On the agenda

1. 1Call to Order - Roll Call▶ 0:00
2. 2

   ↳You arrived here from a search for “Rose's Bistro” — transcript expanded below

   Discussion Regarding Legislative Priorities for the Pasco County Legislative Delegation Meeting

   discussed

   City Manager Debbie Manns presented proposed legislative priorities for the upcoming Pasco County Legislative Delegation Meeting on September 1st in Zephyrhills. Topics discussed included sovereign immunity caps, annexation reform, cybersecurity, environmental resilience, protecting the Florida Retirement System, and broadband expansion. Council also discussed advancing the Fire Station No. 2 project and the Marine Parkway/Grand Boulevard Path project for legislative appropriation requests, along with possible additions including a downtown parking garage and Orange Lake stormwater/recreation project.

   • direction:Council directed staff to advance Fire Station No. 2 and the Marine Parkway/Grand Boulevard Path project for legislative appropriation requests, and to carry forward the discussed legislative priorities to the Pasco County Legislative Delegation. (none)

   📍North River neighborhood📍Old Cannon Ranch site, SR 52 / I-75 corridor📍Sims Park📍Zephyrhills City Hall🏢AT&T🏢Bright House🏢Dade City🏢Florida League of Cities🏢Frontier🏢General Telephone🏢Gulf High School🏢Hacienda🏢Kaiser🏢Main Street Landing🏢Rose's Bistro🏢Spectrum🏢Stacy Tech🏢Verizon👤Brian👤Camille Hernandez👤Chopper👤Debbie Manns👤Frank Starkey#American Rescue Plan funding#Coast-to-coast trail / state trail connector#Fire Station No. 2 project#House Bill 1129 (sovereign immunity)#Marine Parkway/Grand Boulevard Path project#Pasco County Legislative Delegation Meeting (Sept 1, 2021)#Senate Bill 84 (FRS defined contribution transition)#Special Risk Class FRS expansion bill

   ▶ Jump to 0:27 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:00:28] Okay it's that time of year and Pasco County will be conducting their [00:00:37] legislative delegation meeting on Wednesday September 1st. This year it [00:00:41] will be conducted at the Zephyr Hill City Hall building. Typically at this [00:00:47] time of year the Florida League of Cities has advanced a platform for us to [00:00:57] refer to. They have not done so this year and so my expectation at this point [00:01:09] is that many of the issues that didn't pass last year will likely debate it be [00:01:16] debated during this legislative session. And so I put together a little bit of a [00:01:22] PowerPoint that might take us through some of those issues which we should [00:01:27] keep our eye on and monitor during the legislative session. And I know that [00:01:37] during the conference that you attended last week there was a session on [00:01:44] legislative issues. If any of you were able to attend I'd be interested to know [00:01:50] what you may have learned from that session. They said there would be [00:01:55] PowerPoints available on Florida League of Cities sites from some of the stuff that we got. [00:02:04] I sat on those sessions Debbie and actually spoke to the the legislative [00:02:10] coordinator for Florida League of Cities and asked if that's available and I've got an [00:02:14] email in to him. He said it's he was going to send me a rough copy but in a [00:02:19] few days it'll be up and playing. Basically you know I don't think there's [00:02:25] much different than when I could gather than the prior sessions. They were [00:02:34] disappointed in one piece of legislation that passed last year on the very last [00:02:42] day of session and kind of took them by surprise and which they are going to be [00:02:48] you know trying to factor some some language to try to make amendments to [00:02:55] that this coming session. Well the topics that I think are worthy of our [00:03:00] activism are noted on slides. The first one is sovereign immunity. Go on back. [00:03:07] Thank you. Last year House Bill 1129 was introduced. Our current cap limits for [00:03:16] sovereign immunity immunity are $200,000 per person and $300,000 per [00:03:22] occurrence. The specific language in House Bill 1129 was to raise the cap [00:03:32] limit to $500,000 per person and $1 million per occurrence. As you might [00:03:38] expect the impact on the city would be significant if that sovereign immunity [00:03:47] were lifted to that level. We did get some communication last year from our [00:03:53] various insurance companies as to what kind of an impact that would have on our [00:04:00] premiums. It was not at all favorable. Really? That's a light way of saying it. And so we will [00:04:10] continue to be vigilant and following this matter and advocating that the [00:04:20] current levels be kept in place for sovereign immunity. The next legislative [00:04:28] topic that we expect there to be continued discussion on relates to [00:04:32] annexation. There was a good amount of discussion about annexation, all intended [00:04:41] to make it a little bit easier to annex unincorporated areas and in particular [00:04:52] enclaves. And the discussion was going along very well both in the House and [00:04:59] the Senate but they failed to come to a conclusion which resulted in law. The [00:05:07] expectation is that it will continue through this legislative session and we [00:05:15] will be following it as it respects it as it relates to municipal boundaries [00:05:22] and our ability to grow our borders and do so in an expeditious fashion and [00:05:35] minimize the processes that are currently required by law. The next [00:05:44] really hot topic is cybersecurity and the request is to have the state [00:05:58] dedicate some resources to develop and enhance both municipal cybersecurity by [00:06:05] providing opportunities for local governments to take advantage of some [00:06:12] technical assistance, threat assessments, infrastructure improvements, data [00:06:18] protection and employee training, all necessary components in our [00:06:25] estimation to protecting our cybersecurity and very much a necessary [00:06:30] function of local government anymore. [00:06:33] I talked to someone in this particular field and he said do not hesitate [00:06:37] spending any amount of money you can to get those things. [00:06:42] Florida League of Cities is both pursuing that both on a state level and [00:06:47] also on a federal basis to help cities and municipalities. [00:06:51] We keep our eyes open for funding opportunities to help us implement. We [00:07:00] will implement measures on our own but we will look for partners as well [00:07:07] recognizing the importance of cybersecurity. The next topic it relates [00:07:16] to resilience and a sustainable environment and we are looking and [00:07:21] following legislation which will provide funding for water quality improvements, [00:07:29] policies and additionally funding for water supply development, policies for [00:07:38] intergovernmental coordination and planning to address climate changes such [00:07:43] as drought, coastal flooding and inland flooding and we are looking to implement [00:07:51] local government controls to address natural, pardon me, natural resource [00:07:59] protection strategies. [00:08:01] The League of Cities also has done a lot of work for cities in [00:08:06] gathering information on funding and grants and things so it doesn't hurt to [00:08:14] go through them to see if they've got something that we haven't found. [00:08:17] We're very, last year we very much advocated their platform in large part. [00:08:25] The department heads did come up with a number of other bills that we did [00:08:31] follow during the legislative session but they they do a fine job. I had hoped [00:08:38] that their platform would be out before we met and before we were preparing a [00:08:42] platform to go to Jaffer Hills but these are the things that we thought were worthy of note. [00:08:49] When they had the committee reports at the general meeting, over and over again they said and staff will work to fix up this language so it's still in very rough condition. [00:09:12] I wanted to introduce two final legislative topics for your consideration. [00:09:19] This one is about protecting the Florida retirement system. I only identified two [00:09:27] Senate bills which were introduced last session but there probably were at least [00:09:35] eight or ten bills that were introduced which were different attempts to alter [00:09:42] the Florida retirement system. These were the two that would have impacted [00:09:51] the city the most significantly though and Senate Bill 84 would have transitioned [00:09:59] from what we have now a traditional defined benefit program to a defined [00:10:06] contribution investment plan which is a very big difference and in my estimation [00:10:15] would have changed a good number of candidates for public employment's minds [00:10:23] about whether or not that would be an appropriate career choice for them. [00:10:29] The second bill which was introduced relates to the special risk class and they really wanted to expand the risk class to include and the risk class is typically police, fire, career [00:10:50] members of the class and they earn benefits at a 3% higher rate than [00:11:00] regular class employees that receive a rate of 1.6%. They qualify for earlier [00:11:07] retirements and the employer rates for contribution are much higher. They're [00:11:14] over 15.07% higher for special risk class employees and they were looking to [00:11:24] expand the special risk class very liberally which would have had a very [00:11:30] big financial implication on the city. There are some positions in the city [00:11:37] that very well may qualify but there were some that we felt were really [00:11:44] outside of special risk and so we want to follow that very closely. There were [00:11:52] others that we felt were worthy of note. The Florida retirement system is a good [00:11:58] retirement system and it's one that is worthy of protecting for the future of [00:12:08] the existing members of the class as well as future employees of the system. [00:12:14] So it's one that we would like to continue to watch. The last item is an [00:12:24] issue that is commonly talked about and was bantied about quite regularly in [00:12:33] legislative sessions and it has to do with expanding broadband internet access [00:12:40] to all areas of the state and thereby reducing the digital divide. There's [00:12:49] really two components to that. One is expanding areas that are traditionally [00:12:56] underserved by broadband providers. The second part is introducing an [00:13:02] opportunity for cities to provide telecommunication services and thereby [00:13:09] even increasing some funding opportunities for them to construct the [00:13:14] infrastructure for broadband, which could potentially be a source of revenue [00:13:22] for cities. Both components are very, very important and something that I think [00:13:29] that we need to follow. [00:13:34] Yeah, a little bit. Yeah, and I got hung up because we've got two broadband [00:13:44] providers in the city now and I was trying to wrap my head around how would [00:13:49] we be able to compete against two rather large entrenched incumbents. Didn't take [00:13:56] it much beyond that. We have a unique experience because we're so built out. [00:14:04] About the only way you'd pull it off would be doing some sort of wireless [00:14:10] mesh and I don't know that the technology would be affordable for us to [00:14:18] try something like that. I suppose potentially we could do it in specific [00:14:26] neighborhoods. The downtown might be an option. Some of the more compact [00:14:35] neighborhoods might be as well. I don't know that the North River neighborhood [00:14:39] would necessarily work well just because of how stretched out it is, but there's [00:14:45] some places down near Gulf High School that they're not built out with large [00:14:52] tree canopies or anything else and you might pull something off down there. [00:14:58] You think that... [00:15:00] Do you think that the new 5G will really kind of leapfrog that? [00:15:05] I would think that any technology we were doing would wind up being a 5G type solution. [00:15:12] So the mesh probably wouldn't work, but it sounds like the 5G is already being built [00:15:20] out particularly in densely populated, and to my knowledge it works kind of like a mesh [00:15:29] and you have to be closer than the traditional 4G cells, right? [00:15:35] You would wind up, and when I'm talking about mesh, instead of us stringing cables all over [00:15:40] creation we would probably have repeaters that would, using some of these high speed [00:15:49] frequencies such as 5G, then spread the signal out. [00:15:56] I have a feeling that's a pretty large investment, and like I say, with two incumbents in the [00:16:04] area I had a feeling they would pretty well crush us before we got our feet off the ground [00:16:10] good. [00:16:11] Probably that and the fact that the technology is changing so fast, by the time we've got [00:16:16] it built we'd be behind. [00:16:18] Yeah, and back in the early 90s I was an internet provider, and ultimately you have to get your [00:16:27] internet feed from somebody, and then Verizon, or General Telephone before them, was very [00:16:42] good about writing their tariffs and getting them approved at the state in such a way that [00:16:48] it made it very difficult for anybody to compete against them, and the only way that you could [00:16:56] do it was with DSL and copper, and part of the push that they made back the last 10 or [00:17:09] 15 years was to drop copper lines and go exclusively to Fios. [00:17:15] It's not just a technological issue. [00:17:19] They were doing it because they're not required to share the Fios lines, and as a result they [00:17:25] were able to basically put everybody else out of business other than Bright House, or [00:17:31] now Spectrum, because they had their own co-ex and they're now moving to fiber, and because [00:17:37] of the way the tariffs were written, Spectrum slash Bright House never had to share, and [00:17:49] they are the best example of a monopoly or a duopoly that I can come up with, and yeah, [00:18:01] anti-competitive is, I think, part of their charter, it is, take it for what it's worth. [00:18:08] Like the old AT&T, what's your business plan, nobody but me. [00:18:13] There was a good description, and it's in a video actually, of Judge Green dividing up AT&T [00:18:23] into a bunch of regionals, and then they all reassemble themselves just sort of like that [00:18:29] liquid metal Terminator, but it's very true, and so as much as that would be nice, I think [00:18:42] we could drop a ton of money on it and wind up losing every bit of it. [00:18:47] So anyway, go ahead. [00:18:51] Yeah. [00:18:52] Just to throw in on that, there was one of the vendors at the League of Cities conference [00:18:59] who provided dark web, or laid your own fiber optic, dark cable, and they've done it in [00:19:11] a number of places, but I think it would be worthwhile to examine, I've heard of data [00:19:16] centers being opportunities to transition from these old buildings like our Verizon [00:19:25] Frontier building downtown, which as I understand it is probably only manned by one or two people [00:19:31] in that whole big building, it takes up a good bit of our footprint of our downtown, [00:19:36] and I've heard of some places, and I think someone said that you may be familiar, maybe [00:19:42] more than me, but I understand that some cities are able to make arrangements with [00:19:50] the providers to turn their facilities into useful workstations or places, for example, [00:19:59] for data centers, and if we had, of course, the response from the audience that we should [00:20:07] pursue the American Rescue strategy to make these services available to folks who couldn't [00:20:13] afford it, rather than paying for individual house internet connection, we give some connection [00:20:21] in the library, but competing communities like that one with the giant outdoor swimming [00:20:30] pool along the 75 corridor there where the old Cannon Ranch used to be planned on 52, [00:20:37] I think, the area, where they're really doing this connected cities and all of that, so [00:20:44] I think it would be worth us exploring over the course of the year to see what opportunities, [00:20:49] whether it's partnering with an existing taxpaying tenant to see whether we make the investment, [00:20:59] but they've already got the pipelines, the lines, and they're probably most obsolete, most of it. [00:21:05] That's a good point, and if Frontier were amenable to leasing out part of that building [00:21:12] for IT purposes, then, you know, that might be worth taking a look at. [00:21:19] We've got dead zones of, we've got dead zones for health services in our downtown, not to [00:21:25] mention everybody trying to get on, and so a Wi-Fi hotspot of our downtown would be a [00:21:32] good option, rather than paying everybody's bills. [00:21:36] Yeah, we could do Wi-Fi in the downtown fairly easily. [00:21:42] For a while, my company had an access point up on the roof that did a nice job of streaming [00:21:52] Internet all the way over into Sims Park, pretty much down to the river. [00:21:58] You've got some tall buildings where that could be done. [00:22:03] Certainly the Hacienda, the county health department building, the tower up on the top [00:22:16] side where Rose's Bistro is, all of those are obvious places where you could do it. [00:22:21] We've probably got some spots here that have pretty good line of sight, and between Main [00:22:27] Street Landing and Kaiser and the parking garage, you could pretty well cover that whole [00:22:35] area as well. [00:22:37] The trick would be getting a feed with enough horsepower to make it worthwhile, and again, [00:22:47] that technology is changing really, really quickly. [00:22:53] We've had somebody, and I don't know if Stacy Tech has it, but I think the folks that were [00:22:59] there before them in the old incubator had twin 500 gig feeds into that building. [00:23:08] So when you start talking about terabyte size or 500 meg, gigabyte size feeds, that's [00:23:20] pretty compelling, but you've got to have the feed to feed it. [00:23:26] There are some cities, and I'll defer to Brian to come up with a list of them, but there [00:23:35] are some cities that have done this, and they're offering basically gigabit speeds two to three [00:23:42] times faster than what we can get from either Frontier or Spectrum for like 50 bucks a month. [00:23:56] From an economic development standpoint, you're talking about Hacienda, other businesses that [00:24:00] hopefully come in. [00:24:01] Some may be second floor businesses that are not retail, but anyone who is in the new work [00:24:10] from home and having to have reliable internet, I mean, mine went out last week with the storm. [00:24:22] My Spectrum went out, and so there's also a benefit of having a redundancy so that you [00:24:28] can have the ability to recruit folks who won't come if they don't have a reliable communication. [00:24:35] So I think it's an important element, but this is a legislative discussion, so it'd [00:24:40] be nice if somebody who knew the industry could direct us. [00:24:48] If there were funding available to build that sort of stuff out, it might be worth taking [00:24:52] a look at, but don't estimate how expensive it will be to do. [00:24:59] It'd be interesting to see what's, it's Frontier building, right? [00:25:02] So just what kind of pipe they have there. [00:25:06] I'm familiar with a city, Wind Raven has a similar building that's like four stories [00:25:14] in height that they basically sold. [00:25:17] Private Enterprise came and purchased the building, and now because it's a hardened [00:25:21] building, and because they've got such a big pipe right underneath it, now they've [00:25:27] quite successfully developed that into servers in there, emergency services, and so forth. [00:25:36] So if they ever decide to abandon that building, they might put Private Enterprise through [00:25:41] something similar. [00:25:42] But yeah, I worry about the, providing the mesh and so forth downtown, I worry about [00:25:49] the cost of that in relationship to keeping up with the technology and those floors. [00:25:54] And I think most, a lot of our business downtown offer their patrons Wi-Fi service that they [00:26:00] can sign on. [00:26:01] And that's, you know, we do that, and quite frankly, for what we're using, I think we've [00:26:07] got a hundred meg service. [00:26:08] It's not the fastest thing in the world, but since we've moved most of our servers offsite, [00:26:15] it's more than adequate. [00:26:16] Maybe it's back to the telephone, when the cell phone doesn't come in or cuts out in [00:26:20] our own downtown, it's a bit strange. [00:26:23] It's around the park, over the bridge, different places we have spots that are not really signaling [00:26:30] good. [00:26:31] That's not Wi-Fi, that's not internet. [00:26:33] That cell service in Frontier has a building right there that you would think they would [00:26:37] have put a tower up on it. [00:26:39] Yeah, well, maybe it's worth asking them what they intend to do to help us. [00:26:46] Okay, Fire Station? [00:26:48] The next item for your consideration is to advance some projects for consideration under [00:26:56] a legislative appropriation, and we're recommending that you consider allowing us to advance the [00:27:05] Fire Station No. 2 project and the Marine Parkway Grand Boulevard Path project. [00:27:12] We're thinking that both of those have some appeal, and any other projects that you'd [00:27:20] like to suggest we'll carry forward for consideration to our state elected officials. [00:27:30] Those are two excellent projects. [00:27:31] Especially the second one, it ties right into the state's goal project, going from one coast [00:27:36] to the other coast. [00:27:37] As long as we emphasize that it's hooking up with their project, I don't see why we [00:27:42] would jump on that. [00:27:43] Talk to Safety first when it comes to the Fire Station. [00:27:46] One of the things when you talk to the legislators about putting a project, and then they go [00:27:53] back to the departments that are in charge of it, and there are grants out there. [00:27:59] One of the things related to the bike path, the path project, is that my understanding [00:28:06] is to apply for a grant versus just asking for funding, you need to have a citizen's [00:28:12] advisory committee or something like that. [00:28:14] I think we're told that. [00:28:16] I'm not sure exactly the details. [00:28:21] I'm not certain that we need a citizen's advisory committee to apply for a grant, but I haven't [00:28:27] gone into the detail yet, so you may be correct. [00:28:30] I would also check with Frank Starkey that was recommending that we needed that in order [00:28:34] to go after some money. [00:28:36] I would check with Dade City because I think they went for it for some of their... [00:28:40] I can just check the grant or Dade City, sure. [00:28:44] I think they went all kinds of ways to get it. [00:28:48] I'm assuming something like the Marine Parkway Path Project would go similar to the pathway [00:28:56] as the New Port Richey pursued the pathway underneath the... [00:29:01] This is different. [00:29:03] That was still funded. [00:29:05] They were asking for state funds for that, and it was approved two years ago, and it [00:29:12] was actually vetoed out. [00:29:14] The funding was approved for that and it was vetoed out. [00:29:19] That's a project by itself. [00:29:22] This one is a connector for something that started on the other coast. [00:29:30] You have a master plan now, right? [00:29:32] So we've got that? [00:29:33] We do. [00:29:34] That was the one requirement, yeah. [00:29:36] Okay. [00:29:37] We have money in the budget, so we can show matching funds too, right? [00:29:40] Right. [00:29:47] Are there any questions or any suggestions for me? [00:29:51] Just a couple of things. [00:29:53] I think the annexation is a really important thing for us to look at. [00:30:00] at. Camille Hernandez told me that they had something like 6,500 unit subdivision going [00:30:13] under construction. I'm presuming they annexed that in. So they're going to grow rather significantly [00:30:20] here over the course of the next year or so. To the extent that we could continue with [00:30:27] what we've talked about, not only annexing the enclaves in, but looking at smoothing [00:30:33] out some of those borders. I think there is a public safety component to that, so that [00:30:41] you know who you, where you live, and who do you call. Exactly, or more important, when [00:30:49] you call 9-1-1, the 9-1-1 operator knows who to call. It's, I think, worth us taking a [00:30:57] look at it, and it would continue to improve the city's revenues. We've got some areas [00:31:06] that we've got water and or sewer in now that might be places we ought to be talking to [00:31:15] folks about. But to the extent that annexation can be streamlined at the state level, that [00:31:23] would help. Cyber security is huge. They talked about it at the conference, as Chopper alluded [00:31:30] to, that was a fairly serious concern. The comment one of the presenters made was, it's [00:31:41] not a question of if you'll get hacked, it's how bad have you been hacked. And that's why [00:31:49] it's very important for the city to really, really look at beefing up cyber security. [00:32:01] And that's going to take some resources. I think the state may be willing to put some [00:32:10] money behind doing that, because it's not just New Port Richey, it's not just Oldsmar [00:32:15] or Dunedin or any of these places. Brian can probably show you log files where they're [00:32:22] rattling the doors pretty much continuously. If they will provide some state money, it [00:32:35] may be that what we're already working on we can enhance even further. This is an arms [00:32:40] race. There's no question in my mind. And the third item I had, and I'm surprised Councilman [00:32:49] Altman didn't catch it first, we're talking seriously about moving the city of New Port Richey [00:33:00] into a net zero carbon footprint over the coming decades. And I know we've had some [00:33:09] discussions on that in the past. It would be very helpful, and let me try to phrase [00:33:18] this diplomatically, if the state legislature would just get the heck out of the way. They've [00:33:27] passed some things, including in this last session, that I think actively hurt the effort [00:33:33] of cities and counties to try to control greenhouse gases and other things inside their borders. [00:33:48] The prohibition that was put forward by the oil industry and the gas industry that prohibits [00:33:57] you from specifying what type of connections buildings can have, that prohibits you from [00:34:05] requiring that gas stations also include EV charging. The cities, in my mind, are an incubator [00:34:17] for new ideas, and you can try something out in a small city or even a decent sized city [00:34:22] like Tampa, and if it doesn't work, it's no harm, no foul. You haven't spent a huge [00:34:27] fortune on it. But we are the incubators where some of these ideas can be tried out before [00:34:37] somebody at a statewide basis tries to do it. So it's another part of Home Rule that [00:34:43] we ought to try to get them to repeal that. I do find it amusing, as an aside, that if [00:34:51] you drive up to US-19 on Main Street and look to your right at the corner, the 7-Eleven [00:35:00] construction site is using solar power to power the security camera that is guarding [00:35:06] the gas tanks that they are now installing underground. [00:35:10] To follow up that, the program that was at the League of Cities was probably one of my [00:35:17] most inspiring ones from a standpoint of ideas. One of the ideas was that they were putting [00:35:21] solar panels floating in large retention ponds, actually collecting the energy off of the [00:35:32] pond. One of the arguments that I've heard from uninformed, I guess, opponents of the [00:35:41] solar has been that the panels themselves reflect so much heat back into the atmosphere [00:35:48] that maybe it's warming up the earth. So we think we're doing a good job, but we're not. [00:35:52] I asked that question and the answer was, how about our lakes? Florida has more man-made [00:35:58] lakes than any place else around. So the lakes reflect off as well. [00:36:05] The gist of it was the University of Central Florida's program and not only that, the demographics [00:36:17] folks, all of them combined are saying that the biggest industry in Florida is going to [00:36:24] be us baby boomers who don't want to die, that are going to live a little longer and [00:36:28] really impose a lot of economic activity to be had for us. And that Florida is where [00:36:37] everybody's coming. The population explosion of our state is just incredible, what's being [00:36:43] almost assured to happen in the world issues as well. But in terms of the back to the solar [00:36:54] and the net zero, the carbon capture, it's just become the topic with the red alarm that's [00:37:05] been signaled off internationally and the attention and the money that's being sent [00:37:11] even through our legislature, which is, you know, I think everybody's coming around to [00:37:17] the expectation and understanding that things are different, things are heating up. So with [00:37:23] that being said, back to legislative, Debbie, I heard that Jack Mariano announced at the [00:37:29] Regional Planning Council that the county is going to have another big monster burner [00:37:35] because they got so much more garbage to contend with that they're planning to build another [00:37:39] incinerator. And, you know, the incinerator is not the favored process for dealing with [00:37:46] things that can be captured and sunk into the ground. So I believe that if that's something [00:37:55] that has to be regulated, it would be nice to piggyback on your comments, Rob, to say [00:38:04] can we identify recommended courses of action? And I go to our waste and our trash collection, [00:38:11] which goes to get composted and is so valued by our local food folks, at-home food. It's [00:38:20] not just a trend that's going to go away. It seems to be really the industries of the [00:38:25] future are going to be all focused on that. So to commit to net zero and then to allow [00:38:33] so much of our stuff to be burned, it seems like we're missing, we're a bit behind the [00:38:40] curve, to me, in terms of how we and our county are burning our refuse and whether [00:38:48] we could become a hub of sorts for some innovation and maybe that will help to attract the kind [00:38:53] of businesses that we're looking to bring here. [00:38:56] I did say something to the staff at Tampa Bay Water a year, year and a half ago, about [00:39:02] the floating solar panels with the thought that the C.W. Bill Young Reservoir would be [00:39:07] a really nice place to put that. At the time, the economics didn't make a lot of sense. [00:39:13] They did commit to putting a small solar farm at the site, just not on top of the water. [00:39:23] But the presentation that we sat in, they indicated that even just over the last two [00:39:33] years, the economics of solar panels has dropped cost-wise so much that it is now the most [00:39:45] cost-effective way of building out new electric generation. So certainly encouraging the state [00:39:54] to support that would be good, but I think also we probably ought to task somebody in [00:40:02] Robert's department to find out what the current numbers are and start looking because we've [00:40:09] got a bunch of buildings that if we could save some money on the electrical costs and [00:40:16] pay for this over just a few years, we'd be doing the taxpayers a huge favor over the [00:40:24] next, the coming years. And while we're on the subject of that particular program, there [00:40:32] was a fellow from BARTO who was quizzing the presenter both before and then a little bit [00:40:37] after the meeting about electric vehicles and I heard him and I went up and introduced [00:40:44] myself and explained what my experience had been and the fact that we'd added EVs into the [00:40:52] fleet here. Then he saw the city I was from, he said, yeah, you guys just had a Main Street [00:40:59] conference there and our people came from, our Main Street program came back and we're [00:41:05] just raving about how New Port Richey has it all together. So wanted to share that with you. [00:41:13] Speaking of trash, one interesting thing, that guy that spoke up, what is it called, upside? [00:41:18] Upside. [00:41:20] He said that we throw away 50% of our food. [00:41:34] Food that we produce. [00:41:35] Right. [00:41:36] We throw half of it away. So the issue is not going to be feeding the world. The issue is [00:41:42] we've got to quit throwing all the stuff away. [00:41:46] He was, he sent you back in your seats. [00:41:49] Yeah, he did. [00:41:50] He also said we'd have already had legalized marijuana if the hippies could remember where [00:41:55] they put the petitions. [00:41:58] He was comical too. [00:41:59] Very funny man. [00:42:03] Maybe just to go back to legislative issues just for a second. I think a couple of things [00:42:09] that I took away was that number one, we've referred this term home rule quite frequently [00:42:17] and that is all about allowing municipalities and cities and even counties to enact their [00:42:24] own ordinances and laws covering various things. And then the state would come in and, you [00:42:33] know, kind of overrule those. [00:42:34] So two things. [00:42:36] One is that when we talk to legislators, the term home rule sometimes turns them off. [00:42:42] You don't necessarily use that when we visit with them. [00:42:45] But we have to understand that what's taking place is that we've got a corporation, [00:42:53] whether it be broadband provider or oil and gas providers or whoever, if they can enact [00:43:03] a law that encompasses the state and they throw a bunch of money at that law to try [00:43:08] to get it enacted, that's much easier than going from town to village to city and getting [00:43:16] it done. [00:43:17] So we have to kind of make, when we make these appeals and we talk to legislators, we need [00:43:25] to remind them of that, that just because it's good for one part of the state doesn't [00:43:30] make it good for all parts. [00:43:32] And, you know, and maybe that particular industry or interest needs to focus where it [00:43:40] makes sense so it doesn't provide the detriment to other parts. [00:43:45] So as we get involved with these specific issues in more detail, we'll want to make [00:43:55] sure we develop some good work tracks and plans and strategies when we have the [00:43:59] opportunity to visit, keeping those things in mind. [00:44:03] Mike, on that point, the same thing is true from a city standpoint, too, because we go [00:44:08] to the conference and we'll hear somebody stand up and say, well, when the legislature [00:44:12] didn't give us home rule because they're forcing every city in the state to accept [00:44:19] this new cottage food, cottage industry changes, which now say we don't care what [00:44:26] your land use is, what your zoning is, if you've got a cottage food. [00:44:29] And, of course, we've got our Tasty Tuesdays and we've got people doing food at [00:44:34] the place and we have all of this new vibe that says that's better and the [00:44:38] transportation and the carbon footprint. [00:44:41] So the state has come and said across the board, you can't stop somebody from having [00:44:48] a cottage business and they've increased the revenue that that little business can [00:44:53] earn from 50,000, I think, to 300,000. [00:44:56] So you could have a pretty substantial business making. [00:45:00] peanut butter or whatever you're going to do and have not be able to be stopped [00:45:07] from having a little sign or a driveway or whatever are you know whatever those [00:45:13] are now that's home rule has been trampled on but I'm not so sure that in [00:45:19] our city that we would not maybe have some flexibility to consider you know [00:45:26] we're having his home gardens and farming and and that's a that's a good [00:45:30] example we've we came out with a residential gardening ordinance early on [00:45:37] years ago and then it it was custom-designed to fit what our needs [00:45:44] are here in the city of New Port Richey and then the state legislature and its [00:45:48] infinite wisdom came through and passed a blanket of home gardening law that is [00:45:59] somewhat different from what we had had but they were basically forcing the [00:46:04] issue on a whole bunch of cities that hadn't come up with it and from from my [00:46:10] perspective I thought we had a competitive advantage by having one when [00:46:14] some of the other cities didn't have one and I don't think we were better off [00:46:20] before they they came and passed it statewide because that's that's the sort [00:46:27] of thing if if New Port Richey wants to have people growing wheat in their front [00:46:34] yards and that doesn't grow here so we'll use that as a bad example but [00:46:40] wheat that we know well that if we pass a law saying that either one can be [00:46:58] grown in somebody's front yard that ought to be the the call of the the city [00:47:05] of New Port Richey and if New Port Richey doesn't want to allow that and they only [00:47:09] want to allow you to grow kumquats you know so be it but that that provides for [00:47:16] some diversity some differences among the communities that we can we can stand [00:47:20] up and say hey we're doing this it's it's it's part of what we are a good [00:47:28] example of that that that is working out far beyond my wildest expectations was [00:47:35] the whole golf cart thing which I didn't figure there'd be more than a [00:47:39] handful of people that would have wanted golf carts and I don't know how many [00:47:42] hundreds we've gotten now but it's a bunch and it is it's become part of the [00:47:49] DNA of New Port Richey had the state had a blanket prohibition against golf carts [00:47:57] on city streets you know we'd have been out of luck there is one issue I did not [00:48:04] raise for legislative but I guess I ask first have we continued to engage and [00:48:10] wasn't sure if we were going to still be budgeting and paying for a lobbyist to [00:48:15] tell us what the legislature is doing are we still engaged with that firm on [00:48:19] in some capacity we did not include in our budget recommendation for the fiscal [00:48:30] year 21-22 any specific lobbying services we did as we always have [00:48:39] continue the tradition though of appropriating some money for [00:48:43] professional services so that in the event that they're an issue presents [00:48:48] itself that we think warrants some special attention we do have a lobbyist [00:48:56] on call that is able to do work on a retainer basis for us because a few [00:49:04] years ago when I and I continue to hope to stay up on the soapbox here for our [00:49:10] ability to hold to have ambulance services it still just rubs me the wrong [00:49:16] way that we don't I think he had mentioned that there had been a law that [00:49:21] has been proposed that might have might have modified this archaic idea that that [00:49:28] we can't provide emergency services without the county's approval and so [00:49:36] many cities that have that service and the county that farms out to private [00:49:41] concerns some of those services and I'm not even so worried about whether we get [00:49:49] to bill for it but in our county when I see other municipalities that have [00:49:59] different working relationships with the share with the fire department and we [00:50:03] seem to be getting this you know big stoplight in front of us in a building [00:50:10] right on the foot and the borders of our area it would seem the least they could [00:50:16] do would be allow us to do it and they could do the billing I mean there could [00:50:19] at least be some intergovernmental agreement at the minimal research on [00:50:26] what it would cost to put that together no but it's something I'd be happy to do [00:50:32] and I think I wish that we had some ideas the one time we asked publicly I [00:50:38] think the answer was anything we could do to make it better for the for the [00:50:43] residents when we go to our house we would be in favor of but I know there's [00:50:46] also how much does it cost well we just spending eight hundred and fifty thousand [00:50:50] on the ladder truck so we can you know have the best services so are we looking [00:50:56] at some kind of study regarding [00:51:07] yes mr. mayor thank you a couple of different questions have been raised [00:51:13] first in response to councilman Altman's question about the certificate [00:51:18] of necessity the city attorney is currently compiling a legal opinion [00:51:24] which will outline what steps and if it's a possibility that the city could [00:51:34] obtain from the state an authority to provide service outside of the counties [00:51:45] providing us the authority to do so and so we'll have that in coming weeks in [00:51:51] response to councilman Peters question yes we do have a study I'm sorry we do [00:51:59] have a proposal to conduct a study to determine the cost that would be [00:52:08] associated and the revenue that would be received if the city did operate our own [00:52:16] advanced life support transport services and that is due to be in front of you [00:52:24] for consideration in conjunction with your September meeting schedule okay [00:52:32] only only thing I think I would add for legislative ass would be and I think I [00:52:38] talked to you about it was infrastructure projects they tend to be [00:52:42] looked on more favorably because it's a need versus a want type thing so I don't [00:52:47] know if there's anything out there but it'd be worth going out there if that's [00:52:54] got the legislative stuff we have a final review for the budget do mr. mayor

   This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

3. 3

   Final Review of FY21-22 Proposed Budget

   discussed

   Staff presented the final FY21-22 proposed General Fund budget of $25,529,760, walking through revenue categories and department-by-department changes since the initial work session. Key changes included reducing AV equipment for Council Chambers by $28,000, eliminating the Administrative Services Department/Assistant City Manager position, deferring various capital purchases (library blinds, fire ATV, gym improvements), and adjusting police overtime and lease vehicle line items. No formal vote was taken; this was a review/discussion item.

   • direction:Defer $50,000 of the Recreation and Aquatic Center Improvement Project (gym wall painting and divider replacement) to the next fiscal year.
   • direction:Eliminate the Administrative Services Department, including the Assistant City Manager position, from the budget.
   • direction:Defer purchase of fire department ATV ($30,000) to next fiscal year.
   • direction:Reduce AV equipment appropriation for Council Chambers by $28,000 (from $78,000 to $50,000) and add a management position to Technology Solutions.
   • direction:Convert proposed full-time marketing coordinator in Recreation to a part-time position.

   📍Cavalier Square🏢Duke Energy🏢Pasco County👤Chris👤Crystal Feast#2021 Recreation and Aquatic Center Improvement Project#American Rescue Plan funding#Certificate of Use Inspector program#FY21-22 Proposed Budget#Library Renovation Project#Municipal Civil Infraction Program#Red Light Camera Program#Residential Rental Inspection Program#Tampa Bay Water payments

   ▶ Jump to 52:55 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:53:02] and we'd like to make the final presentation of the proposed operating [00:53:06] budget and crystal feast and I are prepared to do that with you this [00:53:12] evening you do have your budget books in front of you I think in respect to the [00:53:21] time we'll go we'll clip through it rather quickly I'm going to ask crystal [00:53:26] to present the general fund revenue to you and then we will go through each [00:53:35] department and I'd like to present the changes that have occurred from our [00:53:46] first presentation to you till now and then we can respond to any specific [00:53:52] questions that you may have of the budget and just major changes all right [00:54:00] so if you open up your binder the first three pages consist of anticipated [00:54:07] revenues for the general fund which total 25 million five hundred twenty [00:54:13] nine thousand seven hundred and sixty dollars and it's broken up by category [00:54:18] the first category being taxes total taxes and you'll see that the major [00:54:24] revenue sources in that category consists of our ad valorem taxes which [00:54:29] based on our property values and proposed our tentative millage rate [00:54:35] we're budgeting at five million eight hundred forty four thousand five hundred [00:54:39] and seventy dollars but right below that we have an estimate of delinquent [00:54:45] ad valorem taxes that we expect to receive next year and then the other [00:54:51] remaining significant tax in that category is our electric utility tax [00:54:56] which is the third line coming in at one million four hundred eighty five [00:55:00] thousand and I won't hit every line item but if there's anything that you [00:55:06] want to discuss in further detail please just stop me so total taxes we're [00:55:12] proposing are what we anticipate for next year would be eight million two [00:55:17] hundred twenty nine thousand five hundred seventy dollars the next [00:55:20] category is our licenses and permits and the major line item in this category is [00:55:28] our electric franchise fees which we collect from Duke Energy and we're [00:55:33] anticipating receiving one million two hundred forty thousand dollars from them [00:55:38] next year the next significant item in this category is our building permits [00:55:44] which is the second item under licenses and permits coming in at three hundred [00:55:51] thousand which is what we anticipate we're a little above what we budgeted [00:55:57] for this fiscal year and so we expect to receive a little bit more next year [00:56:03] we look at the estimate column then to see what you think is going to happen [00:56:08] versus the amended budget yes I would use both of those columns the building [00:56:15] permits just just to maybe point of reference there that the actual the [00:56:20] eighteen nineteen were up almost fifty percent above what we were those two [00:56:25] years is that and I should probably know this but is it's based upon our [00:56:31] permits is based upon not not strictly the volume but also the type of permits [00:56:37] right value correct so so I was just kind of interesting to see yeah okay we [00:56:47] we all know construction is going up right plus the amount so for license and [00:56:57] licenses and permits were anticipating 1 million nine hundred twenty thousand for [00:57:02] next year the next category is our intergovernmental revenue which consists [00:57:07] of the majority of our state revenue that the city receives and it also [00:57:14] includes the American rescue plan funding that we anticipate that we will [00:57:21] present to you at our regular City Council meeting and anticipate that you [00:57:25] will approve so in that we have but already budgeted American rescue funding [00:57:35] are proposed it for next year and so we've included that and that is that [00:57:39] third dollar amount in that category one million five hundred ninety three [00:57:45] thousand three hundred and ninety so that is the largest amount in this [00:57:48] category then full amounters at the half amount that's a half amount no I'm sorry [00:57:56] go ahead fight over so if you remember when we presented at the work session is [00:58:03] it a half of the full half thank you it's not it's a portion it's the [00:58:09] majority of it sure this is just what we've dedicated to loss revenue that [00:58:21] category that was presented so there were five other categories that we plan [00:58:25] on spending are proposing to you just use that money for this is just one of [00:58:30] the categories if you go down you'll see that we expect to receive one [00:58:39] million one hundred ninety one thousand three hundred dollars and half cent [00:58:43] sales tax so that's the next largest category in this our item in this [00:58:48] category the rest the majority of the rest is state revenue which I get [00:58:57] directly from the state it's an estimate that I received directly from the state [00:59:03] and so there's not much fluctuation in what we can do with budgeting it is what [00:59:10] it is whatever they tell us to expect is what the budget on to the next page the [00:59:16] next category is charges for services if you go down six lines you'll see off [00:59:29] duty pay and I'm pointing out off duty pay because it is it has gone down what [00:59:35] we're proposing are anticipating for next year is a little bit less than what [00:59:40] we've budgeted this fiscal year and that's just based on discussions with [00:59:47] the businesses that we service and what we anticipate on having to provide for [00:59:53] them we anticipate that we may experience a reduction in revenue [00:59:57] related to that [01:00:00] Next, we have recreation memberships, which is about halfway down the page at $175,000. [01:00:11] And you'll see that that is a little bit less than what we've budgeted this fiscal year, [01:00:16] but slightly higher than the estimate that we will come in this year. [01:00:20] We're anticipating that, you know, as people, you know, start going outside and utilizing [01:00:27] our facilities, we anticipate that we'll experience more revenue at the Recreation [01:00:32] Center. [01:00:33] Does anybody recall maybe what are the reasons behind the drop-off in that recreation membership [01:00:40] from 18-19 to 19-20? [01:00:43] That was directly related to COVID. [01:00:45] So that 19-20 column is in the height. [01:00:48] It might cancel mid-year. [01:00:49] Yeah. [01:00:50] And we were closed temporarily and then restricted, had restricted hours. [01:00:57] So in total for charges and services, we're anticipating $972,350. [01:01:05] The next category is our fines and forfeitures. [01:01:10] And the most significant item in this category is our red light fines. [01:01:15] So we've anticipated receiving about $1.8 million. [01:01:19] That's about, that's four lines down in this category. [01:01:23] It's less than what we have anticipated to receive this year, and that's just because [01:01:29] of the uncertainty of, you know, the virus and what to come with the economy. [01:01:37] We've taken a conservative approach and budgeted a little less. [01:01:42] This is driven by citations that are issued, and I want to remind you that we don't receive [01:01:50] all of this $1.8 million. [01:01:53] More than half of it does go to the state. [01:01:56] And then we use a portion of it to cover the program costs. [01:02:00] So we have a whole division in the police department dedicated to this red light program. [01:02:06] So that's covered by this $1.8 million as well. [01:02:12] If we turn to the next page, in total for fines and forfeitures, we're anticipating [01:02:20] $2,411,000. [01:02:24] The next category is our miscellaneous revenue, and this includes interest, contributions, [01:02:33] and our transfers from some of our other internal funds that they provide money to the general [01:02:42] fund for administrative services that the general fund provides. [01:02:45] So that would all be included in this category and the next category where you see contribution [01:02:51] from water and sewer fund and contributions from stormwater utility fund. [01:02:57] So there hasn't been much fluctuation in any of these items in these categories except [01:03:04] for you'll notice, one, two, three, four, five, six, seven lines down, $850,000 budgeted [01:03:13] to be received next year, and that is for the sale of the wastewater treatment plant [01:03:20] purchased by the county. [01:03:23] All right. [01:03:26] Just south of the drip bus land sales. [01:03:33] 364220. [01:03:36] I do have a couple of comments, I'll just make them all at once if I can. [01:03:46] Sure. [01:03:49] Which is that in recreational fees and memberships, you're looking at overall like a 10% increase [01:04:00] over your budget, but a little more of the estimate because of the year. [01:04:08] The code enforcement court fines and costs that were listed as amended budget at $620,000 [01:04:18] only came in at $238,000, so what was it that we thought was going to happen that didn't? [01:04:25] It actually converted to a municipal civil infraction program, and so less cases were [01:04:35] going before the special magistrate and more fines were being received through the municipal [01:04:45] civil infraction program. [01:04:48] I'll find numbers somewhere else then for that in a different line item. [01:04:57] The rent of Cavalier Square was $1,500, and I don't necessarily think we have to put it [01:05:07] in the budget now, but I think obviously that is an asset that we have, it's behind the [01:05:13] restaurant that's about to be built. [01:05:17] It's incorporated I think from listening to Chopper's request before to make sure it was [01:05:22] incorporated in our railroad square, but I'll be curious as to what the city might want [01:05:28] to do as a policy with that, because it does offer some opportunity, whether it's banquet [01:05:35] opportunity to our restaurants that are downtown, or whether it's again, it was given specifically [01:05:41] to one restaurant for use. [01:05:43] I kind of like the idea of the city having it, to have it for whatever purposes, but [01:05:50] in terms of how that comes out, I don't know if there'll end up being a rent if a commercial [01:05:56] enterprise wants to use it, but I think by the time you fix up that square and you have [01:06:01] all that space, there could be some revenue opportunity, not much. [01:06:07] It would allow us to control the space too, what would interact there, what would go on there. [01:06:21] The contribution from the water and sewer fund, the Tampa Bay water interest is just [01:06:26] reflecting again that that's a dwindling number, it started at 328, it goes down every year, [01:06:32] that's the interest as we draw down on the payments that we're getting from Tampa Bay [01:06:36] water, and that's going to impact our water rates I guess at the point when it's all finished [01:06:42] or not our rates, at least it's a revenue stream of principal that's building, on the [01:06:48] other hand, because they're making the same payment every month, so the public utilities [01:06:52] is getting more every year, because the principal is higher and the interest is less, but when [01:06:58] that final payment is made, that's still four or five years out, I'm not sure how far [01:07:02] out it is, but that'll be a radar to keep an eye on, obviously, as a cash flow. [01:07:11] And then that's finally, when you look at the total from 25 million budget this year [01:07:17] to the estimate of 23065, that difference is 2 million, is to a large degree, the 850 [01:07:32] from surplus land sales and the transfer that you talked about from the American Rescue [01:07:40] so we're not going to have that every year, that's going to drop and go away, so whatever [01:07:49] level of general fund expenditures that we have, we're going to need to be looking for [01:07:57] other revenue sources, wherever they're at, and you're aware of that, but I just want [01:08:03] to say... [01:08:03] Continue to look for revenue sources to embellish a general fund, certainly. [01:08:08] And the other side of the coin is efficiencies, however we can... [01:08:13] Of course. [01:08:15] Okay. [01:08:17] With that being said, Mr. Mayor, we can move on to the presentation of the budget, if it [01:08:22] meets with your approval. I do not have any changes to the City Council budget, I do not [01:08:34] believe there were no changes to the City Manager's budget. There was one change to [01:08:43] Human Resources budget and it relates to expense number 44521, Building Contents and Insurance. [01:08:57] Originally our estimate for insurance costs was that we would be receiving a 15% increase [01:09:09] and in the end our increase was only 9%, and so our new premium is $206,290, [01:09:25] which brings our total budget to $747,150. [01:09:34] The next budget that I'd like to present to you is the City Clerk, which remains at $80,020. [01:09:55] There were no changes in that budget. The Technology Solutions budget, there was a change in it. [01:10:06] I have added the position of another management member of the staff to that department and [01:10:16] I have additionally reduced the amount appropriated for the AV equipment for the Council Chambers [01:10:31] and I've reduced that amount by $28,000 and so the special purpose equipment was reduced [01:10:40] from $78,000 to $50,000. The operating budget along with the personnel budget for the department [01:10:57] is $1,268,730. The Administrative Services Department, which housed the Assistant City Manager position, [01:11:12] has been eliminated from the budget at this time. The Finance Department, Accounting and Budgeting Division, [01:11:25] there was one change and it relates to Travel and Training, Account 44011. [01:11:34] The Travel and Training budget was reduced by $900 to $4,500. The Billing and Collection Division, [01:11:46] there were no changes proposed to their budget amount, so the total budget for that division of the department [01:11:55] is $565,950. With that, Ms. Feast will present the remaining budgets. [01:12:09] If you go to your library tab and the budget schedule for that department, you'll see that there are two significant [01:12:19] changes that we want to point out. One with part-time wages, 41311, and that amount was reduced by $37,320 [01:12:32] and it's based on the timing of the completion of construction. We're anticipating that some positions won't need [01:12:40] to be filled, some current vacant positions. [01:12:45] Excuse me, I got $206,000 in the wrong category. [01:12:50] No, that's correct. [01:12:51] I see a $30,000 decrease then. [01:12:54] So the reduction is from the original proposed budget during our work session. [01:12:59] Oh, okay, that number's not there. [01:13:00] Yeah, that's right. [01:13:01] Okay, I was looking at $191,000. I'm like, that'll do. Okay, all right. [01:13:04] So currently there are a number of vacant part-time positions in the library, and so based on the timing of the completion of [01:13:14] construction, we're proposing that we don't actually fill those positions until construction and everything is complete. [01:13:20] And so that caused the reduction there. [01:13:23] And then the second line item, 44611, Maintenance and Repairs, Building and Grounds, [01:13:29] we've reduced that number by 7,800. [01:13:33] Originally we proposed the purchase of blinds, but we will include that in the library renovation project. [01:13:41] So we won't propose it as an operating expense next year. [01:13:45] We talked earlier quite extensively about solar, and I recall a conversation about solar on top of the library. [01:13:54] Is that already been expended and set up, or is that something that's just been discussed? [01:14:00] It hasn't been installed at this point, but there is a solar array that is planned as part of the project. [01:14:06] As part of the restoration? Okay. [01:14:09] All right, so then we'll move on to police. [01:14:14] And if you remember, police has six divisions, so we'll flip through each one, [01:14:21] the first being supervision, and if you turn to that budget schedule, [01:14:26] you'll see that there weren't any changes made to what was originally proposed. [01:14:32] The next division is support services. [01:14:37] And so looking at that budget schedule, there was only one change. [01:14:42] We've reduced overtime wages by $5,000. [01:14:47] So we're currently proposing $35,000 in overtime. [01:14:53] Moving on to the criminal investigations division and looking at that budget schedule. [01:15:00] There are three changes that we want to point out. First being overtime, where we've reduced [01:15:06] that line item by $5,000. Next is automotives, and we've reduced the original proposed amount [01:15:16] by $2,060 in order to be in line with the lease agreements on those vehicles. And then [01:15:25] two lines down, we've reduced our central garage maintenance and repairs by $1,150 just [01:15:33] to be more in line with what we expect the cost will be on those leased vehicles. We [01:15:39] don't expect as much. [01:15:40] Are we breaking ground on the new garage? [01:15:43] The parking structure? [01:15:44] The new garage. Not on Leo kit or whatever. [01:15:49] We're not certain at this point. We don't have a date selected. [01:15:54] All right. Moving on to patrol division. If you flip to the next budget schedule, you'll [01:16:02] see that there are four changes that we would like to point out. In overtime wages, there [01:16:08] are two categories that were changed, and what we did or what we're proposing is just [01:16:14] to move $15,000 from overtime wages, that first line item, into overtime wages downtown [01:16:21] detail. [01:16:22] The next item is our off-duty pay. So we've reduced this by $20,000 to be consistent with [01:16:32] the revenue. If you remember at the beginning of the presentation, the off-duty pay revenue [01:16:38] was reduced also by a similar amount, and that's just because we anticipate a slight [01:16:46] reduction in services that we will be providing for them. [01:16:51] And the last item is our automobiles, automotives, our lease vehicles, and that actually went [01:16:59] up by $9,220, but that is to keep it in line with the expectations that we have on the [01:17:08] lease payments and the vehicles that we will include in our lease program. [01:17:17] All right, that is it for patrol, and so if... [01:17:24] Can I just mention other patrol? Because the overtime wages are down from the estimates [01:17:31] in the past, but I do see that the regular full-time wages are up about $150,000 or whatever [01:17:39] they are, $250,000. So I know we have talk of new people being put on, so is the hope [01:17:48] that the overtime component goes down as we have a more full garage of, well not garage, [01:17:59] corral or whatever you... [01:18:01] Well, we certainly hope that the addition of the officers will in part address some [01:18:10] of our overtime wages in the department, but we also have instituted some management practices [01:18:23] and some changes in some of the events that warrant overtime, and we believe that those [01:18:31] changes will result in reduced overtime costs over the next fiscal year. [01:18:39] All right, so if you flip a few pages, we'll talk about code enforcement division, and [01:18:53] looking at that budget schedule, there's only one change that I want to point out, and that [01:18:59] is in health insurance, and that was reduced by $9,050 just to be more in line with who [01:19:05] is expected to participate in the city's health plan. And the last division for police is our [01:19:13] special traffic enforcement division, and there are no noted changes. So we'll move on to [01:19:20] fire. The first division is the supervision division, and looking at that budget schedule, [01:19:31] there's only one noted change, and that's in part-time wages, and that was reduced by $18,730. [01:19:39] Originally, we proposed a part-time administrative assistant for our residential rental program, [01:19:45] but we've since removed that proposal, so we've reduced that amount. [01:19:55] The next division is our firefighting. So if you flip to that budget schedule, there's only one [01:20:01] noted change, and we have reduced the overtime for residential rental inspection by $5,000. [01:20:10] Just a comment. Is firefighting a generic term that's being used regularly around now? [01:20:18] I know the firemen, we have the fire trucks, we have firemen, but emergency services seem to be [01:20:24] about a majority of the type of work done. Once a fireman, like once a mayor, always a mayor. [01:20:34] Yeah. Chris, did you want to respond to the question? [01:20:39] That's not a big deal. It really is. [01:20:56] So firefighter is the general term. We have women in the fire service, so we don't say fireman anymore. [01:21:03] Emergency services, we use that specifically due to the fact that all our firefighters are paramedics, [01:21:11] so we respond on medical calls as well. So that's the reason for that. [01:21:18] All right. That's good. Thank you, Chief. [01:21:23] Did you get your steps in coming down? [01:21:27] All right. If you flip to the next page, there's one more item that changed in firefighting, [01:21:34] and that is our special purpose equipment. This amount was reduced by $30,000. [01:21:40] Originally, we proposed the purchase of an ATV vehicle, but we've since proposed to defer that until next year, [01:21:49] and you'll see that presented on the next page. We've just moved that $30,000 to next fiscal year. [01:21:58] All right. The next department is our economic development department, and there were no changes to this department, [01:22:07] so we'll move on to development. If you flip to that budget schedule, there's only one noted change, [01:22:16] and that is in part-time wages. We've reduced that amount by $6,080. [01:22:23] Originally, we proposed a part-time certificate of use inspector for the full fiscal year, [01:22:28] but given the fact that this will be a new program that will be presented, [01:22:34] we anticipate that we really won't – there's no need to fund it for the full fiscal year. [01:22:40] So we expect to have the program presented to you by halfway through the fiscal year. [01:22:47] So we've reflected that in the budget. [01:22:52] And that is it for development. Moving on to recreation and aquatics, this department consists of two divisions. [01:23:00] The first, recreation, so we will flip to that budget schedule, [01:23:06] and you'll see that there are two line items that have changes, regular full-time wages and part-time wages, [01:23:13] and they both changed by $22,470. [01:23:18] Originally, we proposed a full-time marketing coordinator, [01:23:24] but since then, we're now proposing to keep that position part-time. [01:23:30] And so full-time was reduced by the $22,470 and put back into part-time. [01:23:37] If you flip to the next page, you'll see that there was a change in building improvements. [01:23:45] If you flip one more page, it will be better explained what that change is. [01:23:52] So in the 2021 Recreation and Aquatic Center Improvement Project, [01:23:58] originally we budgeted $260,000, [01:24:03] but we are now proposing to defer $50,000 of this project to the next fiscal year, [01:24:11] and that $50,000 included the painting of the interior gym walls and the replacement of the gym divider wall. [01:24:20] So we're just proposing that to be moved to next year. [01:24:27] In Aquatics, if you flip to that budget schedule, you'll see that there are no noted changes. [01:24:36] So moving to our last department, Public Works. [01:24:43] Public Works obviously includes several divisions, so we'll go through each one. [01:24:48] The first is Supervision. [01:24:50] So if you flip a page and get to their budget schedule, there's only one noted change. [01:24:56] We've added $18,000 to improvements other than buildings to cover the purchase of [01:25:04] or the replacement of the cantilever gate at the administration building. [01:25:13] If you flip two pages, you'll see that that purchase is also reflected in their schedule on that page, [01:25:22] Capital Improvement Schedule. [01:25:26] All right. [01:25:27] Moving on to Street and Right-of-Way, the next division. [01:25:32] Getting to that budget schedule. [01:25:34] There are three major changes. [01:25:38] The first change is in overtime wages, which was reduced by $3,000. [01:25:44] The next item that was changed was Orangewood streetlights, [01:25:50] and that amount was increased by $2,500 to cover expected costs next year. [01:25:57] And the same in Operating Supplies Miscellaneous. [01:26:01] All right. [01:26:02] The next pages didn't have any changes in that division, [01:26:06] so we'll move on to Facilities Maintenance. [01:26:10] And there's only one noted change here, and that's in Operating Supplies. [01:26:15] There was an additional $1,000 in Operating Supplies Miscellaneous, [01:26:20] and that amount was increased by $3,000 to cover the replacement of the cantilever gate at the administration building. [01:26:30] Operating Supplies, there was an increase to this amount by $2,500. [01:26:35] And, again, just to be more in line with expected costs for next year. [01:26:43] All right. [01:26:44] And then the Grounds Maintenance Division. [01:26:46] This is actually the last division in the general fund, [01:26:49] so all of the departments and divisions that we've gone over so far are funded by the general fund, [01:26:57] schedule that we went over at the beginning. [01:26:59] So this is the last department, excuse me, division that is included in that. [01:27:06] And it only had one change, and that's in Regular Exempted Salaries. [01:27:12] We've reduced this by $7,680. [01:27:16] The current field supervisor is expected to retire at some point during the next fiscal year, [01:27:21] and we anticipate filling that position at a lower rate. [01:27:24] So we've budgeted for that. [01:27:30] All right. [01:27:31] So now we're into the Water and Sewer Fund. [01:27:35] Before we go back to water and sewer, just a question. [01:27:39] I'm curious. [01:27:42] I couldn't quite find the budget items that we use for debris removal from residents. [01:27:50] Is that on the street right-of-way maintenance, or is that under the grounds maintenance budget? [01:28:00] For the debris removal, landscape removal from residents? [01:28:06] Streets and stormwater. [01:28:08] Our stormwater utility fund also incurs some of that cost. [01:28:13] So it's sort of split between? [01:28:16] Yes. [01:28:17] Why don't you come up, Robert? [01:28:20] I was trying to isolate really what our expense of that program is, [01:28:25] is what I was trying to understand. [01:28:27] I know you don't have to. [01:28:30] The majority of it is streets, 102. [01:28:34] And then we have some in stormwater utility. [01:28:38] Some of the other divisions, like sewer and stuff, [01:28:41] if they have some trimmings and stuff like that, [01:28:46] we'll incur a little bit out of their line items. [01:28:50] The purpose of it, I was just trying to, in my own mind, [01:28:54] understand what that really costs the city. [01:28:58] I can get that information for you. [01:29:02] I was trying to see if it was in the budget, [01:29:04] but it's kind of intermingled a couple of different line items, right? [01:29:08] Correct. [01:29:09] That was my question. [01:29:11] Thank you. [01:29:15] Back to ground maintenance. [01:29:17] I do have a question while Robert's here, [01:29:19] and that is the regular full-time wages are listed as 272, [01:29:25] up from what was actually 137 and then 188. [01:29:30] So there's been an increasing in actuals in order to try to do, [01:29:34] because you have more maintenance that you have to do. [01:29:38] Your estimate was 200,000. [01:29:41] Your budget is 272. [01:29:43] But when I look back to your personnel chart of full-time wages, [01:29:47] it seems like you still have the same 11 people. [01:29:50] So do we have additional folks that we're going to put in under the positions? [01:29:56] Are you putting more people in, [01:29:58] or do we have a substantial increase in that? [01:30:00] in order to get people to work, or what's the... [01:30:04] We are not proposing additional employees for this division. [01:30:12] There may have been a budget amendment within this division [01:30:17] that reduced the regular full-time wages in the current year, [01:30:21] but I can look into that number. [01:30:23] I'm looking at 1920. There was $188,000 in regular full-time wages. [01:30:28] That was $272,000, so you've gone to $188,000 to $272,000. [01:30:33] That's $100,000 more with the same employees. [01:30:36] Well, the same positions, but maybe they all weren't funded or filled. [01:30:41] I'm sorry. They weren't all filled. [01:30:43] Correct. [01:30:44] We did experience some vacancies. [01:30:45] And then when we had vacancies, we also budgeted the year before [01:30:49] not to hire those positions until the second half of the fiscal year. [01:30:57] So that's where you might see some of those discrepancies. [01:31:00] The total amount of employees stayed the same. [01:31:03] It's a matter of not filling positions. [01:31:07] And then I think when we did add a position, [01:31:12] we waited until halfway through the year before we advertised for it. [01:31:16] And we also conducted a wage and classification system [01:31:20] and effectuated wage increases for the positions. [01:31:24] The key is, to me, the maintenance I've been thinking for a long time [01:31:27] is important with our curb appeal and how we look. [01:31:30] I don't know if grounds maintenance will ever extend into other places [01:31:34] like, I'm guessing, intersections or the things you see [01:31:40] in the community development district where we're adding more signage [01:31:43] and more landscaping. [01:31:45] So hopefully we get a full staff that can be handled [01:31:49] but with the right number of people [01:31:51] if you can just keep them all hired and employed. [01:31:54] Correct. [01:31:55] That's a good answer. [01:31:58] We have a number, like 10%, [01:32:00] that are positions that aren't filled in the city. [01:32:03] Is that probably a pretty close number? [01:32:05] Probably most of them are in public works. [01:32:09] We have 20 people down now. [01:32:12] That's 10% of the city, let alone what other roles we have. [01:32:21] As long as the wage study has been implemented, [01:32:23] is that still not working then to hire people? [01:32:29] They'd better look around. [01:32:30] It's not just in the city. [01:32:32] Oh, I know. [01:32:34] Labor challenges for sure. [01:32:36] Oh, that's a good way. [01:32:39] Go ahead, Crystal. [01:32:40] Okay. [01:32:41] So if you could turn to the page that provides you [01:32:44] with the water and sewer fund revenues, [01:32:46] and that's the column in orange, [01:32:49] you'll see that we're anticipating receiving $17,217,870 [01:32:57] in revenues next year, [01:33:00] which is what is used to fund the remaining public works divisions. [01:33:07] If I go by category, [01:33:12] the first category is permits and intergovernmental, [01:33:15] and that's a very insignificant amount there, [01:33:18] sewer permits we're anticipating $400. [01:33:21] The next category is charges for services, [01:33:24] and this includes our water sales, sewer sales, bulk sales, [01:33:30] and reclaimed water sales. [01:33:33] So in total we're anticipating $15,084,030. [01:33:38] And also a 4% annual rate increase has been incorporated [01:33:45] in what we're anticipating for next year. [01:33:48] The next category is our miscellaneous revenue category, [01:33:52] which includes interest, our late payment penalties, [01:33:57] impact fees, and our county share of operations of our treatment plant. [01:34:04] In total we anticipate $1,883,800 [01:34:11] to fund our public works divisions. [01:34:17] And then finally we're using $249,640 of reserves [01:34:26] to balance out the budget. [01:34:30] So now we'll go over the remaining public works divisions, [01:34:33] starting with water production. [01:34:36] If you move to that budget schedule, [01:34:39] there's only one noted change. [01:34:42] There was an increase in professional services by $50,000, [01:34:46] and that is to cover an elevated high service pump feasibility study. [01:34:52] On the next – [01:34:53] Mr. Mayor, I'm just looking at the clock, [01:34:56] and I'm partly to blame for holding this up until 6.30. [01:34:59] Well, don't shake your head too hard. [01:35:01] But if I might ask, [01:35:04] because we've got a number of pages without trying to rush and shortchange it, [01:35:08] can we either take a recess and then complete this at the end of the night? [01:35:17] I would suggest we do it between the regular meeting and the CRA meeting. [01:35:23] Yeah. [01:35:24] Is that okay? [01:35:25] Is that all right? [01:35:27] Robert's here as well, and the finance director. [01:35:29] Why don't we recess, then?

   This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

4. 4Adjournment▶ 1:35:31