Council - public_hearing

Buonasera. Oggi è martedì 15 settembre 2026 alle 18. Siamo qui per la nostra prima udienza di bilancio. Andiamo per aprire i lavori. Sig.RaiWrite può fare l'appello?

Primo annuncio, il suo ordine del giorno potrebbe riportare. Alexa Righello. Questa è una correzione, dovrebbe riportare Scenacurch. Sig.RaiChurch? We stop with the mayor Goodman. He is absent. President Hinz. Present. Vice President Jones.

Councilor Cox. Present.

Councilor Martin. Present. Councilor Church. City Manager at Interim Terry Bovard. Financial Director Steven Bloom.

Present.

Attorney Kirsten Ballou. Municipal Secretary Trisha Wright. I'm here. And all the rest of the staff. Green. All right.

It's nice to be with you guys. It's okay, even if it's not in our program, if we can get a prayer from Capo Stigl.

Amen. Amen.

of the Republic that represents a nation under God, indivisible, with freedom and justice for all.

Thank you. Well, at this point we will open the public hearing. The city of Williston proposes to impose a military aliquot of 7.25 This is an increase of 10.8% compared to the rollback of 6.5725. Mr. Blum. Good evening. As mentioned, this is the first of the two public sessions to examine the balance sheet.

Usually I don't make presentations during these sessions, but since you have modified the budget since the last time you saw it, you thought it was right since you are examining the tax issue first and know what will happen in terms of budget so the anti-fire assessment in this version of the budget has been reduced it has been reduced by about 51 thousand dollars and I would just like to point out that the anti-fire assessment is clear which means that it also includes discounts So, when you vote on the evaluation, you voted on a big number. If you pay in advance, you get up to 4% and you pay in the first month and then it goes down from there. Let's put it on the balance sheet. So, I only say it because when you look at the budget it will be a little lower than you thought, because you voted on a big number. But the result is 51,000 dollars. So, from there I had to find other money. What we did was to examine a couple of different areas. Nothing drastic. We didn't take anything and changed the tail. And still at 2%. However, any open position that would not have been suitable for 2%, you know, 10-1, we eliminated it. So this gave us some money to start this process. we also examined the anti-fire vehicle that had been preventive and we realized that only because of the production probably it would not have arrived before the middle of the year so we withdrew part of the loan because obviously we would not have obtained it before buying a vehicle or at least using the loan for the vehicle so this gave us I think another 14 or 15 thousand dollars We also examined the program of subsidies, the funds of subsidies related to the fires. We were looking to examine the fires because obviously the fire assessment was coming. So we also examined the subsidy, then the subsidy. The police department, the police and fire guards said they would have been able to find funding to cover the purchases of the radio. so again instead of having to reduce the expense I was able to insert additional entries also additional entries to cover the bunker equipment that was not present in the previous version so with all those changes I was able to balance the budget again in the general fund without doing anything else you know drastic or extreme and also keeping the carbon there So basically tonight I present you a balance completely even in all your funds and everything else is very similar. I haven't changed anything else. Maybe some formulation or something in the balance sheet. So the first part of what you will do tonight is to focus first on the tax issue. These are the requirements. And the only thing I wanted to mention every year is a little different and I don't do it because we haven't increased the mileage for four or five years. I haven't said it for a while. But since the 725 is above a certain percentage, you will need a unanimous vote to approve the 725. So the chart that I have included and that we always include in the package. I will refer to this so that you know that while you are discussing it is on page 10 of the balance sheet. It's just my graph of the options of aliquot that basically shows you if you should consider something else. Again, the budget is based on 7.25 and balanced on 7.25. If you decide to move away from there, of course, we should discuss where it will come from. But with the aliquot of 7.25 you should have a unanimous vote. Now, if I had to change it myself, considering only other votes, anything at 7.88 is lower than a vote of two thirds. And then the majority would be at 6.565. So, again, we didn't have to do this exercise for many years and I'm happy to help you while you make your decision on how that vote will be, but if you vote for 6.265 or lower, it's just a majority vote. Once you reach 7.288, it becomes 2 thirds and then at 7.25 it's unanimous and obviously you can't go any further at this point. So I just wanted to make sure that you had all the facts before opening the public hearing for the participation of the public and then, of course, when the Council will hold its discussions. That's all.

Thank you. Well, at this point we will listen to the comments of the public on the fiscal aliquot and the budget proposed specifically only on the fiscal aliquot on the budget. point 3 resolution 2026 57 the city of woodland proposes to adopt a tax rate of 7.25 for the fiscal year 2027 I can get a motion for this.

I propose the approval of the resolution 2026-56.

Excuse me, Commander Preston, to clarify, it seems that the first page of the first resolution, while I look at it, is actually 2026-56. It's for... Oh, I see it's duplicated down here. I see that too.

I will change my motion to Resolution 2026-56.

I have a motion and a support. There are some discussions in the Council. Not seeing any, I propose to vote. All those in favour say yes. Yes. All those against say no.

The motion passes with five votes in favor and zero against. This closes the public hearing. Now we will open the public hearing. Point number four.

Mrs. President, I'm sorry. So, I would just like to admit verbally, only that after the vote the city also proposes to impose a 7.25 tax liability. This is an increase of 10.8% compared to the rollback rate of 6.5-6.25.

Well, so we will start the introduction of the public hearing. So, the city of Williston proposes to adopt a military rate of 7.25%. We agree.

We can move on to 2026.57.

Resolution 2026-57, City of Williston, County of Levy, Florida, which adopts the provisional budget for the fiscal year 2026-27. There is something from the public.

My name is Dan Kaufman, resident 32 of Northwest Fort Reet. I will try to summarize everything at once in this public statement, so I will not have to continue to go up and down. Obviously the tax rate is higher than it should be allowed, but obviously it takes a unanimous vote to increase it to the height you are asking for. I still have some problems on a couple of issues. You hired a consultant and I was surprised last night because I went to the meeting on reflux waters and I was really surprised when I distributed a sheet that I brought to the meeting. Regarding the $139,000 that have been transferred from the fund of the users, and I understand why you have transferred them, because you know how to do your budget, I mean, quite obvious. But I find it very serious when we, when people ask through you, you have hired a consultant to give advice on how to increase. Taxes. In this area it's like moving money from the funds for water and sewage to pay the city's general expenses, leaving less money to repair pipes, pumps and... excuse me, treatment plants. And then the second point was to skip the costs of ordinary maintenance, systems break down more quickly, leading to expensive emergency repairs in the future. And then the last one is probably important for you because subsidies seem to be the biggest and most important thing you can do to compensate for your budget. And that was the one in which it was stated that the federal agency offers subsidies and loans at low interest to cities that prove to take care of their systems. If the city uses the bills of the utilities as a current bank account, instead of investing in its own assets, it could be disqualified to receive future subsidies. I'm not really saying this to make it public because last night there was a microphone or something like that that I know, so I'm reading this just because. In a way, it confirms what I said in the last 4-5 meetings about stealing from Pietro to pay Paolo to do the things we need to try to keep pace with the city. The next thing I have to ask is that you have courses around, the search for another 30,000 dollars to finance your 2% increase, I keep saying no. This year, if nothing else, put a moratorium on increases, because I told you before that people have difficulty even just paying the bills, not to mention adding costs. to find money, Mr. Blum, to find money when you have employees who are in the city, such as planning and zoning, for example their salaries and their benefits and all the rest, you said that you would not have eliminated that position, but you would do it and if necessary later it could be examined. Well, that money is taken from that position and put somewhere else. This means that when the time comes we will have a planning and zoning director and a staff.

We have to look for them again somewhere else in the 2027 budget, so I still wonder how it will work with the positions that have not been used or have not been covered.

The money has been used in other places to meet the criteria of the budget. I'm a bit like Mr. Bloom, without disrespect, but after reading all this documentation and all the rest, and having read all the second, third, fourth draft of the budget, the numbers don't come back to me. But I must honestly say that I'm not a commercialist, and it takes a commercialist for the public to understand these things. And I'll be honest with you, at least I can understand something. I know this, that if For any reason in the course of the next year, year and a half, if it were to happen that someone supported enough to force him to give a percentage to which he wanted to make a state check of our accounts, of our accounting books and so on, I would ask myself if it would overcome that rigorous test. I am from Palm Beach and something like this happened in Palm Beach about 20 years ago. And before it was done, three police officers went to prison. Not because they really did something. It was on the basis of the fact that we have always done so. To justify the numbers and everything they did. And they voted and they accepted it. Well, the judge says, and I quote, the judge says, well, you did it wrong. And the law is the law. And they found themselves with a five-year sentence for this reason. When it's like IRS or your taxes, you can have a perfectly good salesman who calculates everything, gives them the information and they elaborate it until they are good or bad. And the fact that they make an error, you make an error, you don't present something, once you have accepted, you have stopped the document that when it comes from that tax you are not responsible for it. The government doesn't care about him or her anymore. It's you, the one who organized everything, who is responsible for the actions taken. So I want you to keep that in mind while you do this. And I think the last thing... We still don't know what the voters will do at the next election on taxes and property. This could be nothing and it hasn't happened before starting, really. I mean, you will start it, but the point is, what would you do if all this happened? It's like a three-card game. The part here is just to understand where it is. Because following all this is almost impossible, I'll be honest with you. Next year I hope you can actually show where the money goes, where the money comes out, where they go and who spent them. Instead of simply trying to find out. Well, this is the balance, this is the balance of 2005 or 2005. Here, this was what we had perceived. This is what has been revealed to be, and this is what we are planning, and then this is what we will create for the entire balance sheet. And these are the detractions, but you can't say what really came in, apart from the numbers of the big lines, without saying what they actually served. Like, how much fuel was at the airport? How much elsewhere? I mean, in here. Three lines. They say it wasn't there, but what I mean is that you almost have to be a seasoned scientist to understand where it is, because not always It is in line with where we would expect it to be. And with this I go back. Thank you.

But before you vote, a comment. Well, if that's the case, I'll wait for the audience to finish. This concerns the CBA.

It has to do with the budget.

No, it has nothing to do with it.

This is what we're talking about. So yes. Excuse me.

I'm waiting for my turn. So I have to tell you that I met the CBA representatives on Monday here in the municipality and we are examining their contract and we are trying to see if you know why it is about to be renewed. I will tell you that they requested that the generic employees receive an increase of 7% this year and they would like you to take it into consideration. So I had to talk to you, regardless of my ideas, and that at least you take it into consideration.

This year, in the sense of this budget... Yes, ma'am. They shouldn't have done it in April.

They should have done it, and still I don't know what happened then, but you know, from the moment they made it clear to me, I had to talk to you. They argue that certain things have not happened. We argue that certain things have happened. From the reality that I understand clearly at what point is the budget, I understand what we can afford and what we cannot afford. But to continue with the negotiations, you know, in an equal and practical way, you know, I have to at least make it clear to you.

I think he says that if they want an increase in budget, anything negotiated in terms of budget must be presented within April.

It does. It does. My impression is that the previous human resources director told me he didn't want it. There were emails, I think, back and forth. There was a long exchange of messages. So I'll tell you. This is what I've been told. It's what I'm using.

But you know, I have to say it. And it happened last year too. At the last meeting, they came without any warning and asked for an increase of 7% last year. They were told they should have it by April.

So, they didn't know.

If I believe that the reality is that, regardless of their request, I will tell you my opinion. That is, obviously we cannot allow it. We are fighting to reach 2% as it is today. We can hardly keep it tight. So if you want the opinion of your city manager, the answer is obviously no, we cannot allow the increase in salaries of 7% for all and I am happy to have them both. If this helps you, while you go on with your discussions before expressing your provisional vote.

There are some discussions from the council on the balance sheet.

Well, this is really an emotion.

I would just like to say that Mr. Kaufman, where he participated in our first workshop on the balance sheet, which lasted until 10.30 p.m., participated in our first workshop on the balance sheet, which lasted until 10.30 p.m. Well, the reason why we stayed here until 10.30 p.m. is because we examined every single page and every single line of this book of the balance sheet. and we talked about all the things he just mentioned. And I would also like to comment that last night's Diane, I think her name was like this, had all the transfers integrated into her graphics, knows that it is something that is not only allowed but that we must do and this here is the balance I want to say the accounting review we do an accounting review every year it is not that we never do an accounting review we are held by the state law to do an accounting review we do it this would be there is someone

Mr. President, before proceeding to the vote, I will read out verbally that the City of Williston proposes to adopt a budget for the fiscal year 2026-2027 with expenses and total mortgages equal to 31,000 compared to the expenses and total mortgages of 2025-2026. The resolution for this is Resolution 2026-57, which is a resolution of the city of Williston, in the county of Levy, Florida, which adopts the provisional budget for the fiscal year 2027.

I propose the approval of Resolution 2026-57. I support. One motion and one second. Are there any other discussions by the Public Council? Seeing none, I propose to vote.

Those in favour say yes.

Those against say no. The motion passes with five votes in favour and zero against. I close the public hearing and propose to update.

Madam President, before suspending the session, I apologize, I announce the public hearing to adopt the final registration fee and the final balance, scheduled for September 29, 2026, at 6 p.m. at the Municipal Council of Williston. Thank you. I can get a motion.

I propose to suspend the session. I accept it. Today it's mine.

One second. All those in favour say yes. All those in favour say no. The motion passes with 5 votes in favour. We suspend the session at 18.25. He presented the motion of suspension, right?

Usually this time it is not allowed to speak.