[1. CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:03]
>> I'D LIKE TO CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER.
THIS IS A SPECIAL MEETING. IT'S MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 14TH, 2020. PLEASE STAND FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
>> CRAWLD PLEASE. >> MAYOR HUDSON, PRESENT, COMMISSIONER ALEXANDER, COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, YES, MA'AM. COMMISSIONER PERONA, COMMISSIONER SESSIONS. YES, MA'AM.
>> FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS COMMENTS ON THE AGENDA, ON ITEMS NOT REQUIRING A PUBLIC HEARING. WE DID NOT HAVE ANY SIGNUPS
[5. NEW BUSINESS]
TONIGHT. NEW BUSINESS, THIS IS WHERE THE MAYOR WILL PROPOSE THE NEW MILLAGE RATE AND ROLL BACK RATE.>> THE CITY OF THE FORWARD PIERCE IS PROPOSING A MILLAGE RATE OF 6.9, WHICH EXCEEDS THE ROM BACK RATE BY 5.81.
MS. JOHNNA IS MORRIS WILL EXPLAIN.
>> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS, PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020, 2021 ACKNOWLEDGE AND WE ARE PROPOSING A BALANCED BUDGETS OF $43,323,874.
WHICH IS AN 893,902 INCREASE FROM FISCAL YEAR 20.
THE HIGHLIGHTS OF THIS BUDGET ARE THE FIRST IS, AN INCREASE IN OUR ESTIMATED THE TAXABLE PROPERTY VALUES.
OF 2.7 BILLION. IT'S A 6.1% INCREASE FROM LAST FISCAL YEAR. SAND BECAUAND BECAUSE OF THIS IE ARE PROPOSING NO CHANGE TO THE MILLAGE RATE OF 6.9%.
A LOT OF TIMES OUR RESIDENTS GET A LITTLE CONFUSED, THINKING THAT WE HAD THAT 6 MUCH 1% INCREASE IN TAXABLE VALUES THEY'RE GOING TO SEE THAT IN THEIR RATES AS WELL AND THAT IS NOT THE CASE.
I TRY TO INCLUDE THIS SLIDE IN ALL OF OUR BUDGET PRESENTATIONS SO THAT IT MAKES THE CITIZENS AWARE THAT IN 1995, OUR FLORIDA CONSTITUTION WAS AMENDED AND BECAUSE OF THAT AMENDMENT IT LIMITED THE ANNUAL INCREASED AMOUNT THAT ANY HOMESTEADED PROPERTY WOULD SEE IN THEIR VALUES.
AND IT'S CAPPED AT 3% OR WHATEVER THE CPI IS AT THAT TIME. AT THE TIME WHEN OUR PROPERTY APPRAISERS SET THE RATES FOR OUR CITIZENS IT WAS TWOM 2.3%.
I INCLUDED IN THAT TABLE TO SHOW WHAT THAT 2.3% EQUATES TO.
ICIAL USUALLY I WOULD STOP AT TT TIME 100,000 BUT I INCLUDED THOSE THAT ARE ASSESSED AT 300,000.
180, 200,000 COULD SEE HOW MUCH OF A DIFFERENCE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. SO WITH THE TW TWO 2.3% INCREASO CHANGE IN OUR MILLAGE RATE, THE THE INCREASE IS IN VALUE AND NOT IN OUR RATE. FOR PROPERTY THAT'S BEING ASSESSED 200,000, LAST YEAR THEY WOULD HAVE PAID $1,380, WITH THE 2% -- 2.3% INCREASE THEY'RE GOING TO PAY 1,411, A DIFFERENCE OF 31.74. SO SO OF TALL A ALL THE AD VALO, THAT ARE COMING TO THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE.
I WANTED TO SHOW THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS THE COMPARISON OF THE MILLAGE RATES AND ABOUT BUDGET VALUES WE HAVE.
IF YOU TAKE A LOOK YOU'LL SEE THAT OUR TAXABLE VALUES HAVE NOT REACHED THE TAXABLE VALUES AT '08-DESCRAIN AS OF YET, HERE IT IS 13 YEARS LATER AND WE ARE TRYING TO RECOUP THE COST, THE COST OF LIVING THAT IS CAN DRASTICALLY INCREASED IN THAT TIME HOWEVER, IF YOU LOOK AAT OUR TOTAL GENERAL FUND BUDGET IN
[00:05:01]
'08-'09 IT'S 42 MILLION, IN 2021, IT'S 43 MILLION.WE'VE HAD TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS AND WE ALSO HAVE TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION, DURING THE 09 TO 12-DLEAN THOSE WERE IF TIMES WHEN WHEE WERE ALL GOING THROUGE LAST RECESSION.
WE KEPT OUR MILLAGE RATE TO OUR DETRIMENT AT THE 5.46 EVAN SFN R YEARS, WE'VE KICKED THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD FOR SO LONG, UNTIL NOW, WE HAVE TO ADDRESS SOME ISSUES. WE ARE SEEING THE INCREASES IN ORDER TO OPERATE AND NOD DRASTICALLY CUT SERVICES, WE'VE HAD TO KEEP OR HAVE BEEN PROPOSING AND KEEPING OUR MILLAGE RATE AS IT IS SO WE CAN GENERATE THE REVENUE TO KEEP THE CITY GOING AT THE RATE THAT OUR CITIZENS ARE USED TO US
OPERATING AT. >> COMMISSIONER SESSIONS.
>> I LIKE WHAT YOU'RE POINTING OUT WITH REGARDS TO 11, 12, 13, 14, AND 15. AND THEN WE START INCREASING, 35, IN WHAT IS IT, 15, 16 WE GO TO 36.
BUT THAT'S JUST A CLEAR INDICATION THAT WE CAN DO IT IF NEED BE AND WE DID IT WHEN WE HAD TO.
I HEAR YOU SAYING WE'RE TRYING TO PLAY CATCHUP NOW.
BUT I'M JUST A LITTLE CONCERNED BECAUSE AS TIME GOES ON, I UNDERSTAND THE ENERGIES IN THE E BUDGET BUT THAT'S QUITE A PERCENTAGE INCREASE DON'T YOU THINK? BECAUSE I MEAN AGAIN, WE DID IT WHEN WE HAD TO DO IT.
AND BACK 32, 34, 34, 36, BACK TO 2016, BUT AFTER THAT, WE STARTED INCREASING, WE'RE NOW BACK UP TO 43 AGAIN.
>> COMMISSIONER SESSIONS, IF YOU TAKE -- IF WE WERE TO TAKE THE SAME AND LOOK AT '08 CONTRACTS AND '08-'09 TO THE COST OF CONTRACTS NOW, WE HAVE TO IN ORDER TO OPERATE, IF YOU THINK ABOUT ALL OF OUR BILLS OR GROCERY OR GAS, ANYTHING WE WERE PAYING AT THAT TIME, 13 YEARS AGO HAS DRASTICALLY INCREASED IN THAT TIME. SO ALL OF OUR CONTRACTS AND THEN WE'RE TO THE POINT NOW WHERE OUR INFRASTRUCTURE WAS TO WORN DOWN, YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOT THE REVOLVING LOANS FOR VEHICLES, WE HADN'T PURCHASED VEHICLES IN 20 YEARS.
AND IT WAS TO THE POINT WHERE THEY WERE FALLING APART.
SO WE HAD TO DO SOMETHING IN ORDER FOR THAT.
WE HAVE MAINTENANCE YOU NOAA THATKNOWTHAT WE HAVE HAD TO UND.
LIKE THE SEAWALL THAT WE HAVE AND THAT HAD TO BE REPAIRED.
THAT WAS A BIG MAJOR COST THAT WE THOUGHT FEMA WAS GOING TO PAY FOR AND NOW THEY VERY WELL MAY NOT PAY FOR AND ONE OF THE REASONS WAS THAT MAINTENANCE HAD NOT BEEN DONE.
SO THOSE ARE THE THINGS WE HAVE TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION.
RIGHT NOW LIKE DANNY, ONE OF THE ISSUES HE HAD AT THE GOLF COURSE ONCE HE CAME IN, THINGS MAINTENANCE HAD NOT BEEN DONE IN YEARS. AND SO NOW HE'S HAD ALL THIS COST TRYING TO BRING IT UP TO AN OPERATIONAL FACILITY SO HE COULD GENERATE ADDITIONAL REVENUE. AND THAT'S HOW -- WE HAVE HAD BUILDINGS THAT ARE FALLING APART, OUR ROADS NEEDED TO BE PAVED AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. BECAUSE WE HAD TO DURING THAT TIME. WE LET SO MANY EMPLOYEES GO.
WE ARE NOT POINTS THAT WE LOOK AT THE EMPLOYEE COUNT, I THINK WHEN I REVIEWED IT 08-'09 UNTIL NOW, IT WAS 60 LESS EMPLOYEES.
WE ARE DOING SO MUCH MORE WITH SO MANY LESS EMPLOYEES WE HAVE.
>> THE REASON IT REALLY STOOD OUT IN MY MIND, I LOOKED AT 08-DESCRI09 AND IT WAS 42, SEVEL YEARS LATER WE'RE BACK TO 42.
I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM.
OF COURSE WE HAVE TO PLAY CATCHUP AND WHEN I LOOK AT THE CONDITION OF THE STREETS SERGE THERE'S SOME INCREASES WITH REGARDS TO EMPLOYEES. THE CUTBACKS.
BUT JUST TO GO FROM 08 TO 09 AT 42 AND THEN SUBSTANTIALLY HAVE A DECREASE AND SEVERAL YEARS LATER WE'RE BACK TO 42 AGAIN IT JUST
[00:10:03]
STICKS OUT LIKE A SORE THUMB. WHEN YOU CONSIDER WHAT WE CAN DO VERSUS WHAT WE HAVE DONE IN THE PAST.BUT SO MUCH FOR THAT. I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
>> PROCEED. >> SO IF WE LOOK AT OUR REVENUE HIGHLIGHTS, OUR AD VALOREM CAN REVENUE ASK 17.8 MILLION WHICH IS AN INCREASE OF $1,022,553. WE ARE DECREASING ALL OF THE REMAINING TAX REVENUE AND COLLECTIVELY IT IS $300,000.
OUR LOCAL OPTION GAS TAX, OUR TELECOMMUNICATIONS TAX OUR ELECTRICITY TAXES ALL OF THOSE ARE BEING DECREASED.
ALL OF THESE DECREASES IN OUR BUDGET ARE RESULTED FROM COVID-19. AND HAD WE NOT HAD THE PANDEMIC WE WOULD HAVE BEEN ON COURSE TO POSSIBLY NOT MAKE YOU KNOW DECREASE OUR MILLAGE RATE OAR GO TO THE ROLL BACK RATE.
BUT BECAUSE WE HAD ALL OF THESE MAJOR DECREASES AND THERE'S SO MUCH STILL, SO MUCH UNCERTAINTY, WE ARE AND ALL OF MY COLLEAGUES, WE'VE DISCUSSED THIS. WE ARE BALANCING A BUDGET WITH SO MUCH YOUR HONOR CERTAINTY. THE GOVERNMENT HAS ALREADY -- SO MUCH UNCERTAINTY. OUR GOVERNMENT HAS SAID OUR BUDGET WILL DECREASE, THEY DON'T KNOW THE AMOUNT.
FLORIDA, TOURISM AND OUR SALES TAX REVENUE WE'RE GOING TO SEE ADJUSTMENTS IN. WE'VE GONE IN AND TRIED TO MAKE AN INFORMED, EDUCATED DECISION ON HOW MUCH WE'RE GOING TO DECREASE THAT REVENUE BY. AND SO TAKING ALL OF THAT INTO CONSIDERATION JUST ON OUR TAXES WE'RE DECREASING THE ADDITIONAL
TAXES BY ABOUT $300,000. >> MADAM MAYOR.
>> YES, SIR. >> JOHNNA, AND SPEAK OF THAT, THIS YEAR'S BUDGET YOU'VE DECREASED BY HOW MUCH IN PREPARATION FOR OR IN ANTICIPATION OF A DECREASED
REVENUE FOR NEXT YEAR. >> WE'VE DECREASED ALL OF OUR EXPENDITURES BY 2.5%, SO IT'S GOING TO GENERATE A SAVINGS OF
ABOUT $1 MILLION. >> THIS YEAR'S AMOUNT YOU WILL ROLL OVER IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO DO?
>> WE'LL HAVE TO ROLL IT OVER CHEM WE DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH OF A SHORTFALL WE'RE GOING TO HAVE. IF ALL THINGS REMAIN CONSTANT ANY SHORTFALL WILL USE A PORTION OF THAT AND THE REMAINDER ON
ROLLOVER. >> LET ME ASK YOU THIS ON THE SAME NOTE. YOU SAY 2.5 ACROSS THE BOARD.
BUT IF YOU ARE TO GIVE FULL CONSIDERATION WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE IMPACT WHAT ABOUT THOSE DEPARTMENTS THAT ARE SUBSTANTIALLY HIGHER THAN OTHERS? WOULD IT NOT BE RELATIVE SHOWING A GREATER INCREASE FROM THEM AS OPPOSED TO THOSE THAT DON'T TAKE AS MUCH AWAY FROM THE BUDGET?
>> WELL, IN TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE SIZE OF THEIR BUDGETS, THE 2.5% WOULD HAVE BEEN LARGER IN SOME DIVISIONS AS OPPOSED TO IT WOULD HAVE BEEN, IN MY DEPARTMENT I THINK IT WAS LIKE $18,000. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE POLICE IT WAS 100-SOMETHING OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
>> THAT'S WHERE I'M GOING. YES.
>> THE TWO AND A AND A HALF PERE JUST SAID ACROSS THE BOARD
EVERYBODY GAVE UP 2.5%. >> DONE PROPORTIONALLY.
>> OKAY. WE ALSO ARE DECREASING ALL OF OUR STATE DISTRIBUTED REVENUE, THAT'S OUR SALES TAX, OUR STATE SHARING, STATE SHARE REVENUE TAX.
ALL OF THAT REVENUE WE WENT IN AND DID A DECREASE TO ALL THAT STATE DISTRIBUTED REVENUE AS WELL.
WE DECREASED OUR REVENUE FOR ALL OUR RENTAL FACILITY CHARGES.
SO ALL OF THOSE CHARGES ON OUR RENTAL FACILITIES BECAUSE WE UNDERSTAND THAT PEOPLE MAY NOT BE RENTING THE FACILITIES AT THE SAME CAPACITY THAT WE NORMALLY WOULD BUDGET SO WE MADE ADJUSTMENTS FOR THAT AS WELL. AND ALSO, WE ARE STILL RESTRICTING THE 600,000 FOR CAPITAL EXPENDITURES THAT WAS APPROVED, THE LAST BUDGET MILLAGE RATE THAT WE INCREASED, WE SAID THAT WE WOULD ALWAYS RESTRICT THAT PORTION TO BE USED FOR CAPITAL EXPENDITURES, AND WE REMAIN -- CONTINUE TO DO THAT.
>> EXCUSE ME. OUT OF THAT 600,000 DO WE HAVE ANY LEFT? DID WE USE IT ALL?
>> IF THERE'S -- IF IT'S -- IT'S AASSIGNED TO PROJECT.
EVERY BUDGET YEAR IT'S SA ASSIGD TO PROJECTS.
IF I.T. USES 20,000, THE 200,00S ROLL SO WE LET THE FUNDS ROLL, IF THEY ARE STILL ON NEGOTIATIONS ON PURCHASING A UNIT THEN THAT 20 REMAINS WITH THEM TO BE USED THE NEXT FISCAL
YEAR. >> SO IT STAYS WITHIN THAT DEPARTMENT BUT IT JUST ROLLS OVER FOR THEM TO UTILIZE?
[00:15:04]
>> CORRECT. BUT IT'S ALWAYS USED FOR CAPITAL EXPENDITURES. NO OTHER EXPENDITURES, ALWAYS CAPITAL EXPENDITURES. OKAY.
AS WE LOOK AT OUR EXPENDITURES, ALL DEPARTMENTS OPERATING BUDGETS ARE REDUCED TO LEVELS TO HELP MITIGATE THE IMPACT OF THE REVENUE LOSS. SO EVERY DEPARTMENT WITHIN THE GENERAL FUND WAS DECREASED IN SOME CAPACITY TO HELP ABSORB THE REVENUE LOSS THAT WE ARE GOING TO EXPERIENCE.
BUT ONE OF THE MAIN ISSUES OR CONCERN OF THIS COMMISSION WAS TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR OFFICERS WERE PUT INTO THEIR CORRECT STEP PLANS AND RECEIVED A COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENTS FOR THAT.
WE HAVE UTILIZED A PORTION AND THAT'S WHAT A PORTION OF OUR INCREASE IN OUR MILLAGE RATE, THAT INCREASE THAT WE'RE SEEING IN THE AD VALOREM TAX, 450,000 OF THAT IS GOING TO OUR POLICE OFFICERS TO TAKE FOR THEIR RAISES.
SO THAT'S A MAJOR PORTION OF THAT.
>> WE ARE PROPOSING THE MILLAGE RATE TO STAY THE SAME, THE
REVENUE IS INCREASING. >> THE REVENUE IS INCREASING AND A PORTION OF THAT IS GOING TO TAKE FOR THIS INCREASE TO OUR OFFICERS. AND HAD WE NOT HAD AN INCREASE WE WOULD HAVE ENDED UP EVEN WITHOUT THIS ALLOCATION WE WOULD HAVE HAD A SHORTFALL OF ABOUT $951,000 IN OUR BUDGET.
THE INCREASE PLUS WITH SOME OF THE DECREASES IN OUR OPERATING BUDGETS, WE ARE SAYING THAT THE INCREASE IN THE REVENUE THAT WE'RE GOING TO RECEIVE THE GOING TO HELP PAY FOR THIS.
>> YES, SIR. >> WHICH ONE OF THE DEPARTMENTS AS FAR AS OPERATING BUDGETS IS CONCERNED GAVE THE GREATEST
IMPACT REGARDS TO NUMBER 8? >> IT PROBABLY WOULD HAVE BEEN POLICE. BECAUSE THEY HAD THE LARGEST GUJT. BUDGET.
15 MILLION OF IT IS POLICE. >> WHAT IS DISWO AND 3?
>> IT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE LARGER THE NEXT LARGER WHICH PUBLIC WORKS CAN CLIIVEL WOULD HAVE COLLECTIVELY, AND THENENGINEERIT BUDGET. SO IT'S THE BUDGETS THAT HAVE THE GREATEST AMOUNT OF EXCESS. BUT THEN ONE OF THE BIG DECREASES WAS ONE OF THE POSITIONS IN OUR CITY ATTORNEY'S BUDGET. IT WAS A LARGE ITEM.
HE DEFERRED THE POSITION. AND IT WAS A GREAT SAVINGS.
SO IT WAS A -- >> WITH REGARDS TO THAT SAME ISSUE OF EMPLOYEE SALARIES, HAVE YOU ALL LOOKED AT EMPLOYEE SALARIES AS RELATES TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, AND HOW THAT IS IMPACTING THE BUD BUDGET ITS? IS THERE ANYTHING THAT STANDS OUT FROM THE EMPLOYMENT, OTHER THAN THE HIGH TURNOVER RATE FROM THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, THAT WOULD HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL IMPACT
ON THAT SAME ISSUE? >> I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION. IS IT ALL OTHER -- OKAY.
CLARIFY. >> LET ME BREAK IT DOWN TO YOU IN SIMPLE TERMS. DID THE POLICE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, AS IT RELATES TO EMPLOYEES, YOU JUST STATED THAT OUR CITY ATTORNEY GAVE A CONTRIBUTION WITH REGARDS TO CUT BACK AS IT RELATES TO THE POSITION. MY QUESTION TO YOU IS, COULD WE TAKE THAT SAME PRACTICE WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, AND WHETHER OR NOT YOU FEEL THAT IN LIGHT OF THE PRESENT SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES, THAT'S SOMETHING WE NEED TO TAKE A LOOK AT?
>> THAT'S A QUESTION I'M GOING TO HAVE TO DEFER WITH MR. MIMS.
>> MADAM MAYOR. MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT DID REDUCE THE NUMBER OF THEIR EMPLOYEES.
THESE WERE CIVILIAN STAFF AND NOT SWORN OFFICERS BUT YES, THAT
WHAT I'M GETTING AT IS THIS. BOOTS ON THE GROUND, THAT'S ONE THING, THAT'S ONE THING I WANT TO SEE THE POLICE DEPARTMENT DO AS I'M SURE THE CITIZENS DO. BUT WHEN I LOOK AT REPETITIVELY THE NUMBER OF HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLAR SALARIES COMING FROM TAMPA THAT REALLY CONCERNS ME AND THE HIGH TURNOVER RATE OF THOSE SALARIES, THAT'S WHERE I'M GOING WITH THIS.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU ALL HAVE NOT NOTICED AND SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED AND DESERVES SOME ATTENTION?
>> I'M NOT QUITE SURE HOW TO ACTUALLY ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
BECAUSE WE LOOK AT A DEPARTMENT BASED UPON A NUMBER OF POSITIONS, WE'RE POSITION CONTROLLED AND A BUDGET FOR THAT NUMBER OF POSITIONS. SO IF THOSE POSIT POSITIONS AREL
[00:20:05]
THEN WE BUDGETS THEM TO THAT LEVEL.IF THEY ARE VACANT THEN WE DO NOT BUDGET THEM TO THAT LEVEL.
IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT WE HAVE CIVILIAN AND WE HAVE SWORN POSITIONS. AS FAR AS A HIGH TURNOVER, DO I BELIEVE, AND UNFORTUNATELY OUR HR MANAGER IS NOT IN THIS ROOM RIGHT NOW, WHAT I BELIEVE OUR TURNOVER RATIO AT THE FORT PIERCE POLICE DEPARTMENT HAS ACTUALLY DECREASED AS OF LATE.
AND I BELIEVE IT IS VERY COMPARABLE TO OTHER POLICE ORGANIZATIONS THROUGHOUT THE STATE.
>> OKAY. WELL, THAT'S AS IT RELATES TO CAN POLICE OFFICERS, BOOTS ON THE GROUND.
>> YES, SIR. >> BUT I'M TALKING ABOUT THOSE ASSIST CHIEFS AND CHIEFS AND MAJORS AND WE HAVE MORE MAJORS AND CHIEFS THAN WE EVER HAD IN THE HISTORY OF THE CITY.
THEY KEEP COMING FROM TAMPA. EVERY TIME THEY COME THEY COME WITH A $WHIERND,000 PLUS SALARY. MY QUESTION TO YOU IS IS THAT SOMETHING YOU THINK WE ALL SHOULD LOOK AT, IS IT SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO YOU ALL'S ATTENTION OR SOMETHING THAT YOU ALL THINK WE NEED TO CONSIDER OR SOMETHING OF SERIOUS
CONCERN FOR BOTH OF YOU? >> FROM MY PERSPECTIVE AND LOOKING AT THE OPERATION OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND HOW THE COMMAND STAFF OPERATES I BELIEVE WE HAVE PROBABLY THE MOST PROFESSIONAL COMMAND STAFF POLICE DEPARTMENT THAT WE HAVE HAD IN SEVERAL YEARS. THEY ARE VERY RESPONSIVE AND THEY ARE VERY PROFESSIONAL. AS FAR AS THE OPERATION AND THE ACTUAL STRUCTURE, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE REVIEW ON A CONSISTENT BASIS. WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED COMPLAINTS ABOUT THE STRUCTURE. IF YOU WOULD LIKE US TO LOOK INTO THAT, SIR, WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO DO SO BUT MY OFFICE HAS NOT OFFICE HAS RECEIVED A COMPLAINT ABOUT THE STRUCTURE.
>> NO, SIR IT HASN'T TO DO WITH A COMPLAINT.
IT HAS TO DO WITH YOU BEING IN CHARGE WITH THE BUDGET AND MY BUDGETARY CONCERNS THAT I'M RAISING OR THAT MAYBE OR WOULD HAVE AN IMPACT. I WOULD LOVE TO SEE OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT GET SOME POSITIVES JUST LIKE OUR CITY ATTORNEY JUST DID WITH THE SAME POSITION THAT HE TOOK IN HIS DEPARTMENT.
AND WHEN I THINK ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, I'M JUST WONDERING, IS THAT AN AREA THAT WE JUST NEED TO LOOK AT? BECAUSE I'M REPETITIVELY SEEING INDIVIDUALS HIRED, IN THE ADMINISTRATION, THAT COME IN BY WAY OF MAJORS, ASSISTANT CHIEFS, AND IT'S NOT ONE, BUT IT'S ONE AFTER THE OTHER. AND I'M JUST WONDERING IF THAT'S AN IDEA THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT. WHETHER IT'S BY WAY OF COMPLAINT, I'M NOT DISPUTING, SIR.
IT MAY NOT BE BY COMPLAINT, TRUE ENOUGH.
BUT AS A COMMISSIONER, THAT'S AN ITEM FOR BUDGETARY PURPOSES THAT I THINK WE NEED TO START LOOKING AT.
OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT IS ONE OF THE BIGGEST, AS WE ALL KNOW, BUDGETS OF THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE.
AND IF WE'RE GOING TO START CARVING, LET'S START CARVING WHERE WE NEED TO CARVE SOME FAT OFF.
>> OKAY. ON THE SAME TOKEN, THERE WAS NO COST OF LIVING INCREASE FOR OUR BARGAINING AND NONBARGAINING EMPLOYEES IN THIS BUDGET. THERE HAVE BEEN NO INCREASES AT ALL. WE HAVE DISCUSSED THAT MAYBE LOOKING AT IT MID-YEAR TO SEE WHERE WE WERE.
BUT RIGHT NOW, BASED ON WHERE WE ARE WITH FUNDS, WE ARE NOT PROPOSING ANY INCREASES FOR OUR BARGAINING AND NONBARGAINING EMPLOYEES. ALSO, NINE POSITIONS WERE UNFUNDED, OR IN THIS BUDGET, AND WE ARE STILL GOING FORWARD WITH THE HIRING FREEZE. SO THERE WERE NINE POSITIONS THAT WERE UNFUNDED. SOME OF THOSE POSITIONS WERE IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT'S ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISIONS.
THERE WERE POSITIONS IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AS WELL BUT IT WAS A TOTAL OF NINE POSITIONS.
THERE IS AN INCREASE IN THE RETIREMENT CAN CONTRIBUTION RATE OF .05 FOR GENERAL AND 1.3% FOR OUR POLICE AND YOU CAN SEE THE- AMTHEDOLLAR AMOUNT FOR THE INCRE AND THERE IS AN INCREASE THAT
AMOUNT AS WELL. >> MADAM MAYOR, BEFORE YOU LEAVE THAT SLIDE, WE ARE GOING TO IN OUR BUDGETARY WORKSHOP, I BELIEVE WE TALKED ABOUT REREALITYING NUMBER TIN AFTER THE FIRST QUARTER, BRINGING IT BACK MAYBE EVEN YOU KNOW AFTER A
HALF YEAR. >> APRIL IS WHAT I REMEMBER.
[00:25:01]
>> AND MAYBE A REPORT AT THE FIRST QUARTER I BELIEVE.
>> THAT'S RIGHT, REPORT FIRST QUARTER AND ONCE WE GET PAST THE MID YEAR AFTER MARCH WE WOULD LOOK AT IT IN THE FIRST PART OF APRIL TO SEE WHERE WE WERE FISCALLY IS AND IF WE WERE ABLE
TO OUNDERTAKE THAT. UNDERTAKE T. >> THANK YOU.
>> WE HAD A .5% INCREASE IN OUR HEALTH INSURANCE COST AND AN 8% DECREASE IN OUR DENTAL INSURANCE COST.
WE CHANGED PROVIDERS SO WE WILL SEE A SAVINGS IN OUR DEJ INSUOUR DENTALINSURANCE PREMIUM. OUR CAPITAL IS 2.251 MILLION, AS WE SEE COMMISSIONER SESSIONS HOW THOSE FUNDS ARE BROKEN OUTS HOW IT'S ALLOCATED THERE AND WHAT IT WILL BE USED FOR.
WE HAD THE 1.5 FOR THE INFRASTRUCTURE SALES TAX PROJECTS AND THAT IS WHAT THE CITIZENS VOTED FOR FOR IMPROVEMENTS. WE HAVE $250,000 ALLOCATED FOR I.T. 100,000 TO PAY THE LEASE PER THD THOSE WERE THE VEHICLES OUTSIDE OF THE ENTERPRISE CONTRACT IF YOU CAN REMEMBER, WE HAD ABOUT 24, 25 VEHICLES THAT WE HAD GONE WITH PRIOR TO ENTERING INTO THE LEASE WITH THE ENTERPRISE, AND SO WE MAKE THAT ANNUAL PAYMENT FOR THOSE.
THE 100,000 THAT YOU ALL APPROVED FOR, FROM THE CSI FUNDS FOR POLICE SECURITY ISSUES, THE POLICE BODY CAMS, WE MAKE THAT $90,000 ANNUAL LEASE PAYMENT FOR THOSE AS WELL.
AND THEN, THE $85,000 IS FOR OTHER CAPITAL PROJECTS THAT ARE TO BE ASSIGNED. SO THAT IS THE ALLOCATION FOR THE 2.125 FOR THE CAPITAL PROJECTS.
AND LASTLY, OUR DEBT SERVICE COST HAS INCREASED BY $321,692.
AND THAT'S A RESULT OF THE PRINCIPAL PAYMENTS.
BEFORE WE RESTRUCTURED WE WERE DOING A LOT OF INTEREST-ONLY PAYMENTS ON THE FIRST PART OF THEM AND NOW BECAUSE THE INTEREST RATE IS SO LOW WE ARE PAYING MORE OF THE PRINCIPAL PAYMENT AS OPPOSED TO THE INTEREST PAYMENT SO THAT'S THAT INCREASE FOR THAT. AND CHOSE ARE THE HIGHLIGHTS THS FROM OUR BUDGET. LIKE I SAID, COVID, THIS PANDEMIC HAS REALLY WREAK HAVOC ON OUR BUDGET AS A WHOLE.
NOT JUST FOR THE CITY. OUR STATE AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENTS AS WELL. AND SO A LOT OF THE THINGS THAT WE WERE RELYING ON OR SOME OF THE REVENUE THAT WE WERE RELYING ON, WE CAN'T RELY ON FOR THAT FISCAL YEAR UNTIL WE'RE MORE CERTAIN. AND AS A RESULT, THOSE ARE OUR -- THIS IS OUR RECOMMENDATION AS TO WHY WE ARE PROPOSING TO KEEP OUR MILLAGE RATITY SAME RATE THAT IT IS FOR
THIS FISCAL YEAR. >> THE DEBT SERVICE 5.2 MILL AM
I REMEMBERING THAT CORRECTLY? >> 5.4 I BELIEVE.
>> 5.4 AND IS THAT GENERAL FUND ONLY?
>> THAT IS THE PORTION THAT GENERAL IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT
WE PAY, YES. >> AND THEN THE FPRA IS OVER AND
>> AND FPR AFTER IS 5 MILLION. THERE IS A FIVE MILLION, 5.4 I
THINK IT IS. >> WE DON'T PAY 10 MILLION A
YEAR IN DEBT SERVICE DO WE? >> NO.
A PORTION OF THAT 5 MILLION THAT IS IN GENERAL IS GENERAL PAYING THE PORTION FOR FPRA, SO FPRA SENDS OVER 2 MILLION FOR THE PORTION THAT GENERAL RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT WE'RE PAYING.
>> THE TOTAL SERVICE WOULD BE ABOUT 5.4 MILLION EVERY YEAR IS
THAT RIGHT? >> THAT'S -- YEAH, ABOUT 4, 5.
>> THANK YOU. THAT'S SOMETHING WE HAVE TO PAY
BEFORE WE CAN DO ANYTHING ELSE. >> THAT'S THE FIRST THING WE HAVE TO PAY. CRAFTING THE BUDGET.
THE FIRST THING I BUDGET IS DEBT BECAUSE WE HAVE TO PAY THAT.
>> AND WE ALSO RESTRUCTURED SOME OF THOSE DEBT SERVICE PAYMENTS
TO SAVE, OR ELSE THIS NUMBER >> CORRECT.
>> THREE OR 74 MONTHS AGO, COULD IT HAVE BEEN LOWER AS WELL.
A LOT OF MAJOR PORTIONS OF THOSE WAS INTEREST-ONLY PAYMENTS, WHICH WAS A SMALL NUMBER. AND BECAUSE THE INTEREST PAYMENTS DROPPED SO LOW, WE HAVE A LARGER PORTION BECAUSE WE ARE PAYING MORE OF THE PRINCIPAL NOW BECAUSE THE INTEREST IS SO MUCH
>> I'LL ENTERTAIN ANY QUESTIONS. >> ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF
[00:30:01]
MS. MORRIS? OKAY.SO WE APPRECIATE THAT. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING.
[6. PUBLIC HEARING]
ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK TO THIS ISSUE PLEASE COME FORWARD.YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES. AND SEEING NO ONE, WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AND ARE THERE ANY AMENDMENTS PROPOSED FOR THE 2020-2021 BUDGET?
>> I WANT TO BRING UP SOMETHING FOR CONSIDERATION.
AFTER HAVING A LITTLE CONFERENCE WITH OUR CITY ENGINEER, REALIZING THE STATE OF OUR ROADS AND RECONSTRUCTIONS, AND WHY WE'RE SAYING WE'RE NOT RAISING TAXES, AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT IS ALL ABOUT THE PEOPLE'S TAX BILL.
AND THEY LOOK AT IT AS AN INCREASE, EVEN TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY ITSELF.
WHICH CONTRIBUTES TOWARDS THAT BEING HIGHER.
BUT RIGHT NOW, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT WE'VE REPLIED FOR A GRANT, AND THAT GRANT IS GOING TO -- WE -- AT LEAST OUR APPLICATION FOR THE GRANT IS ABOUT $9 MILLION.
AND THAT'S FOR THE STREETS, A STREET THAT WE REALLY, REALLY ARE IN THE DIRE STRAITS OF AND IN NEED OF RECONSTRUCTION.
AND THAT IS 13TH STREET. AND THE COST OF THAT STREET, ACCORDING NOT EST TO THE ESTIMAR CITY ENGINEER EQUATES TO ABOUT $9 MILLION AND IT'S TO BE DONE IN SEGMENTS FROM GEORGIA AVENUE TO ORANGE AVENUE. AND THEN FROM AVENUE E TO AVENUE Q. NOW AM I TALKING ABOUT AN AMENDMENT OF $9 MILLION? NO WAY.
BUT WHAT I AM TALKING ABOUT IS WITH THE ANTICIPATION OF THE CARES GRANT FROM THE COUNTY THAT WE'VE APPLIED FOR, THE PREREQUISITE FOR IT IS THAT THE PROJECTS HAVE TO BE SHOVEL-READY. AND IF WE CAN GET THEM TO PAY $9 MILLION FROM TALKING TO OUR CITY ENGINEER WE'RE TALKING ABOUT $90,000 FOR THE ADDITIONAL PLANNING AND DESIGN THAT'S GOING TO BE REQUIRED FOR THAT PROJECT TO BE SHOVEL-READY.
SO WITH THE IMPACT ON THE NEIGHBORHOODS, AND WHAT HAS BEEN GOING ON AROUND HERE, THAT'S ONE OF MY ISSUES THAT I'M GOING TO ADDRESS WITH REGARDS TO RACIAL AND SOCIAL TENSIONS, THE DISPARITIES WITH THE CONDITIONS OF THE ROADS, I WOULD LIKE FOR US TO ADDRESS NOT THE PROJECT ITSELF, BUT THE NECESSARY PREEQUIVALENT PLANNING AND DESIGNING WHICH EQUATES TO ABOUT $90,000, IN ORDER TO MAKE THAT PROJECT SHOVEL-READY.
AND IF 13TH STREET CAN BE RECONSTRUCTED FOR $9 MILLION THAT WOULD JUST LIGHT UP THE WHOLE ENTIRE CITY.
BECAUSE WHEN YOU LOOK AT WHERE IT'S LOCATED AND IF CONDITION OF THE CORRIDOR AND HOW INDIVIDUALS ARE REALLY, REALLY NOTICING THIS TYPE OF DISPARITIES, I'M LOOKING TO THIS COMMISSION TO TAKE ALL THINGS INTO CONSIDERATION FOR US TO FIND THAT $90,000.
AND JACK IS HERE. I ALWAYS COME PREPARED BECAUSE I KNOW A LOT OF TIMES Y'ALL DON'T THINK YOU KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. BUT I BROUGHT THE PROFESSIONAL IN HERE. AND HE CAN TELL YOU BETTER THAN I CAN THE THE THE NECESSITY ANE DOLLAR AMOUNT AND I'M LOOKING TO THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE THE ABILITY TO MAKE IT HAPPEN.
JACK IF YOU COULD COME UP PLEASE SIR.
[00:35:02]
MADAM MAYOR IF YOU DON'T MIND. >> MR. MIMS PLEASE COME FORWARD.
>> MADAM MAYOR, WHEN I ASK YOU, I ASK OUT OF RESPECT OR THE YOU IN TERMS OF PROCEED SCOL. BUT I DON'T THINK WE HAVE TO HAVE THE AUTHORITY OF OUR CITY MANAGER FOR ME TOO CALL ON A
DEPARTMENT HERE. >> BUT I LIKE TO GIVE HIM THAT COURTESY BECAUSE HE'S THE HEAD OF THE STAFF.
>> AS FAR AS THE LAW IS CONCERNED WE DON'T HAVE TO DO THAT BECAUSE HE'S A DEPARTMENT HEAD.
BUT I JUST DON'T LIKE FOR US TO START SETTING TRENDS THAT MISREPRESENT WHAT WE HAVE TO DO VERSUS WHAT WE NEED TO DO.
AND OUT OF RESPECT FOR ME I DON'T HAVE TO GET HIS AUTHORITY MA'AM TO CALL A DEPARTMENT HEAD TO ELABORATE ON THE ISSUE THAT I'VE RAISED. THANK YOU.
>> MR. ANDREWS. >> MADAM MAYOR, COMMISSIONERS, THIS AFTERNOON I HAD TALKED TO COMMISSIONER SESSIONS ABOUT OUR APPLICATION THAT WE HAD PUT IN FOR 13TH STREET.
IF YOU REMEMBER, THE PLANS FOR 13TH STREET WERE DONE PROBABLY SEVEN, EIGHT YEARS AGO. AND TO GET THOSE PLANS UP TO GET THEM OUT TO BID, IF WE WERE FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO RECEIVE THIS GRANT, I HAD TOLD COMMISSIONER SESSIONS, IT WOULD BE 80, $90,000 TO -- FOR A CONSULTANT TO COME IN, REVIEW THE PLANS, GET THEM UP TO TODAY'S STANDARDS AND GET THEM OUT TO BID.
AND SO THAT IS WHAT THE COMMISSIONER IS IN REFERENCE TO, TO THAT MONEY. TYPICALLY, WE COULD MAKE A -- I NOTICED OPEN THE IMUJTD WE HAD FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS WE HAD THAT $85,000 OR I ALSO BROUGHT UP THAT WE DO HAVE IMPACT FEES FOR TRANSPORTATION THAT WE COULD UTILIZE SOME OF THAT MONEY. BECAUSE THIS WOULD BE FOR CAPACITY, INCREASED CAPACITY. SO THAT WOULD BE A COUPLE SOURCES THAT WE COULD TAKE THIS FROM.
SO EITHER WAY, THIS IS SOMETHING WE SHOULD CONSIDER.
AND HOPEFULLY, WITHIN I'M NOT SURE HOW QUICKLY THIS GRANT REVIEW WILL TAKE PLACE. BUT WE SHOULD HAVE THESE PLANS READY TO GO, I GUESS. AND --
>> IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT GRANT MONEY HAS TO BE SPENT
QUITE QUICKLY. >> I BELIEVE SO.
>> BY THE END OF THIS CALENDAR YEAR.
THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING. >> VERY QUICK TURN AROUND WHEN WE FOUND OUT ABOUT IT. AND IN FACT THE DEADLINE IS -- WAS 5:00 TODAY. SO THE APPLICATIONS WERE JUST SUBMITTED. WE HAVE THEM IN AND SO WE'RE
WAITING TO SEE. >> YOU SUBMITTED THE APPLICATION
FOR THIS, FOR 13TH STREET? >> YES.
>> COMMISSIONER JOHNSON. >> IS AND THAT APPLICATION WAS FOR WHICH GRANT? DID I HEAR CARES?
>> YEAH, IT WAS THROUGH CDBG AND IT IS ASSOCIATED WITH THE CARES ACT. I'M NOT SURE HOW IT COMES DOWN.
IT'S THROUGH THE CDBG THOUGH. >> OKAY.
AND IF WE CAN GET SOME GRANT MONEY TO HELP US WITH THE PROJECT I'M ALL FOR IT. WHAT ARE THE LIMITS OF THE PROJECT, OF THE ORIGINAL PLANS? YOU SAID EIGHT OR NINE YEARS AGO, IT WAS A FEDERATE BIG SCOPE WASN'T IT?
>> YES, ALL THE PLANS TOGETHER IT WAS BROKEN DOWN INTO FOUR PHASES. AND IT ORIGINALLY WEBSITE FROM VIRGINIA TO AVENUE Q. WE HAVE COMPLETED TWO PARGS PPARTIALPHASES OF IT BECAUSE WEE COMPLETED FROM ORANGE TO JUST SOUTH OF D WAS THE FIRST PHASE AND THEN WE PROCEEDED THERE ON UP TO AVENUE E. SO THAT SECTION FROM ORANGE TO E IS COMPLETED. THE REST OF IT WOULD BE FROM E TO Q AND GEORGIA TO ORANGE. THE REMAINING PHASE WHICH WOULD BE SOUTH OF GEORGIA DOWN TO VIRGINIA, WE NEVER COMPLETED THE PLANS FOR THAT. THAT WAS ALWAYS KIND OF THE TAIL END OF THE PROJECT AND WE HAD LOTS OF DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS BECAUSE WE LOOKED AT PIPING THAT CANAL ALONG 13TH STREET.
AND IT NEVER -- THE PLANS WERE NEVER COMPLETED ON THAT.
WE HAD ABOUT 30% PLANS. >> AND THAT'S WHAT I REMEMBER.
I APPRECIATE THAT INFORMATION. SO, YOU KNOW, THE OTHER IMPACTS ARE THINKING ABOUT YOU KNOW WHAT UTILITIES AND COORDINATION WITH
[00:40:03]
ALL THE UTILITY PROVIDERS, NOT JUST FPO AFTER BUT ALL UTILITIES. FPOA BUT ALL UTILITI. 90,000 WOULD TAKE US TO AN UPDATED SET OF PLANS FROM THE AREAS YOU JUST TALKED ABOUT, COMING THE CITY STANDARD WITH CURB, GUTTER, SIDEWALK ALL THE ABOVE JUST LIKE WE DID AT ORANGE AFTERNOON THERE?>> YES. >> SO WHERE IS THIS PROJECT, WHEN WE CAME THROUGH AND WE DID THE INFRASTRUCTURE, SURTAX, PROFILE LIST OF ALL THE PROJECTS, WHERE DID THIS PROJECT
FALL ON THAT LIST? >> IT IS ON THAT LIST.
WE DIDN'T ACTUALLY RANK ALL THE PROJECTS.
WE HAD A TOP I THINK THERE WAS 12 PROJECTS THAT WERE ON THAT LIST. SO THAT WAS ONE OF THE PROJECTS THAT WAS ON THAT LIST. AND THE REASON WHY WE DID THAT IS JUST FOR THIS FACT. THAT IF A GRANT BECOMES AVAILABLE WE WANT TO GO AHEAD AND PURSUE THAT.
THE WAY WE WORK IS IF WE CAN UTILIZE THE SURTAX TO MATCH ADDITIONAL GRANT MONEY THAT'S THE IDEAL THING THAT WE WANT TO DO. AND SO THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT. THERE WAS A MATCH TO THIS.
>> SO THIS PROJECT WAS DEFINITELY IN THE TOP 12.
I REMEMBER IT BEING ON THERE, I JUST DIDN'T KNOW WHICH SECTIONS AND I DON'T KNOW IF THE VIRGINIA AVENUE TO GEORGIA SECTION WAS ON THERE AS PART OF THAT -- I THINK WE JUST CALLED IT 13TH STREET,
DIDN'T WE? >> RIGHT, WE JUST CALLED IT 13TH STREET. THESE TWO PHASES THAT I'M LOOKING AT DOING HAVE ALWAYS BEEN ADVANCED ON OUR CIP LIST.
THE FOURTH AND FINAL PHASE HAS ALWAYS BEEN CONSIDERED THE LAST PHASE. AND WE DON'T HAVE AS FAR AS THE
DESIGN PLANS AS THESE OTHER TWO. >> OKAY, SO IN YOUR CURRENT OPERATIONAL BUDGETS PROPOSED THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, SO WE DON'T HAVE THAT IN OUR -- THE 90,000 IS NOT THERE?
>> NO. >> IN YOUR CURRENT PROPOSED BUDGET. OKAY.
COMMISSIONER SESSIONS, I AGREE THIS IS A GREAT PROJECT.
WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT DLEANT STREET AS BEING ONE OF THOSE ARTERIAL ROADS AND CONNECTING NEIGHBORHOODS, CONNECTING SCHOOLS, CONNECTING YOU KNOW, VIRGINIA AVENUE TO AVENUE D YOU KNOW AND 25TH STREET BEING THAT NEXT, THAT CONNECTOR STREET, SO I HEAR YOU LOUD AND CLEAR IT'S AN IMPORTANT PROJECT, ABSOLUTELY. SO I'M HERE TO TALK ABOUT HOW WE GET THE -- THAT 90,000.ÚBECAUSER BUDGET AND FINANCE DIRECTOR
SHE'S GETTING FIDGETY. >> WELL, I'M A LITTLE AT EASE WITH THIS ONE ONLY BECAUSE JACK KIND OF NOTE THEY'D WE HAVE SOME IMPACT FEES THAT WE NEED TO UTILIZE.
THIS WOULD BE A GREAT PROJECT TO UTILIZE THOSE IMPACT FEES ON.
SO IT COULD BE -- >> AND YOU ARE ALSO SAYING THAT 85,000 FOR OTHER CAPITAL PROJECTS, DOES THAT -- IS THAT NOT EARMARKED FOR ANYTHING SPECIFIC?
>> IT COULD BE -- >> IS THAT RIGHT, MR. MIMS?
>> MADAM MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION, THAT $85,000 IS CURRENTLY UNALLOCATED AN COULD BE USED FOR ANY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT. TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES IS EXACTLY WHAT JACK IS DOING RIGHT NOW.
THIS IS A TRANSPORTATION CAPACITY IMPROVEMENT AND THAT'S WHAT THE FEES SHOULD BE USED FOR AND I WOULD DEFINITELY RECOMMEND THOSE FEES ARE USED FOR JACK'S ENHANCEMENT OF THOSE
CONSTRUCTION PLANS. >> AND I CONCUR.
I WAS GOING TO SAY THAT, THAT WOULD BE MY FIRST RECOMMENDATION.
>> NOW, THE THE HALLELUJAH ANCHOR USCHORUS IS COMING THROU.
>> THAT WOULD BE A GREAT USE. >> COMMISSIONER.
>> TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES, WHAT DOES THAT FUND LOOK LIKE
NOW? >> I HONESTLY -- LET'S SEE IN --
>> THE IT IS PRETTY HEFTY. >> I THINK IT'S EITHER CLOSE TO
A MILL OR OVER A MILLION. >> I WOULD SAY 1.2.
>> AND THE REASON I BRING THAT UP IS, IF WE HAVE 30% PLANS FOR A SECTION OF ROADWAY FROM GEORGIA TO VIRGINIA AFTERNOON, VIRGINIA AVENUE WE ALL KNOW IS A SIX LANE ROADWAY AND THAT'S AN IMPORTANT CONNECTOR FOR 13TH STREET.
SO IF WE ALREADY HAVE PARTIAL, IN ADDITION TO THE 90,000 I'M SAYING WE JUST DO, YOU KNOW, ALL THE WAY TO VIRGINIA AVENUE.
AND I'M THINKING YOU'RE GOING TO TALK TO US ABOUT SURVEY AND GETTING INVERT ELEVATIONS AND DRIVEWAYS AND YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THREE SCHOOLS, NOT JUST ONE SCHOOL, THREE SCHOOLS IN THE AREA. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT PARKS AND CONNECTIVITY TO PARKS AND RECREATION SERVICES.
[00:45:01]
>> CLOSING IN A DITCH. >> CLOSING IN A DITCH, MR. MIMS JUST SAID. RIGHT.
SO THAT'S PART OF THAT PROCESS. BUT AT LEAST YOU KNOW MAYBE SOME OF THOSE IMPACT FEE MONEYS NEED TO -- THE PLANNING AND COORDINATION WE ALL KNOW WE GET MORE BANG FOR OUR DOLLAR WHEN WE SAY WE ARE GOING TO HIRE A SURVEY COMPANY AND WE GO FROM ONE END TO THE OTHER TO COMPLETE THE MISSION.
IF THAT INCLUDES DESIGN THAT'S UP TO YOU, YOU'LL HAVE TO GIVE US A PROPOSED AMOUNT ON THAT BUT I THINK WE WOULD BE SHORT SIGHTED IF WE DIDN'T DO IT THAT WAY.
>> ANYTHING THAT I CAUTION ON THAT IS, I DON'T SEE THAT BEING COUPLED WITH THIS GRANT. BECAUSE WE HAVE A LONG PERMITTING TASK AHEAD OF US ON THAT SECTION.
AND SO THESE GRANT DOLLARS ARE FOR SHOVEL-READY PROJECTS.
>> ABSOLUTELY AND I DON'T DISAGREE WITH THAT PART.
I'M JUST TALKING ABOUT THE SURVEY DESIGN PLANNING PHASES AND GETTING THAT YOU KNOW LOOKING AT OUR LAND USE.
DID WE CHANGE ANY OF THE ZONING IN THAT AREA THAT MIGHT EXCHANGE HOW WE DESIGNED THE ROADWAY? I DON'T THINK SO.
BUT, YOU KNOW, JUST LOOKING AT THE OVERALL SCOPE AND WHILE YOU HAVE A CREW OUT THERE DOING THAT KINDS OF WORK THAT WE HAVE A PROJECT ON A PLAN AND PIECE OF PAPER READY TO GO FOR BIDDING IF WE NEED TO AND MAYBE THERE'S ANOTHER GRANT THAT'S COMING UP.
>> RIGHT, AND YOU'RE GOOD ABOUT FINDING THOSE, I KNOW THAT.
>> CONTINUE TO LOOK. >> SO I'M WONDERING IF THAT REQUIRES AN AMENDMENT OR THAT JUST REQUIRES US TO AGREE TO
THAT -- THE -- >> THE REALLOCATION IS THE RIGHT
>> MAYOR, COMMISSIONERS. >> YES.
>> IT WOULDN'T REQUIRE AN HEALTH BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RESTRICTED REVENUE. IT'S JUST WHENEVER THE PURCHASE OR THE -- HE'S READY WITH THE PROJECT AND THE COST IT WOULD COME BACK DO YOU FOR APPROVAL FOR THOSE RESTRICTED FUNDS TO BE USED, RESTRICTED FUNDS AREN'T BUDGETED FUNDS.
THEY ARE JUST IN A RESTRICTED ACCOUNT.
SO NO AMENDMENT NEEDS TO BE MADE.
IT JUST NEEDS TO BE ONCE IT'S APPROVED BROUGHT BACK TO YOU FOR
APPROVAL. >> AND IT SOUND TO ME LIKE WE HAVE CONSENSUS. DO WE HAVE CONSENSUS?
>> ABSOLUTELY. >> DO WE NEED TO VOTE ON IT?
>> I DON'T THINK SO. >> WE DON'T NEED TO?
I KNOW THIS IS -- >> WE ARE NOT AMENDING THE BUDGETS AND IT IS NOT AN AGENDA ON THE BUDGET ITEM.
>> I JUST HOPE WE DON'T FORGET HE ABOUT IT.
I KNOW WE GOT A CONSENSUS. I KNOW HOW THINGS HAPPEN.
$85,000 IS A LOT OF MONEY. TO JUST PUT OUT THERE AN THE WHIM. AND HOPEFULLY WE REMEMBER AND DO THE RIGHT THING. I WISH IT WAS SOMETHING THAT WE COULD FORMALLY, SOME KIND OF ACTION WE COULD TAKE.
TO GUARANTEE. >> WELL, I THINK YOU PINPOINTED IT WITH THE TIME FRAME OF GITTING TGETTING THIS MOVING RI? I'M WITH YOU ON THAT, IT'S A MINIMAL UP FRONT COST AT THIS POINT AND IF WE CAN GET IT GOING GET IT APPROVED, HALLELUJAH FOR
THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE. >> JACK WHAT DO WE NEED TO START DOING CALLING THE COUNTY THAT MAKES THE DECISION, BOARD OR SOMETHING, WHO DO WE LOBBY FOR THIS?
WHO MAKES THAT? >> I'M NOT SURE ABOUT THAT.
I HAVE TO DO A LIL MORE LITTLE E INVESTIGATION WHO THE ACTUAL REVIEW COMMITTEE IS. AND WE'LL FOLLOW UP ON IT.
>> THEY JUST GOT THE MONEY. >> WE'LL CHECK IT FOR SURE.
>> MR. MIMS. >> TO COMMISSIONER SESSIONS POINT, JACK WE HAD TO ACT ON THIS PRETTY FAST.
WHEN WE HAVE AUTHORIZATION TO ENTER INTO A GRANT, WE COME TO THIS CITY COMMISSION FOR THAT. WE CAN INCLUDE THE ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR THE CONSTRUCTION DESIGN.
CAN YOU DO THAT ON SEPTEMBER 21ST?
CAN. >> YOU WANT TO WAIT A LITTLE BIR
DIRECTION -- >> IT'S UP TO YOU.
I WANT TO GET THE MONEY ALLOCATED.
>> WE WANT TO MOVE AS FAST AS REASONABLY POSSIBLE, IS THAT RIGHT? AS FAST AS WE REASONABLY CAN.
>> IN MY MIND I WAS JUST THINKING I WOULD WAIT JUST A LITTLE BIT UNTIL I GET SOME INDICATION WHETHER WE WERE IN FACT GOING TO GET SOME MONEY BEFORE WE PULL THAT TRIGGER.
IS SO WE CAN GO AHEAD AND ADVANCE IT.
>> JUST PROCEED AS IF WE ARE GOING TO.
>> OKAY, VERY GOOD. >> IF WE DON'T, WE CAN ALWAYS
PUT IT BACK. >> WELL, HERE'S THE THING JUST TO PUT YOU ALL AT EASE. IF YOU SAY IF YOU WANT ME TO ALLOCATE OR RESTRICT, IN THE RESTRICTION $90,000 PLUS FOR THIS PROJECT I WILL GO TO MY SPREADSHEET NOTE ON IT I AM
[00:50:06]
RESTRICTING 90 PLUS THOUSAND DOLLARS OR SO ON THIS PROJECT.EVEN THOUGH THE MONEY HAS NOT BEEN SPENT, WHENEVER I'M GIVING A REPORT ON UNALLOCATED OR RESTRICTED MONEY, EVEN THOUGH THIS MONEY IS THERE, WE HAVE A POSSIBLE ALLOCATION OF 90 THOUSAND PLUS DOLLARS FOR THIS PROJECT.
>> SOUNDS LIKE JOHNNA IS GOING TO WORK HER MAGIC.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH MR. ANDREWS.
ALL RIGHTY. SO SEEING NO AMENDMENTS TO THE BUDGETS, THERE IS NO NEED TO RECOMPUTE THE MILLAGE RATE, THE PROPOSED MILLAGE RATE. IS THERE A MOTION TO ADOPT THE
MILLAGE RATE OF 6.90? >> SO MOVED.
>> SECOND. >> CALL THE ROLL PLEASE.
>> MR. JOHNSON, YES, MA'AM. COMMISSIONER PERONA, I'M SORRY, COMMISSIONER SESSIONS, YES, MA'AM, MAYOR HUDSON, YES, MA'AM.
>> WE ARE ADOPTING THE MY KNOWLEDGAL AT 6.9.
>> IS THERE A MOTION TO DOOVMENT THE 20-21 BUDGET?
>> COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, YES, COMERGZ SESSIONS, YES, MAYOR HUDSON. YES.
[7. CITY COMMISSION]
>> THE NEXT THING ON THE AGENDA IS RANKING OF APPLICANTS FOR CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENTS TO THE FORT PIERCE UTILITIES BOARD FILLING AN AT LARGE POSITION. WE'RE MISSING TWO SO I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU WANT TO HANDLE THIS BUT I HAVE BALLOTS PREPARED.
IF YOU WANT TO PROVIDE ME YOUR -- WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT AT THE LAST MEETING IS YOU'LL RANK YOUR TOP 3, IN ORDER.
I'LL TELL YOU THE POINTS. AND THE TOP 4 TO 6 WILL MOVE ON
>> WE CAN LOOK AT EITHER PERSONAL INTERVIEWS FIRST AND THEN AT THE BOARD, WE PROBABLY HAVE TIME IF WE WANTED TO DO THE INTERVIEWS AT THE SEPTEMBER 28TH MEETING.
WE COULD ACTUALLY DO THE PUBLIC GROUP INTERVIEWS AT THAT MEETING
>> WHILE WE'RE DOING IT MADAM MAYOR, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANY WAY WE CAN AVOID IT, WE HAVE TWO COMMISSIONERS THAT ARE ABSENT AND THE MAIN REASON FOR DOING THIS WAS TO BE ABLE TO
HAVE THE INPUT OF EVERYBODY. >> I AGREE.
>> SO IT'S REAL UNFORTUNATE. >> PUT US IN AN AWKWARD POSITION HERE. BECAUSE THE THREE OF US JUST DECIDING, IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE USUALLY DO, THAT THAT IS
IMPORTANT. >> THAT'S WHY WE DID THIS.
>> RIGHT, RIGHT. >> WE ESTABLISHED LAST MEETING THAT THE CURRENT BOARD MEMBER COULD WITH THEIR AGREEMENT EXTEND THE TERM. SO WE GOT THAT LANGUAGE IN OUR CITY ATTORNEY. BUT YEAH, I AGREE COMMISSIONER, THAT WE WERE TRYING TO NARROW THIS DOWN FOR TONIGHT SO WE COULD ALL FIVE HAVE SOME INPUT ON IT.
>> YEP, YES. >> PUT IT ON THE AGENDA FOR THE
21ST, MUCH BETTER IDEA. >> THAT'S ALL RIGHT WITH ME.
IS THAT OKAY WITH YOU COMMISSIONER?
>> MOTION TO POSTPONE UNTIL SEPTEMBER 21ST.
>> ALL RIGHT. THERE'S A MOTION AND SECOND.
CALL THE ROLL PLEASE. >> COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, YES, COMMISSIONER SESSIONS, YES, MA'AM, MAYOR MUPPEDZ.
YES. >> THERE IS A MEETING ON THE THE
>> WOULD YOU STILL WANT TO ACCOMMODATE HAVING A NEW BOARD
MEMBER -- SORRY NICK. >> NO, GO AHEAD.
>> I'M TRYING TO GET A SENSE COMMISSIONER JOHNSON ALLUDED TO THE EXACT MR. BAY COULD STAY ON BUT I ALSO SAID COMMISSIONER SESSIONS HAD SAID BEFORE, IT'S IMPORTANT THAT, I THINK OTHERS HAVE, I JUST WANT CLARITY FOR THE CLERK BECAUSE SHE'S GOING TO BE SUBSEQUENT TO THAT MEETING STARTING TO FIGURE OUT WHETHER
SCHEDULING -- >> I DON'T THINK THERE'S TIME TO DO THE IN-PERSON MEETINGS AFTER THE 21ST.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S ENOUGH TIME.
DOESN'T GIVE THE APPLICANTS AN ADEQUATE NOTICE.
>> JUST SO WE GET IT ALL CLEAR IS IT LIKELY THEN THAT YOU WANTED TO HAVE THE IN PERSON GROUP INTERVIEWS ON THAT FIRST
MEETING IN OCTOBER? >> I'LL HAVE TO LOOK AT THE
AGENDA. >> OR YOU WANT A SPECIAL MEETING? THAT'S WHAT I'M GETTING AT.
DO WE NEED TO HAVE A SPECIAL MEETING?
YOU PREFER A SPECIAL MEETING? >> UH-HUH.
>> SPECIAL MEETING. JUST BECAUSE I KNOW WHAT THE AGENDAS ARE LOOKING, WE'LL BE HERE UNTIL 3 A.M. FOR SURE.
>> I AGREE. >> THE 21ST WE'RE STARTING AT 4:00 RIGHT? 4:30.
>> AND THEN ANOTHER MEETING AT 5:05.
[00:55:02]
>> GOT IT. >> THANK YOU MAYOR.
>> OKAY, NEXT WE HAVE COMMENTS TRT PUBLIC.
FROM THE PUBLIC. >> IS THERE ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION, PLEASE COME FORWARD. SEEING NO ONE I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. AND WE HAVE AN ANNOUNCEMENT.
[10. ANNOUNCEMENT]
IS THAT CORRECT? >> THANK YOU, WE DO HAVE AN ANNOUNCEMENT. SO THE SECOND PUBLIC HEARING AND THE FIRST READING OF THE BUDGET ORDINANCES WILL BE HELD AT A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COMMISSION ON MONDAY SEPTEMBER 21ST AT 5:05 AND THE SECOND READING OF THE BUDGETS ORDINANCES WILL BE HELD AT MONDAY SEPTEMBER 28TH, AT 6:00. WE'LL START OUR 4:30 MEETING, RECESS AT 5:05, START THE SPECIAL MEETING, ADJOURN THAT MEETING AND START THE THE 4:30 MEETING.
WE CANNOT DO BUDGET MEETINGS PRIOR TO 5:00.
>> WE WANTS TO DO IT RIGHT. >> IT'S A LITTLE AWKWARD CAN, THIS IS A WAY TO STILL START AT 4:30 AND DO OEVERYTHING WE
NEEDED TO DO PROPERLY. >> I WONDER ID WHY OUR LEGISLATORS CREATED THAT, THE FACT THAT PEOPLE WORK AND THEY MAKE SURE THEY GET THEM IN HERE AFTER 5, HMM, THE ONLY LOGIC I
CAN FIND. >> THE SAME GROUP THAT MAKES US TAKE FOUR HOURS OF ETHICS EVERY SINGLE YEAR.
THEY DON'T DAY FIT THEY DON'T TAKE IT FOR THEMSELVES.
ARE WE READY TO ADJOURN? SO MOVED.
LET'S ALL MOVE OUT OF THE CHAMBERS AND WE'
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.