Let me know when you're ready.
Looking at my computer clocks says 5.59.
Um, he's not here tonight, I haven't got enough things to say, so, are you ready?
Almost.
All right, let me call to order the Mount Doris City Council budget workshop for August 24,
2026.
please rise for a moment of silence and pledge allegiance to
the United States of America
and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
Roll call please.
Council Member Robson.
Here.
Council Member Dawson.
Here.
Council Member Cahill.
Here.
Council Member Walker.
Here.
Council Member Brandt.
Here.
Vice Mayor Cattado.
Mayor Harmonch.
Here.
All right.
Mayor, Council, thank you. Good afternoon, evening. This workshop consolidates the operating
personnel and capital and the fund information from the previous workshops this spring and
summer. As we noted in our staff report, because the fiscal year 2026-27 budget would be
adopted before the November election and the future of fiscal impacts remain uncertain.
Staff recommends maintaining a conservative budget posture. This includes protecting
our reserves, carefully evaluating as we did any new personnel, which we aren't recommending
at this budget, and preserving flexibility to respond to future revenue changes. So
So, this budget reflects that and compiled with the documents, 66 pages, Matt.
I'm sorry.
I'm trying to think.
I think last count we were on the documents.
I'll just turn it over to Matt and go through the PowerPoint.
We did attach the proposed final budget document that I just spoke about.
Also today there was some further background information on budget summaries for you
and the itemized list as well was emailed out today.
But the crux of that, the workshop is the final report.
And then the PowerPoint, Matt, will go through all
of the various funds and where we're at, Matt.
Yes, good evening.
So this will be the, this is the last budget workshop.
There's a lot of summaries putting everything together
and showing the total plan for the budget next year.
We do have, I want to open up with saying what we are still missing from the budget,
which is not most, not much, this budget is 99% done.
A couple, a few things we are missing though is we're missing the state revenue sharing
revenues, such as the discretionary totals, the local option tax, telecommunications state,
sales tax. We're missing the property insurance numbers still and we the way
that I put the bond in the Northeast CRA fund so far is incorrect. We got a lot of
new information from the the resolution and the official paperwork so we'll be
essentially I'll get into it when we get to the Northeast CRA but we'll be
moving the money out of the Northeast CRA that fund will go down
roughly $16 million. It's a pretty big, pretty big jump. So I'll touch on that
later, but for the most part this budget is set. Everything is balanced. We're
good to go. It's really just about the final touches.
All right, so overview of
this this workshop. We have the general fund breakdown. We have a listing of
grants. We have a position budgeting. We have the special revenue summary. We
have the enterprise fund summary, the capital outlay summary, and the
capital improvement summary, and then we touch on the next steps of the process.
So total budget overall.
So we're sitting here at $126,161,110.
This is a year-over-year difference of 7% decrease, however there is one thing I'm hoping no
one caught it, but there is one thing on here it's a little misleading.
I have asterisks next to Northeast CRA and the property casualty insurance.
I put those to show that they weren't final.
And then I used the same marker on the bottom to say,
comparing to the fiscal year 2025-26 tentative budget,
they're two different disclaimers.
The whole thing is compared to the 25-26 tentative budget.
I put those assets on those two funds to show,
to bring up the fact that they were not complete.
But everything, this is a total comparison to where we were
on September 3rd, I think it was last year,
which we're almost there this year, so it's almost a one-for-one comparison.
So jumping into the general fund revenues, it looks like they were up roughly 5.6%,
and again, this is still waiting on a certain amount of revenues from the state.
I would expect them to go up slightly. I wouldn't expect major increases.
I have them budgeted at the same number, so it still could go up a little slightly,
but I wouldn't expect anything major.
The big differences here are fines and forfeitures.
We have a $255,000 difference.
We have the ROI pilot as a difference of $288,000 from the three funds that contribute to that.
The indirect allocations, the difference of $149,000.
And then the ad valorem at a $6.3 millidry was a difference of $1.2 million.
So that's totaling a $1.9 million difference from last year.
When you consider the stuff that went down, such as the Intergovernmental went down $480,000,
the License Permits and Fees went down almost $300,000,
and the Intergovernmental Transfers went down $424,000.
It results in a roughly $1 million increase.
This is the breakdown on how the revenues are shared within the fund based on the category.
As you can see, the Advilorum is the majority.
We have the sales and use tax coming in next at 14%.
The indirect cost allocation at 12%.
The ROI at 11%.
Intergovernmental at 4%, almost 5%.
Transfers at 3%.
Charges of service at 3.7%.
License, ferments, and fees at 3.93%.
The pilot at 3%.
The miscellaneous at almost 1%.
And the finance and forperatures at 1%.
And this equals the total amount of $35,334,563.
This is the general fund's revenues that
balances completely with the expenditures
and barring the update of the revenue numbers
and the general fund's portion of the property insurance
funds.
I don't suspect a lot of changes at this point.
This is pretty much set in stone.
We're moving on with this so far.
Is there any questions or anything?
Yeah, okay.
All right, so just a-
Do they all have the same thing?
It's just the final numbers.
Yes, yes.
Yeah, it just keeps getting more complete every time we- yeah.
Yeah.
This is just a brief history
of the indirect cost allocation.
I just wanted to show the history of it.
I'd like to point out that- so these are the numbers
that come from these individual funds to the general fund
for the services the general fund provides.
City attorney, HR, finance, these funds
don't have their own version of it.
They use the general fund, so therefore we
use a model that weighs all sorts of different allocation
factors, and it produces these numbers.
In fiscal 21-22, we were at a total of $4.3 million.
And as you can see, it dipped down,
and it's slowly gone back up due to the various allocation
addition factors, adding new buildings, inflation, and new assets, more employees, et cetera.
And now we're at $4.3 million again.
So over a five to six-year span, it is pretty much evened out.
So I think it's necessary to point out that you wouldn't expect this to be the same
number five years later with how much the city has grown and everything.
So we have a breakdown of the general fund expenditures here by category.
The personnel services is 22,123,062% of the general fund.
Operating supplies are 8,315,023% of the general fund.
The capital outlay is 1,062,003%.
Other uses, which includes the tax increment payments for the Northeast CRA
and their downtown CRA is $3,094,895.
We have grants in aid at $75,000.
We have our property insurance,
which this number has a 5% buffer on the number
from last year because we don't know it yet.
So it's $463,000, but that very well could change,
hopefully down.
And then debt payments is $198,000
and that's the two bonds we have
for the public's works buildings.
Why isn't the property insurance dollars coming in?
I don't know. We're just waiting on them to come in.
Yeah, but it is completely separate operation.
It should be any day now though.
We'll definitely have them before the final budgets,
and I'll update everybody on what those ended up being.
So the personnel services, it does include a 3%,
annual raise, the, do I have it?
I don't have it on me.
This, this, so because of the, I don't have the exact number on me,
I apologize, but because of us trimming down to general fund employees,
we, in general fund FTEs, we moved multiple employees out of the
public work sector and into the stormwater.
we were able to give the 3% raises and I believe this went up. I might be saying
a number that's too small, forgive me, but I think it went up by like $20,000.
Like it was not a big impact because we made moves to decrease it originally.
So I'll get that final number for you, but the number from last year, but it
was extremely close to this number. And I meant to write that down. I apologize,
I don't have it. Matt, yes. I'm sorry. It was a study done, I don't know, a few
months ago. I guess a rate study for the employees. Where we at with that? Is that
incorporated in this or is that totally different? No. It was a compensation
study. We're still evaluating it and given with the uncertainty in November,
we'll kickstart that again depending on the outcome. Okay, so no action has been
taken? No take-alone. Has the study been completed? Partly 99%. Okay, thank
Thank you, sir.
Excuse me, Matt.
Yes, sir.
As far as the 3% annual raise for employees,
does that include benefits or is that just salary?
It's just salary, but it affects the FICA expenses.
It affects the retirement expenses.
It expects the pension expenses.
So some of the aspects of the salaries
of the benefits are a set amount depending on however much you make, but the ones that
are percentage-based, it would inevitably bring them up as well, and it is included in that.
The totality of the personnel services for the general fund is the $22 million number.
We have them broken down by divisions here.
We have legislative and executive at 1.1 million or 3% of the general fund budget.
We have support services at 4.6 million or 13% of the budget.
We have parks and rec at 4.7 million dollars or 13% of the budget.
The library at 1.17 million or 3% of the budget.
Planning development at 1.3 million or 3.9%.
Law enforcement at 8.3 million dollars or 23.56%.
Fire protection at 5.3 million dollars, 15% of the budget.
budget, public works at $3 million and 8.89% of the budget, and then the other general government
which houses things such as the capital budget and the tax increment payments for the North
East CRA at $5.4 million, almost $5.5 million, or 15% of the budget.
Do we have any questions about if we want to dive in further in any of this, or this
This is the individual department's broken down by category.
I mean the only things and the problem is I don't see the details of the funds but we've
got a couple things coming up the new one-way streets which I imagine will need revamping
All right, so we're going to go ahead and get our lights to accommodate, I mean, to get
that fixed so they're timed and they're, I mean, the flow through downtown we may even
need a new set of lights on maybe Tremaine or Alexander or something, not Alexander, Baker,
just to get the flow going, but I don't know if anyone's looking in that or we got anything
set aside.
Yeah, the traffic signals you were referring to, the traffic lights, I mean, you can
you can get a green light at Donnelly and there's a red light at Alexander and
I mean they're not timed and I just think I mean it's something we need to
look at while we're getting the new streets in place I didn't need yeah I
mean yeah we had we had not scope that as a project item but you bring it up
we can I mean I can see it we need to address that I don't know if we've
got it anywhere in the budget because of the change in the one ways.
I understand.
And the only other kind of item which I think we're sitting on are these seats here.
I don't know if, I mean it's a little bit embarrassing when we got people coming out.
You know I priced them at IKEA. They're 200 bucks. I've been sitting at a 200-buck chair for 10 years now
So I don't know you know between parks and rec with the parks and rec board and that this board and that board
No, I mean, I mean under office supplies or something. We should be able to spread that out
You want to put that in? Yeah, I'm just
Is that is that a consensus?
I'm just looking for, you know, $2,000 chairs, I'm just looking for something that looks okay.
Is that a consensus, a council?
Let's go about it.
It is from my perspective.
I mentioned this a long time ago.
There's code enforcement board.
I mean, everyone's in here now.
So everyone could contribute kind of a little bit under office supplies.
Actually, that's a pretty good deal.
So our butts have gotten all the use we can get over 20 years, or 10 years.
That's a pretty good job.
Something that was bothering me in the kind of general fund.
We're also looking at the chairs in the audience.
The cushions are on there.
If we could have repository of new cushions as well,
with the experience that would be, rather than replacing those,
those could be reupholstered.
But I mean, the use of this space is, I mean, everybody's using it, so I mean, I know you're holding meetings in here too, so just something to think about.
Andrew.
So I'm going to go back a slide. I just looked it up on last year's numbers, and the last year personnel services were $22 million and $5,000, so it's roughly $117,000.
so I was a little off, but I knew it was much smaller than I had imagined it was going
to be because of the changes we had made to moving the employees out of the general fund
to the stormwater, to their proper location, and then we did some inside efficiencies
and we got rid of two FTEs so far this year.
So just wanted to point that out because that's usually a much higher number based
on the 3% raise number.
Matt, when you say you got rid of two FTEs, positions or bodies?
Unfilled.
Okay.
Yep.
We just, you know, people assumed roles and we got more efficient and decided to get rid
of the FTE.
They were unfilled at the time.
All right.
Yep.
All right.
So moving forward to the grant list, so we have,
we have about 30 grants here.
This is, we have the year on here, they're not all this year.
I wanted to break these down and just show that we are trying to do everything we can to seek alternative funding.
Some of these have matching, some of these are straight up grant money.
Some of them have certain factors that you have to keep with the life of the item that they're giving you and stuff like that.
But, so I'm going to skip these next two.
The last one has a breakdown here where it's showing the full, whether it be enterprise funds or the general fund department.
I did want to point out that I included the 23 million economic development from the county.
That's going to skew the number a lot, but it's a big win, so I wanted to definitely put that in there.
But as you can see, we're actively seeking out alternative funding sources so we can put as little as possible on the general fund and tax dollars or the funds that rely on charges of services.
There's water waste water in here.
We have roughly $24 million.
A large portion of that is for the $100 million plant coming up, so that's going to help a ton.
We have stormwater on here.
So, it's not just about tax dollars, it's any expense we're already going to have we're
looking for ways to pay for that are not out of the city's general fund or enterprise
fund budgets.
Okay.
Yeah.
Go ahead.
I want to express my appreciation for this.
Look at those numbers, total of 55 million for the year.
Well, it's three years, but yes.
Three years.
Okay 55 million. Think of the benefit for the taxpayers, what we've done in doing that,
getting grants to support our city services that they want. And that's very
impressive, and I think that'll be some way to let the public know the right time
in the right place. I think I think that's very impressive. I'm glad it's
there. It looks good to me.
Thank you.
Yes, sir.
First of all, let me, I guess, echo that.
Sort of similar to Misty's presentation last week.
It's a great compilation here
and gives us pretty good ideas to, you know,
some of the projects that we certainly heard about all of them,
but sometimes we tend to forget some of them.
I think the, by the way,
the County Transportation Corridor grant,
If it does say applied for, and my question is, I believe the County Commissioner's motion was $23.5 million to purchase the corridor, and so that's really not so much applied for.
I mean, hopefully that's a pretty much given at this point in time. They are going to be applying for the build grant though, which is a similar amount, as you're probably aware, and that's going to be for the construction.
And so my question there is, it does say applied for in that left-hand column, does this apply to the decision of the commissioners or does it apply to the build application?
So I left that in applied for because to my knowledge it's dependent on what happens in November.
So from what I picked up on it is that if the November vote, if they do not choose to vote yes on the property tax issue, then the money will go to this.
If they do vote yes, then the money will not, or there's a much smaller chance of that.
So from what I saw, it wasn't 100% given.
I don't know that reevaluated on the November, so it's an asterisk.
Yeah, so I didn't want to say it's 100%.
There's a high probability, but I didn't want to say it's 100%.
And it does skew the table, but that's really a county program.
I know what you're trying to do is we're a partner with Tavares and Lake County
and benefiting from it.
It's the corridor, but keep in mind a little asterisk on that.
Yeah, absolutely.
I think there may be some question there.
I know I've talked to Misty about that, that it strikes me that the $50 million that was
voted by the taxpayers, that's already a done deal.
And so they were simply allocating, they weren't voting to spend the money, it's
going to be spent.
They were simply allocating $23.5 million for the corridor, but anyway that's another
issue.
I do have a question about though where you do have the house built into the budget because
you've got completed works, you've got awarded, and you've got applied.
The amounts for applied, which I'm assuming means they haven't been awarded, do those
get added into the budget as far as incoming revenue?
It depends if, okay, so let's use an example on here, the Fourth Avenue Docks right in the
middle of the screen.
This is applied.
It's a $1.5 million amount.
We do not have this project in the budget.
So therefore, if we get it, if we get this grant, we'll have to put the project in
the budget in a timely manner in order to receive this money.
So that will come from our matching and we'll see how do we can fund our match
and we'll reassess at that time.
Right.
But so some of them, yes, some of them, no, some of them have already, the expenses already
happened, we've already received the money, it's good to go, it's been in the past, but
so it depends on each individual item is different.
So if you look at the next item right after 4th Avenue Docks, you've got Elizabeth Evans
Park.
Again, 1.5 million amount, 1.5 million match, but it does say that's awarded.
So that is money that we're counting on in the budget, is that correct?
That is money that we're counting on in the budget once we put the project in the budget.
That's the next step of the example I just gave.
Now we have to put that project in the budget and then we will be able to move forward with the grants.
But we do have the 1.5 million match for the Elizabeth Evans Park.
We do not.
Not at this point, even though it's been awarded.
So I believe it's not in the general fund for this year because we projected future, but if we were to move forward almost a hundred percent of our match would come from park impact anyways because of the way the project would be laid out.
Okay.
What about the, by the way, about the Fourth Avenue Docks? Should we be awarded that?
What does the match come for?
Again, depending on the size of the footprint of what we decide to build, if it's expanded, we could use Park Impact again.
Otherwise it would be Future Year General. It wouldn't be this year because we'd be waiting until next year to be awarded for that one anyways.
Okay. Alright, thanks.
So
these are scenarios of doing the due diligence, having the money, 50% of the money set aside and if we can come up with the rest of it and the council agrees and then we'll get into the budget and move forward with it.
But this is just doing our due diligence.
Okay.
Yeah, good luck.
Thank you.
Matt, I think Councilman Dalton had a question.
Yeah, we really wasn't that important.
The $23 million is actually more, it's $27 million, because they have additional grant
money they got from the state.
Oh, okay.
Well, that's true, the three and a half.
And don't forget Urban Forestry with Mark Miller on it.
Yeah.
He's an offer on our grant trees.
The Urban Forestry number changes, like I can't keep up with it.
By the time I put this presentation in, it was changed.
Yeah, Mr. Miller, that's a great job.
And Matt, this return on the investment as far as applying for grants and what it calls
to have the grant writer in place, we spoke about a month or so ago, and this is evident
that the return on the investment is well worth it, so thanks for showing us.
I agree.
Thank you.
All right.
Any more grant questions?
All right.
Let's move on to position budgeting.
As you can see, we got some requests, but we chose the recommendations at this time.
Is that final, Vince?
Yes, it is, okay.
Is it final, final?
Make a motion.
Well, I'm just, I just want to make sure.
I mean, certainly none of us know what Amendment 3, what's going to happen with Amendment 3.
but with the resource and rec center potentially opening in a few weeks just
want to make sure that we're ahead of it and if Troy do you want to help Mr. Walker
I'm sorry I didn't mean to interrupt. No you didn't interrupt. I'm trying to gather staff quickly.
You're fine thank you. And is there a specific question? I'm just I guess
Maybe it would be more befitting for you to answer, Troy, anyway.
Are you at a point today where you can efficiently operate the center?
I believe so because the adjustments we've made that I talked to you about and that I got approved through Vince.
I think we are for this year.
Moving forward, we'll see.
Okay.
And I think I can revisit that, hopefully, I mean, depending on how that happens.
We brought in some new staff that he's been training, but he's also bringing in some of
the existing staff over to the Nathaniel Bell Recreation Center.
Okay.
It's final, final.
Thank you, sir.
Thank you, Troy.
I appreciate it.
All right.
So changing gears from the general fund will move on to the special revenue funds.
This is the special revenue funds, the revenues that we, the funds we have set up with
revenues that are highly restricted have to be used in a certain manner.
So we'll start out with discretionary sales tax.
This is the same number as last year because we have not received this number yet, but it's $2,080,000 at 6.9% of the total.
And we have the CRA at $2,828,000.
9.42 percent. The Northeast CRA, so this is the one that's definitely going to change.
The way this is laid out here is this is roughly a $3.4 million budget with a $16 million debt proceeds and expense to pay the debt off.
However, we found in the language of the bond paperwork that we have to create a special fund for it.
So at this time we think it's it I feel like it changes every day
but at this time we think that it'll be moved out of there there will be
Instead of a the fund 200 debt service fund. They'll be most likely a fund 201 debt service fund another debt service fund
It'll be the same as I said up as our fire assessment bond
And we'll have that fund dedicated strictly to this bond the payments that will go in and out of it every year
and that's that. So there'll be a transfer from the Northeast CRA every year to pay the bond fee.
So this year we're going to have a $16 million, roughly $16 million one-time payment, but until
the life of the CRA then it'll be a $1.1, $1.2-ish million payment until 2049 for that.
Has Mount Dore's rating changed at all from the last time?
Yes, it went up.
Good, yep.
Definitely good.
So yeah, so that's going to be roughly $3.45 million.
I think it's an even $16 million in this budget.
Again, we have not got the final paperwork for that,
so I don't know the exact payment,
but it's expected to be right around $16 million.
It depends on fees and it's just a question of where it resides exactly exactly so like now I will say though that
There's potential for this 16 million to show up twice because of transfers
So when you transfer 16 million out, it's an expense in one fund
It's a revenue in another fund which means it's going to show up in twice
It's supposed to be 32 million, but it's actually going to only be 16 million dollars
So that can get a little confusing at time
But once we figure that out, I'll explain exactly where that is in the budget.
So right now it's set at 19.4 at 64 percent, but that's highly skewed.
It should be roughly 3.4.
The building department at $2 million in $8,000, $2 million in $8,000,
sitting roughly 6, 7 percent, place impact fees at 242,
fire impact fees at 140,000, library impact fees
at $300,000, parks impact fees at $500,000, and these impact fees here, these are estimates.
Sometimes it depends when things hit the tax roll if a project ever gets completed.
Many different factors, so we use these dollars when we can.
They can only pay for new things and then cannot pay for the maintenance of those things
after they're built.
So this is an example of trying to use these restricted funds strategically.
However, we always have to keep in mind that whatever we spend them on,
somebody else will have to pay for the maintenance of the items.
So we have the fire assessment fee at 2.3 million or 7.91%,
and then we have the cemetery at 80,000, 0.3% there.
So total of the special revenue funds is 30 million,
but that'll end up being roughly 14-15-ish when it's all said and done.
Is there any questions anyone?
Just a quick question on the impact fees.
So if you don't use them, they just go into reserve until you then use them.
So they can just keep rolling over here over here.
Is that 14 or 15% comparison to previous years taking out the North East CRA?
Is that typical from impact fees?
What do you mean, I'm sorry?
Didn't you mean you summarized what you just said about the impact fees?
Oh, you were talking about the total, what I was saying, I was talking about the previous
years.
Yeah, yeah, so I was just mentioning that because we're going to take the $16 million
out of the Northeast CRA, so that total's not actually going to be $30 million, it's
going to go way down.
$14 something, you see?
Yes.
Is that typical in prior years for impact?
Oh, okay, I see what you're saying.
Yes, most of these funds are extremely similar.
The only one that has changed throughout the years is the Northeast CRA,
really, because of the Resource Center project.
It's gone way up and way down.
Like two years ago, we had $16 million for capital, so that exploded the budget.
Last year, we had roughly $9 million of finishing the project,
so that still a hefty $12 million or so budget,
but not as much as the year before.
And then this year, the way we have it set up here,
which is incorrect, we were going to pay off the short-term loan here.
So it's going to fluctuate until this project is done,
but then it'll be pretty even.
Probably the year after next, it should be 100% even.
And if I could add to that, this is the police fire library parks.
We also have wastewater and water impact fees in their funds.
And it's really a growth. What is the development coming into?
We anticipate for being permitted the next fiscal year.
So right now we do see a kind of more of a conservative, moderate level.
A couple of maybe three years, four years ago it was a little higher because there was a spike.
But right now it's more of a leveling.
Probably more, this will be more consistent for the next several years, these numbers.
So, yeah, all these funds, right now we're sitting at 30 million and it'll probably end
up around roughly 14, 15 million.
All of these funds are balanced.
I expect very little changes from these, just the Northeast CRA item we've talked about.
Is there any questions anyone, dive deeper into the news?
Okay. So, moving on to the enterprise funds, very little change from when we talked
on July 7th, I think it was.
20th? The Monday after July 4th was the enterprise. I think it was the 7th, I could be wrong. But
yes, so we're sitting at the electric fund here at 13.8 million. I do want to point out
that we added $130,000 of revenue and expenditures on this today that we popped up wooden pole
inspection that will in turn actually bring in more revenue as well. So that would
would be the only change I would see from the electric fund going forward, maybe something
very minimal, just scanning through it and realizing we forgot something.
So that's sitting at $13.8 million, that's going to go up to almost $14 million, we have
the water and sewer utility fund at $18.8 million, which is 42% of the fund, we have
the water waste water impact fees at $2.5 million or 5%, we have the water impact
tax fees at $775,000 or 1.75%.
We have the sanitation fund at 3.9 million at 8.8%.
And the stormwater utility at 4.3 million,
sitting at roughly 10% of the enterprise funds in totality.
This number totals up $44,263,000.
These funds are balanced.
The revenue matches the expenditure.
These funds are based on the master fee schedule that is on the future agendas.
We just had the stormwater one passed, includes the capital budgets,
which we're going to go a little bit further in.
But no real changes on any of these funds since we've talked about them last.
We had these done first.
So,
is there any questions about the enterprise at all?
Yes, you say there's no real changes.
Later in the stormwater, I think it's
stormwater somewhere later in the presentation. I see some changes. I
guess we'll get to that then, but when you say no real changes, what does that
mean? Well, so an example of something that changed in the water department is
that we, when we built our budget, we had roughly $200,000 under,
for
to end the fund balance and we keep assessing, we keep assessing, and then a potential project
popped up of meter replacement that we had funded last year and we needed some extra
money.
So instead of that $200,000 going to the fund balance where I'm just holding it for the
time being because the budget's not complete, then we move it into that water project
and that's not an overall change on the funds, but that's just how funds are
being used to help as problems pop up.
So that stuff like that is going to happen.
There's examples of, like, okay, we forgot an invoice came in for a piece of software we have,
and we look in the budget to see where it's budgeted.
And, oh, it's $3,000 and it's not budgeted.
Okay, so now we have to make sure that's in the future year's budget.
You know, there's little things like that.
All like me and Troy and I revisited the part-time staffing.
We increased that in the general fund a little bit.
We took something else away to counter that and it evened out.
So little things like that are always happening until September 3rd.
But then to a certain point, the line stops, you know,
and then we move on with it and get it adopted or talk to council about it.
When you make the statement little changes, do you base that upon a percentage or a dollar amount?
So the action really just the action. Yeah, okay, so
No matter what the percentage or the dollar amount is I wouldn't say the Northeast CRA is a little change
That's a 16 dollar change
But when we have when we have two hundred thousand dollars that
We know there is a plethora of issues and we just haven't decided to use it yet
And then we finally decide how to use it
Personally, I consider that a little change. Yes
Okay, thank you.
But I mean, you know, I don't want to.
The reason I ask is because we don't know what the changes are.
So really, we don't know if we agree with the change or don't agree because we don't know what they are.
So that's why I ask.
But I trust your judgment on that.
I got you.
Okay.
Yeah, so we reevaluate all of the budgets as the process goes on.
And Andrew and I worked this out and figured out a way to use this money better than what we had originally planned.
So these funds are, they're balanced, they're set on the schedules that are to be voted on soon.
There's no, are there any other questions about any of these funds?
So moving on to the internal service funds, a good way of thinking about the internal service
funds is that all of the dollars, every single $10,221,632 here that's budgeted is budgeted
in other funds.
They're moved to these funds so we can properly record certain expenses.
The public works complex at $2.9 million, which is 29% of the internal service funds.
And this consists of mainly the two bond payments that we have.
However, we do have the capital project within it of the retention bond that collapsed in October of last year.
And then we decided to move forward with a $50,000 year-over-year repair and maintenance program that is to be split the same way the bond payments are.
So this number is, this is an example of a fund that should stay pretty close to the same number every year.
However, this year because of the stormwater, because of the retention pond, it's $1.5 million higher.
The self-insured health, we have received those numbers.
This is our healthcare fund.
This is built into the staffing of every single fund that has staffing.
The clinic is housed in here.
all the expenses are encumbered, and this is completely balanced.
The property casualty insurance fund, this is the same number as last year, however,
when I entered the line item that transfers the money from the funds to this fund, I put
I think a 5% buffer on each one of them, so this number will change, but it should
only affect this fund, and I'm hoping that it only results in the cost to the
other funds going down. So this is one of the ones I mentioned earlier. This is the
one I'm still watching and waiting on the numbers for.
We have the debt service
schedule, which again is wrong because I have the Northeast CRA budget on here
saying that it's in the Northeast CRA bond in here saying it's coming out of
the Northeast CRA budget, but that will end up not being true. However, you do
see the the payment on here of 1.122 million. That'll be roughly the
We don't have exact numbers yet, but we have a very good idea and we expect the payments
to be very close to that every year.
So we have the 2013 CRA bonds, it's $196,000 a year.
We have the 2018 CRA capital improvement revenue note at $222,000 a year, the 2018 fire assessment
at $1.2 million a year, the 2018 capital improvement bonds
for governmental at $97,000 in the general fund.
And I'll explain which fund every single one of these is in,
but these are the terms of general governmental
or special revenue funds, which are backed
by the government fund in many ways.
The 2024 capital improvement bonds,
The governmental is 101,000 in the 2026 non-advalorant revenue bond, which is the Nathaniel Bell
center bond of 1.12 million.
So the CRA bonds are in the CRA budget, this 2026 non-advalorant revenue bond, the payment
I wanted to clarify, the payment is in the Northeast
The CRA budget, the fire assessment is in our fire assessment fund, and it is transferred
to our debt service fund. But the 2018 and 24 are actually in the general fund, and those
are the only two debt payments that are in the general fund. And it is roughly 298,000,
I believe it is. Yeah, 199,000, 200,000.
Yes, sir.
On the 2026 non-Avalon revenue bond for the North D.C.R.A.
Yes, sir.
It says here 25 million, 792.
What is the difference between that and the 19 million that we saw earlier?
So the bond is, I believe, 16 million, 250,000, something along those lines.
But that's the total payment we'll have to pay for it.
Okay.
So yeah, so that's that's that's with principal and interest. Yeah. Yes. Yes. Yes, sir. Thank you, sir. Yep
And I and looking at that other number the income certainly pays for all of the debt service on the bonds as far as I could tell
The income of the CR. Oh, yes. Yes. Yes, sir. Yes
No,
yeah, I mean
Yeah, exactly. Yeah
Okay, so moving on to the enterprise funds for the debt service.
We have the 2018 Capital Improvement Bond, which is the same bond as the one prior, however.
That bond is split 38% water, 37% electric, 14% general fund and 11 fund stormwater.
So, you know, that's 86% of it is paid for by the enterprise funds.
So we have the 2018 Capital Improvement Bond at $596,000.
2024 Capital Improvement Bond at $620,000.
We have these here are various water bonds that I'm going to list next, 2014 Water and
Sewer Bond at $1.159 million and the rest here are SRF loans, drinking water loan at
$94,000, SRF clean water loan at $120,000, 2018 SRF loan at $120,000, 2017 SRF loan
loan at $91,000 and a 2017 SRF loan at $107,000.
So that's totaling $2.9 million total, $5.8 million for the total debt service for the
city broken down by various funds.
Like I said earlier, the general fund is responsible for $200,000 of this.
Do we have any more questions about any of the bonds or what they pay for or anything?
So moving on to the capital outlays up
here so
in the general fund and these are
already built into the general fund we have $155,000 of outlays we have an
IT item we have the community building lobby concessions and parks we have
Gilbert Park swing set replacement for parks we have mule replacement
anti-tractor replacement for parks and that's totaling let's do the math in
my head here, it's about 107,000 for parks and then 48 for IT.
In the discretionary sales tax fund,
we have nine PD vehicles, the upfitting and the body
cam onboarding systems, and that's
going to end up being 720,000 and a public work
struck at 45,000, totaling the discretionary at 767,000.
These are what we've done the last few years
is we've set a certain amount of money towards refreshing the vehicle replacement program
for the PD department. We would like to do this year every year. We hope to do this every
year as long as funds are available. And the fire assessment funds. This is paid for
by either the bond or the fire assessment fee. We have a replacement of a pressure
ventilation fan. We have an equipment trailer. We have the PPE equipment. We have heavy rescue
airbag kits, which is a replacement. We have the fire suppression apparatus, another replacement,
totaling $101,000, almost $102,000. The cemetery, we have a $38,000 cremation niche.
We just did
get a quote back, and that's going down in price, actually. We got it after I'd already
submitted this. So I think it's 25,000-ish. Yeah, something like that. 25,000. Yep. Yep.
Always a help. For the water waste water fund, we have three trucks coming in at $180,000.
For stormwater, we have two pickup trucks, a smaller pickup trucks for $90,000 and a
factor truck for $375,000. This is totaling $1.7 million, but 155 of this is going to be
paid for by the general fund.
Yes, sir.
Matt, I'm assuming that all these numbers are just simply the same numbers we saw before at the prior hearing.
Nothing's been added or...
Okay, thanks.
I just have a question.
The AC for the community center.
Is that in this year's budget?
So it is in here.
So here's the thing.
Here's the thing.
So technically, these are going to end up being repairs.
So in accounting terms, and I struggle going back and forth with this, is a big part of
this is where do you properly budget it?
So what we have done is we have that set under a repair and maintenance line within the
recreation center, within the recreation budget, sorry, not the recreation center,
the recreation department budget.
So technically a repair along with the $20,000 slot for the partial roof repair for the library, that's in the library budget.
However, when we're directly comparing what the library is proposed to spend this year and proposed to spend last year,
I didn't want to skew that by putting a capital outlay project in there.
So as it gets closer to the actual budget being finalized,
then I put it where it actually belongs.
But for properly categorizing it and grouping everything
together, I've included it as a capital outlay up
to this point, or a CIP project.
For example, we have multiple projects
that it really comes down to how we capitalize the item.
And the first step of that is where it's budgeted within the GL system and then therefore where it's purchased, where it's
expensed in the GL system. So a lot of our capital outlay items or CIP projects will end up not being in the 60s,
which is the accounting code for the capital items, but they'll end up being in the 46s because that's their apparent maintenance line.
So yes, it's in there.
It's $350,000 in the recreation budget.
And it's in the notes that I sent over, along with the only other item like that is the library has a $20,000 partial roof repair.
Yeah, they're in there.
You'll figure out the budgeting accounting with Jennifer.
Yeah, we sit down and we write up the budget.
We put everything in there, and then we sit down and one of the last steps is go over it
and say, okay, I have to make sure everything is budgeted in the proper place, and sometimes
it does move things out from the capital slot into the operating budget slot, but I also
don't want to put $350,000 in the recreation budget and be like, well, why did their budget
go up by $400,000 when it only went up 50 or something like that, you know.
So it's a matter of, it depends on how you look at it, and trying to compare
the numbers as fair as possible. So I kept that in an outlay slide.
Michael, it's in there. It's in there, yep.
I'm more like Calgon, I'm going to take me away.
So yes, so moving to the next page, the first two items on here are the
Public Library roof replacement for $20,000
and the Community Building HVAC replacement of $350,000.
So as you see, those are slaughtered.
in the general fund for a total of $370,000.
Moving on to the discretionary fund here, we have the Head Start Building Roof and Repairs,
which we're unsure of the total cost, but we have a slot there for it.
We have the Sidewalk ADA compliance, the year-over-year project for $400,000, and the street resurfacing
program for $300,000, another year-over-year project that's been in the discretionary
fund the last few years.
Is that the one that used to be 800,000 last year?
The sidewalk one, yes.
Just the final one.
I understand you need to save.
I've been talking with Andrew in public works.
He's looking at a piggyback contract
and probably can do the same amount of work
with half the cost.
Yeah, you mentioned that.
So, yeah.
So, we'll bring in a piggyback here shortly.
So, we have a project slider
for the library impact fee fund.
The Simpson Farmhouse Expansion, phase one, $146,000.
And then we have three projects in the CRA, the signage and community beautification, parking improvements, and kiosk replacement.
And that's totaling $798,000.
We have four projects in the Northeast CRA, a property purchase of $200,000, a signage and community beautification of $20,000.
Northeast Streetlight Enhancement of $20,000, Information kiosk of $25,000, and that total is $265,000.
and all of these are already built into the budgets that are already balanced as well.
The property purchase in the North ACRA, that's the Witherspoon.
So it can be, I mean it depends on what we do.
Yeah, I think you're looking for affordable housing sites too.
Yeah, it depends on the number of things.
Okay, so these are the projects that are either in the general fund
or the special revenue funds already built in, balanced, ready to go.
So moving on to the enterprise fund capital improvement projects.
We have the electric fund here with a substation of $122,000 this year
and the advanced metering infrastructure.
The rest of it is $500,000 totaling $622,000.
That does not change the electric.
This is exactly what we covered in the previous meeting.
So no changes there.
I mean, the rest of this is a projected five-year plan on the capital improvements.
I didn't. This is kind of more generic.
But with the purchase of the rail bed, the land,
are we looking into the projected revamping of our underground utilities using that?
I mean, I'm kind of looking here.
I didn't know those are those already planned in or they they're not in this
budget there'll be future as we move that project move forward with engine we
have to look at engineering design and so forth so yes yeah I mean I know it's
not in this but I'm looking down the road here so if you look at the if you
look at the 20 29 30 yeah time frame we're looking at moving that circuit
underground along the railroad right away there so that's what that that's what
that money is there for. And then the other waste wastewater you know along
like Dora there's an old I'll say an old pipe and we want to look at expanding
and things like that or maybe even fiber optics to not go through our little
streets here.
Matt,
can you review the
Sylvan Shores under your own conversion? I cannot, but I'm Steve Langley-Cann.
Is that on county property? That is, yes, that is county. So what we're
looking at is the Sylvan Shores, that particular area in Sylvan Shores, is
one of our worst areas when hurricanes hit. Whenever that happens, there's a
A lot of trees, the lines are in the back of the lots
in their backyards, and it's a lot of trees in there.
So every time Hurgings hit, that line comes down.
And so we're trying to put that underground
and move it in front of the houses.
And so I've tried to get some money
through the FEMA mitigation, that kind of thing.
So we've got applied for that.
We put it in the applied for the legislature to get some money for that.
That didn't work.
So we tried a number of ways to get some grant money for that.
But that's what it's forced to help with hurricane mitigation.
It's a very good idea to get as much underground as you can.
It's expensive.
My dad was that contractor for decades.
And that really helps emergencies.
Okay, thank you.
Moving on to the water or wastewater construction fund here, we have one big project, a $1.5
million project for a clear fire rehab.
The thing I'll say about the water construction plan here for the next five years is there's
a lot of hardening efforts going in and we already have basically just chomping at
the bit to get these next two or three years projects underway.
way.
We have some repaired maintenance needed and we're doing our best to invest in that.
So it's going to be a pretty...
Pretty concrete plan over the next five years for the water funds.
And we have next year we have stormwater. So this is a big one this year.
We've touched on the increasing the rates for stormwater that was just passed.
We're able to do a lot more with it because of that.
So these are the projects that are in the budget right now.
We have $500,000 of a Repair and Maintenance Program and $90,000 of GIS mapping.
The Basin Management Action Plan Project for BMAP program, $200,000.
So these three, these top three here are examples of projects that are with their,
it's exactly what I was mentioning earlier with the capital versus operating,
operating is that these projects are, they're in the operating budget pretty
much because they won't be capitalized. It's a service or it's various small
repairs, fixing things and whatnot. So for a lot of reasons you wouldn't
capitalize them. So therefore when we look at what's transferred to the
general construction or to the stormwater construction fund, those
projects won't be transferred. They're housed within the project. So if we
If you were looking at the stormwater fund, you would see those in the operating budget
rather than the capital plan, but because essentially the stormwater fund is a few items
that we have to take care of, and then all capital.
We're including them in for awareness in the capital plan.
But again, if you were to look at what we spent last year in the operating budget
and then when we spend this year, it would immediately be, you know, $800,000 higher
because of these, even though that they're programs and plans that are going to enable
other construction or capital projects.
So that's something that I can do my best to point out, but it's going to happen
depending on what the project is.
So the rest of it, however, I believe, is transferred over to the construction funds.
So we have street resurfacing repair, St. Andrews Country Club, Liberty Avenue storm sewer installation, railroad crossing to Tremaine.
Groundwater table control on Tremaine between Charles and Liberty.
Drainage improvements at East 5th Avenue and North Rosseter Street.
Alexander Creek and Clayton Colvert improvements.
Flood control on East 8th Avenue adjacent to Mount Dora High School.
door set of Mount Dora subdivision drainage and stormwater management
facilities and the Lake John Basin study which is also funded by a grant and I
actually this is one that's in the operating budget to the last one the
Lake John Basin study we have that that grant is $300,000 $100,000 matching so
totaling $400,000
yes sir excuse me so this is the the slide that I saw
that seem to have the most changes from our July 6 meeting. Yes.
At the July 6
meeting there was $30,000 for something from I don't know what it was
Grant to Pine or whatever whatever that was and that's that's been removed but
I see a lot of items that have been added. The Lake John Basin for $400,000
the door set subdivision for 500,000, 8th Avenue for 100,000,
Tremaine and Charles, I believe, 75th Street, Surfacing,
Country Club, my door for 200,000, Vince.
So every,
well for the last two years maybe we spoke about pine
and I know that's ongoing work but when I don't see the numbers here,
Yeah.
Help me understand that.
Yeah, I'll have Andrew assist as well because there's current budget and then this year's
budget's new money.
I can speak on the actual budgetary aspect of it is that on the July 7th meeting we were
completely, we were building two separate budgets where the current revenues that
we had along with the possible proposed increase.
So we just had two numbers that we were looking to put towards capital and we didn't
have set projects at that time for the stormwater fund.
So then as the process has gone along,
we've narrowed it down to actual projects.
So you can speak to each individual project,
but that's how we approach it from a budget perspective
this year.
So the Pine Avenue project is a very extensive project.
We're hoping to, it's on schedule right now
as far as design, excuse me, coordinating with utilities
because it's just not the stormwater aspect of it.
It's utilities too.
We're going to have to move some utilities, and while we're in there, we're also going
to be replacing a lot of aged infrastructure on the utility side.
We're looking at, I'd probably say spring, is when we'll have full 100% design out, be
able to bid it, and I believe it's in next year's five year.
I have to go back and look.
So pine, we're looking at the beginning of either next fiscal year or the one after
that because of the cost.
I mean, it's roughly a $4 to $5 million project.
We'll have to get outside funding for it, most likely, to cover it unless we, you know,
and acquire some appropriation funding for it, which we're going to apply for.
We're already working on the process now behind the scenes of seeing what grants we could apply for.
But the reality is it's just because it's so expensive and that area has so many challenges
as it takes just the time and effort behind it right now.
And Council Member, we have this year's budget, the one we're working on now, the pine funds to be allocated for the design that Andrew's talked about.
So when we come up with the future years of construction costs, those will be in that.
Correct, yeah.
That budget.
So we're not ignoring Pine Avenue project at all.
It's moving forward as the steps go on.
Correct. Yeah, we've met with Kimley Horn and both departments, the stormwater side and
the utility side at this point, just moving that along. We've already seen conceptual stuff
which – the biggest thing is the modeling aspect that took time is what happens to this
area when we have large-scale events. And even in a 25-year event, a significant portion
of the area is more or less underwater. So there's a lot of challenges with this
area. There's also – we're having to look at the possible land acquisition
because not only do we have to convey this storm water,
where do we put it, where do we send it to?
You know, DOT can only accept so much on 4.41.
And there's other factors in it too, you know,
we're looking at ways of how can we take this storm water
and use it to offset our reclaim challenges.
You know, there's a lot of factors going into it, so.
Okay, so thank you.
The door set of Mount Dorset Division
during the storm water, the 500,000.
What would that $500,000 get you?
That would get full construction, design, all that stuff.
So all these costs in here are most of its construction.
So what we're trying to do moving forward is take the – oh no, I'm sorry, yes.
This one is design.
So this is another large-scale project.
We try to – the way we're trying to do the fund is the one-year's design,
the second-year's construction.
You know, a lot of times, unfortunately in the past, design gets shelved.
We don't want it.
We're trying to avoid that.
So we plan the budget out, design, the next year construction.
We have designs, various designs in for this year.
We're also trying to do a lot of stuff in-house now, just because now that we've moved the
staffing strictly over to stormwater allows us to have them, you know, strictly focused.
I think we have four individuals now in stormwater, whether it's repairs, doing
installation of projects, things like that. We're just trying to do a lot more in-house
of where that funding is going. What we ultimately did, too, is a lot of these projects, you
know, George had created this master list of projects over time, and so we went back
and started going through every single project. We visited a lot of sites. We visited
a lot of residents throughout the community. There's a lot of times where we went
out in rainstorm events, Clayton, some other areas to see what was actually happening so
that way we could identify, okay, what's really the highest priority right now based off this
first year?
So we're trying to target areas that seem to be our highest priority and get those
taken care of.
Okay.
Thank you.
I guess that's where I'm a little lost because on
the whatever meeting that was
us the 6th, July 6th meeting, we did have where the five-year capital plan was out there
and it was $1.4 million. I guess I'm just assuming for the corridor.
And so with the
priority, George gave us a list priority and he said Pine Avenue was priority one
at the time. And I think you also told us when you came aboard that that was still
priority one. Not saying it's not it's just we
put 400,000 in I think two years
ago was it was a two years ago Vince? Maybe a half million I think. And it's
like what's been done with that money this I know things take time and I know
you say this is a large-scale project but I just want to make sure that
but it's still top priority.
And top priority to me is where the dollars are spent.
And so when I look at it and I see no dollars
in this upcoming year budget,
then that to me says it's not a top priority.
So, but I digress, you know,
we don't have to go any further on that, that's fine.
I understand.
And maybe upcoming council,
and Andrew can make a presentation of the pine,
show the drawings and the status,
and do the status report.
Yeah, absolutely. I mean even like it indicated best case scenario if everything continues on time we're in the spring next year with design
So we were really trying to so when I when I came on on in January, you know
The Georgia retired we hadn't even kept off a pre-con meeting essentially with Kimley horn
So that we got that started started with conceptual work
Okay, this is kind of what we're looking at here and we just got to 30
I think 30% a couple months ago
So we're really trying to get them to move ahead now comes in the other factors with the utilities all that stuff
permitting aspect but we it's been you know full steam ahead and it's been a
top priority of ours so yeah and we can give we can have presentation on that
all right and I will say this Mars on every time I've spoken to you you've
always answered my questions I just when I look at the document just don't see
any money in the current year it just in my mind it says that okay it's not
its top priority.
Unfortunately there was just this current or upcoming year
there was just nothing that we could allocate money to just for the project.
So what was it 30,000 on July 6th?
Storm sewer repair at Grand Avenue to
East Pine Avenue? I think it's still on our list but not right. So like a lot
of this stuff, as George indicated, we went through and looked at it, investigated it,
camered it to see the extent of it. Some of the stuff on the list that we even took off,
I think we cut down the list by four million dollars on some of the things, just because
we knew outside of the five-year CFP it still had a lot of life expectancy, but I had to
go back and look at that one, but I think that's what happened, and that was just
after looking at it, it deemed it still had some time,
life expectancy and infrastructure.
All right. Thank you, sir.
All right.
So any more questions on the stormwater fund at all?
Construction?
Only a comment, as we all remember so well.
October of last year and Donnelly Street washout, stormwater issues are pretty important.
I remember a famous council member said,
we've got to take care of our stuff.
And that's what we're doing, it seems to me, in storm water.
Because we could have another 2,000-year storm in a year.
Hopefully in 2000.
I'm thinking of the 2000.
That's really important.
Thank you.
So the next portion of this is just talking about the budget factors that really shaped
and molded this budget.
I just wanted to just reunite the fact that we took a very conservative approach to this
budget because we don't know what's going to happen over the next couple months.
We tried to set ourselves up for success regardless of that.
Our focus, if you said that completely aside, our focus from the get-go is this enhancing the city's critical infrastructures
through strategic investments and resiliency initiatives.
We are prioritizing long-term financial stability, infrastructure resilience, service levels, and public safety.
and then just a continued emphasis on operational efficiency to provide the
services that the the citizens deserve and expect from us. And may I maybe could
talk about the we acquired Ralph Tellus financial to look at the impacts of the
potential ballot and then to this month or maybe beginning in November we'll
probably have me with you one-on-one and go over their dashboard of all the
data and the financial information that we provided them and then we could talk
about if you want a workshop, participation in the November ballot or
maybe we have a presentation but we like to I think a one-on-one with the
The mayor and the council members individually, they're getting ready here with the data we
have to look at forecasting and so forth, and yeah, probably mid-September, so I'll be timing
to wrap that up and then give a report, presentation, so it'll be good information, anticipation
of the ballot in October, where you can see how that impacts us through the financial
consulting, having a third party look at it.
And looking at it, are they just going to kind of tell us where the deficits might be
or will we also look at in the departments where those deficits will be?
I think all above, right?
The way it's set up is they essentially have taken our last few years financial information.
I submitted the budget to them that it was mostly complete, certain projections.
And they have a certain amount of, they build a dashboard that is built on the next five years if we continue in the pace that we're on.
And it shows the fund balance.
It shows the department levels.
It shows the operating efficiencies and everything for the financial efficiencies of everything.
And then they have a certain amount of toggleable items that you click, okay,
let's see what happens if the November happens, bam.
And now you see the effects of that.
You know, if we wanted to devote 3 million to capital a year, that's an item.
Bam, you see, if we wanted to lower or raise the fire assessment, bam.
So there's a certain amount of action items that they'll be able to project how it will affect them.
So they're not going to be able – they're not going to straight up like provide us with information saying, you know,
hey, if November happens, then you should do this, this, and this, and get rid of this.
They're looking for our input – yeah, they're looking for our input to put in – to build the models for those factors
so then they can show us how that will happen, or how that will affect it.
So, Zobo, what we could see is if the general fund goes down – or because the Baffle Arm Tax goes down X percent
And you already have the percentages that goes to each department.
We could see what each department potentially is.
Oh, yes, yes, yes.
Yes, for sure.
Even if there wasn't a ballot on it, it's actually a good...
Absolutely.
...for us to look at before casting for five years out.
Yeah.
This is going to help us no matter what.
Absolutely.
We have that anyway, but this now fine-tunes it with an outside consultant.
We're not getting into their numbers.
They're doing it independently.
We're doing an internal to see if it compares, but in essence this will be a good resource.
And I think that timing in October will show obviously our citizens and the business owners
of what that impact will be.
Speaking of that, I hope many of you saw the recent Sunday editorial in the Orlando
sent them on this very issue. It was excellent if you haven't seen it. Go read it.
Yesterday's
editor, main editorial, was very, very good and explains critically all the issues that
If yes goes happens, all of the issues that will negatively impact residents through
no
fault of ours.
I thought it was an amazing editorial.
Matt, we have a busy September schedule.
Yes, sir.
So the next steps here, so there's a regular council meeting on September 1, but then the
Thursday of September 3, we have the tentative millage and budget meeting, which is a special
meeting.
So this will be putting forward for adoption the budget just built on the next year's money, no rollover whatsoever.
The fire assessment on Thursday, September 10th at 6 p.m. a week later.
And then the second public hearing, September 15th, this is a normal regular council meeting.
This is where we'll present the final budget for adoption.
The new monies for next year, plus any carry forwards, which is the PO rollovers and encumbrances.
So there's, as I mentioned previously, there's two or three items that I'm still waiting on.
One of them being, we have to figure out exactly how to do the Northeast CRA bond.
So next time I see you guys, I'll be able to lay out exactly how that happened
and what changes happened, or the results of those changes, I mean, so we'll lay all
that out for everybody. But this is, that is it, so if you guys have any questions, any
wanting to dive deeper into anything, I'm here for taking questions.
Thank you.
Well done.
Thank you.
Yeah, excellent.
Good job.
If we're going to conclude, I said two other things so I don't wait until next councilman
to mention it while we're here.
I attended the Sunday lecture at the library of the Rosenwald,
and it was two hours worth
of superb information on the importance of that building, which now is a daycare center.
And the importance, the important hand, for example, Collie Lott had in that, along with
Dr. Booker Washington and the boys and other very important people that put them out
Dora on the map national. So it was excellent if it's possible. And our archivist was there,
Aaron. And if there's a way that she could put together or somebody could put together
a little summary of that for all of us and for the public, if that's possible.
It impressed
impressed me. There were maybe 25 people there. It was very, very interesting and I'm really
glad I attended and be something that we all should know about the importance of that building
in the Northeast, historically. And secondly, Troy gave me a nice tour of the Bell Center.
It was Shirley and I were there and it is absolutely superb.
Thank you, Troy.
That's all.
I move we adjourn.
And nothing else.
OK.