for the passage or defeat of an issue, referendum, or amendment. This subsection does not preclude a local government or a person acting on behalf of the local government from reporting on official actions of a local government's governing body. And these are key words, members of the commission, in accurate, fair, and impartial manner, posting factual information on a government website or in printed materials, which we'll have before you this afternoon, hosting and providing information at a public forum. You've conducted public forums in the past with other matters such as this. providing factual information in response to an inquiry, or providing information as otherwise authorized or required by law. The consequence of this statute is, and it was revised in 2022, it does limit to some degree, and I can use the word great degree, but I use the word to some degree, Ability of local governments, which specifically only includes, for the record, a county, a municipality, a school district, or a political subdivision of the state. It does not include the legislature, does not include the governor, does not include constitutional offers as such as well. The consequence of all this, Mayor and Commission, is that what you had before you will be a presentation by your city administration, by the city manager, which will be primarily based upon factual information. to the extent that it is legally possible, which must, as the statute suggests and also requires, it is accurate, fair, and impartial. That's the basis on which you'll be hearing information today from the professional staff of the city through the city manager. I reviewed the document and find it to be legally sufficient on which to proceed. Your commentary on the record is sitting in a public forum, and you're able to comment consistent with the statute and consistent with what is both accurate, fair, and impartial as you proceed with this presentation today that's been highlighted as a workshop and for the purpose of discussion is limited to the mayor and commission's conversations, along with your city manager and professional staff as needed. Happy to answer any questions, Mayor, but thank you for the opportunity.

So we have to be very careful, commissioners, how we treat this information to keep our questions factual and to rise above any possible allegation here that we are either favoring or disfavoring or advocating for or against the measure that's going to be on the ballot because the state has made it illegal for us as city and local officials to do that. They are, of course, free to do that, correct, Mr. City Attorney?

Yes. Yes, they are.

And state officials are free to do that as well. It's just the local officials, is that correct, that are prohibited from having?

Statute tells us county, municipality, school district, or other political subdivision.

And for that reason, lamentably, even though our city charter does not call for public participation in budget workshops or any workshops, today we will not be, and I know that there are several members of the public who are here, we will not be taking a public comment today. There will be ample opportunity for people to speak up at the podium of the people when we have our budget workshops prior to adoption. But this is a special meeting. And in the abundance of caution, in order to keep any allegation from arising that we are advocating either for or against any measure, the only voices you will hear today are from administration and from this dais. Mr. Dodge, how would you like to begin?

Excuse me. First, Mayor, I'll begin with the proposed budget, and then the second presentation is on Amendment 3.

Without objection. Okay.

The agenda for the proposed budget is we're going to review all the funds, the general fund highlights, the road and bridge highlights, the utility fund highlights, and function source savings. The total budget for all funds is $596,629,445. All funds are balanced as required by Florida statutes. And the proposed budget has been published Since August 1st, online, the general fund budget, as you will see, is $297,270,603. And then we have individual funds, and there's several of those, but the key ones are the general fund, the road and bridge fund, the utility fund.

Mr. Dodge, before you continue, could you, or maybe Ms. Chong, if you prefer, Whenever we see this list, and we've seen this list in every budget that I've been part of in the last 22 years, people walk away saying, well, I don't understand. You have $596 million. But not listed under these codes is property tax. And so it creates a... a difficulty for people to understand between how much we collect in property tax and how much the total budget is and why money from other parts of the budget can't be used for different parts of, say, funding that is supported by property tax. Could you just spend a moment talking about that a little bit and what the limitations are on the rest of the budget and what property tax versus non-property tax coverage? Because that's an often asked question.

If you want, Mayor, I'd be happy to address that. Please. The general fund, the revenues.

If you could speak into the mic a little bit better, thank you.

I'm sorry, Mayor. Yes. The general fund is the only fund that receives the ad valorem taxation. All of these other funds, like road and bridge fund, we receive monies from the state through gas taxes. And the general fund also subsidizes that budget, since the state does not provide us sufficient funds to do that. The building fund is a separate fund that's based upon revenue that is received from permitting, nothing to do with ad valorem. And all of these other smaller programs, like law enforcement grants and opioid legislation settlement, are all from grants from other sources. But they're designated for those sources and nothing within the general fund. The Older Americans Act is monies that we've received now since 1976. that really do not increase, but that provides the services for the operation of our senior center, community bus transportation for our seniors. However, even those funds aren't sufficient that the general fund is required to subsidize that program. debt service fund. That money is received from the general fund basically to cover debt that we currently have. The utility fund at this point has no debt, but all of the revenues that provide the budget for the utility fund come from fees for the services of providing water and wastewater services. The sanitation fund are monies that we receive from the public in the form of on their water bill for the collection of garbage. And the public insurance fund, the general pension fund, fire and police trust fund, and other post-employment benefits, those are significant dollars and they do come out of the general fund. We do receive some state funds for pension But primarily, it comes from that. So when you're talking about the general fund of the 297, it is a mixture of revenue, ad valorem, state-shared funds, communication taxes, and other sorts of funds simply to run general government.

So when a Pembroke Pines resident is reviewing this 596 and they see all these line items, we are not able to use, for example, budget code 504 or budget code 201 or budget code 127 to fund things that are in the property tax line item under 001. Is that correct?

That's correct, Mayor. And sometimes it's a little deceiving when you say the total budget is $596. Actually, it's somewhat duplicative because the revenue for general pension trust fund comes from the general fund, but we have to set That up is a separate fund. The same way with the police and fire pension trust fund, those monies come out of the general fund. And there are some other state funds that were received. And other post-employment benefits, those funds are received from the general fund, from the road and bridge fund, from the utility fund. So they're already being expended from one fund, but they have to be accounted for separately.

Thank you very much. Please continue.

The taxable value as of 7-1-26 increased by 4.97% to $20 billion. OK, what happened?

20.92 billion.

Yeah, right. 20.92 billion. The debt service millage rate is .2507, which is .0355 lower than the current rate and will generate approximately $5 million for debt service payments that were required to make. The general fund property taxes, the Aggregate proposed millage rate of 5.9197 is less. It's 0.0355 lower than the combined millage rate for the current year. This rate requires three affirmative votes at the first hearing to approve a tentative millage and four affirmative votes at the second hearing to adopt. The value of every mill is approximately $19,875,863.

So in other words, if we were to lower the millage rate that you're proposing from 5.917, excuse me, 5.9197 to 4.9197, we would have to come up with about $20 million worth of cuts. Is that correct?

In the current year's budget, yes. That is correct.

Go right ahead.

The general fund, the 10-year millage rate history for our community, as you will see, over the last 10 years, our millage rate has decreased. We have not increased it over that period of time. So we're at now 5.6690. That's the operating millage. And the debt service millage has been reduced to 0.2862.

Are you able to go back, let's say, 15 years? I know that we're going back some years here, but it's the 11th consecutive year of aggregate millage reduction, which is pretty profound. But are we able to go back further in time, if residents should ask, so that they could see a longer trend line of what the millage rate has been?

Yes, Mayor. We could go back 15 years. We could go back 20 years, whatever you would desire to see.

Thank you.

OK, the next is the general fund aggregate millage rates and taxable value comparison for the top 10 Broward County cities. Currently, the adopted budget for, I'm sorry, the adopted budget in 2016-17, the millage rate was 6.2381 in our proposed. 10 years later, it's 5.197. which is a decrease of 0.3184. And that's a history of comparing the other cities to us as far as what millage rates are. So we're really at the lower end of what the millage rate is. If we look at the general fund residential taxable value as of 7-1-26, We have 56,826 residential properties. 40,448, or 71.2%, have homestead exemption. 2,596 single-family properties pay no taxes at all. So as you will see, the Amendment 3 would not at all affect them. In fact, the number of paying no taxes probably would increase. The general fund residential fire assessment rates, this is the history from 2017-18 fiscal year to 2026-27. The proposed rate is $437.63. The change is $29.49. That increase is primarily due to personnel cost. If you look at where the money comes from in revenues, you will see that ad valorem taxes for the city, 38% of all of our revenue comes from ad valorem. Charges for services is 16%. Special assessments is 12%. Intergovernmental revenue is 6%. Franchise fees is 7%. Rents and royalty is 7%. That's buildings that we rent out in the city, as well as cell tower revenue. The utility taxes is 6%. If you look at how we spend, and where it goes as far as expenses. 36% is the police department. Fire service is 26%. So if you combine the two, 62% of your budget is for public safety. Recreation and cultural arts is 9%. Public service is 10%. which are environmental service, maintaining roads, and services. Tech services for IT is 5%. And all of the other administrative budgets are the 3%, 2%, and 5% numbers. The general fund personnel budget. The personnel budget is $177.5 million. This budget is created by negotiations of increases for the next year for firing general employees, which have already been approved. Net changes and positions include reduce one police support specialist one, In fire, there was a request for add three lieutenants and add one assistant division chief. Engineering and utilities, adding one senior engineer. The general fund capital budget. is for the entire budget is $10.4 million out of the $297 million. So you can see what we spend on capital dollars is very small compared to all of our other expenses. In the police department, we have budgeted $1.4 million for 18 police vehicles and related equipment. That's the lowest amount we've requested in a number of years. $420,000 for portable radios. in the general government buildings, $900,000 for bathroom renovations in all of the city-owned schools, $485,000 for playground improvements at Central Campus, and $325,000 for windows and doors to prep building 39 for public service where we store surplus and auction items. The capital budget for fire is $1.2 million for a new fire engine, $1.1 for tactical support unit, $429,000 for an ambulance, and $0.325 for the expansion of the fire training facility. And at the Howard C. Forman campus, which the city maintains and controls, the widening of those roads has become a problem with the traffic in and out of there. So we have budgeted $600,000 for that. The next fund we have is the Road and Bridge Fund, and that one stands at $7.9 million. The budget includes improvements needed for ADA compliance and the share of costs for South Broward Drainage District for the pump station construction that this commission agreed and approved a couple of years ago. Appropriations include managing public rights away, landscaping and maintenance, pressure washing in sidewalks and medians along the city major roads, litter control for right-of-way areas, maintaining swales, drainage, rehabilitation, and street lighting. All resurfacing projects are to be funded as part of the strategic plan. So there were not sufficient funds this year in doing any improvements or road resurfacing in the road and bridge fund. The utility fund is 87.8 million, and within that budget it includes 14 million for capital projects, 7.8 million for wastewater treatment plant rehabilitation, 2.4 million for water plant equipment improvements and Biscayne aquifer well replacement, 1.8 million for metering upgrades for water, reading meters for our water, $1.1 million for the Howard C. Forming water sewer utilities improvement, and $1 million to force main pipe restoration. One issue I'd like to explain to you, because this has come up before, we have saved over $72 million from function sourcing. Below illustrates some of the savings to the general fund. This has come up many times before. And I've been asked, what is the difference between function sourcing, hiring an outside company to come in, rather than retaining public employees? If we look at our DBI contract, and that's the Operation Maintenance and Management of Municipal Public Rights Way and Wetland Maintenance, the estimated annual cost to that contract is $637,531 over a five year period. That has saved us. No, I'm sorry. Since we started the function sourcing in that area, we have saved $7.7 million. The Calvin Giordano Associates CGA contract for parks, operation, and maintenance. That contract was 1.333011. Since we began that contract, the city has saved $16,100,000. What that means is if we had retained the traditional city employee with our benefits and contracts and everything else, we would have had to pay $16 million more. The Calvin Giordano Associates facilities and grounds, the initial savings the first year was $504,000. The average annual savings as of 2024 was $2.4 million. So since we've had that contract, the city has seen a savings of $12,600,000. And the facility contract services, where we retain professional employment services for employees in just about every department we have in the city, the estimated annual savings for that is $5.7 million. So since we've been doing that, we have saved $35,900,000. So I think that's significant in that that $72 million was a savings to the residents of the city. The first public hearing is going to be this Thursday evening at 6 o'clock. Then on the 14th, a week or so later, the fire protection assessment hearing is going to be at 515 on Monday, September 14th. And the final budget hearing is September 16 at 6 p.m. here at City Hall.

So this is basically a preview. This isn't the first budget hearing. This is a preview of what the budget's going to be.

Correct. This is what you have in the booklet we provided to you. We've had meetings before on the budget, but this is a summary before the September 3 meeting so you have an idea where all of the revenue is coming from, what our expenses are. That's based on the current millage for the fiscal year 25-26. The next presentation I have for you is the impact to the community based on Amendment 3, both for the first year and the second year, and how that affects our budget and what we need to do to consider. Mr.

Dodge, if I can interrupt you. So, City Attorney, just so that we're clear, there were two statutes. One of them was the... One of them was the... the vote to put this on the ballot. And then the other one that started this year was to begin reviewing budgets for a 10% or whatever. Is this presentation in satisfaction of both?

No, Mayor. That workshop won't take place till next year after January when it becomes effective. But they kind of run one in the same, because Amendment 3, with the first $150,000 exemption, that's going to have more than those cuts. For the first year, it's over $19,000.

Gotcha. OK. I just wanted to make that clear. Please, go ahead. Mayor, just one second if I can. Yes, sir. Just for the record, Mr. Dodge, as are you, to reference House Bill 1329. We provided a memo to you when the bill was signed by the governor, and it does provide for a unique approach to budgeting effective as of January 1 of 27. But it does come into play at that point. It does require some preparation, et cetera. You have the memo. Happy to answer any questions. But this is not what this is about this evening.

Thank you. Go right ahead. Mayor, before I continue, I forgot. I went through it quickly. If any commissioner has any questions or comments concerning the proposed budget that we presented to you this evening.

Does anyone wish to be heard on the budget? I see some hands. We'll start with the vice mayor.

I wanted to thank the manager, because we had a long meeting especially when it comes to graphics. The most interesting, and I've seen this one before, the general fund 10-year millage rate history, that's wonderful. But for folks in government, we all understand it. To me, more powerful images are not only the following slide, which is general fund aggregate millage rates and taxable value comparison to top 10 Broward cities, but also in this book, which I'm thrilled to read probably tonight and tomorrow, the page 20 and 21. Because working in communications for my 21-year career, Many times, I think folks assume that residents or others that may pay attention to the news truly understand this. And they don't, oftentimes. So I really appreciate page 20, which shows the community profile and shows what our... Vice Mayor, just one more.

Yeah. I don't have a book. It wasn't provided to me.

I see that we have... Commissioner, you were provided with it a couple weeks ago.

When?

You had asked for it from... Yeah, I brought mine here. No, well... Lisa, was it not provided?

Is this the PDF that I asked you to... Okay. Yes, the same book. Okay.

Since you asked for it and we knew you had it, we made copies for everybody else.

You made a hard copy of it. Okay. Okay.

Thank you. Do you need a copy now? I can give you mine if you need to look at it.

Well, I didn't know what this presentation was going to be tonight. Okay. I didn't have my questions answered that I had submitted. I know staff is working on it. And I look forward to seeing that on Wednesday, so I can be prepared on Thursday. Correct. Okay, so 21, I just need, because I don't have the book, and I want to follow the Vice Mayor.

I'm talking about page 20, so it says. Okay, so I want to. Look at a community, at the top it says community profile comparison to local cities, 2026, 2027. Got it. I'm starting there, but I'm also going to reference the next page. But that's the kind of information that I think is important. Oftentimes through no fault of our own, and I'm not going to speak for Commissioner Rodriguez, but being a comms professional herself, I'm sure she has thoughts as well. Sometimes our city gets grouped with potentially other neighboring cities in this county or elsewhere. as having unreasonably high millage rates. Well, we don't. And you could see it there. Between Coral Springs, Fort Lauderdale, Hollywood, Miramar, Pembroke Pines, Pompano Beach, and Sunrise, other than Fort Lauderdale, which has a different economy than our bedroom community, we have the second lowest combined millage rate based off of 2025. And I can say this now because we're all here. I insisted, although it's the manager's call at the end of the day. Commissioner Schwartz, now I'm referencing this one, not the book, for one second. On the function sourcing, which is a very interesting name. I understand that's the jargon. I would just say private contracting. Contracting out. Or contracting out, however you want to call it. But we'll go with what it says here. $72 million savings. Now, I know we have to dive into the numbers. I'm not going to be up here very long and mentioning it, but presentation matters. When there's a lack of clarity, misinformation or disinformation can fill the void. I know. I experienced it in Miami-Dade, and that budget was eight billion with the B dollars. where folks would ask you, why can't you just take from Miami International Airport and reallocate it over here? Well, because it's illegal, because they're enterprise funds. And you can't just take from one pot and give to another. It's governed by state law. So that's why I spent, although the manager only had about an hour, I took almost two and a half hours, sorry about that, of his time about two weeks ago insisting that this kind of information be made available so that every citizen who wishes to engage, like my friend and constituent Scott Barnett, who absolutely loves looking at our city budget, that they have this information to point to, to see what it is that our city does, in fact, use to operate. I want to thank the administration for that. I did want to also point to, I'm back in the book, Commissioner Schwartz, I'm sorry, page 21 at the very top. So the per capita city general fund cost compared to population.

And now my eyes are starting to challenge me.

We have cities listed, Coral Springs, Fort Lauderdale, Hollywood, Miramar, Pembroke Pines, Pompano Beach, and Sunrise. You have their populations and their general fund expense budgets. This is also critical because it shows that you get a pretty good deal living in the city of Pembroke Pines. Those are just my comments. Mayor, back to you.

Thank you very much. Commissioner Good.

Commissioner Dries My first thing is thank you to to the staff for preparing the document I did request a physical copy which have been kind of skimming through and reading through I Think off the top of my head one of the biggest things is the communication of all this especially with the conversation on amendment 3 this is a pretty hefty book of about a 432 pages. And I know that we are internally working on some ways to get that information out. I know we've, in the past, put out some information once we've adopted the budget and while we're going through the budget hearings. I would really appreciate if the communications team put something together in advance of the first budget hearing, just to simply acknowledge that this is what's going on. Obviously, we have two budget hearings. The public can come and speak during that first one, as well as the second one. And there's some time in between for everybody to reach out to us. Whether in a group or individually or to that email we have set up the budget at peapines.com but that means that communication and that Request for feedback needs to be happening now because what has happened sometimes is that we go through the first hearing and then we get some kind of feedback and we're already in the second hearing and it's a lot harder to from my end to be able to dive into these questions and these line items leading up to a second hearing than it would be on the first hearing prior to us accepting certain things. And that also goes for those of us on the dais as well. If we come forward with proposals about what to cut, I really, really hope that we are being as detailed as possible or what to add as detailed as possible as well within the line items, because I simply don't feel comfortable in a first or second hearing simply saying, OK, let's slash it this much, and then dropping it on our staff's head to figure out the numbers. Because I don't think that that's a fair way to work from the dais to the staff members as well. And I want to make sure that we're all in a well-oiled machine, not rushing last minute, mostly because who knows if I make it to that second hearing, but I really, I'm hoping, I'm hoping I'll be there. But in that case, kind of doing things, especially with the public much in advance, because Lisa, when, when was this publicized? The August 1, right? So it's the 31st. We've obviously had some time to digest it. And I don't want to come across even a first or a second hearing just throwing numbers out there, because I don't think that that's fair for us to be able to digest all of that within a meeting or for our staff to be able to bring it back to us. So I want that feedback that we get from constituents to be well in advance. And if we put the communication out there, budget meetings happening, blah, blah, blah, blah. Put out some of these nice figures that we have in the presentation to be done well in advance and to remind everybody that we do have that email we set up last year or the year before to do that. In addition, I would ask the communications team also to look at some of the work. I mentioned Coral Springs a lot. They've been putting out some really good information regarding their budget. I think we talked about it last time, a platform that can digest some of this information a little bit more easily online, because flipping through all these pages is a little complicated. And so I know that that's been in the works, but if there's any way to expedite that to get that through a first hearing or find some kind of alternative to be able to perform or not perform to place this online in a easier way to like digest and read as not only for ourselves because we have the physical copies but for our our Residents as well one of the things that I I also wanted to point out one of the questions I had for the function sourcing savings. I know it's a large number, 72 million, but from how far back are we calculating that?

They vary. Some were five years, some were a little longer. It's when the contract began. 2014 for some, but not all.

So I think this would be really good to, if we can, I think it's a good figure to promote, to be completely honest. It's a good system that we have and very different from other cities as well. But if we put out the $72 million, I don't want misinterpretation that that's been the saving this last year or just within a year. If we can put a date, whatever the date is of even the first one of these descriptions, that would be ideal so we can have something that's a little bit more clear. my opinion and then I know I want to thank mr. Dodge and mr. Bonilla for having a meeting with me we went through some of the things that I had suggested during our visioning sessions that made it on to here and there's small things like just more funding for our communications department which I I was really looking forward to and I was informed that there was a new position being added as well of obviously now we have um we're in the search of a communications department director all of that thing i think is going to make this process a little bit easier in the future i did ask for i haven't double checked but it is a small enough amount that if we have to take it out of something else some kind of funding for the interns that we have for the summer or if we're having it through the year. I know we formalized that through our HR department previously, and I really want to be an advocate for if we're getting this kind of labor and internship work from students in the community, we don't just take it as free labor, but instead we actually give them some kind of stipend for their work throughout the summer or through the other semester. So that's one thing that I've advocated. And I know you mentioned we could possibly make it happen. I'll confirm on that before the meeting. It's a relatively small amount, but I think it shows some of the value that we put into our younger residents as well. And I had had another request, but being that our budget may be constrained to come November, I think that's something to, regarding an intergovernmental affairs person, something that I'm hoping to evaluate later on in the year. But those are my visioning session bits that made it onto here, so I do appreciate that. And just an emphasis on the communication part would be amazing. Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner Schwartz.

Commissioner, City Manager Dodge, how much money was set aside for commissioner town halls?

Excuse me. How much are we set aside? Yes. I don't believe we have any dollar amount set aside for a town hall meeting. Normally, those kind of meetings are charged to an expense account if there are any expenses to the commission budget. Normally the town hall meetings is a question of bringing people in here We don't pay anyone so I can't think of any expenses, right?

That was a different response. I had six months ago Well, it costs money to have a district to town hall.

It wasn't in the budget. No. No. No when you say

Town hall meeting yeah, yeah if district commissioners want to like engage I think Commissioner I can't hear the same magic.

Well, that's because I'm speaking. Oh, yeah, let's please stay cool Thank you If you're referring to the meeting you asked about, it wasn't considered a town hall meeting per se. If I can recall back when you had asked one for us to open the building for that.

Yeah, I recall you saying that there was an expense to that. Now you're saying there isn't one.

Well, if you open a building, yeah, there could be utilities or something. I'm just saying, there's a departure of what's being said tonight versus what was six months ago. It's not an expense for your hiring people or paying staff to come here. I'm sorry, I didn't hear you.

How much money is set aside for my colleagues to have outreach meetings? Are you setting aside $2,000, $5,000?

Commissioner, I don't know what you mean by outreach.

Constituent engagement. If we want to turn the lights on and have a gathering of First Amendment exchange.

Commissioner, the city manager said that any expenses along those lines would be attached to the city commission budget. I didn't hear that. Yes, I heard it. So I'm just letting you know.

Maybe I didn't hear you because I couldn't hear everything he was saying.

Okay.

So is it under the commissioner budget is the question.

That is what he said.

Mayor, why are you answering for him? I'd like to hear from the city manager, not my mayor. Okay. Okay.

Mr. Manager.

Mr.

Manager.

Yes, Mayor.

Are town hall meetings funded at any expense that might be associated, funded from the commission budget?

Actually, it's from the governmental budget, which is for all funds. So it wouldn't only be for commission projects. It could be if there was a project that the engineering department hadn't had to put a A PUBLIC HEARING OUT FOR THE PUBLIC FOR A PARTICULAR ISSUE. BUT ONCE AGAIN, TO IDENTIFY WHAT THOSE EXPENSES ARE, IT WOULD BE KIND OF DIFFICULT IF YOU'RE JUST TURNING ON THE LIGHTS AND THE AIR CONDITIONING.

OF COURSE, IF WE ASKED FOR CURTAINS OR GREEN COLUMNS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, THERE WOULD BE AN ADDITIONAL EXPENSE, RIGHT? OH, ABSOLUTELY. OKAY. GO RIGHT AHEAD.

SO, SENIOR MANAGER, CAN YOU FIND FOR THIS COMING THURSDAY, CAN YOU FIND A I guess a line item in the budget that we can look at, we can count on?

Yes, I can do that.

Thank you. The remaining questions I'll be receiving from administration on Wednesday, so I'll reserve my time for that to review.

Thank you very much. I took a very hard look at this budget, as I do every year and as I have every year that I've been here. Pembroke Pines is considered one of the leading communities in the United States in which to live and raise a family to business, retire, recreate, or enjoy. We are a beautiful community with excellent infrastructure, a lot of natural beauty. We have A quality schools. We have a very forward real estate market. The number one concern among realtors in Pembroke Pines is not enough inventory. There are many more people willing to move and wanting to move into Pembroke Pines than our real estate will generate houses for. It is a city that is the 11th largest city in Florida. We are the second largest city in Broward. In no hurry whatsoever to become the largest city in Florida. That's not our goal. Our goal has always been to be as good a city as we could. It is a low tax city, comparatively speaking, as the chart very clearly shows. We are a low crime city, thanks to the work of an outstanding police department and staff. We are a very safe city thanks to a class one fire rescue operation that gets our people to the hospitals quickly and effectively and saves a ton of lives. This is a great place to live. That did not happen by accident. That happened through many decades of work. sort of stacked like bricks as you build a building, one on top of the other. Many, many years of planning, many, many years of effort, many, many years of hard work went into the building of what we now see as Pembroke Pines. And with respect to this budget, I have to tell you that the city would be unable to summon up the history of fiscally conservative and fiscal constraint that this historical perspective that Vice Mayor pointed to clearly illustrates. You couldn't summon that up because you wanted it in a sound bite at a point when people are looking at governmental expenses with some, I would say, healthy degree of cynicism. and yet the record for that is exactly here. This is a city that has historically prided itself on being frugal in the full sense of the word, not spending more than it needed to in order to produce tremendous success, and it has done just that. And as we stand today, this is now at least the 11th year in a row that we, and probably the 14th out of the last 15 years that we have held the line on the millage rate, living solely on the estimated 3% of a much higher property value that we would get on the property tax side of this. which is an indispensable portion of the budget, but one of the smaller portions of the almost $600 million budget that we're asked to oversee. I like that we stay very close from year to year to the consumer price index for cities in our area. in terms of growth of the property tax section of the budget. We are very good at attracting grant funds in an environment that is having fewer grant funds available. Both at the state and at the federal level, we have seen enormous declines in the amount of grant funding that is available to assist cities. Panama Pines is a donor city. What do I mean by that? We pay more in tax. than we get back from the state of Florida and from the federal government. The notion is that you pay tax, and then it comes back to you. That same amount of money showers back to you, although in categories. So you pay tax, and it comes back to you in education. Or you pay tax, and it comes back to you in roads. Or you pay tax, and it comes back to you in police assistance. We are a donor city. We pay a lot of tax that ends up going elsewhere. Where does it go? It generally goes to rural areas or other areas that don't pay as much. Most cities are in that same boat. And it's an unfortunate thing. But as we drive through the state and we see other cities and we respect the way that they look and we respect the way that they behave, we can take some comfort that, well, we were part of that. We were part of that. And so we get to I found this budget to be very much in line with the others that we have put together. It produces a millage rate that is low, but it is powerful in terms of what it does. We're very, very lucky to have an administration and a team of government professionals that know how to manage this money and manage it well. And I'm very thankful to you, Mr. Dodge, for the presentation. I think it's yet another example of how Pembroke Pines does what it has to do to create excellence at the lowest reasonable price to taxpayers. So I want to thank you for that. Is there any further comment on the 2027 budget?

I do. I'd like us to be able to communicate maybe a sample trim notice or something of that sort to explain to residents that the tax bill that they see come through, if they're homeowners or commercial property owners, is that the city, at least on the residential side, only receives one third of that, if I'm not mistaken. If the numbers haven't changed too much, but it's about a third. And I think we need to emphasize that the full bill is split up between a whole host of other governing bodies rather than 100% of that funding going to the city itself.

I think that's a point well taken. Mr. Dodge, is there a way that we can put together something that, you know, a sample trim notice or a sample tax bill that shows people, you may pay this, but this is what we get here in Pembroke Pines? We can do that as a slide.

Thank you.

Anything else? Mayor, quickly. Yes, sir. The manager mentioned the $70-something million in savings to residents. That's $70-something million to taxpayers because we have a commercial contribution and we have a residential contribution to our general fund. So it's anyone who pays taxes within Pembroke Pines benefited from the $70-plus million savings in the function sourcing. Is that accurate?

That is accurate. It benefits the residents, the taxpayers.

If possible, can we break down the residential contribution to our budget through property taxes?

You're going to see that in my presentation in Amendment 3.

Can we?

OK. You'll see it. If it's not enough, you can advise us, and we'll create a different document. Thank you.

Anything else on the 27 budget? OK, moving on to the next portion of the presentation. Mr. Dodge.

Yeah, thank you, Mayor and Commission. The Amendment 3 ballot question, this presentation is meant not to promote for or against. It's simply to define what impact If that additional homestead is approved by the voters, the $150,000 in fiscal year 27-28 and $250,000 in 28-29, what impact it has on revenues and how does that affect the operation of the city? The background, basically, is that those are the two amounts. And it takes effect in January of 2027. And there's also an annual cap for non-homestead properties. Used to be 10%. Now it's been lowered to 5%. And that the amendment requires counties and municipalities to use property taxes solely. for public safety, education in schools, infrastructure, natural resources, bond debt service, retirement benefits for employees. Those are the core services that we have to make sure are there. So if we don't get enough money to cover all of those things, we have to go into the budget and find out what do we do with community services, with recreation? What do we do with some of the other programs that are very important? to the community in maintaining its aesthetics. What we're going to do is explore options for counterbalancing the effects of the amendment. The analysis is pegged and based on the 2026-27 budget, the one you have before you. And it's associated to the July 1, 26 tax roll. To isolate the impact of homestead exemption, neither growth of the budget nor the tax roll has been incorporated into that analysis because we won't know what that is in future years. The change in city services. The amendment will reduce the tax base and curtail future growth, thereby impairing the city's ability to cover rising costs. Consequently, core services like public safety will be reduced. So if you look in 26-27, the taxable value for the city of Pembroke Pines was roughly $20.9 billion. That generated in taxes $112,676,267 as revenue to help fund the 297 general fund budget, the $297 million general fund budget. In 2728, if we're approaching that $150,000 homestead exemption, the revised table indicates that because of that additional homestead, the revised taxable value of all properties in the city is reduced by 3.5 million, or the taxable value is only $17.4 million. What that does is it reduces the amount of revenue in that year in ad valorem dollars to $94 million. That's an $18,687,825 reduction in the amount of money we're going to receive just in ad valorem. In 28-29, with the $250,000 homestead exemption, the taxable value reduction is almost $7 billion, reducing our taxable value to $14.8 billion. And that reduces it. down to $79,830,709 that we received to fund government. That's $32 million. And the legislation also states that if all homestead properties are reduced so that there is no tax, the amount on homesteaded properties, that's a reduction of another $9.4 million. which reduces the amount of revenue the city can receive is $61,699,503. That represents almost $51 million. So in possibly three years, you're going from 112 million in revenues that we've received to run government down to 62 million. If you look at it over a period of 10 years, you can see in 2017, the taxable value of all property in the city was $11.7 billion. When we go to 2026, which was this current year, the amount of taxable value was $20,921,960,913. What that basically means is over that period of time, there was a lot of new construction. There was properties resold. They were reappraised. So it did generate more taxable money. But if you look in 2027, You can see that value, based on $150,000 exemption, is reduced to $17.4 billion. In 2028, the $250,000 exemption reduces our value to $14.8 billion. And if exempt all homesteaded properties, the amount of taxable value in the city would be reduced to $11.5 billion, which is less a taxable value that we had in 2017. That is very, very significant. If you look at public safety funding and look at what the gap is, in 2015, the property tax revenue was 55. I'm sorry. Let me look at this. That's in millions. It's $112 million. It was $55 million in 2015 for property tax revenue. In 26, 27, it's $112.68. However, to operate our police and fire department as it exists today, In 2026, that budget totals $133 million. So we have a $20 million shortfall. So your ad valorem taxes does not even cover the budget for public safety. So that other $20 million has to come from other sources that, in some cases, is being reduced as well, such as communication tax and some other state revenues. So any increases in the operating millage rate shifts taxes to non-homesteaded properties. The table below shows the impact of increasing the millage rate to offset the loss in revenue from homestead exemptions. So if you wanted to have a break-even situation,

So that would give you $112,000. In order to bring in that same amount of money, one option would be to increase the millage by 1.12. What that millage would apply to are the non-homesteaded properties, which would then be 62.2%. And the homesteading would drop to 34%. I'm going to show you a chart. how it affects renters. In 2028, in order to bring in that same amount of money, you would have to raise it to millage to 1.2050. That would be a great reason where you would receive all the current money you have now, which would avoid cuts. But that may not be an option. So the possible options we have for year one at the $150,000 homestead exemption there would be a shortfall of 18.7 million. In year two, for the 28-29 year, it would be 32.8 million. So if you look at options and how you want to address shortfall, one option could be reduce your expenses by 18.7 million. Option two would be increase the operating millage by 1.1272 special assessments to provide for some of these services. So if we look at the 18.7 million footfall in 27-28, we will have a year to address this. This isn't something we have to address tonight or even address before this current year budget is. If we look at what we currently have and we were to take the vacant positions that we currently have in various departments, freeze those positions, which would save 7.8 million. Under operating, we could reduce maintenance and repairs, which we have identified in the next slide, which is 7.9. And in the capital, we simply cut it in half, which we could save 4.5. But you have to understand, by cutting capital expenses, we've always looked at having a program that We replace vehicles, we replace equipment. Anything that we need to do for capital, we do it on an annual basis and we program it over four years. What will happen in this situation is some of the equipment and the facilities we have could become deteriorated and cost you a lot more in the future. So if we looked at the 18.7 million, we came up with a list of items. These are not a recommendation, but we need to see what impact it has on the city. So if we were to take the 12 police officers, four police support specialists, one police captain, fire department position, lieutenants, administrative battalion chiefs that aren't filled at this time, and you didn't fill that, that's a $5.1 million savings. And then if we do the same thing with the facilities contracts, both FCS and Calvin, and we do the same thing with vacant positions, the total savings and personnel cost would be that you wouldn't have those positions. I don't know what impact that would have to providing services, but it would be a $7.8 million cut. If you look at reducing citywide lawn maintenance to monthly instead of bi-weekly cuts, which will inevitably Negatively impact the city's aesthetics and property values. That's almost a million. Eliminate all special events such as Pines Day, Fourth of July, Easter Egg Hunt. That's a half a million. Closure of the Frank Art Gallery, which is next door. The cost, there's a loss of $400,000 on that. Land building, major projects. FPL improvements to facilities that the city controls. That's a million dollars we'd be putting off. Reduce logistics unit, fleet management, resurfacing of roads within Howard C. Foreman, repairing to park facilities, drainage repairs, reducing it 50%. That's $1.8 million. The reason we list this as a safety is because the city contributes out of the general fund close to a half a million dollars a year to maintain those services for the city, even though it comes under road and bridge. Traveling conferences would be $300,000. We exclude the fire department because those are paid by special assessments. Membership sponsorships and special events, $300,000. Police department special events, crossing guards major safety issue but the city subsidizes that program for the community benefiting the community but also the schools by a million dollars that's 7.9 million then if you look at the only the 10 million capital budget we have which is very small we would eliminate an ambulance put it off for a year or two police portable radios try to put it off if we're able to replacement of doors and windows at public services building, which is used for storage of equipment, IT equipment and everything, $1.3 million, fencing and installation of sidewalks. So that totals, that inventory thing is totaling roughly $20 million. So if you went in that fashion, then you'd be cutting those services to the community. for non-homesteaded properties now what does that mean non-homesteaded properties are those homes that people rent they are all of our apartment buildings so it really goes against the grain of affordable housing because those taxes if they went up a mil uh those residents i'm sure that would pass the cost on to them would be anything from 18 to 24 a month commercial real You know, you're talking close to $200,000 just for those two, not counting all the strip stores. Then you've got industrial warehouse, monthly rent increase, two cents per square foot. That's about $150,000 on two properties that we looked at within the city. If you go to year two, which now we're looking at the $32 million shortfall, you could raise the millage again, which would be $1.2 million. and everything. Operating, there's only 105,000 of that total budget, which only reflects 30% of the budget. The capital is three and the others are minor. So whatever that cost will be, there's not a lot of money that can really be taken without affecting personnel services. So if we look at an illustrative reductions summary, for that year. If you decrease part-time and full-time city employees' salaries and wages by 10% or cutting hours, there's an 8.7 million savings. You cut skilled trades and contractual services by 20%, 25%. That is going to result in delays in repairs and maintenance of facilities. That's 1.7 million. If you do the same thing to contractual services, for part-time and full-time, that's 2.2 million. And if we were to decrease some of the grants that we provide to community services, senior services, such as transportation, personal care, health support, the shuttle bus system, that's a savings of about 1.5 million. But there's also repercussions to that because our reimbursement for those grants are based on ridership. So if we cut the ridership, The monthly rate increase for non-home state properties would go anywhere from $38 to $49 a month. Commercial retail would go from $0.08 per square foot. An industrial warehouse, the monthly rent increase would be $0.03 per square feet. is a service to the youth and the public the same way as community services in providing services for our seniors. If you look at the losses that we have in all of these programs, it's close to half a million dollars. If you look at the Frank Art Gallery next door, that's 400,000. So you have $863,000 basically in losses. The way to overcome that is either increase fees or eliminate some of these programs. The key distinctions and examples of operating expenses versus capital expenditures, there's always been confusion and it's been said over If you take money out of the bank to buy a new car or do some improvements, that's a one-time expenditure. And those funds are separated for that purpose. They're not used for operating the city because once you program those funds to operate the city, For salaries and benefits, utilities and fuel, insurance, contact services, routine maintenance and supplies, where the capital is for major equipment purchases, buildings, major renovations, fire engines, infrastructure improvements, major technology services. That is the key distinction. And the key takeaways we're talking about, you're going to pretty much not eliminate, but really restrict pressure cleaning, road maintenance, mulching, litter control, recreation programs, perhaps closure of some pools, discontinuation, maybe of the police community there program, and put those officers back on the road. These are all valuable services. . . . . . . .

Once that happens, there really isn't any going back. So I'm open for any questions you have.

Ms. Dodge, I have a couple of questions for you. So on your slide number four.

Which one?

Number four.

OK.

So you project that in year one, the increase of the homestead property tax from the current to $150,000... will generate a revenue loss to the city of $18 million and change. Is that correct?

That's correct.

And then in year two, when the Homestead exemption increases to $250, the loss will be an additional $32 million or a total of $32 million for the two years?

It's a total of $32 million for the two years.

OK. So if all homestead property tax is eliminated in your third chart, the reduction is $51 million, basically. Is that right?

Yes, Mayor.

OK. But in chart I can't find it exactly. But somewhere here you said, so in year one, when the homestead goes up to $150,000? Yes, Mayor. There will still be property tax payable to the city for any property whose assessed value is above $150,000. They'll just pay it on the balance. Is that right?

Yes, Mayor.

So if your property was assessed for taxes at 160, you would pay the millage against the remaining $10,000 in values, right? Is that right?

Whatever that value is, Mayor.

Okay. Similarly, in year two, when it goes up to 250, if your property is currently property tax assessed at more than 250, you will pay on that balance. But if your property is assessed at less than 250, then you will pay nothing. Is that correct?

That's right. The number of residential units that will not pay any city tax whatsoever for city services would be nothing. And the number of residential units would increase. Right now, I think it was around 2,500.

Are you guys following? So then, what things could a homeowner do to hold down their assessed value? Mr. Dodge, would you hold off on, for example, expanding? doing certain repairs or doing certain maintenance improvements or adding, I don't know, a pergola to your home or putting in a pool or that kind of thing, are there things that homeowners can do to sort of slow down what their assessed value would be?

Well, any improvements to your home, the property would be reassessed, and that would be taxed if it's above the $250,000. In other words, if your home had a taxable value of $250 and you had that $250 exemption, you pay nothing. If you come in and you put in a pool or an addition on your house and the value of that was considered $40,000, now they would have to pay tax on that.

So without any way advocating for or against it, one of the strategies that homeowners could use to contain how much they'd pay is to manage very carefully how much they contribute to the taxable value of their own property by not doing certain improvements that they might otherwise do.

That's correct.

OK. And the city of Pembroke Pines also passed, I believe, a second homestead exemption for seniors. And I think we also passed one for disabled veterans.

Well, we have one additional 25%, $25,000 for seniors.

So would that be added? No. Or would that be part of?

No, it's all part of the $250,000.

All right, so that special benefit would go away, Mr. City Attorney, or we don't know?

It wouldn't go away. It's just that if they had, say, a home valued at $250,000 and they had a $75,000 home, homestead exemption, then their home, then their value is down to 150.

No, what I'm saying is, let's say I'm Mrs. Jones and I'm a widow, or I, I, I took advantage of a second homestead exemption, which this city provided many, many residents are, or Mrs. Jones might also be a, a widow and a, a veteran. And she comes in and said, wait a minute. I don't want 150. I want I want $200,000 because I'm a veteran and also a widow. Do they get the $200,000? Or does the passage of the city's additional homesteads in the past get wiped away? We don't know. I don't know that answer, Mayor.

Mr. City Attorney? Mayor, I similarly don't know. It's a very valid question, and I cannot answer it on the day of study. I don't know the answer.

So who would answer that question?

Mr. Mayor, if I may ask? Yes, sir. I'm just thinking that if I'm not mistaken, the way that that language was written, it was $100,000 and then $150,000. And that's how the $150,000 came up is because we already have $50,000 on top of it. In other words, it was $100,000. Is that correct? I believe so. So that means in 150 years, because you already have a $50,000 homestead exception, so they added the $100,000. Now it makes it $150,000.

But if you weren't a senior or you weren't a veteran, then you only got the $25,000. No, I think you still get it.

I think what the legislation did was add it.

It's $50,000 for all of us except for the school board. We've been up here for a very long time as elected officials. We all benefit from a $50,000 exemption. If you're a homeowner, there's additional widows. It's $500. You have military veterans who are disabled. They get a reduction. It's all taken off of the taxable value, not the assessed value. Let's make sure we're not projecting a possibility of what could be. I'm not projecting anything. I'm asking staff a question. Allow me to finish. Talk about projections. We can only talk about facts. Thank you.

I'm asking a question. Please, please. Well, you're out of order now. I'm asking a question of staff. My question is, this commission passed certain additional homestead exemptions. And my question very simply is, do they get added to the state's promulgated 150 or to the state's promulgated 250, or are they assumed as part of the 150 or 250? Yes, no, I don't know. You don't know.

I don't either, Mr. Mayor.

OK, we have to ask that question because I don't know either. And I'm not exactly sure how that works into this. But I think that we should anticipate questions from people who have those additional exemptions that they might be entitled to more than the $150,000 or to the $250,000. And frankly, I think that under any set of circumstances, whatever a taxpayer is entitled to, they should get it. So I'm asking the question. I don't know the answer. All right.

Sorry, Mayor, on that point, can I just clarify? So is that the exemption that I believe Marty's office has presented to us as, I guess, thanking us at some point for having approved that exemption? Because some cities may or may not approve that exemption. Is that the one we're talking about? Yes, OK. So the clarifying question would simply be, is it in addition to? Right.

Because otherwise, the senior who is a, a widow or the senior who is a taxpayer who is a veteran gets no special exemption over and above what everyone else would get. So my question is whether or not how that applies. And I'm not sure that I've heard the answer to that question. And professional staff is saying they don't know. And I would ask them to inquire about that question. Mr. Dodge, you said to me in a previous meeting, and it's possible that I misheard you, sir, because we're following this, but I thought you had said that if all of property, well, first of all, let me ask, Mr. City Attorney, all of property tax could, a homestead property tax, could go away under this bill. That is, the legislature could decide on their own under the terms of the bill to eliminate all homestead property taxes statewide. Is that correct?

The short answer is yes, because the bill was adopted. The language of the ballot question was what was modified.

So it's possible that the ballot question language and the bill itself don't completely align. Nonetheless, it's coming before us in November. I'm not here to quibble about that. I'm here to ask, is the legislature, if they wish to, capable under the language in the bill of eliminating all homestead property tax?

The answer is yes.

And would that include the school?

I don't want to speculate, Mayor, nor do any of us. Right.

And would that include the school exemption? So in other words, let's say that they read the bill to mean, no, the school exemption was really for only the first two years, but we have the authority under the bill to eliminate all homestead property tax. Would that be something that they could decide to do?

The legislature reserves unto itself the right to act constitutionally, and if that's what they believe to be a thoroughly legal thing to do, they could theoretically do that.

So they have, so it's your legal opinion that under the current language of the bill, they have the authority to eliminate all homestead property tax?

I believe there are some people, yes.

And Mr. Dodge, if they were to eliminate all homestead property tax, I thought you had said to me in our previous conversations that the impact to the city would be about $60 million, though here I only see about $50 million.

Well, actually, it is $50 million. Maybe when I was talking to you, I was looking at the $60 million being that's the amount of money we would receive.

Well, I guess, I don't know. Through you to the CFO, Ms. Chong, have you calculated what the total amount of homestead property value? In other words, if we got zero in homestead property value, what would that amount be?

Could you repeat that? Because we're saying that we would go down by $9.5 billion for all homesteaded values.

Yeah, what would the difference be? In other words, what would the shortfall be if Pembroke Pines was deprived of all homestead property value?

That's the $51 million.

That's the $51 million?

Yes, sir.

I think in that case, you're taking into account that some of the homes would increase in value.

Right now, we're holding everything steady. We're assuming there's no increases in taxable value.

Okay, then that, I'm sorry to interrupt.

That was going to be a... Because I thought the 50 million was only to 250 of homestead exemptions.

Well, it works out that it's almost the same number. So year one was 19 million, year two, 32. So if you add those two, it almost seems as if it's the same 50 million that we're talking about. But if you eliminate all the homestead exemptions, we're looking at the same, like $52 million is a separate...

Now, there are cities where that coincidence wouldn't happen. I'm sure. Cities with much higher values. But in Pembroke Pines, what you're saying is the 250 basically amounts to no homestead property tax collection for the city government.

No, Mayor. We have properties that far exceed the 250. Correct.

My question is, After the 250, there will still be homestead property taxes coming into the city. Are you saying that they're de minimis?

No, we'll collect 79 million.

Oh, so the number would grow to 79 million?

we would have a decrease in taxable revenues to the city to $79 million. So the decrease is actually $32 million. Instead of us getting $112 million in tax revenues, now we're only collecting $79 million in tax revenues.

I must not be explaining this right. So under your scenario, after $250,000 in homestead property tax exemption, we lose a total of about $50 million. It's $32 million, you're saying? Yes, $32 million. Okay. So it's 30 because it's 18 the first year and 30. So these are not cumulative numbers. Now I'm following. Okay. I've never seen this chart before. That's why I'm asking. Okay. Okay. So if we lost all of property, a homestead property tax, it would be $50 million. Yes, sir. At that point, if we lost all of $50 million and we increased no taxes and we increased no fees, would we, Mr. Dodge, be able to afford to run the government? We wouldn't be able to provide any kind of services because- Would we be able to make payroll in police and ambulance?

Well, the police right now is 20 million short a year as it stands. that the general government subsidizes it. Now that we don't have that money, we don't have that $20 million, as you say, to subsidize it. And there are other state revenues that keep going down. So this only makes reference to ad valorem. if someone to say, well, you could cut operational, but there are some operational costs, just as a homeowner has, that your electricity costs, your telephone costs, your communications, maintenance contracts, IT contracts.

I'm being very patient because sometimes the hardest questions to answer are the very simplest ones. If we lose the... After the 250 is done and we are in the hole for $32 million.

You would have to cut employees.

OK. Point of order, please. What is your point of order? OK. The city attorney. Yes, sir. What is your point of order? Allow me, sir. Go ahead. OK. City Attorney, I am uncomfortable with projections and assumptions of who may lose their job and who may not. I am uncomfortable hearing. Your point of order is overruled. I'm going to challenge the chair. I will challenge the chair at this point.

Is there a second? Is there a second? It dies for lack of a second. Sir, you are out of order. Sir, you are out of order. Thank you. Your point of order is rejected. So let me go back to the comment that I was making. So at the point that the homestead property tax amount is removed from this budget my question to you is Mr. Dodge without increasing taxes without increasing fees relying only on cuts are you able to run this government are you able to make payroll in police are you able to make payroll in ambulance are you able to make payroll in parks or Well, let's just take the police and the ambulance payment, because the fire portion of the fire department is paid for through a fire fee. What isn't paid for is the ambulance service. Is that correct? That's paid for through property tax, right? Correct, ma'am. OK. So Lisa, how much is the rescue portion of the budget that it's paid for with property tax?

Give me a second, Mayor.

Is it 74? Because then I'm going to ask you, what is the police payroll that's attributed to the operating expenses that are attributable to property tax? Those are the two numbers that I need.

for police and fire in 26-27 is 133 million. The property tax revenue for 26-27 is 112. So the property tax does not cover 100% of the cost of police and fire.

And it would be reduced by $32 million. So if you take $32 off $112, you're left with $80, right?

You're left with 150. You're left with 70, yeah, 80 million.

So that 80 million would have to stretch still into 133. Otherwise, you have to cut police and fire because you've cut everything else out, right?

Well, I think, and I have to defer to the attorneys, the law says public safety is really kind of exempt. So I don't know if... If when you're looking at the total budget, it would go to other divisions and other programs that are run. I don't know if that's a legal answer that Sam has to address.

Sam. Mr. Mayor, if I can. Yes. One of the concepts of local government and county government, there are five core services. Aside from the core services that are referred to in the amendment, which is in the actual revised amendment, is police, fire, water, sewer, and garbage. That's what local government is required to do. And some cities that have adopted charter schools must provide for charter schools to the side. That's a sixth function. But the core functions are principally one and two is police and fire. So if you're navigating into an area where you... This is just theoretical, by the way, and it's not advocacy on my part or yours. No, I'm just asking questions. It's theoretical conversation. If you can't afford to provide for those core services under whatever guise of the constitutional amendment is adopted or a statute that the legislature may impose on you, then you begin... traveling into a potentially difficult area of bankruptcy or unable to pay your bills to be able to fund those services. I'm not aware of any municipal bankruptcy in Florida history in recent times. But is it possible? Yeah, there's a provision in the IRS code that allows for it. I'm not even believing that as a possibility. But if you're looking at a situation where you can't fund your core services, You have to look to other options to protect the rights of the public.

OK, so just to review, the manager has said that the combined total for operations for the rescue and police is $132 million, and that 112 is what the baseline is currently calling for. And if you take 32 out of that, you've got $80 million left. You with me, Ms. Dodge?

Yes.

And that 82 million somehow has to cover the 133. Is that correct? Did I follow that right?

No, because you're only talking ad valorem. You're not talking about all the revenue.

So that's why I tried to pinpoint my question. What is the ad valorem contribution to rescue and police?

Well, police and fire combined is $133 million.

No, that's not my question.

Why?

My question is only ad valorem that goes into rescue and police.

Fire doesn't get any ad valorem. I'm sorry. So it's rescue and police is $133 million. Does that include, Lisa, the revenue from fire assessment?

The fire assessment is included, sir, yes.

Okay, so we have to back that out. So how much is the fire assessment?

That's already net of the fire assessment revenues.

Maybe this is getting to where I'm simply looking for the amount of money that ad valorem, total ad valorem, pays into rescue and policing. OK. So if you can get me that number,

That will answer my question. Mayor, if I could be helpful. We have 62.

No, I don't need you to be helpful. I need her to be helpful. Thank you. We have 62% of the budget.

Yes, I understand all that. Is fire and police. Thank you. OK, we have a fire assessment fee of $400. Thank you. And we have the number of accounts to get billed. Lisa, please. Yes, sir. Just back it up.

So if you look at that chart, we're saying that we don't have enough to cover right now the police and fire costs. If you add on to that the rescue, I think we're looking at an additional $28 million.

Right. I thought it was about 30. So 30 for rescue, let's just call it 30. And police is how much?

We don't have it separated here, but it would be the $20 million, let's say.

$20 million. So you're saying that if we have $20 million in ad valorem for police and $30 million in ad valorem for rescue, we can cover that budget with the other revenues that are coming in that are untouched? Yes. I don't see how. I don't see how that number, you all need to gather together and figure out that calculation for me. I am trying to determine whether the 80 million that's left after the 32 comes off the 112 is enough to take care of both the rescue portion of fire and police operating costs. That's what I need you to work your calculation up on. I don't need it right now, but that's the question I'm getting at. I need to understand whether that covers it over and above any other cut that we would make if we didn't raise any form of taxes and if we didn't increase any other fees. That's the only other question that I had. Vice Mayor, did you have anything? No? Commissioner Good? Commissioner Rodriguez?

Yes. On page 10 in year one, option one, I just want more of a clarifying question from city administration. Currently, obviously the A possible thing that we may need to do in the case that this passes is freeze the vacant current positions. If, for example, a year goes by and kind of separate, just more budget related, if a year goes by and that budget is not being used up because we don't fill the vacancy, what happens to those funds? Do they get then revised in the revised budget later on and we say we didn't spend that amount of money? Or what happens to those vacancies?

Those dollars that are spent in a year goes back into fund balance.

OK. Hm? And then I had another one, but I have to look for it. So Commissioner Schwartz has anything.

Commissioner Schwartz, your turn.

Over the summer, I reviewed some of staff's budget projections and the impacts of Amendment 3. Staff worked extremely hard putting that work product together. In accordance with, and city attorney helped me out, FEC 106 dot something, any information gathered using public funds whether it be the printing these things out or keeping the lights on, can only be based on verifiable factual information. 106 also precludes government from making projections or assumptions of what ifs. It can only be based upon actual information that our finance director, Ms. Chung, produced. Mr. City Attorney, do you concur with that legal opinion?

May I respond, Mayor? Yes. I read the language to you all before in 106.113, and that speaks to the issue specifically of fair, excuse me, accurate, fair, and impartial information, basically.

Right. And the law was changed in 2022. with respect to how information is what government can and cannot do regarding Amendment 3. So I'm going to be very straightforward. I want to keep myself in this box. I am uncomfortable with the first slide that the city manager produced. because it's based on assumptions. No growth rate, meaning that Marty Kerr's office sees absolutely zero percentage of increase in property values in Broward County. Period. Or at least in Pembroke Pines. A zero increase in property taxes. Now, I don't recall being a resident of this county for 37 years where property value didn't go up. That makes me very uncomfortable.

Mr. City Attorney, do you have a problem with the legal presentation of the city manager?

Thus far, I do not on the premise that it must comport with the statute. I read, again, into the record what I believe the statute is as clear as can be discusses. The answer is it's based upon what is talked about as accurate, fair, and impartial information, and basically posting that information in connection with that fairness, which is required by the statute. It is a chapter 106 item. It is true for Commissioner Schwartz that the statute was amended in 2022 and became more restrictive.

Thank you, City Attorney. And 106.13 is very explicit that the information that is provided to electors and how it's distributed to electors, there are rules that follow that. And this presentation The second one, none of us had an advance copy of it, correct? None of us saw this in advance? Colleagues?

No, we handed it out this evening.

He handed it as soon as we got here. So please make sure, Mr. Dodge, that whatever information is being produced like this, is being captured in identifiable cost so that we're in compliance with 106.113. Mr. Mayor?

Mr. City Attorney, are we even close to out of compliance with the state statutes applicable to the commission as questioned?

Again, Mayor, if I can, the language in the statute in 106.113 subsection 2B2 basically talks about being accurate, fair, and impartial. I believe if the production of information is both accurate, fair, and impartial, it is consistent with what the statute appears to require.

OK. So do you see any obstruction in in sharing this with the public at large?

If I may, Mayor, the information is based upon the factual data which is available to the administration and has been promulgated or been offered up by the manager consistent with that finding.

OK. And a follow up for 106.113 specifically, the city of Penrith Pines And all cities in Florida cannot mail this publication out. We cannot email this out to electors. It can only be available in city halls. Is that correct, city attorney?

The answer is that it must be accurate, fair, and impartial, posting factual information on the government website or in printed materials, hosting and providing information in public forms which are allowed. But not sent to electors. Is that correct, sir? I don't see that specifically in the statute. It also allows for the information to be responsive to inquiries made with regard to that subject.

So if the city commission decided to mail it, we'd be able to do it under the statute?

So long as it's clear that it follows the statutory requirements of being accurate, fair, and impartial.

City attorney, I want you to look at it again. I'm not going to ask you to do your homework. But I want you to take a hard look at the new definition of electors and communication under 106.113. There has been a significant change since the last time this came forward. Without objection. Mr. Mayor?

Yes, sir. The other thing I'd like to address, what Commissioner Schwartz said, this item, because we're a year ahead of time, we're preparing budget. Come July 1 of 27, we will in fact know if there was an increase in taxable values. At that time, we're able to modify a proposal that what needs to be done. Yes, of course. And the issue you have that even if there are properties that went up 3%, they still may be exempt because they didn't meet the threshold.

All I'm saying, Mr. Dodge, with the greatest respect, how you just answered that could have been a footnote in this slide. It was. It was. He said it's there.

It's based on, it's tagged to the current fiscal year. It says it right there.

But that's not how we just answered July 1, 2027.

If you look at slide number three under methodology, it says to solicit the impact of the homestead exemption, neither growth of the budget nor the tax goal has been incorporated into the analysis.

Right. OK. Thank you. Anything else?

Yes, I have a question. Yes. Obviously, this is a public document now that we've discussed it. It's out in the public. If one, whether elected or not, is to use this information to put out on their personal social media, would we be able to do that?

City attorney? The question?

Question is, if this information is already, after this meeting, made public, would an individual in their personal capacity, elected or non-elected, be able to use this information to create social media content informing their followers or whomever follows them about this presentation?

The best answer is found in subsection 2 which says that a local government or a person acting on behalf of a local government may not expend or authorize the expenditure of any person or group may not accept public funds for public advertisement or any other communication, and this is the words, sent to electors concerning an issue, referendum, or amendment, including any state question that is subject to a vote of the electors. And that language is in the statute.

But if I filmed a video in my personal capacity at home about the contents of this discussion that was already public, would I be subject to that?

The answer is that the statute speaks for itself globally. But the answer is, by your doing so, would that subject you to a complaint filed that you violated chapter 106? Certainly, the risk is the risk. The risk is that it's not clearly set forth in the statute. But the issue of what you can send and what you can't send is provided for. So the best answer is, if you have any reservation, then you should consider not doing so. But again, if it's consistent with the statute, is both factual, it's accurate and fair, and you're republishing something as opposed to the city, that's a different issue.

Yeah, like if I posted it on my personal Facebook.

The answer is that that's not specifically precluded by the statute.

Okay, thank you. So to be clear, people are entitled to use this material, which is now public record, in their personal capacity without generating any cost to the government free and clear of any of the state's laws.

I believe that to be accurate, Mayor.

Okay, thank you.

Let's try yes on precise, too, because that's what it is. It's not the city doing it. It's the commissioner doing it. Republishing information was made available. Okay.

Mr. Mayor, yeah, and I just, I'd like to weigh in just a little bit on this subject matter. Just please ensure that that's a reference to what is being presented by staff, not by this commission. Yeah. Because the one thing that I haven't weighed in on is all this dialogue is because I do understand, A, first and foremost, a vote hasn't been taken yet.

No.

So we don't know if Amendment 3 is going to pass or not. But even if it does, there is still a requirement for us now, new, if I'm not mistaken, Mr. Manager, right, where we will be going through an exercise early in the fiscal year or in January, possibly, where we are going to go through an exercise of showing what our budget looks like at a 10% reduction of what it is today. And if we go through that exercise, that 10% is easily the $30 million, because it's a $300 million general fund already. 10% is $30 million. If Amendment 3 passes, it's a $30 million And we'll know what it is when we go to that workshop, when we do the 10% reduction. So everything that's here today is just some things that could happen. But it ain't what this commission has agreed to. So I just want to caution that anything that is shared about presentations tonight certainly is not my opinion, other than the facts of some of the numbers, but how we get to resolving those numbers. I'm not weighing in yet.

I think that's a very, very good point. I think that's a point very well taken. And I would encourage anyone in the community or certainly any of us as elected officials, if you have ideas on cost cutting for the city, and this certainly includes our budget committee, the Citizens Budget Council, who, Mr. Dodge, I'm sure, Ms. Chong, I'm sure will be presented this information. Bring that forward. We believe that we are running a lean government here and that we have a history of running a lean government. We covered that point, certainly I did, in the discussion that we had about the fiscal 27 budget. However, we are open to improving. If there is an area – I keep hearing folks saying, you know, there's all this waste and whatever. Some of them don't even live in our city, but that's okay. Maybe there's waste in their particular city. But if anyone has an idea for things that should be taken out of the city – and they've thought through how they would live with that without it being made available by their city, submit it. We're open. We're hungry. We're eager to take a look at any suggestion along those lines. You may also have ideas for areas that are currently covered in the budget that you think we need to do more of. And if there are areas like that, you should speak up. This commission has never turned away anyone's suggestion about improving the work of the government. And we haven't ever presented ourselves as being absolutely perfect. Nothing is absolutely perfect. God is absolutely perfect. Everyone else? is just standing on line doing the best that they can. So if anybody has any suggestions or ideas along these lines, by all means, put them forward. But let's specify what we're talking about. Let's not just regurgitate rhetoric about, cynical rhetoric about, oh, they can do this and they can do that, or they've been wasteful here. Let's pinpoint. and provide some examples because the taglines and the political slogans don't help us to balance budgets, but specific examples are always very, very helpful. Mr. Dodge, Mr. Gorin, do you have anything else? No, Mayor. Commissioner, are we done?

Mayor, if I can, when you have a moment. Yes. Just to be clear, House Bill 1329, which we provided a memo to you on back in July, is effective as of January of 2027 as the manager properly resolved on the record. The budget exercise would be for next year's budget and must be conducted within 14 days of the final budget for next year. It's not an exercise due in January, but the law goes into effect in January. And you have to post your quarterly budget data early on as opposed to later on when the statute would kick in. So it is a future obligation, but it's in play as of January.

And that's why it's so important. When we go into these budget meetings, that we not get a bunch of grandstanding of, you know what, on second thought, I think we should go ahead and lower the millage by two mills or whatever. Whoever makes that suggestion had better come here with some homework about what they want to cut. Because that's an idea that's way too attractive to say no to unless you've come in empty with no information. It's just rhetoric. or grandstanding, and that's no way to do business. That's just no way to do business. So if somebody has an idea for cost-cutting, bring it forward with the cuts, and you'll see that this city commission, as it always does, will stand tall and listen and act appropriately. And with that, if there's nothing more, we are adjourned.