City Commission - Regular Meeting

If you would, Ms. Bravo, please call the roll. Mayor Ryan. Present.

Assistant Deputy Mayor Clark.

Here.

Commissioner Kirch.

Here.

City Manager Mark Lebelski. Present. Deputy City Manager Emily Smith. Present. City Attorney Thomas Moss. Present. Director of Finance and Administrative Services Susan Neighbors. Present. Budget Manager Carrie Ann Ashworth. Present. Administrative Services Manager Lourdes Lawrence. Present. City Clerk Felicia Bravo here.

We also have the Deputy Mayor by phone. Is that correct?

Correct.

Okay. Deputy Mayor, you go ahead and you can state your presence. We'll deal with the motion in a moment on that.

Yes, I'm here. Thank you.

Thank you. I hope you're feeling better. And I believe Commissioner Scudo is listening as well. Is that fair? Correct. All right. Just let the record note that. All right. If you would, please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. Good afternoon. This meeting has been noticed both as an in-person meeting and a virtual meeting. The public may attend in person or participate in the meeting by calling 954-395-2401 and entering the code 368262. Procedures for public participation and comments will be explained in a moment. Information for each item on the agenda has been and is currently available at City Hall and online 24 hours a day at www.sunrisefl.gov. Anyone interested is also invited to call 954-746-3430 for additional information. The city has provided various options for members of the public to address the commission. Prior to the start of the meeting, we asked if anyone wished to speak on any matters before us. We will maintain that list, and I'll call upon speakers at an appropriate time. I'll also open up for public comment at an appropriate time and ask if anyone attending in person or by phone wishes to speak. For those participating by phone, you may press 5-star on your phone to request to be heard. I'll attempt to take the comments in the order that they're requested by the five-star feature on your phone, but please be assured all comments will be included as part of the public record for this meeting and will be considered prior to any action taken. When addressing us, please state your name, address, and what you're here to speak about. I'd ask everyone on the call to please mute your phones until you wish to speak. And if you're experiencing technical difficulties, you may call 954-578-4792 at any time. Our staff is available to assist you. All right, we'll begin with open discussion. Anybody wishing to speak on any matters before the city, please come forward or press five star on the phone. And that, let me put in some context, matters that are not on the agenda tonight, because we have a number of folks here I know who want to speak on a variety of issues. But if it's about a matter that's not on the agenda, please raise your hand or press five star on the phone. See no hands raised on line. Can you confirm?

I confirm. No hands are raised.

All right. I'll close open discussion. All right. We're going to proceed as follows. I'm going to ask for a motion to move up. First, let's make a motion on Deputy Mayor to waive the 24-hour notice in light of her illness. Can we have a motion? Motion by Commissioner Kirsch, seconded by Assistant Deputy Mayor. All in favor say aye. Aye. All right. Mr. Moss, that allows the Deputy Mayor to be a voting member this evening, correct?

Yes, and I understand the reason for her physical absence is due to personal illness.

Correct, as noted in the motion. Thank you, sir. All right, could I have a motion to move 5B, 5C, and 5D? We'll handle those individually, but could I have a motion to move those up? Motion by Commissioner Kirsch, seconded by Assistant Deputy Mayor. 5B. Resolution of the City of Sunrise, Florida relating to the provision of fire rescue services facilities and programs in the City of Sunrise, Florida reimposing the fire rescue assessments against assessed property located within the City of Sunrise for fiscal year beginning October 1, 2026. Approving the rate of assessment, approving the assessment role and providing an effective date. City Manager Mark Lebelski, Susan Neighbors, Director of Finance and Administrative Services can have a motion. Motion by Commissioner Kirch, seconded by the Assistant Deputy Mayor. This is a public hearing. Anyone wishing to be heard on this matter, please come forward or press five star on your phone. I see no one come forward. Can you confirm no hands raised?

I confirm no hands raised.

All right. We'll close public discussion. Any discussion from my colleagues on this? Go ahead and call the question.

Commissioner Kirch?

Yes.

Assistant Deputy Mayor Clark? Yes. Deputy Mayor Guzman? Yes. Mayor Ryan?

Yes. Item passed is 4-0. C, a resolution of the City of Sunrise, Florida relating to the parking garage assessment area and adopting the annual rate resolution for fiscal year 2026-2027. Approving the assessment role, providing for severability, providing for an effective date. City Manager Mark Lebelski, Susan Nabors, Director of Finance and Administrative Services. Can I have a motion? Motion by Commissioner Kirch, seconded by Assistant Deputy Mayor. This is a public hearing. Anyone wishing to be heard on this matter, please come forward or press five star on your phone. I see no one come forward. Can you confirm no hands raised?

I confirm.

I'll close the public discussion. Any discussion from my colleagues? Call the question.

Deputy Mayor Guzman? Yes. Commissioner Kirch?

Yes.

Assistant Deputy Mayor Clark? Yes. Mayor Ryan?

Yes, item passes 4-0. D, a resolution of the City of Sunrise, Florida, relating to the transportation assessment and adopting the annual rate resolution for fiscal year 26-2027, approving the assessment role, providing for severability, providing for a defective day sitting manager, Mark Lebelski, Susan Nabors, Director of Finance and Administrative Services. Do you have a motion? Motion by Commissioner Kirsch, seconded by Assistant Deputy Mayor. This is a public hearing. Anyone wishing to be heard on this matter, please come forward or press 5-star on your phone. I see no one come forward. Can you confirm no hands raised?

I confirm no hands are raised.

All right, I'll close public discussion. Mr. Lebelski, we had an extended discussion about this when it was a proposal. I know that there are a number of issues relating to how this gets assessed and against which businesses and how much. I've obviously raised, I have some questions and concerns, particularly in light of some things that are going on within the legislature and within what we have to face in the coming year. If we move this forward this year and it turns out that it needs to be adjusted or changed or even terminated, is that something that we're able to do in the coming year? Yes, sir. Help me to understand when this assessment would be imposed.

It would be imposed on their current tax, the bill, as it has been sent out today.

All right. So once it's assessed, we're committed for the year, essentially, because we will have charged everybody for it.

Correct.

Okay. And, you know, I've talked about a number of the metrics and whether or not this has value or worth to some of the individual businesses. I understand for the overall district, but I have some concerns about that. moving from that previously this service there have been suggestions about trying to duplicate the service around the city in different areas previously when we did this it was based on an FDOT grant and we had all sorts of funds that were focused on the business district and we weren't able to replicate this what's your recommendation with the ability to replicate this in any other part of the city and what are the structural limitations that we would face in doing that

Staff had performed an analysis of this probably three to six months ago, provided the commission some information. The challenge was it was really not financially feasible to implement citywide. You would have to break the city up into districts and then have cars within each district with a transportation hub located within the transfer from one district to the next.

Um, it just became a real challenge and really put some guardrails on it where, where the district is great. Let's just call it central sunrise for lack of a better term for a car. Basically those businesses are paying for a car or cars in that district.

Correct.

Not to be transported elsewhere, whether it's, you know, other cities or anywhere else, it's that district. So there's a structural limitation of being able to maneuver or move people from one district to the other.

Correct.

And why is that?

Because then you would be required to have a significantly number more vehicles to be able to have drive times that would be sufficient to be reliable.

In addition, because it's district-based, it's the businesses in wherever that district is located that are footing the bill for those cars, correct?

Correct, and so when you look at east, west, and central, outside of the entertainment district, there just is not that much businesses that would be able to fund this service in other parts of the city that would result in very high assessments to those businesses.

So you looked at it, realized the cost for these individual businesses as well as the structural problems.

That is correct.

Make it near impossible, certainly not the recommendation of staff.

That is correct. And I just also want to highlight the commission had requested us to go back and do additional public outreach than what we had already previously done. We held a public meeting and sent letters out to every business in the business entertainment district. And we held that public meeting and we only had one business show up, which was the Sargas Mills Mall, who we'd already met with individually.

All right. This is two readings, Mr. Moss? Or is this one reading tonight?

No, this is just one reading for the final assessment resolution.

I have concerns about doing this. I'm going to probably agree to do it this time, but I'm going to look really carefully at the performance and the burdens. To me, this is much more like a pilot project being funded by the individual businesses, and then we'll have to get feedback from the Chamber and otherwise. I know that these are wildly popular in other cities. There's not any doubt about it. We know that it was wildly popular when the businesses weren't funding it, but there's a difference between it being popular to go to certain locations and where we're funding it and FDOT's funding it and then small businesses funding it, but maybe not getting a single patron. I know that the, There was at least one who had outreach to you about this, had some concerns. But once they realized it was $29 for the year, they said, OK, I have no problem with that. They just didn't understand it. So I think the devil will be in the details on this one as we move forward. I think it's a worthy effort. But I think we're really going to have to look closely at the metrics and the calculations for these EVUs, as we discussed previously when this was presented.

Mayor, I agree, and this is a one-year. I look at it as a pilot as you, and we'll be reevaluating this next year. If it's not successful, then we'll make changes.

So I think it's two levels. If it's not successful or it turns out it seems too burdensome. Correct, yes. All right, that's the only comments I have. Anyone else have any comments? Call the question.

Assistant Deputy Mayor Clark. Yes. Deputy Mayor Guzman. Yes. Yes. Commissioner Kirch?

Yes.

Mayor Ryan?

Yes. Item passes 4-0. All right. At this time, we're going to move to 5A and 5E. 5A, a resolution of the City of Sunrise, Florida, adopting a tentative millage rate authorizing a levy of a 6.0543 mills ad valorem tax at $6.0543 per 1,000 of assessed value on all taxable real and personal property within the city, authorizing the levy of .2865 mills ad valorem. That's... 20.2865 per $1,000 of assessed value. An all-taxable real and personal property within the city for funds for the annual debt service of the City of Sunrise, Florida General Obligation Bond for fiscal year 2026-2027, providing for an effective date. City Manager Mark Lebelski, Susan Nabors, Director of Finance and Administrative Services. Do we have a motion? Motion by Commissioner Kurtz, seconded by Assistant Deputy Mayor. I'm going to read the budget ordinance because this is going to be a simultaneous public hearing on both the millage and the proposed budget. 5e Commission discussion interaction right first reading an order to the city of Sunrise, Florida making appropriations for the general fund waste water wastewater gas stormwater and the other enterprise funds and various other city funds for the fiscal year 2026 2027 based upon the estimate of revenues and requested appropriations as Submitted by the city manager adopting a personnel summary for fiscal year 2026 2027 Reducing the economic development fund balance established by resolution number 11 dash 1 2 2 as amended providing for conflict right for several billion providing effective date City Manager Mark Lebelski, Susan Nabors, Director of Finance and Administrative Services. Can I have a motion? Motion by Commissioner Kerr, seconded by Assistant Deputy Mayor. This will be a simultaneous public hearing on both the proposed millage rate and the proposed voted debt service millage rate and the tentative fiscal year 2026 budget. City staff will make a presentation, and then I'll open up the discussion for public hearings. Mr. Lebelski.

Before I do the presentation, I'll have Carrie Ann, I'm sorry, I'll have Susan Nabors come up and read the budget information.

Good evening, Susan Nabors, Director of Finance and Administrative Services. The proposed ad valorem tax levy passed by the City of Sunrise City Commission on July 14, 2026 for fiscal year 2026-2027 was 6.0543 mils. This millage rate is 0.3343 mils, or 5.84% more than the rolled back rate. of five point seven two zero zero mills the purpose of this increase is to fund various personnel and operating costs for fiscal year twenty twenty six twenty seven staff recommends that a tentative millage rate of six point oh five four three mills be passed additionally staff has computed the tentative millage rate needed to fund the fiscal year twenty twenty six twenty twenty seven voted debt service tax levy for the general obligation bonds The voted debt service tax levy needed is .2865 mils. Because this is a voted debt service tax levy, no rollback rate calculation is required. Staff recommends that a tentative voted debt service tax levy of .2865 mils be passed.

Thank you, ma'am. Mr. Lebowski. Thank you, Mayor. Mark Lebowski, City Manager. For tonight's presentation, The development of the FY26-27 proposed budget and five-year capital improvement program was a collaborative process involving every city department with significant involvement from the city's leadership team. We entered this budget cycle from a position of sound financial stewardship supported by years of disciplined fiscal management, conservative budgeting, and continued commitment to maintaining high-quality municipal services. While the city's underlying economic fundamentals remain stable, the fiscal landscape before us has changed significantly. The city must prepare for an increased financial uncertainty and the potential for significant changes to future revenues resulting from actions being considered by Florida voters. A critical component of the annual budget is the continued assessment of economic conditions emerging challenges and legislative changes that could affect the city and our ability to deliver services. The 2026 legislative session concluded with the passage of legislation that presents significant long-term financial challenges for the city of Sunrise. Most notably, the legislature placed Amendment 3, a statewide property tax reform proposal on the November ballot for consideration by Florida voters. The proposed property tax reform would significantly increase the value of the homestead exemption for eligible property owners, reducing the taxable value of homesteaded properties, and consequently the amount of property tax revenue available to the city. Property taxes are a primary source of general fund revenue and support essential municipal services, including police and fire rescue, roadway and median maintenance, parks and recreation, and code compliance. Based upon current projections, the city would experience a property tax revenue reduction of more than $10 million in fiscal year 2728 with steeper reductions in subsequent years. The proposed amendment would also limit the growth of taxable value for non-homesteaded properties and contemplates the future elimination of homesteaded property taxes, although no definitive timeline has been established. The potential property tax revenue reductions are compounded by a permanent loss of revenue from the city's utility surcharge to outside customers. During fiscal year 2026 session, the legislator adopted House Bill 1451, which eliminates the city's ability to charge the surcharge despite longstanding interlocal agreements with the Town of Southwest Ranches, portions of the Town of Davie, and the City of Weston. The proposed budget conservatively reduces the utility surcharge revenue by approximately 25% or $5 million in fiscal year 26-27. The full elimination of this revenue is projected to reach approximately $17.5 million, no later than fiscal year 28-29, representing nearly 10% of the total general fund revenue. The utility surcharge revenue loss alone will create a structural imbalance in the city's general fund that cannot be addressed through one-time solutions or temporary reductions. When combined with the potential impact of property tax reform, these revenue reductions could represent nearly 20% of the city's general fund revenue. At the same time, the cost of providing municipal services continues to increase due to inflationary pressures, public safety costs, infrastructure renewal and replacement needs, and unfunded state and federal mandates. If property tax reform passes, Sunrise will face an unprecedented fiscal environment requiring fundamental changes to the way the city funds and delivers municipal services. I am prepared to present strategic options to address the resulting budgetary gap The scope and depth of those recommendations will depend upon the outcome of the November ballot measure. However, the city must begin preparing now for the $17.5 million structural revenue loss associated with the utility surcharge. Over the next two slides, I have identified examples of programs and services that are subsidized through property tax revenues. Many of these programs provide critical services to our residents and serve as a lifeline to vulnerable and underserved members of our community. Programs such as summer camp, senior center, and senior transportation provide valuable services and direct assistance to residents who rely on the city for these resources. The programs identified on this slide represent approximately $11.1 million in annual general fund expenditures supported in part by property tax revenues. These programs are examples of the services that could be affected as the city responds to the structural revenue reductions discussed previously. While the programs identified on this slide represent approximately $1.2 million in annual expenditures, their impact on the Sunrise community is significant. Many of these programs leverage city funding with contributions, grants, partnerships, and other resources allowing a relatively modest city investment to generate a much greater benefit to our residents. The Boys and Girls Club Team Center provides developmental programs, mentorship, and opportunities to help shape the next generation of Sunrise residents. Traffic calming and sidewalk repair programs are consistently among the city's most popular programs and directly address quality of life and neighborhood concerns. If the property tax measure passes, each of these programs along with other property tax supported services will need to be evaluated for potential modification, reduction, or elimination. As highlighted from the previous two slides, even if the city were to eliminate all of the programs identified, the total expenditure reduction would be approximately $12.3 million. While eliminating these programs would have a significant impact on our residents and community, $12.3 million would not be sufficient to offset the potential revenue loss associated with property tax reform. Compounding this challenge is the 17.5 million dollar permanent loss of utility surcharge revenue resulting for House Bill 1451 These two structural revenue impacts demonstrate that the fiscal challenges cannot be addressed through program modifications or eliminations alone Addressing the revenue gap will require a comprehensive evaluation of the city's entire financial structure including all revenues expenditures programs, services, and levels of service. We have commenced a comprehensive review of all revenues to determine the opportunities to enhance our revenues to offset a portion of these impacts. This slide is for illustrative purposes only and are intended to demonstrate the range of options available to the city. No action or direction is being requested from the City Commission at this time. In addition to further reduction of operating expenses where possible, strategic recommendations to close the budgetary gap may include a hiring freeze, elimination of non-essential vacant positions, full cost recovery of programs, identifying new revenue sources, special assessments, reducing or eliminating non-core services, eliminating of special events and select programs, adjusting the millage rate, outsourcing city operations where appropriate, refocusing on core municipal services, and or monetizing city assets. No single strategy will address the projected structural gap. A comprehensive approach will be required. If the property tax reform measure passes on November 3rd, The city cannot wait until the next budget cycle to begin implementing necessary changes. The financial impacts will require action well in advance of the FI 2728 budget process. As outlined previously, the city has already commenced a comprehensive evaluation of opportunities to reduce and streamline expenditures, enhance revenues, and evaluate programs and services. Following the November election, we will meet individually with each city commissioner during November, December to review potential strategies and options for addressing the anticipated budget gap. Based upon that input, the city manager's office will develop a comprehensive proposal and plan of action for consideration by the city commission. The proposed plan of action will be presented for public discussion at a city commission meeting in January or February, 2027. with the objective of establishing a clear path for immediate implementation. The goal is to be prepared to act, not wait for the next budget cycle. Moving forward, I would now like to hand the presentation to Emily Smith, our Deputy City Manager, to provide an overview of the proposed 26-27 budget.

Thank you, Mark. Good evening, mayors, city commissioners, city managers, staff, and the public. Emily Smith, deputy city manager. I'm joined here this evening with Sean Dineen, assistant city manager. It's both an honor and a privilege to be able to present to you the FY2026-2027 proposed budget. The total budget for the City of Sunrise for FY2026-2027 is $553.4 million, and that comprises all funds in the budget, including capital improvement projects. Here are highlights of some of the funds that are included in that number. Through careful budgeting and streamlining of the budget, as Mr. Lebowski said, we were able to successfully reduce the general fund budget this year from the current year by $250,000. So the budget this year is actually less than the last year's budget. And this is done while maintaining essential services and programs for our community. Our proposed millage rate remains at 6.0543 mills. This is the 18th consecutive year. It was first adopted by the City Commission in FY 2010. This rate has not changed and has not increased for our Sunrise residents. As discussed in the economic outlook section, due to the elimination of the utility surcharge, we have reduced our general fund revenue this year by $5 million. Fortunately, this reduction was largely offset by the 5.99% increase in our property values. Our fire assessment fee supports fire prevention, fire suppression, and educational services in the Fire Rescue Department. We are proposing to keep it level at $309.50 per residential family. This fire assessment fee remains very low among all Broward cities as it's the eighth lowest fee in Broward County. And this year we implemented a new Sunrise Transportation Special Assessment for commercial properties in the Western Sunrise area. As discussed, this new fee supports our on-demand transportation. It connects workers and visitors to commercial properties in Western Sunrise as an economic development tool. This service is provided through freebie, and each year it connects approximately 42,000 rides on average. Grant funding covered approximately 50% of this service for the first couple of years, but that funding ended last year. This assessment only applies to non-residential properties and the initial assessment rate is $94.71 per equivalent benefit unit. Because of the increase in property tax revenue for the current year and the expenditure reductions that were made, our general fund budget remains structurally balanced for the 12th consecutive year. This is with no use of our savings account, no use of fund balance, with our recurring revenues covering our recurring expenditures. The proposed budget for the general fund is $186.6 million. As I stated before, it's $250,000 less than the current year budget. Our personnel costs remain a significant portion of the budget at approximately 75.9%. This includes salaries, benefits, and personnel related expenses. This equates to approximately 141 million of the $186 million general fund budget. For the FY2027 budget, we are proposing to convert two vacant part-time public service aid positions in the police department to one full-time position. Sorry, that's a records position. This will result in the elimination of one part-time position from our citywide personnel complement. And in the city manager's office, we are proposing to transition the quarterly Horizons Magazine away from a printed magazine to only a digital format. This change will save approximately $148,000 per year and represents a shift towards more modern communication, including the use of social media and digital communications. We currently print approximately 40,000 copies of the Horizons Magazine per quarter. and this is distributed through every door direct mail, which is very cost effective, even though the total cost is $148,000 per year. In the Leisure Services Department, we have included funding to replace a synthetic turf at Wellaby Park and the damaged playground surface at Flamingo Park, both with poured in place rubberized material. Wellaby Park is our busiest park and the synthetic turf just hasn't withstood the traffic in that area. And we recently completed an assessment of the Sawgrass Sanctuary Boardwalk, and we are proposing funding to implement the repairs that have been recommended as part of that report. Those repairs will include the planks, fascia, beams, piles, and railings. And the Civic Center Aquatics Complex pool deck lighting is the original lighting at that facility and has reached the end of its useful light. We have been utilizing temporary lighting at that location to ensure that the patrons have sufficient lighting in the evening hours. And we are also continuing the successful alternative work schedule program that was implemented this year. We have had a lot of successful comments from our employees. It has improved employee morale. It has also been used as a recruitment tool and a retention tool. And we've benefited from less employee leave and enhanced customer service with this program. In the police department, we'll be purchasing a subscription for blockchain analytics software to enhance investigations related to digital assets such as Bitcoin and cryptocurrency. This is a professional tool to track on-chain transactions and to monitor wallet risks and to investigate crypto compliance. This software enables our detectives to monitor and trace crypto transactions. The police department has established a real-time operations center. This is to enhance the police department's response to incidents in real time by integrating closed caption television, police intelligence, and communications into a centralized environment. The real-time operations center strengthens operational efficiency as it relates to criminal activity and it enhances officer safety due to the intelligence. And as previously discussed, we're converting two part-time records specialists into one position. Those part-time positions are difficult to fill and difficult to retain. So by converting it to a full-time position, it will help with operational efficiency. And we are reclassifying three public service specialists public service aids to traffic infraction enforcement officers. These are civilian positions and they will support the city's automated traffic enforcement programs. Per state statute, the traffic infraction enforcement officers must be certified and are authorized to review automated enforcement evidence and to confirm traffic violations. In the police department, we are also replacing 50 portable radios that are no longer supported. And 35 radio headsets, which are specialized communications tools for our SWAT team for hands-free two-way radio communications, which is extremely critical during active crime scenes. We are also purchasing two 360-degree cameras for crime scene documentation in the Criminal Investigation Division. These cameras will take 360-degree high-resolution photos with one snap simultaneously, which includes measurements. It creates a seamless crime scene, and it allows detectives to recreate that crime scene and allow for 3D video walkthroughs, which would be really critical for court evidence. And in the Fire Rescue Department, we are proposing the replacement of two electric hydraulic vehicle extrication kits. These devices use hydraulics to cut and spread a vehicle open to be able to rescue trapped occupants. This life-saving equipment is also known as the jaws of life. And in the Public Works Division, we have included funding for replacement of the Sawgrass Sanctuary Park Irrigation Pump. This pump was installed in 2000 and has reached the end of its useful life. Funding is also included to replace three air handling units in the public works building and one condenser unit in the third floor of the public safety building. The existing condenser unit is 16 years old. And our self-insured health insurance program has performed very well since it was established, allowing us to avoid premium increases for seven consecutive years through 2015. The city continues to experience rising medical costs and our benefits consultant has recommended another adjustment to insurance premiums this year to support the rising costs. This budget includes the use of surplus reserve funds to cover a portion of the recommended premium increase per calendar year 2027. This will utilize a significant portion of the remaining surplus reserve funds. Employee health insurance coverage remains free for employees selecting single coverage. For those electing family HMO coverage, the estimated premium increase for starting in January will be $22 per paycheck. And we are also continuing the wellness screening program into the next fiscal year with the funding that was already allocated this year.

Good evening, Mayor, Commissioner, Sean Deneen, Assistant City Manager. Moving on to highlights of other funds. Starting with the building division, the automatic CPI adjustment for single-discipline permit fees is included at 2.8% for fiscal year 2027. With this adjustment, the building division is projected to fully support its operations without a general fund subsidy. Within the fuel and roadway fund, we are continuing the neighborhood traffic calming program with this year's budget request based on current applications. A replacement tack trailer is also proposed to support paving activities throughout the community. The IT department is not proposing any new programs for fiscal year 2027. However, they will remain focused on maintaining the strengthening, the organization's existing technology infrastructure, services, and cybersecurity posture. For the Spring Tree Golf Fund, the 2027 budget includes replacement of the golf cart fleet, which is 60 golf carts. We will trade in the existing golf carts to help offset the cost of the new carts. We are also recommending the replacement of a utility vehicle that is essential to golf course daily maintenance operations. Turning to the stormwater fund, staff continues to focus on strengthening the city's flood control and stormwater management capabilities. For fiscal year 2027, staff is recommending the use of a consultant to analyze and model the existing stormwater conveyance system within Basin 18 to develop recommendations for potential improvements. Additionally, a new utility vehicle is proposed to support the department's daily operations, including irrigation maintenance, waterway maintenance, litter control, and other stormwater related field activities. In the gas division, staff is requesting the purchase of a replacement forklift that is utilized daily to safely and efficiently move parts and materials within the warehouse. Transitioning to fleet management, staff has identified vehicles that have met or exceeded the city's established replacement criteria and are being recommended for replacement in fiscal year 2027. Within the police department, 27 marked and unmarked vehicles are recommended for replacement. Within the Fire Rescue Department, staff is recommending replacement of one vehicle and one pumper truck. In the Leisure Services Department, one truck used by facilities maintenance is recommended for replacement at this time. And additionally, in Public Works, a five-yard dump truck has reached the end of its useful life and is recommended for replacement to ensure the continued reliability and efficiency of field operations. With a total operating budget of $145.6 million, the utilities department is proposing three new programs for fiscal year 2027. The Sawgrass Water Treatment Plant East High Service Pump Station Rehabilitation Project is proposed as a two-year phase project and will allow staff to replace two pump motor base plate assemblies. This project was recommended as part of the city's Water and Wastewater Master Plan and is necessary to maintain the reliability and operational capacity of the city's water treatment system. The spring tree water treatment plant platform and silo rehabilitation project includes a comprehensive structural condition assessment, engineering design, and construction of recommended improvements. This project will help ensure the continued safety, reliability, and longevity of the facility. At the Sawgrass Water Treatment Plant, staff is recommending surface preparation and recoding of the existing chemical storage tanks. This work will address and prevent corrosion, protect the tanks, and extend their useful service life. The Utilities Department capital outlay includes the purchase of a new excavator and trailer for valve installations and emergency water leak repairs, allowing staff to respond more quickly to maintenance needs and critical system issues. The replacement capital A requests include the replacement of a roof at the Springtree Treatment Plant and Southwest Treatment Plant. Two blowers at the Sawgrass Water Treatment Plant are recommended for replacement to maintain reliable treatment operations. Additional replacement requests include eight gas detectors utilized by lift station maintenance staff and various pumps and motors used throughout the city's treatment plants and lift stations to ensure continued reliability of critical utility operations. SEVEN VEHICLES ARE RECOMMENDED FOR REPLACEMENT BASED ON THE CITY'S ESTABLISHED REPLACEMENT CRITERIA. OF THESE THREE ARE PROPOSED TO BE REPLACED WITH HYBRID PICKUP TRUCKS SUPPORTING THE CITY'S CONTINUED EFFORTS TO IMPROVE FLEET EFFICIENCY AND INCORPORATE MORE SUSTAINABLE VEHICLE OPTIONS INTO ITS FLEET. I'M GOING TO HIGHLIGHT SEVERAL PROJECTS WITHIN THE GENERAL CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND. This year, additional funding is being proposed to support the Oscar Wind Park phase two project, which includes parking, a multipurpose building, covered basketball courts, pickleball courts, a splash pad, landscaping, lighting, and security improvements. Renovations to the existing restrooms at the Sawgrass Sanctuary Park will also be included. The City Hall Amphitheater Improvement Project includes accessibility upgrades, a new stairway, drainage improvements, and ancillary enhancements. These improvements will expand the functionality and accessibility of the facility. Moving on to other capital improvement project highlights within the gas capital projects, staff is continuing the replacement of older gas mains and service lines. The project will focus on older steel infrastructure and replace it with more reliable polyethylene piping. Within stormwater capital projects, staff is proposing drainage improvements within Basin 15, including culvert upgrades and improvements necessary to make compliance with the Basin's South Florida Water Management District permit. Within the water and wastewater capital projects, the Sawgass Wastewater Treatment Plant RAS and Aeration Tank Influent Project will replace deteriorated underground piping that has reached the end of its useful life. The Springtree Water Treatment Filter Rehabilitation Project We'll address structural repairs, replace the filter control center and lighting, improve the filter system and building envelope, and replace other critical components. Along Sunset Strip, the existing sanitary sewer force main will be upgraded, replacing 18,000 linear feet of aging cement pipe and address associated utility relocations within the project area. The Northwest 44th Street water main replacement project will replace the existing 30-inch water main from Nob Hill Road to Pine Island Road and provide connections at the intersecting streets. Lastly, the utility SCADA upgrades project will improve the reliability and security of the city's utility control system. The project is anticipated to be a multi-year effort and will include system upgrades, server segregation, and localized firewalls to strengthen the city's utility infrastructure. The projects previously mentioned were intended to highlight some of the significant work planned for this upcoming fiscal year. However, there are other capital projects planned for 2027 as well.

And this concludes the staff's presentation, but before we get to questions and donation funding requests, I do want to thank each of the mayor and commissioners for your continuous engagement and input throughout the entire year by providing staff with priorities and concerns that drive the development of the budget as presented tonight.

Right, this time I'm going to open up for public discussion. Anyone who wishes to be heard on any matters related to the budget, unrelated to charitable, this is the time to come forward. Please raise your hand or press five star on the phone. No hands raised. Can you confirm no hands raised online?

I confirm no hands are raised.

OK, thank you. I've been up here a long time, not as long as Commissioner Scudo. And I was here in 2010. when the post 2008 financial collapse presented as an existential threat to the budget, where there were concerns about having to raise taxes and cut services, cut employees. And even in that moment, it wasn't as solemn as what we're facing here. I think there's a recognition that this is different. This is not a storm that we can, simply work our way through or an economic crisis where we know we'll come back as we always have. COVID hit, deeply concerned about our ability to deliver services, to protect our people, to protect our employees, protect our residents and businesses. And we saw the impact on businesses who were desperate and the funds were coming too slow, still didn't have this level of solemn presentation. The threat that we face through Amendment 3 is compounding what the legislature already did that's punishing utilities. It wasn't really asked for by those that we supplied. It was a dispute in another part of the state amongst a couple of cities, and it led to a statewide impact for all utilities. To Mr. Lebelski and your staff, and all of those in the departments down who had to face what is essentially a flat budget. It is actually a significant reduction if you exclude the personnel costs, which make up the vast majority of our costs and the vast majority of why our budgets continue to rise. We're like every other business, sometimes even worse in terms of inflationary impacts, cost of money, what it takes for us to deliver life-saving services, what it takes for us to provide programs that make Sunrise unique, what makes it worth living, working, playing, eating, entertaining, what we do here to differentiate ourselves from other cities to provide not just better services for the sake of it, but to keep us competitive. to keep our housing stock moving forward, but also to support our workforces and our businesses. Mr. Hrabowski, the slides related to the economic outlook and the program costs were particularly powerful. And I just want to take a minute to kind of explain a few of these, to put them in context, because they can get lost in words and digits. When you talk about the recreations program, $2 million, that's a subsidy that we provide to youth athletics that families can access deeply discounted recreational programs because we value and we know how important that is for us to provide and no one else can do it. Is that correct?

That is correct, Mayor.

And in order for that to be revenue neutral, it would mean raising $2 million out of the families of those who play soccer and basketball and other sports, correct?

That is correct.

We look at the summer camp program. It is short in time in terms of the overall year. Those of us up here and staff and those that stay in line for six, seven hours in order to get their spot in summer camp understand that it is a lifeline for working families. You don't have to change it. I don't know who's changing it, but you don't need to do that. It is a lifeline because the alternative of paying $5.50 for a child, if you have to go out and do it privately, is probably triple for the summer. That's real money. That's $1,000. That's per child difference. That makes the difference between just leaving the child home with maybe some older siblings or putting them in a program that is healthy and nurturing and makes the summer worthwhile. In order to do that, we would have to raise on working-class families $1.2 million to make that revenue neutral. When we look at our door-to-door transportation, our senior minibus, which we provide for free, that is more than just an opportunity to go from point A to point B. It is a lifeline for those who want to do their own shopping, who want to get out, those who need medical services that we provide. That would mean raising on seniors $1 million. We can go through each of these, and you pointed out, I thought, quite powerfully, that there's a number of these that look relatively small. You know, the traffic calming program, it's only 200,000. It's 155,000. But it's one of the biggest complaints we get in the city about our ability to respond and provide traffic calming in neighborhoods. Residential sidewalk repair, we don't own sidewalks, but the cost of repairing in the private market is so substantial to the credit staff and commission's that have been up here for years and years, it provides greatly reduced cost because we do it with our staff. The Boys and Girls Club, it's not a babysitting service. This is a youth empowerment organization that is making differences and changing trajectory in lives that we have to make some choices. And so when we look at what's coming, And even if we eliminated all of that, we're still short. We still cannot do it. And when you go through the strategies for how to make it up and what those look like, it's tough. If we're forced, if I'm forced, choose between providing summer camp that is greatly discounted for working families here in sunrise and raising costs on businesses and raising costs on investment property i'm telling you what choice i'm making i gotta choose between telling seniors they can't use a free bus and costs going up on businesses and on non-resident and on homesteaded property i know what i'm choosing When we look at all of these strategies, this is being forced on us not because there was an affordability crisis caused by property tax. It is performative politics that was not well thought out. It was proposed on a Thursday night, delivered on a Friday, voted on Monday, and by Tuesday it was a referendum. There was no policy discussion. There was no economic analysis. In fact, the economic analysis wasn't done until after. And then all sorts of statements about we'll help all those counties that just can't seem to meet it because they've been cut so badly that the legislature will provide grants and funding for public services and first responders is just not the way policy should happen. As Commissioner Kirch just said, they're taking our money that we give them in taxes, taking our money, our sales tax we generate here so that they can fund a performative politics policy that is not intellectually based, that is only seeking votes, only trying to distract. And I'm sorry I'm going to say it's only distracting from the other issues we face, the other affordability issues. Our property insurance continues to go up. Our auto insurance is going up. All of these costs go up, and yet we don't have a special session for that. And so they'll ask you residents to donate to pull counties in rural areas out of a jam that they created. They'll set the fire and then try, as the arsonists, to be the hero when they try to put it out. It's a substantial issue that voters have to decide. And to Mr. Lebelski and staff's credit, it was important that we look at that in this budget. We cannot hide from it. It's coming. And we'll get to the charitable donations in a second. That's a number that I'm not going to support tonight. I'm going to propose it much like city staff was recommending, that we only do half. That we only do half until we know what happens in November. If it doesn't pass in November, we'll come back and talk about it, because these are great services area-wide, all these big folks who provide so many services. But if those who you provide services vote in mass numbers for this, we won't be there to help. We can't be there to help. To the small charitable donations we do that make a difference, that are really thin margined and really about providing direct services where cutting from 5,000 to 2,500 is a lot, get ready. That's what we're gonna have to do. Because again, if I have to make personally, I don't know about anyone else, but if for 155,000, I have to make a decision about traffic calming versus providing a few services for 20 or 30 residents, or whether I'm proposing to hike fees or being one of those to support that, There's gonna be cuts to it. We cannot get revenue neutral by simply cutting. We will not get there. The quality of life issues will be dramatic and rapid. And I'll just finish with this before I open it up for comments from my colleagues as well. If we're forced to do these things, either cut entirely, or raise costs, and someone comes to the podium and says, I'm outraged that you cut the senior bus, or I'm outraged that you levied additional costs on businesses to fund senior bus, my first question when your comments are done at the podium is going to be, did you vote for this? Because sometimes we get the government we want, and sometimes we get the government we deserve. And if this passes, it is going to change the quality of life here in the City of Sunrise. It's going to change who funds it. And to put in context, the benefit being sought is only for those who are homesteaded at a certain level. For our workforce that's renting, they're getting no breaks. anything, they're going to bear the brunt of it because we're going to have to increase what we charge non-homesteaded properties. That is commercial buildings. That is renters' buildings. Rent's going to be passed through. Businesses aren't going to absorb that. So the same workers, the line cooks and the servers and those that help us in hospitality and those that are struggling that can only hope some day for a house because of property insurance and auto insurance and the cost of living and inflation and get no benefit from this and bear the brunt of this are going to make it harder on the businesses. We already have a tremendous challenge keeping our workforce together. We don't have workforce of housing. We don't have enough of it. And the next victim of that will be our investment and our effort to actually do what the state hasn't done for 20 years, and that is invest in affordable housing. We subsidize that significantly. Those are going to get cut. If there's a difference of about $1 million or $600,000 to invest in an apartment complex that maybe gives 30 or 40 units at affordable rates versus providing summer camp for hundreds of children or providing the senior minibus, Those in the affordable housing sector need to stand up and understand and make clear to everyone our ability to incentivize more affordable housing, which we have been doing aggressively, and we didn't need the state to tell us how to do it. We've been doing it for a long time. That is going on the blocks because we're going to have to focus on what is it that makes living here affordable as much as possible. And to make up a million dollars on kids playing soccer and baseball versus investing in, again, 30 or 40 units, yeah, it's important, but we have to make choices. So this is the most solemn moment I've faced. There wasn't another time that we didn't have a strategy that we knew we could implement and get through the storm, get through the man-made or natural. But if this passes, the damage will be lasting, it will be rapid, and it will be permanent. To my colleagues, there are a few decision points, and then I know each of you will have comments on this as well. One of the decision points that was raised by staff was the elimination of the horizons. I've talked to staff about this. I'd propose some sort of middle ground before we do that. I'm concerned because, you know, not everyone is as adept at technology as, let's say, Commissioner Scudo and others in this room, but there are some who really rely on the printed copy. I know that we distribute. into certain areas where we deliver for usage and we have them at city events. I think this first year we have to probably think about what kind of impact. There's probably people who don't even look at it and throw it. And so that's wasted both in direct mail and the physical copy. But I wonder if it's possible to say, okay, we're going to eliminate the direct mail. We're still going to print a meaningful number. that can be either distributed or can be requested to be mailed. I don't know if the costs at some point get too high to do that, because obviously you're getting bulk rate for mail and everything else. But I could see some members of our community, our constituents, who really want to receive it. And we may not be able to if everybody says they want it, because we're going to have to face these costs are very significant. But I wonder in this first step, is that something staff has considered?

Yes, we have and Emily's already started to come up with a plan. I'll hand it off to her to go into a little more details.

Thank you, Mark. Yes, Mayor, following up on our conversation, we did get pricing to print either 5,000 or 10,000 copies, and we did look at the information available for all of the phases, and it looks like there's approximately 7,500 units in the phases. So we could print 5,000 copies for about $4,400 or 10,000 copies for about $7,200.

Still a significant reduction from where we are now.

Yes, very significant. We wouldn't mail them unless somebody called and specifically asked us to mail them.

But we could go to the rec centers and leave at the front desk so people can get them, that kind of way.

Of course. At the senior center, all the city facilities, everywhere we have our utility billing access points as well. Three of the four issues we do are about 36 pages, so to mail that would be $2.56 per per issue if we were going to mail that the larger one is about two dollars and eighty six cents to mail that so you know just just under three dollars per copy if we needed to mail it if somebody couldn't get to one of our facilities but wanted the information right the other areas that we want to consider the faith-based community because they work very closely with our residents and many in our faith base don't may not use the digital access it the same way and so we'd want to work

to make sure that they're getting the programs out because we need them participating as well. And other maybe major businesses where we could over time evaluate.

Sure. I would recommend printing the 10,000 copies and then sort of adjusting that as needed going forward. We could revisit the areas where we left the copies to see if there were any copies remaining at the end of the quarter and also speak to the folks there to see if there was an increased demand that we didn't allow for. So then we can make adjustments based upon that. And that would be $7,200, which is still a significant savings from the $148,000 we're spending now.

Are there other decision points in here, Mr. Lebowski? You want the commission before their comments on the individual? There weren't really any significant program modifications at all. This has been the, you know, typically I know, I'm sure my colleagues the same way, I have pages and pages of notes and questions about modifications and justifications. There are very few of those, but are there any decision points?

Not specifically, Mayor. I think you hit on the horizons was the big decision point. The rest of the items in here, the program mods and capital outlay, are mostly focused on really needs rather than wants for the organization.

All right. I'll just go down the line. Deputy Mayor, just out of courtesy, I don't know if you have any questions that you want to raise, and then I'll go to Assistant Deputy Mayor.

Yes, I'm here. In reference to the horizons, Mayor, you already addressed it. I had concerns. So knowing that we have options, I'm okay with that. I do want us to have some printed. So what Emily Smith mentioned about placing different locations, I think would be suffice. And I'm open to hearing the rest of my colleagues on the other things that haven't been mentioned. Since we don't have to make a decision, I am listening. And I guess I'll talk to the city manager when that time comes. Thank you.

Thank you. Assistant Deputy Mayor.

I would like to thank the staff for their detail outline of this presentation for tonight and the thoughtfulness that is put into each program that we offer and the ability of whether or not the cost outweigh the justification. So I want to thank you for that detailed information. It gives us tangible evidence as to what cost is put into each program and how the responsibility of each resident is to the contribution of it all. So I hope that suffice with everyone as they're seeing the numbers and knowing what the cost is and that the value of your money that you're returning is going to a great cause. As it relates to the horizon, I would hope that we don't necessarily just mail it out. I would eliminate mailing altogether. I mean, I would think it's easier to just drop off at these particular areas. They all have HOA presidents and we can reach out to them as to how they can get it distributed into their individual hands. also alerting the other residents. Most people that are utilizing our facilities attend one of our facilities. So getting a hands on this copy I think would be easy for individuals in that way. And then the rest of them I think could get it online. So I think we should eliminate printing altogether. I mean, sorry, mailing altogether and just resort to printing and maybe have a communication with those individual HOAs as to how much they would want initially so that we can really get an accurate amount so we're not one, overprinting and two, that we're not really, we can have an accurate count of the cost and if it goes up then at least we know that individuals are actually utilizing it and then we may be able to re-evaluate based on that type of conversation. And also probably educate them as well about going online because a lot of people are becoming tech savvy. And so they may be able to have a link to an app and so they can figure it out and try to make that user accessibility. So that's one of the things that I would like to see happen or maybe create an app for it. easier to access for individuals because I do think it has valuable information and a lot of times persons ask me questions and I relate them back to that where they get to see that detail information and the operation of times as it relates to programs that may necessarily be things we consider in the future? I don't really have any, because I do think that the programs that we do have are, have a value, and I can see the value when residents talk about it from individuals may not even be parents that are attending our summer camp, but their grandparents are talking about it and how beneficial it is. When it comes on to the traffic, we get a lot of emails regarding that and to see that as a program and the cost of it really goes to show that one, we're using it, and two, to also let the residents know that it's not a two-second process because sometimes they think it, It costs us nothing, but it really does have a real value towards it. So I believe that is important. Wouldn't want to change anything about our advisory board and public art is important because especially when you're going through something, you really like to see something that is pretty, right? It gives you a common mental state of mind. And in this climate, a lot of things are, not so common to the individuals. And so I would like for us to try to ensure things of that nature that really helps to beautify and remain as stable as possible to the community. So thank you for this detail.

Thank you. Commissioner Kirch.

I'm in agreement with Commissioner Clark and you, Mayor, that I don't think we should be mailing these out. I think if they want to be picked up, And I'm talking about the Rise magazine. If they want to be picked up, I'm fine with that, just to see.

So on that decision point, I think we can come to consensus.

I do have a couple questions before staff, before I have some comments. The $5 million that this staff has accounted for for the coming utility surcharge revenue loss in this budget. Actually, that policy takes effect in July of 2027, correct?

That's correct.

So you're just being proactive to account for that in this budget as well?

Well, so for the full year, the revenue was budgeted previously at $17.5 million. And so we've accounted for basically one quarter of that, starting with July of next year. And so that's when we said we conservatively included a $5 million reduction.

So next year we'll be taking the full brunt of that.

That's correct, an additional $12.5 million.

And you said this budget is structurally balanced. That means we're not using any revenues or savings to fund General fund. Savings to fund the general revenue?

Right. So our recurring revenues cover our recurring expenditures in the budget, and that's our structurally balanced budget. No use of fund balance, which we consider our savings account.

And we're not touching the revenue stabilization reserve at $10 million?

No, sir.

And the contingency reserve at $25 million?

Correct. We are not touching either of those.

And I didn't see any new positions or major new services in this budget, correct?

Correct. In fact, we're reducing the personnel complement by the one part-time position.

Now, I saw that 75.9% of the general fund budget comes from personnel costs. Would protecting public safety become more difficult in the future if the city experiences substantial revenue losses?

Yes, absolutely. So, for example, the $141 million of personnel costs out of $186 million, so we only have $45 million left for all of our operating expenses and capital outlay expenses. So when we talk about a possible $33 million reduction, it's very significant.

$7 million to run the rest of the city?

Correct, unfortunately.

Okay. I hear a lot of comments on, oh, this is just fear-mongering by the cities if this passes. Has anybody come up and said, hey, you guys identified some wasteful spending in this budget? Has anybody in the public come up and identified anything as wasteful spending?

No, sir.

What about pet projects? Are there any pet projects up here that the commission has that's being included in this budget?

No, sir.

In fact, I think you have about 28 capital fund projects, mostly all through utility, stormwater, gas, and fuel tax.

That's correct.

Those are all justifiable projects that need to be done?

Absolutely.

If we don't do those, the consequences would be pretty catastrophic if we don't deal with the stormwater pumps?

All those projects are necessary.

I also have Oscar Wynn Phase II Park that's in the capital project. But that's part of the 2014 general obligation bond project. All right.

So that project was identified as part of the original general fund obligation project. However, we did utilize all of those dollars. So these are general fund dollars that are being allocated to that project, which was identified originally as part of that bond campaign.

In fact, we promised them that they would get their park right. That's correct. So we wouldn't be doing a disservice to our residents if we were going to say, hey, we're going to cut it now that we're facing this amendment.

Correct.

That's just we do that, but I'm just pointing it out to the public. The amphitheater improvements, that's because of accessibility and safety issues, correct?

Correct, we wanted to ensure additional accessibility and also we felt like it was necessary to add additional staircase on the western side of the amphitheater which would provide easier access to the restroom facilities and access to be able to get out of the amphitheater from that area. So it's a number of things that provides additional structured walkway areas as well and railings which we felt should have been included in the original project. It'll also relocate the technical team to a further area.

Has staff evaluated whether postponing any of these essential infrastructure work could increase future cost or service risk?

I'm sorry, can you repeat that?

We delayed the maintenance or infrastructure. We'd probably be looking at a greater cost later on, correct?

Absolutely, yeah. Even something like the Sawgrass Sanctuary boardwalk, we absolutely do not want to delay any of those repairs and maintenance on that boardwalk. We don't want to be in a situation where it becomes unusable. So we absolutely want to do those projects. Okay.

It's been closed down for quite a bit, right?

Well, the Okamik one was closed down, and we don't want to have a situation where a sawgrass sanctuary is closed, so we want to ensure those are done in a timely manner.

And then staff is proposing $123,960 as the ceiling for charitable contributions, staff.

So that represents 50% of the city commission policy, which was created by ordinance, and that's in the city code, and that's 0.14% of the prior year operating budget.

And I'll just jump in there, too, is separately that staff is recommending that the chamber and the Chess Foundation be moved from the charitable donations and be handled as more like city programming as they operate in city facilities.

Is that a decision point we need to make?

Yes, when we get to general donations, yes.

When we get to that point, I'll hold off on that. Since we're going there, I see some of these organizations have a matching funding component. Can you explain that to the public on what that does in expanding services for our residents?

Sure, absolutely. For the organizations that have matching funds, they're able to leverage the contribution from the City of Sunrise to provide a much greater contribution to the entire region. And so those impacts from those organizations become very significant in the support for our community. So we have a couple of those organizations that do leverage the dollars, and it is something that I'm sure they'll speak about, but it's critically important for them to get the dollars in order to have a significant impact in Broward County and in Sunrise.

I don't think we did it last year. I might be wrong, but I know in years past we had some ARPA dollars to supplement some of these programs. Is there any remaining ARPA dollars in the budget that can be used to fund that? I don't think we had it last year, but just to make sure.

Correct. There are no remaining ARPA dollars. All the ARPA dollars had to be committed by December 31st, 2026, and they were committed, and they will be spent by December 31st, 2027. So there are no remaining ARPA dollars for this purpose.

So we're at a zero balance on that.

Correct, on ARPA.

Let me ask a question on charitable donations. If we choose to fund some of these Can we wait on disbursement to see if Amendment 3 actually passes or we have to commit to them tonight and they get the money? It's kind of like I'm flying blind and I don't like to fly blind. Yeah, that's an excellent.

So the proposal I had made to staff to have them consider was whatever we decide to fund, we budget. But we do not agree to fund all of it. until we come back together post Amendment 3. So as staff has pointed out in one of the slides, that if Amendment 3 passes, we're going to have to have workshops.

There's not any doubt.

If it doesn't, it would be at that time where the commission can make those decisions based on whether we continue to have this. To your point, this isn't going away. Some of the politicians at the state level are saying, if it doesn't pass, we're going to try to do it another way. We're going to do it just as radical. going to put it through the next Constitutional Commission so we cannot just feel relieved we'll know more from the numbers but to answer your question at least what I asked staff mine's on I won't move my face anymore that that we agree to whatever we think we would do if Amendment 3, this is just a proposal, whatever we would do, but we don't allow staff to fund more than half of whatever we decide to do until we know whether Amendment 3 passes. If it doesn't pass, then the decision is going to be, unfortunately, pretty easy. And I think that the groups that are involved will have

that skin in the game on how this on this goes forward so i think it's an idea that you're saying it's a great idea yeah and like i said a lot of these questions i know the answers to it's more of an educational component they say a lawyer never ask a question that you don't know the answer to but uh i i thank staff for your incredible work and that's all the departments all the department heads typically i and my questions with each charter officer saying, is this a budget you can live with and maintain your mission? And I'm not going to do that this year because you guys have all come together and put this, and I do recognize the challenges that each staff and every employee is going to face in this organization if this does pass. But, you know, as we say, a budget is more than a spending plan. It's a statement of priorities. Every member in this one, or every number in this one, was set in a year when the ground moved under us. Under our city charter, setting policy and adopting the budget are the central responsibilities of this commission. I take those responsibilities seriously. I devoted the time to review this year's budget. I've compared it with previous year's budget. studied your presentations. I've examined the charitable organization's request and funding summaries. I applied my background in finance and management, my law degree, and 13 years of municipal budgeting experience to analyze the numbers, diagnose the challenges, and evaluate the choices before us tonight. Let me start with what this commission does not control. As said, in November, Florida voters will decide whether to approve Amendment 3 and raise the homestead exemption. If they improve it, our own estimates say Sunrise loses about $10 million in property tax revenue in year one, rising to $16 million a year by year two. Let me be clear where I stand. That decision belongs to the voters. If they make it, I'll do the best I can to implement it. with the least possible disruption to the services the residents count on. Tonight isn't the night to argue about that amendment. It's the night to show our residents and businesses that we're preparing for either outcome. The second thing we don't control has already happened. Sunrise has provided water and sewer service to Weston, Southwest Ranches, part of Davie, Through agreements those communities entered into with us, those agreements carried a 25% surcharge for customers outside our city because serving across city lines costs money Sunrise taxpayers shouldn't quietly carry for somebody else. This year, the legislature passed House Bill 1451 to eliminate that surcharge. Full annual loss will be about $17.5 million to the general fund revenue, close to 10% of that fund. That is the money that supports our police officers, firefighters, parks, roads, code compliance, and leisure service. As staff has indicated, the city has already built $5 million of the coming surcharge loss into this budget, even though that bill doesn't take effect until January I'm sorry, July 1st of 2027. And as staff pointed out, the loss will reach the full $17.5 million a year, no later than fiscal year 2028, 2029. Residents should hear this plainly. The households relieved of that surcharge live in other cities. The services that lose the money are ours. The revenue pressures originate in Tallahassee. The legislature enacted the surcharge elimination and placed the proposed property tax challenges before the voters. I respect the voters' right to decide on Amendment 3. We have a responsibility to explain what the state actions mean for Sunrise. This is not fear-mongering. It is an honest assessment of the city's budget revenue losses identified in our own financial documents what do we do our tax value taxable values rose by almost six percent additional property tax revenue largely offset the five million dollars in surcharge revenue we are losing in this budget and we will still brought forward a smaller general fund budget than last year's We did not use this budget to expand the general fund with new positions or major new service commitments. In fact, as Ms. Smith indicated, this budget has one position fewer than last year through the conversion of two part-time records positions to one full-time position. We're entering the citywide interim program and moving horizons to digital with the limited pickup copies at our facilities. The general funding operating accounts are down nearly 12% and capital outlay is down more than half. We're holding the property tax rate at 6.0543 mills for the 18th straight year and keeping the residential fire assessment flat, still among the lowest in Broward County for class one department. We're not touching our revenue stabilization reserve and our contingency reserve at $25 million and $10 million, respectively. But controlling spending is only part of our responsibility. We also have to strengthen the tax base that supports these services. Well-planned development can put underused property to productive use, attract businesses, and add taxable value to help offset some of the revenue we may lose from a larger homestead exemption. That growth should also create opportunities for people to buy a home in Sunrise. By allowing a thoughtful mix of smaller homes, townhomes, and other ownership options, we can expand supply and give first-time buyers and working families more choices. Our tax base can grow through additional homes and businesses while individual buyers gain access to more attainable housing. And as this commission always does, we will continue to judge each proposal by what it contributes. Infrastructure and services it requires and how it fits our community Development takes time and it will not close every a budget gap Responsible growth should be part of how we protect services and keep sunrise a place the next generation could afford to live Now the hardest part of this budget every year Organizations come before us and ask for help and the people behind those requests are real Seniors trying to stay in their homes children in foster care, families who need childcare so a parent can work, young adults with disabilities learning a trade. This year, the charitable organization asked was for about $353,000. And going with staff's recommendation, the proposed budget provides $123,960. far short of those requests. Let me say this directly to every one of them. A smaller number next to your name is not a judgment about your work. It doesn't mean your mission matters less or that your quest was undeserving. I wish we can fund it all. As indicated in the past, we've even used ARPA dollars available to help fund some of the contributions. Those were temporary federal dollars and we no longer have those dollars available. At the same time, decisions made in Tallahassee have imposed a permanent loss of utility surcharge revenue and placed the voters a proposal that could significantly reduce property tax revenue. Those state-driven revenue pressures are central to this year's difficult choices. We have to protect the services our residents depend on, and we cannot make permanent commitments based on revenues we may not have. I support keeping the proposed $123,960 for charitable contributions in this budget with disbursement deferred until after November election. If Amendment 3 does not pass, we can proceed with the approved contributions. If it does pass, those funds should remain on hold until this commission reviews the financial impact, and decides what we can responsibly release. How we allocate that money matters as much as the total. Some of those contributions providing matching dollars. Our support for area-wide council aging helps secure federal and state funding for Broward seniors. Our support for the Early Learning Coalition helps provide matching funds for childcare, allowing parents to work with their children, receive care, and early education. Reducing those contributions can mean losing additional support beyond the dollars we withhold. As we allocate this limited funding, I want us to weigh the additional dollars a contribution can bring into the community, the number of Southern Rise residents served, the urgency of their needs, and the results each organization demonstrates. Matching funds should be an important consideration alongside the value of essential services provided by organizations, that do not have a matching opportunity. Our responsibility as a commission is to make each available dollar do as much good as possible for our residents. This recognizes the important work these organizations do while preserving our ability to respond to voters' decisions. We should communicate that condition clearly now and ask staff to identify any matching fund deadlines or essential services that delay a delay could affect. Let me close with the standard I try to hold all of this to. The taxpayers who pay this city millage is the same taxpayer who pays Broward County, Tallahassee, and Washington. Same taxpayers, same money, same standard. I expect the city to control its own spending, and I expect the same discipline every government that reaches into that household's budget. We cannot control what they decide, but we control whether we were ready. The numbers show why this is so difficult. Police and fire rescue together account for approximately 57.9% of the proposed general fund budget. Personnel costs account for 75.9%. Those percentages overlap but he tells us something important about how much of this budget supports people delivering services. Looking at those numbers, I do not see how we can absorb the full revenue losses resulting from Tallahassee's actions through spending cuts alone without putting public safety and funding at risk, particularly if this amendment passes. It will be up to us to examine every reasonable alternative including efficiencies, revenue options, and well-planned development. We cannot promise that the police and firefighter budgets will remain untouched regardless of how much revenue is taken away. This means we must also be willing to reassess the fire assessment fee in the coming years to help close these funding gaps and sustain fire protection. This year's proposed budget keeps that fee flat Future budgets may require an adjustment. Any proposed budget should be based on the cost of providing fire services, the portion eligible to be funded through the assessment, and the impact on our residents and businesses. We owe the public a clear explanation of the need and a full opportunity to be heard. I won't pretend the city can cut forever without anyone noticing. Deferred maintenance is still maintenance. The program that got smaller is smaller. Some of this year's savings come from efficiencies. Others come from delaying purchases or removing one-time expenses. This budget protects essential services, but it does not finish the work ahead. Even without Amendment 3, we still have to address the full surcharge loss. If the amendment passes, we will back at this day, it's in the winter, making harder choices. I'd rather say that tonight than explain it later. That is exactly why I will support this budget. A vote for this budget is a vote for a plan that recognizes what has changed, protects what residents actually use, prepares for what might be coming, and respects the people who pay for all of it. Sunrise should stay a city where people want to live, work, play, learn, shop, and eat. This budget helps keep us there prepares us for the difficult decisions and work ahead. Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you, Commissioner Kirch. Thoughtful as always. Before we move on to charitable, I want to finish with what I expect will be a foreseeable response from some in the community. Why not just cut people? Start cutting programs and cut people. I don't really care if seniors have a free minibus. You don't need that. They can find their way. Why not just cut some staff in buildings? We can take longer delays on our permits. We don't need them. That scream is going to start coming louder and louder. And yet, we don't, I don't hear it. I don't think my colleagues hear it. We don't hear the stories that motivated Tallahassee about enormous pet projects, about wasteful spending and huge trips, about things being wasted in too many employees and not having long wait times and why they can't do their job. There may be places like that, and they have examples of it. But when you take a chainsaw to policy like this, everybody's getting cut. Everybody's getting impacted. And I think we have a rough road ahead. The reason I'm solemn about this is not because there's something that's going to benefit me or us up here. It's that I look at these programs. If you've stood there like all of us have, and seen hundreds of parents waiting for summer camp programs. They're not doing it because they had nothing better to do on Saturday. They're parking there at 3 and 4 a.m. to get in line to get something desperately they need for the summer for their family. Or the seniors who don't pay a dime and you see them on the bus and they get our drivers who take them door to door or help them off the bus. Those are people treating neighbors. or the investments that we have put into affordable housing or park system that our voters voted for that we're gonna have to start thinking about that we reduce the programming. You voted for the land and the improvements, but we have some hard choices to make now. Maybe it's not open as often. And make no mistake, to police and fire has been mentioned. There's gonna be a heavy analysis of what we do going forward. We have no choice because when you look at the budget Only line items that go up, consistent with everything else that's going up in our community, are the personnel costs that are by contract. So, as has been said, we'll adjust. We did it in post-2008, we did it in COVID, and we'll adjust here. But it might be quite painful. And if you agree with that, and if you think these programs are valuable, If you think what the City of Sunrise is providing the businesses and residents being attractive for investment and having people come and want to live here and entertain and free concerts, if you think that's important, then you know what to do when you're in the booth. It's all about the character of our city. It's absolutely right. I don't, uh, commissioner, uh, I mean, deputy mayor Guzman, before we moved to charitable, I don't know if you wanted to offer any additional comments and then I'll offer the same to commissioner Skudo. If he's able, I'm not sure he's in a position to be able to speak deputy mayor.

Thank you. I just wanna thank commissioner Kirch for sharing all of his words, um, on the issues that we, as a city have been preparing for. And I also think the staff for all of their hard work, because I know this has not been easy. And just like the mayor stated, you know, there have been concerns like this in the past, but nothing as severe as this. It's going to truly affect families somewhere, regardless of the outcome. So I am trusting our staff. I'm trusting this commission. I'm proud to work with this commission and our city because I know how each and every one of us truly take everything into consideration. And at the end of the day, it is always in the best interest of our residents. So I'm trusting the process, and I'm looking forward to the rest of this discussion as we move on to the nonprofits. Thank you for the time to speak.

Thank you, Deputy Mayor. I'll offer to Commissioner Skudo, I don't know if he's able to, where he's at, to be able to speak, but if just as a courtesy. If so, I don't know if it's possible. We need a motion for that. No, he can speak. It's public. I'm going to treat it as public comment.

It's public. My concern is his comments may be construed as participation.

I'm opening it up for public comment, so I'm taking the risk.

Commissioner Scudo, you're muted.

In the meantime, if anyone else wishes to speak, they can come forward as well. I'll reopen public comment. Or they can press five-star as well. I see he's unmuted, but I don't hear anything. He may be muted on his end. Okay. All right. Seeing no one come forward, no hands raised, and Commissioner Skudo having challenges coming on, I'll go ahead and close. Reclose public comment to make Tom feel more comfortable. We used to have a cardiac monitor he would wear that we could watch on the screen every time we did something. All right. So on the charitable. All right. So to put in some context, this was. Briefly outlined by Commissioner Kirch, last year we awarded $220,150. This year, the requests of new money went up $135,000. Some by new organizations, some by existing. Three of the organizations alone are $209,000, which almost takes up the entirety of what we funded last year. And to get to the point of where we are capped at, the number pursuant to the statute, I mean, sorry, pursuant to our ordinance, what's the total amount?

0.14% of the budget.

What's the dollar amount? Yes.

$247,920. $247, one more time. $247,920.

It's not on my page. They didn't have it on this one.

Sorry, $247 what? 920.

All right. So as a first step, I want to also reflect upon this commission has on occasion not fully funded. We did that last year. We dialed back understanding that we had some tough economic issues. At the outset, you know, I can't get I personally can't agree to. These increases that have been sought by some of these organizations. We have a couple of new ones, but we also have FarmShare wanted 60,000. We just can't do it. Mr. Hrabowski, you had some comment about the chamber?

Yes, Mayor. So as we looked at the list of charitable donations here, we saw that there was two that kind of stood out. That would be the Chamber and the CHESS Foundation. Both of those utilize city facilities and they operate more functionally like a city program. So staff is recommending that we pull those out of charitable donations and fund those as a city program moving forward.

All right. And where would you find the funding for that?

So we would move the funding for the CHESS program into the leisure services budget, and we believe that they can absorb that funding for the upcoming year. And then we would keep the funding for the chamber in the non-departmental budget where it is now, and we would simply utilize some contingency dollars to support that program for the upcoming year.

All right. And the total of those?

The CHESS program is $35,000. Right.

The chamber is $97.50. Correct. All right. To those who received funding last year for the first time we required quarterly reports And I'm happy to report that everybody provided their quarterly reports Part of that transparency that we sought And that's very helpful I think we need to make sure that's institutionalized moving forward allows us to make sure that we're not only what service are we being provided but also helps us to validate what hasn't been spent and uh... and the process as i understand it from staff yes if someone is awarded and it's funded they don't spend it it's kept with the city right it's not towards return they have to return the dollars promptly okay all right so i don't know how this is always the the most challenging because as commissioner kirch and all my colleagues feel every one of these provide great services but i did just as an outset i don't know how we possibly increase. I know area agents here, they asked for an extra $31,587 above the 50. I think you've heard our comments tonight. You understand? Okay. All right. So as we go through it, and staff will keep track of this, if we kept all at the same level from last year, we still have to So first of all, you'd take out the 44,750, right?

Correct, Mayor.

If that was the will of the commission. And if we kept all of the others, I know that early learning also went up $6,598. We kept it flat at that. Goodman Jewish Family Services, if we kept that flat, I'll talk about the new ones in a second. Special Olympics, we were at 13.9 last year. If we kept that flat, and if we kept Voices for Children of Broward and Youth Empowerment both flat at their last year funding levels, we haven't gotten to the new requests, what would that leave us at?

You would be at $172,900, which would be $48,940 in excess of the 123.

We're talking about the gross. We're going to talk about 123. 123 is a policy decision. It's not staff. So we'll come off that. We start with what we're allowed to do, and then if we roll back, we'll do that. So I appreciate you showing that, but let's talk a little bit more about whether we get there. The new ones, as I see it here, are Family Central at $5,000, FarmShare at $60,000. You guys are here tonight, right? So FarmShare? FarmShare? Yes, sir. OK. $5,000 from Hope United or United International. So those are the only new ones, correct?

Correct.

OK. So the smaller ones are $10,000, and then they have farm share at 60, correct? And let's start with the concept of if, I'm not saying the commission would do this, but if we went to the 172, which is funding everybody flat, excluding chamber and chest, because that's moved into the general fund budget, into the departmental budgets. If the commission said, all right, we're gonna approve that as a budget, we're not either there's two choices we're not funding it we're not letting staff fund a penny yet until we get to november 3rd right because that's one option another option say we're only going to fund half and then we'll address whether the the amount is is available after november 3rd when we get together as a commission those are the two basic options in that scenario is that right Okay, go ahead, Commissioner Kirch.

Is it possible to fund the amount and then make this decision post-November?

Yeah, I think that that's option one, where we would budget.

We'll fund up to $150 or whatever, and then we'll do the allocation.

But we're not, we're budgeting, we're not funding. We're budgeting because that's staff funding, right? We're budgeting, but we're not approving disbursement of any funds until post-November 3rd when the commission gets it. That is an option.

Do we have to pick out how, assign the dollar amounts tonight? Or can we wait until after?

I think it would be healthy to do it to make it clear to each of the organizations. Certainly we could do that. And maybe some withdraw and they decide not to. That is a third option for sure. I don't want to kill a good idea. That's an excellent idea as well. But I think even if it passes November 3rd, we have the money in the budget to at least provide half funding. say all right we're giving you a lifeline for this year but you know you're not getting it next year because it's just not going to we won't have it there or you have to adjust and i think commissioner kirk's really you know touched on an excellent point it's this matching which provides great opportunity for leverage and and expanded service is not available to a lot of the really good services that are being provided by the other charities and that's unfortunate they don't have anywhere else to make it up but we have to be consistent across that. All right, so what's the will of, we now have the numbers, give me the exact number, 172? 900. Okay. And then that's not addressing the three that were entirely new, the Family Central, FarmShare, and Hope Unite International, Inc. FarmShare's here. Why don't you come forward, because I really got to, I have to hear from you as a new one understanding the predicament we're in. Oh, absolutely. And 60,000 is just an enormous number for us.

And I understand. I understand. It's just that it is what it is. We are in difficult times right now. What you have shared here is something I've heard consistently throughout 67 counties in the state that I've been to. Not all of them, but in every single one, the fear is the same. If this passes, you guys are going to be very short on money, which is kind of where I live, because I'm always looking for funding. And today, if you look at the news, we have a new record in diesel prices. We ran the numbers this morning, and in September already, we have surpassed by $8,100 the amount of money we spent in fuel in August. so that projection is where we are in fact the numbers when i run this and i submitted it back in march april i don't know if the gas prices continue to go if the my calculations here would suffice because that's the fear that we're having right now what i do want to point out is that sixty thousand dollars yes i understand you don't have the money but don't look at it like that exclusively. Consider that we'll be providing 31,250 meals in seven distributions for 500 households each, and we can move on that very, very quickly and make sure that it's exclusively here in Sunrise, in any of the areas that you guys determine. We work with your offices, we'll work with the city, to determine what would be the most viable venue where the biggest needs in the community are, where the biggest deserts are, and that's where we would go and focus on our efforts.

And this is an example that the state is crushing us with an unfunded mandate. They want us to address affordability. One issue is people being able to eat, right? Food deserts, food insecurity. Who's making up that? Cities that have been contributing, working with great donors, vendors and corporate, and we know that we want to provide that service.

uh... but the funds out there iraq and so i did i understand that one thing that i want to point out about our proposal the way was written it's scalable so if we cannot get the sixty thousand dollars if we get the sixty thousand dollars will do the seven distributions for the five hundred households each if we can only get half of that then we'll do half the distributions and whatever amount you guys can do based on the numbers that were running We do have a great price that we have been able to secure for protein boxes and produce boxes. If anybody here can take $15 and go to Publix and get 10 pounds of either meat or vegetables, then let me know what Publix so I can go myself. But we get that price because of our relationship with the farmers. And that's what I'm proposing here. It's basically you're purchasing the food through me, and I'm doing the distribution, I'm doing the delivery, making sure the food is safely handled, and all that good stuff.

No, I understand. It's not, again, to Commissioner Kirch's point, right? Whatever numbers to the right in the column that we approve is not a reflection of the value. I understand. It's the challenge.

Mayor, trust me, if anybody understands where you're sitting, it's the guy that is working for a nonprofit trying to look for funding.

I know. I agree. All right. Thank you very much. No, thank you, sir. Other questions? So if we funded at the same level or budget at the same level, did the two new ones, which generally what we've done in the past for new ones is only 5,000. Hope United International is an entirely new. We've not funded in the past. Is that correct?

Correct.

I just want to go through a couple more things. Family Central has been here before. It's not really a new one. And I know FarmShare has also been asking in the past as well.

Excuse me. The Family Central program before was the Parent Leader Training Institute, and now it's a meal program. Right.

Okay. Even if we and post removal if we were to just so people can visualize we were to do half on on farm share at 30 on the Two new ones which was actually Youth empowerment wants to go to 10, but if we kept them at the same level that they're not new so Hope United International is new at five. Family Central is technically five. That would only be ten of the new, right? So that would be essentially 212,900. Is that the number you got?

Correct, Mayor.

All right. That's a generalized concept. Assistant Deputy Mayor, we want to make that motion, by the way? Assistant Deputy Mayor? Mayor. Yes.

I'm sorry. Deputy Mayor Guzman has comments.

Okay. Yes, I will in a second. Did you want to make that motion on the two? Sure. And we can. Okay. Motion to remove chamber and CHES program and move it to departmental. I have a motion and a second. I'll open it up. Deputy Mayor.

I'd like to speak on that.

Yeah, I'm opening it to you. Hang on one second. Floor is yours, Deputy Mayor.

Thank you. In reference to the CHES program, I know we've had this for quite some time and we have a number of students and residents that utilize this program. But I don't know if I fully agree with us moving that program and embedding it into our city programs and putting that burden on our staff that's already overworked in leisure services. So I'm curious to know what that looks like for staff if we're going to make it a city program. Who is going to be manning that entire thing rather than the organization itself. And then overall, based on all the other programs that are here, not discrediting CHES, but the amount of climate that we're in and the economy and the families and the programs and resources that are so desperately needed, I don't think CHES is at the top of the priority based on all of these needs here. So I am not supporting us moving it to leisure services. And if we are going to keep it, I would definitely look into cutting that program into half of the funding that we've been giving them for many, many, many, many years. And I know this is a very important program for you, Mayor, given that your background in chess and it's a baby for you, I respect that. But looking at the needs of the community, I just feel like there are other priorities. And given what we're dealing with right now with all the cutting across the entire city, this is something we should be looking at as well.

Thank you. Mr. Lebelski, in terms of staff demands, I assume what you would be doing is continuing to contract with them. Staff provides all the services already. There's not any new programs out of this. There's no new additional staff requirements or strain, is there?

That's correct. So if it transitions to leisure, it would not include any additional staffing burden.

No additional time that they'd have to do what they're doing? Correct. For instance, we're going to have huge press attention this weekend on the mayor's chess challenge, one of the regional 20-something chess challenges around the region. Staff was already doing that anyway, right?

That is correct.

In terms of the other programs the weekly open play staff already opens up the building and does that now correct you just don't provide the teachers and Folks that are teaching and supporting it whether it's the chess Queens the young women in chess or any of the others That's what's relied on for NSCF through the Sun Center for excellence. Yes, that is correct mayor Yeah, I hesitate to I mean whatever the will the Commission is obviously there's other Requests in this charitable that are not providing food or housing. They're providing other things, so. Go ahead.

So my comment to that is that this CHESS program is a program that is run throughout different cities. Most of them, we do it, but it's a competition. well and there's a lot of functionality with it and I do think that in the event that we have to scale back this program will naturally scale back as well because it would already be a program that we would be running as a city and so it would be something that we would naturally conceive as a program that would be scaling back without any influence or any

Okay any further discussion on that motion Yes Commissioner Kurtz, yes Assistant deputy mayor Clark.

Yes deputy mayor Guzman Can you please repeat what the motion is

Yes, the motion is to move the chamber contribution, the CHESS program, into departmental activities, one to leisure and one to within city departmental.

No.

All right, that passes through to one. All right, so... Yes. So here's the issue then we have remaining and it's up again, we can go through each one of these. You know, there are certain programs here, youth empowerment, you know, village. You know, it's about etiquette. You know, it's not the same as feeding, but it provides a really important skill, right? Motivational training. I think we can't put everything right now in this concept of we can only focus on the specific needs of housing or food. We got to make sure we're also doing those voices. They've asked for an additional thousand. We should continue to fund. They certainly support in the foster care. I think that's important. So anyway, if we were to keep it at existing funding, do half to farm share, and fund the two new ones at 5,000 each, that would be 212,900, which is about 35,000 less than our cap.

Correct.

Additionally, the commission would have to move towards a discussion as to whether we're actually approving the funding or we're just budgeting. Whether we're not going to do it, we'll just send a message. That's an option after. So let's go through the options. One, fund it fully at the 212-900. Two, don't fund any of it, just budget it and address it in... post-November 3, agree to fund half or $106,450 and readdress it after November 3 as to whether we'll fund the second part of it. There was a fourth option.

I just have a question. So for the ones that are seeking matching, do they need, like, commitments to say that they're going to have this commitment before they can go seek?

Okay, maybe area aging. That's a great question. The question is, if we say we're budgeting but clearly not funding either any or only half, does that impair your ability to get matching funds? No, because we have time. Okay. Okay, the answer for those who couldn't hear at home was no, we would have time after November 3rd to be able to address that issue with both the commission and your matching funders. Okay.

That's a great question.

And they know it's in January we're going to be readdressing this.

Just a brainstorm.

We could say, you know what, we're going to give 70, whatever the amount is.

I'm giving you the 100%, but we're going to, whatever the amount to fall in, whatever number we want, maybe it's 62% of your ask, or 62% of the budget, and we just apply it equally down the, understand what I'm saying?

Yeah. You mean, like, not come back and revisit it?

I think, for me, I'm more fine with, I like the half part, because we're coming below the 123.

I think that's where my head's at.

That's good right now, and then we'll see what happens. Because if we come back in January and we're cut, I'm not going to be saying, hey, I can give you the rest of the money. I'm leaning more towards let's do the half because it's below the 120. It's even lower than what staff is asking.

Correct. See, Mr. Lebelski, you were giving money away. Typical city manager, giving money away.

And then if Amendment 3 passes or doesn't pass, then we can readdress it.

So that would mean would be given half of the 124 which would be actually it'd be 106 450 So here's how the numbers work it was 212 212 900 which represents everybody flat But everybody flat plus 30 to farm share, plus the 10 to the new ones, that equals 212,900. If we say we're only going to fund half of that before November 3rd, that's all we're committing to fund, that's 106,450. So all the organizations will, you know, Double Dutch will do an email tonight saying, the city only gave us half, why did they do that? Amendment 3. Everybody's got to make a decision, right? Just like youth empowerment and everyone else. Why did the city only give us half?

So we're given half of the ask for everybody?

Is that what we're doing?

That's the numbers that we were from last year.

Again, taking the two 2025-2026 numbers, keeping them where they were funded last year. So there's some that asked for more. We're not giving them more.

So I think last year, the ask was the 2027 amount, and we only funded.

2025, 2026.

So we gave 10,000 last year?

You gave five.

We gave five, but their original ask was 10.

All right, so that's kind of proposal deputy mayor I'm If the money is there I would say to make a motion to just fund it, but I'm at the will the Commission I

It's a fair point, and I think we're still going to have to look at this anyway, even if Amendment 3 doesn't pass, because we've got the impact, not this coming year as badly, because staff is taking care of the utility. But personally, I would say that we approve the budget of 212,900, which is still $35,000 less than what our ordinance provides. But we will not fund it without further direction from the commission more than half so that only what we're approving to be funded is $106,450. Anything else more than that has got to be approved by the commission when we come back whenever, December, January, whenever. Does that make sense?

Yeah, just to clarify, we would be approved to disburse the $106,000?

Correct.

Okay.

Correct. They have to report just like they're doing. Of course. But that to me is the incentive and I know everybody would be, you know, engaged in that.

I like that idea. Like I said, it comes in below what staff was recommending. I don't want to put us in a position to where we're really cutting core services for charitable giving.

I don't think that's a wise decision on this.

So I'm comfortable with funding half the request now and then revisiting it post-November 3rd.

All right. Do I have a motion then? Can we get a motion? I'd make a motion. Motion by Commissioner Kirch. Seconded. Seconded by Deputy Mayor. Everybody understands the motion, correct? I just want to make sure. All right, call the question.

Deputy Mayor Guzman. Yes. Commissioner Kirch. Yes. Assistant Deputy Mayor Clark. Yes. Mayor Ryan.

Yes. That passes 4-0. Mr. Lebowski, do you need any further guidance on the budget or charitable? No, Mayor. All right. Is there any necessity to amend the tentative budget at all?

No, Mayor.

Okay.

So let's go ahead and there's no amendments that are being voted on. And is there any need for staff to recompute the millage necessary to fund the budget as it has been approved here tonight?

No, Mayor.

All right. And I call the first question on the millage resolution.

Assistant Deputy Mayor Clark? Yes. Deputy Mayor Guzman? Yes. Yes. Commissioner Kirch?

Yes.

Mayor Ryan?

Yes. That passes 4-0. I'll call the question on the budget ordinance.

Commissioner Kirch?

Yes.

Assistant Deputy Mayor Clark? Yes. Deputy Mayor Guzman? Yes. Mayor Ryan?

Yes. Passes 4-0. All right. Thank you to staff. As has been said over and over by my colleagues, this has been a very long and difficult process for staff, every department, Every deputy director every assistant deputy director everybody down the line all the way to rank-and-file who know that this has been going on and to mr. Lebowski who every year no doubt says the Sky is falling but this year had the tools with which to say that was accurate and to the credit of staff to be able to come back and Bring us a budget that has been flattened as much as possible in this first pass. I thank you for that So do we have a motion to adjourn? Motion by Commissioner Kirch, seconded by?

Second.

Assistant Deputy Mayor, all in favor say aye. Aye. We are adjourned.