Link

Social

Embed

Disable autoplay on embedded content?

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[1. Call to Order ]

[00:00:03]

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE, MADAM MAYOR. REAL QUICK.

YES, MA'AM. STAFF WAS SAYING THEY COULDN'T HEAR YOU ON YOUR MICROPHONE EITHER.

I THINK THEY CAN HEAR ME. CAN WE CHECK YOUR MICROPHONE, MADAM MAYOR? YEAH, WE COULD CHECK MY NOW. YEAH, YEAH, YEAH, IT WAS.

I THINK IT WAS JUST TOO FAR AWAY. OKAY. MAYOR HUDSON, PRESENT.

COMMISSIONER BRODERICK. YES. COMMISSIONER GAINES.

PRESIDENT. MA'AM. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR. YES, MA'AM.

AND COMMISSIONER JOHNSON. SORRY ABOUT THAT. OKAY.

FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC.

OKAY. THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION.

YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES. STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.

PLEASE MOVE FORWARD IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK. SEEING NO MOVEMENT, WE'LL COME BACK TO THE REGULAR AGENDA.

OKAY. NEXT, WE HAVE THE BUDGET WORKSHOP. OKAY, NOW WE'RE ON THE BUDGET WORKSHOP.

[A. FY 2026 Proposed Budget Adjustments]

MR. CHEST, DO YOU HAVE ANY LEAD IN? YES, MADAM MAYOR AND COMMISSIONER.

AT THE PREVIOUS COMMISSION MEETING. WE WERE DIRECTED TO RETURN AND PROVIDE SCENARIOS AND BUDGET OPTIONS TO ADDRESS SALARIES FOR BOTH THE POLICE UNION, THE TEAMSTERS UNION, AS WELL AS THE NON BARGAINING EMPLOYEES.

MISS MORRIS IS GOING TO GO THROUGH THOSE OPTIONS AND WE'LL BE HERE TO FIELD ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU, MISS MORRIS. GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS.

WE ARE GOING TO START WITH OUR GENERAL FUND PROPOSED BUDGET, AS IT IS NOW AT 67,000,787 TO 11.

THAT'S 3,119,107 INCREASE, OR 4.8. THAT'S A SLIGHT CHANGE IN OUR REVENUE, WHICH WHY I PUT THAT THERE. AND SO YOU CAN SEE WHAT WHAT ACTUALLY CHANGED.

JOHN? HOLD ON. CAN YOU HEAR ME? WE DON'T SEE ANYTHING YET.

OKAY. HOLD ON. I THINK.

I THINK, MADAM MAYOR, THE TECHNOLOGIES ARE NOT USED TO US BEING HERE AT 1:00.

I THINK IT'S ON BREAK. IT'S. IT'S PROTEST. IT'S ON BREAK HERE.

WE ONLY PAY FOR IT FROM 5 TO 9. YEAH, MISS MORRIS, I SEE IT NOW.

SOMETHING NOW. NOW. OKAY, SO THAT'S THE INCREASE.

VERY SLIGHT, $250,000. AND HERE IS WHERE IT IS.

IT'S IN THE INCREASE. AND WE INCREASED OUR ALARM PERMIT VIOLATIONS BASED ON GOING BACK LOOKING AT NUMBERS AND WHAT WE ARE PROJECTING INCREASING OUR REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENDITURES, LOOKING AT OUR AIR AND WHAT WE'VE GOTTEN THUS FAR AND THE EXPECTATION AND THEN WE INCREASE THE RESTRICTED REVENUE TRANSFER BECAUSE WE DID NOT MAKE A TRANSFER, THE TOTAL TRANSFER THAT WE HAD IN THE PREVIOUS YEAR THAT WE NEEDED TO DO.

SO WE'RE GOING TO TRANSFER THAT $50,000 OVER AND THEN INCREASING THE GRANT TRANSFER OF $125,000 AS WELL.

SO THAT'S THE $250,000 IN ADDITIONAL REVENUE THAT IS IN THIS PROJECTED BUDGET.

AND THAT AS OPPOSED TO THE ONE WE SAW THE OTHER DAY.

IS THAT RIGHT? OKAY. THANK YOU. RIGHT. AND SO BEFORE WE MOVE, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS.

BECAUSE THE ONLY EXPENDITURES THE NEXT WE'LL GET INTO THE OPTIONS THAT WE GAVE AS TO TRYING TO ADJUST OUR EXPENDITURE COSTS TO MAKE ADDITIONAL CHANGES FOR THE COMPENSATION FOR OUR OFFICERS.

ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS PARTICULAR SLIDE? THE REVENUE OKAY.

THANK YOU. OKAY. SO WE PROVIDED SEVEN DIFFERENT OPTIONS.

TO BE TO CONSIDER AS, AS TO COST WISE AS TO ANY CHANGES THAT WE WERE GOING TO MAKE ON THE BUDGET AS IT WAS PRESENTED.

SO WE PRESENTED A INITIALLY A 5% FOR OUR NON BARGAINING.

5% FOR BARGAINING AND THE STEP PLUS 5% FOR OUR POLICE.

IT WAS PROPOSED THAT WE LOOKED AT WE DID THE FIVE, 1515 TAKEN THAT WE WOULD DO THE SAME FOR OUR TEAMSTERS, THAT WE DID FOR OUR POLICE, AND WE SEE WHERE THE COST IS GOING TO BE.

THAT'S GOING TO BE THE FOUR FOUR TAKES OUR PERSONNEL COST TO 41,000,009 THOUSAND 160.

AND THEN WE HAVE OUR OPERATING EXPENDITURES REMAINING THE SAME AND OUR CAPITAL OUTLAY REMAINING THE SAME.

WE INCREASE THE GRANTS AND AIDS BY 22,500. AND THAT IS TO COMPENSATE FOR THE EDC INCREASE.

WE HAD IT AT 40. WE GOT THE INVOICE FOR THE 62 FIVE AS TO WHAT THE COST WAS GOING TO BE.

SO WE DID INCREASE THAT BY THE 22,005 FOR THAT.

AND SO THAT TAKES OUR EXPENDITURES UP TO 71,399 689, 71 MILLION, 71 MILLION.

[00:05:04]

I'M SORRY. OKAY. NUMBERS ALL DAY. WE'LL HAVE YOU EVERYWHERE.

YES. SO WE SEE A SHORTFALL OF $3.6 MILLION IF IF WE ENTERTAIN THAT WITHOUT MAKING ANY ADJUSTMENTS.

AND SO THE MILLAGE RATE TO COMPENSATE FOR THAT WOULD BE 7.6787.

THAT WOULD BE NEEDED TO GENERATE THAT AMOUNT OF REVENUE.

IS THERE ANY PLACE ON HERE WHAT PERCENTAGE INCREASE? THAT IS FROM WHERE WE ARE? WELL, IT'S A 0.7787 IN DOLLAR AMOUNT, PERCENTAGE WISE.

YEAH. LET'S SEE I WOULD DO IT ON MY CALCULATOR RIGHT QUICK.

CLOSE TO 10%. YEAH. CLOSE. VERY CLOSE. YEAH. OKAY.

IT'S IT'S. WE CAN FIGURE IT OUT. OKAY. AND SO YOU'LL SEE AGAIN, I DID.

AT THE BOTTOM OF IT. WHAT IT WHAT THAT OUTLINES THERE.

THE OPTION TO IS BEFORE WE CAN GO BACK TO THAT PLEASE.

SO JUST SO THAT I'M CLEAR THIS WOULD BE FOR THIS YEAR.

AND SO THIS IS FORECAST BASED ON A CURRENT TRENDS WHAT CURRENT AD VALOREM THAT WE'RE ON.

AND SO GOING FORWARD WE WOULD HAVE TO TRY TO MAINTAIN THOSE SALARIES THAT WE'VE MOVED INTO AND KEEP THAT MOVING FORWARD FROM UNDERSTANDING.

SO WE WOULD NEED AT LEAST A WHATEVER THE CURRENT TREND IS FOR WHAT WE'RE GETTING IN IN REVENUE AND NOT A DOWN TICK IN THAT.

CORRECT. WE'LL HAVE WE GOT DOWN WILL REALLY BE UPSIDE DOWN.

RIGHT. BUT RIGHT NOW TO GET THIS WE WOULD HAVE TO INCREASE OUR AD VALOREM TAX TO 7.6.

IS THAT RIGHT? I MEAN, THE MILLAGE. I'M SORRY.

THE MILLAGE. I'M SORRY. OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY.

IF WE LOOK AT OPTION TWO. I'M TAKING THE 515, 15 AGAIN.

WE HAD ALL DEPARTMENTS MAKE A 3% ADJUSTMENT IN OPERATING EXPENSE.

SO DECREASE THEIR OPERATING EXPENSES BY 3%. AND THEN IN THE CAPITAL OUTLAY, 3 MILLION OF THAT IS JUST THE INFRASTRUCTURE.

TRANSFER. SO ONCE WE TAKE THAT OUT, IT'S THAT 600,000 THAT WE RESTRICT EVERY YEAR IS WHAT WE'LL HAVE FOR CAPITAL.

SO WE'RE GOING TO BE DECREASING OUR CAPITAL OUTLAY BY $1.3 MILLION, WHICH IS GOING TO BE TAKING OUT ALL OF THE CAPITAL THAT'S BUDGETED.

AND THEN GOING BACK AND TRYING TO SEE OF THAT 600,000 WHAT WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO AGAIN, THE ADJUSTMENT. SO WE STILL BE 1.832 MILLION.

SHORT. AND THE YOU SEE THE MILLAGE RATE THAT WILL BE NEEDED TO FUND THAT.

7.2950. QUESTIONS, MISS MORRIS. I HAVE A QUESTION, SIR.

WE DECREASE OUR CAPITAL OUTLAY BY 1.315 MILLION.

WHAT'S LEFT IN THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT? THAT 600,000 THAT WE TRANSFERRED.

THAT'S HARD. IT'S HARD. RESERVE MONEY FOR LIFE, RIGHT? THAT'S WHAT WE MOVE OVER EVERY YEAR. WE HAVE ZERO ABILITY FOR CAPITAL OUTLAY.

ASIDE FROM THAT 600,000. WE HAVE 9.5 IN PROJECTS.

OF THOSE 9.5, WE'D HAVE TO TAKE THE 600,000 AND TRY TO SAY, OKAY, WHAT'S MOST IMPORTANT FOR US TO FUND? BY IMPORTANCE. AND WE HAVE TO ALSO CONSIDER WHEN WE'RE, WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THIS AND WHAT'S BUILT INTO THIS CAPITAL OUTLAY.

THERE ARE PROJECTS THAT PUBLIC WORKS MUST ADDRESS.

WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, DELAYED OR DEFERRED THE COST OR THE OF THE PROJECT FOR YEARS.

AND NOW IT'S TO THE POINT TO WHERE IT'S ALMOST CRITICAL FAILURE.

AND THERE'S EQUIPMENT THAT THEY ARE UTILIZING THAT HAS TO BE FOR SAFETY REASONS.

ADDRESSED AS WELL. SO THAT'S WHY WE WENT IN AND YOU SAW THE NUMBER SO GREAT AS TO COST WISE IN OUR CAPITAL EXPENDITURES BECAUSE WE'VE GOT TO ADDRESS WE'VE GOT TO ADDRESS IT. OKAY.

THANK YOU. AND DOES THAT CAPITAL FIGURE INCLUDE THE SURTAX THAT 3 MILLION DOES NOT THE DECREASE BECAUSE THE 3 MILLION.

WE JUST IT'S JUST A AN IN AND OUT. YOU SEE THE REVENUE AND THEN YOU SEE IT, YOU KNOW EXPENSE ON THE EXPENSE SIDE.

SO IT'S JUST AN IN AND OUT THAT WE HAVE TO YOU KNOW WE CAPTURE.

BUT THAT 600,000 IS THE ACTUAL NUMBER. THAT'S FOR A GENERAL FUND USE AS TO CAPITAL COSTS.

BUT YOU CAN'T WE CAN'T DECREASE THE SURTAX. WE GET THE MONEY FOR THE SURTAX AND WE HAVE TO SPEND IT ON THAT.

RIGHT? NO, THAT THAT'S MONEY. THAT'S JUST IN AND OUT.

RIGHT. OKAY. EVEN, YOU KNOW, DO ANYTHING WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE COMMITTEE AND ALL OF THAT STUFF.

SO THAT'S OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE. YEP.

[00:10:02]

THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. YES, SIR. AND SOME OF THESE CAPITAL PROJECTS.

AND I'M THINKING OF ONE IN PARTICULAR, THE THE AVENUE D PROJECT.

I KNOW WE GOT MONEY IN. WE GOT SOME GRANTS IN FOR THAT PROJECT.

SO HOW DOES THIS DECREASE OR TAKING THIS MONEY OUT OF THESE CAPITAL GAINS AFFECT THAT GRANT? BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO LOSE THE GRANT AND HAVE TO GIVE IT BACK. IF SO, CAN YOU EXPLAIN? WELL, THE GRANT PORTION IS NOT IN OUR GENERAL FUND ALLOCATION.

IT'S NOT. THE PORTION THAT'S IN OUR GENERAL FUND IS THE AMOUNT THAT WE WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT THE GRANT WOULD NOT BE PAYING FOR.

BUT WE. BUT IF I, IF I CAN REMEMBER RIGHT. THE GRANT WOULDN'T.

THE GRANT WASN'T GOING TO COVER THE WHOLE ROAD.

IT WAS WE HAD TO PUT SOME MONEY WITH IT. CORRECT.

AND THERE'S SEVERAL DIFFERENT AVENUES OR FUNDS THAT ARE, THAT ARE FINANCING THAT.

IS THERE SOMETHING LIKE WITH THESE OTHER FUNDS THAT IF WE DON'T USE IT WITHIN A CERTAIN TIME, DO WE LOSE IT OR I DON'T WANT TO LOSE IT IF WE IF WE CAN'T USE IT, I WANT TO USE FUNDS THERE THERE ARE FUNDS.

YOU KNOW THE GRANT THERE IS STIPULATION AS TO THE TIMING AS TO WHEN THE GRANT FUNDS HAVE TO BE UTILIZED.

THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT. SO THERE IS SOME TIME. THERE IS A TIME LIMIT ON THAT. OKAY. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. JUST REAL QUICK. SO THE WAY I LOOK AT THIS AND I ALWAYS TRY TO GET MY INTERPRETATION, SO WE'RE BASICALLY GOING TO REDUCE OUR CAPITAL OUTLAY BY 1.3 MILLION.

AND WOULD YOU SAY THE MAJORITY OF THE CAPITAL OUTLAY PROJECTS OR PUBLIC WORKS RELATED.

WHAT WHERE ARE THE MAJORITY OF THESE. THAT WOULD BE, I GUESS, SACRIFICED TO GET THIS $1.3 MILLION REDUCTION.

THEY ARE. LINDA, YOU ALL HAVEN'T WIPED THE COMPUTER, HAVE YOU? FROM THE LAST MEETING. DID YOU ALL WIPE THE COMPUTER FROM THE LAB? I CAN'T HEAR YOU, JOHNNY. YOU GOTTA WIPE THE COMPUTER FROM THE LAST MEETING I WAS.

IT GETS WIPED EVERY NIGHT. YEAH. OKAY. SO IT'S GONE.

OKAY. YOU CAN PULL. I MEAN, IF YOU CAN PULL UP FROM THE LAST MEETING.

LET'S SEE IF I MAY. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, PRIMARILY IT'S ENGINEERING AND PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS THAT WOULD BE TAKE THE BIGGEST HIT, RIGHT? ENGINEERING. AND, YEAH, I DON'T HAVE TO GET INTO GREAT DETAIL, BUT BECAUSE I THINK IT GOES TO THE POINT OF WHAT MISS MORRIS IS SAYING IS THAT EVEN UNDERSTANDING THAT IN THE FURTHER DEPTH, LOOKING AT THE PUBLIC WORKS, A LOT OF IT'S CAPITAL EQUIPMENT THAT THEY HAVE BEEN WE'VE BEEN HOLDING ON, ETC., AND PIECING TOGETHER. AND NOW, YOU KNOW, WE WOULD TAKE A REDUCTION IN THAT.

SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAD AN UNDERSTANDING THAT TO GET HERE, THIS 1.3 LARGELY COMES WILL BE COMING AT CUTS IN PUBLIC WORKS AND ENGINEERING CORRECT ON OUTLAYS OKAY. IT'S BUILDINGS THAT ARE OUR REVENUE GENERATING BUILDINGS RIGHT NOW THE GARDEN CENTER IS DOWN BECAUSE OF A MAJOR UPGRADE OR MAINTENANCE ISSUE THAT HAS TO BE ADDRESSED.

AND SO THAT IS RIGHT NOW. SO IT'S THINGS LIKE THAT THAT HAVEN'T BEEN DONE, BUT NOW IT'S TO THE POINT WHERE THEY MUST BE DONE.

AND SO WE'VE GOT TO ADDRESS THEM OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU. PROCEED. OPTION THREE IS A 5% FOR NON BARGAINING, 10% FOR BARGAINING AND STEP PLUS 10% FOR POLICE. AND YOU SEE THE COST OF THAT WITH THE PERSONNEL TAKING OUR PERSONNEL COSTS TO 40,000,001 37 TO 88.

IF WE LEAVE IN OUR OPERATING AND MAKE NO ADJUSTMENT TO OUR CAPITAL, WE'RE 2.74 MILLION SHORT WITH THE MILLAGE RATE TO FUND IT OF 7.4907. QUESTIONS? FIVE. 1010. SO THE ONLY CHANGE IN THIS IS REALLY THE 10%, RIGHT? IS THAT RIGHT? RIGHT. YEAH. SO THE 10%, WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO CUT ANYTHING ELSE BECAUSE WE REDUCED IT FROM 15.

SO THE SAVINGS KIND OF TOOK IT DOWN A LITTLE BIT.

YEAH. I GOT 2.7 MILLION, BUT WE'RE STILL SHORT 2.7.

THE MILLAGE RATE WOULD STILL BE 7.4907. YEP. YES.

OKAY. THANK YOU. OPTION FOUR IS THE FIVE, TEN, TEN WITH THE ADJUSTMENTS WHERE WE WOULD BE THE 3% FOR THE OPERATING EXPENSES OF ALL DEPARTMENTS. AND THEN WE WERE WE'RE REMOVING 767,892 OUT OF THE CAPITAL BUDGET. AND WHAT THAT IS, IS THAT'S THE POLICE BUDGET AMOUNT THAT'S IN FOR THE ONE CAPITAL EXPENDITURE THERE.

AXION. AXION PROJECT COST. THE REASON WE REMOVED IT IS BECAUSE THE EXPENDITURE WILL NOT BE DUE OR PAYABLE UNTIL SEPTEMBER OF 26, WHICH IS THE END OF OUR FISCAL YEAR. AND SO BY THAT TIME, WE KNOW THAT THERE WILL BE PROBABLY SOME COST SAVINGS IN THE PERSONNEL COST UP TOP THAT WE CAN PAY FOR THAT EXPENDITURE WITH. AND SO WE REMOVE THAT OUT OF THE CAPITAL OUTLAY AND SEE THAT IF WE WERE TO TAKE THAT OUT AND

[00:15:01]

DO THE FIVE, TEN, TEN WITH THE ADJUSTMENT TO CAPITAL, WE'RE STILL ABOUT 1.5 MILLION SHORT.

OKAY. QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? DO WE HAVE ANY GOOD NEWS ANYWHERE? YEAH. WELL, WE'RE GOING TO MAKE IT DOABLE. LET'S SAY THAT WELL WE CAN I CAN DO WHATEVER YOU WANT ME TO DO.

I CAN MAKE IT HAPPEN. BUT WE'VE COME UP WITH MR. CHESS AND I. YOU KNOW, WE WENT THROUGH SO MANY SCENARIOS AND WE CAME TO SOMETHING THAT WE THINK IS IS DOABLE FOR US.

BUT WE DO STILL HAVE TO CONSIDER OUTLOOK AS TO, YOU KNOW, WHERE WE'RE GOING TO BE AND HOW WE CAN ADDRESS IT.

WELL, I, FOR ONE, HAVE A VERY PESSIMISTIC OUTLOOK PAST FISCAL YEAR 26 ON AD VALOREM.

WE SEE THIS TAKING PLACE IN THE MARKETPLACE RIGHT NOW.

THOSE ADJUSTMENTS ARE TAKING PLACE, AND IT'S GOING TO BE IT'S NOT A 2008 SCENARIO.

IT'S NOT A 1999 SCENARIO OR 91 SCENARIO, BUT IT'S GOING TO BE SIGNIFICANT.

AND IF WE HAVE JUST A 10% ADJUSTMENT IN VALUATION, WE LOSE 10% OF OUR OUT OF THAT 10.5% WE PICKED UP THIS YEAR IS GOING TO BE GONE.

THAT GIVES US ANOTHER WHOLE OF $3.8 MILLION, GIVE OR TAKE, YOU KNOW, SO I'M NOT REALLY CERTAIN HOW WE CAN EXTEND OURSELVES. I GUESS THE BEST WAY TO PUT IT IS FISCAL TIMES ARE GOOD FOR US RIGHT NOW.

I'M VERY, VERY TROUBLED WITH THE CONCEPT OF ELIMINATING CAPITAL EXPENDITURES WHEN TIMES ARE GOOD.

BECAUSE WHEN TIMES AREN'T GOOD, YOU CAN'T. YOU HAVE MORE MONEY.

GET AHEAD. WE HAVE NO CUSHION AT THAT POINT. WE'VE ALREADY DELETED ANYTHING THAT COULD BE DELETED TO FUND SALARIES.

I'M I'M VERY, VERY DISTURBED BY ALL OF IT, BUT I WON'T.

I WON'T STEAL YOUR THUNDER. I'LL LET YOU CONTINUE ON WITH YOUR YOUR PRESENTATION.

BUT I HAVE VERY, VERY DEEP ROOTED CONCERNS THAT THIS TAKING THIS DIRECTION, I THINK IS A IS A MISTAKE.

BUT LET'S I'LL LET YOU CONTINUE ON OKAY. TO OPTION FIVE OKAY.

OPTION FIVE IS 5% FOR NON BARGAINING, 5% FOR BARGAINING AND 10% PLUS STEP PLUS 10% FOR OUR OFFICES.

AGAIN WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO ADDRESS THE 3% IN OPERATION OPERATING COSTS AND THEN THE 767 ADJUSTMENT IN CAPITAL.

BUT WE ARE STILL AT 1.245 SHORTFALL. HOWEVER, HERE'S HOW WE ARE PROPOSING TO ADDRESS THAT IS WE ARE STILL GOING TO HAVE TO DO THE DECREASE.

AND WE DO THE NO CHANGES TO THE NON OPERATING WITH THAT EDC.

WE ARE PROPOSING TO USE A FUND BALANCE TRANSFER TO ADDRESS THIS TO FUND THE CAPITAL.

THAT 1.2 IS, IS IS OUR CAPITAL. WITH THE ADJUSTMENT OUT, YOU KNOW, WOULD BE ABOUT 1.2.

ANYWAY, WHEN WE TAKE THE 767 OFF. AND SO WE'RE PROPOSING THAT WE DO A BALANCE, A FUND TRANSFER FROM OUR FUND BALANCE TO PAY FOR CAPITAL ONLY.

CAPITAL EXPENDITURES ARE ONE TIME COST. AND SO IT'S NOT GOING TO FUND THE REOCCURRING PORTION OF THIS BUDGET, BUT IT WOULD FUND THE PORTION OF THE CAPITAL PROJECTS FOR THIS FISCAL YEAR.

MADAM MAYOR. SO YOU SAID AT ONE TIME, FUND BALANCE TRANSFER WILL COVER THE SHORTFALL OF 1.25.

RIGHT. RIGHT. OKAY. AND THE OUTLAY HERE, THE 760.

I THINK YOU MENTIONED EARLIER, THAT'S LARGELY WITH POLICE DEPARTMENT AND THEIR CAPITAL EXPENDITURES.

THAT'S THAT'S ONE OF THEIR CAPITALS, ONE OF THEIR AT A TOTAL REQUEST OF ABOUT $2.2 MILLION IN CAPITAL EXPENDITURES THIS YEAR.

WE WERE ONLY GOING TO FUND THAT PORTION. SO WHAT I SEE TO THE RIGHT IS 4.1 MILLION.

BASICALLY, IT WILL BE THE CAPITAL EXPENDITURE THAT WE CAN REALIZE, WHICH MEANS THAT A LOT OF THE PROJECTS THAT ARE OUTLINED FOR THIS BUDGET WOULD GET ADDRESSED AT THIS $4.1 MILLION HERE, THAT WOULD ADDRESS ALL OF THOSE OTHER THINGS.

OKAY. YEAH. OKAY. FOR NOW AND KEEPING THE 6.9.

CORRECT. KEEPING THE CURRENT MILLAGE RATE. OKAY.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE WE MOVE? NO. PROCEED.

OPTION SIX IS IF WE WERE TO DO 4% FOR NON BARGAINING, 4% FOR BARGAINING, AND THE STEP PLUS 9% FOR PD. WE STILL ARE GOING TO HAVE TO ADJUST THE OPERATING AND THE SAME CAPITAL AS WELL.

BUT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE, WE HAVE A SHORTFALL OF 934,963.

SO EITHER WAY WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO DO A FUND BALANCE APPROPRIATION TO ADDRESS OUR CAPITAL COSTS.

AND THAT'S WHAT WE ARE SAYING, THAT THE 934 IS GOING TO BE A TRANSFER FROM FUND BALANCE TO HELP US PAY THE

[00:20:04]

CAPITAL COSTS. AND DOES THAT IS THE FUND BALANCE.

ARE WE USING THAT INTERCHANGEABLE WITH OUR RESERVES? NO. WELL, IT'S THE SAME FUND. IT IS THE SAME FUND.

AND RIGHT NOW WE HAVE A A SOMEWHAT HEALTHY RESERVE, BUT WE DO HAVE TO TAKE ACCOUNT THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO RESERVE THE SIX NEXT FISCAL YEAR 6.6 MILLION 778,007 21, 10% OF WHATEVER OUR OPERATING BUDGET IS, WE HAVE TO RESERVE FOR EMERGENCY PURPOSES ONLY. THAT'S OUR POLICY.

THAT'S OUR POLICY. CORRECT. AND THEN THERE IS ABOUT 2.5 THAT IS FOR PROJECTS THAT WE ARE DOING.

ONE OF THOSE IS BEING ADDRESSED RIGHT NOW. AND THAT'S THE FUEL ISLAND THAT WE HAD MONEY, YOU KNOW, ENCUMBERED FOR YEARS TO ADDRESS. AND IT HAD NOT BEEN ADDRESSED UNTIL IT BECAME CRITICAL FAILURE.

AND NOW IT'S AT THE POINT NOW WHERE WE ARE HAVING TO ADDRESS THAT.

SO IT'S THOSE PROJECTS THAT ARE IN THERE SO REMAINING.

WE WOULD HAVE PROBABLY ABOUT FOUR AND A HALF, 4.5 MILLION.

BUT WE STILL HAVE TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION NEXT FISCAL YEAR.

WE MAY VERY WELL BE NEEDING THAT JUST TO DO REGULAR OPERATIONAL EXPENSES.

I WAS TELLING OUR DEPARTMENT HEADS AND I WAS TELLING STAFF I WAS OVER THE WEEKEND LOOKING AT SOME ECONOMIC THINGS, AND I SAW WHERE IN FLORIDA, YOU KNOW, OCTOBER 1ST, WE NO LONGER IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA.

IS SALES TAX GOING TO BE ABLE TO BE COLLECTED ON COMMERCIAL LEASES? SO THAT'S ALL STATE REVENUE THAT WE WOULD GET FROM THE STATE.

AND NO LONGER WILL WE BE GETTING THAT PORTION OF OUR STATE REVENUE.

SO AGAIN, THERE MAY BE SOME, YOU KNOW, ADJUSTMENTS.

DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA OF WHAT THAT AMOUNT WOULD BE FOR CITY OF FORT PIERCE? I DON'T I WOULD HAVE TO SEE HOW MUCH OF OUR COUNTY IS REVENUE IS FROM THAT PARTICULAR, YOU KNOW, THING SO THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO DO FURTHER INVESTIGATION ON THAT. BUT WE DO KNOW, AS THE LEGISLATURE HAS BEEN TRYING TO DO THAT FOR YEARS, AND THEY FINALLY DID IT THIS YEAR. YEP YEP YEP.

MADAM MAYOR. YES. SO SO BACK TO COMMISSIONER BRODERICK'S FORECAST HERE.

AND AND SO I DETERMINED A DIFFERENT WAY IS, YOU KNOW, WE CAN'T GET TOO FAR OVER OUR SKIS HERE WITH THIS BECAUSE WHICHEVER WAY WE GO, WE ARE FORECASTING THE DOWNTURN IN AD VALOREM THE NEXT YEAR.

SO WE'RE STILL WORKING OUR WAY. SO IF WE EITHER ONE OF THESE LAST TWO SCENARIOS, WE HAVE TO COMPOUND WHATEVER EITHER 900,000 OR 1.2 MILLION AND THEN ADD ON A FORECASTED LOSS IN REVENUES FOR THE ADDITIONAL YEAR.

SO IN ESSENCE, THAT'S ALMOST COMPOUNDING THAT ISSUE IN MY MIND, UNLESS I'M LOOKING AT THIS WRONG BECAUSE WE BECAUSE WE HAVE TO SUSTAIN WHATEVER WE ARE PUTTING OUT THERE, RIGHT. THESE SALARIES AT THAT LEVEL, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO TRY TO FIND A WAY TO FUND THEM NEXT YEAR. EVEN IF WE GIVE NO RAISES WHATSOEVER, IN MY MIND, WE STILL HAVE TO FUND THEM BECAUSE THEY'RE THERE AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A SHORTFALL IN THE AD VALOREM MONIES.

WELL, IF I'M LOOKING AT IT, PROBABLY, BUT BUT MAYBE THIS YEAR WAS 10.5 INCREASE.

SO NEXT YEAR MAYBE THERE'S NO INCREASE. OKAY.

WE HOPE. WHICH IS? YES. RIGHT. WE HOPE. RIGHT.

WE DON'T KNOW. WE'D BE THRILLED IF THERE WAS JUST NO INCREASE.

RIGHT. RIGHT. THE NEGATIVE NUMBER IS. WHAT IS THE CONCERN? RIGHT.

RIGHT. BUT ANY, LIKE YOU SAID, ANYTHING WE DO, WE'VE GOT TO CONSIDER THAT THIS IS.

AND IT'S LIKE I. YOU KNOW, I'VE SAID THIS BEFORE.

WE HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL AS TO MOVEMENT, BECAUSE WHATEVER WE DO IS PERPETUAL.

IT'S NOT THAT ONE TIME THAT YOU'RE DOING IT. IT'S YEAR OVER, YEAR OVER YEAR.

AND MY ARGUMENT HAS ALWAYS BEEN NOT THAT WE WERE RAISING IT, BECAUSE I DO KNOW THAT THEY WORK HARD.

EVERYBODY HERE WORKS HARD AND SHOULD, YOU KNOW, HAVE A LIVABLE WAGE.

HOWEVER, WHEN WE ESCALATE TOO FAST, WE CAN'T SUSTAIN THAT.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, AND AND WE'RE GETTING TO THAT POINT TO WHERE WE'VE ESCALATED TOO FAST AND THEN HOW DO WE SUSTAIN IT.

RIGHT. WELL, WE DIDN'T ESCALATE TOO FAST. IT ESCALATED.

YEAH. OKAY. YOU READY FOR OUR FINAL OPTION? OPTION SEVEN.

AND THAT KEEPS 6.9. CORRECT? YEP. CORRECT. THE LAST OPTION IS A THREE AND A HALF FOR NON BARGAINING.

A THREE AND A HALF FOR BARGAINING. AND THE STEP PLUS NINE FOR POLICE.

STILL MAKING THE ADJUSTMENT IN OUR OPERATING.

AND THAT CAPITAL ADJUSTMENT AS WELL. AND WE STILL HAVE AN $840,000 SHORTFALL THAT WE'D BE ADDRESSING TO HELP FUND THE REMAINING PORTION OF THAT CAPITAL OF 840,000.

ON YOU HAVE NEW EMPLOYEES ON THIS ONE, AND THEN YOU HAVE ON THE PREVIOUS ONE, TWO NEW EMPLOYEES,

[00:25:05]

WHICH WHAT ARE THE TWO NEW EMPLOYEES? LET'S SEE.

LET'S JUST NUMBER EIGHT, MADAM MAYOR. LET'S GO BACK.

I KNOW, I KNOW, BUT I WAS JUST WONDERING WHICH TWO.

OH, NO. THAT'S THE NUMBERS. ONE, TWO. THAT SLIDE.

OH, THAT'S A LIST. THE ONE THAT. OH, YEAH. THANK YOU.

SO YOU'RE SAYING BOTH OF THOSE, YOU KEEP ALL THE NEW EMPLOYEES YOU HAVE IN THE BUDGET.

NEW EMPLOYEES. CORRECT. OKAY. CORRECT. AND THEN I GOT IT.

YEP. OKAY. AND SO THOSE ARE THE OPTIONS. I'LL LET MR. CHESS DISCUSS WHAT HE'S RECOMMENDING. AS WE GO FORTH IN THE RATIONALE AS TO WHY HE'S MAKING THAT RECOMMENDATION, MR. CHESS. YES. MADAM MAYOR, WHEN I LOOKED AT THE OPTIONS, CERTAINLY THE MILLAGE INCREASE CERTAINLY WAS NOT AN OPTION FOR ME.

I'M LOOKING AT ITEMS ONE THROUGH FOUR. ITEMS FIVE, 6 OR 7.

I DO FEEL IT'S DOABLE, BECAUSE THE MOST IMPORTANT THING FOR ME IS THAT WE'VE BEEN DELAYING CAPITAL PROJECTS TOO LONG AND WE NEED TO ADDRESS THAT.

WE CAN HANDLE A $1.2 MILLION RESERVE USE, AND THEN THE OTHER AMOUNT WAS 9.34 AND THE LESSER AMOUNT WAS 840, WHICH IS $105,000 DIFFERENCE. BUT WHAT'S KEY FOR ME IS THAT OPTION FIVE GIVES US THE OPPORTUNITY TO STEAL THE REWARD.

THE EMPLOYEES THAT SAY FIVE, 6 OR 7 OR PREFERABLE.

I PREFER OPTION FIVE, AND OPTION TEN IS ABSENT FIVE AS WELL.

ALLOW US TO ADDRESS THOSE CAPITAL EXPENDITURES.

AND AS WE SAID, THE CAPITAL OUTLAY FOR 767, WE'LL BE ABLE TO PAY MORE THAN LIKELY BECAUSE EVERY YEAR WE HAVE THE SALARY SAVINGS TO COVER THAT EXPENSE.

WHAT I AM CONSCIOUS OF AND I DID DO AN ANALYSIS.

IF WE CONTINUE TO INCREASE THE THE UNIONIZED EMPLOYEES IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, AND WE HAVE THIS MINIMUM AMOUNT THAT WE'RE GIVING TO THE MAJORS, CAPTAINS AND DEPUTY CHIEFS, THOSE SALARIES ARE IS CREATING IN EQUITY, MEANING THAT WE GAVE 15% TO THE HIGHEST LIEUTENANT. TODAY THEY'LL BE MAKING MORE THAN THE CAPTAIN.

AND THAT CASCADES. IF WE GAVE 10% TO LIEUTENANTS TODAY, THEY'LL BE JUST $2,000 BELOW.

THE CAPTAIN'S MAKING THE MOST AMOUNT OF MONEY.

SO WE WANT TO BE CONSCIOUS OF THAT. SO AS I LOOK AT THESE BALANCES, IT'S NOT JUST THAT, WELL, WE WANT TO GET 5%, BUT WE WANT TO ADDRESS THE INEQUITY THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN TO THE LEADERSHIP IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AS WELL, BECAUSE WE'RE FOCUSING ON POLICE SERGEANTS AND LIEUTENANTS.

BUT AS WE INCREASE THIS 9% OR 15%, AND WE'RE LOOKING AT 3.5%, 5% FOR THE LEADERSHIP, IS INEQUITY THERE.

AND AT SOME POINT, THE LIEUTENANTS ARE MAKING MORE THAN THEIR SUPERIORS.

AND THAT, I THINK, CREATES A BIGGER PROBLEM FROM MORALE STANDPOINT.

AND NOT TO SAY FROM THE NON BARGAINING SIDE, YOU KNOW AND I HAD THIS DISCUSSION WITH ALL YOU INDIVIDUALLY, ALL EMPLOYEES TO ME ARE VALUABLE. AND, AND I ADVOCATE FOR EVERYONE.

I MEAN I THINK EVERYONE SHOULD BE RECOGNIZED, RECOGNIZE, APPRECIATED AND VALUE AND EVERYONE SHOULD BE FEEL THAT THEY THEY, THEY HAVE AN IMPACT. AND WE SHOULD RECOGNIZE THAT WHETHER WE CAN REWARD IT FINANCIALLY IS A DIFFERENT SITUATION. BUT I LET ALL OF THE DEPARTMENT HEADS KNOW THAT, HEY, EVERYONE IS AN ORGANIZATION IMPORTANT TO ME. I HAVE TO LOOK AT IT FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE, FROM THE SEAT, INCLUDING THE CAPTAINS, MAJORS AND DEPUTY CHIEFS ADVOCATE FOR THEM AS WELL, AND THEY'RE KIND OF GETTING LOST IN THIS DISCUSSION.

SO THE INEQUITY CONCERNS ME THAT WE GIVE THIS 10%, 10%, 10% EVERY YEAR.

WE DO THIS EXERCISE AND WE HAVE 3.5%, 5% TO THE LEADERSHIP THERE, AND IT'S INCREASING UPON THEIR SALARY.

I WANT TO IMAGINE SOMEONE WHO'S MAKING $1,000 LESS THAN ME.

I'M MAKING ALMOST THE SAME AMOUNT AS ME. SO WE NEED TO ADDRESS THAT FROM THE LEADERSHIP AS WELL.

IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. I'M NOT ADVOCATING GIVING THEM MORE MONEY, BUT, HEY, WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT. WE HAVE TO BE FAIR TO THEM AS WELL. AS FAR AS THE NON BARGAINING IS CONCERNED, THE SAME INSTANCE, THEY WORK VERY HARD AND NEEDS TO BE VALUED AND RECOGNIZED AND APPRECIATED.

SO I FEEL I'VE SEEN FIVE, 6 OR 7 WORKS FOR US.

WE CAN DEAL WITH THE 1.2 AND IN RESERVE. AND THEN THE INEQUITY, AS I SAID, THE FIVE PERCENTAGE IS TO KEEP, YOU KNOW, THE SUPERIOR LEADERSHIP AND POLICE IN LINE AND THAT THEY'RE NOT.

SO THE LIEUTENANTS ARE INCREASING UPON THEIR SALARIES.

THAT'S A PROBLEM FOR ME. I MEAN, YOU CAN HAVE SOMEONE IN A LEADERSHIP ROLE AND THEY MANAGE SOMEONE THAT'S MAKING A LITTLE MORE THAN THEM.

IN SOME INSTANCES, WE GAVE 15%. THEY'LL BE MAKING MORE THAN THEM.

SO MY RECOMMENDATION IS FIVE. BUT 6 OR 7, YOU KNOW, ACCEPTABLE.

GO AHEAD. I'M COMING TO YOU. GO AHEAD. I HAD A QUESTION. PLEASE.

WHEN I DRAFT UP MY COMPANY'S BUDGETS ANNUALLY AND IN YEARS WHERE WE'RE EXPECTING A COMPRESSION IN REVENUES OR REDUCTION IN REVENUES, COMPRESSIONS, THE FANCY TERM FOR NOT MAKING AS MUCH REVENUE GENERATED.

ONE OF THE LAST THINGS I WOULD DO IS LOOK AT BRINGING IN NEW STAFF.

I CONSIDER THAT TO BE A SOFT POINT. JOHNNY, CAN YOU GIVE ME AN OVERVIEW OF.

[00:30:01]

WE'VE GOT THREE QUARTERS OF A MILLION AND NEW EMPLOYEES.

CAN YOU GIVE ME AN OVERVIEW OF WHERE THOSE PEOPLE ARE BEING DEPLOYED TO? SURE. THERE ARE THE EMPLOYEES IN THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE.

THAT'S THE REAL I REMEMBER THE TITLE PROPERTY AND ASSET MANAGER.

ASSET MANAGER? A COMMUNITY OUTREACH COORDINATOR, COORDINATOR THE ADMIN, WE'RE JUST MOVING UP FROM ONE DEPARTMENT TO THE OTHER, BUT THOSE ARE THE THREE THAT ARE THERE. AND THEN WE HAVE THE TWO IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

THAT'S THE RECORD SPECIALIST AND CSO. FOR THOSE TWO, THERE'S ONE, THE NETWORK ADMINISTRATOR IN IT, AND PUBLIC WORKS, THERE'S A DISSERVICE. DISPATCHER AND THEN THE ENGINEER WE'RE PUTTING BACK BECAUSE THAT POSITION WAS A DEPUTY. MADE A DEPUTY CITY MANAGER SLASH PUBLIC WORKS, WHERE WE'RE ADDING THE CITY ENGINEER BACK IN AS A FULL TIME ON THE ENGINEERING SIDE AND NOT PUBLIC WORKS.

I GUESS MY FOLLOW UP COMMENT TO THAT IS, IS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT SIGNIFICANT DECREASES IN CAPITAL OUTLAY.

YET WHILE WE'RE COMMITTING TO A LONG TERM INCREASE IN PAYROLL, NOT JUST THROUGH THE INCREASES OUTLINED 3.5%, 5%, WHATEVER, THAT NUMBER WOULD BE 10%, 15%, BUT WE'RE ADDING THREE QUARTERS OF $1 MILLION IN ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL COSTS.

CONTEMPLATING THAT IN THE FOLLOW UP YEARS. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON WAS SAYING IS THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE NO MONEY TO FUND THOSE POSITIONS.

SO IS IT IS IT THE PRUDENT THING NOW TO BE EXPANDING, EXPANDING OUR EMPLOYEE BASE? I QUESTIONED THAT BECAUSE THAT'S THREE QUARTERS OF A MILLION. THAT OFFSETS SHORTFALLS.

AND THE OTHER COMMENT I WAS GOING TO MAKE IS THAT I BELIEVE CITY MANAGER CHESS COMMENT RELATIVE TO.

I BELIEVE THE CORE PROBLEM IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT IS NOT OVERALL COMPENSATION.

I BELIEVE THAT IT COMES MORE DOWN TO THE STEP PROGRAM IS NOT BEING FUNDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH OUR PEERS, AND THAT VERSUS A BLANKET ACROSS THE BOARD INCREASE COULD BE SOMEWHERE THAT IT'S LESS COSTLY TO CORRECT OUR STEP PROGRAM AND BRING IT IN LINE WITH OUR COMPETING ORGANIZATIONS, POTENTIALLY, AND BE LESS COSTLY THAN JUST A 10% PLUS STEP INCREASE OR 15% WHATEVER.

THAT NUMBER IS 9% BECAUSE I COME BACK TO COMMISSIONER GAINES COMMENT IN OUR LAST MEETING, RELATIVE TO I DON'T FIND PARITY IN GIVING DEPARTMENT X 3.5 AND STEP PLUS TEN TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

I THINK THAT'S VERY PROBLEMATIC. AND I'M ALSO GOING TO FOLLOW UP ON CITY MANAGER CHASE'S COMMENT THAT.

ALL THE DEPARTMENTS THAT ARE NOT CUSTOMER FACING ARE OF CRITICAL IMPORTANCE TO THE DEPARTMENTS THAT ARE CUSTOMER FACING.

WITHOUT FINANCE, NOBODY GETS PAID. WITHOUT IT.

THERE'S NO. THERE'S NO COMPUTER SYSTEMS. THERE'S NOTHING.

SO EVEN THOUGH THESE DEPARTMENTS ARE NOT CONSUMER FACING, WITHOUT THEIR ACTIVITIES AND THEIR HARD WORK, THE CUSTOMER FACING DEPARTMENTS SUCH AS POLICE, PUBLIC WORKS, CODE, ETC.

HAVE NO SUPPORT SYSTEM. THEY'RE NOT FUNCTIONAL.

SO THAT BACKROOM OPERATION. IS, AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED.

OF THE SAME IMPORTANCE AS THE FOLKS THAT ARE OUT THERE FACING THE CONSUMERS ON A DAILY BASIS.

SO I REALLY I'VE THOUGHT A LOT ABOUT THAT DISCUSSION WE HAD FROM THE LAST MEETING.

AND MY TAKEAWAY AFTER DIGESTING ALL THAT IS SOMEWHAT DIFFERENT IN THAT I FIND IT TO BE COMMISSIONER GAINES.

I THINK YOU'LL WANT TO SET IT. IT'S AN INSULT OR A SLAP IN THE FACE TO THE THE PERSONNEL THAT AREN'T GETTING THOSE SIGNIFICANT INCREASES.

AND I CAN'T SQUARE THAT. I CAN'T I CAN'T SQUARE THAT IN MY HEAD THAT THAT THAT'S A REASONABLE THAT BASED ON THE ARGUMENT OF, WELL, THEY'RE CONSUMER FACING VERSUS THE OTHER ONES THAT ARE NOT I'M NOT GOING TO BUY INTO THAT THEORY.

I'M JUST NOT. SO I'M NOT GOING TO SUPPORT THAT THAT CONCEPT.

SO I COME BACK TO TWO THINGS. ONE, I REALLY THINK WE NEED TO TAKE A HARD LOOK AND HAVE A DISCUSSION REGARDING THE ADDITION OF THESE NEW POSITIONS.

IS THAT A NECESSITY THAT WE DO NOW? NOW IN ONE EXAMPLE, CITY MANAGER CHESS AND I HAVE DISCUSSED AT LENGTH THIS COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE CZAR WORKING OUT OF HIS OFFICE BECAUSE WE'RE LOSING TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS AND UNDERVALUED REAL ESTATE JUST ON WHAT THE CITY OWNS FOR ASSETS.

[00:35:05]

OF COURSE, THAT'S ANOTHER REVENUE STREAM THAT'S GOING TO HELP OFFSET ADDITIONAL COSTS. IT'S GOING TO TAKE A YEAR OR TWO TO GET ALL THAT STUFF STRAIGHTENED OUT BECAUSE IT'S A MESS. IT'S A QUAGMIRE, AND WE'RE LOSING MONEY HAND OVER FIST IN THOSE AREAS.

SO HAVING HAD SAID, THAT IS NOW THE TIME TO FUND THESE POSITIONS OR CAN WE PARE THOSE DOWN? THAT'S WHERE I'M GOING WITH I LIKE THIS BODY TO HAVE A DISCUSSION REGARDING IT. GET YOUR INPUT ON IT. MADAM MAYOR.

YES, SIR. ALL RIGHT. BEEN QUIET TODAY. COMMISSIONER BRADDOCK, I START WITH YOUR LAST.

YOUR LAST QUESTION. SINCE THIS IS OUR ONLY TIME THAT WE CAN TALK AND ANSWER EACH OTHER.

EVERYBODY HEAR ME? OKAY. OKAY. THE NEW HIRES.

THE NEW HIRES. THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN LOOK AT.

BUT LET'S BE REAL CRITICAL WITH THE ONE YOU JUST TALKED ABOUT, DESIRE.

YOU'VE BEEN SAYING FOR THE LAST YEAR AND A HALF.

WHAT THE CITY OWNED PROPERTIES AND HOW WE'RE DEALING WITH COMMERCIAL LEASES AND EVERYTHING.

YOU'VE BEEN SAYING THAT FOR A YEAR. IT NEEDS TO BE OVERHAULED.

I USE THAT WORD OVERHAUL. AND IF WE CAN GET SOMEBODY IN HERE IN THAT POSITION THAT IS SATISFACTORY TO US WITH A, WITH A WITH A SALARY RANGE, I SAY WE DO THAT TO GET THAT IN ASAP, BECAUSE ANY DOLLAR THEY CAN TURN AROUND WILL HELP WHAT WE'RE FACING IN THE FUTURE.

I AGREE. OKAY, I'LL STOP START WITH THAT. I'M GOING TO BE HONEST.

I'M. I'M GONNA GO ON CITY MANAGER. AND JOHNNA, WHEN THEY SAID FIVE, SIX, SEVEN, I WASN'T GOING TO USE ANOTHER ONE OF THOSE NUMBERS BECAUSE I DIDN'T LIKE ANY OF THE RED I SAW. AND THE REASON I DIDN'T LIKE ANY OF THE RED.

I'M NOT GOING TO SIT UP HERE AND PUT MY HEAD IN THE SAND THAT NEXT YEAR IS NOT COMING.

IT'S COMING GUYS. I MEAN, IT'S IT'S IT'S IT'S COMING.

DON'T DON'T TAKE THIS 10% WE GOT THIS YEAR AS SOMETHING THAT'S COMING.

SO AS A STEWARD OF THE TAXPAYERS MONEY, I THINK WE NEED TO BE VERY CAREFUL BEFORE WE, YOU KNOW, STICK OUR NECKS OUT TO PUT OURSELVES IN A POSITION WHERE WE CAN'T UPHOLD OR MAINTAIN.

THAT'S THE WORD I'M LOOKING FOR. MAINTAIN. THANK YOU FOR ABOUT SEEING WHAT I WAS SAYING ABOUT THE THE OTHER THE OTHER STAFF.

EVERYBODY IS IMPORTANT. BUT I'M NOT A BUDGET GURU.

ONE OF THE ONE OF THE QUALIFICATIONS THAT OUR CITY MANAGER CAME WAS BUDGET GURU.

THAT'S WHAT HE DID. THAT'S WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT.

AND SO IF HIM AND MISS MORRIS ARE SAYS THAT THEY'RE FINE WITH FIVE, SIX, SEVEN OR WHATEVER.

ONE OF THEM NUMBERS, THE CITY CAN DO IT. I JUST ASKED MADAM CLERK TO CALL MY NAME LAST.

IF IT COME TO THE VOTE. BECAUSE I'M HAPPY TO BE THINKING.

BUT IT'S IT'S. I WASN'T THERE BECAUSE I DIDN'T WANT TO SEE ANY RED AND BUT EVERYBODY.

EVERYBODY CAN GET CAN GET SOME TYPE OF INCREASE.

I'LL SIT BACK AND THINK ABOUT IT. THE ONE THING THAT I WAS COMING IN TO SAY TODAY, GUYS, WAS IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A NO VOTE.

AND I'M TELLING YOU, IT'S GOING TO BE A NO VOTE FOR ME.

ON ANY PROPOSAL WHERE WE RAISE THE MILLAGE, I'M NOT VOTING FOR IT.

IN A TIME WHERE OUR RESIDENTS ARE ALREADY STRUGGLING AND THEN WE ASK FOR MILITARY AID, WHEN YOU'RE DOING THE RESEARCH, ALL THE COMMUNITIES AROUND US ARE EITHER KEEPING THE SAME OR LOWERING IT.

I'M NOT. I'M NOT DOING IT, SO I'M JUST NOT DOING IT.

SO IF THAT'S GOING TO GET ME EMAILS AND PEOPLE MAD, SO I'M JUST NOT GOING TO DO IT.

HOWEVER, AS I SAID BEFORE, I'M NOT ANTI-POLICE.

I'VE NEVER BEEN ANTI-POLICE. WE NEED OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT.

THEY NEED TO BE PAID. I WOULD LOVE TO LOOK AT A A A STUDY DONE BASED ON THE INFORMATION THAT THAT MR. CHURCH JUST GAVE ME. WHERE SERGEANTS AND LIEUTENANTS ARE RIGHT THERE, YOU KNOW, BY CAPTAINS AND CHIEFS THAT THAT THAT'S A PROBLEM.

AND ANYBODY THAT SITS THERE AND SAYS THAT THAT IS NOT A PROBLEM, YOU GO, YOU'RE GOING TO RUN A BUSINESS AND YOU BE THE CEO, AND YOUR VICE PRESIDENT IS MAKING $1,000 LESS THAN YOU AS A CEO OR AS THE HEAD.

[00:40:06]

THAT'S A PROBLEM. IT'S JUST HUMAN NATURE. THAT'S THE PROBLEM.

SO WE NEED TO LOOK AT THAT. SO AGAIN, IF, IF, IF, IF NUMBER FIVE, 6 OR 7 IS THE WILL OF THE, OF THE COMMISSION. I'M NOT HAPPY BECAUSE I DON'T LIKE READ, ESPECIALLY KNOWING WHERE WE'RE GOING, ESPECIALLY KNOWING WHERE WE'RE FACING YOU KNOW AND IF I'M GOING TO RELY ON HIS EXPERTISE AND FINANCES.

EXPERTISE. TO MAKE MY VOTE. BUT THE ONE THING AND I'M GONNA SAY IT AND I'M GONNA SAY IT AND SIT BACK.

WE GOTTA STOP CUTTING COST AND MONEY, GOING TO ALL THESE OTHER DEPARTMENTS, ALL THESE OTHER DEPARTMENTS, TO TRY TO KEEP UP WITH SOMETHING WE CAN'T KEEP UP WITH.

NO ONE WANTS TO SEE IT. THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE.

I SAID THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE IS NEVER GOING TO BE SAINT LUCIE COUNTY SHERIFF AND THEIR BUDGET.

THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE IS NEVER GOING TO BE THE CITY OF FORT.

PORT SAINT LUCIE WITH THEIR BUDGET FOR POLICE OFFICERS.

WE'LL BE PLAYING CATCH UP FOR THE NEXT 20 YEARS.

WE DON'T HAVE THE MONEY. I DON'T KNOW WHERE WE'RE GOING TO GET THE MONEY FROM AND WE'RE JUST NOT GOING TO DO IT, SO LET'S NOT KEEP BURYING A HOLE. HOWEVER, EVERYBODY DESERVES A RAISE.

BUT I'M JUST LIKE I SAID BEFORE, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU SEE A NUMBER AND THEN YOU SEE A DOUBLE NUMBER, THE DOUBLE NUMBER, IT STARTS TO WEIGH ON PEOPLE.

AS YOU SAID, COMMISSIONER BRODERICK, THAT YOU DON'T SEE IN THE PUBLIC, BUT THAT'S HERE WORKING EVERY DAY.

IT STARTS TO, TO WEIGH ON THEIR, ON THEIR MENTAL.

SO I THANK YOU FOR SAYING THAT. SO MADAM CHAIR, I MEAN, MADAM MAYOR, IF IF THE CITY MANAGER AND FINANCE DIRECTOR ARE OUR TELLS US THAT I THINK THEY SAID FIVE, SIX, SEVEN WILL WORK.

I'M RELYING ON THEIR EXPERTISE AND AND HOPE THAT ALL THE FIVE OF US ARE RIGHT.

SO, MADAM MAYOR I WANT TO JUST SAY A COUPLE THINGS ON SOME THOUGHTS HERE.

COULD YOU GO BACK TO SIX? BECAUSE I THINK SIX HAD THE 5%, OR IS THAT 4%? AND I GUESS OPTION FIVE WAS THE 5%. OKAY. THAT FIVE FIVE.

YOU DIDN'T DO A FIVE, FIVE, NINE. YOU KNOW, I'VE BEEN LOOKING AT THIS, RIGHT? AND THERE WAS SOME BACKUP DATA THAT WAS SENT TO US THAT LOOKED AT WHAT WE DID FROM HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE LAST YEAR WHEN WE GOT INTO THIS WHOLE PROPOSAL AND HR WORKED ON THIS. WE WERE TRYING TO PUT IN A PATHWAY SO THAT WE CAN BEGIN TO MOVE TOWARD TRYING TO GET SOME ESCALATION IN OUR RANK, OUR RANKS, SO THAT WE COULD GET THERE, MR. CHEST, WHEN IT CAME TO SURROUNDING AREAS. RIGHT.

AND SO WE HAD A CLEAR PATH THAT WE KIND OF MAPPED OUT THAT THIS WOULD BE A STEP HERE, AND YOUR NEXT STEP WOULD BE HERE, YOUR NEXT STEP WOULD BE THERE. ET CETERA, ETC.. AND SO I KNOW HR WORKED ON THAT.

AND AND WE STARTED THAT PROCESS. AND I THINK WE'RE ONLY A YEAR OR TWO INTO THIS WHOLE STEP PROCESS IF I'M, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN. AND THEN LAST YEAR PERSPECTIVE, WE GAVE A 9% PLUS THE STEP.

AND SO YOU KNOW LOOKING AT THAT AND THEN LOOKING AT WHAT SOME OF THOSE SALARY BANDS ARE AND WHAT THOSE WHAT THOSE CHANGES WERE.

IT'S IT WAS 9% PLUS WHATEVER THAT INCREASE IN SALARY WAS.

SO IN SOME CASES YOU KNOW, THE FURTHER IN YOU WERE THE BIGGER THE STEP.

SO IT COULD HAVE BEEN A NINE PLUS OR 2% OR NINE PLUS A 3%.

SO THAT PERSON WOULD GET A 12% INCREASE WHEN IT COMES TO THAT SALARY.

RIGHT. AND SO WHAT YOU JUST MENTIONED IS, IS OF CONCERN TO ME AS WE LOOK AT THE PARITY BETWEEN THE THE OFFICERS AND RANK AND, AND PROXIMITY. AND I DON'T KNOW WHERE WE ARE WITH THAT, BUT I THANK YOU FOR BRINGING IT TO OUR ATTENTION BECAUSE THAT TOO COULD CAUSE DISSENSION IN THE RANKS AND CHALLENGE THERE. RIGHT. BUT I DO RECALL OUR CONVERSATION WAS THAT WE WERE TRYING TO MAINTAIN NOT ONLY THE OFFICERS BECAUSE WE GAVE RANK THERE TO, I MEAN, STEPS THERE AS WELL FOR, FOR OFFICER SERVICE.

AND I THINK THERE WAS A BIG JUMP AFTER ABOUT YEAR FOR YEAR THREE.

THAT WAS IT WAS A BIG JUMP IN THAT TO TRY TO REALLY BRING THAT PARITY, BECAUSE WE HAD REALIZED THAT THAT'S THE TIME THAT WE ARE REALLY STARTING TO LOSE OUR EXPERIENCED OFFICERS GOING TO PORT SAINT LUCIE, AND THEY WERE GETTING A BIGGER JUMP TO JUST TO GO START THAT.

SO WE WERE TRYING TO CLOSE THAT GAP AT THAT CRITICAL POINT, WHICH IS AROUND ABOUT YEAR FOUR, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN. AND SO, YOU KNOW, MY HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE AND LOOKING AT THAT IS TO KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO OBVIOUSLY ADDRESS IT. BUT HOW DO WE DO THAT AND WHAT THAT PERCENTAGE IS WHEN IT COMES TO THE STEP PLUS THAT,

[00:45:05]

THAT STEP PLUS WHATEVER PERCENT IN THIS CASE FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

RIGHT. SO I'VE SEEN SCENARIOS HERE THAT RANGED ANYWHERE FROM TEN WHICH IS ACTUALLY A 1% INCREASE OVER WHAT WE DID LAST YEAR BECAUSE LAST YEAR WAS A 9%. SO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S A LITTLE CONCERNING TO ME.

SO, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE ARE CUTTING. PARTICULARLY IN THIS SCENARIO, WE'D BE WE'D BE CUTTING OUR CAPITAL OUTLAY, WHICH IS THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, ANYWAY. SO MAYBE THAT'S NOT A GOOD EXAMPLE.

BECAUSE THAT WASHES OUT, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN.

BUT OUR OPERATING EXPENSES WE'VE ASKED EACH DEPARTMENT TO TRIM BY 3%, AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE FOR THEM.

I'M SURE THEY WENT, AND THEY REALLY TIGHTEN THEIR BELTS.

THANK YOU. JUST 3% THERE. BUT EVERYBODY'S GIVING A LITTLE BIT HERE TO TRY TO MAKE THIS PUSH.

AND SO FOR ME I'M LOOKING AT SCENARIOS. I CAN'T LOOK AT ANYTHING BELOW 5% RIGHT WHEN IT COMES TO THESE BARGAINING NON BARGAINING WHERE MY, MY DELTA IS A LITTLE BIT IS THIS STEP PLUS. AND I THINK IF ANYTHING WE NEED TO PARE THAT AND REALLY LOOK AT THAT.

IF IT'S NINE IT'S STILL AN INCREASE RIGHT. IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN.

SO IT'LL BE STEP PLUS TO NINE AND TRY TO FIGURE OUT WHERE THIS FLATTENING IS AND WHERE THIS ISSUE IS GOING TO COME WITH THE PARITY OF THESE RANKED OFFICERS. WE'RE STILL INVESTING, WE'RE STILL PUTTING CAPITAL OUTLAY IN THINGS THAT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT HAS COME FORTH THAT THEY NEED, THAT WE HAVE TO GET. BUT THEN AS WE GO FORWARD, THE OTHER REASON I LIKE THIS IS THAT IT HOLDS OUR MILLAGE HERE.

AND IF WE DID A 9% ON THAT, THAT WOULD ALSO DECREASE THAT SHORTFALL JUST A LITTLE BIT, I'M SURE BY LOOKING AT IT.

SO ANYWHERE FIVE, 6 OR 7 I'M OPEN FOR DEBATE ON IT.

I'M TO, IN MY HEART STOP ON ANYTHING INCREASE IN OUR MILLAGE.

I CAN TELL YOU THAT YOU'RE RIGHT. OUR SISTER CITIES AND OTHER ENTITIES ARE EITHER REMAINING THE SAME OR LOWERING.

AND I THINK THAT RIGHT NOW WITH PERHAPS AN ANTICIPATED CHALLENGING NEXT YEAR, WE PROBABLY DO NEED TO GET SOME THINGS ADDRESSED THAT IF WE DON'T, WE'RE GOING TO REALLY BE IN A BAD SHAPE NEXT YEAR WHEN IT COMES TO SOME OF THESE CAPITAL OUTLAYS AND FIND OURSELVES HAVING TO DO SOME DRASTIC THINGS HERE TO JUST GET EQUIPMENT AND GET THINGS OUT THERE THAT WE NEED TO MAINTAIN JUST THE ORDINARY SERVICE WE DO.

AND THAT'S THAT'S CONCERNING. SO, MISS MARSH, YOU DIDN'T RUN A SCENARIO ON THAT WITH A 9% AND A55.

DID YOU? IT'LL BE $149,559 LESS. YEAH. OKAY, OKAY.

149,150 150 GRAND. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WELL, SO SO I JUST FROM A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE, LIKE I SAID, 910. I'M NOT GOING TO SPLIT HAIRS THERE. MY CONCERN IS WHAT YOU BROUGHT UP, MR. CHESS. I DON'T KNOW WHERE WE ARE WITH THAT.

I JUST KNOW THAT WHEN WE WENT THROUGH THIS WHOLE THING IN THE LAST COUPLE OF MONTHS, THE THING THAT CAME UP THAT THAT WAS MENTIONED FROM THE DAIS AND FROM HERE WAS IT WASN'T REALLY NECESSARILY MONEY THAT WAS DRIVING MORALE.

IT WAS THE MORALE WAS DOWN BECAUSE OF THE LEADERSHIP.

AND WE'RE GETTING READY TO STEP INTO A POINT WHERE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A NEW CHIEF.

PERIOD. AND THAT NEW CHIEF, WHOEVER THAT PERSON IS, THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME ADJUSTMENT EITHER.

EITHER WAY, IT GOES, RIGHT? WHOEVER THAT THAT PERSON IS.

AND SO I'M, I'M, I'M CONCERNED THAT IF WE THROW A WHOLE BUNCH AT THIS WHEN IT COMES TO THE MONEY, ARE WE BACK AT THE SAME SITUATION THAT WE HAVE CHALLENGES IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT BECAUSE OF MORALE? AND THEY'RE NOT AGREEING WITH THE CURRENT WHOEVER THAT CHIEF IS, AND HOW ARE THEY GOING TO LAY OUT HOW THEY'RE GOING TO LEAD OUR MEN AND WOMEN IN LAW ENFORCEMENT? SO AND YOU COUPLE THAT IF WE HAVE THIS CLOSENESS OF THESE RANKS AND THE SALARIES, THAT'S GOING TO PUT MORE PRESSURE ON US, I THINK, AGAIN, TO TRY TO HOW DO WE FIGURE THAT OUT? SO I THINK WE GOT A LOT OF SCENARIOS. I'M GLAD WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IT.

I DON'T HAVE ALL THE ANSWERS. I'M JUST FROM MY RECOLLECTION, I KNOW WHAT WE TRIED TO DO AND I KNOW WHERE WE ARE NOW.

SO I JUST WANTED TO BRING THAT HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE UP.

THANK YOU. YES. AND WE HAVE TRIED SEVERAL YEARS TO IMPROVE THE STEP PROCESS AND IT'S OBVIOUSLY STILL A WORK IN PROGRESS. I AGREE WITH YOU.

BECAUSE IF THE, THE, THE BIG JUMP IS IN YEAR FOUR AND AND THAT'S WHAT IT'S BEEN SAID FROM THE PODIUM BY POLICE OFFICERS. AND SO I THINK THAT THE STEP WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE STEP PROGRAM AND THE PROCESS AND SEE HOW IT SEE IF IT REWARDS OUR, OUR POLICE OFFICERS ADEQUATELY.

[00:50:02]

AND ALSO, AS YOU SAID IT, WHATEVER THE MANAGEMENT IS CAN'T IT CANNOT BE IT CANNOT BE OUT OF, OUT OF SYNC WITH THE MANAGEMENT. AND ALSO, I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AND SEE IF, IF THERE'S ANY IT'S A BALANCE, BUT. AND I JUST BRING THIS UP. IS THERE ANY. IS IT ADMINISTRATION? IS THE POLICE DEPARTMENT ADMINISTRATIVE HEAVY? IN OTHER WORDS, ARE THERE ARE THERE. THE BALANCE HAS TO BE LOOKED AT IN TERMS OF HOW MUCH THERE IS IN MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION, AND HOW MUCH POLICING IS ACTUALLY DONE OUT AND ABOUT IN THE COMMUNITY.

AND I KNOW THAT THAT'S WE'RE TRYING TO DEAL WITH THE BUDGET RIGHT NOW, BUT I'M JUST SAYING THAT IS AND I ALSO THINK WE NEED TO LOOK, I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER BRODERICK IN THE SENSE I'M PEOPLE KNOW ME.

I NEVER WANT TO ADD STAFF. SO THAT'S I'M GOING TO PUT THAT RIGHT OUT THERE.

I'M ALWAYS FOR LET'S DEAL WITH WHAT WE NEED TO DEAL WITH.

AND AND SOMETIMES LEAN MAKES US THAT MAKES US BETTER SOMETIMES.

AND BUT HAVING SAID ALL THAT, I REALLY HIRING.

IS IT EIGHT NEW EMPLOYEES? IS THAT RIGHT? EIGHT OR CREATING NEW EIGHT.

NEW POSITIONS. IS THAT RIGHT? AND IS AND I HAD A CONVERSATION WITH MR. CHESS ABOUT IT, AND I TOLD HIM I, YOU KNOW, THAT I REALLY OBJECTED TO ADDING THESE EMPLOYEES, JUST ESPECIALLY IN ADMINISTRATION. AND BECAUSE I THINK IT INCLUDES IN MISTER CHESS OFFICE, A DEPUTY CITY MANAGER AND A THE REAL ESTATE AND THE OUTWARD OUTREACH PERSON AND THE FRONT DESK PERSON.

AND I'M NOT QUARRELING THAT THOSE ALL COULDN'T BE NEEDED AND NECESSARY, BUT IN HARD TIMES, WE MIGHT NEED TO DOUBLE UP ON SOME OF THOSE. AND AND HE AND I TALKED ABOUT THAT, AND SO WE CAN'T HAVE EVERYTHING WE WANT WITH THIS BUDGET. WE KNOW WE CAN HAVE SOME.

SOMETHING'S GOING TO HAVE TO GIVE. WE KNOW WE CAN HAVE OUR.

HER. SO I I DON'T WANT TO GET US TO A INCREASED COMPLEMENT OF STAFF, AND THEN IT'S HARDER TO CUT. BELIEVE ME, IT'S HARDER TO CUT THAN NOT HIRING IT IN THE FIRST PLACE.

I WILL JUST TELL YOU THAT. AND AND I ALSO, I STUDIED THESE STEP, THESE SALARIES AND THESE COMPARISONS TO PORT SAINT LUCIE. AND I SEE THAT WE'RE GENERALLY THREE AND $4,000 BEHIND.

GENERALLY. GENERALLY. AND AND WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THOSE JURISDICTIONS ARE GOING TO DO RIGHT NOW AND THIS YEAR.

BUT YOU KEEP HEARING THE RUMORS OF THE INCREASES THAT THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT IS GOING TO GET AND THE INCREASES THAT PORT SAINT LUCIE IS GOING TO GET.

AND SO I HEARKEN BACK TO WHAT COMMISSIONER TAYLOR SAID ABOUT LET'S FIX IT ONCE AND FOR ALL.

AND HONESTLY, WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO DO THAT. FIX IT FOR ONCE AND FOR ALL.

AND THEN THE OTHER JURISDICTIONS GO UP. RIGHT.

AND THEN WE'RE LIKE, BACK IN THE SAME BOAT. WE'RE BACK IN THE SAME BOAT.

SO ALL I'M SAYING TO THIS COMMISSION IS YOU'RE DIFFERENT.

DIFFERENT ONES OF US ARE SAYING, THIS IS FOR ME, AND THIS IS WHAT I REALLY BELIEVE IN.

AND, AND AND ALL OF THOSE THINGS MAKE SENSE, EXCEPT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE SOME PAINFUL DECISIONS.

WE DON'T HAVE GOOD CHOICES HERE, SO WE JUST HAVE TO DECIDE WHERE WE WANT TO, WHERE THE PAIN IS GOING TO BE.

AND. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR, YOU HAVEN'T SAID ANYTHING YET.

YOU'VE BEEN POLITE AND LISTENING, TAKING IT ALL IN.

YEAH. WELL, FIRST OFF, THANK YOU, JOHN AND YOUR TEAM AND ALL THE DEPARTMENT HEADS.

I KNOW THIS WAS A LOT OF WORK AND A SHORT AMOUNT OF TIME TO GET THESE OPTIONS TOGETHER FOR US IN LESS THAN A WEEK, AND I REALLY APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK THAT WENT INTO IT.

I LOVE HAVING THE OPTIONS. I THINK THAT'S A GREAT A GREAT WAY TO DO IT.

OR WE CAN KIND OF LOOK AT PROS AND CONS AND AND FIGURE OUT WHAT'S BEST.

THAT BEING SAID, OPTION FIVE WAS WHERE I WAS GRAVITATING TOWARDS AS WELL.

I'M HAPPY TO SEE YOUR CITY MANAGER WAS ON THE SAME PAGE.

HOWEVER, I THINK I ALSO TAKE SOME NOTE FROM COMMISSIONER BRODERICK ABOUT THE ADDITION OF NEW EMPLOYEES.

SO I THINK THERE'S SOME OPPORTUNITY THERE WHERE I THINK IF WE CAN REDUCE THAT, I KNOW THERE'S A AND JUST KIND OF SEE WHERE WE CAN USE THAT TO SUPPLEMENT THAT 1.245 TO GET THAT A LITTLE BIT LOWER WHILE MAINTAINING THE 5% AND FIVE AND TEN.

[00:55:02]

I KNOW I SPOKE WITH OUR CITY CLERK ABOUT THE LEASING OFF THE LEASING MANAGER.

I KIND OF. I KNOW IT'S NEEDED. I KNOW WE NEED TO REWORK ALL THAT.

I KNOW THAT'S A HUGE THING. WE TALKED ABOUT IT IN STRATEGIC PLANNING.

BUT I KIND OF LOOK AT THAT AS ONCE IT'S DONE, IT'S KIND OF DONE.

ONCE THE SYSTEMS ARE IN PLACE, ONCE WE'VE GOT A EVEN A TEMPLATE OR OR SOMETHING TO MANAGE AND GET ALL THAT CLEANED UP.

I THINK WE CAN KIND OF MAINTAIN IT ON OUR OWN FROM THERE.

IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE EVEN SAID SHE HAS THE ABILITY TO DO THAT AS A TEAM, A TEAM EFFORT.

SO I WOULD LOOK AT THAT EVEN, LIKE WE BRING IN A, IF NECESSARY, A CONSULTANT, A ONE TIME THING.

GET IT ALL DONE. READY TO GO. AND THEN THE CLERK'S OFFICE IS MAINTAINING MOVING FORWARD.

I DON'T THINK IT'S IN THIS BUDGET. I DON'T THINK IT'S NECESSARY TO HAVE A FULL TIME STAFF PERSON TO MAINTAIN IT, I THINK, AND THAT COULD BE COMPLETELY OFF ON THAT, BUT THAT'S HOW I'M LOOKING AT IT.

THE. I'M JUST FLAT OUT SAYING I'M NOT INTERESTED IN ADDING A ANY MORE PEOPLE TO THE IT DEPARTMENT.

I THINK WE'RE I JUST DON'T THINK IN THIS BUDGET WE CAN DO THAT.

I THE COMMUNITY OUTREACH COORDINATOR, I THINK IS A FUN THING WHEN YOU HAVE A LOT OF MONEY TO SPEND.

BUT I DON'T THINK THAT'S SOMETHING NECESSARY THAT WE COULD USE AT THIS POINT.

AND JUST TRYING TO GET THOSE DECISIONS OUT THERE AND JUST SAY WHAT I'M THINKING.

A COUPLE OF I TRIED TO WRITE DOWN AS FAST AS YOU WERE READING THEM. BUT ANYWAY, I THINK IF WE GO WITH OPTION FIVE AND ARE ABLE TO REDUCE NEW EMPLOYEES TO KIND OF REDUCE THAT 1.245 FUND BALANCE APPROPRIATION, I THINK WE CAN GET TO SOMEWHERE WE CAN BE HAPPY WITH. I'M REALLY IMPRESSED WITH THE 3% REDUCTION IN OPERATING.

I KNOW THAT'S A DIFFICULT THING TO DO. AND JUST THE REALITY OF WHERE WE ARE, AND I APPRECIATE EVERYBODY'S WORK ON THAT. BUT THAT WOULD BE MY PROPOSAL OR MY MY OPINION ON MOVING FORWARD IS OPTION FIVE WITH REDUCTION IN THE NEW EMPLOYEES AND WHATEVER, THAT LOOKS LIKE A TOTAL FUND BALANCE.

BUT THANKS AGAIN TO EVERYBODY. AND I THINK THERE'S WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THE STEP PROGRAM FOR AT LEAST A YEAR, AND I WAS FOLLOWING ALL THAT LAST YEAR. I THINK THERE'S DEFINITELY SOME OPPORTUNITIES TO RE CONFIGURE.

AND I KNOW THE UNION HAS SOME OPTIONS AS WELL THAT THEY'D LIKE TO RECONFIGURE AS WELL.

BUT IF THEY TAKE THAT STEP PLUS THE 10% AND LOOK AT THAT AS A TOTAL FUNDING, I THINK THEY CAN RECONFIGURE SOME THINGS AND WORK SOME THINGS AROUND IN THE STEP PROGRAM TO MAKE IT MORE BENEFICIAL AND MORE EFFECTIVE IN KEEPING OUR OFFICERS EMPLOYED PAST THAT THREE FOUR YEAR MARK.

I WAS ALSO HOPEFUL. AND MAYBE ONCE WE HAVE A NEW PERMANENT CHIEF IN THAT, THERE'S JUST LOOKING THROUGH THE THE SALARY SPREADSHEET THAT WE GOT OF ALL EMPLOYEES THAT THERE MIGHT BE SOME OPPORTUNITY TO KIND OF SHIFT SOME POSITIONS AROUND AT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT THAT WE'RE KIND OF FOCUSED ON SOME THINGS THAT WERE BEING DONE IN THE PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATION THAT THERE MIGHT BE OPPORTUNITIES TO RECONFIGURE THAT.

I KNOW THAT'S PROBABLY NOT SOMETHING CHIEF RADEL WANTS TO TAKE ON IS HE'S NOT GOING TO BE THERE FOREVER.

BUT I COULD JUST LOOKING AT A VERY HIGH LEVEL.

I THINK THERE'S SOME OPPORTUNITIES FOR THAT. LIKE THERE'S A I'M NOT GOING TO I'M NOT GOING TO POINT OUT WHAT I, WHAT I SAW, BUT IT'S IN THERE. I DON'T WANT TO CALL ANYBODY OUT OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

I JUST THINK THERE'S SOME REALIGNMENT OF PRIORITIES WE COULD DO TO GET MORE EFFECT, YOU KNOW, MORE BANG FOR OUR BUCK, I GUESS, AT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. BUT ANYWAY, I'M STARTING TO RAMBLE HERE, SO I'M GOING TO PIPE DOWN, BUT THAT'S WHERE I'M AT.

I THINK I'M I'M HAPPY WITH THIS. I'M NOT ON BOARD WITH ANY TYPE OF RAISING THE MILLAGE RATE.

SO I THINK OPTION FIVE WITH SOME REDUCTION IN THE NEW EMPLOYEES.

AND I'D BE PRETTY HAPPY WITH IT. I MEAN, I GOT A COUPLE A COUPLE OF FOLLOW UP COMMENTS.

I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER TAYLOR. I THINK I STATED AT THE OUTSET THAT ADDING NEW EMPLOYEES WITH THE EXPECTATION THAT OUR REVENUES ARE GOING TO DECREASE TO ME IS FOOLHARDY. YEAH. SO FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, I WOULD ELIMINATE THAT LINE ITEM IN ITS ENTIRETY.

I HAVE DISCUSSED WITH MISS COX THE PROSPECT OF SHIFTING THE REAL ESTATE ANALYSIS WORK TO THEIR OFFICE,

[01:00:04]

BECAUSE THEY'VE GOT STAFF TO BE ABLE TO PUNCH UP.

THESE SPREADSHEETS, I THINK HAS A LOT OF BENEFIT.

I DO BELIEVE WHEN IT COMES TO MAKING REAL ESTATE DECISIONS, THAT THIS BODY IS MORE THAN CAPABLE OF HANDLING THAT, ESPECIALLY IF WE ACCUMULATE SOME MARKET DATA, ETC..

BUT THE CORE OF THIS STARTS WITH THE INFORMATION FLOW THAT WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WE OWN, WHAT WE'RE GENERATING FOR REVENUE, WHAT BUILDINGS ARE ZERO REVENUE GENERATION, AND ALL OF THE PARADOXES THAT GO ALONG WITH THAT.

I'VE GOT A STACK OF FILES IN MY OFFICE OVER ON DELAWARE AVE.

THAT'S A THIRD OF MY CREDENZA OF REAL ESTATE LEASES THAT THE CITY IS INVOLVED WITH, AND I CAN BE HIGHLY CRITICAL OF THEM, BUT I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE THAT. YOU'VE HEARD ME GET ON THIS SOAPBOX BEFORE.

I BELIEVE THAT MRS. COX HAS THE THE BUSINESS ACUMEN IN HER POSITION, ITS VALUE ADDED.

HER PAST BUSINESS EXPERIENCE WOULD BE VERY VALUABLE IN THIS UNDERTAKING, AND HAS A STAFF CAPABILITY TO INPUT ALL THIS DATA AND CREATE THAT BASELINE PIECE OF INFORMATION THAT WE NEED. AND THEN ULTIMATELY, THIS BODY CAN MAKE THE DECISIONS AS TO WHAT WE SHOULD BE DETERMINING FOR MARKET VALUE FOR OUR ASSETS, ETC. MOVING FORWARD. SO I AGREE WITH YOU COMPLETELY.

WE CAN KEEP THAT IN-HOUSE. WE HAVE THE CAPABILITY TO DO IT.

AND MISS COX HAS INDICATED THAT SHE HAS THE STAFF TIME AVAILABILITY TO BE ABLE TO TO TAKE THIS ON.

SO WE ELIMINATE THREE QUARTERS OF $1 MILLION IN NEW EMPLOYEE EXPENSE.

MY NEXT CONCERN, THOUGH, IS WITH ASKING ALL THE OTHER DEPARTMENTS TO TAKE A 3% REDUCTION IN OPERATING EXPENDITURES, AND WE'RE LOSING THREE QUARTERS OF $1 MILLION IN CAPITAL OUTLAY.

WE CAN'T CONTINUE TO KICK THAT CAN DOWN THE ROAD.

WE JUST CAN'T. AND. FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, I COME BACK TO THE 5% NON BARGAINING 5% BARGAINING. ORIGINALLY WE WERE AT STEP PLUS FIVE FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

I'M STILL THERE. BECAUSE THAT ADDITIONAL 5% THAT'S IN THIS ANALYSIS.

WHAT DID YOU INDICATE. 3% IS ABOUT ONE AND A QUARTER 125,000.

SO THAT'S THREE QUARTERS OF $1 MILLION IN ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR POLICE DEPARTMENT SALARIES ALONE IN THIS ANALYSIS.

I'M NOT ADVOCATING FOR THAT. SO YOU TAKE OUT THREE QUARTERS OF A MILLION AND NEW EMPLOYEES, SOME OF CHANGE IN A DIFFERENCE OF 10% TO SOME LOWER NUMBER AT THE COST FACTOR OF $125,000 PER PERCENTAGE POINT.

WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO CLOSE THAT GAP RAPIDLY, BUT THAT STILL DOESN'T FIX OUR CAPITAL OUTLAY ISSUE, WHICH AT SOME POINT IN TIME THAT'S GOING TO COME HOME TO ROOST.

I ACTUALLY THINK IT'S HERE RIGHT NOW. AND WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO WHEN PUBLIC WORKS COMES TO US AND SAYS, WE NEED A TRUCK? WE NEED A WE NEED ANOTHER TRASH TRUCK.

WE NEED THIS, WE NEED THAT. AND WE DON'T HAVE ANY MONEY OR ANY CAPABILITY TO FUND THAT.

I BELIEVE TAKING MONEY OUT OF OUR RESERVES, OUR RAINY DAY FUND TO FUND OPERATING COSTS IS A TRAGIC MISTAKE.

YOU DON'T RUN A BUSINESS BY BURNING THROUGH RESERVES AS LINE ITEM EXPENDITURES.

YOU JUST DON'T RUN A BUSINESS THAT WAY. SO THREE QUARTERS OF A MILLION, A SAVINGS IN THE STEP OR IN THE 10% AREA IN THE POLICE INCREASES GETS US CLOSE TO SHORTENING THIS UP TO ZERO.

BUT THAT STILL DOESN'T ADDRESS OUR CAPITAL OUTLAY. I'M NOT SURE HOW THAT COMES INTO PLAY.

DO YOU HAVE A COPY OF ACTUALLY OF THE ORIGINAL BUDGET THAT YOU HAD PROPOSED LAST WEEK? COMMISSIONER. ROGER, CAN I ASK YOU ON. ON, LET'S SAY OPTION FIVE, BECAUSE WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT.

IT SAYS 4.1 MILLION ON CAPITAL OUTLAY. RIGHT.

THAT THAT DOES ADD IN ALL THE CAPITAL EXCEPT THAT ONE POLICE THAT WE TOOK OUT.

AND WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THAT OUT ANYWAY BECAUSE IT'S ONLY IT HAS TO BE FUNDED SEPTEMBER OF 2026, WHICH IS THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR. OKAY. AND SO WE KNOW WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SAVINGS ON PERSONNEL COSTS.

CLEARLY WE'RE 20 OR 20 OFFICERS SHORT. THAT'S A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF UNLESS SOMETHING MIRACULOUSLY HAPPENED AND FOR THE ONE TIME WE'LL BE FULLY FUNDED BASED ON GOING TO HAPPEN. AND SO WE USUALLY ALWAYS THROUGHOUT THE FISCAL YEAR WHEN YOU, IF YOU RECALL, POLICE WILL COME BEFORE YOU WITH SOMETIMES WE'LL HAVE SOME LARGE PURCHASES THAT WE APPROVE THAT YOU ALL COME BEFORE YOU FOR APPROVAL.

LARGE CAPITAL PURCHASES THAT THEY NEED. WELL, WE KNOW THE WE DON'T BUDGET FOR THEM IN THE BUDGET BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE MONEY UP FRONT. ALL OF IT'S IN PERSONNEL. SO AT THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR, WHENEVER THEY BRING THAT BEFORE YOU, I'LL SAY IT'S APPROVED BECAUSE WE KNOW WE'RE GOING TO SAVE MONEY.

WE'VE GOT MONEY UP IN IN PERSONNEL COSTS THAT CAN PAY FOR THOSE EXPENDITURES.

[01:05:02]

SO THEY MAY HAVE A $250,000 CAPITAL EXPENSE THAT COMES BEFORE YOU THAT THEY NEED.

AND I'LL GIVE AN APPROVAL ON THAT BASED ON KNOWING THAT WE'VE HAD TO FUND THOSE POSITIONS.

AND SO WE KNOW THEY'RE VACANT, THEY'RE GOING TO BE VACANT.

AND SO THE MONIES THAT SAVED THERE AND I GET IT.

I FOLLOWED THAT CLOSELY. IT'S SOMETHING I'VE ASKED YOU ABOUT ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS.

IS THIS VACANCY FACTOR AND WHERE WHERE ARE THOSE FUNDS GOING INTO THE ETHER OR, OR BEING DEPLOYED SOMEPLACE ELSE? THERE'S ANOTHER. MISS COX, DID YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY? I KNOW THIS IS INFORMATION WE JUST RECEIVED FRIDAY, RELATIVE TO THE FUNDING REQUEST WE SUBMITTED TO CONGRESS AND PASSED RELATIVE TO.

HAVE WE EXPENDED THOSE FUNDS ALREADY? AND LET ME I'M SURE THE REST OF THE COMMISSION IS NOT AWARE OF THIS AS OF YET.

BUT CONGRESSMAN MASSE WAS ABLE TO SECURE FOR US THROUGH THE FEDERAL BUDGET WE HAD DONE.

WE HAD DONE OUR SUBMISSION TO HIM OF MULTIPLE DEPARTMENTS REQUESTS.

WHERE THAT ENDED UP LANDING IS. CONGRESSMAN MASSE WAS ABLE TO SECURE FOR US $463,000 WORTH OF CAPITAL EXPENDITURES SPECIFICALLY DEDICATED TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. WHAT WE DON'T KNOW IS IF WE'VE ALREADY GONE AHEAD AND EXPENDED SOME OF THOSE ITEMS, BECAUSE THE GRANT OR THE EARMARK IS VERY SPECIFIC TO GO TO THE ITEMS WE SUBMITTED, WE SUBMITTED THOSE MONTHS AGO SO THAT WE HAVE MAY HAVE FUNDED AND PAID FOR THOSE ALREADY.

IF WE HAVEN'T PAID FOR THEM YET, WE COULD THEN USE THE MONEY COMING FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO TO UTILIZE THAT.

I THINK ONE OF THEM WAS FOR WEAPONS. RIGHT. AND ALL OF THOSE ARE THEY ARE OUTLINED IN THEIR CAPITAL.

BUT WHAT WE DID, WE DID. I WAS NOT AWARE OF THE ALLOCATION UNTIL AFTER WE'D ALREADY CREATED THIS, AS A MATTER OF FACT, JUST ON THURSDAY. AND SO THEY HAD ALREADY BEEN PUSHED OUT ON THE CAPITAL OUTLAY FOR NEXT FISCAL YEAR.

HOWEVER, WE'VE GOT THAT GRANT THAT WE DID THAT ALLOCATION AND THERE'S A MATCH.

SO IT'S 480 I THINK FOR 82. AND WE HAD NO. YEAH, 4240.

AND WE HAVE A MATCH 200. WE HAVE TO MATCH THE 241,000.

SO WE'RE GOING TO GET TO 41. AND THERE'S A MATCH OF $241,000.

SO POTENTIALLY WE'LL BE ABLE TO USE SOME OF THESE FUNDS TO FUND.

I GOT TO LEAVE THAT UP TO YOU GUYS BECAUSE THAT'S BEYOND MY PAY GRADE TO FIGURE OUT HOW ALL THAT WORKS. BUT HAVING HAD SAID THAT, SO WHAT YOU'RE INDICATING IS THAT THE CAPITAL EXPENDITURES, EXCLUDING WHAT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, THAT ONE ISSUE THAT YOU'RE REFERENCING WERE FULLY FUNDED.

CORRECT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT THEN I'M SATISFIED WITH THAT.

SO THAT SOLVES THAT PROBLEM. SO WE COME BACK TO NOW DEALING WITH THE THE OPTION FIVE ELIMINATING NEW POSITIONS.

REDUCING THE PERCENTAGE. PLUS THE STEP GOING TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO SOME OTHER PERCENTAGE.

BE IT 5%, SIX, SEVEN, EIGHT, WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE.

KEEPING IN MIND IS $125,000 SAVINGS FOR EACH POINT.

THAT'S WHERE I'M COMING DOWN ON THIS. SO OUR CAPITALISM IS INTACT.

I'M NOT HAPPY ABOUT OUR OTHER DEPARTMENTS TAKING A 3% HAIRCUT, BECAUSE I HAVE NO CLUE WHAT NET EFFECT THAT'S GOING TO HAVE ON THEIR OPERATIONS, BUT WE CAN'T GET IT ALL HERE. WE JUST SIMPLY CAN'T.

SOMEWHERE THERE'S GOING TO BE PAIN. SO I'M SAYING THE NEW POSITIONS ARE JETTISONED.

OUR CAPITAL OUTLAY IS FINE. OPERATING EXPENSE SIDE I'M CONCERNED ABOUT.

BUT WE'VE GOT TO REDUCE THE 10% TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT BECAUSE WE AREN'T GIVEN THE OTHER DEPARTMENT NON BARGAINING AND BARGAINING.

FIVE. RIGHT. THAT'S WHERE I'M COMING DOWN ON THIS.

THAT TO ME. THAT TO ME IS THE THE PATH TO SOLUTION HERE.

MADAM MAYOR. YES, SIR. I'M SITTING HERE LISTENING TO EVERYTHING, AND I AM SITTING HERE ABSOLUTELY DUMBFOUNDED RIGHT NOW BECAUSE I'M HEARING THINGS FOR THE FIRST TIME I HAVEN'T HEARD IN TWO YEARS.

I ALREADY MENTIONED IT. I'VE BEEN HEARING FOR TWO YEARS HOW MUCH WE NEED TO GET SOMEBODY TO LOOK INTO ALL THE VACANT PROPERTY, ALL THE LEASING, EVERYTHING WE HAVE THAT WE'RE LOSING MONEY ON IN THE CITY.

WE'VE BEEN HEARING ABOUT IT. I GET A CITY MANAGER TO COME IN AND SUGGEST WE HIRE SOMEBODY TO GIVE US THAT NUMBER.

AT NO TIME PRIOR TO THIS BUDGET. AS I'M SITTING IN THIS SEAT, HAVE I EVER HEARD THAT WE PUT IT IN ANOTHER DEPARTMENT. HAVE THAT PERSON START LOOKING AT STUFF.

I NEVER HEARD BRINGING IN A CONSULTANT. I NEVER HEARD ANY OF THAT STUFF.

NONE OF IT. AND THAT'S FOR TWO YEARS. AND IF THAT WAS THE CASE, WE SHOULD HAVE DONE IT TWO YEARS AGO.

AND WE COULD HAVE HAD THE ANSWERS THAT WE NEED RIGHT NOW.

[01:10:01]

TALKING ABOUT BUDGET. SO I'M KIND OF DUMB. I'M KIND OF DUMBFOUNDED ALL OF A SUDDEN THAT A NEW CITY MANAGER COMES IN, ASKED FOR THIS POSITION, WHICH WE COULD LIMIT THE COST OF THE POSITION.

WE COULD LIMIT THE TERMS OF THE POSITION. BUT NOW WE DON'T NEED IT.

AFTER FOR TWO YEARS, WE NEED TO FIGURE THIS PROBLEM OUT.

BUT NOW WE DON'T NEED IT. WE CAN PUT IT IN ANOTHER DEPARTMENT OR HAVE SOMEBODY ELSE DO IT.

BUT FOR TWO YEARS WE'VE BEEN CRYING ABOUT IT.

AND NOT ONE TIME DID I HEAR. WELL, LET'S HAVE MISS COX OR LET'S HAVE SOMEBODY ELSE DO IT.

I DON'T CARE ABOUT THE OTHER EIGHT NEW HIRES.

I DON'T CARE. BUT FOR US TO SIT HERE AND DON'T THINK THAT ISN'T IMPORTANT.

THAT IS AN IMPORTANT HIRE WHICH WE CAN PUT OUT.

WE CAN PUT A PRICE ON IT. WE CAN DO WHATEVER.

AND IT WOULD NOT AFFECT THIS BUDGET THAT MUCH.

9%, 1% OR WHATEVER. WE CAN PUT THAT IN AND WHATEVER WE PAY, THAT PERSON IS GOING TO BENEFIT EVERYBODY IN THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO GENERATE US REVENUE. SO I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHY ALL OF A SUDDEN, NOW THAT I DIDN'T HEAR ALL THIS STUFF TWO YEARS AGO OR EARLIER THIS YEAR OR ANYTIME. SO I HAVE A VERY I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT.

I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT, THAT IT COMES OUT NOW, BUT IT HASN'T COME OUT IN IN ANY OTHER TIME BUT TONIGHT.

SO I'LL JUST BE HONEST WITH YOU. SO IF THE, IF THE, IF THE VOTE IS ONE FIVE OR HOWEVER YOU DO IT, AND AND ELIMINATE ALL NEW POSITIONS, ESPECIALLY THE ONE THAT IS CRUCIAL TO US TRYING TO FIND MORE MONEY FOR OUR BUDGET.

MY VOTE IS GOING TO BE A NO. I'M JUST. AND I DON'T MIND STANDING ON ON BY MYSELF WITH A NO.

BUT THAT'S THAT'S WHAT I'M GOING TO DO BECAUSE IT'S IS DUMBFOUNDED TO ME THAT THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I'M EVER HEARING ABOUT ANOTHER DEPARTMENT CAN DO IT, OR WE CAN WE CAN SAVE MONEY DOING THIS WAY.

WE COULD HAVE DONE THAT TWO YEARS AGO. WE COULD HAVE DONE THAT LAST YEAR BUDGET OR THE BUDGET BEFORE THAT BECAUSE IT WAS A PROBLEM THEN.

AND HAVE WE DONE IT TWO YEARS AGO? WE MIGHT NOT HAVE HAD TO TALK ABOUT IT TONIGHT, BECAUSE WE COULD HAVE FOUND SOME MONEY AND FOUND SOME WAYS TO MAKE OUR PROPERTIES EARN MONEY. SO THAT'S AN ISSUE FOR ME. AND IF THAT'S THE WAY WE'RE GOING, I CAN LET EVERYBODY KNOW IT'S GOING TO BE A NO VOTE ON ON ON THAT.

IF YOU'RE TRYING TO ELIMINATE ALL EIGHT POSITIONS BECAUSE WE HAVE WE HAVE A DUTY TO THE TAXPAYERS.

AND IF WE HAVE TO HIRE SOMEBODY FOR 150, 125,000, $80,000, WHATEVER IT IS TO COME IN AND TELL US HOW TO MAXIMIZE THOSE STACK OF PAPERS YOU TALK ABOUT HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT IN EVERY OTHER, EVERY OTHER PROBLEM WITH OUR PROPERTY AND VACANT LANDS AND COMMERCIAL LEASES AND EVERYTHING THAT WE'VE BEEN DEALING WITH FOR THE LAST TWO AND SOME YEARS.

IF, IF NOW ALL OF A SUDDEN IT'S AN EASY FIX. I HAVE A PROBLEM.

WHY IS IT EASY FIX NOW? SO IF THAT'S WHERE WE'RE GOING AND YOU'RE GOING TO ELIMINATE ALL EIGHT POSITIONS, INCLUDING THAT POSITION, IT'S A NO FOR ME BECAUSE NOW I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHY ALL OF A SUDDEN NOW, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT IMPORTANT. BUT FOR THE LAST 2 OR 3 YEARS, IT'S BEEN SO IMPORTANT THAT WE GET THIS, THIS, THIS UNDER CONTROL. MADAM MAYOR. YES, SIR.

SO. I'M GOING TO PICK UP WHERE COMMISSIONER GAINES LEFT OFF, BECAUSE WE SAID IN THAT MEETING AND I SAT NEXT TO MY COLLEAGUE AND HE VERY DESCRIPTIVELY DESCRIBED WHAT WE NEEDED IN THE PERSON, AND THAT HE FELT THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE THAT EXPERTISE IN CITY HALL TO DO THE TYPE OF EVALUATION DEALING WITH COMMERCIAL LEASES THAT WE ARE INVOLVED WITH, EVEN DRAFTING, ETC.. AND SO I'M TOO I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THAT.

AND SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT NEW EMPLOYEES, THERE WERE A NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES.

MISS MORRIS MENTIONED TO US THAT WILL BE ELIMINATED FROM THIS, NOT JUST FROM THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE, BUT AN ENGINEER WOULD BE LIMITED, WILL BE CUT.

I THINK TWO PEOPLE FROM THE POLICE DEPARTMENT IN THAT PERSONNEL THAT WOULD BE CUT.

AND SO I TWO AND I KNOW THERE WAS A NETWORK MANAGER IN IT, ETC..

SO ALL OF THAT, EVEN ON TOP OF A 3% REDUCTION THAT ALL OF THE DEPARTMENTS, INCLUDING THE POLICE, ENGINEERING AND EVERYBODY WENT IN AND REDUCED BY 3%.

AND SO I'M OKAY WITH US GOING THROUGH AND MAKING TOUGH DECISIONS.

I'M PERFECTLY FINE. I JUST WANT US TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE RAMIFICATIONS ARE.

AND I TOO AM CONCERNED BECAUSE, COMMISSIONER BRODERICK, YOU MADE A VERY COMPELLING ARGUMENT ABOUT WHAT WE NEEDED, AND I I'M NOT A COMMERCIAL REALTOR PERSON. I DON'T KNOW THAT STUFF.

I BUT YOU MADE IT VERY COMPELLING THAT WE NEEDED SOMEONE THAT UNDERSTOOD ASSET VALUATION, MARKET,

[01:15:05]

HOW TO PUT CONTRACTS TOGETHER TO DO THAT, TO BASICALLY BE THE ASSET MANAGER AND ALSO DEALING WITH CAPITAL DEPRECIATION WHEN IT COMES TO ALL OF THE ASSETS THAT WE HAVE. SO NOW I'M I TOO AM CONCERNED THAT IT'S MERE BEYOND JUST TAKING INVENTORY AND PUTTING STUFF ON A SPREADSHEET.

AND AND NOW WE'VE GOT A DEPARTMENT THAT IS, IS IS HIGHLY CAPABLE IN DOING WHAT THEY'RE DOING.

NOW THAT WILL BE BASICALLY ASSET MANAGERS. AND AND SO I TOO AM CONCERNED WITH THAT.

AND NOW WE COULD SEE A REALLOCATION AND CONSULTANTS COME IN TO HELP US WITH THAT.

THAT'S A DIFFERENT STORY. OBVIOUSLY THAT'S AN EXPENSE RIGHT.

SO I, I'M CONCERNED WITH THAT. WHERE I DO AGREE WITH YOU WITH IS THE STEP PLUS SOME PERCENT.

I THINK THAT'S THAT'S OUR NEXT CONVERSATION. WHAT DOES THAT NUMBER LOOK LIKE? BECAUSE AGAIN, A NORM WHAT WE DID HISTORICALLY LAST YEAR.

AND THEN THE MADAM MAYOR, AS YOU SAID, THE THE CULTURAL CHALLENGE THAT WE ARE CREATING FOR OURSELVES BECAUSE LAST YEAR WE GAVE 9% PLUS A STEP. AND WHILE WE GAVE ALL THE REST OF THE THE CITY STAFF 5%.

AND SO POLICE ARE VERY VALUABLE TO US. WE ARE TRYING TO GET THAT PARITY RIGHT SO THAT WE WON'T LOSE.

PARTICULARLY AFTER THAT YEAR, FOR WE WERE LOSING OFFICERS GOING DOWN BECAUSE OF THAT.

WE PUT THAT IN PLACE TO TRY TO ADDRESS THAT. SO YEAH, WE'RE GOING TO MAKE SOME TOUGH DECISIONS.

BUT I CAN TELL YOU THIS, THIS IF WE'RE GOING TO GO LINE BY LINE ON THE NEW EMPLOYEES, WHICH I'VE NOT HEARD, THIS IS JUST A TOTAL ELIMINATION OF QUARTER OF A MILLION.

I'M ASSUMING THEN THAT THAT WOULD ROLL BACK AND GIVE US MORE MONEY.

IN WHAT ASPECT THEN IT WOULD, IT WOULD GO TOWARD THE OPERATING OR CAPITAL OR SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE.

WELL, IT WOULD BE IF WE WERE TO ELIMINATE ALL.

THE FIRST AREA TO ADDRESS WOULD BE THE OPERATING EXPENDITURE, ADDING THAT 496 BACK IN.

OKAY. I'M AT 464 AND THE REMAINING WILL GO TO THE CAPITAL SHORTAGE.

BUT AGAIN WE HAVE ADDRESS THAT 767 WE CAN. I'VE ALREADY TOTALLY ELIMINATED THAT.

I WONDER IF THAT'S TAKEN CARE OF. IF I MAY ON THAT SUGGEST.

YES. EXCUSE ME. AND THAT'S 767. THE ONLY ONE I WILL NOT ELIMINATE IS OUR CITY ENGINEER, BECAUSE THAT IS SITTING RIGHT THERE.

THAT IS HIS POSITION. AND I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE ELIMINATING THE CITY ENGINEER POSITION.

AND MAYBE A REMEDY FOR ME, FOR DIRECTOR OF REAL PROPERTY AND ASSET MANAGEMENT THAT I AM WOULD LIKE TO HIRE THE DEPUTY CITY MANAGER, WHICH IS ALREADY BUDGETED. PERHAPS I COULD BRING THAT PERSON WITH THAT SKILL SET AND DO THAT WORK. BECAUSE MY CONCERN IS THAT AS THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF OPERA, I'M GOING TO BE INVOLVED WITH THESE DEALS. I HAVE A STRONG BUSINESS BACKGROUND, CONTRACTS, MANAGEMENT, ALL THAT. BUT TO HAVE SOMEONE AS A DCM TO COME ON THE ADMINISTRATIVE SIDE, THEY CAN HANDLE THAT WORK AS WELL.

SO THAT I FEEL IS A COMPROMISE FOR ME AND IT STILL WORKS.

SO WE CAN ELIMINATE ALL THE POSITIONS. BUT I NEED OUR CITY ENGINEER AND THE DEPUTY CITY MANAGER.

IF I CAN JUST BRING THAT ONE POSITION ON. I CAN DEAL WITH THAT INTO THE OTHER, THE OTHER POSITION.

I'M FINE WITH THAT. SO IF THAT'S WORKABLE, DOABLE FOR YOU.

SO WHAT? I MAY HEAR YOU, MADAM MAYOR, IF YOU GET A THE DEPUTY CITY MANAGER, THAT'S PART OF THE CRITERIA THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR SOMEONE THAT HAS THAT EXPERIENCE DEALING WITH THAT IN THE CITY ENGINEER, OF COURSE.

OKAY. SO WE ELIMINATE SEVEN POSITIONS THAT I CAN REQUEST.

THAT'D BE FINE. BUT I JUST HAVE TO QUESTION BECAUSE THE POLICE I KNOW WE'RE LOOKING SPECIFICALLY FOR SOME FORENSICS, TWO POSITIONS, I THINK. RIGHT. NON SWORN AND I DON'T I, I KNOW IT'S IMPORTANT.

RIGHT. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT IS. IS IT. WASN'T IT FORENSICS, THE RECORD SPECIALIST.

RECORD SPECIALIST OKAY. CSO A COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER OKAY.

ALL RIGHT, WELL, I WANT I CAN I CAN SEE IT, SO I GOT IT.

YOU MAY NEED IT, BUT THAT'S GOING TO BE THE THE ONE I CAN UNDERSTAND THE RECORDS I DON'T BECAUSE THAT'S IS THIS BECAUSE OF, YOU KNOW, RECORD REQUEST FOR YOU, THAT KIND OF THING THAT WE ARE TRYING TO ADDRESS THAT THERE OR THAT WHAT'S THE ISSUE WITH THAT PERSON.

YEAH. WHAT IS THAT PERSON GOING TO DO? YES. DEPUTY CHIEF RIDDLE IS HERE.

THAT WAS I LET THE MAYOR CALL. YES, CHIEF. DEPUTY CHIEF.

ACTING CHIEF RYDER, PLEASE. YEAH, WELL, HE'S COMING UP.

ACTING. ACTING CHIEF. SORRY, CHIEF. YES, YES, SORRY.

I'M SORRY. I'LL HOLD MY COMMENT. JUST. CHIEF.

MADAM MAYOR. YES, COMMISSIONER. TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION.

THOSE ARE. THOSE TWO POSITIONS ARE RECOMMENDED BY THE CSM STUDY.

OKAY. CPM STUDY. AND SO WHAT DOES THE RECORD SPECIALIST DO? THEY HANDLE PUBLIC RECORDS, REQUEST THE PROCESSING OF CRIME REPORTS.

WE'RE UNDERSTAFFED. OKAY. MADAM MAYOR, HOW MANY DO WE HAVE THERE? SO THIS IS AN ADDITION, RIGHT? SO YOU'VE GOT SOME ADDITIONAL. OKAY, WE HAVE FOUR.

OKAY. AND YOU HAVE THE CSOS. HOW MANY DO YOU HAVE? WE HAVE FIVE CSOS. ONE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS AT CSM SAYS THAT WE ADD ONE AND A HALF PERSONS TO OUR DUTY OFFICE.

[01:20:03]

RIGHT NOW OUR DUTY OFFICE IS STAFFED WITH CSOS.

SO INSTEAD OF ASKING FOR ONE AND A HALF, I ASKED FOR ONE.

YEAH, WE APPRECIATE THAT. I DON'T KNOW HOW WE'D FIND THE HALF ONE AND A HALF SUMMARY.

YEAH, RIGHT. BUT THE RECORD PERSON IS BEING A B A FIFTH.

NOW, IF YOU WOULD GET THAT POSITION RIGHT BECAUSE YOU HAVE FOUR. OKAY. THANK YOU. AND THAT INCLUDES THE REDACTING ON THE TAPE.

YES. WHICH IS A TIME CONSUMING. OKAY. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM MAYOR. I GOT A FOLLOW UP.

COMMISSIONER GAINES. I UNDERSTAND YOUR COMMENTARY, AND I FULLY ADVOCATED FOR THIS POSITION OF A REAL ESTATE CZAR, FOR LACK OF A BETTER DESCRIPTION. CITY MANAGER CHESS SUGGESTION I HAVE COMPLETE SUPPORT FOR.

BUT THE REASON I BROUGHT UP ELIMINATING THE POSITION, THE ENTIRETY. I DIDN'T HAVE THE LUXURY OF HAVING THIS PILE OF RED INK SITTING IN FRONT OF ME WHEN I MADE THAT SUGGESTION AND STRATEGIC PLANNING, SO HAVING IT SAID IT, IT'S A WISH LIST ITEM.

I CAN SIT HERE ALL DAY LONG. WISH LIST ITEMS UNTIL I SEE THE BLEEDING RED INK THAT WE'RE HEMORRHAGING HERE WITH THIS PROPOSED BUDGET.

SO I HAVE TO SIT BACK AND SAY, OKAY, WE HAVE TO MAKE SOME SACRIFICES IF WE NEED TO REALLOCATE THESE TYPES OF THINGS AND GET PEOPLE TRAINING TO BE ABLE TO DEAL WITH THEM, THEN THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO. CITY MANAGER JESS SUGGESTION, THOUGH, I THINK SOLVES THAT PROBLEM IN THE ENTIRETY.

WE'RE BRINGING IN A DEPUTY CITY MANAGER THAT HAS THAT AS AN AREA OF EXPERTISE, I THINK WOULD BE A COMPLETE SOLUTION BECAUSE, CANDIDLY, IT'S NOT A FULL TIME JOB. HANDLING THE CITY ASSETS.

YOU KNOW, I DO THAT ANALYSIS WORK IN MY OFFICE RIGHT NOW FOR PROBABLY 5 OR 6 HOURS A MONTH.

IT'S NOT IT'S NOT OKAY. THAT'S JUST THE ANALYSIS THAT I GET.

THERE'S A LOT MORE TO IT THAN THAT. I UNDERSTAND BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I DO ALL DAY LONG. SO HAVING SAID THAT, THAT IS THE SOLUTION THAT CITY MANAGER HAS PRESENTED IS THE SOLUTION.

IT SATISFIES THE CONCERN ABOUT BRINGING IN SOME NEW BLOOD THAT HAS SOME EXPERTISE IN THIS AREA.

BUT I NEEDED YOU TO UNDERSTAND MY LOGIC OF WHY I'M SAYING WE CAN DISCARD THAT, BECAUSE WHEN I STARTED LOOKING AT THIS, IT BECOMES A LUXURY. AND I GET IT. IT'S MORE THAN A DOLLAR FOR DOLLAR PAYBACK.

THE PAYBACK TO THE CITY IS GOING TO FAR ECLIPSE THE SALARY WE'RE GOING TO BE PAYING THIS INDIVIDUAL TO SIT IN THAT CHAIR AND MAKE THESE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COMMISSION.

THE INFORMATION THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE GIVING US IS GOING TO BE VALUABLE, AND IT'S GOING TO BE DOLLAR GENERATED, WHICH IS A CRITICAL THING. I WOULD SUGGEST TO YOU THAT EVERY OTHER POSITION THAT WAS IN THIS LIST, NONE OF THEM ARE GENERATING REVENUE FOR THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE.

SO I TRUST ME. I IT WAS SOUL SEARCHING FOR ME TO SAY, OKAY, WE GOTTA WE GOTTA JETTISON ALL OF THIS BECAUSE WE'RE BLEEDING RED INK HERE.

SO THAT'S THE ONLY REASON I WENT DOWN THAT PATH. SO. DON'T KNOW. NO, DON'T DON'T DON'T THINK I HAD A CHANGE OF MIND. I HAD A CHANGE OF HEART. NOT A CHANGE OF MIND. YOU HAD. AND YOU LOOKED AT THE MONEY. THE AMOUNT OF MONEY WE MAKE.

TO ME, IT'S SINFUL. WE CAN'T FOSTER THIS. ON TO THE CITIZENS OF THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE.

PERIOD. WELL, MILLAGE INCREASE IS OFF THE TABLE.

I AGREE WITH YOU COMPLETELY. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR SAID IT. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON SAID IT. WE'VE ALL SAID IT. IT'S UNACCEPTABLE. WE'RE NOT GOING TO GO THAT ROUTE. SO THE HARD DECISIONS NEED TO BE MADE. THAT'S WHY I WENT BACK DOWN THAT ROAD. THAT'S RIGHT, COMMISSIONER BROWDER, THANK YOU FOR THAT. AND JUST SO THE PUBLIC UNDERSTANDS, IT WAS NOT AN ATTACK ON COMMISSIONER BRODERICK.

THIS IS MY ONLY TIME TO TALK TO COMMISSIONER BRODERICK FACE TO FACE REGARDING ANY ISSUE THAT WE HAVE IN THE CITY.

AND I USE THE TERM. I USE THE TERM DUMBFOUNDED BECAUSE I WAS TOO AT THAT STRATEGIC STRATEGIC PLANNING.

AND I SAW HOW YOU LAID OUT THE VISION OF YOU WANTED.

SO I'M LIKE, OKAY, WELL, WE COULD HAVE DONE IT BEFORE.

SO THIS WAS NOT A SLAM ON ANY COMMISSIONER. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN OF THE PUBLIC, WHOEVER LISTENING.

THE ONE THING I LOVE ABOUT THIS COMMISSION THAT I'VE BEEN ON FOR NOW, THE PAST FOUR YEARS, AND WHAT I WATCHED BEFORE, WE CAN SIT HERE AND ARGUE WITH EACH OTHER.

WE CAN SIT HERE AND DISAGREE WITH EACH OTHER.

BUT WHEN IT COMES TO THE VOTE AND IT COMES TO FIGHTING FOR THE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE, IT STOPS HERE. I'M NOT GOING TO NOT GO INTO THE HALLWAY OR OH, COME HERE, COME HERE.

COME, MICHAEL, LET ME GO THE OTHER WAY. IT'S NOT THAT TYPE OF SITUATION.

SO THIS IS MY ONLY CHANCE TO QUESTION ANY COMMISSIONERS, INCLUDING THE MAYOR UP HERE.

AND AND WE GO FROM THERE. SO IF I EVER COME ACROSS, LIKE I'M JUMPING ON SOMEBODY, I AM NOT.

I'M. I'M STANDING ON FOR WHAT I WAS ELECTED FOR AND WE'RE HAVING A DISCUSSION.

SO PLEASE, DIDN'T TAKE OFFENSE TO THAT. I DON'T TAKE OFFENSE.

I WAS JUST I NEED YOU TO UNDERSTAND MY I UNDERSTAND MY PATHOLOGIC HERE.

I GOT IT BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, AT THE END OF THE DAY, WHEN I GOT TO DO THIS BUDGET PROCESS IN MY OFFICE, I START WITH EVERYTHING UNDER THE SUN THAT I WANT, AND THEN I GET THE CHAINSAWS OUT.

WE GOT IT. OKAY. YEAH. BUT I WOULD LIKE TO ADD TO THIS NOT TO ADD FUEL TO THE FIRE.

[01:25:06]

BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HAS TO HAPPEN IS THE CLERK'S OFFICE NEEDS TO BE INVOLVED IN THIS, BECAUSE THE LEASES NEED TO BE HOUSED IN THAT OFFICE.

THAT IS A VERY IMPORTANT PART OF HER JOB IN TERMS OF WHEN THEY'RE COMING UP, WHAT THEY REQUIRE, WHAT SHE'S THE RECORD KEEPER AND THE PERSON WHO'S.

AND THAT'S THE WAY YOU HAVE CHECKS AND BALANCES.

RIGHT. AND SO I ENCOURAGE YOU TO, TO USE HER AS A RESOURCE.

AND IN THIS TOO, BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S THE BLEND OF THAT IS GOING TO BE REALLY IMPORTANT FOR THIS, BECAUSE WHAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO AS A CITY AND AS A STAFF AND AS A COMMISSION IS WE'RE ALL GOING TO HAVE TO BE A LITTLE BIT LEANER AND MEANER.

AND WE RECOGNIZE THAT. AND BECAUSE I TELL PEOPLE IN THE PUBLIC OUR BUDGET IS HEALTHY, BUT WE ARE NOT WEALTHY.

AND SO WE WANT TO KEEP IT HEALTHY. AND JOANNA AND HER STAFF HAS HELPED US DO THAT, REDUCING THE DEBT.

AND WOULDN'T IT BE AWFUL IF WE WERE STILL CARRYING ALL THAT DEBT AND IN THIS SITUATION NOW? SO BACK TO IT. SO IS THE NEXT DECISION. WELL, WE STILL NEED TO TALK ABOUT THE NEW HIRES.

THAT IS A DECISION WE STILL HAVE TO MAKE. I'M WONDERING IF WE I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY BUDGET MEETINGS WE'RE GOING TO HAVE, IF WE'RE GOING TO MAKE THAT DECISION RIGHT NOW, OR WE DO HAVE NUMBERS FOR YOU IF.

OKAY, IF WE WERE TO TAKE THE FOUR THAT HAVE BEEN SUGGESTED, THE DEPUTY CITY MANAGER, THE TWO FOR THE POLICE AND THE CITY ENGINEER THAT'S 393,000 OF THAT. 752. SO IF WE TAKE THAT OUT, WE'LL DROP THAT NUMBER AND NOT DO THE OTHER FUND THE OTHER FOUR.

THAT'S $359,000 THAT WE WOULD. WELL, MADAM MAYOR, I THOUGHT IT WAS THE OPPOSITE OR 393 FOR THE NEW EMPLOYEES.

THE NEW EMPLOYEES IS 752,000 TO 85, RIGHT? IF WE TAKE THOSE POSITIONS THAT ARE NOT GOING TO BE FUNDED? YOU'RE SAYING NOT TO FUND. THAT'S WE'RE GOING TO TAKE $359,000 AWAY FROM THAT.

SO FROM THE 752 285. WE'LL ELIMINATE THREE 5969. AND JUST SO EVERYBODY'S CLEAR, MISS MORRIS, YOU'RE SAYING THAT WE'RE SAYING, RIGHT, THAT THE TWO POLICE, THE TWO POLICE AND THE THE THE DEPUTY CITY MANAGER AND NOT THE NOT THE RIGHT, NOT THE ASSET NOT THE OTHER ASSET OR THE OUTREACH OR THE OUTREACH.

SO YOU'RE SAYING, OKAY, POLICE RECORDS SPECIALIST, THE POLICE COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER AND THE CITY ENGINEER THAT HAS TO GO BACK IN.

IF WE TAKE ONLY FUND THOSE POSITIONS, WE'LL SAVE 393,000.

IT'LL BE 393, 216. THAT'S THE NEW NUMBER FOR THE NEW EMPLOYEE.

WHAT'S THE CSO COST? WITH BENEFITS 56,500. 250,000.

RIGHT. YEAH. YEAH, I THOUGHT I THOUGHT, MADAM MAYOR, WE WOULD DISCUSS.

I KNOW THE ENGINEER, AND I KNOW THE DEPUTY CITY WERE THE TWO THE POLICE, THE THE.

I DON'T THINK WE WERE THERE WITH THAT. WITH THOSE TWO.

YEAH, BUT I THINK THE REASON MAYBE SHE THOUGHT WE WERE IS BECAUSE HE SAID IT WAS RECOMMENDED IN THE REPORT.

WELL, BUT I DON'T KNOW. I'M RIGHT. BUT I THINK WE CAN DISCUSS IT.

AND IF WE DISCUSS IT. ABSOLUTELY. THE WORKLOAD.

AND MY CONCERN IS WE HAD FOUR IN RECORDS RIGHT NOW.

IT WOULD BE FIVE. AND YOU'RE RIGHT, THE RECOMMENDATION WAS THEY'RE BASED ON A REPORT AND IT'S A RECOMMENDATION.

THAT'S RIGHT. WE DIDN'T DECIDE THAT. YOU'RE RIGHT.

YOU'RE RIGHT. YOU'RE EXACTLY RIGHT. IF WE DO THE TWO, THE DEPUTY CITY MANAGER AND THE CITY ENGINEER.

SO WE'LL BE WE'LL TAKE 472,008, 28 FROM THAT.

FROM OUR 752. I LIKE THAT NUMBER. OKAY, SO WE PLUGGED THAT ONE IN.

NOW FOR NEW EMPLOYEES. SO THE NEW NUMBER FOR NEW EMPLOYEES WILL BE 2797 57.

AND THE SAVINGS OF THAT.

478,472. 828 OKAY. NOW. 472 828. OKAY. SO LET'S FOR RIGHT NOW, LET'S SAY THAT'S A WORKING OR WORKING HYPOTHESIS, RIGHT? JUST FOR RIGHT NOW. ALL RIGHT. AND THEN THE NEXT IS THE PERCENTAGE OF THE STEP.

PLUS, COMMISSIONER BRODERICK, YOU'RE SAYING STEP PLUS FIVE OR SOME NUMBER THERE, BUT NOT STEP PLUS TEN.

IS THAT RIGHT? IS THAT WHAT I'M HEARING? THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. AND I, I COME BACK TO COMMISSIONER GAINES'S ARGUMENT HERE

[01:30:09]

ON PARITY BETWEEN ALL CITY EMPLOYEES, BASICALLY WHO ARE AT 5% FOR NON BARGAINING, 5% FOR BARGAINING, THEN 10% FOR POLICE. I UNDERSTAND THE BASIS OF COMMISSIONER TAYLOR'S ARGUMENT HERE, I GET IT.

HOWEVER, ONCE AGAIN WE BUMP INTO THIS WALL OF RED INK.

IF WE DID A MARGINAL INCREASE ABOVE THE 5% FOR BARGAINING NON BARGAINING, I'M PERSONALLY I'M AT 5%.

THAT'S WHERE I'M SITTING. BUT IF THERE WAS SOME NUMBER THAT SOMEBODY WANTED TO PROPOSE SLIGHTLY HIGHER THAN THAT I COULD PROBABLY BE PERSUADED TO GO IN THAT DIRECTION.

DIFFERENCE AT EIGHT WAS THAT I SAID SPLIT THE DIFFERENCE AT EIGHT.

I THINK THAT'S TOO HIGH TOO. BUT, YOU KNOW, I'M JUST SAYING, AT EVERY POINT THAT WE CUT THIS NUMBER IS $125,000 TO THE BOTTOM LINE.

YOU KNOW, SO QUICKLY WE SEE THIS NEGATIVE NUMBER GOING AWAY.

JOHN, WHAT'D YOU SAY THE SAVINGS WAS BASED ON THE PERSONNEL CHANGES? 472828.

FOUR. SEVEN FIVE. THAT GIVES US RED INK OF $770,000 BASED ON THE NEW PERSONNEL ANALYSIS.

SO IF YOU CUT THAT 2%, IT'S A QUARTER MILLION DOLLARS.

GET YOU DOWN TO $520,000. NEGATIVE. YOU CUT IT TO SEVEN.

YOU'RE AT 400,000. 7%. PLUS, IF YOU KEEP IT AT FIVE, CURTIS, YOU'RE AT 150,000, RIGHT ON A NEGATIVE SHORTFALL, RIGHT? CAN YOU RUN A QUICK NUMBER IF IT MAINTAINED IF THE POLICE WERE MAINTAINED AT 5% PLUS STEP, WHAT DOES THAT DO TO OUR DEFICIT? WELL, LET ME BE CLEAR ON TO SOMETHING.

TWO WE HAD TO MAKE WE WERE GOING TO MAKE AN ADJUSTMENT IN THE BUDGET ANYWAY, BECAUSE WHEN WE RAN THE FIRST SET OF NUMBERS IN THE SHEET THAT WAS USED, IT DID NOT CAPTURE ALL THE OFFICERS THAT WERE AT THE TOP OF THE RANGE.

IT DIDN'T DO BECAUSE THEY WERE. USUALLY WHEN A PERSON IS AT THE TOP OF RANGE, THEY DON'T GET ADJUSTMENT ON SALARY, THEY GET ONE TIME BONUS. HOWEVER, AS THE POLICE, IF WE INCREASE THEIR STEP, DO A PLUS ON THE STEP.

IT CHANGES ALL THE RANGE ON THE STEP. SO WE HAD TO GO BACK AND MAKE ADJUSTMENT FOR THAT.

SO WE WERE GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE. ADJUSTMENT IN THE ORIGINAL NUMBER AS WELL.

ANYWAY, TO ACCOUNT, TO GO BACK AND PICK UP ALL THOSE OFFICES THAT WERE NOT A PART OF THE ORIGINAL.

SO WE WERE SEEING THAT BIG NUMBER OF VARIANCE IN THE SALARIES.

AND SO WHEN I WENT BACK TO GO AND LOOK AND KAREN, YOU KNOW, HAD HER DO A SECOND LOOK, WE SAW WHERE THE NEGATIVE NUMBER THAT WAS IN THERE THAT WAS ELIMINATING THOSE OFFICERS THAT WERE IN THE TOP OF THE STEP.

SO WE HAD TO GO BACK AND WE'RE GOING TO WE HAD TO MAKE AN ADJUSTMENT IN THAT ORIGINAL NUMBER.

SO THE 5% COST POLICE STEP, THAT'S A MILLION, 01,081,005 63.

THAT'S THE COST FOR THE STEP PLUS 5% 1081563 $1 MILLION, ONE $1 MILLION.

THAT'S STEP PLUS FIVE, RIGHT? AND I'M. NO, I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY. SO YOU SAID SEVEN.

YOU WOULD PROPOSE SEVEN. BUT 1 MILLION BASICALLY.

IS THAT FIVE? RIGHT. WITH THE ADJUSTMENTS AND ADJUSTMENTS, WE MAKE THE ADJUSTMENT.

WE'LL THAT GOES BACK DOWN. THERE'S ABOUT 400,000 IN THERE IS FROM THE ORIGINAL ADJUSTMENT THAT HAD TO BE MADE FOR THOSE THAT ARE ALL AT THE STEP.

SO THERE'S ABOUT $400,000. CHANGE IN ORIGINAL TO THAT TO ACCOUNT FOR THOSE OFFICERS THAT WOULD NOT BE GETTING A ONE TIME BONUS, BUT WE WOULD BE CHANGING THE RANGE OF THEIR SALARY.

OKAY. SO WE NEED TO ADD THAT ON TOP. RIGHT. IT'S IN IN THIS.

THAT'S THE THOSE ARE THE NEW NUMBERS THAT ARE BASED ON THESE NEW.

WHAT YOU'RE SEEING HERE HAS ALL OF THAT INCLUDED IN THAT.

AND SO THIS SHEET SHOWS THE CORRECT AMOUNT. CORRECT.

THAT'S THOSE ARE THESE ARE THE CORRECT NUMBERS.

IF IT SAYS PLUS FIVE. THAT'S THE CORRECT AMOUNT.

AS INTO THE ADDITIONS. BUT FROM THE ORIGINAL THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE IN THE ORIGINAL.

OKAY. WELL, WHAT WHAT IS THE PLEASURE? ANYBODY HAVE A SUGGESTION? THE BEYOND STEP PLUS FIVE. LET'S WHERE COMMISSIONER BRODERICK IS BUT WILLING TO ENTERTAIN SOMETHING ELSE.

[01:35:01]

I KNOW IT'S NOT COMING FROM COMMISSIONER GAINES. I KNOW YOU KNOW IT.

I THREW AT EIGHT. THAT'S TOO HIGH FOR COMMISSIONER BRODERICK.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT EVERYBODY ELSE THINKS ABOUT IT. SOMEBODY ELSE WANT TO THROW OUT A NUMBER? NO, I WANT TEN. WE GOT ONE. HARD TEN. COMMISSIONER GAINES, I'M A SOFT FIVE.

HE'S A HARD FIVE. I KNOW THAT HE JUST SAID IT FOR ME, SO THAT'S FINE.

BUT WHERE ARE YOU FIVE? I'VE, I'VE, I'VE SAID IT EARLIER THAT I DIDN'T LIKE ANY OF THE READ ON ANY OF THIS STUFF, SO I WAS AT A FIVE WHEN WE SAID THAT. PLUS FIVE.

YES. OKAY. YEAH, I'M SOMEWHERE BETWEEN FIVE AND THAT NUMBER FIVE AND EIGHT SOMEWHERE IN BETWEEN.

BUT REALLY I'M TRYING TO GET BOTH PARAMETERS HERE.

FIVE WILL BRING US DOWN ON OVERALL GIVE US ABOUT WHAT 500,000 LEFT IN THE SHORTFALL.

608 FROM FIVE 5000 500,658 OFF OF THAT 12 SEVEN.

SO ABOUT FIVE, FIVE, $5 MILLION, HALF $1 MILLION.

BUT WE'RE STILL SHORT, A HALF $1 MILLION. THAT WOULD OBVIOUSLY COME FROM THE FUND BALANCE.

RIGHT. AND OH, BOY. YES, SIR. WE'RE SHORT. WE ONLY BE SHORT ABOUT A QUARTER MILLION.

IF YOU GOT 1.245, WE'RE TAKING 500,000 OUT OF NEW EMPLOYEE.

CORRECT. WELL THAT'S IF. YEAH. ONCE WE TAKE THE MAKE THE ADJUSTMENT FOR THE NEW 500,000 OUT OF THE STEP OR OUT OF THE.

OKAY. THAT'S RIGHT. SO YOU'RE AT ABOUT 100. 7000.

YOU'RE A HECK OF A LOT CLOSER. YEAH. MR. TAYLOR.

I JUST WANT SOME CLEAR. LIKE. ARE WE VOTING ON THIS TODAY? I KNOW WE NEED TO GET SOME CLARIFICATION FOR THE TRIM NOTICES.

SO I THINK WE'RE PAST THAT PORTION WHERE WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE RAISING THE MILLAGE.

BUT SOME OF THIS SHOULD BE SUBJECT TO NEGOTIATIONS.

I WOULD ASSUME. RIGHT. SO DO WE NEED TO GET THAT SPECIFIC TODAY ON WHAT PERCENTAGE WE WANT TO BE AT OR LIKE WHAT ARE WE LOOKING AT? IS LIKE, ARE WE VOTING ON THIS OR WHAT? WELL, USUALLY WE WOULDN'T WE WOULDN'T HAVE IT OPEN THE OPEN DISCUSSION AS TO YEAH, RIGHT. WE DO HAVE IT IS STILL STILL SUBJECT TO NEGOTIATIONS.

BUT IF THIS IS, YOU KNOW, THE HARD NUMBER THAT WE HAVE AND ALL THE MONIES THAT WE HAVE, THEN THAT'S WHAT WE GO IN NEGOTIATION WITH.

AND, AND THEY CAN SAY, OKAY. AND WE HAVE PROPOSED THIS IN THE PAST.

IF THEY SEE WHAT THE DOLLAR AMOUNT IS FOR, WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED.

THEY TAKE THAT NUMBER AND THEN THEY REALIGN THEIR STEPS BASED ON THAT.

USUALLY THEIR STEP DEVELOPMENT IS IS THEIRS. WE DON'T YOU KNOW, WE'VE MADE SUGGESTIONS IN THE PAST AS TO HOW WE THOUGHT IT SHOULD GO.

BUT AGAIN, IT'S IT'S THEIR DEVELOPMENT AS TO ALL WE HAVE TO REALLY DECIDE TODAY IS 6.9.

CORRECT. THAT'S WHAT WE CAN. BUT IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE ANOTHER WE IF WE'RE NOT DECIDING THE REST OF IT, WE HAVE TO HAVE ANOTHER BUDGET MEETING. I WOULD ASSUME.

IS THAT RIGHT? YES. YES. BUT WE DO NEED DIRECTION FOR THE TRIM BECAUSE THAT'S DUE THIS THURSDAY, I BELIEVE. SO WE CAN SET THE BUDGET AT WHATEVER YOU DECIDE TODAY.

WE CAN ALWAYS REVISIT IT AT ANOTHER WORKSHOP.

WE CAN ALWAYS ADJUST WHAT SUBMITTED WITH THE TRIM.

BUT WE NEED DIRECTION TODAY SO WE CAN GET THE NUMBERS TOGETHER.

THE ONLY DIRECTION YOU NEED IS THE MILLAGE RATE.

RIGHT. CORRECT. RIGHT. RIGHT. YEP. AND I THINK WE'VE ALL AGREED.

AND THERE'S NOBODY HERE PUSHING FOR A DIFFERENT MILLAGE RATE.

I DON'T BELIEVE. YEAH. SO WHAT'S YOUR PLEASURE, GENTLEMEN? DO WE NEED A MOTION FOR THE SET TO TRIM? NOTICE OF THE MILLAGE RATE. I'M SORRY. WE HAVE A CONSENSUS, MISS HEDGES.

DO WE NEED A MOTION FOR A MILLAGE RATE AT THIS POINT? MADAM MAYOR, I DON'T THINK IN THE PAST YOU'VE DONE A MOTION FOR IT.

I'LL DEFER TO MISS MORRIS IF SHE BELIEVES YOU NEED A MOTION.

I THINK SHE UNDERSTANDS YOUR DIRECTION. PRETTY CLEAR.

MADAM MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS TO. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY A LITTLE BIT. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SETTING OUR BUDGET AND WHAT OUR BUDGET IS GOING TO BE.

NEGOTIATIONS WITH ANY UNION THAT'S OPEN OR TO BE OPENED.

THAT IS TECHNICALLY A SEPARATE ISSUE. THAT WOULD THEN COME BACK TO YOU FOR APPROVAL.

SO THIS IS SETTING YOUR BASELINE BUDGET AND WHAT YOU'RE APPROVING IN YOUR BUDGET CURRENTLY, OR AT LEAST DIRECTING MISS MORSE AT THIS POINT TO INCLUDE IN YOUR BUDGET.

IF SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE CHANGED LATER ON, IT WOULD COME BACK TO YOU ALL FOR A VOTE, A BUDGET AMENDMENT, ANY APPROVAL OF ANY CONTRACTS, THAT TYPE OF THING.

THANK YOU. YES, MA'AM. MADAM MAYOR, WHAT I THINK I UNDERSTAND AT THIS POINT IS WE'RE FINE ON THE MILLAGE.

AND WE WITH THAT MILLAGE BEING SET, WE KIND OF KNOW WHAT THOSE OPERATING PARAMETERS ARE WHEN IT COMES TO REVENUES.

WE'VE HAD A GOOD DISCUSSION NOW, AND THE COMMISSION HAS TALKED ABOUT THEIR CONCERNS AND WEIGHED IN ON NEW EMPLOYEES.

[01:40:07]

SO WE'VE TRIMMED THAT WAY DOWN. AND WE'VE MADE A RECOMMENDATION HAS BEEN MADE.

I THINK AT THIS POINT, WHAT WE WOULD MISS, MORRIS WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK TO US, I GUESS, AND PUT IT ALL OUT HERE AND CLEAN IT UP. AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE.

I MEAN, WE ALWAYS GO BACK AND FORTH ON THE BUDGET. I MEAN, THAT'S WHAT I THINK. I HEAR MY MY QUESTION, MR. CHAIRMAN. MY QUESTION IS SO REGARDING THE STEP PLUS, WHAT IS THAT GOING TO BE SO WE CAN PUT THE NUMBERS TOGETHER.

I WILL WE NEED DIRECTION ON THAT. THAT'S WHAT WE DON'T HAVE.

YEAH, RIGHT. SO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS YOU WANT US TO MAKE A DECISION, AND THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE UNION NEGOTIATIONS BECAUSE WE NEED DIRECTION. MISS MORRIS, HELP! MOVE ON. RIGHT.

CORRECT. AND WE'VE ALWAYS EVERY FISCAL YEAR, WE SET OUR BUDGET.

AND AFTER NEGOTIATIONS, IT'S USUALLY NOT IN AGREEMENT WITH THE BUDGET.

SO WE'VE ALWAYS HAD TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS PRAYERFULLY THIS YEAR BECAUSE OF THE OUTLOOK THAT WE HAVE.

THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE TO. WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO GIVE.

SO AND I MIGHT. YES. WE'VE ALREADY. I JUST WANT TO SAY FOR THE RECORD IN THIS THAT WE'RE CONTEMPLATING IS ALREADY A 3% DECREASE IN ALL DEPARTMENTS, RIGHT? RIGHT, RIGHT. EVERYBODY. YEAH.

THAT'S GOOD. EVERYBODY'S CUT. YEAH. MADAM MAYOR, I'M GOING TO MAKE A SUGGESTION AS A WAY TO COMPROMISE.

OUR WAY OUT OF THIS POTENTIALLY IS 5% NON BARGAINING 5% BARGAINING.

POLICE DEPARTMENT. STEP PLUS SIX. STEP SIX. ALL OTHER THINGS BEING EQUAL, WELL, TO THE NEW HIRES THAT THAT'S DONE.

THAT'S BEEN. YEP. MORE THAN EVERYBODY ELSE IS GETTING.

SO IS THERE ANY EXCITEMENT ABOUT STEP PLUS SIX? EXCITEMENT, I THINK MIGHT BE THE WRONG TERM. STRETCHING IT HERE.

YEAH. I CAN IF, IF, IF THE COMMISSION WANTS TO DO A SIX STEP PLUS SIX, I CAN GO WITH THAT.

I GOT OFF MY ROCK COMMISSION. I PROPOSED THAT I WOULD GO ALONG WITH THAT.

GIVEN WHERE WE WERE LAST YEAR AND THEN NO ONE ACROSS AND NO PERCENTAGES DON'T.

BUT YOU KNOW. LAST YEAR WE GAVE NINE WE HAD A 3% CUT ACROSS ALL OF OUR DEPARTMENTS TO GET TO THIS BUDGET.

SO I CAN I CAN SETTLE WITH THAT. I THINK THAT'S A IT'S A FAIR THAT WE'VE ASKED EVERYBODY TO TAKE A LITTLE BIT HERE KNOW AND, AND SOME OF THE NEW WE CUT NEW EMPLOYEES DOWN TO THE BARE MINIMUM AND WHICH WE, YOU KNOW, TO TWO POSITIONS IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. SO EVERYBODY'S GIVING HERE.

I MEAN, EVERYBODY'S SACRIFICING. WE'RE ALL TIGHTENING OUR BELT. AND I'M SURE THAT YOUR COMMISSION, WHEN WE GET TO THAT POINT AND MAKE OUR DECISION ON WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO, WE'LL PROBABLY TIGHTEN OUR BELT, TOO. RIGHT? SO BUT IT'S IT'S ALL IN HERE.

SO THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I'M AT. SO I CAN GO WITH SIX.

I THINK YOU'RE THE ONLY PERSON WHO HASN'T SPOKEN.

NO. YOU HAVE. YOU SAID YOU'RE A HARD TEN. YEAH, I REMAIN IN THAT POSITION.

I THINK I'VE SAID MY ARGUMENT SEVERAL TIMES AND I'M REMAIN AT A TEN.

BUT WHATEVER THAT MEANS, I THINK I'M BEING OVERRULED.

OKAY, SO WOULD YOU MISS HEDGES, DO WE NEED A A MOTION ON THAT PARTICULAR.

MADAM MAYOR, COMMISSIONERS, YOU DO NOT. MISS MORRIS WILL GO BACK AND WORK THE NUMBER MAGIC THAT SHE'S GOING TO WORK.

AND I SUSPECT WE'LL BE BRINGING IT BACK TO YOU FOR A FINAL LOOK.

ARE YOU A NOT. NO, I NEED DIRECTION. IF IT'S STEP PLUS SIX, THAT'S WHAT I'M.

FOUR OF US HAVE SAID. THAT SAID, WE CAN LIVE WITH THAT. ONE OF US CANNOT LIVE WITH IT.

BUT I HOPE HE SURVIVES, YOU KNOW, DECREASE THE COMPLEMENT OF THE NEW EMPLOYEES AND WE'LL DO THE FIVE, FIVE STEP PLUS SIX IF THAT'S THE CONSENSUS. AND THAT'LL BE OUR, YOU KNOW, BUDGET BASED ON THOSE NUMBERS.

YOU'LL SEE IT WHEN IT'S REDONE AS TO WHAT THOSE.

SO WE VOTE ON IT THEN YOU DON'T VOTE ON IT UNTIL SEPTEMBER.

RIGHT. WE'RE RIGHT NOW JUST DRAFTING IT FOR CLARITY.

THAT'S WHAT I WAS REFERRING TO. WHEN THE FINAL BUDGET COMES BACK TO YOU IS WHAT YOU WILL VOTE ON. SORRY IF I DO WANT TO HAVE ANOTHER BUDGET WORKSHOP.

WE HAVE A SECOND BUDGET WORKSHOP TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED FOR AUGUST 11TH.

DO YOU WANT TO HAVE ANOTHER BUDGET WORKSHOP? IT'S.

IT'S SCHEDULED IN CONJUNCTION WITH OUR REGULAR DAY MEETING.

I'M OKAY. IT WON'T HURT. I MEAN, WE CAN WE CAN TALK ABOUT IT IN CASE SOME THINGS CHANGE. MY QUESTION IS THAT EVEN WITH ALL OF THIS, WE WILL STILL HAVE A SHORTFALL HERE. ABOUT $170,000, GIVE OR TAKE.

OKAY. I'M OKAY. I'M OKAY WITH THE 11TH TWO SINCE WE'RE GOING TO BE HERE ANYWAY, I THINK.

[01:45:05]

RIGHT. I THINK, YEAH, I'D STILL LIKE TO SEE. YEAH, THAT'D BE FINE.

WE'RE HAVING A REDO OF ALL THE ALL THE NUMBERS THAT ALL THE ALL THE DEPARTMENT BUDGETS, ALL THAT.

NOW THAT WE'VE SET SOME DIRECTION HERE AND WE HAVE TWO ADDITIONAL THINGS TO DECIDE.

WHAT IF WE'RE GOING TO TAKE AN INCREASE OR NOT.

RIGHT. THAT HAS TO BE VOTED ON. AND WE TALKED ABOUT MISS COX GETTING AN INCREASE WITH THAT.

THAT'S RIGHT. SO WE THOSE TWO THINGS WE HAVE TO FIND SOMEPLACE OR DECIDE ON THE RIGHT.

MADAM MAYOR. YES, SIR. SPEAKING OF THOSE TWO THINGS I GUESS THAT SPEAKING OF MRS. COX, THAT'S THAT'S IS THAT NOT INCLUDED IN THE THE THE THE BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS OR IS THAT SOMETHING DIFFERENT? HER, HER HER HER PAY IS JUST BROAD ENOUGH TO TO OR THAT'S SOMETHING WE HAVE TO COME BACK AT ANOTHER TIME.

IT'S NOT FACTORED IN TO THIS NEW BUDGET BECAUSE I DIDN'T HEAR AS TO WHAT IT WAS.

THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. SO YEAH. INCLUDED. I'M NOT CLEAR WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT.

WE TALKED I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT THAT PART, BUT RIGHT NOW, IF WE WOULD HAVE TO CONSIDER, IF ANYTHING, 5% GOING TO ALL CITY STAFF, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE HER AND THEN THAT WOULD PUT HER AT A CERTAIN POINT.

SO ANYTHING WE'RE CONSIDERING IS WHERE WE GO FROM THERE TO.

TO THE OTHER PARTIES OF OTHER CLERKS. AND I KNOW SHE SENT US SOME INFORMATION AT.

OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO BE CLEAR OF. SO WE WOULD IN OUR CONVERSATION, WE'D HAVE TO FACTOR IN.

WHERE SHE'S AT CURRENTLY. NOW KNOWING THAT IF THE WHEN THE BUDGET PASSES, IT'LL BE 5%.

MORE IN HER SALARY AND THEN ANYTHING ELSE WE COULD DISCUSS.

THAT'S OKAY. AND THAT'S THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING.

THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING. WHAT I'M ASKING IS IS IT IS IT MORE PRUDENT JUST TO.

WE'RE HERE. AND IF IT'S IF IT'S. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT.

THAT'S WHY I ASKED. WAS IT UNDER THE BUDGET TO GIVE.

FINANCE TO GET THE FINANCE AND EVERYBODY THE NUMBERS THAT WE WERE GIVEN AND COME UP WITH THE NUMBERS.

SO IT'LL ALL BE IN THE BUDGET. SO WHEN WE COME BACK ON THE 11TH, YOU KNOW, WE'LL HAVE ALL THAT IN THERE.

I'M JUST SAYING I DON'T THINK ANYBODY. WELL LET ME, LET ME LET ME BACK UP.

GO DOWN THAT PATH. LET ME LET ME BACK UP. I PERSONALLY, YOU KNOW, FEEL THAT MISS COX NEEDS USE A PAY INCREASE.

FOR THE WORK SHE DOES. SO THAT THAT'S THAT'S WHERE I'M READY TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION.

AND I DON'T KNOW WHERE MY OTHER COMMISSIONERS ARE.

SO MY QUESTION ARE WE CAN DO IT NOW. ARE WE SAYING WE'RE GOING TO WAIT UNTIL THE 11TH OR DO YOU NEED ANY INFORMATION NOW? THAT'S THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING. THAT'S WHY I THINK SO TOO. OR ARE WE DOING IT ON THE AFTER THE BUDGET IS APPROVED AND THEN WE DO IT, THEN WE DO IT THAT WAY. THAT'S THAT'S THE CONFUSION COMING IN.

YEAH. WE HAVE TO DO IT NOW SO I CAN FACTOR IT IN AND IT'S ALREADY BUDGETED.

THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT. THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE I'M COMING FROM BECAUSE OF IT NOW.

SO WE GOT INFORMATION FROM THE VARIOUS CLERKS AND IT'S ALL OVER THE MAP AS WE THOUGHT IT WAS, WAS. AND SO I'D LIKE TO HEAR JUST A QUICK QUESTION, MADAM MAYOR.

SO THIS NUMBER THAT WE'RE SEEING HERE UNDER THIS INFORMATION, THE BUDGET SURVEY OF LISTING THE FORT PIERCE CURRENT SALARY IS.

IS THAT ACCURATE? 129. MISS COX, IS THAT ACCURATE? THAT'S ACCURATE. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. SO LET'S GO.

THERE'S A CALCULATOR. SO WE KNOW 5% IS ALREADY ON TOP OF THAT PERHAPS.

WELL, I KNOW, COMMISSIONER BRODERICK, YOU THREW OUT A NUMBER, AND I.

AND IN THE SPIRIT OF WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH IN TERMS OF CUTS AND EVERYBODY TAKING A HIT.

I WAS I WAS GOING TO THROW OUT THE NUMBER OF SOMEWHERE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF 160.

I COULD SUPPORT THAT. BUT WHEN I LOOKED AT ALL THE DIFFERENT CLERKS AND WHERE THEY WERE AND THE DIFFERENT THE MEDIAN AND THE MAXIMUM AND THE MINIMUM AND THE AND WHAT MISS CLARK'S DOES, I AND I THINK SHE GOT HIRED ON THE LOW END WHEN SHE WAS HIRED. THAT'S WHERE I THINK WE COULD IT'S ABOUT A 22, 23%. WHAT IS THAT? I'M TRYING TO.

OKAY, SOMETHING LIKE THAT. I FIGURED DIFFERENT PERCENTAGES AT HOME, BUT I DON'T HAVE THEM HERE.

[01:50:05]

25% INCREASE IS 161, SO IT'S ABOUT 24%. ON TOP OF THE FIVE.

OH, NO, YOU JUST WENT STRAIGHT FROM 1 TO 29. RIGHT.

AND THAT'S MADAM MAYOR. AND THIS IS WHY I ASKED THE QUESTION.

BECAUSE I READ THOSE NUMBERS AND I'VE BEEN TRYING TO FIGURE OUT.

ARE WE LOOKING AT THOSE NUMBERS PLUS THE 5% INCREASE, RIGHT.

PLUS THE 5% INCREASE. AND THAT'S WHY I WANT TO DISCUSS IT.

BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I DON'T WANT TO SAY, WAIT A MINUTE.

WE WE GAVE A NUMBER AND THEN SHE GETS THE 5% INCREASE.

NOT SAYING SHE DOESN'T DESERVE A 5% INCREASE, BUT I'M JUST SAYING, WELL, WHILE WE'RE HERE.

SO LET'S LET'S WHAT WHAT ARE WE DOING? WELL, IF YOU INCORPORATED THAT IN TO WHAT THE MAYOR SUGGESTING, YOU WOULD GIVE A 15% INCREASE PLUS THE 5% WOULD COME ALONG WITH EVERYBODY ELSE.

YOU'LL BE THAT FIGURE. CORRECT. YEAH. SO WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS IF THE NUMBER THAT I'M HEARING IS 160.

SO WE GIVE. WE GIVE AN INCREASE TO WHATEVER THE INCREASE IS TO THAT.

THE 5% WOULD MAKE IT TO THE THE 160. BUT THE 15 YEAR AT 148 350.

ADDITIONAL FIVE GOES TO 155 767. SO IT HAS TO BE ABOUT A 16% INCREASE.

I'M NOT GOING TO DO MATH AND AND GET IT WRONG AND EMBARRASS MY MOM.

SO, YOU KNOW, I'M JUST I LET OTHER PEOPLE DO THE MATH ME TO DO IT BECAUSE I'M NOT I'M NOT HAVING THAT DISCUSSION TONIGHT.

BUT IF THAT'S IF THAT'S THE CONSENSUS OF IF THAT'S THE CONSENSUS OF, OF THE THE COMMISSION.

AND I'LL WAIT TO HEAR FROM THE OTHER TWO COMMISSIONER JOHNSON AND COMMISSIONER TAYLOR, IF THAT'S IF THAT'S IS THE, THE NUMBER. I'M, I'M, I'M FINE WITH THAT. THAT'LL GIVE ME MORE SOMETHING TO 60 NET WITH INCLUDING THE 5% KICK.

THAT'S THAT'S YOUR NUMBER GUYS DOWN THERE I DON'T.

IT ALREADY INCLUDES THAT. IT ALREADY INCLUDES IT.

YEAH. SO WHATEVER THE OTHER PERCENTAGES IT'S SOMEWHERE 1,617% PLUS THE FIVE GETS YOU TO 160.

SO IF WE'RE USING THE GROSS AGGREGATE SAY 160 IS THE NUMBER THE PERCENTAGES WILL BE BACKED IN.

CORRECT. THAT'S WHY THAT'S WHY I BROUGHT IT UP.

SO WE CAN. YEAH I APPRECIATE THAT, COMMISSIONER. SO WE HAVE A DISCUSSION I HAVE A QUESTION THERE FOR THE BUDGET. SO THIS WOULD BE OBVIOUSLY IN HOW DOES THIS IMPACT THIS.

BECAUSE NOW IT'S GOING TO WIDEN THE SHORTFALL.

RIGHT. BECAUSE IT HAS TO GO IN THERE UNDER IT'LL BE IN PERSONNEL COST PERSONNEL.

YEAH. AND SO JUST KNOWING JUST HEARING THE NUMBERS RIGHT NOW, WHAT TYPE OF IMPACT ARE WE LOOKING AT.

THAT'S ABOUT A $26,000 DIFFERENCE AS TO THE COST CURRENT.

PLUS THE 5% IS ABOUT 134. SO SO IT'S ABOUT ANOTHER 26,000 THAT YOU'RE GOING TO ADD ON.

SO THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL $26,000 WE ADD ON TO THAT BOTTOM.

WE KNOW IT'S AROUND 125 RIGHT NOW. GIVE OR TAKE THE COST BECAUSE IT'LL INCREASE BENEFIT COSTS SOME TO BUT SO.

SO YEAH FELLOW COMMISSION. SO I'M LOOKING AT THE ACTUAL DATA THAT WAS SENT US I GUESS IS SOME SURVEY THAT WAS DONE IN 2025.

AND THAT WOULD PUT MRS. COX AT THAT POINT AND IN THE UPPER ECHELON OF CITY CLERKS.

AND I KNOW THAT SOME OF THE DISCUSSION CAME UP ABOUT HER COMPARED TO DIRECTORS, ETC., THAT ARE HERE.

AND IT PUTS HER IN A RANGE. THAT'S THERE. THAT OBVIOUSLY IS YOU KNOW, WE'RE STILL A THERE'S SOME DIFFERENCE THAT WE WE KNOW THAT. RIGHT? SO WE'RE NOT WE CAN'T GO ALL THE WAY THERE.

THERE'S A LOT OF IT THOUGH. SO SHE, SHE WOULD BE THE HIGHEST PAY.

I GUESS CORAL GABLES WOULD BE THE, THE NEXT HIGHEST HERE.

BASED ON WHAT I'M SEEING ON THIS DATA. THERE'S SOME MORE.

THAT OVER 200. OH, OKAY. MAYBE LOOKING AT THE WRONG THING.

NOW YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE RIGHT THING. YOU JUST. YOU HAVE TO KEEP SCROLLING AND AND ALSO YOU HAVE TO GO ALL THE WAY OVER TO THE RIGHT, BECAUSE I MADE THAT MISTAKE, TOO. I SEE, I SEE.

I SEE OKAY. AND THEN AT THE BOTTOM THERE'S LIKE MAXIMUM AND MINIMUM.

MEDIAN. YES. ALL RIGHT. YEAH, I SEE IT.

MADAM MAYOR. YES, MA'AM. COMMISSIONERS, CAN I JUST CLARIFY FOR MISS COX? IS THIS THE ONE THAT I HAD FORWARDED OUT PREVIOUSLY, OR WAS THIS A DIFFERENT.

IT'S A DIFFERENT. IT WAS A REVISED ONE. THEY HAD THE NEWER ONE.

IT'S FROM THE SAME ORGANIZATION, THOUGH. CORRECT.

[01:55:02]

AND SO, MADAM MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS, IF YOU RECALL, THIS WENT OUT FOR THE 2024 VERSION WHEN WE WERE LOOKING AT THE CITY MANAGER SALARIES.

AND SO JUST ONE POINT OF CLARIFICATION FROM SPEAKING WITH OUR FMT REP WHO ASSISTED WITH PRODUCING A LOT OF THIS STUFF AND POINTING US IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.

THIS IS AN ORGANIZATION THAT COMPILES THOSE THAT VOLUNTARILY REPORT.

SO THIS IS NOT EVERY CITY OR COUNTY OR WITHIN THE STATE.

SO JUST BEAR THAT IN MIND THAT THIS IS A SMALLER SAMPLING OF WHAT ACTUALLY EXISTS OUT THERE.

IT'S A BUNCH. IT'S A BUNCH OF THEM, BUT IT'S NOT.

YOU'RE RIGHT. IT'S NOT EVERYONE. YES, MA'AM. I JUST WANTED THAT CLARIFICATION.

WE WOULD. I LIKE IT FROM A SENSE THAT I CAN LOOK AND SEE SIMILARITIES BETWEEN, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE CITIES.

THERE'S A THERE'S A. YEAH. YEP YEP YEP YEP.

WELL IS THERE? DO I HEAR? DO I HAVE ANYBODY THAT WANTS TO GIVE AN OPINION OR ARE YOU READY TO TALK? ARE YOU READY? I'M ON THE SAME PAGE AS COMMISSIONER RUDDOCK.

I'LL MAKE A MOTION IF YOU NEED ONE. WE NEED A MOTION ON THAT MOTION.

MADAM MAYOR, COMMISSIONERS, I THINK THE DIRECTION TO MISS MORRIS TODAY TO INCLUDE IT.

AND THEN ON THE NEXT MEETING AGENDA, WE CAN INCLUDE IT AS A SPECIFIC VOTING ITEM SINCE IT WASN'T NOTICED TODAY.

WE CAN PLACE THAT ON FOR AN OFFICIAL VOTE, BUT I THINK THE DIRECTION TO INCLUDE IT EXISTS SO THAT IT CAN BE DONE FOR THE NEXT MEETING AT THE NUMBER.

I THINK I'D LIKE A LITTLE BIT OF CLARIFICATION AS TO THE EFFECTIVE DATE.

SO IS IT OCTOBER 1ST? IS IT EFFECTIVE NOW AND THEN? WE HAVE TO FUND IT IN THE BUDGET CYCLE. CORRECT? CORRECT. IF THAT'S YOUR DIRECTION. AM I DOING IT NOW OR ARE WE OCTOBER 1ST.

IT'S GOING TO BE 160. I PUT THE BUDGET. I'M THINKING OCTOBER 1ST BECAUSE THAT'S THAT'S THE OCTOBER 1ST BUDGET.

BUT I'M GOOD WITH THAT. YEAH. OKAY. THANK YOU.

JOHN, YOU GOT THE NUMBERS, RIGHT? 160. HOW HAVE YOU GOT TO BREAK DOWN THE PERCENTAGES? OKAY. OKAY. NOW DO YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT OUR SALARIES OR DO YOU WANT TO WAIT FOR THAT? I BROUGHT THAT UP. I'LL BRING IT UP. I'VE ALWAYS BEEN ON AN IMPRESSION, MADAM MAYOR, THAT I UNDERSTAND WHAT THE CHARTER SAYS, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT. I'M NOT ASKING FOR OR WE SHOULDN'T BE ASKING FOR FOR RAISES AS FAR AS ANY TIME IN A BUDGET CRISIS OR ANYTHING. BUT I NEVER UNDERSTOOD WHY, AS A CITY EMPLOYEE, EVEN THOUGH I'M ELECTED, I AM A CITY EMPLOYEE, THAT WE ARE EXCLUDED OUT OF JUST SIMPLE COST OF LIVING.

JUST COST OF LIVING. YOU KNOW, WE WE WE SUFFER COST OF LIVING ALSO.

SO I ALWAYS FELT THAT WE SHOULD BRING THAT UP.

AND I KNOW WHY IT'S IN THE CHARTER THAT WE GOT TO VOTE ON IT, BUT I FEEL THAT EVERYONE UP HERE IS, IS IS DESERVES A COST OF LIVING. YOU COULD YOU COULD FEEL DIFFERENT.

BUT SPEAKING OF MYSELF I AM A CITY COMMISSIONER FOR FORT PIERCE 24 HOURS A DAY. IF SOMETHING HAPPENS AT NIGHT, SHE OR SOMEBODY FROM HIS DEPARTMENT IS SENDING ME A TEXT MESSAGE.

IF THERE'S AN EMERGENCY, WE'VE BEEN NOTIFIED OR WE'RE TRYING TO GO ON, ON ON THE SCENE.

IF I WALK INTO PUBLIX. IF I WALK INTO WALMART, IF I TRY TO GO GET A BOTTLE OF WATER, I LEAVE IT AT THAT. YOU KNOW, WE GET QUESTIONS AND ABOUT THE CITY.

AND 99% OF THE TIME, BOTH OF US ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS.

SO AND THIS IS NOT INCLUDING THE THIS IS THIS IS NOT INCLUDING ALL THE BOARDS WE'RE ON.

ALL THE MEETINGS WERE ON ALL THE TIME. SO I JUST FEEL THAT THE COMMISSION DESERVES A A COST OF LIVING.

LIKE ALL OTHER EMPLOYEES OF OF FORT PIERCE. AND THAT'S JUST JUST JUST MY BELIEF I COULD BE WRONG AND AND BUT THAT'S WHY I FEEL SO. THAT'S WHY I BROUGHT IT UP, MADAM MAYOR. THANK YOU.

[02:00:03]

SO JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, I WANT TO SEE IF I REMEMBER WE DECIDED TO SET OUR OWN SALARIES.

IS THAT NOT TRUE? THAT'S NOT IN THE CHARTER. DIDN'T WE DECIDE TO SET OUR OWN CHARTER? BECAUSE ALWAYS THERE WAS TIME WHEN THE COMMISSION DECIDED TO SET THEIR OWN.

THEN THERE WAS A TIME WHEN THE COMMISSION GOT IT AUTOMATICALLY. SO I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER.

I TRULY DON'T REMEMBER. IT'S IN THE CODE OF ORDINANCES.

AND IT IT'S ALWAYS BEEN IN THE CODE OF ORDINANCES THAT YOU SET IT.

THERE WAS A DISCREPANCY IN HOW IT WAS INTERPRETED.

SO BECAUSE YOU USED TO JUST DO IT AUTOMATICALLY IN THE BUDGET.

BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT IT SAYS. YOU HAVE TO VOTE ON IT.

YEAH, I KNOW THERE WAS SOME KIND OF CHANGE THAT ORDINANCE SO THAT IT IT INCORPORATES SO THAT YOU GET IT AUTOMATICALLY.

IT JUST IT'S GOING TO TAKE A CODE CHANGE SO WE CAN CHANGE IT WITHOUT GOING TO THE VOTERS.

RIGHT. SO IT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT THAT'S ALREADY ON THE BOOKS AND AND SO AND THE LAST TIME, I DON'T THINK WE TOOK AN INCREASE LAST YEAR, I THINK THE YEAR BEFORE.

WHAT AM I REMEMBERING THAT? RIGHT. I BROUGHT IT UP TWO YEARS AGO, AND IT WAS A RATHER HEATED DISCUSSION.

LAST YEAR DIDN'T GET BROUGHT UP AT ALL. SO IT WAS AN INSTANT EROSION OF WHATEVER THE CONSUMER PRICE INDEX WAS LAST YEAR, WHICH IS PROBABLY POTENTIALLY 4% LAST YEAR. I KNOW THE INCREASE WAS DIFFERENT THAN THAT, BUT THAT'S NOT GAUGED EXACTLY TO THE CPI.

SO I, I'M GOING TO SUGGEST I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER GAINES'S PERSPECTIVE ON THIS, IS THAT I FIND THIS ONE OF THE MOST UNIQUE POSITIONS I'VE EVER HELD, AND THAT THEY CALL US A PART TIME JOB. YEAH.

THAT'S NOT. YEAH. MORE TIME INTO THIS THAN I DO IN MY FULL TIME JOB.

SO I'M NOT REALLY SURE WHAT THE BALANCE IS THERE BETWEEN THE TWO.

HAVING HAD SAID THAT, I BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD BE TREATED SIMILARLY TO ALL OF THE CITY EMPLOYEES AND WHATEVER THAT NUMBER IS, THAT THE CITY COMMISSION SHOULD RECEIVE THE SAME. SO IN THIS CASE, IT'S A 5% INCREASE ACROSS THE BOARD.

I'M ADVOCATING FOR A 5% INCREASE FOR THE CITY COMMISSION AS WELL.

AND I KNOW MY INBOX IS GOING TO BE JAMMED WITH HATE MAIL OVER THIS, BUT AND A LOT OF IT IS FROM THE RETIREES.

I KNOW THE ARGUMENTS THAT ARE MADE FOR THEM ON THIS TOPIC.

I ALSO KNOW WHAT THE CITY CHARTER SAYS. SO IT'S NOT AS IF WE'RE PAYING, YOU KNOW, WE'RE PLAYING GAMES WITH THIS STUFF.

THIS IS WHAT THE CHARTER CALLS FOR. IN NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES, THIS GROUP WOULD BE AFFORDED THE SAME INCREASE AS EVERY OTHER DEFINED EMPLOYEE BY THE CITY BECAUSE WE ARE DEFINED AS EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE.

RIGHT? SO I DON'T REALLY SEE WHY WE'RE TREATED DIFFERENT IN THIS REGARD, BUT WE CERTAINLY ARE.

I UNDERSTAND THE POLITICAL REASONS WHY AND THAT IT WAS LEFT TO BE A FUNCTION OF A PHYSICAL VOTE OF THE COMMISSION INSTEAD OF AN AUTOMATIC INCREASE.

I UNDERSTAND ALL THAT. I THINK IT SHOULD BE CHANGED CANDIDLY, BUT THAT'S PROBABLY NOT GOING TO GARNER GARNER.

I UNDERSTAND. AND I'M JUST SUGGESTING I SAID THIS SHOULD RUN IN SYNC WITH OTHER CITY EMPLOYEES.

AND WHY IT'S NOT IS BEYOND ME, BUT THAT'S THE WAY IT IS.

SO IF THAT'S THE WAY IT IS, THEN I'M SUPPORTING COMMISSIONER GAINES'S MOTION TO COME FOR THE FOR THE INCREASE THIS YEAR.

MADAM MAYOR COMMISSIONERS, IF IT'S HELPFUL, WE COULD PULL UP THAT CODE SECTION.

I'D MISS MORSE'S HELP IF SHE CAN PULL UP THE CODE IF YOU'D LIKE TO SEE HOW IT CURRENTLY READS.

BUT I CAN READ IT TO YOU. FOR EACH THE MAYOR OR A COMMISSIONER, IT SETS YOUR SALARY EFFECTIVE AS OF OCTOBER 1ST, 2023, WHICH IS THE LAST TIME YOU VOTED ON AN INCREASE.

IT THEN SAYS THAT ANY MODIFICATION TO THIS AMOUNT MUST BE DONE BY ORDINANCE SPECIFIC TO THAT SECTION OF THE CODE.

SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT MISS MORSE HAS BUILT THE 5% INTO THE BUDGET INCREASE FOR THE COMMISSION.

PRESUMING THEY APPROVE THE 5%. IS THAT RIGHT? CORRECT. I ALWAYS BUILD IT IN. AND THEN YOU GIVE ME DIRECTION AS TO WHETHER YOU WANT ME TO TAKE IT OUT OR LEAVE IT IN.

SO THE AMENDMENT THAT WE WOULD DO TO THE CODE WOULD BE WHAT YOUR SALARY WILL BE EFFECTIVE AUGUST 1ST, 2025. PRESUMING YOU DO THE 5%. OCTOBER. SORRY, OCTOBER 1ST, 2025.

IF YOUR DIRECTION AND THERE'S A CONSENSUS THAT YOU WANT THIS AMENDED TO INCLUDE AUTOMATIC COLA INCREASES, WE CAN BUILD THAT LANGUAGE INTO A CODE AMENDMENT AS WELL, SO THAT EACH YEAR THE COLA INCREASE DOES NOT HAVE TO COME BACK FOR A SPECIFIC VOTE AND A CODE AMENDMENT. BUT ANYTHING ABOVE THAT COLA, IF YOU JUST WANTED SOMETHING ABOVE WHAT THE NORMAL CITY COST OF LIVING INCREASE WOULD BE, THAT WELL, IT COULD BE WHATEVER YOU WANTED IT TO BE, BUT THAT WOULD NOT BE YOUR LAST TERM.

I WOULD NOT RECOMMEND THAT. BUT YOU ALL TELL US WHAT TO DO.

SPEND IT NOW. SPEND IT NOW. NO, MADAM. YES, SIR.

I WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR ON THIS, BECAUSE, COMMISSIONER BRODERICK, WHAT HAPPENED LAST TIME WAS THAT IT WAS MISINFORMATION GIVEN TO OUR COMMUNITY

[02:05:02]

THAT WE WERE ASKING FOR A PAY INCREASE, AND WE.

AND IT WASN'T THAT WE WERE ASKING FOR COST OF LIVING INCREASES THAT EVERY CITY EMPLOYEE BECAUSE WE WERE IN, YOU KNOW, IN A TERM CITY EMPLOYEE. SO THAT'S WHERE THE CONFUSION AND THE HOSTILITY CAME FROM THE AUDIENCE AT THAT TIME.

AND WHEN I SPOKE TO SOME AFTER THAT MEETING AND SAID, IT'S JUST A COST OF LIVING.

IT'S LIKE, THAT'S NOT WHAT WE WERE TOLD. SO THAT'S WHERE THAT CAME FROM.

I TRIED TO STRESS THAT POINT TWO YEARS AGO, BUT I KNOW THEY DID FALL ON DEAF EARS, OBVIOUSLY, AND THEN IT WAS CONSUMED INCORRECTLY. SO I HAMMERED THE POINT THAT THIS IT'S THE IDENTICAL COST OF LIVING INCREASE THAT ALL CITY EMPLOYEES ARE RECEIVING.

AND I JUST THANKED ME PERSONALLY AND ME PERSONALLY.

I THINK THAT AS A CITY EMPLOYEE, I DON'T CARE IF I'M ELECTED OR APPOINTED OR WHATEVER.

I AM A CITY EMPLOYEE. MY CHECKS COME FROM FOR THIS POSITION.

COMING FROM THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE. I THINK AS AN EMPLOYEE, WE SHOULD BE ENTITLED TO AND INCLUDED IN ALL THE REST OF THE CITY EMPLOYEES. AND IF THE COST OF LIVING IS ONE, IF THE COST OF LIVING IS TWO.

NOW, YOU KNOW WE CAN ALWAYS I DON'T EVER SEE US GETTING, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE GIVE A CITY EMPLOYEE COST OF LIVING 10%, 12%, 13%. YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? MAYBE, MAYBE ONE DAY SOMEBODY SITTING UP HERE COULD DO THAT.

AT THAT JUNCTURE, WE CAN ALWAYS PUT A LIMIT ON AN ELECTED OFFICIAL.

BUT I DON'T SEE THAT HAPPENING ANYTIME SOON. ALL I'M ASKING IS THAT WE'RE TREATED AS EVERY OTHER CITY EMPLOYEE.

THAT'S IT. SO I HAVEN'T HEARD FROM TWO OTHER COMMISSIONERS.

I'M OKAY WITH IT, MAN. MINUTE. I'M FINE. MR. TAYLOR? YEAH. WHAT'S WHAT'S 5% OF 20 BUCKS? I MEAN, IT'S NOT FIVE.

THEY'RE FOR ALL FIVE POSITIONS. IT'S $8,268. OKAY.

LESS THAN TEN GRAND. LESS THAN TEN GRAND. OKAY, I'M GOOD WITH IT.

YEP. WE'RE GOOD WITH IT. YEP, YEP. AND MADAM MAYOR.

YES, MA'AM. COMMISSIONERS. JUST FOR MYSELF IN THE CITY CLERK'S.

I IMAGINE ONE OF THE TWO OF US WILL DRAFT THIS CODE AMENDMENT.

IS THE INTENT THAT YOU ALL WANT THE COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT TO BE AUTOMATIC MOVING FORWARD? OR DO YOU WANT IT TO COME BACK EACH YEAR FOR YOU TO VOTE ON THE COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT AND AMEND THE ORDINANCE? WHAT'S THE FEELING OF THE COMMISSION? I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE AUTOMATIC UNLESS, I MEAN, COMMISERATE WITH OTHER EMPLOYEES. OTHER CITY? CORRECT. BUT NOT AUTOMATIC.

AND I MEANT AUTOMATIC TO BE WHAT OTHER GENERAL EMPLOYEES GET IS WHAT YOU WOULD GET.

I'M FINE WITH THAT. ARE WE GOOD WITH THAT? THAT PART THE ONLY WAY.

THAT'S RIGHT. THE ONLY WAY WE WOULD VOTE FOR SOMETHING OVER AND ABOVE THAT.

YES, MA'AM. AND I WILL WORD IT MUCH MORE. THE WAY THE COMMISSION FEELS, THE WAY I UNDERSTAND IT.

YES, MADAM. YOU COULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO WAIVE IF NEEDED.

CERTAINLY. YEAH, SURE. YES. UNDERSTOOD. OKAY.

THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY MORE DECISIONS TO MAKE? YES. YEAH. ANYBODY ELSE? ANYTHING MORE? MR. CHESS, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO CONTRIBUTE NOW? I WANT TO THANK YOUR FINANCE TEAM. ALL THE DEPARTMENT HEADS AND THEIR STAFF ARE REALLY, YOU KNOW, SHOPPING THE PENCILS AND BRINGING IN THEM 3% REDUCTIONS.

I WANT TO THANK YOU ALL, THOUGH, FOR THE HEALTHY DISCUSSION. I MEAN, I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT. I MEAN, THAT THAT DEBATE IS VERY REWARDING FOR US TO HEAR YOU CONSIDER ALL THE OPTIONS WITH GREAT DETAIL. I MEAN, YOU UNDERSTAND THE DECISIONS THAT WE'RE MAKING. YOU DIDN'T JUST COME DOWN WITH THE HAMMER.

YOU REALLY THOUGHT IT THROUGH. SO I BELIEVE WE HAVE GOOD DIRECTION, EXCELLENT DIRECTION.

I LIKE A BALANCED BUDGET. I HAD TO PUT THE POSITIONS OUT THERE.

SO I WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT I THINK YOU ALL MADE VERY GOOD CHOICES, AND I THINK WE'RE MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.

SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND THEY WERE NOT EASY CHOICES.

I HAVE TO SAY TO YOU, THEY WERE NOT EASY CHOICES.

AND WE APPRECIATE THE DIALOG IN THE DIRECTION.

I REALLY FEEL THAT WE ARE ON A GOOD PATH HERE.

GOOD. AND MISS COX, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING YOU WANT TO ADD? NO, MA'AM. ALL RIGHTY. AND, MISS HEDGES, HOW ABOUT YOU? DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING YOU WANT TO ADD? NO, MA'AM. MISS COTT, I MEAN, MISS MORRIS, DO YOU HAVE ANY LAST MINUTE WORDS FOR US? I DON'T, BUT I WILL ECHO MR. CHESS. AND I SAID THIS TO OUR DEPARTMENT HEADS, AND I WANT TO SAY THIS IN FRONT OF EVERYBODY, THAT OUR TEAM IS GREAT. EVERYBODY LOOKED AT WHAT NEEDED TO BE DONE.

WE WEREN'T HAPPY, BUT WE SAID WE'D COME TOGETHER AND DO WHAT NEEDED TO BE DONE AS A TEAM AND WORK TOGETHER TO MAKE SURE THAT IT WAS DONE.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, I'VE BEEN HERE WHEN IT WASN'T THAT WAY.

SO I APPRECIATE ALL OF OUR DEPARTMENTS, IT'S, YOU KNOW, WILLING TO DO WHAT NEEDED TO BE DONE.

AND WE APPRECIATE STAFF. AND YES, YES, THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT, I THINK, DID A GREAT JOB SPINNING UP SEVEN DIFFERENT SCENARIOS IN A FEW DAYS IS NOT A PIECE OF CAKE. TRUST ME, I DO THIS STUFF TOO AND THIS IS NOT WHAT THEY PROVIDED HERE.

TODAY WAS A YEOMAN'S BIT OF WORK TO GET IT DONE RIGHT.

THE WHAT IFS AND YOU DID IT SO WE COULD UNDERSTAND IT, RIGHT.

SO ALL THOSE DEPARTMENT HEADS TO TIGHTEN THEIR BELTS BECAUSE THAT'S THAT'S REAL.

[02:10:01]

NOW IT'S JUST 3% CUT AND THAT'S, THAT'S I'M SURE GOING TO HAVE IMPACT.

AND TO ALL THOSE DEPARTMENTS THAT UNFORTUNATELY DIDN'T GET FUNDED IN THE SUGGESTION RIGHT NOW YOU KNOW, I THINK YOU JUST HAVE TO KEEP US APPRIZED AS THINGS PROGRESS.

BUT WE ALL ARE TIGHTENING OUR BELTS HERE TO TRY TO GET THROUGH THIS.

RIGHT? RIGHT. WANT TO STAY HEALTHY. AND UNFORTUNATELY, WE'RE NOT THERE TO WEALTHY YET.

READY? SHALL WE ADJOURN? YES. OKAY. WE'LL BE ADJOURNING.

EVERYONE WILL LEAVE THE CHAMBERS AND UNTIL 5:00.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.