like a jersey. >> All right, everyone. We're going to call this meeting to order. Today is Wednesday, September 24th. It is 5:01 p.m. This is a regularly scheduled budget hearing, the second one. All council members are present including the town attorney, the deputy town
attorney or town manager, deputy town manager. He got promoted or demoted I guess was the town attorney and and the town clerk. Uh first order of business is uh public comment. >> Uh first up I have Ellen Vaughn and then
after Ellen is Tom Toruson. >> Good late afternoon to everyone. Um, I'm I'm in awe of the amount of effort that you have put into this undertaking. I understand that I didn't stay with you last time and you were here till after 9. So, I I applaud your diligence in
this activity and I'm standing here to encourage you to please vote to increase the millillage. Um, I know this is a challenge for a lot of people on the island, but I've talked to many people who did that agree that I I did pull up the the millage rates and we're among
the lowest of this of the self-governing parts of Lee County. And our needs are great and if we're going to be a successful community again, we need we need services and we need reasons to have people to want to come to this town and things like Bay Oaks and the
Moundhouse are among them. And so we need funding for those. And I recognize that there are other things that certainly need funding. We have to have the roads fixed. We have to have a lot of things done. Last time I just said I really like infrastructure. I do like infrastructure. I like all those aspects of in infrastructure that make us a
community. Please help us stay a community. Thank you. >> Thank you, Ellen. >> Uh Tom Ferguson. That's all I have signed up. >> Tom, >> my first time at the new de dis. Um feels really good. It's beautiful. Um, I
too am here to advocate for for the tax increase. Um, I'm I'm a conservative person by nature, so it it you could say it goes a little against my grain, but uh I think we could all agree pretty quickly that these are not normal times and not normal circumstances.
and uh you know I don't know the details like all of you do um so I can't speak to the the details but um I cutting services um it it just isn't a time for that. I think that there's probably opportunity to charge for some services
but not get crazy um but to cut them I I I really don't see that is in our best interest short-term long term. Um I kind of view this as you know I'm come out of the business world and I kind of use an analogy whether it's good or bad you know out of the business world and and
businesses go through their cycles and uh they usually don't go through hurricane Ian but they do go through cycles and there's a time when when when you can reap the rewards of of their successes and there's a time when when when reinvestment just needs to happen
and they need a little help a lot of help sometimes um to rejuvenate them and propel them on into the into the into the future. And it's a time when the owners just have to invest money back in and and reinvent themselves and propel
themselves forwards and and then there'll be positive times again. You know, it's just uh it's an unusual circumstance. Um, I think that uh um we um it's it's time it I also could say I don't know if I'm running out of time,
but I I look at the town's piece of of of the t overall tax bill that all of us pay and it's so so small. I think the town has been has a longstanding history of of financial um fiscal responsibility, government light. Um, I
I don't think that uh we've been aggressive in the in the history of of this town. I'm very proud that it's been run the way that it has and and as it is today and I'm all for reinvesting in the recovery of this island. Thank you.
>> Thanks, Tom. Only one other person >> like moral support. All right, then we will close public comment. uh talk to Nancy about our public hearings. We're going to do it a little bit different than what we've been accustomed to over the
last five years. Um we don't have to open and close like we did last time. >> So >> go ahead Nancy. I'll let >> you comment. So the Florida statute requires that the first order item of business for you to review is the um
proposed adalorum millage rate. Along with that in that presentation um there is a representation as to what budgeted items are necessary or have been requested to support that particular millillage rate. So it somewhat blends.
Um so I believe that uh it would be appropriate to go ahead and and follow that uh procedure in that order. I think that staff is prepared to uh to present that and then based on whatever your determination is as far as millage, we
would announce the millage rate. We would fill in the blanks on the resolution that is in your packet. Um you would take a vote and then we would proceed on to the budget and we would ask for a motion that would be consistent with your prior discussion
during the um the millage rate discussion. Um, and then the fee schedule would be a separate item. >> So to try to unawyer it a little bit, can I say it this way? Before we would we would table item A, which is the
millage rate setting, and then go down to discuss the budget, have all the discussions, then table that, go back and do the millage rate. Essentially, what we're doing is just reversing it. We'll discuss the budget items under the millage rate to then set the millage rate. Then when we go to the budget,
it's just basically confirming what we've already discussed as opposed to opening and closing. >> So the beginning of the conversation is regarding the millage rate. >> Correct. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So our first or our first item is a it's resolution 25-278
the final fiscal year 26 ad valerum mill rate. A resolution of the town council of the town of Fort Myers Beach adopting the final valera mill rate for the town of Fort Myers Beach, Florida at soon to be determined which is blank for each 10,000 of address valid
assessed valuation and is a percentage greater than the roll back rate of 8954 mills for fiscal year 2026 commencing October 1st, 2025 and ending September 30th, 2026 for the purpose of providing sufficient funds for the general fund
and providing an effective date. Take it away, Joe. >> Good evening, everyone. My name is Joe Anzac, the finance director for the town of Fort Myers Beach. Um, I'd like to begin by thanking our budget manager, Cassandra Penner, who prepared this
presentation for us, um, and all the work that went into that. So, to to begin with, where we're really be starting with is where we left off at the first hearing. So that that is our starting point there. Um the adopted
tenative millage rate of 1.15 um was approved and that 1.15 millage rate is 28.43% over the rolled back rate. Then this just gives you an idea of what
we're going to be our presentation will cover. So, we're going to um go over the changes that were included um as a result of the first budget hearing. We'll we'll run through um a summary of the FY26 budget as it stands and then
we'll move on to the actual military decision. Jill. >> Yes. >> If I could just uh just for folks who may be watching, I think the the the the numbers obviously important 1.15, but I think the public is in part watching
uh to determine percentage increase. For example, the initial meeting prior to our first budget meeting, there was a suggested cap on the the maximum uh uh uh millage rate which translated into a 26% increase in the millage rate and I
believe at the first budget meeting uh there was a reduction in that cap to roughly 13%. Is that fair? >> Yes, that that is fair. the the 13% you're referencing
correlates to it being a 1.15 millig rate increase instead of the 1.255 I believe was 255. Yes. >> Okay. I just think that'll help people track this conversation. Thank you. >> Sure. Okay. Um so as a result of the
first budget hearing um it was decided to adjust the mill rate down to 1.15. um that was a tenative millage rate. Then um as a result of discussion and consensus from the um the town council,
we added back funding for the July fireworks and this was based this is what we as a staff did to um act upon um the suggestions by town council. So, we added back um given the fact that we had the 1.15 um millage rate, which would
bring in an additional $719,000, we added back $100,000 to cover July fireworks. We added $25,000 for community policing or or the sheriff services to go along with with the
fireworks. We added um back um the Bay Oaks staffing that had been cut. So that was adding back into the budget $136,350. And then we added the remainder the the remaining difference um between those
items and the $719,000 was the $458,000 that would now become available for any state appropriations that um may become um available to us next year to apply for. So that's those are the basic
changes that we made with that additional revenue. >> Joe, before you before you go on, I think it's important we discuss about that because this 77 719,000 would be what the increase in funding would be from the 1.15. >> Yes, that's correct. >> And this is what staff is recommending
that increase would be used for. >> Well, uh this what we're trying to present is what came out of the discussion from town council at that evening. So then we went on and built the budget accordingly and then we the staff we as a staff we do have
additional changes which I'll present at the very end which would incorporate um some new information that we were able to consider especially concerning the emergency fund but but we we had to post a budget initially based on what was
decided at the first hearing. And so I'm just trying to run through what what changed from the one that was presented at the first hearing to the one that we left with after the decisions were made after the first hearing. And then tonight we have to make decisions to
like fine-tune it um further. And those are the recommendations that we'll have for you at the end of this presentation. If that does that make sense? >> It does. cuz I just if I'm sitting at home watching this, I'm looking at a 1.15
presented suggested rate to raise it and $125,000 of fireworks. That's what I'm looking at. And I don't remember from the first meeting a majority of people saying that we're in favor of of supporting $100,000 fireworks show anymore.
>> I would concur with that. Now, if that 125,000 is to go towards the reserve fund, that's a whole different story for me, but >> that's in my sorry, Mr. Mayor, but as Joe was explaining, that's that is the recommendation. I can talk about it now or we can let Joe go. I just wanted to
make sure >> it was it was our understanding, you know, from coming out of the last meeting that there were certain things that council >> wanted us to look at um and and you know, as we come back with a 1.150 and these were these were some of those that
he wanted us to look at. >> Okay. uh additional discussions um and and myself with the staff and and I've is that I yes my priority recommendation to you which will come later is for the reser emergency fund and the uh as
priorities over even what you see here is uh emergency fund and grant matching uh for that 719,000. >> Okay. Sorry if I got ahead of myself there Joe. I just and people at home I know are watching this and that's the first thing that I would appreciate if I was sitting there >> the opportunity to clarify. >> Yeah.
>> Okay. Um then additional changes since the first budget hearing we were trying to fine-tune the budget a little further. Um we became aware of an additional Moringfield grant of 51,000. So that um of course helped the moing field enhance
to our revenues ex on the expense side. Um we realized there was uh an error in the um headcount for the mooring fields. The mowing field coordinator is actually a full-time position. So we needed to reflect that in the budget um by adding
the 35,000 to that budget. Um we added um the town clerk training um budget, the 3,000. We added that back in. Um we um added um $12,850 to the Bay Oak special events and youth
program. Um and then we another change that was made that came out of the meeting was to increase the moing field fees. Um and we did so that was enough to increase the revenue by 35,000. By doing so it decreases the amount we need
from the bridge loan by 35,000. state appropriations. So, we they were not included necessarily in the budget that was previously presented to you, but these were appropriations that we did um receive from the state. We were awarded those from the state, but they
had not been incorporated into the budget. So, this slide is what we did, and it is incorporated in the version of the budget you now have before you. So, there's um $1.2 million of grant. So, there's $585,000
um to go towards road repairs um out of the gas tax fund. There's $350,000, I believe, for the is it the north water I mean it's north um tower south I'm sorry, south tower um building repairs and then we have storm water pairs um
for downtown for 292,000. All of those grants require matching funds. And so there's matching funds coming out of the gas tax fund, the water fund, and the storm water fund for the same total amount. And then of course the entire project would be um
the double those amounts. So be $2.4 million. So all of that's added into the budget. Now the bridge loan status, this is just to update it once again. Um it's it's basically the same. I think the amount that we'll be using for the bridge loan
is slightly reduced as a result of that additional mingfield revenue. The position count this this is just um the comparison of the changes um by department um total changes from FY25 to
FY26 is unchanged here. Um general fund revenue by source. So I'm I'm just kind of running through now just the overall budget summary um as we're required to do and this is again based on that 1.15 mill rate increase.
So this is the the listing of our revenues in the general fund in descending order by the percentage contribution. So adorum taxes is the largest um source of revenue for the town at 27%. Um and then our charges for services
which primarily includes parking and other things is almost 23%. And then of course you have the bridge loan and then what's transferred in um from other areas. Um we have other taxes 1.2 million. So this is just a summary of everything that we've presented
previously. Um and here it is again. Um general fund expense by category. So we have wages, services, benefits, liability insurance. Those are the categories and again it's in descending order of um cost to the town. So you can see that
wages are is almost 34% um services 24%. So that would be like our contractual services and then benefits 15.5% insurance 8.5%. So those are the the largest um items.
Um general fund expense categories by year. So this compares the the FY26 budget to the FY25 budget by on those same categories. You can see how most of them have gone um down other than um
benefits has gone up and services has gone up. General fund expenses by department. So this is just a year-over-year comparison by department. That's just the dollar amount change. And then again it adds it adds up to the
same figure of of five a total of $552,000 increase year-over-year. This is the sources of revenue um as a percent of the total and this is for all the funds not just the general fund. So
in comparison then um adalorum tax revenue is smaller because we're talking about all the funds. charges for services is a large amount because this now we're talking about charges for water um and sewer storm water. So those
are the revenues that are coming from that um and then license permits and fees is about 3.8%. Um loan proceeds the 15.6% um and then the use of reserves is almost 37%.
And then this kind of details out the use of reserves. So you can see because it is a large number where where it's all coming from. So we have the Astera Boulevard landscaping that that was the um result of the ILA with Lee County that we're still carrying forward to be
used for next year of 782,000. And then this is the balance that's available in the road impact and the parks impact funds that is available for spending. Um we planning on using 7 1.7 million of the bridge loan with the
latest figures of revenues that we're using. Um the FDM hurricane recovery. Um this is the entire amount of the loan that we have available to us. We're budgeting for the whole amount. We probably won't use it, but we just want
to make sure it's available in the budget. And this again is um the loan that we received to cover very specific FEMA projects. Um it's a very limited um number of projects. Um and the total that would be available is 4.4 million.
Beach nourishment um 8.4 million. A good portion of that is may not actually even be spent. It may be a repayment of a grant that we received that we did not use. And so a good portion of that I'm
I'm just estimating it's around $4 million. So that's about half of the budget is the repayment of that grant. Um Asterero Island lighting project. >> Do we know why it wasn't used? >> Because we had so much funding for beach reourishment from various sources
whether it's FEMA, we had um quite a bit from Lee County and then that was the um Department of Environmental Protection that gave us a large grant. So, we had large grants and we were trying to use the ones um that were
well, I guess Chad could probably best answer it, but we we they were very specific about um which sources of funding were used so that they could get the most out of the funding um in terms of the grant terms of each grant and
what what was that it was allowed to be used for. But there are time limits also associated with the grants. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Uh let's see. Eststero Island lighting project. So that's what remains of the the project that should be
finished this year. Um the replacement program. This is just um a small amount of the capital budget that we have on hand that's spread out over all the departments to be used to replacing any equipment or um that they may need during the year to make any capital
repairs throughout the year. So, it's something that we budget each year to have available for unexpected um things that come up. The building um this is really the building fund. So, we're using about $464,000 of the building fund reserve balance and
that balances the accumulation of permit revenue um when that was accumulated immediately after hurricane Ian when we had so much permanent activity happening. Now, we're required to spend that over within a certain period of
time. And so now that we've shifted over um some employees that 75% of their town, I'm sorry, time is used in enforcing Florida building code, were able to use some of that fund balance towards that. Um, and then now we have
these state appropriations where we're using um gas tax um reserve to cover um the road um appropriation and then the water um the the water fund. I'm sorry I couldn't
quite see that. The water fund of the 350,000 and the storm water fund of 292. Okay. And then the grant revenue. This is just an outline of the grant revenues that we have budgeted. So, we have the um West Coast Inland Navigational Grant,
the WCIND. This is um for marine law enforcement. It's it's budgeted for 25,000, but as you'll see in one of the last slides, um we've learned that it's actually 35,000. So, there's going to be a correction
that's recommended to be made to the budget at the end. But, this is what's in the budget now and what's been published online. Um so we have um moundhouse um grants 264,000 Newton Park 53,000 beach maintenance 40
and this is all TDC or tourism development council grants for those three items. We have the CDBGDR which is the community development block grant disaster recovery um budget. This is just based on the original timelines
that were um when the grants were applied for. We had to pro provide them with a timeline of how the funds would be spent. Um it doesn't necessarily mean it'll happen this way, but this is really all we have at the moment um to build a budget with. Um we have a TDC
marketing grant for moundhouse 20,000. And then we have those same three state um lab grants which are the state appropriations that you just saw in a previous slide. Um and then we have the clean vessel act grant which helps provide funding for the pumpout services
for the moing field. The transfers this is just to detail the the $2.8 million worth of transfers like where it's coming from. So we have um one almost $1.6 million coming from the bridge loan to the general fund. We have
137,000 um from the bridge loan to help um make up the difference in the water fund. Um the difference between the revenues that they're expecting is in comparison to their expenditures. And then we have the transfer from the general fund to the
emergency fund of 500,000 and then the annual transfer um to pay our debt service um of 581,000. we have um all funds expense. So this is all the expenses from all the funds um
presented as a percent of the entire expense. Again the all funds expense would be $56 million. We have um this is all funds expense by categories. So it's fun wages, transfers, services. um the same
categories as was laid out for the general fund is now laid out for all the funds and you can see that the difference from FY25 to FY26 for each of those overall just it's might be good to point out the overall budget is down
almost $10 million from FY25 to FY26 and this is the all funds expense budgets by fund and so this is a compar comparison by fund of the budget from FY25 to 26. >> Joe, you can't just leave that one on the table there. You said the overall
budget is down 10 million from last year. Yes. What do you attribute that to? >> Well, I mean, partly if you look at um like this display, you can see um by fund like where where it's it's coming from. So, we've got um less well, we're
not budgeting anything from the American Rescue Act because that will be will have been completely spent. So, that's 877,000 beach access. Um you Oh, gee, I wished I was more prepared because now I'm trying to
remember. So, if anyone can remember this, you know, could please jump in and help me. I believe there was beach reourishment funding that was included in beach access last year. that is not included this year. So that would account for the 1.3 million. We're using
um almost half as much of the bridge loan um for uh well not half. I guess it's it's a little more than half but one almost $1.2 million reduction in the bridge loan um in the building um side of things. This is a building fund. We
had budgeted $3.5 million budget and that's down a million dollars um just to cover expenses um that were associated with um personnel primarily and the services contractual services that are provided. So that's a significant
reduction um capital um $4.4 4 million reduction and I think you know a good portion of that has is capital encompasses quite a few things from um I I would say primarily it that what's
composing that um variance would be the um eststero island lighting project. You know there was probably $3.8 million in the budget from last year that's no longer in the budget um this year. There is also um beach reourishment. Um we're
you know we're finished with beach reourishment so that's gone down quite a bit. Um so that would be I think beach reourishment and sterile boulevard lighting bridge loan. Those are the big things that have made a difference. And you know of course there's beach reourishment and the beach access.
That's also their emergency fund. Um, this might be a little bit deceiving because, you know, we only are budgeting 500,000, but there's probably going to be more than that. But we because it is an emergency fund, you don't know what you're going to spend until you need to spend it. And so, we normally do budget
adjustments as needed. So, I think that's it's showing that it's going down by 3 million, but that doesn't necessarily mean that'll play out that way in this coming year as we'll probably be doing budget adjustments. Um, we have the hurricane recovery funds. You know, last year we budgeted
the whole amount of the loan. We hardly used any of it. That's the 225,000 that was used. So, we're budgeting the whole amount again for this year. Uh, let's see. Um the gas tax, I think that's
quite a bit more because of we're using the funding for um state appropriations and we're trying to make sure that we we are planning on using as much as we possibly can for the road repairs that need to be made. Um so I think that covers the majority of it. Is there
anything else you would like me to focus on or >> That's helpful. Thank you. >> Okay. Well, before you go on though, I think for those at home that maybe aren't following along with that because it can get very confusing. Is again people watching at home, don't want them to think that, well, it's $10 million
that we're spending less this year than last year. Why are our taxes not going down because we're spending less? This this $10 million pretty much came from state appropriations, federal appropriations, grants, things of that nature. That's why that number is so significant. >> Yes, that's correct.
>> Make sure that people understood that. >> Okay. Good points. Thank you. Um capital budget items. Um this is just what is in the budget for the cap the capital budget. So we've got the $8.4 million of beach nourishment. Um storm water. This
is the what's ongoing for tier one. I'm not sure exactly what all the details are of that, but that that's what is left in the budget for that. the FDM loan project. That's that total amount that I've been mentioning now a few
times. The Astero Island lighting project. So basically it's it's reiterating the things that I mentioned already that was included um but just in more detail. Okay. And then this is um again this is that FDM FEMA project loan. Why this
slide is in here is because as I was reviewing and cash flows and getting into more granular detail, I was realizing that we need to make a correction to the budget based on what's actually been spent to date or not spent
to date. And so what was presented in um the budget or what's currently included in the budget um and where what it needs to be that is the final column is where it needs to be. So, we actually have $236,000
more available than what was previously thought. So, I I just wanted to make sure that that correction would be incorporated um into the new budget. Now, we have a fund balance projection by fund. So, we're starting out um with
you can see the the emergency fund is the one that sticks out the most. We have a negative um beginning a year balance and a projected um negative end ofear balance there. And so, this is one of the items of concern that we'll be
addressing as we continue this um conversation. But that that is definitely one of the things that stands out here. Um the emergency fund is part is included with the general fund and
the um revenue replacement fund and the bridge loan fund. They're normally all combined um into one fund. So seeing them separated like this could probably cause more concern, but when it was presented like in the trim ad, those
were all combined. So it it wasn't as concerning. But I I wanted to be fully transparent with you so you can see each fund where it stands. Okay. Now, debt service. This is one of the things that we're required to present. Um here again is that FDM FEMA
project loan. It was originally $5 million. We received it upfront and in February of 2024. It's an interest free loan. However, we do pay um FDM any interest that we earn on it.
and it only may be used for preapproved list of FEMA projects. And as we do use it, when FEMA reimbures us for the project, they um instead of giving it to us, they use it to repay the loan. So it goes directly back to FEM rather than to
us. So that's a way of um FEMA being or FDM being assured of repayment. Um, this is a $10 million capital improvement revenue note that the town um initiated back in November of 2020.
Um, the repayment date um the when it needs to be fully repaid is in 2040. So, it's a 20-year term. The maximum amount that we had was 10 million. And if this was a loan that was supposed to have been used for Times Square Bay Bayside
Park and the redevelopment project or improvements that were to be done at um Bay Oaks Recreational Center, but of course then we had Hurricane Ian and then the the plans were put on hold for a lot of the things. I think Bayside Park was completed, but then we had a
redo Bayside Park and then after that we did get the $500,000 um grant from the governor. Um, so the funding wasn't necessarily needed for that. And then because there there was uncertainty as to what we were going to do, we thought
perhaps we could use some of the funding to do something to create a new town hall facility by adding on um to what had already been planned, but of course that was not feasible. So the funding the loan finally expired I think it was
in May. Yeah, May of 2024. um we did and that was the longest we could possibly negotiate an extension for and it was for ve the loan itself was for very specific uses so we could not go outside of that. So um we only
spent $3.5 million and our repayment is the same no matter whether we have spent three and a half or 10. It's the 581,000 a year, but because we used $6.5 million less, the payments will end that much
sooner. Um, and it's only a 3.15% interest rate. Okay. The DEEO bridge loan, um, this is something that you're well familiar with now. We received it, um, originally in June of 2023. It was originally um
supposed to um be due payable back to the state um in the following year, but it was extended to year 2033. Um it's we've used or we've been we were awarded the 11.9 million and the balance
after what we've used so far through FY25 will be $4 million. It's once it's due to be repaid in July of 2033. After that point, any unpaid balance will be subject to a 10% annual interest
rate. The Florida State Revolving Funds, these are the four loans that we have that have been very much um the funding source for our tier one project. So, there's two loans for drinking water and two loans for storm water. And this is
just outlining the details of the percentage interest rates that we have for each one. Um as well as what we've the principal balances meaning that that is the amount that we've borrowed so far. So the total so far that we've borrowed is $50 million. um the annual
payments um and all of them combined um is almost $3 million and all of this is coming out of the um water and storm water funds and it's being paid for by the fees that are charged um to our to the customers.
>> Joe, it's at some point I I believe we got a $10 million grant for this subject matter area. Is that reflected in these numbers at all? >> No, this is only the state revolving loan. So, this is the actual um current state of of that loan of those four loans.
>> How where is that $10 million uh grant reflected in your in your presentation? >> It's really it's not it's not in here yet. Um I think we have some things to figure out with that. Um, so it's it, you know, at the point in which we understand how it would be used, we'll
certainly, you know, we'll probably come back with a budget amendment. Okay. Then now we'll just kind of we that was the presentation of the budget as it stands as far as the version of the budget that is attached to the to
the budget resolution and was utilizing that additional revenue from the millage rate. Um so this is just to represent to you um some of the options that are out there. So we have if you
were to keep the military rate the same at.99 um it would be 10.56% above the roll back rate and it would it would not generate any additional revenue than what's already been included in the original budget and that
would require four out of five votes to the highest the mill rate could be raised um with a four out of five vote is the 1.0294 0294 um level that would u generate $177,149
of additional adorum revenue over and above what we would um have otherwise. And that's $14.96% above the rolled back rate. And then the 1.15 millage rate, which is what this
current version of the budget is based on, generates that $719,387 of additional advalorum revenue. Um it's 28.43% above the rolled back rate and that would require a unanimous vote.
Um, so we're now we're into staff recommendations and this is um now well it's what it's I guess that's pretty self-explanatory. Um in in order to um kind of set the stage for the recommendations I wanted
to present to you the status of the emergency fund. Um and I this is something that is just kind of a snapshot of where we're are right now. So we since hurricane Ian, so this goes back to hurricane Ian, which is there
was not very much in the emergency fund at that point with hurricane Ian since then um which was September of 2022,
we um have spent $43 million, $545,000 um of emergency expenditures ES insurance proceeds we received 10.9 million FEMA and FDM reimbursements combined we received 18.4 4 million. Um
then we had various transfers from other funds trying to um shore up the emergency fund and we we were able to utilize $439,000 from ARPA and that was to cover some expenses that were just not reimbursable that we incurred but they were not
reimbursed by FEMA um or our insurance. We had um we transferred in the $2 million from our FY23 savings. we transferred $2 million from our FY24 savings. Uh, and these were savings out of the general fund. So, this is less
spending that had um happened that was incurred during the those years than had been budgeted. Um, we then put also budgeted to add 225,000 in FY24 to the to the emergency fund and then we
budgeted um this current year FY25 435,000. So those are all the transfers that went into the emergency fund. We received a total of 30 almost $35,000 of donations. Um some of that like for example was for
um the ball field the um the grant or the donation from um 7-Eleven. So that is reflected there. Then we have um the balance. So the balance after you all the expenditures and then all all
these transfers and proceeds that we received there's actually a deficit in the emergency fund of $9,39,000 almost $9,40,000. We are expecting um to the best of our
knowledge by looking at the expenses we've incurred and matching them up to the the FEMA projects to the best of our ability um we are expecting about $12.2 million of reimbursement yet to come in you know over the next two to three
years. So, it's there's going to be quite a lag before that money comes back to us. Um, after um we >> Let's That's a huge number. I think it's important to spend a little time there. >> Sure.
>> You said a lot of things there. You said a $9 million deficit. >> Yes. >> And the potential of money coming from FEMA. We have no guarantees from them that we're going to receive that money. >> So, right now, we're operating at a $9 million deficit to our emergency fund. Yes. >> With no guarantees that we're going to
get that money back. >> That's true. >> We We're hopeful. >> Yes. >> But hope is not a strategy, right? >> Absolutely not. >> When you told me that number, I about fell out of my chair.
>> Um yes. Go continue. >> Okay. So, >> I'm sorry. >> If if we do if we do um get the 12.2 2 million then we will have almost $3.2 million in the emergency fund. So that's
in the future. Um oh I'm sorry. So I yeah that is on the slide. So we do of that $3.2 million that we will eventually have $2.5 million of it would be $2.5 million of
unspent insurance proceeds. So these are insurance proceeds that we have received for very specific um reimbursements for property damage, building damage, um what it was, very specific payments. So
theoretically um we should be using that money for those purposes. So if if we were to do that, then that would only leave us with $668,000 um after in the very end um in the future.
Okay. So, that sets the stage then um for the recommendations. So, um just >> just before you go on, Joe, not to go back a little bit, but >> those that may be out there asking how did we what's the reason for the $9 million that was spent and I think this
is a good point to a time to point out that that's money that we had to expend for FEMA projects to replace things since Ian before you can even get reimbured. So you have to outlay the capital before you can get reimbured for it or potentially get reimbured for it there. That's the reason behind that
number. Is that a safe way to say it? >> That's true. We have to spend it before we're reimbursed and then unfortunately the reimbursement takes a long time um to get through the process and all the reviews. Um so it's it's very time consuming and even just submitting it to
FEMA is a very time consuming process. So staff has been working on it, you know, since hurricane Ian and and collecting all of the documentation project by project and submitting it. And of course, projects are ongoing, so there's ongoing expenditures and it's
it's time consuming. Um, and the there's it's still not completed. I mean, it's in terms of the projects themselves. >> Joe, since we're going back a little bit before we get to the recommendations, if you could go back to slide 30, please.
This is involving millage rates and required votes. >> I think your categories are interesting and potentially a bit confusing. >> When you reference the millage rate at 0.99 and it says generated by millage rate increase, I agree there's no millage
rate increase, but there's no increase. But but if you keep the millage rate the same, our revenues do increase, particularly if you're looking at the roll back rate. Is that fair >> in comparison to the roll back rate? Yes. Yes. >> So, so that's true. So, there do you
know you know what that number is by the way if we what what what the revenue ballpark? >> Um I'm sorry. >> That's okay. But here's the here's my point. You know, you you say.99 uh and then you use the percent above roll back, but then you you say that it
doesn't generate any in uh increase in revenue. That gets a little confusing to folks. Um it's really it's it's it's I just based upon the conversations we've had thus far. Uh the it would be 0.99. There would be
an increase generated by the 0.99 because the roll back rate uh it's it's above the roll back rate. And then the next category uh would be it would be really 0% increase above the current mill rate. And then the next number 0.1
I'm sorry 1.0 0294, which is uh which is a a more modest increase in the millage rate. That would be uh I don't even know what that is, but 1.15, which I believe is going to be the recommendation from the town manager. That's really it's 28%
above the roll back rate, but it's it's in essence, correct me if I'm wrong, it's it's a 13% increase in the millillage rate. I think you're you're you're we're kind of doing apples and oranges here as we have on on this chart and it gets folks a little bit confused >> and I can appreciate that it is
confusing. We're required to present Gotcha. >> the increase over the roll back rate. >> That makes sense. >> Which um adds to the confusion. I know. So, so for folks who are watching the uh 0.99 uh is a 0% increase over the current
mill rate obviously, but what's being proposed this evening, the 1.15 is a 13% in the increase in the current mill rate. Is that fair >> just so people can track? >> Yes. I mean, I'm I I'm assuming the 13%
is correct. It sounds correct. I >> Yeah, at least that's the premise we've been working under at least. >> Yes. Yes. I agree. It would be 16, wouldn't it? Because if it's 0.99 to 1.15, it' be 16%. >> 16 >> is it? Okay. I don't know. I don't have
that in front of me, so I'm sorry. >> Just want to make sure we're all singing from the same himnil here. Well, and I think to the vice mayor's I think I don't want to speak for you, but I think what you're trying to get at is although it shows that there's no increased revenue coming in, if it were
to stay at 0.99, there is an increase, but we don't know what that increase dollar amount is off the top of your head or how it relates to the increase in services with insuranceances and things like that. >> We do. Cassandra, go ahead. If you have the microphone there, I know she's
calculating kind of getting >> well what I was getting at is yeah what I was getting at is we're really not no one I don't believe is is arguing that we should go back to the roll back rate >> and I know statutoily you're required to portray it that way but in as we have
our deliberations this evening I think it's >> probably more simple to just discuss what the millage rate is and what the recommended increase in the millage rate is because I think that's where we're all that's kind of the platform we're all discussing right now and I just
think for just discussions purposes going forward. It might be easier for everyone involved and then I know you again let's set this roll back grade out aside for now because that's really not part of the the paradigm that we're we're discussing this evening just to avoid additional confusion because I
know it's complex. Does that make sense? That's that's the point I was making. >> It does, but maybe I just went a little further down. >> That's fine, too. Yeah. I don't I just feel >> is is if you have the numbers I would it would be interesting to know what that >> would be interesting >> what that percentage is and how it relates to services. >> Yeah. Yes, gentlemen. We had that
calculated into our original FY 2026 budget was based on the 0.99. So I know that we do have those numbers. Go ahead if you want. >> Uh Cassandra Penner, budget manager. >> It's not on I don't think he's >> Cassandra Penard budget manager. It would be $670,200.
So what and then what you're looking at beyond that is in in addition to that right Joe if the 1.0294 0294 or the 1.150 the numbers reflected there would be in addition to that >> 0.99. >> Yes, >> correct. Yeah.
>> Sorry for the confusion. >> No, no, I I I totally understand that. I'm just curious at how that that number correlates to the increase in services that we saw from last year. Whether it's I think do you understand what I'm saying with the insurance costs that
went up and all the other costs that increased over last year? How does that, if you were to stay at the 0.99, how does that relate to that cost? So, of that, you said it was $670,000, what of that was is spent on the the natural increases that occurred from
last year? I know it's probably you don't have the numbers off top of your head yet. >> Yeah, I'm not even sure that it's as easy as that because, you know, there's fluctuations in all the revenues. So, various specific revenues
actually went down. like for example um >> but I I think what the mayor and I'm going to try to guess what you were saying. I think what the mayor is saying is is that in essence we we don't go back to the roll back roll back rate because because of the the inflationary dynamics that we have to deal with.
>> Better way to put it. You don't have the numbers so I don't want to belabor this too much. I just >> go on Joe. >> I'm sorry. I Okay, >> Joe. Didn't you say too um when you were
when you're talking about the FEMA reimbursements and how long they take? >> I think in our meeting you said that we literally just got an Irma reimbursement. >> And that was in 2017.
>> So that's eight years of waiting for this money. It can be >> can be up to, you know, hopefully it won't be, but >> there's no rhyme or reason when it gets paid.
>> That's true. I mean, based on our experience, that's true. >> They're still waiting for Michael. They're still waiting for money. >> Yeah. So, >> so, uh, our staff recommendations and so
here's the emergency fund status. So, It is the recommendation that the final millage rate of 1.1500 which is 28.43% over the rolled back rate and which
would generate the $719,387 of additional advalor revenue be unanimously approved. And then there's also these following changes to the budget that we would be asking to be made. um they and then this
is assuming the $719,000 increase of revenue would be in the budget. So these are just a few of the the um changes that we've would like to focus on. So there's that $10,000 um
correction to the maritime um WCIND law enforcement grant revenue. So that should be an easy one. Um and then if you just quick look at the bottom of that slide, we're also adding $10,000 of expense. So this is really reimbursement for the sheriff services related to
maritime. So we're we're getting $10,000 more revenue, $10,000 more expense. So that should be an easy one to approve. Um but now these are the other changes then that we're proposing. So we're proposing taking away that $100,000 that
was added for the July fireworks. Take that back out. remove that extra $25,000 that was provided for policing for the fireworks. Take that out. Um the the Bay staff um that we added the those
staffing that was pulled out originally and that we were at the start of this meeting, we were saying we would add it back in. Now we're saying at the end of this meeting based on all this information that we have, especially regarding the emergency fund, we're pulling that back out. Um, we're adding
grants. Well, I'm not sure if I follow. Am I saying this right? >> Okay. So, I see. I just I'm sorry. I got confused with the presentation. Is this my own fault? Okay. So, we're taking
back out the grant matching of 458,000. So, we're basically reversing those changes that were initially proposed and now instead we're um we're going to take that $719,000 and we're going to split it between the
emergency fund and grant matching. And by grant matching, it's to have funds available for um future state appropriations. So, that would be the recommendation. Um let me just see if there's another slide. Okay, then there's just a couple more um things to fine-tune. So because we made the
changes of adding more to the emergency fund on the emergency fund budget itself, we have to show um an increase of the transfer by that same amount of almost 360,000 and then show that we're adding it to the reserve. And then um this this slide
here goes along with making the correction to the FM hurricane recovery funds loan budget that we're actually increasing it by the 236,000. So this slide is really a correction. Um I think that's it. Yep. So that slide's
a correction. This slide regarding the emergency fund is what we proposed to do with the additional funding. And then these were the other changes that we're proposing that we make assuming there's um the mill rate would be approved to to
provide the additional $719,000. Scott or John questions for for Joe? >> Not right now. >> Vice Mayor. >> Uh just to recap, Joe, prior to the first budget meeting, uh
the the town staff recommended a 26% uh increase in the millage rate as a cap uh as we as we went into the first budget meeting. And uh and I believe at that meeting the town council I think really almost
unanimously I think it was unanimous said uh gave the town manager a charge because at that premeating that you all had said and and presented a $1.2 million structural deficit for the town of Fort Myers Beach. Is that correct?
>> Yes, that's correct. And that was in part one of the reasons why you wanted that 26% uh increase in the millage rate. Is that fair? >> Yes, that's correct. >> So then the town council gave you all the charge to say, hey, you know, everybody around here on Fort Myers Beach has to tighten their belts. Uh I
think maybe the town should give that a shot as well. And you all accepted that challenge and then presented to us uh at the first budget meeting uh $1.2 2 million in uh belt tightening measures which again uh not easy uh but very
professionally done and I think demonstrated that we're willing to uh tighten our belt just as everyone else uh does here on this island particularly post Ian. Um, so is what you're saying and what the town manager is saying now
is that those belt tightening measures will remain in place which balances the structural deficit, but given the the impact of Ian, we need additional help for the emergency reserve fund and for uh matching dollars in order to enable
us to get state, federal, and county uh grants. Is that is that a fair overview of what's happening? Yes. >> Yes. >> You concur as well? >> Yes, sir. >> So, so the $1.2 million in belt tightening measures that were presented are still in this budget. >> That's correct.
>> So, we can say to the public, we're we are, you know, we've we've heard you and we've tightened our belts and we're we're making some some tough choices here. Uh but at the same time, fiscally, we've got to do something
about our emergency reserve dynamic. And let me just clarify that a bit and maybe this is just a budget uh uh nuance that you're utilizing but I I believe in our meetings you said to me that technically uh and again not all money is fungeible.
I know you've got certain restrictions, but that emergency reserve, I mean, if in other words, if we know if we don't get any appropriations and those matching dollars aren't necessary, that those matching dollars that we've set aside would be available
to supplement the emergency reserve. Is that a fair characterization? >> Yes, it would. If it's unspent, it just becomes part of the savings that the town council could then decide to use in whatever way it would like to use them. Is it the intention of the town manager to utilize any savings that we don't
utilize with matching funds to be utilized for the emergency fund? >> Yes, unless otherwise directed by the council. >> Understand? Thank you. That's all I have. >> Council Woodson. Questions for Joe? >> No, I think Jim had pulled it out of you
perfectly. >> I'm good. >> Councelor Sanford, >> I'd like to hear from the town manager. Yeah, I think uh I appreciate the highlighting the hard work again that the staff has done um to go through the
uh difficult tasks of belt tightening as you put it, Mr. Vice Mayor. Um, I think that I just my bottom line is this the emergency fund is what keeps Joe and I up at night. um thinking about uh as I
talk with the staff and everybody thinking about what this town has been through and how much money this town has had to um you know spend and and pull out of general fund, pull out of wherever to to uh um pay for recovery
needs, emergency needs right away. um and then hoping for, you know, and working very hard to get the reimbursements and and the the uh replacements from our state and federal partners, which we'll continue to do, but but uh as I expressed to the mayor
before and to others, you know, I'm a firm believer that hope is not a strategy. I I mean, I believe in hope. I think, you know, hope is very important to have, but hope is not a strategy. We have to plan. um we would any of us would expect individually to uh always
be putting money away in savings for that emergency. Um and I think yes that has been done um but this town has been through a lot and had to expend a lot and we're in a situation now where I think uh once again we need to go to
prioritizing um putting you know additional revenue into the save into our emergency fund savings as much as possible. Yes, sir. >> I I would 100% agree. >> Yeah, I guess you know I look when we
met and you showed me that $9 million number like I said I about fell out of my chair. um you know that money was was spent to as you said well to spend to to do emergency repairs on things that we needed to do that we had to do based on the procedures that are in place for
FEMA to be able to get reimbursed. Um, you know, we expect to be reimbursed with that at some point, but you know, if you just looked at that that slide alone is your own bank account and you went from $10 million in cash to
$668,000 in cash and there is an opportunity for you to start preparing in the event that you don't get that money and not do that to me would be extremely reckless. And and we still have a long way to go. We we I mean the capital improvement
projects that we still have out there. I mean the numbers if I remember right after the storm was north of hund00 million were the projects that we're still working on. If we were to redo the towers do all of that kind of it was I don't remember the exact number but it it's a significant amount of money and
at some point as that slide shows you run out of cash until you get money back. And to me I think what you're asking for is warranted. I wish we would have known this before, honestly. I mean, it's not your fault. It is, you know, it is what it is where we're at
where we're at. But to not take the steps to continue to save for the future, I think would no other word in my mind other than reckless. Anyone else have any other comments? Would anyone like to make a motion?
I I will make a motion to approve the staff recommendation to set the the the fiscal year 2026 millage rate at 1.15. >> I'll second. There's a motion by Mayor Aller, seconded by councelor Safford. Further
discussion councelor Woodson >> I >> Oh, discussion. Oh, public comment. Oh, sorry. I forgot about public comment >> also. Um I think we need to go ahead and make the announcement as to if you were to adopt that the impact on the roll
back rate. Just a short >> Okay. Should we do public comment first and then >> um I think let's do the announcement. Okay. Public notes. >> Go ahead. >> Could we did you for additional comments? >> Yeah, there'll be still Yes, we just do public comment first. >> Cassandra Benner, budget manager, just
um ensure you say 28.43%. >> You want me to say that? >> Yeah. When you when you make the motion, just say 1.15, which is 28.5. >> Find the slide so I get the exact number. >> Page 33.
>> Okay, hold on. We'll get there. >> Joe, back right there. >> All right. I will amend my motion to recommend approval of stack stack staff recommendation millage rate for fiscal year 2026 at a rate of 1.150
which would be a 28.43% increase over the roll back rate from the previous fiscal year. >> I'll amend my second public comment. Ellen, >> I I would like to honor you. Well, I
would like to say thank you for all of the diligent work by all of the people involved in this. I guess I can lower this and then I don't have to stand on my toes. Who knew? Um, and I just encourage I understand that in order for this to be adopted, the vote has to be unanimous. So, I'm just encouraging you
to all vote in the affirmative and adopt this budget. Thank you. >> Thank you, Ellen. Tom, >> I I simply echo Ellen's words. Uh we need your unanimous >> You got to state you got to state your name. >> Uh Tom Dorson, resident Fort My speech.
I I echo um Ellen. Um we need your unanimous consent on this, please. Anyone else? No moral support. Okay. All right. All right, we'll close public comment discussion. Vice Mayor,
>> Joe or Will? Maybe we'll start with Will because these are high level questions. Will, so just to recap what we've accomplished here, we were presented early on in this process with a structural deficit of 1.2 million. We
were spending 1.2 million more than we were taking in. And the staff presented cuts of $1.2 million. And those cuts are reflected here in this budget before us. Is that correct? >> That is correct. >> And the millage rate increase that's
been uh uh moved and seconded that will be used in its entirety to either support the emergency fund and or uh potential matching grants that would come our way. And that is the exclusive
purview of of that millage rate increase. Is that a fair characterization? >> Yes. >> So none of the mill rate will be going for additional spending aside from again the concept of an emergency fund andor matching of of of federal, state or
county grants. Is that correct? >> That is correct. >> Thank you, John. Any additional comments? >> Not at this time. >> Uh the only other comments I have is is for staff. I'm sure you already know, but on packet page seven and 8, the
documents still show the previous meetings um number of 1 25 on the documents that you would be sending to the state. I'm sure you'll change those, but just wanted to bring it to your attention that it still shows like on
line 26 on page 8 still shows the 1.255. It wasn't updated to the the new 1.15. Just wanted to bring it to your attention, but I'm >> before it gets the the certification. >> It's on there's there's two spots. I noticed that it was on page or it was on
line 20 or 17 and 26 of the >> I figured you probably knew, but I just wanted to point it out just in case it'll be updated. >> Thank you. Thank you for the clarification. We'll update that. >> Um, all right. With that, we got a motion and a second. >> Mayor, yes. Can you read the title to
the resolution now that we know the numbers? >> The title to the resolution? Yes. Okay. >> I think Cassandra has them. If you would >> Yes. Can if you have all the numbers, Cassandra, would you like to read the resolution? >> Sure. >> Oh, thank you. >> Okay. A resolution of the town council
of the town of Fort Myers Beach adopting the final abalorum millage rate for the town of Fort Myers Beach, Florida at 1.15 mills, which is 1.1500 for each $1,000 of assessed valuation
and is 28.43% greater than the rolled back rate of.8954 8954 mills for fiscal year 2026 commencing October 1st, 2025 and ending
September 30th, 2026 for the purpose of providing sufficient funds for the general fund and providing an effective date. >> All right, with that we've got a motion and a second. I am an I. Councelor Saffford >> I. >> Councelor Woodson
>> I. >> Vice Mayor Ederal >> I. and councelor King. >> Well, reckless is one of the nicest things I've been called in a long time, but um I'm going to stand with the taxpayers that that contacted me and I'm going to vote no. >> Okay, that motion fails. Four to one.
And I wasn't directing you as reckless. >> That's fine. I'm I'm used to it, Dan. Thank you. >> All right. With that, is there is there another motion? I don't know how much more discussion
we we can have. Let's ask you this, John. Is there any other number besides um the 0.99 that you would support? >> I guess my concern is that I see where we put it what $4.6 million from the
last two uh budgets surpluses into the reserves. Um, but now I'm hearing tonight any future money will not be spent, but I guess that that confuses me. Uh,
so I I can't I can't support an increase. >> Well, I won't speak for Joe, but my understanding would be that that money was put in there, but has been spent and that's reflected in the $9 million >> shortcoming of cash. Is that >> Yeah, and and that's what I understand,
Mayor. But why now are we not going to be spending the reserve the money we put into the reserves? I guess um >> what's already been spent. >> No, what I heard I maybe I misunderstood the vice mayor was uh and and the town
manager was the 600 and some thousand that will be put in there will not be spent. Correct. >> Did I hear that correctly or >> you talking about this slide here, John? >> Yes. That's reflecting if we get the $12 million from FEMA and FDM
reimbursements, that would give us a balance of 668. Is that correct? >> Yes, that's correct. That >> is correct. >> But I'm I guess what I heard tonight was that any money that's going into the reserves will not be spent. >> Well, any money additional revenue that
that we receive out of the council's decisions will go to the emergency fund and and is is what we're telling. I get I'm again I'm asking did I did I misunderstand Vice Mayor? I guess I thought that's what I heard. So
>> Joe, would it be safe to say that if we don't put any money into the reserve fund or emergency fund that there is no money in the emergency fund based on this slide? >> Uh yes, that's accurate. Um yes. >> Joe, didn't you earlier say in your
original budget that you were placing $500,000 into the emergency fund? Yes. >> What what would happen? Did that get changed? >> No, it's still included in the budget in the number. >> So, it would be there along with anything additional that we would be
adding to the fund. Well, and I when I say it'll be there, I mean it's obviously when you're adding to a negative, it's still going to be negative, but um >> it would just be less negative. That's a powerful statement.
It's just less negative. So I guess we're at a we're at a we're at a crossroads here. It John is your position you're not comfortable with supporting anything over the 0.99. >> Correct. >> So what would be the maximum amount if you could do the calculations on what
would require less than a >> workers comp? >> Less than a uh 10294 >> 1.02 0294 is okay. >> That is correct. 1.00294. >> Okay. >> Which only is $177,000
increase when we spent 43 million in emergency funds. >> And Will, would it be safe to say if that is adopted at the 1.0 0 294 that that 177 149 would be split evenly the
same way that the it was presented at 1.15. >> Yes, Mr. Mayor. That's >> so essentially we'd be putting 86,000 87,000 somewhere in there. 88,000 into the negative emergency fund balance.
>> Yes. >> Okay. I made the I I don't feel comfortable making that motion. Quite honestly, I I stick with the fact that I think we need to be at that 1.15, but I will open it up to any council member that would like to make a motion. >> I feel the same way as you do, Dan. I
just don't think it's enough. Um, no one wants to raise taxes. Nobody wants to pay more taxes, but we are in this situation. If I mean, truly, I wish it was back at the 1.25. um which I know we can't go back to. Um
but the cuts that the staff has made, everything that you have done, everything you've presented, I absolutely think the 1.15 is warranted. >> So, no, I won't make a motion otherwise. >> I think that was an important point that
you pointed out, Vice Mayor. It was it was well articulated is the fact that the cuts are still there. the $1.19 million cuts are still there. >> 1.2 or 1.2 >> just under 1.2 y >> are still there. So you have achieved
what you were tasked to do. >> This is simply just trying to protect ourselves. We still have a month left in hurricane season. >> Um this doesn't and then we have another hurricane season coming in before we do this exercise again next year. I think I think will your your recommendations
are spot on. I think your emails that you have sent to us have been spot on in your in your worry that this this leaves us not that we're we're out of the woods by any stretch of imagination at 1.15, but we are certainly in a in a worse position by not having um you know, who
knows? FEMA could come in tomorrow and and we we get all kinds of an influx of cash. I'm not a believer that that's going to happen. >> Hope is not the strategy, right? I think we'll see it somewhere, but I think we're leaving ourselves really open to um to some potential dangers.
Scott, how do you feel about making a motion? Um I just just wow. Um I guess somebody's going to have to make the motion. Um if Mr. Mr. King's not moving.
>> You still feeling that way, Mr. King? >> Thank you for checking. But yes, >> Jim, do you have any other words? Sorry, Scott. Go ahead. >> I I I I don't uh I'm but but out of necessity, I would be willing to make
the motion. Uh I mean, if if that's where we're at. Um, but I don't have my computer is shut down, so I don't have the stuff in front of me. So, Scott, why don't you, if you wouldn't mind, I don't have my the language in front of me. Or if the town
attorney wants to phrase it for me, I'd be happy to uh affirm it. >> Um, so are you going with the 1.0294? Is that correct? >> That's my understanding. >> Okay. So, um you would be making a
motion um to approve the resolution. And I believe that Cassandra does have the um the numbers associated with that. So perhaps the easiest thing would to do would be to have her read the resolution
and that would you would be making a motion to approve that resolution. >> That would be fine. A resolution of the town council of the town of Fort Myers Beach adopting the final advalorum militaryrate for the town of Fort Myers Beach, Florida at
1.0294 mills, which is 1.0294 0294 for each $1,000 of assessed valuation and is 14.96%
greater than the rolled back rate of8954 mills for fiscal year 2026 commencing October 1st 2025 and ending September 30th 2026 for the purpose of providing sufficient funds for the general fund
and providing an effective That would be the announcement of the military that's being proposed and your motion is to >> my motion is that is my motion. >> Okay. >> To approve the resolution to approve approve the resolution as read.
>> Okay. >> All right. We got a motion by Vice Mayor Adderhol, seconded by Councelor Safford. Any further discussion? >> John, looks like you're getting ready to push the button. Uh just >> uh Vice Mayor Adhalt. >> Hi.
>> Uh councelor Safford. >> Hi. >> Councelor Woodson. >> Hi. But not really, but I have to. >> Councelor King. >> No. >> And yes, I'm with you. Reluctantly. I am an I as well. That motion carries unanimously.
>> No. Four to one. Four to one. Sorry. Four to one. I'm sorry. Sorry, John. >> That's all right. >> You got long arms. >> I know you've had a tough day. Yeah. Um, that brings us to item B. This is resol a a a res resolution 25-279. This is a resolution of the town council
of the town of Fort Myers Beach adopting the final budget for fiscal year 2026 commencing October 1st, 2025 and ending on September 30th, 2026 and providing for an effective date. Go ahead, Joe. I think we've covered it all, but
>> yes, I I think we have. um we would just um in order to adopt the budget then you know let me just see if I can find my way back here. So so we would be um you know obviously this slide is now different. So it would
be the millage rate of the the 1.0294 and the additional revenue. Let's see where is that >> 177. >> I'm sorry I'm like lost in my own slides here. >> There's a lot. >> Okay. So, it's $177,149 would be the additional increase in
revenue. And then according to what was just stated a little while ago, we would divide that in half and it would be $88,574. um like one amount that would go to the emergency fund would be8
$888,574 [Music] and then the amount that would go to state appropriations would be $88,575. We just have to have $1 off because it's an odd number. So that would be the adjustment then to
um let me see right there. >> Okay. So this would be the transfer to the emergency fund would be $88,574. The transfer to grant matching would be
$88,575. So it would be all of these changes except for changing those two amounts. So in order to adopt the budget then we would recommend that you approve these recommended amendments which includes
this. So what slide number is that? Slide 34, 35 and 36. But okay, this so slide 34 would be and I'm state trying to state this so that somehow someway you can make a a motion
that would incorporate this. So slide 36 remains unchanged. Slide 35 would change to the new amount of the $88,574 for the emergency fund for both the revenue and the expense
sections. And then here again, slide 34, those two line items, the transfer to the emergency fund and to grant matching would would change to what I had stated at $88,574
to the emergency fund, $88,575 to the grant match for grant matching. So if that those changes were made, that would be our recommendation at this point to move forward in adopting the budget.
All right. Any questions for Joe? Scott? >> No. I guess 87,000 we can probably get a swing set, right? >> You're lucky. >> Maybe the slide. >> No, I don't have any questions. >> Councelor Woodson, >> I have none.
>> Vice Mayor Hall? >> No. Council King, >> I like swing sets, but no, >> I do not have any questions. Thanks. Thanks, Joe. Uh, with that, I'll make a motion to approve resolution 25-279 for the final fiscal year 26 budget, uh,
based on the change of $88,574 to transfer to the general fund and $88,574 added to the emergency fund reserve based on Joe's comments. Is that sufficient? >> That is um, don't forget public comment,
although no one's here. Okay. >> I just want to put it in the record. I will open it up for public comment. Anyone like to speak of public comment? >> Is this the final budget vote? >> Seeing none, we'll close public comment. >> I got there's a motion on the floor. Is there a second?
>> I'll second. >> All right. Got a motion by Mayor Allers, seconded by Councelor Safford. Further discussion? >> Yes, sir. >> I'm going to appline one more time. This is the final bud budget vote as I understand it procedurally. So, I just wanted to say for the record uh with respect to my vote, uh
I came out of the first budget uh hearing uh with a no vote uh excuse me because I thought I heard in part uh the the cuts that had been presented by the town. uh there was some
discussion about modifying those cuts and I thought it was important to uh make clear to our citizenry that we were making the tough choices. Um I would say to my dear friend uh councelor King uh in his defense uh my
correspondence on this issue was overwhelmingly against a tax increase. So I respect your vote. I felt like today that uh we continued to uh enshrine those tough cuts and I felt like the increase was going to go to the
emergency reserves. So I thought I that made me more comfortable which is why I changed my vote. But I I respect everybody's viewpoint on this because these are tough issues and I and I I I that's all I've got. Thank you. >> Well said, Councelor King.
>> I have nothing to say. Thanks. Okay, we have a motion and a second. If there's no further discussion, I'm an I. Councelor Safford, >> I. >> Uh, Councelor Woodson, >> I. >> Vice Mayor Adrial, >> I. >> And councelor King, >> no. >> That motion carries 4 to one. That brings us to our final item. Sorry, my
computer shut down. Uh, it is resolution 25-280. This is a resolution of the town council of the town of Fort Myers Beach adopting the final fee schedule for fiscal year 2026 commencing October 1st, 2025 and ending on September 30th, 2026
and providing for an effective date. Joe. >> Okay. So, this presentation will um just kind of run through the changes that were made to the fee schedule based on the input from the town council when it was presented to you at the last
meeting. So, it's only going to show the changes since that last meeting to show you that we did incorporate what you suggested and asked that we do. So, the first one, this is probably going to be hard to read. I I'm going to face this way a little bit easier for me.
>> Okay. Um, so personal watercraft vendor licenses are only going to go up by I think that's a 3% increase. Same for Paris sailing vendor license. Um, beach raking permit is going to stay at $25.
Um, beach furniture vendor license first year is at the 3% because under that's 3%. Beach f furniture vendor license renewal that's at the 3% and beach furniture vendor license late fee is
going up from 25 to $100. Okay. Uh this is a clarification of the fee schedule changes um for the Bays Rec Center. So youth club wreck um during the school year per semester or the year is $125
for the semester, $175 for the year. Um that was the original fee. And then in the proposed fee, it'll be $350 per year or $200 per semester. Um, and then is that resident versus non-resident? Okay.
So then, so that was what I just read was for the resident for non-resident it would be $400 per year or $275 per semester. Okay. Now, these additional changes that I'm about to run through for you are not
incorporated into the version of the fee schedule that was attached to the resolution. These came in after that. uh resolution was published. So when you approve this fee schedule, you would need to uh approve it with um these
additional changes that I'm about to show you. So these additional changes are really all the ones regarding the building um the building fees per so it's it's quite a few here to go through. Um so we got the um concrete
restoration going from 525 to 550. Um, roof, re- roof, roof over 500 to 550. Um, all driveways 625 to 650. Um, dock, walkway, pier, platform, boat lift,
hoist um on that group, we go from 400 to 450. Pools um above ground, below ground, spas go from 850 to 875. um interior remodel up to 50% of
structure value 800 to 850 roof re-roof roof over insulated um pan roof go from 300 to 350 I I think um maybe I'm failing to indicate whether it's is it residential or commercial is that would be
>> okay so I'm sorry if I'm not clarifying that so those first couple at the top are for commercial um and now these this these next two that I read um interior. I'm sorry. So, the number of windows times um 30.
It's just going from the number of windows at $30 each. Um I'm not sure how to interpret this. Maybe Frankie, you can help me um describe this. So, basically, it's a per each uh piece
on the old scheme at $30 each uh based on a $50 fee added on. So, our 10 window max, it comes to 350. That's just how we did the residential planning. Uh, as far as that fee goes before, all we did was take it up uh $20
to the new price of $50. So, instead of a 350 base price, you're going to end up with a 560 base price for a 10 window change. >> Thank you. Okay. So, then miscellaneous change of contractors going from 60 to 75. Um this
inspection partial pass additional inspection requested by contractor goes from 60 to 75. Inspection reinspection after failed inspection goes from 60 to 75. Inspection lockout um inspector did not have access to the construction site
goes from 60 to $100. Um permit extension first three months goes from 120 to 135. permit extension the second three months goes from 180 to 200. Um plan revision after issuance of
permit goes from 60 to 100. Reissuance of expired permit um commercial not including code enforcement fees goes from 600 to 650. Reissuance of expired permit um residential not including code
enforcement fees goes from 300 to 350. And then the reissuance of expired permit um trade goes from 120 to 150. Then we have um resubmitt fee after first resubmitt $60. It is going from
$60 per resubmitt to $75 per resubmitt. Um temporary um seal certificate of occupancy goes from $210 to $225. Single family minimum use determinations
goes from 350 to 400. Accessory apartment determination goes from 350 to 400. Administrative interpretation um 250 plus $100 from each additional issue question goes to $300 plus $150
for each additional issue question. Temporary use permit goes from 100 to 150. Garage sale permit goes from stays at 10. Um development agreement original agreement goes from 5,000 to 5,500.
Development agreement amendment goes from 2500 to 3,000. Development orders 3,000 to 3,500. Um cumulative addition or enlargement of an existing impervious area goes from
500 to 550. Um, any outof-door recreational facilities goes from 350 to 500. Any one-time subdivision of land into four or less lots um goes from $350
residential, $500 non-residential to $500 residential, or $600 non-residential. Um, any single building accessory improvements um from $500 stays at $500.
Any development for fenced or screened outdoor storage goes from 350 to 400. Any other improvement to land determined by the director to have insignificant impacts goes from 1,100 to $2,000.
LDO amendment $50 to $100. A resubmitt goes from 100 to 150. A daily rate goes from 25 to 35. A weekly rate goes to 175 to 210. A
monthly rate goes from 410 to 535. Um Moringfield pumpout um I'm just wondering so so Morningfield pumpout paid this is it correctly stated? Morningfield pumpout paid rented. I'm
not sure that that's worded correctly, but one pump is it's going from one pump free for 24 hours to $5. Lost FOB. Um I believe is is that like a a fob?
>> Okay. So the lost fob will go from 25 to 30 and then 500 foot notification fee goes from 15 I'm sorry $150 per strap number per mailing recipient to $2 per strap number per mailing
recipient. Special exception goes from 3,800 um I'm not sure how to interpret that or 3300. Joe, can you go back real quick? Just that one, that last one you said. Didn't we change that 500 foot
notification to put that on the applicant? >> That is correct. >> That is correct, Mr. Mayor. But that only applies to large projects when we have a developer order. If we're doing variances and things like that and it's a small contain thing, that's where
we're still doing it in house. >> All right. Appreciate the clarification. >> Okay. Special exception. Um, it's going to $3,800. Variance for residential is going from 1,800 to 2,000. Additional variance from
500 to 550. Variance non-residential going from 2,800 to 3,000. Additional variance 700 from 700 to 750. Comprehensive plan text amendment. Small scale going from 5,800 to 6,000.
placement of fill going from 1,00 to 1,500 with drainage plan going from 700 to $750. Um PD administrative amendment minor it's going from 2,000 to 2500 hearings
and appeals going to council going from 1,00 to 1,500. Zoning review from 100 to 200. flood plane review um is going from $150 each submitt after second or $25 trades
valuation and scope review. It's going to 150 $75 each submitt after second or 50 trade is it trades valuation and scope review. All right. And environmental fee going
from 100 to $150. public works review fee going from 70 plus cost of subconsultant services to $100 plus plus cost of subconsultant services. FMB review submitt resubmitt
going from $50 each submittal after the second resubmitt to $75 each submitt after the second resubmitt. Parking lot yearly inspection fee going from 50 to 75. A right-of-way permit is going from
50 to 100. Storm water review inspection and reinspection is going from 50 to 100. Looks like that's the end. >> Scott, questions for Joe. >> Uh, just to make sure. So, the parking
originally was going to go from 25 to 100 and we dropped back to 50. Is that right? >> The parking sticker. Is that what you're >> Yeah. >> According to this >> probably in this sheet. I don't think
>> so. I I Yeah. Ju just to predicate that preface that I most of the emails I got the the two biggest concerns that I heard from my constituents was the parking fee going from 25 to 100. >> 50.
>> Yeah. >> Yeah. Now it was originally 100 on last meeting. Correct. >> Uh for the business owner was going 50 to 100. I don't think that has changed. >> No, >> it was 25 to 50. >> Okay. >> Per individual. >> Per individual. Yeah. >> Yes.
>> But the last mean was it 100? >> No, I don't believe it was. >> No, it wasn't. Okay. My mistake. Uh and then the raking fee or raking permit >> that got corrected. Correct. >> That got corrected. >> Right. >> Just so everybody knows. >> Okay. So, with the with the increase, I know we had had discussions about
opening up where you could park with that fee. Is that included in this fee increase or no? >> Go ahead, Tom. >> Thomas Yazo, emergency services director. Yes, that was the last direction you had given us that you
wanted to allow uh residents to be able to park everywhere in all spaces as long as they were parked legally within the town spot. So that was the concept behind raising that fee to try to make up for some of that time. >> Thanks for the cl because that that's the clarification I just wanted to make sure because that's that was what I
believed was happening but I wanted to make sure it was on the record that you are before you couldn't park at beach accesses you couldn't park in other spots right outside of because we changed it for out of season but now this is going to be year round. So, normally you could park under the bridge downtown and you could park at any of
the beach accesses except for wasted away, which had been part of a an old agreement before I came here. Uh, now you can park with a town resident spot or business spot. You can park in any of the spots. Uh, as long as it's a legal spot and you're parked, you're parked properly and not hindering traffic.
>> Town spot only. >> Town spot only. Correct. >> And what when will that if we approve this when when will that go in effect? Just for clarification. That's That's been in effect since you gave me the direction before. >> So, we're going to keep doing Okay. All right.
>> Perfect. Thank you. That's all I have. Thank you, Joe. Very concise. >> Uh, councelor Woodson. >> No, I'm good with everything. >> Vice Mayor Holt. >> Councelor King, >> I just want to say uh thank you for hearing what uh the concerns were about
the increase in the beach breaking and adjusting that accordingly. I think it's going to be well received and appreciate it. Thank you. All right. Thanks, Joe. All right. Would anybody like to make a motion on resolution 25280 for the final
fiscal year 26 fee schedule? >> Anyone? Anyone >> is that with the amendments? >> Oh, we got a public comment. >> Amendments >> with Yes. Based on the amendments >> for the building fees. >> Okay. Yes. >> Based on the amendments with the building fees. >> Okay.
>> Public comment. There's no one here. We will close public comment. All right. Will anyone like to make a motion on the final fee schedule? >> So moved. >> All right. Got a motion by councelor Safford >> with amendments.
>> I'll second. >> Seconded by councelor Woodson. Any further discussion? Councelor Safford. >> I. >> Councelor Woodson. >> I. >> Vice Mayor Ederhol. >> I. >> Councelor King. >> Hi. >> N I as well. That motion carries unanimously. Final public comment. No
one's here. So we will close final public comment. Counc >> move to adjurnn. >> Got a motion to adjurnn. I'll second. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor say signal by saying saying I. I. I. Opposed. Hearing none.
We arejourned at 6:42.