I turned that off. >> Good evening. The time is now 6 pm and I'm going to call to order the town council workshop of Thursday, July 23rd. May we have a roll call, please? >> Mayor Kitzky >> here.
>> Vice Mayor Choy >> here. >> Councelor Gisinger >> here. >> Councelor Sunstrom >> here. >> Town Manager Kitsuro >> here. >> Okay. Um just want to And we don't have any public comments, correct? >> Correct.
>> Okay. I just want to kind of kick this off. Normally I just turn it over to staff, but I want to help make sure that we're setting expectations to the public. The session tonight, which you'll hear, is an opportunity for the
council bound by sunshine laws to talk about the potential implications of a ballot amendment uh that'll be voted on in November and could even be modified or changed or
whatever based on some litigation in action. But we're it's we always review anything that comes out of the legislature that uh whether it's challenged or not and then start to begin how would we respond to that. Um
so I just wanted to make it clear when you're hearing we're going to have conversation staff's going to present. Um, I'm going to ask that we pause at every page. We get every question or concern out and then the outcome of this meeting for us and it'll be public record is the list
of concerns that uh that we have as elected officials for what how this might impact um you know the town of Jupiter as it is as a local government uh you know set up to uh serve local interests.
Um, I do want to say this is the most impactful legislation I could have ever imagined and we're all deeply concerned about it. So, uh, so an outcome of this again will be a list of what the concerns are and then we'll see how it
how it proceeds, but we'll at least begin to start to take some action where it's appropriate um, to deal with the this if it were to pass. Um, so with that, uh, I'm going to turn it over to, uh, Scott Reynolds, our finance director, or I should say chief
financial officer. Apologies. >> That's fine. Thanks very much, >> Scott. Chief Financial Officer, >> is yours on? I'm not sure it's coming as clear as mine sounds. You want to tap it? turned on.
>> Okay. >> Um, as you indicated, Mayor, we're here this evening to have a workshop discuss the uh impacts of the state property reform. >> State property reform. Thank you.
>> I guess the light is not on and that means the mic's on. >> That's why I tap it. By the way, it's my secret. Um uh the House joint resolution 1F uh titled save our homes from excessive property tax uh now is uh referred to as
amendment three. Uh the history of the of the legislation, it was originated as a priority of Governor Dantis. Uh we've all heard that on the news. We've been watching uh the governor talk about it for some time. Uh it was passed by the
legislature on June 2nd in 2026. uh uh will be a constitutional amendment on the November 3rd, 2026 ballot. Uh it requires 60% plus uh voter approval to pass. Uh if approved by the voters uh
will be effective coming January 1st, 2027 uh and but it will affect budgets starting in fisc our fiscal year 2028 which would be October 1. uh comp there is a companion bill uh Senate Bill 4F uh
that went in effect uh currently it affects the the town millillage we talked about uh some of those impacts uh that started uh with our trim just uh this past Tuesday so we did talk about that already >> before you proceed uh what I should have said is and I'm speaking to my
colleagues and so the public hears um generally when we get these kind of workshops we always allow for comments page by page. Sometimes it's more appropriate or members feel it's appropriate to wait to the end. So, we'll we you may see some differences,
but it doesn't matter. We're all here to get our questions answered. But, I do think this is so important. I'd like to have you pause at the end before you turn the page. So, I don't have any comments or questions on that page. >> I'm okay with that because I do think it's a lot to digest. And just a couple
of clarifying questions because the in the state legislature there were eight proposals in the house and so there this has been a topic of conversation for a long time not only by the governor but by the house and senate. Um and those proposals were materially different from
the proposal that was passed um in June. I remember carveouts being different. Can you talk about what's carved out, what's not carved out in this? for example, schools, public safety, um some of that. >> We will talk about that in the presentation this evening. But in
previous legislations, uh there were also uh some items to help disadvantaged communities. Uh uh a pot of money that would be available for communities uh that could meet some of their obligations. Uh that has been removed.
There was also in previous legislation um carveouts for public safety, police departments specifically. uh and also firefighters, those have also been removed. Uh so there's been a number of changes uh over the legislative period uh for the final bill that actually got
signed. >> So the only carveout I know of currently is the school district. Is that correct? >> That is that's that is correct. >> Nothing else. >> Nothing else. >> Thank you. >> Okay, moving on. Uh the [clears throat] proposed changes uh primarily to the
homestead exemptions. Since I wanted to talk about the Jupiter tax role, so you can kind of see uh the lay of the land here in Jupiter. Uh we have a total uh number of parcels of just over 30,000 parcels. Uh total of just over 27,000 residential parcels. Uh the total number
of homesteaded parcels just over 17,000 uh parcels of residential uh res% of residential parcels that are homesteaded is 64.13%. uh number of parcels with assessed values less than $150,000 is uh $1,740.
Uh these numbers uh came to us from the property appraiser. I just wanted to uh thank them for that because I know these are questions that we need to know as we proceed forward. The number of parcels with values that are uh assessed at less than $250,000 is uh 5,490.
percent of parcels less than 250,000. That's 31%. Uh so that's uh that's pretty significant. Uh what the legislation is calling for, it replaces the current $50,000 homestead exemption structure with uh beginning in FY28,
$150,000 homestead exemption impacting that budget of fiscal year 28, increasing to 250,000 in the following year, FY29. uh and then thereafter uh will increase by the CPI uh from FY29 on uh there's an
unspecified requirement for a possible full elimination uh of the tax base. We talked about that the other night uh uh with our lobbyist that was here the other day. Uh that's kind of unclear how that's going to play out. I know there was questions about that. Uh there's
still some portions of the bill that is being uh uh interpreted. Uh this is one of those items. Uh there's also for residents that are coming into the state of Florida, uh they think they're going to be able to receive the exemptions immediately. Uh that is not the case. One of the things in the bill is it
imposes a 5-year waiting period uh for new residents to receive the full benefit. Uh the way the uh language is written is that they need to start uh with uh the 27-year and then wait 5 years before they receive the full benefit.
One question on it. I have a question on it. >> I do too. And >> just correct me if I'm wrong. That 31% represents 31% of the homestead homes in the town of Jupiter would not pay any tax towards services they receive from the town
>> that are less than $250,000 is 31%. >> Then you have the rest of the almost 70% or 69% that would be paying the rest of >> carrying the burden for everybody else. >> Correct. >> Okay. All right. Thank you. I just wanted to have a little conversation on resident. We're talking
in the language here. It's new. Residents could be here as a tenant renter for a period of time. Does that qualify or add in once they purchase a property if they've been leasing for 2
years, which means they've been a resident? >> Uh my understanding is you actually have to file for homestead. you have be on the record as as a homesteaded property owner for five years to receive the benefit. >> Interesting. Okay. >> Well, that why don't we flag that as one
of the items. It's an interesting twist because I was thinking it might have been otherwise, but it certainly isn't clear because in fact, I had marked up that and then you said it that new out ofstate residents. >> Yeah. Uh but uh so that I thought somebody who was a renter but they were
in the town for were in Florida for 5 years or more that they would be eligible. So let's just list that as a a question. >> Yeah. >> I didn't know. Uh just I have a couple items and just to reinforce
um number one and nothing I say should be taken as any uh constructive critique, but you're kind in calling an unspecified requirement for possible full elimination of taxes u
tax base. And I say that and I apologize to the public. I do have a reputation of being blunt on things, but I'm going to continue that. It is clear that it appears to be a complete accountability
entitlement for the state legislative government without any voter approval to eliminate entirely exemptions. It enables them. They don't have to come back for another constitutional amendment. They may not do it. So you
can say it's possible, but this is not going to have to come back. If this passes as it was, it isn't 250. We've given legislative entitlement. You don't have to come back to the public. Do you agree with that? >> There is some language in there that
that leads you to believe that. Yes. >> Okay. Well, let's just put that down. Again, we don't all have to agree. What we're doing tonight is we're listing collectively con legitimate concerns that we might have. That's a legitimate concern because I think the public does need to
know if that is the intent and that is the then whoa u then they've this is not about 250 it's about full elimination. Then I'll say additionally um as you had in the third bullet increases annually the exemption
increases annually based on CPI. That means anybody that was exempt. Well, first of all, even even for the 250 then anybody that was exempted um you know remains exempted because the valuation can only go up by CPI or 3%
whichever's lower which means that once you're get once by this bill you're exempt from property taxes as a homestead as long as you continue to be a homestead it's forever more with this legislation. >> Agreed. It does not touch. You're
referring to the Save Our Homes. Yeah. Uh, right. It does not touch the Save Our Homes initiative. >> Well, this supplements it. >> I'm sorry. >> Well, it supplements what what the Save Our Homes was is now this adds to it, if you will. >> Um, so the the impact of this isn't
just, you know, two years. It's um, you know, potentially a year later, legislature could come back and the governor say, "Hey, let's go all the way." And there is no voter say about it. Just wanted to have that on. Did you have something?
>> I do. Just going back to the slide with 30 31% of parcels less than 250K. Um Palm Beach County and counties around the state have multiple municipalities and we often operate in regional systems. For example, our fire departments um back each other up and
have mutual [clears throat] aid, automatic aid, all of that. Um my understanding is that there are municipalities with a higher percentage and that there is some risk of some municipalities risking insolveny and there's been discussion my understanding
at at the county level there's kind of a dual burden. There's cutting costs of the county but also adding scope for fire rescue and for other services should municipalities become insolvent. Is there some risk in our regional
partnerships that others with higher percentages might make cuts that be that kind of risk our interdependency or our partnerships in providing services? >> Th those are discussions we would have
to have with them. Uh we can't tell what future councils are going to do uh relating to their uh cooperation with us. Uh but those would be continuing discussions we would need to have with them. Uh and we do have a lot of very close partners. Uh we do it through even our 911 system.
>> Uh so those those would be discussions we would definitely be having with them. Um but uh understand your your concern. Uh that's all over the state. Uh for example, 67 counties in in the state of Florida. Uh you've got I believe over 29
of them that are what called critical economic concern. uh if you look at their millages uh they're the poorest of the poor uh really and they they understand that and but but because of the that designation they receive preferential treatment on grant
applications and other assistance coming in from the state uh to make sure that they're able to meet their constitutional obligations and other obligations of the communities. Uh so those communities specifically even counties is what I'm really looking at as well uh are they're they're going to
be hit very hard uh with some of the legislation that we're seeing with the 250 especially the ruler communities. And I look out west uh in in Palm Beach at the smaller municipals that are out there that are again their rural communities. Uh they're already at close
to if they're not already at the 10 mil cap. Uh what are they going to be able to do? So definitely understand your question uh and uh we will be interacting with our partners uh going forward because that's one of the things that we talk about this evening is
embracing those partnerships to help lessen the blow uh going forward. >> And if municipalities may risk insolveny and if counties risk the same issue you're talking about some of these counties um that would lose their budgets. What then happens if if there
is a hurricane or an emergency response where if they don't have the funds locally because FEMA is now pushing pressure on an immediate local response and local funding for that response. Do they then have to wait on the state to fund that response or how does that I
mean how does that work for neighboring counties, neighboring cities? not address. >> A lot of it happens in a in an interdependent kind of ecosystem, especially when something big happens. >> So, we don't know is the answer. >> Well, it's not addressed. We know that.
>> Yeah. >> It's not addressed. And for the record, we know that there's some municipalities already in Palm Beach County that are 10 mills and the county already subsidizes municipal services because of that concern. Um, and then this just makes it
more difficult for if the numbers go up or for them to continue that if they lose, you know, significant. And for the public, you got an excellent I'm glad you brought that up on emergencies because we all know that if we were to have a hurricane, an emergency, we don't
get reimbursed anyway uh for three or four years from the feds, right? I mean, that's been a track record, hasn't it? depending on the size of the >> that means that somehow government local governments are going and that isn't there doesn't seem to be a concern in the legisl legislation about that that
we have to have funds to do that. um people even if they're not paying ador taxes would hope that we're out there helping in in hurricane aftermath >> and I I know there are many I know that there are a number of cities that are risk at risk of insolveny in Palm Beach
County and I just heard recently for the benefit of my colleagues that there are 80 across the state of the 411 that are at risk. >> So just not sure >> that Mr. I'd just like to repeat on this solveny issue. You can see see how open
that we don't have the answers, but for our residents and those that are listening, this list, I think once we put it together and it gets to our legislature team, the language, we don't even understand it. How can a voter
understand this? Um, but the solveny issue is huge. What happens in a disaster for any of these municipalities or towns or cities that don't have the funds to take over? >> Has there been any explanation from
Tallahassee about what happened with the counties or towns that became insolvent? >> No, there has not. And like I said, previously in previous legislation, there were there was actually uh talk of having a pool of funds available uh to help out those communities. uh that has
been stripped away. >> Okay. >> One thing just for the public listening, I want to be clear um because we don't want to be guilty of casting, you know, incorrect information. This is legitimate for municipalities. It wouldn't be for Jupiter, you know, for
at least several years. So, we're not suggesting this is something if you live in Jupiter, you have to worry about because we've been fiscally prudent. Uh but over the course of time, we could get in the same condition if we're not able to have funds for hurricanes, which happened. We've been blessed. We haven't
had any in a while, but boy, remember when did it get hit? And you don't get reimburseed for you can go through millions and millions of dollars uh in in help to the community. >> We do talk about it every year. I know I know this council is aware of that. Specifically during the budgetary
process, we uh analyze and make sure that we have enough reserve balances to be able to uh make sure that we have the funds available that we're not waiting on Tallahassee or or the federal government. We we've we've been good stewards uh uh making sure of that. Uh
to your point, I can't speak for other communities, but I know what we've done uh to make sure that uh if if that day comes, uh we're able to quickly respond and take care of our residents. So, uh, I know what we've done, uh, in speaking with my partners. I feel that a lot of
them, especially here in North County, uh, are are in the same spot. There are some smaller jurisdictions, uh, that, uh, you know, they are our partners, as you indicated. Uh, we do have, um, mutual aid contracts. We will help. Uh but at the same time, we've been great
stewards of of the taxpayer dollars to make sure uh that we understand our number one role is is public safety and uh making sure that we're prepared that if that day ever came uh we had the cash to respond quickly and not wait for an outside agency or specifically uh the
state or the feds. Okay, I'm going to move on. Um so continuing on with the changes in the homestead exemptions as uh uh councelor Sunstrom pointed out uh it exempts the exemption applies to all non-school
taxing avalorum taxes uh cities, county and special districts. So this the school uh they got to carve out. Uh so that's that's pretty important. Uh does not impact non-avalorm assessments uh fire rescue, storm water, uh solid waste, street lighting, other
parcel-based assessments. So does not affect that. Uh changes to the nonh homesteaded taxes. It reduces the cap. This is another item that was included in the legislation as we all are aware. Uh right now the cap on on the values is
10%. Uh that's going to drop to 5%. Uh so like this year our our assessed values went up by 6.4%. Uh it would only be able to go up to 5%. So uh just keep that uh in mind as we go forward uh through uh now I have analyzed you to
try to come uh to see what that amount would be uh looking at the current proposed taxes for next year uh it's a very small number uh but uh it is something that we need to watch >> just to just to add one uh I think
important point to the item about you referred to it as a you know schools got to carve out. The only reason they got to carve out or one reason they got to carve out is because the state government has the overarching responsibility for funding schools, >> right?
>> And they in fact determine how much locally we pay in property taxes. So we are a donor taxpaying community compared to the statewide average because they think we can afford it. So 37% of your
tax bill in Jupiter Avalor tax bill is public schools and the legislature and the governor responsible for determining how that gets funded. So effectively the carve out was so they didn't deal with it. But I wish they did deal with it because
I'm tired of being a donor county if they're worried about property taxes we're paying do it at our fair share same as everybody else. And question on the special districts is that is that the three most impactful to Jupiter? That would be the Florida Inlet
District. Is that correct? I mean, excuse me. The Jupiter Inlet District, find and what? CRA. Are there the three in this area? >> Well, the the CRA is an uh that that is a that is a district. Yes. Uh that would be, but I'm not sure the complete list of of the special districts, but I can
get you that. >> I know they all are. >> They're all going to be impacted. special taxing districts, I guess. So, so I assume they'd all be impacted. >> You'll see. >> Means our inlet and our waterways are inter coastal and everything, right? >> I think you'd look at the your our property tax bill, >> right?
>> And uh every any one that we're affected by is is on there >> on there. >> There there's a list there at the bottom of the special districts. >> So, I actually I brought mine here so I could refer to it because I think this is what we all see every day. But um so
I belong to the Northern Palm Beach County Improvement District and I believe all of its funds or vast majority are via nonadalorum assessment. So that will not change. I'll continue to pay and that's many many hundreds of dollars. I mean it's over a thousand actually um for a special district and
that is a fee I'm paying not a tax on my tax bill. But the other districts are millillage. So, um, for let's see what we've got here. >> I'm glad you brought that up because you just made the point that it's only
special districts that are advalorum related. >> Correct. The bottom of your property tax bill, those are your fees or special assessments or nonadalorm assessments. And then these items are the ones that um are millages that are adopted. So,
the Jupiter and district is a millage and would be impacted. um the health care district would be impacted. Something I learned I didn't know before was they actually pay for the nurses in the schools. So while schools while there's a carveout for schools, schools are being impacted because all of the
school nurses and public schools are being impacted. Um as well as trauma, the helicopters, all of that. That's the health care millage that we pay. Um but higher than any of those millages is my non-advalorum assessment for Northern Palm Beach County Improvement District.
So just because there's a millage doesn't mean it's going to be high. It can be very low. In fact, my I pay more to my HOA than I pay in town taxes each year, which is another fascinating find. >> Another point to add to the point you
made, which is a good one on trauma. Um people may not know this but the by legislative decree the healthc care districts were created uh to at least demand the trauma service and I remember some years back our
county commissioners and I was at the meeting were meeting with Martin County because they never created such a a uh paying mechanism and I think to this day so Palm Beach County residents as as a result of a legislative mandate of 20
years ago or whatever to create a trauma service cover that >> and then other districts I have I know we don't have an exhaustive list and your districts might be different from mine but the children's services council will also be impacted um and the South
Florida Water Management District and I did hear that there may be some stop work orders associated with them from [clears throat] other businesses. I heard that recently at a conference. So, >> I know I have the Northern Palm Beach Improvement District >> when you uh when you comment on it, we'll pull your mic over.
>> Yeah, I'm sorry. Yeah, I I know for sure that I'm part of the Northern Palm Beach Improvement District. So, I got >> They manage the canals and all that. Correct. >> Yeah. Preserves >> and that will not change because it's a fee and it's not an adorum tax, but everything else to my knowledge is. So
>> just a question under the um all non-school taxing aren't there other services within the school that will be impacted? >> Not fully aware. I mean JPD does some services for our schools and crossing
guards. You know different communities pay in different ways for different things. So correct, >> you know, it's not going to be the same across each municipality. Okay, moving on. So the question that is
what what is what can we pay with the Avalor taxes that we will be collecting uh via the legislation? It's public safety, uh, education, infrastructure, natural resource projects, uh, local bonds, retirement benefits of local government employees, uh, operations and
administration, which is kind of a, uh, it was added at the end of the legislative session, excuse me, kind of a catchall, uh, on what we can spend the property taxes on. uh and there was some language that was also inserted that says um and all
others that are um that are allowed by law. So that language uh kind of lends to what the mayor was hinting at earlier uh that the legislature might be able to come back at a later date and restrict uh what the
abalor tax could be used for at a later date. not might they enabled themselves by putting it in there that way. I have a couple items on this one. Um so on infrastructure, >> you know, and I asked this question the
other night, but to me on a read it's pretty clear. It's defined in the legislation and it appears limited to road and bridge construction and maintenance and storm water control. So an optimist would read it like we could do more than that. But a clear read on
the legislation is it could be very it could be limited to just that which means that what we've historically thought of as infrastructure is very narrow from a legislative and um that you could even use advant taxes for. That's number one. Then number two on
the local bonds and why I've read this I do think that it covers two elements of bonds. One is bonds that exist that they're going to accept the fact that we have to pay them off. But I do interpret it as future bonds are very limited.
So things that we did, for example, that overwhelmingly this community voted 704% for purchased property with land, you know, land. Um I don't think that we necessarily will have the right to bond it based on the
limitations I'm reading. And again, tonight we should just be flagging all these concerns and hopefully some of the concerns will be proven wrong, will be corrected, right? But that's a legitimate huge impact on what this
community has historically valued that we would no longer be able to do that. And then even the operations and maintenance administration >> what >> um you know it says you know except as prohibited by general law and as you said they can change that they've
entitled themselves. Uh but uh but what my concern is is the language um in the uh in the ballot language talks about ensuring funding for core services which they define and uh it doesn't they
I'm not sure that they care about for example things like parks and recreation that and I don't want to alarm anybody you know cuz we do okay and that's not going to change but this is what we may be handcuffed and being able to use
advalorum taxes even to bond stuff by by a worse read of this and hope I'm wrong. Right. >> And I wanted to ask our finance director what he's hearing in his circles and if that is his understanding as well or if there's any additional information you
could provide around limitations around local bonds or that last item. Yeah, I was going to comment because I mean really um I mean I can't speak for what the legislaturator is going to do obviously, but uh and it will affect uh what's going to happen in the bond
market. You know, uh think about if you're going to go out and borrow money just on your own. Uh they look to make sure that you're able to pay for your bills, specifically the loan you're seeking. Uh so if your revenue is shrinking uh over time, uh it's going to
limit what you'll be able to uh to borrow uh in the future and for how long of a term. Uh so trust me, the the bond market is is is looking, they're watching this uh because it is going to have an effect going forward, especially the rates that you pay. They maybe allow
you to pay, but you're going to pay a larger rate. Uh so those those things are are are uh being discussed. Uh and um you know it it only makes sense that some jurisdictions that are uh capped out uh the full faith and credit of the
of the citizens uh to go out and borrow money uh they're going to pay a much higher rate and uh they may not may not be able to borrow as much as they used to. I know for all of our playgrounds recently, we we had the money. We put it
in CIP. We used it to advance the contracts and we got it done on time and on budget. So if we're borrowing money, it's a longer term. We're paying interest as well. And so we're paying higher costs in the end for the same services or same infrastructure.
>> Okay. >> How do we go about getting a better understanding? We see these limits of property taxes, but Mr. Mayor, you identified additional limits that may also be possible. How do we get that overall picture of what those additional limits may be on each one of these?
>> Well, I think to some degree, remember this is other governments have already workshopped about this. We're workshopping now. Others will follow, but we're just I, you know, there's challenges in the court we're not going to talk about tonight. >> Who knows how that might change things. We're reacting to what we're reading and
expressing our concerns. We're going to punch list it. Then going forth, we see what the outcome of the court challenges are. It may address a number of our concerns or not. Right? It doesn't take effect until next budget cycle. Uh so while there's some things we might do in this budget cycle, you know, we're just
beginning to prepare and make sure that we our public knows what the implications may be on how we, you know, can provide services as they've relied upon and overwhelmingly supported in in
the past. it may no longer be an option even if you overwhelmingly support it uh because that may be taken away from local government. >> Okay. >> Uh continuing on uh regarding the Senate Bill 4F um again uh it takes uh it took
effect this the for this upcoming uh fiscal year. Uh what the legislation actually did was it removed the per capita per person personal uh capita income growth factor. Uh we talked about this uh at length at trim on last
Tuesday. Uh that it took that allowance away and made the roll back rate as the max millage rate. Uh that could be approved by a simple majority vote of the council uh making meaning three of the five of you could approve it. Uh, anything above that up to the 110% it
would take twothirds of a vote or four of the five of you. Uh, anything above that would require a unanimous vote or go to referendum. Uh, so uh you can see here on the chart we put together a chart to show what these impacts and reductions would mean relation to the
roll back and the uh proposed rate uh that we adopted the uh last Tuesday. Uh you can see those reductions in the overall amounts at $25.8 million at roll back uh compared to the millage rate that uh
will preface this by saying our millage rate had to go up uh because of the first year of the fire rescue, the replacement rate for the uh Palm Beach County Fire Rescue. Uh so what's going to happen going forward is that will plateau uh now that we're at the the
rate the uh the internally that the town is now uh adopting the rate instead of the county commission uh going forward in the next few year rate it won't be 25 million it won't be 23 million uh the difference between the roll back and the
actual uh um uh adopted millage. So, uh, those numbers will go down, but that's just this one year, uh, sign significant review, uh, of going into 27 with that first year of funding Jupiter Fire Rescue. So, I wanted to make sure to qualify that, uh, that that will not be
the case going forward, uh, once we, uh, go into FY28 discussions next summer. >> I actually want to stop here because I think this is a super important slide and I think it's in French for a lot of residents. Um, I remember people asking
me what a mill was or what millillage was. And I want to assume, you know, I think a part of the purpose of tonight is to educate residents and about [clears throat] what the impact of all of this is. And so, um, can you remind us again quickly of what a mill is, what
one mill is? >> It is the, uh, one mill equals $1,000 of assessed value. uh it's the it's the rate that we set that will uh go against your asset uh your taxable value on on
your tax bill. So one thing to make uh uh res hopefully the residents will understand is if you look at your tax bill uh you'll you'll be able to see what is your taxable value and then what is your uh market value uh of your home.
There's there's usually a difference in that. So the market value will be uh what uh you could sell your home for or or based on your uh area sales data and then you have your taxable value. Uh as we've discussed before could be limited
by the save our homes depending on how long you've lived in the home. Uh but the millage uh is based on the rate that is per,000 of your taxable value. So simple math uh you can you can multiply your taxable value by the millillage
rate and it comes up exactly with what you pay in taxes. >> It's the dollars it represents a dollar per thousand of of uh taxable valuation. Correct. >> That is correct. >> But our at our millage rate it would be $3.58
per,000 of taxable value. >> Correct. >> So I'm looking at the taxable value on column one of my property bill. It's lower than the Zillow that I see when I Google my house. Um, and so the taxable value is lower if you're homesteaded and
that accumulates over time. So it's a lower taxable value and on that taxable value you apply a percentage a rate to get your the taxes that you would pay. So what's changed this year and if you can help me understand um it used to be
that you needed a simple majority to keep that millage rate that tax um the mill rate flat. If you don't increase it, you know, as long as it's flat, simple majority, >> but now instead of keeping the rate the same for a simple majority, you're
keeping the dollar numbers the same >> from the previous year. And that's what that that's what that rolled back rate is. It it says what would be the amount of dollars that you would collect in the previous year. That's what the rolled back rate stands for.
>> So if I collected $100 last year, here's the rate at whatever valuation exists in the town today. Could go up, could go down as well in future years. We don't know. >> Um so no matter what, um here's the rate you need and that could go up or down
depending on the valuation to get the same number of dollars. Okay. Um that I think that's >> and in previous years they allowed your the rolled back rate and that you could increase it for the simple majority vote. They would take that personal
income growth into account uh for the calculation to say what was acceptable for that 2/3 or I'm sorry for the simple majority vote of the council to like the static millage. It would always be above the roll back rate. uh but it fell
within the personal income growth that was allowed by law. So it was always a simple majority vote of the of the town council uh to continue on with that rate. Well, that has now been removed. So now the rolled back rate is the
maximum uh rate that can be allowed with a simple majority of the council, meaning uh three of the of the five. And anything above that uh you would have to go to four the five up to 110% and anything above that you have to have a majority vote of the or I'm sorry
unanimous vote of the council or you go to referendum of the voters. >> So if you keep the same say you adopted the roll back rate every year same dollars every year um inflation still persists. So it's eating away if you're not indexing in a way you're subsidizing
over time. Yep. >> Long term. So just structurally I'm trying to understand it. And then I also just want to say example of FY2027 I think is a bad example. It's a bad year to do an example because we're restructuring our rate and what we're
doing is replacing Palm Beach County Fire Rescue which is on the tax bill as Jupiter Fire Rescue. But that's not that's not our Jupiter Fire Rescue that we just started. This is still Palm Beach County until um October 1st and
then it will become Jupiter Fire Rescue. So this is actually Palm Beach County Fire Rescue. Um, and it has a millage rate of 1.7251. So we're replacing that >> with a lower millage. >> That is correct. >> So there is a savings, but this
restructuring kind of makes it a bad year for a for an example when we're trying to do apples to apples. Okay. Thank you. >> And that's why I was saying for going ne going forward in the subsequent years, this example that you see on this page, [clears throat] it won't be as drastic. It's only because of that first year uh
that the that the town is making that decision for the millage rate. The county used to set the what you uh just talked about uh the uh uh fire MSTU rate uh the 1.7 >> but I will have fewer line items on the
taxes part of my bill because our millage will be rolled in our fire millillage will be rolled in to the municipality Jupiter operating item. Okay. And then Jupiter Fire Rescue as a line item will disappear from my bill
completely. >> It will disappear. >> Thank you. [clears throat] >> What will the non-advelor look like? >> It'll be at the very bottom of the bill. Uh if you look at uh her bill there uh or her trim bill, it'll be at the bottom of your tax bill along with the like the solid waste authority
>> the other fees. Correct. Yeah. Because that's that's exempt from this. >> That is correct. And just to be clear again on the fire, fire fire rescue and the increase just for this year, we are still saving 10 million. The we are still saving $10 million the first year.
>> I wanted Thank you. >> Okay, let's let's talk about the impacts. Uh the first of all, I want to I want to thank and I said it earlier, I want to say it again. Uh the property appraiser and her staff have been great. Uh as soon as the legislation was
passed, they started trying to get us uh impact information along with the Florida League uh the Association of Counties, but specifically the property appraiser has been getting uh updating data as as they as they have it and making sure that all the municipals have
the latest and greatest information. So, we've been [clears throat] able to use that data uh going forward to say, well, what is going to the impacts to Jupiter going to look like? Uh the town is estimated to lose about 4.4 billion or 2413%
of its taxable value by FY29. It goes up in increments every year. You can see the first year uh at 1.5 billion and then 2.9 billion uh in 29. Uh what does that translate to? Uh you can see here
over the 2-year period uh $16 million is is the estimate. Now these are based on uh FY26 uh final taxable values uh to come up with this. So this uh these numbers will fluctuate uh as I was discussing with somebody this afternoon.
Uh we all know that homes are going to be sold. Uh they will reset uh in their value. So there's going to be some fluctuation going forward. Uh new homes will be built. Uh we are at buildout. So uh not as much on that side. But we do
know as we saw in in the trim presentation uh the majority of the taxes that we do receive are based on valuation. Uh Jupiter's values are are very high. Uh but as homes get sold, change in ownership, uh those kind of things will actually fluctuate this
number. Um [clears throat] and then the to be determined is the uh reduction from the 10% to the 5%. Uh you can tell we had the 6.4% 4% increase this year. Uh when I looked at that, uh compared to the 5%,
uh it is actually a a minimal impact. And when I say minimal, uh less than a million dollars, uh compared to the $16 million estimate here. Uh and what we discussed earlier in previous legislation, there was a backs stop for lost revenue. Uh that had been stripped
out of the legislation. There is no backs stop uh to help communities with the revenues that'll be lost. So I wanted to make sure to point that out. Again, >> I have a few items on this page. So this is a great all your slides did an excellent job because it is enabling us
to have conversation uh about it. One um I would just add a bullet. I want to just emphasize a point. Um, under the revenue impacts, add a third bullet that to remind that the existing Saver Homes constitutional amendment caps
homesteaded uh, properties valuation increase at the lower of 3% or CPI. So, historically, um, historically
we've seen more than 3% and then we were capped at 3%. What's the what's the highest uh inflation we've seen in the last 5 years? >> 9.9. >> Okay. So therein it already but that was already the existing and that is part of
the reason why um I think this came off here. That is part of the reason why um and I want to just and we know this up here but if you look at the past 10 years if you've had homesteaded property
your this includes all taxing entities for someone in Jupiter the uh property tax has gone up 5.1% in the last 10 years versus inflation of 35.2%.
So, Saver Homes has been proven to be an exceptional legis uh constitutional amendment and protection. And again, pardon just the way I am, but state government was grandstanding about homestead property
tax increases because it isn't happening. But nonetheless, they're here to help. Um I do want to pause to reflect that u because you look at it says it right here. So the impact being
imposed upon us is $16 million if it only goes to the 250. But the fact of the matter is, as you've heard already tonight, that we made a decision three years ago to create a fire Jupiter fire rescue department,
[clears throat] and it will save $10 million this year. Um, and that's effectively 10.1% reduction in the overall town millage rate. That's our job. We've been doing it
>> without any uh big brother or big sister nudging us to be responsible stewards of your money, the public public money. Uh but as you heard, the formulas don't take into account that we could have done this. So the calculation forces us
to look at this like we're increasing taxes, but we're not. We're lowering them because we're taking two line items further. I would say when you think about it, I'm kind of somewhat specialized in contracts. We had a contract for services with Palm
Beach County Fire Rescue. So having a contract, we were bound to pay them no matter how we had to pay them uh without any so they didn't uniquely with any municipality they're providing those services. if they have a contract
like we had, we'd have to pay regardless of whether there's an advorum tax mechanism. So kind of grateful that we move this into ours and we can manage it totally. I just want to make that point and then I'm going to open this to my colleagues on this page, but I also
thought it's important to pause to reflect on that note. Um because before we turn the page and be looking at revenues because the process [laughter] that the town uses and has used historically I don't want
this to be misunderstood is we look at for efficiency improvements and cost reductions before we ever look at increase in revenues. Tonight we're going to be talking about revenue increases next only because we
want to see what options we might have to deal with the loss of revenue. But I can't overemphasize I think that the teamwork every single person on the town staff has contributed in an incredible organizational teamwork
effort to create JFRD >> to deliver a $10 million savings. And that's why this local government is not going to have any conversations about reducing staff. We might have to next year, but it'd be a it it would be uh
not appropriate the way our staff has worked up till now um to be good stewards. Um so, but I don't want someone to interpret, oh, they went right into talking about tax increases. No. As and I'm using fire rescue as an example. We start there in our budget
process. If you watch our workshops and conversations, we start with the budget. We've already had a workshop and we see where things can be reduced and whatever. Only after we're done with that we come and talk about what the revenue needs are. Um,
>> and we we already run with a very lean staff as it is. >> I mean, correct. I'm just trying to give make sure that there's >> that's the process we've always followed. Yes. I I was just concerned we go to the next page because in our list of things to do before we talk revenues, we always do look at these other things
and I don't want it to be misperceived when you turn the page >> talking about revenues. >> I think that was a good overview, mayor. Thank you. >> And you made a great point about we're not locked into the Palm Beach County fire contract next year because it's going to go up even more. So that's, you know, a
>> kind of lucky we did it when we did it, you know. >> So >> I agree. It's a significant significant savings and it was a very heavy lift and still is until October one. So, I'm really um proud of this council and everyone that helped work on it. Um I do
think, you know, again, we have two goals tonight. One is to educate our residents. It's our responsibility and duty to you to make sure you're informed and then the second is to respect your decision and to implement whatever you decide. And so, we're talking about options to do that and how how we see it
going forward. part of the education here. I really want to keep it resident focused and one thing I'm grateful for the percentage um finance director Reynolds but and the 24% that's helpful context but I always remember people telling me oh we saved you know this
many millions of dollars and I would always say what does that mean is that a lot is that a little to you know your scales are so different than mine so um I only know my household budget I don't necessarily understand like all the all the scale of this so um when I go to the
website and I go to the town budget at a glance for 2026. I see total budget by fund and it says total 2026 budgeted expenditures for all funds are $190 million. So our budget is $190 million.
This doesn't sound like that large of a percentage of the budget. What would I be getting wrong there? If you're looking at the total budget, which you you obviously are, that includes all the capital, which includes uh the water utility, it it includes the building
fund. Uh it it includes all these other funds that we're not talking about tonight. They uh the utilities, they generate their own revenue. Um and they they are aside and also you're you're looking out uh over uh a portion for the CIP specifically over a 5-year period.
Uh so there's that included. Uh but it's very important because I I you know to your point I've heard people discuss uh this uh this legislation and they're confused about how it interacts with the
uh enterprise funds. The enterprise funds are standalone. Um they they don't rely on advorum tax. Uh the water fund we talk about that every year. Our storm water fund. Uh they generate their own revenues. they come before the town council every year and and have their
rates approved by the town council. Uh that's totally separate from this discussion that we're having uh around abalorum dollars. >> So the 190 million is across many different pots of money and some pots can only be used for one thing. The water utility can only be used for the
water utility, nothing else. It's like a small business. It's off on the side. It's standalone. It must fully pay for itself. We can't lend it money. It can't lend us money. They can't trans they can't transfer. >> Well, you can you can you can you can do that. But there are uh a number of the
revenues that you're referring to that are restricted, >> right? >> Um if if that's your point, that that is a very true statement. Um >> water utility um transfer funds for well for for water related purposes. So for
example in the new town hall we have space assigned for the water utility for a public facing element for the water utility but can it be used for nonwater utility related? >> You couldn't you couldn't use the water utility funds to say pay pay for police
services. >> Okay. uh unless there was a benefit to the utility, meaning that they had to pay uh an officer to come out and run security at the at the at the utility, just like a private business. If they needed uh security that they wanted to hire, that something they could do. Um
>> so 190, >> but they're not they're not subsidizing the police department budget. Correct. Uh they are restricted from doing that. >> And we have a number of restricted funds that can only be used for one purpose or a limited number of purposes. So what
does this impact? Which fund gets impacted by these cuts? >> The the legislation uh specifically the advalorum is the general fund that is that is the primary fund of the town. Uh that is the largest uh uh benefit
benefactor of the advalorum dollars. Uh if we proceed forward with the non-avalorum assessment, the fire fund is held separately. they will uh they are also the second largest uh fund to receive benefit uh from the advalorum
dollars being generated. And then the third uh and it's because of the uh how the town uh uh parses out its Avalorum dollars. The third would be the uh the the CIP uh for the capital improvements
uh uh element. uh we carve out 15% of Avalor dollars received in the general fund uh to go towards uh the capital improvements uh element of the budget. >> Okay. So the general fund has police in it, it has fire rescue, it has what goes
to our capital budget, our infrastructure, all of the capital projects around town. Um it has finance, it has human resources, it has code compliance. Um, so there's some things that are distinctly touched by this, but some are not. You're saying less
impacted or not impacted at all would be the water utility. >> The water utility, the storm water utility, uh, the building fund, uh, that generates their own revenue as well. >> So, those are not impacted. We're talking about a very specific fund and
more limited to police, fire, code compliance, capital projects, and that fund is kind of self-contained. So if we were to protect at 100% which is often recommended police and fire we don't want to touch public safety then there's
a multiplier effect is there not if there's a cut on that fund >> and you protect at 100% the two largest parts of that fund you have a multiplier effect and are having in fact much steeper cuts on anything that's not being protected 100%.
>> Sure. Obviously >> right it's helpful to put that together. I don't, you know, I think there's so much swirling around you never I to stop and think about those impacts is really important and some of this stuff and we're still digesting it. I'm learning new things every day and that I learned
or thought about more recently. So, this is important to think about. If we protect anything at 100%, they're not sharing the burden. That burden is being shifted within the fund to other departments. >> Can I just piggyback on that? What is the percentage of the UN 190 for fire
and police? I'm sorry. >> What is the protection amount for fire and police in the 190 >> or in the general fund general fund? >> Just over 21 million just over $21 million in advorum. >> Okay. >> What's projected for next year?
>> And the reason I asked this and to play devil's advocate if you're a resident and you're saying what I want my taxes reduced or eliminated having this education to understand what else you're going to lose. Um, so there's there's m
multiple sides to this dialogue tonight is to educate on the plus side if you view not having taxes but from this side of the the das there's a lot that you would lose if it goes through. So I
think this education portion for all of us is very very critical >> and the departments are indep are interdependent as well right. So just as I had spoken about how municipalities depend on one another through various agreements and our local agreements districts the school district has
agreements with the town for recreational facilities and those could be impacted. Um, so it's the same with the departments I would say and I would argue our police department depends on human resources for its hiring and if we have vacancies or extend look at what we
just did with fire rescue. How many people did we hire and how much of a lift was that? >> Um, so police maybe while not directly financially impacted and that's a local decision that we have to make. Um, you know is still being impacted in other
ways I would say. So we have to think about how the interdependency of different departments and then within our town system and then interdependencies within the county system as well. >> So there's always the the
[clears throat] motivation to protect um um fire, police, you know, public safety services, but what about things kind of twisting the wind like parks and recreation, even um road improvements, all that? What does all that that's all
general fund also correct? So >> that would be you know the the roads uh public works uh the the engineering department that is all centered in the general fund >> which are non-enterprise funds obviously >> they are not enterprise funds >> so that's all >> that's that's
>> basically be fighting for dollars or we'll be scrambling to try to fund them. >> Correct. Well, they they they would have to carry a larger burden if we if we decided to trim back if if police and fire were exempted for that. >> Okay. >> One thing to add to the point uh
councelor uh Delaney, you brought up u an item. So the legislation includes somewhat I'll call protection for roads you know and maintenance of roads in
from an infrastructure standpoint. So at least the legislature ex you know acknowledges that. But I just want to share a point because I had been contacted recently by the media and they were asked me about something and I just want to bring we we had flexibility
to meet local needs and I'll use by example. Um we went ahead and funded um trying to about $4 million to FOT to complete an Indian town road
improvement. Mhm. >> Now, years ago, it used to be state did the state roads, the county did the county roads, and the town did the town roads. And that's changed. Okay? The state doesn't have
enough money. They weren't going to get to that road for, you know, forever. Mhm. >> And uh the only way we can act upon it is we make a decision on behalf of our residents who just don't are tired of that congestion to put up $4 million.
And where did it come from? Advorum taxes, >> right? >> So you could argue it wasn't our accountability. Some people say you shouldn't have done it, but people are not sitting in as much gridlock today. I just want to bring that up. So, it just I'm not trying to make this complicated,
but just share how this eliminates uh meeting local wants. Uh because quite frankly, we're not we wouldn't be able to do that if we're really we would have to painfully probably
not go forth with a project like that. Um, and then FDOT wouldn't you couldn't get it in the budget because if you're subsidizing their cost in a way you move up a little bit. It works that way. So I just wanted to you brought up thank you wrote but so there is some legislative
protection but it doesn't really address the purpose of local government to influence >> with public money. >> And I think the point being quality of life in Jupiter is why people are here and the services that we provide. that that
lack of state funding that we put forward is what they want. So between a rock and they thought that right. >> Exactly. >> And uh if they if we're not making decisions, they can run us out of office. But uh that's what local government is supposed to be about. >> Yep. >> And we have the local knowledge being
here in the ground what the town needs. And should we kick in for a project like that and you know with with the shrinking of the funds that'll probably disappear as we won't have the flexibility to do it. >> Yep. >> So this is this is just a just a plethora of un unintended consequences
>> at it. So >> we have to meander through it. So >> anyway, okay. And we'll move on to the next slide. Uh so uh we started talking about this a little bit uh in our in our earlier discussion that uh one of the things
we'll be discussing this evening is possible funding sources to make up for that $16 million over time. And again, it's an incremental uh decrease over a 2-year period uh that's being projected. So what we wanted to point out first is what are some of the things that are under town control? You know, you talked
about local partners, uh the state, the counties. Uh some of those things are not under our control but these things are uh what are the things that we can use to mitigate uh what may be coming our way. Uh certain things like uh new Avalor uh non-avalorm assessment fees uh
if you wanted to do that increasing town fees for service user fees to full cost recovery uh for example uh recreation fees facility use fees false alarm fees engineering review fees planning and zoning fees. Uh those are fees that live within the general fund. Uh we talked
about the difference in the funds and the restrictions. Uh these are funds uh that directly impact the general fund uh to help make up for some of those avalorum dollars that may be lost. Uh establishing property based assessment programs for neighborhood sidewalks,
road paving, and infrastructure projects. For example, currently every year, uh the the town council appropriates funds for our uh street repaving uh our maintenance program. Uh and we use Avalor dollars for that. Uh
we could if we wished use it for the main arterial roads, but if a neighborhood wished to have their uh community repaved or their sidewalks done, uh we could do a property based assessment to help pay for those. uh reduce the annual CIP uh contribution.
We talked about that a little bit this uh earlier. Uh currently the split is 8515. So when we uh receive our Avalorum tax, 85% of that goes to pay for uh the capital contributions every year. Uh if you wish to reduce that, which we've
done that during recessionary periods, a very short period of time, uh we reduced it to a 9010 split. So what would that look like? uh and uh today's dollars that'd be about $2.2 million less uh that would go over to fund uh CIP
projects uh and more funds uh for our town operating in the general fund. Uh we a few years ago got rid of the business license fee. Uh we could look to see what it would take to reenact the uh business license fee if we wished. Uh that brought in a half a million dollars
a year at the time. Uh but we had staff members also uh that would manage that program. Uh so there's a cost to it. Uh also um borrow funds. Here's something you know I haven't really heard a lot of my colleagues talk about uh but uh if we
wish to go forward uh with some capital projects instead of using the avalorum dollars. We've always been good stewards of of doing a payo type scenario for all of our CIP projects. until uh only a few years ago. We we went out and borrowed some money for environmentally sensitive
land uh that was a voter referendum approved by the voters. Previously, we've borrowed money for capital improvement projects years ago. We have since paid those debts off. Uh we could go out and we could go to market and borrow some money to free up some
advalorum dollars uh for general use. Uh the mill would be s uh if we wish to increase the millillage. Uh I've heard some of my colleagues talk about uh increasing the millillage uh to help uh uh offset some of the uh impact of what
the uh you see here the $16 million. Uh I will tell you if if we wish to do that I did a calculation to see what the millage would look like to replace the whole $16 million. Uh that would be the millillage would be 4.4750 4750 uh based on the assessed value that of
what what it would look like in 2019 uh 29. Uh but again, this could be raised over a two-year period. And it doesn't have to be exclusively one of these line items. It could be most likely a combination of of different things to
make up for that loss in revenue. Director Reynolds, when you refer to other colleagues, you're referring referring to your counterparts at other municipalities you're talking to, not Jupiter. So, >> that is correct. >> Okay. I just want to make sure we're clear on that. So, >> thank you. Thank you. >> A chief financial officer collaborates
with a whole bunch of chief financial officers on how to best address and they pick best they learn best practices from each other. So, >> I I thought that, but I just make sure the residents understood that point. And I have a number of items. Um, and I just want to kind of repeat that, you know,
and I hope it's coming across this way. We're not crying wolf. We've you've had expectations public. We've had flexibility and local governments. There was a home rule that uh is being threatened here. And uh so first I'll
just talk about you know when we created Riverwalk we have in our comprehensive plan that no paid parking. So in Riverwalk despite the fact that Harborside has paid parking the reason you have the first
two hours free is because we thought that every resident should be able to go with their family with a brown bag lunch and picnic for nothing. So the values that we have in Jupiter, okay, you could say we've been fortunate
based on, you know, uh, available funds. But, uh, that's why two nights ago we officially, uh, passed a resolution and I signed earlier the letter that we agreed upon to the county that we're opposed to beach parking. That's exactly
this item here. That's exactly what it would be. Um, and so these are last resort items. okay that we wouldn't want to do and it would change who we are as a community. Um this thing about recreation fees, we
increased a few recreation fees and oh my gosh, you know, you are the thought of full recovery. First of all, what would happen would be there'd be families that couldn't afford it. So this would be a spiral. >> There would be families that could let's be real about it, right? You full
recovery is people wouldn't be able to afford it. That's what we agonize about here with that with that balance. Um, so while it's on there, I'm particularly speaking to our staff because it's premature for us to be even talking about that. We're just realizing what
menu we'd have to go to to make tough decisions. But you're also hearing just by our defense of no paid parking on the beach is that we still believe that's a quality of life issue. That should be a local decision to be bade. And until
such time that this were to pass and we lose the options on how we think we should be representing the community's interest, we're going to kind of hold to that. Um, and if you are getting to the point you think otherwise, then you know, gee, let us know. But I just wanted to point that out because I'm
really concerned. I don't want our staff to be yet worrying about this, but these are really legitimate uh items to talk about. Interestingly, reinstate the business license fee. We eliminated it in the COVID era to help businesses.
Oh my gosh. You know, to go be going back just kind of would kind of break me personally about that. >> But this is the things you'd have to do. I know I'm speaking for everybody. >> Um I know everybody agrees. Um the
referendum I this is the one that's uh let me first go back interestingly the calculation and I learned this in the uh um League of Cities presentations that the roll back calculations recognizes an actual roll up because when you lose the
$4 million in tax base it recognizes the fact that the rate would go up and they call that ironically a roll back rate. um just expect but that means then those costs are passed on no inflation but they're passed on to who businesses and
renters you know um people in our community um the quite frankly one of the bigger concerns I have is this referendum um is and I don't this is be an unintended consequence and that this is not a stretch um we've we've relied on
referendums and again I asked from our town clerk work to get the voting results and we the last two referendums passed 71% and 74%. So does that not speak to the values that voters have had and that was for buying you know park
property and open space property. So locally, we feel reasonably confident that there's things that we could go to uh that we but we put it out to a vote. And I think that that is in jeopardy of being coming no longer a possibility.
And the reason I'll say this is just think about it. You go back a few slides. How many people are exempt from any property tax? I can't imagine it's not going to be litigated that how can
10,000 voters that don't have a stake in the game because they're totally exempt from abortum taxes be allowed to vote to tax not themselves but others. So you know it's a question um and quite
frankly I know at least the risk of people litigating that right. So I think one of the most important um things that local government could do with regard to referendums on advalorum tax I think it's a risk of being lost
and I I don't think I hope nobody in this room thinks this is you know crying wolf if it's real because you think it's fair. >> Your point is well taken on the pool of voters they're not impacted. >> Yeah. if they're not impacted then I gee if you weren't weren't if you were in an
other pool where it's going to go up you're gonna challenge that and saying gee is that fair that that had never existed before but it would exist now. Um so just you know again we're putting these concerns on the table but we have that down as a as an option which would
which if it wasn't in jeopardy it is an option. We've always we've used it. It's a good way to get, you know, local government feedback, but maybe this legislation, if it was to the referendum, if it passed, the states decided we should no longer have. They
probably don't realize that's a consequence, right? But it's a big one. >> And I think it's again, I think you gave another great example for interdependency within the county because the county is going to have its own problems. that might even have a greater burden than we do because as we
said they could be receiving cuts but also taking on additional scope. And so we did pass a resolution and we did send a letter and we are opposed to all paid parking in the town of Jupiter because if there were paid parking for
non-residents or residents that will impact the town parking spaces that exist in Jupiter by the beach. People will not go to the parking spaces with the app. They're going to go to our town lots and they're going to fill our town lots. So, they're going to go to lots
near businesses and take those spaces. You know, assessing that is a heavy lift. And again, that's not something we have full control over because we operate in an interdependent system and impacts to other municipalities to the county will be felt by us as well. So,
>> okay. Uh, Councelor Gisinger, I just wanted to say thank you for uh having me qualify that statement. Um, the legislation that we're talking about this evening is one of the most important things uh that myself and my colleagues, other finance directors, chief financial officers will be facing
coming our way. Uh, and we feel that it's our duty that we do network to help find solutions. the list that you're seeing in front of you or ideas uh obviously to spark discussion and deliberation uh with the council members, but thank you for making uh
that qualification. So, um again going on with some possible funding sources going forward uh that are under town control, a rebate of the CRA tax increment. Uh not a lot of people know this, but uh uh at the end
of the of the calendar year uh if there are leftover funds, we could refund those uh those funds back to the town and to the county. We would have to do both. Uh we couldn't be selective just for the town. It'd have to go to the town and the county. Uh we could use
existing reserves. Um that's a one-time use. uh if there was a stop gap measure that was needed uh over the next couple of years to get a program up and running uh to generate additional revenue. If we needed a stop stop gap funding measure for one-time use, the reserves are there
for that. Uh we also uh have a uh a number of escrow funds uh in in the town. Uh this is again these are one-time use monies. Right now there's approximately $3 million in escrow funds that have accumulated over time. Some of them are very old. Uh, for example, if
there's a development, I know the council knows this because you talked about one the other evening uh where they make uh capital contributions uh to the to the town. Uh those uses could be very restrictive in nature uh based on how the development order is written. Uh
that those funds that are collected could only be used for a very specific purpose and sometimes those purposes may not materialize for a number of years. So right now we have a number of escrow funds. Now we do look through those funds every year. Uh we look to see what
those restrictions are uh and see if we can use them for capital projects uh in the town to make sure that they're still viable. Uh so we are uh aware of them. It isn't like it goes on a list and we forget about it. So uh during specifically the budget season, we are
reviewing those funds uh to see if we can use them in any way. But they are restricted. uh that may be something that uh we could look at maybe trying to find a way uh that we can unrestrict some of those funds uh to be used for general uh CIP purposes possibly.
>> And these options that you're going through are options we we uh we consider every year. We look to see if we can definitely use the >> we've done I mean we've done this. I just wanted this isn't like these aren't new but what you've done and thankfully is we thank you for that is you're
putting it all here so we can remember these are the tools in the toolbox we have you know to deal with uh you know fiscal challenges we might have. But >> again things that are in the town's control uh we wanted to kind of list that first. Uh things that you can act on and and and do in the future. Uh so
again this is a list to to spark discussion and deliberation. Uh the other one uh that we talked about earlier we started talking about uh cost uh cost reductions. Uh capital uh funding is a big one. We we uh transfer approximately uh just over $6 billion a
year to our uh capital fund. Uh that's one of the options going forward is is uh to change that distribution and some do something different with that. Uh here's the cooperative efforts. You know, future items to consider, a little bit more of a heavier lift. Uh takes a
little bit more time working with other municipalities uh and to reinstate the reinstate the infrastructure s tax. Uh if you remember right, uh we went to the voters and got approval uh for an infrastructure sir tax throughout the county. Uh the town was definitely a
beneficiary of that. We collected approximately $45 million uh off that small tax that everyone paid into, not just the taxpayer. Uh people from out of state, anybody that purchased here in Palm Beach County paid into the tax. Uh so we were a beneficiary of that and
helped pay for this building here, the police uh facility, and other improvements. Uh so that's something that if if the council so wished uh could work with other municipalities to try to reinstate if they so wish. But again, it would require voter approval.
Uh but that's that's definitely uh uh something to to think about. Also uh something very interesting. Uh for example, the u the stadium uh here in in the town, the major improvements that are being paid for there is through the
tourism development tax. that's what's paying for the bonds uh that were used to to do that development. Well, that's traditionally and overwhelmingly a a funding mechanism that's only exclusive to counties. There is one jurisdiction in the state of Florida, and I have no
idea how they got into the into the legislation, but years ago is the city of Surfside down in Miami. Uh they are a municipality that is allowed to collect their own tourist development tax. So, uh there are things that we can lobby the legislature for as well uh to help
generate revenue that we can bring back uh and use locally uh for our own projects. So, that was again that was something I felt was very unique. I wanted to add it to the list just to emphasize you know uh we can lobby the legislature uh to create new revenue
source opportunities uh for the for the municipalities uh including the town of Jupiter. You know, again, phenomenal list for us to just supplement it with words that in most cases you already know um but just among ourselves we're
discussing it. You know, the infrastructure s tax going forth or this uh amendment to pass there'd be compet there already is competition for those kind of sources. People have a
limited tolerance to now going ahead and increasing sales tax. So for those that may not realize it, there was some interest in having a collaborative sales tax agreement uh with the school district and they decided to go ahead, you know, without
this. So while it has been a solution in the past and still remains a valid one, the challenge will be because I know that for example, we already heard or we got an email confirming that the county
is proceeding to vote for a bond for the libraries. I think they were going to vote for a bond for county parks. Um and um that's already going to be on November. Um so all these things and you
know collectively you know it it people are only going to vote for them up to a certain limit and then they're going to say you know enough's enough and to some degree you know local governments with our county have tried to really balance that and
have if the timing wasn't right but I know that the county is doing a county transportation plan because they were looking for a funding source for transportation that doesn't exist. Um, so again, I just think it's good to have it on the list, but I just would
caution that the likelihood of it becomes less and less when you have the competing priorities. I'd be more for the infrastructure s tax, but there's other areas of the county that think the transportation is an important item, you know, and so be more challenging to get, you know, a
kind of a consensus, you know, on that. Um, so I just, you know, wanted to kind of make sure I'm putting we're putting that out there that we're we're thinking about, but again, we want the list total. Uh, but they're not some of them are now going to be less likely options
going forth while they were great options, you know, in the past. Um, and hopefully they still will be. But, um, other comments on this page, >> I would just say I think you're right. um if a resident goes to the ballot box
and sees 20 different asks for different bonds um and additional millages to apply, they would get tired of that. Um I know the county recreation master plan includes some projects in Jupiter, the Jupiter Aquatic Center, the West Jupiter Community Center. So when you typically
go for a referendum for a bond like this for the library or for recreation, you provide a list of projects that you believe it would fund and we would do the same. And so it seems that those projects are now contingent on that funding more than ever. Um, which is something, you know, that's changing. So
what we may have been able to count on for recreation, we may need to put out to voters and it will be contingent on that. But as the mayor said, you know, the issue is some people will be voting for programs that others will pay for.
>> So I'm I think >> significant amount. >> I know. I mean the cost of this is one thing but for me it's the structure the restructuring of how government works at all areas of local and state government that creates so much uncertainty with so
little time to adjust and that's if knock on wood things go well with storm season this year and next year and the year after. Um, that is my biggest concern is just our structuring and how we're going to work together with our partners.
>> I just don't think looking down the road into the future that this was well thought out. Like you said, they're kind of throwing it at us and we're scrambling because, you know, I'm sure some towns could cut significantly, some less amounts. I know we run a very tight chip here. I think the mayor
called us spinthrifts a few meetings ago and we've been you know we spend money we we provide services people that what people demand in Jupiter but we've held off on parks and wreck and it's I've been here a while is people been like what do you do the parks but it's expensive a lot of money so we had to
figure it out so um you know it's just the money has to for some of these a lot of these items that we provide through taxpayer money has to come from somewhere and we're just going to scramble to find out how to do it. So, I just I I just think this was illconceived. >> I think the most important takeaway is
first of all, we're blessed. We're in Jupiter. That's not going to change, >> right? >> Um and um what what potentially would change here would we would be the timeliness that we could respond to and ask
for example, kids would like families would like the athletic fields to be upgraded while their kids are still kids. Yeah, I mean it sincerely. >> It's true. >> And it may just be the case. Sorry, but we can get to your grandkids, you know,
>> cuz it's going to be slower. >> Mhm. >> Um and if that's the way it is, we're, you know, your local elected officials, we'll work with whatever whatever is here. That is our job. That's why we run for local office. It just this is such a staggering change in uh what used to be
home ruled uh that would be taken away from us that we really just need to make sure that there's an understanding. First of all, we understand it >> because uh you would kind of I I don't want to be telling people I have grandkids. I don't want to be able to say I don't want to be saying well it
isn't until my great grandkids, you know, can we get to the fields. I was pretty passionate about getting going on fields that are 20 plus years old last year. I'm no less passionate now. >> Count down on that, right? >> Our former mayor, he was always pushing indoor indoor gym space and me and I I
was always behind him on that. And we had one conversation. So he he he said, you know, our kids will never see it. They're going to cycle out by and we still don't have it what we what he we wanted, but you know, it takes a long time. It's going to take longer. But but again, if this were to pass, we're all going to just understand that uh local
control and influence has been lessened >> and we'll figure out a way to still work it all out. >> I think another important thing is that we're assuming costs remain the same, that costs aren't escalating around us, and they are for families. I mean, our health budgets are facing all kinds of
pressures. Um but the council faces pays for the same gas, right, or diesel. And so we're we see the cost too. But then you know oftent times when we're talking about inflation or how we'll adjust for
inflation and population no Jupiter has not grown very much. I think we grew 2% and we aren't building a lot um to lead to that. But in terms of inflation you know CPI the basket of goods are eggs consumer electronics. We're not those
aren't things we're buying. We're not buying eggs. We're buying asphalt and we're paving roads and our basket of goods is different from the basket of goods in a household. And so, um, finance director Reynolds, I just wanted to ask about what we're seeing in terms of costs. What indices do we look to
CPI? you know, you go to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and we talk about this in the budget frequently, but um there are others that more accurately collect and and reflect the costs that government pays for different projects.
>> We're looking at that every day. In fact, we're facing it every day because we have to come back before the council and explain why these costs have gone up uh over time. So, we are constantly reviewing that. For example, um one of
the ones uh uh resurfacing uh standard 1 and 12 in asphalt resurfacing with incidentals used to be um $125,000 uh per mile and that was in 2020. That's
now $225,000 per mile. That's an 80% increase. >> Mhm. So, uh, just that alone, >> uh, commercial institutional buildings used to be back in 2020, uh, $350 per square foot, you remember those days,
uh, has now escalated to $650, uh,,000 a square foot. So, another 86% increase. Uh, our utility director specifically, we looked at the utility projects uh, that they that they've been facing. Um uh uh Amanda Barnes and and Rebecca uh
put together uh some great slides where they look at the utility indexes compared to CPI. Uh the utility indexes for construction far outpace the CPI uh uh in in these years. So we're looking at like a 30 to 40% even up to 70%
increase on some of the construction costs uh relating to the utility. So these are these are uniquely municipal issues that that we're facing over that time period. Uh you can everybody can remember what happened during co uh there were supply chain issues and other
issues. Well those costs have increased along with the cost of gasoline. Everybody knows just by going to the pump what that is. Hence the loaf of bread discussion. You've seen those increases with loaf of bread. A lot of it's directly related to gasoline. uh
but uh overarching when uh the uh um uh the supply chain issues started getting resolved, you still saw these increases for construction and a lot of it has to do with labor cost uh material costs have gone up uh due to transportation
cost but uh you can see these anywhere between 30 and 70% increases on on these construction type activities. uh and we're facing that uh with our CIP projects every day. Uh when we're going out to bid, uh we try to be as competitive as possible, but
specifically the South Florida market is more a lot more expensive than when you look at the average, the national average. Uh but uh >> I think that was hard too. Like I remember previous budget cycles where people were talking about inflation being four, five, 6%. That is extremely
high. But then when you look at local inflation specific to the West Palm Beach area and the Bureau of Labor Statistics measures all of this regionally, it was much much higher than the national average. And so looking at the local data and local impacts is what
has been impacting our budget for the employment cost index. Also at the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Miami is one of the highest rates in the nation for employment. And so these are the costs that we have been absorbing far above CPI. And so we will continue to face
those costs. And even to provide a [clears throat] COLA to employees to remain competitive with the private sector with others um is going to be difficult when you stay with the same dollar number. And so, you know, again, for me, I'm just focused on the
structure and how can we secure our services for residents long term in a structurally sound way and reduce uncertainty and I just feel like we're in the wild west of budget development. I mean, I
know the enabling legislation for the health district, I was looking at how it was impacted earlier today. Their maximum millage is 2 mil. So we have 10 for municipalities and that rate is two for them. But they also have a maximum amount they can increase it. They can't do more than a quarter mill each time.
And that I mean I wouldn't I would say you never know what to expect in future years and what changes could be made not only constitutionally that we're seeing but >> statutoily too. And so just to get
ourselves in as good a position structurally, not fixing just short-term problems, but long-term structural soundness of the town as we surf the waves of of this. So if I might, I'd like to just ponder a little bit back on
the funding sources. There's a trickle down effect on this and yes, you could add into a tourist industry tax that we already have. What happens then? This part of our revenue sources in any municipality will
start decreasing if the cost to a tourist gets higher than they want to pay. But what then that does it affects businesses, parks and you could add fees for services, children's, families who can't afford it. What happens a trickle
down effect. We're not going to need the staff we have. It we can go on and on and then a litany of all these possible sources that yeah, we could we could add a fee. We could add tourism taxes, but that's not the quality of life. Can it
be sustained in Jupiter versus other towns? Probably. We don't want that. But all that being said, this is part of the bigger discussion. there was always a trickle down effect and we don't even see it here yet.
>> Just uh number one to add to what uh or Mr. Reynolds said about looking at it all the time. We on the council looking at it all the time because every time you come in with a contract to renew a service like landscaping or whatever.
I was asking you always provide how much was it last year? So every time we renew a contract for something we service a service that we provide, we know what it is in the change in and um
rarely and it has sometimes but rarely has it ever gone down. Um and then I just want to and again you know we will work with whatever is the outcome of this. Uh but again I want to repeat
because when people are hearing us being concerned um we're not resisting if this is what the public wants but let I just look at my home ownership. I've been blessed I I got homesteaded property protection and in the last 10 years inflation's gone up
35% but my property tax increases have gone up 5%. It's not the cost of where the pressures is. My homeowners insurance has gone up 229%. All right. >> So if you go back historically over time, you know, yes, let's remember
where is the opportunities and I know the legislature has done some stuff and there's a minuscule, you know, reduction. Uh but let's realize that in my mind for those of us that have been blessed to have saver homes protection,
this really isn't the issue. It's really, quite frankly, it's the nonhomesteaded properties we always agonize about because we realize that they've been uh, you know, getting increased and that's people that are renting and what have you. Uh, but I
just I just can't overemphasize that point. Um, and um, so again, we're going to we deal with whatever's thrown at us. That's why you elected us. I can't overemphasize that. We can get better. We will work to get better. But just the
scope of this is just I I just couldn't have had I could never have imag when we made the decision on fire rescue. I thought I was just dealing with we were just dealing with the most
impactful benefit that could ever have happened to this public that we deserve. and this amendment. Oh my gosh. You know, so it would be a stretch
beyond anything I could imagine. And that's why we're just expressing concerns, looking for options, preparing and further uh because we already had a workshop. I just want to say because I've weighed in um we all have in that workshop next step. So, this isn't the
first time. It's a normal annual process. And I already said that um we don't know what the voters will decide. So, I don't want to get into be talking about use increasing user fees large amounts and alarming people like the beach paid parking did. And I'm not
finding fault in saying that, but we're not going to do that here. I know that my colleagues agree on that. I'm really speaking for all of us as I normally do. Um but we can and should I believe
pause on some of the capital spending um because uh once and just for the year until we know. So we're going to do something different in our capital planning this year. I think we're going to agonize about it cuz I said already I've been trying to get, you know,
fields improved uh that need to be improved, but uh but I'm okay with at least planning that we'll hold off pending the result of the referendum because then the responsible thing to have done >> is to hold hold off because it just may
be we can't afford to upgrade uh and we have to live with that and u so I just want to emphasize that is one step. Make sure you heard that that we will take in the normal process. Um and then um
I want to emphasize that um you know I'm a fiscal conservative and for many many years I profess that we shouldn't increase more than inflation and population growth. And I've come to learn that was a flawed
thinking and I'm going to use by example. Our base budget didn't include things that were being built by new construction. Abico [clears throat] was built. We never had a budget for paving Abico streets. We had a budget for paving all
the other streets. Our parks, a lot of them were built by impact fees 20 years later. >> No. >> Okay. never were in a base budget. So, I submit I've learned there's a lag with
population growth to where those costs show up. How many of us have not heard from an Abico neighborhood about, hey, when are we going to pay what are you going to pay more street? It's been 20 years and it's a fair question, but that
represents a budget increase because it was built. It was never added because we weren't there. Um, so I just, you know, these are the things that we have to deal with. I just want to emphasize that, right? And we're going to really agonize and painfully hopefully come to an
agreement, but probably not a it's not possible realistically. Uh, but uh I think the capital is at this point in time a capital pause. We have a 5-year plan, so we we should mark up in the CIPs as we go. These are pause
items. public have been asking for it, but we're going to pause on spending that money because if this hits then the next year, we have the money that we wouldn't otherwise have. And um I don't know if we want to go to the next sheet or anybody want to say
anything. >> So that that comes to uh the council direction. Uh consider policy direction on addressing potential loss revenue. What items would you like for staff to pursue and bring back or take action on? Uh kind of hits on some of the things
you were just saying, mayor, about the 2728 budget. you know, looking forward, maybe uh as we get into this, if the legislation does pass, maybe do a u early workshop for the budget uh so that we can go ahead and flesh these things
out based on uh uh recommendations from the council on policy direction that you would like us to concentrate on as staff and come back and implement into an early budget so we can have those workshops early early in the in the year and start preparing. or is there other
council ideas that maybe you've been pondering them that we just didn't list? Uh so we you know you you've been very good tonight to to express your thoughts and and some of the ideas going forward. So again, what what we're seeking tonight is what what would you like us
to do uh going forward or things that we should be concentrating on that you would like to see? I I heard one from you just now, mayor, but the rest of the council. >> Well, to clarify on that one because you got that as your last bullet. So we have two budgets. We have a capital budget. We have a I mean simplistically a
capital budget. We have a a operating budget. Um and the capital side we can already be preparing >> when we go through it. We'll be talking about these are important to us. But let's pause it pending if we have uh >> council or we have a CIP workshop coming
up in uh uh August. >> Right. And I do think then the outcome of this budget process would be our C cip would be clearly marked up because we wouldn't be kicking something out of the plan but we would just be designated as a pause >> um and then uh but then we're I think we
don't want to get into preparing the operating budget u because the impact doesn't happen for a year because we don't want to be you know uh crying wolf early or or getting into some of these extreme measures we might have to. Um,
so that one I we agree well we'll start the process earlier next year if the referendum were to pass. Right. And then quite frankly what I'm expecting this is the first time we've talked about this. We've listed a bunch of concerns and
whatever. there is litigation before a judge that may change things and uh so that needs to and you're not you didn't present nor should you have what is being litigated and what may be impacted
so I would hope that there's going to be some changes when that is understood we would come back and hopefully this list that we've had of concerns I'm just an optimist some of those concerns might go away. And if they do,
then we just take it off the list, right? And that's like it's then looking not just just as we do with legislation, where's the unfunded mandates, it be after the voters have after the uh the first step is after a courts were to
decide is this or isn't this like maybe it may come up about a referendum no longer being a possibility. the legislature maybe call me naive but might want to correct that if there were time left you know uh but it's going to
be what it's going to be and then when the voters act um that's when so to me I'm just laying down it's a continuum we've we've started down the path here tonight uh but it may change we need to be fluid what we now know tonight or or have
questions on some of those may be answered >> what's the Cuto off date for the final language for the November ballot. >> I'm not sure. I thought it was August, but I'm not sure. >> I I thought >> because they have to print the ballots and distribute and there are voters
overseas and all of it. >> I think that it goes to the judge though or >> Right. That's where I'm going with that, doesn't it? >> Do you know? >> No, sir. >> Okay. >> Could the lawsuits delay that? >> That's what I was referring to. I think I I thought I read the the hearing was
se Jul July 28th 29th >> that I could be wrong. So >> I didn't hear I don't know what the date was but soon. >> But then because what'll happen at that hearing the judge may say the ballot language has to be changed and he may rule on other things, right?
>> What if what if it passes and then the commission that meets every 20 years to look at the tax structure of the state determines another course is best? How is that resolved? >> It's in the constitution now. >> Yeah. >> Right. >> Yep. >> And it would have to be So, because this
is in a statute, I mean, when the legislature passes a law, they can amend it the next year, they have glitch bills, things like that. So, they can tweak it and improve it over time based on feedback if something goes wrong. But for a constitutional amendment, the only
way to fix this, if any single provision causes any unusual impact or outsized impact, the only way to fix it is another referendum. >> I thought, but >> well, >> that is correct. >> If the voters were decide they want this
entitlement of free free government without taxes, you're not going to get them to vote to increase the tax back again. I mean, I see wisdom. I see wisdom in property tax reform and I see, you know, I I absolutely understand the
benefits in some ways, but this specific solution with all of its provisions, I think has a lot of consequences that are unknown, >> right? There's too many legs going here on should have been done. We're >> not We're not voting on something generally. We're voting on a very
specific thing that has many many specific provisions with specific impacts. And if any one of them causes a major issue, we would have to go back and get another 60%. And the cost of the campaigns, the uncertainty for these
groups is it's a lot. >> Should have been the uh that 20-year look that they do would be comprehensive, but it is what it is. It's just that every town has different needs and wants and revenues and to just kind of cookie cutter this thing
through. It's just going to be tough on everybody. We're blessed. We're Jupiter. We, you know, we're pretty very solvent, but I really feel for the smaller towns and counties that not going to be able to deal with this. So, >> just getting to exist, >> right? >> And, you know, we can talk about Jupiter
is blessed, but it comes to down to the reality of what's fair. Is this a fair way with to present something without I mean it's not even clear. >> That's the why we're sitting here tonight. So yeah, blessed is one thing.
Fair is another. >> It's definitely not fair to those 69% that are bearing the cost of the other 31% won't pay that won't will not be paying any property tax should this go through in 2029. Well, actually, don't forget um it could
go up to what uh not just 31% because uh the legislature would have has empowered themselves, >> right, >> to go down to nothing for homesteaded properties, you know, in which case um what was it in your presentation, Scott?
>> Um and it's not just the legislature just there is language in there that allows local jurisdictions to also >> Yeah. >> allow 64%. It's possible that 64% this uh this enables 64% of residential
uh properties uh all residential properties in the town to be exempt from paying a taxes >> based on the homestead. >> Based on homestead >> that's what that's what's before the voters. And so then if you had a referendum then
they'd be able to say do I want something the other 36 are paying The other thing to consider here is you have 67 counties and if it passes you could have 67 different business models coming out of with chang
um fees what whatever it might be. So you could come back you're going to have a very a portion of those towns failing. So somebody's got to pick it up. So again, that whole trickle down, 67 different ways of financing a town or
municipality, it's it mindboggling. >> 400 municipalities, 500 local governments. >> And I think even, you know, we're not coming into this as strong as we would otherwise. Recent legislation had a budget impact of 1.4 million at least.
So we have a 1.4 million hit that we're working through this year, even before. any additional? >> Well, it's it's only you're talking about the search charge issue. Is that what you're talking about? >> Yes. >> Uh it's it's really only a quarter of
that total. The 1.4 is what we collect. >> Only a quarter because it doesn't take effect until the fourth quarter. >> Right. Right. >> But if it if it's not resent go away if we didn't do the study. >> Okay. Okay. >> Excellent job. You you created your
presentation and your thoroughess as you always do. all the staff that helped uh created an environment that I think we had the most uh we all collectively learned and had dialogue. So we all we all learned something from each other
from you and we have a list of uh um you know concerns that we can punch list to make sure that we're prepared to deal with this if it passes. Um and um >> well mayor as as usual the council has done their homework ahead of time. You
all had a lot of very good questions. uh and to make sure that I understand the direction is that we're going to be looking at the CIPs coming in August. That's step one. Uh and to go through the list of the CIPs, uh if there's ones
that uh you all would like to go ahead and freeze going forward. Uh but we'll we'll start with the CIP process in August and then wait to see what happens in November and then uh do some kind of early uh uh workshop or discussion on
the on the upcoming budgets if the legislation were to pass. >> Well, one one caveat others may have but uh I suspect staff's going to help us and going to be proposing uh items to be paused, right? So, we talk about it that
like you always do, right? I'm sure you're already doing that. I know that. I wasn't questioning that, but just people hearing this. No, staff is, as they always do, already working to respond before it ever even gets to us. Um, and I know you were doing this
already, but I just Yeah, it'll come back in the public venue in in August. Yes. Thank you. >> And we've had a budget workshop before this for those watching. We've already talked about some of what we expect to do ahead and we have talked about our CIP and I had said before I absolutely
support that we just need to make sure that we have criteria for what we're doing some kind of logic and how to prioritize these projects. Certainly we'll probably be deferring a grid number. Um but like I had said earlier we're getting a number of appropriations
from the state. So those require matching funds. Certainly we'll prioritize those so we get them done. and we've learned recently that the state really values that and that impacts our future ability to get funds. So, um just looking at I think we should all be thinking through our logic as to
how to approach these capital projects and prioritize them and I know staff is doing that as well and in previous years I remember we've done some pretty deep scrubs of CIPs. So, you've brought back recommended projects to scale back or defer and it's been very helpful. So, thank you. Yeah, I think CIP is the
simplest and for now the least painful >> Yeah. >> route to take. I don't want to start looking at, you know, other fees and >> we're not going to that's what we >> I know, but I'm just saying putting it out there. It's like that's that's the last thing I want to think about right now. But let's start with CIP.
>> But I think on the CIP emphasizing because yeah, you're going to want items. We're going to have the CIP contain all the projects that we would normally do in the budget.
Therein we'll reach consensus like we always have. But some of them and I would submit a large portion of them that we would be committing to between now and the referendum >> would be marked to pause.
>> Agreed. So, uh, you know, I'm going to want athletic field renovations done, but I'm going to accept the fact that it's a pause. I'm also affecting the fact the fact that they were line item vetoed because the state doesn't seem to care about
athletic fields. So, and accepting that um, and it's not it's not addressed as covered in this package. So, but I'm no no less going to want it in there. uh with a pause, but then what would happen is then if it passed and it's likely
those pauses then get extended. They get extended, you know, we and then subsequent so they just won't get done in that calendar year and then next year they'll wind up being pulled out of some of those are going to be painfully pulled out of this CIP. That's what
would happen, right? >> So I don't know why we wouldn't get an agreement on that, right? because everybody could still get items in there, but it's just good business, good representation of the public that if that's what they want,
then we're prepared to stop spending on things they've asked for. >> Well, when it comes down to where the, you know, you know, push comes to shove, it comes down to, you know, lease essential services,
but the general public may call lease essential. Somebody said, "No, that's very essential to me. I want my kid to play in the field and all that, but it's going to come down to the things uh safety wise the lower priority on that scale and it's going to hurt some people and it's just just the way it's going to be. Hope hope it doesn't happen
that way. But, you know, >> but but again, I want to I one thing I've tried several times tonight is recognizing our staff that have worked so hard that match the what we believe the community needs that I don't want them to take a message on even now when
we begin to pause stuff. I just hopefully they understand, right? We we'll we'll figure out a way. Uh, but we got to hold on to every dollar we can. Um, not knowing what's going to be confronted with. >> That was my point. >> Thank you.
>> Great job. >> Thanks, guys. Thanks, Scott. >> Appreciate it. >> The time is now 7:57 and I'll adjourn the meeting.