What do you feel? Please ensure that you sign in first. Uh you can use the sign-in sheets on the podium or scan the QR code on top, please. Let's go. Hey,
hey, hey. Welcome to the city of Miami Beach Commission Chambers. We're glad to have you. >> You can use the sign-in sheets at the podium or SC or scan the QR code that is digitally on the bulletin boards.
>> We'd now like to introduce our city of Miami Beach elected officials and leadership, Mayor Steven Miner. City Commissioners Kristen Rosen Gonzalez, Laura Dominguez, Alex J. Fernandez,
Tanya Kbot, David Suarez, Joseph Magazine, City Manager Eric Carpenter, City Attorney Ricardo J. Dico, city clerk, Raphael E. Granado. As a courtesy to everyone present, please silence all cell phones and
electronic devices at this time. Lobbyist disclosure reminder. If you are a lobbyist appearing before the city commission or any city board, you must have registered with the city clerk prior to participating. If you have not yet registered, please do so immediately.
Presentation reminder. If you submitted a presentation within the 24 hours prior to the start of today's meeting, please check the computer located at the podium to ensure your file is properly loaded. When the floor opens for public comment, please step up to the podium. Speak
clearly into the microphone and begin by stating your name and address for the record. How to participate in public meetings via Zoom. Once you have joined the Zoom meeting, go to the bottom panel and click on the raise hand icon to notify
the meeting host that you would like to speak. As soon as the host grants you permission to speak, a dialogue box will pop up on your screen with two options. Select the unmute button to begin speaking. After you finish speaking, mute your microphone and click on the
lower hand icon. If you are joining Zoom via phone, tap the keypad icon and press star 9 to notify the meeting host that you have raised your hand to speak. A voice operator will prompt you to unmute your microphone by pressing star
six. Once unmuted, you may begin speaking. After you finish sharing your comments, be sure to press star 9 to lower your hand and star six to mute yourself. We kindly ask everyone to conduct themselves in a respectful and
professional manner throughout today's meeting. Thank you for your cooperation and thank you for participating in your local government here in the city of Miami Beach. Don't like that. Can you be happy?
about I do I do feel Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey, hey, hey. One day, Please take your seats. The meeting is about to begin. Remember to speak into
the microphone as this meeting is being recorded for public record. Please stand by. We are going on air in 5 4 3 2 1. >> Good afternoon. Thank you for coming to
our commission meeting to finalize our budget, which we are statutoily mandated to do by today. 11:59 and 59 seconds. Uh we'll get it done. I'll turn it over to our city clerk to uh give us any important announcements.
>> Good afternoon everyone. Welcome to today's hybrid commission meeting. The city commission is physically present in the commission chambers at Miami Beach City Hall, 1700 Convention Center Drive, third floor. Members of the public are invited to attend either in person or virtually. If you're joining us virtually, here here's how to
participate. You can log in using the Zoom app or visit the Zoom US on your browser. You can also call by phone at 3052241968. Again, 305224-1968 or toll-free 888-475-4499.
The webinar ID is 813-928-57671 pound. Again, the webinar ID is 813-928-57671 pound. If you'd like to speak on an item during the meeting, please click the raise hand icon if in the Zoom app or press star 9 on your phone. The Zoom
link, webinar ID, and phone number stay the same for every commission meeting. Before we begin, I'd like to go over city lobbyist regulations. All lobbyists must register with the office of the city clerk located on the first floor of city hall. You do not need to register as a lobbyist if you're an expert witness giving only technical or
specialized testimony. A representative of a neighborhood association or not for-profit group speaking without pay or reimbursement, a public official or employee acting in your official role, someone required to appear before the board or commission or responding to a code violation or a private citizen
speaking on your own behalf without compensation. However, if you're an expert witness or a representative of a neighborhood or nonprofit group, you must still submit a written disclosure form to the office of the city clerk before speaking with the commission or city staff. These forms are available at
the office of the city clerk. There are two more important points to cover. First, if a lobbyist gives or agrees to give anything of value at $1,000 or more to a neighborhood association or its representative in connection with the matter before the city, that that contribution must be disclosed in
writing to the city clerk. Second, contingency fees are strictly prohibited. That means no one can offer or accept payment that depends on the outcome of a city decision. Finally, if you plan to speak during the public comment session today, please ensure that you sign in first. You can use the sign-in sheets at the podium or the or
scan the QR codes to sign in digitally. Thank you. Thank you, Ralph. Um, we're going to start with the Sutnik hour. Just want to tee it up. Uh, these are all public hearing items. So uh for every item we call and there's R7A through F public will have the
opportunity to speak but also we have the open forum where you can come up and speak about the budget related items. Um this is a multi-month process that we go through starting in June. We unanimously voted on the budget and millage rate at
our September 17th meeting. Um, for all those uh listening, our our tax rate, our millage rate is staying the same uh flat as it's been for the last couple of years. And I'm proud of the work our chair has done, Commissioner Magazine, and in running our finance and budget
committee and and the entire commission. The our budget focuses uh significantly on public safety, quality of life, cleanliness, critical services such as fire, police, code compliance, park rangers, and other
safety and uh quality of life services. So proud of the work that our commission has done to get to this point and uh again having multi multi- meetings, public meetings like this and of course many many meetings uh on on oneonone to
to get to the point and then we of course discuss it publicly in a transparent way. So well let's open it up to uh to Sutnik. >> Thank you everyone. If you wish to speak under Sutnik on any item, please approach the podium. I'll first call uh Zoom. Uh Omar J Himenez is our first
caller on Zoom. Please state your name, address, and you have two minutes. Mr. Himenez, please unmute yourself. Good evening everyone. My name is Omar Himenez. I'm a candidate for city commission in group one. Uh over the past 5 years, our city budget has grown by 45%.
This year, we'll also have a record 2330 municipal employees. Yet year after year, the city underfunds critical infrastructure and capital projects. Nearly 1.2 billion in projects will go unfunded over the next 5 years. While at the same time, we're uh overspending on
wasteful ventures like 31 million for a scaledback Lincoln Road pro pedestrian project, hoping it brings Lincoln Road back to its heyday. Meanwhile, residents face higher taxes, higher rents, and an affordable housing crisis. What about the taxpayer that keep this city
running? When do we start giving back to them? Instead of waste and higher taxes, I support rolling back the tax rate, not the increased push by staff. This so-called balanced budget is nothing more than a farce. We need affordable housing, fair rents, and incentives to
support small businesses and infrastructure upgrades that don't bury residents under more fees. We need the We need to invest in expansion of our stagnant economy so that we're not solely reliant on tourism and property tax dollars. Yet year after year, we see
bloated payroll and growing bureaucracy driving residents and businesses out of Miami Beach. It's time to elect leaders who put people over special interests. Because if we keep voting for the same establishment politics, we'll keep getting the same broken results. It's time for a change. We cannot keep
reaching into residents pockets to fund wasteful projects and inflated salaries. Let's restore fiscal responsibility, address living costs, and finally make this city work for the community, not just for the insiders. Thank you. >> If there's no one in the audience
wishing to speak, I'm going to go to the next caller. Uh our next caller is Paula. Paula, state your name, address, and you have two minutes. >> Hi, my name is Paula Allen. I have two addresses, 345 Ocean Drive and 100 Meridian Avenue. Um, I second what Omar
just said. You know, I think that the city, the budget is uh growing and growing and I am all for spending money on safety and the infrastructure. What I'm not for spending money on is extra
things, arts things, art projects, art in public places, uh, you know, stuff that I I really don't get it. you know, it just seems to be supplementing artists uh way of life. I'm not for that. You know, let them do
their art. If they want to donate it, fine. If people want to support the Miami City Ballet, let them donate out of their own pockets. We're tired of getting robbed as city taxpayers on stuff that benefits only a few in my
opinion. Um it's Yeah, it needs to stop. and design. I don't know these like First Street design project. I don't know how much design, but I'm hearing it's millions and millions to design it. All we really want are pumps and pipes that work. We really don't care how
pretty they are. Get it done. We pay all these design people. Oh, do you want this covering or this one or a wavy or this? You know, you know what? For what? How much we paid him? 100 million to design something that hadn't even broke ground yet. Too much of that stuff goes
on. Meat and bones. That's what we need. Meat and bones. We're just tired of paying and paying and paying. And exactly. Some of the salaries on the city employees if it's competitive for their experience and their education. I've seen some that seem quite bloated
and that's that. You know, just stop with the extra spending. If it's not a budget item, if some group comes up and says, "I want a h 100,000 for equality save." If it's not in the budget, just like in our condo associations, if it's not in the budget, you're out of time. I
apologize, >> Ralph. I just want to for people listening, I just want to set the facts straight. Um, when somebody talks about a design item for a public works project, it's not about what color it's going to be. It's making sure that we are designing something to have the
right size pipe fit into the space available for the job it's needed to do. So, I just want to make sure everyone understands because we all use design like let's design a birthday cake to look cute, but that's not what it's used for in public works and in city budgets.
It's designed to make sure that the money that is being used from taxpayers to make our infrastructure and roads and other things that we build as a city safe and functional. That's the design that we're talking about. Just wanted to clarify that for the record.
>> Go ahead. Please state your name, address. You have two minutes. >> Thank you. I'm Celia Gus. I live 120120th Street, Miami Beach, Florida. We have a spending problem. We just spent $42 million on a park that
we all just visited on Sunday. And our infrastructure is deteriorating. We take enough taxes. we take in enough taxes, but we just must get our spending back under control. Thank you.
>> Thank you so much. Our next virtual caller is Mr. Mitch Novik. Mr. Novik, state your name, address, and you have two minutes. >> Good evening, everybody. Mitch Novik, 901 Collins Avenue. I believe two to30
million needs to be cut from our city budget. Since former city manager George Gonzalez departed, we've added roughly 500 new employees and I've watched our budget more than double. All while
quality of life and public safety have diminished. This October, tomorrow, or within the next week, residents will see yet another automatic rate increase on their utility billing order statements.
Over the past 15 years, we've endured 17 consecutive hikes and new fees, including the monthly fire sprinkler fee. We all know the administration is waiting in the wings to push for more
whopping fee hikes and rate increases, thereby making Miami Beach even more unaffordable. It's time to look within and stop walloping the taxpayers of this city. Thank you. >> Thank you, sir. Again, if there's anyone who's interested in speaking, please
approach the podium. I'm going to call uh someone with a screen name of breakdiving. Please state your name, address, and you have two minutes. >> Uh, hi, my name is Monroe Man. Uh, I was a former commissioner candidate. I dropped out recently, but I want to
share seven of my my points that I think would help the city of Miami Beach. I live at 1110 Pennsylvania Avenue. So does my mom in a different apartment, and we also own two condos that we rent. Number one, the sidewalks are filthy. I've moved here four years ago. It's inexcusable. This is not the Bronx, and
you guys have massive amount of money to hire a power washer. make that happen. Every sidewalk in the city. Two, don't raise the taxes. The property values have plummeted. Uh we can't get as much rent as we could before back in 2021. If
you raise the taxes, you're just hurting everybody, landlords and tenants. Please don't do that. Everybody's struggling. Three, Metro Mover has to come to the city. More and more people are moving here. And I'm sorry if people don't like it. If the traffic here is horrible
already, it's only going to get worse. The only solution is the Metro Mover, not a bus. Metro Mover that runs on its own tracks. Number four, start finding people for marijuana use in public on the streets and sidewalks. And the second time it happens, arrest them. Misdemeanor. It's disgusting and it
makes it this place feel very trashy. Number five, tragedy that the movie theater's gone and there's no bookstore in Miami Beach. The mayor keeps talking about how this is a world-class city. It is not. A world-class city has a major bookstore and a movie theater. So, do whatever you need to do to bring them
back. Six, the 18% required tip at restaurants is disgusting, especially for residents. It needs to get gone for everybody, but at least if you live here, no more 18% because no one wants to go out and eat out here. And finally, seven, you need to have a license to
drive an electric bike or scooter, a regular driver's license. You need to be follow all the traffic laws. And I mean, people are dying. People Someone just died at my corner about a month ago because uh he ran the red light. It was his fault. But >> thank you so much. Dave, thank you.
Bye-bye. Go >> ahead. Please state your name, address. You have two minutes. >> Hi, my name is Ava Frankle, 70 Lor Circle. I'm running for commissioner in the upcoming election in group one. Um, to the person that just spoke, we don't
have a movie theater or a bookstore, but we do have a cheesecake factory. Yay. No, I'm just kidding. We don't need that. Um, but on to the budget. As we all know, Florida does not have state income taxes. So, where do we collect revenue from? Sales taxes and property
taxes. and those are great, but if our sales taxes are down, which they are, at least I would think that they are, judging by the vacancies, then we need to raise our property taxes. Now, I know that those are the two options, but I think that there are more untapped
options for the city to earn revenue that we just don't even explore. So, recently, we just did a $1 summer parking program to incentivize people to come spend money here. I think we could have offered the same discount while
also increasing revenue for the city. I think that we could have potentially added a watch this advertisement for 50% off and collected from the advertisers and also offered our residents discounts. So, that's just one example of a creative solution that we can have
to earn more revenue. And then I guess I have 39 seconds left, so I'll hurry quickly. But onto the flooding and drainage, I really hope that in whatever comes, we see more channel drains rather than single point drains. And I hope
that we see less above ground water storage. So the tanks that are above ground that need pumps that require electricity, which we all know electricity is one of the first to go during a hurricane, which is when we need the drainage to work the best. I
hope that we explore underground water tanks which is feasible and possible. So yes, thank you. Bye everyone. Also www.aval lovesmiami beach.com. My ideas are there. Bye. >> Next public speaker is Tom Mcloan.
Please state your name, address, and you have two minutes. >> Yes, my name is Tom Mclo. The address is 73613th Street. And I'm calling in tonight just the the mayor started the the call tonight talking about no increase in the millage rate. But you
know, we all know that numbers can be very deceiving in terms of how they're spun. And so if I say that a number goes from 1 to two, it's 100%. But what I didn't hear the mayor say regarding the budget is that it's gone from a billion to a billion one or whatever that number
is because it's a really large number. And I just asked the mayor and the commissioners a number of who have been on for a number of terms, how much money is enough for this city? A billion dollar budget and you're looking for more money. I just don't understand. And
like the other people said, and and even right now, I think there's three people on the commission, two two commissioners and and the mayor who are running for office. I haven't seen any comment from any of those people running for office about how they're going to save money or
how they're going to cut expenses so that the average person who gets increased property taxes isn't going to be affected by what's happening with this year's budget. And what blows my mind more than anything is that although you have a billion dollar budget, the
poor government efficiency, the government is really inefficient. I did a 109 in kitchen renovation and it took 13 inspections to get it done. So, if this commission or mayor aren't capable of doing it, I do think that we need new
blood or maybe we should contact Elon Musk and have Doge come in and look at the city's billion dollar budget. Thank you very much. >> Thank you so much, sir. Go ahead, state your name, address, and you have two minutes. >> Yes. My name is Walter Olirri. I live at 110 Washington Avenue, apartment 2213,
Miami Beach, Florida, 33139. I'm not going to speak about economics. I do actually teach at University of Miami. I'm on the advisory board of the economics department. I also teach fintech in the finance department. This is really more of a conversation about the social fabric of Miami Beach. And
what I mean by that is that economists don't like to add in high food prices in the core PC, which is what everybody looks at in terms of inflation. We don't like to look at rising utility rates as Novak pointed out, but what we do need
to look at is the confluence of all these rising prices and rising costs and a lot of not for profofits are adjusting their budgets. I can tell you for a fact, my alma mater, University Chicago, they're blending in departments. They're cutting back. Why can't the city do the
same? Why can't we adjust according to the times? Somebody pointed out real estate prices are no longer rising. We need to adjust accordingly. We cannot ask taxpayers to continue to fund projects that don't meet the needs of
the taxpayers. My point about social fabric is that we're pushing people away from Miami Beach by not controlling prices. the confluence of rising. If you're an owner, insurance costs, HOA assessments,
taxes, if you're a renter, less quality of life, less services out there. You need to actually embrace the fact that we have to adjust with the times. You cannot continue to tax and spend, tax and spend, tax and spend. You need to
create value. Economics are about limited resources. their finite resources act accordingly. You need to make the most with the least and that's the reality of life. So why not adjust like everybody else and provide better
value. >> Thank you sir. >> Thank you. >> Our next caller is Quinton Weisberg. State your name, address, and you have two minutes. >> Good evening. My name's Quinton Weisberg. I live at uh 4560 Royal Palm
Avenue, Miami Beach. I've lived on Miami Beach most of my life. Most of my family lives here. And um I just want to share my my feelings about with insurance and utility costs already rising and
um the streets flooding, the sidewalks being flooded. It's it's uh just uh too much. um and and to raise property taxes now. Um I urge you not to do that and to help keep Miami Beach affordable. Thank
you. >> Thank you so much. Our next virtual caller is Sharon. Please state your name, address, and you have two minutes. >> Hi. Uh this is Sharon Weiss, uh 23381st Street. Um wow. I could not believe that our budget for 80,000 people is almost
$1 billion. That is like mindboggling to me. Um I I don't know if I I don't know if anyone of you on the deis are in real estate or if you have any clue what's going on in the real estate market. Um there's going
to be a massive condo crash. You guys better tighten the belts. No time like the present to do it. Um, and and every single one of us here taxpaying citizens, we have a certain amount of money that comes in.
We we have to live within our means. We have to budget ourselves. Our mortgage company doesn't just adjust our our our payments because of of a whim. Uh, the insurance company doesn't adjust a payment because of uh because of their
whim. Um, we we we budget personally and you guys should budget. Every single one of you, I certainly hope, has a budget that you stick to in your own personal lives. Why is it when it's other people's money? It's just an open pocketbook. Um, I urge you to roll back
the millillage. Um, there there's no reason for our costs to go up so much. Um, I I there's not enough time in 2 minutes to get into all of the ways that um you're overspending and wasting money. Um, but it's it's it's
unfathomable. You actually have have me almost unable to to form coherent sentences o over how puzzled and annoyed, angry, uh, uh, just disgusted that I am. Please, um, listen to all of the all of the intelligent people who
are calling in and sharing our thoughts with you. Um, we have to tighten our belt. There's so much waste and fluff. We need to cut to the bone. Um, and you need to treat the residents who pay for all of this like partners. >> Thank you so much, Miss Weiss.
>> Our next virtual caller has a screen name of Inz's iPhone. Please state your name, address, and you have two minutes. >> Anz please unmute yourself. >> Yes. Yes, I unmuted. My name is Enz Flax. I'm at 1500 Ocean Drive, apartment 106, Miami Beach, Florida.
I'm just calling to um agree with everyone who's spoken so far. >> And I think that Miami Beach has just become unaffordable and that you know, you need to look at your budget and you need to look at cutting your budget instead of increasing our taxes. Thank
you very much. >> Our next caller is Andrea. Please unmute yourself, state your name and address. >> Hi, my name is Andrea Spiritanakos. I live at 227 Michigan Avenue. Uh I'm like a over 25 year resident of Miami Beach.
And I mean I'm just going to ask you guys, do you think that this is working right now? Is this a successfully run city? 17 consecutive rate increases. It's a $900 million budget for 80,000 people.
We have visitors from all over the world coming here, renting uh uh hotels and eating out and we every year have to hire more and more and more employees. It's bloat. It's waste and I hate to say
it's maybe abuse. It's really gross to us as citizens watching year over year our dollars being spent. We don't even know how. So more and more employees I don't believe make a government more efficient. My building it's small 28 units. I just want to let you know it
took us over 2 years to get our permit to replace our front door. Exact same just remade. And guess what? In the meantime the guy who was doing the work lost the pieces and everything. He says two years to get the the permit. This is not a well-run city. I ask you to look
deep inside yourselves. Look at yourselves in the mirror and say am I doing the best I can? Have I lowered? Can Can I cut corners more? This is what successful businesses do. And I ask you to be a successful business and not like a slop shop. Hey, we're just spending
other people's money. I ask you to roll back the miller and please help us. Do not It'll just trickle down to raising rents. You think Lincoln Road is empty now, wait till the taxes go up higher. You think Washington Avenue is empty now. This is not the way to run a
successful city. I thank you very much for your time. >> Thank you. Our next caller is Irene Bigger. Please state your name, address, and you have two minutes. >> Good afternoon, everyone. It's Irene Bigger. I'm at 1500 Ocean Drive in the Art Deco District. Uh just a couple of
things. I'm not sure if uh it's been mentioned yet, but it's very important to consider the benefits of private public partnerships. There are many creative ways to tap into the private sector to assist us to pay for many programs in our city. And um while a
small portion of the costs in our city, we should also look into what we are giving away versus what we are getting for the for leasing out our public spaces. Um namely, you know, in the area of special events here in Miami Beach. Uh and just the second point I wanted to
mention is I do believe there should be another review of where our tax money is going so that we can figure out how to better function um you know as a city and be more efficient and effective. Thanks everyone. >> Thank you. Our next caller is Valerie's
iPhone. Please state your name, address, and you have two minutes. >> U Valerie Owen, 1580 Bay Road, Miami. Um, I concur with everyone that's against this hike and I don't think that
many understand what it's like to run an apartment building here and it is unbelievably difficult. I mean, not only right now is there like 4 200 vacant
units, but my property taxes went up almost $10,000 in a few years. And I understand like you want to throw parties and have fun and do all these parks and all these things, but like
Irene said, you need public, private, you know, you know, contributions. I mean they every single day I read about all these events and everything like we need more
private investment because they're benefiting and we have to stop just spending money like drunken sailor. I mean like we're surrounded by water but we're not sailors, you know, and this is getting ridiculous. But thank you very much. Have a nice night.
>> Thank you. Our last caller is Janet Silverman. Please state your name, address, and you have two minutes. >> Hi, my name is Janet Silverman. I live at 6899 Collins Avenue. Um, I want to state for the record that I'm on the board of uh the North Beach, Allison
Park Neighborhood Association, but I am speaking on my own and hopefully I don't have to fill out a form in order to make the comments I'm going to make. Um, so you know, I heard at the last commission meeting that like the budget is not
prepared on a grounds up basis, on an annual basis, that the commission really just approves enhancements and and reductions from line items that have been there for god knows how long. And I think that part of the problem is that
no one's looking at the budget on a groundsup basis. I also learned when I was on the uh budget advisory committee that we do no benchmarking. We don't look at our costs as compared to like kind of cities to see if maybe we're spending too much on something, maybe
we're not spending enough, I don't know. But it, you know, I just, you know, I I worked in finance for a long time and when I looked at a company I never seen before, the first thing I would do is go or company I never a industry I never saw before, I would go and say, okay,
what should this line item be as a percentage of revenue or as whatever the appropriate metric was and we don't look at any of that. And so I think there's a lot of probably a lot of bloat in the budget and I think that it could be, you know, better constructed. Um, and that's
all I have to say. Thank you. >> Thank you so much, Mayor. That concludes SNICK. >> Thank you, Commissioner Magazine. Vice Mayor Magazine. >> Well, thank you. Um, as was laid out, uh, tonight we are mandated to pass a balanced budget. And what I am uh we'll
start with uh what we are proud of coming into this year. We knew sitting in this seat last year and we talked about it that this would be a very difficult budget year. We had multiple union contracts that were going to be
renegotiated and significantly raised. And that put us from out of the starting gate into a multi-million dollar hole. So all throughout the year we've been managing in a diligent fashion knowing that there were going to be a lot of constraints uh on our budget and that is
going to continue. I echo many of the sentiments that some people called in with. I am going to correct the record on a whole host of things but the overall sentiment before I got elected I was sharing these same things and
since then I've been sharing these same things. I don't want it to be lost on anybody. We are taxpayers, right? We get in minuscule amount to serve the public and we're paying well above and beyond that in taxes. So, we have an aligned
interest and it has been a tough battle back and forth at times with city staff and things like that. We do need to control our spending and I am confident and proud of the work that's been done over this past year.
That work will not stop. We hear loud and clear what is going on out there and the emphasis and the priorities on more efficient and more prudent spending at a government level, enhancing our
efficiencies. And we have started many efforts to make government more efficient and better serving our taxpayers. A government does not make widgets. It doesn't make iPhones or refrigerators. It makes money one way,
taxing people. So every dollar that we spend is money being taxed. And we have to have an even greater appreciation for where that money comes from and where that money goes. That being said, several callers alluded to it. I want to
make this very loud and clear. We absolutely are not raising your taxes here. Our millage rate for three years in a row, despite many external pressures, is remaining flat. Now, as
home properties increase, yes, that percentage applied will likely increase. That's essentially mirrors inflation for the cost pressures that we face with with the city. >> But I agree that we need to do better. And over the past several months before
this even came to the forefront, this commission and our finance committee has put directives to staff and we're actually going to go through this. We have a list right here that we directed our city manager to go out and we have a
balanced budget. We have what is mandated by law, but that wasn't good enough to us. We wanted to find a more efficient government because we need to prepare for a rainy day. And even if the days remain sunny, we have to respect our taxpayer money even more. And that
is part of the exercise that we're going through here tonight. We have found multiple millions of dollars in cuts over the past several meetings. So, we are in lock step with the comments that we heard from our residents tonight. And I think what you're going to see here
tonight is an even enhanced focus on that of making government spending more efficient because we're going to go line item by line item and see where we can better serve our community on a more efficient basis. So, I'm going to hand
it over uh where we go with this. Ultimately, at the end of the day, I'll ask our city man uh our city attorney, what happens if we do not pass a budget today? >> Well, there could be some serious consequences to that. Uh failure to
adopt the militaryrate as required by the statute could result in the loss of state funds. uh failure to adapt the budget. Um that's a little more nuanced, but if it results in a financial emergency and there are various um indicators that that a financial
emergency has been triggered, could then result in oversight by the government uh by the governor or or by a legislative committee. Um it's uh it's an unprecedented thing. I I know that um
the CFO uh made some calls. We did some research. I to our knowledge there is no other municipality or local government that has failed to adopt a budget or a millage rate uh when it was supposed to. >> The governor's office would come in and take over the city of Miami Beach.
>> It it could happen if if a financial emergency is determined to have occurred as a result of this. Yes. >> Okay. Excellent. So, while we have spent months on finding efforts to deliver a more efficient budget and we're doing so without raising our millage rate for
three years in a row, to sit here the 11th hour and call for not passing a budget or to roll back our millage rate, Mr. CFO, that would take, if we rolled back our millage rate, a cut of what? 17 to 20 million. >> Yeah, I believe the number would be
about $21 million. notice. I philosophically don't disagree that that's a good idea and I've led some of those conversations, but to do so or propose that at 6:00 p.m. the night a budget is mandated
is incredibly irresponsible. Incredibly. We have we've had four different budget meetings where we've all given directives to our city manager. Okay. And included in that is defined $2 million in cost savings and we could go
through every one of these items. But the situp here, we don't have the ability to roll back $20 million because we couldn't even we don't have line item by line item granularity. And that is one thing that will be changing. I'm bringing a legislative item. We talked about this
much to my dismay at our se uh at our June budget meeting. I this is important for the public to know. We don't have insight into every dollar of our groundup budget. Us up here as legislators and
that will be changing. I'm going to be bringing the legislative item in October. It's not grandstanding or things like that, but for us to truly know what's in our budget. We need to go dollar by dollar. And if my colleagues want to join me in those initiatives,
I am happy to lead that effort. >> Yeah, I'll co-sponsor with you. But that cannot happen here at 6 pm. We and we talked this afternoon, we can pass a budget keeping our millage rate flat. And we could dedicate two hours of every
single finance meeting to finding efficiencies in government. And in fact, I have a line item or a legislation to sponsor turning our budget advisory committee into our budget advisory and government efficiency committee. and our FIRK meetings shouldn't just be spent on
how to spend money, but how to be more efficient with the money that we already take in. Okay? So, while we are making tremendous amounts of efforts, and I've never seen this from a Miami Beach government, I agree, we turned around and we landed on a billion dollar budget
over the years, and that is not acceptable. I will not be okay with that, and I will continue those efforts. But to sit here and say that we should vote no on a budget at 6:00 p.m. and then have the state come in here.
But even more importantly than that, we won't be able to pay our bills tomorrow. We won't be able to pay payroll. We're going to ask our police and our firefighters and our public safety officers to come in telling them they're not guaranteed a paycheck.
Okay? Our police officers, if we vote no on this budget, have no guarantee they get a paycheck. So, we're going to ask them to come in and keep our city safe, telling them we have no ability to pay them. Okay? So,
I hear our taxpayers loud and clear. We all happen to be one of them, right? And we are going to continue on these efforts to be more efficient with our budget. And if you've seen our meetings over the past year or two years or even when I called in, that is one of my
biggest personal prerogatives, but you have to do so in a smart fashion. And to roll back our millage rates, if that was a true intention of this body or any individual, that would have started months ago, not at 6:00 p.m. when we have to have a budget signed in six hours.
>> And may I, Mr. Chair, may I comment on that? >> Yes. Um, I, you know, I love the fact that there are seven of us who come from different perspectives and have additive ideas to try to make the end goal
better. I mean, that's what we're all here for. I mean, three of us ran, four of us ran at the same time, um, to try to make things better. Well, all of us ran when we ran to make things better. But but you know, David Joe and I um were elected as as neoight commissioners
to make things better because we share a lot of the concerns that we have heard today. But I will tell you that as an elected official, one of the most important things that you can do with your platform is to advocate for the greater good. And there are a lot of
ways to be additive to the greater good. If you think something isn't going the way you want it to, talk about it. Come to the budget meetings. Come to the workshops. Come to the FK meetings. I couldn't make one of the budget meetings
uh because I was at a wedding. I called in. I wasn't here, but I I was part of that meeting. You better be sure of it because that is one of the most important responsibilities we have. We are a billion-doll business. And if any of us is taking it lightly with um
performative emails the morning of the day that we're supposed to um make this official, as my colleagues said, and as I'm sure you'll hear from most of my other colleagues, those are real concerns that are raised
as our callers have raised that we ran on that we all here share that Joe and others on this on this on this body are working to amilarate over the next few years, but to put everything that we are
as a city at risk for the sake of of I'm not sure what the motivation is is irresponsible. And I think that is a disservice to the community. You know, we we heard people talking about a $42 million park that is really spectacular. And yeah, it's expensive. Do you know
how long it took to get that park built? Over 30 years. And do you know how we funded it? The taxpayers were asked, "Hey, we can build a park here. This is kind of what it it's going to look like. We're not entirely sure, but if you're interested
in having a park here, it's going to cost 30 $42 million. I don't I don't remember how much was in the geo bond, but would you like to have a park here?" And overwhelmingly, the city taxpayer said, "Yes, please. I will give you some more of my taxpayer
dollars to fund this park." So, yeah, it's an expensive park. It's absolutely spectacular. If you haven't been there, you should, you know, go as soon as this is over. But we chose to tax ourselves that park. Now, that's not the same thing with everything that's in the
budget, which is why there has been so much discussion about how do we see from the ground up every line item? How do we get to the granularity? because there are probably things in here that are holdovers from past initiatives that are no longer necessary or directions that
we're no longer going in or things that we no longer prioritize and we are working to get there. But to say, you know, at the 11th hour and the 59th minute and the 59th second, it's irresponsible to pass this budget and we're not going to do it. And you know,
that's what's irresponsible. >> Yes. Just to echo uh some of the sentiments again, just to reiterate, we're we're not raising the tax rate known as the as the millage rate. We have started tightening our belts and we're going to continue to do so as uh Commissioner Magazine and that's why I'm
I'm very pleased that you're chairing the the the um finance committee and I like your name change as well. So, uh to focus on efficiencies and and we're doing that. We're going to continue to do that. The problem with cutting and slashing at the last minute, as I think is obvious, is we do offer some great
services in our city, and I hear it all the time from our residents. You call 911, the the phone call is answered, and police come quickly. Fire comes quickly. Public works, wherever department you call. So there doesn't I I am so I am agreeing that there are efficiencies
that we can do but the wholesale cut at the last minute we got to be very careful because our residents rightly demand that we provide first class services which we do. So it has to be done uh deliberately and we'll get it done and we'll do it. Um and partly it's
again it's been started. We've that's part of this process. We mandated some cuts uh as part of this process and unlike I'm not going to start naming but the county had to do it. the county had slash departments and uh and and a lot to get down. We didn't have to do that because despite some of the uh extra
expenditures, uh we are at the point now where we do have a balanced budget uh that if if our body uh concurs, we can pass today in compliance with state law. >> Mr. Mayor, >> Commissioner Suarez. >> Thank you.
You know, developers and special interests too often in city hall get our full attention and the residents, the very people who live here, raise families here and pay the bills here feel ignored as
we've seen today. We may hear them, >> but do we really listen to them? >> I'm here today to be their voice. Today alone, over 60 Miami Beach residents emailed me. Not a single one said, "Please raise my taxes."
Instead, they talked about the very same things we all worry about. Skyrocking housing costs, crumbling infrastructure, and a city government that just keeps on getting bigger and more bloated. And you don't have to take my word for
it. The truth is right in the title of the resolution final advalor millage of 5.702 mills which is 6.5% more than the roll back rate 6 and 12%.
That's more than double the official inflation rate of 2.9. At that pace our city budget will double in just 10 years. Tell me, how many families in Miami Beach can
afford to double their housing spending in 10 years? If we can't, why should government? This kind of growth isn't just reckless, it's unsustainable. If residents have to tighten their belts to show, so should
City Hall. The truth is, another downturn will come to Miami Beach. We're already seeing signs in the housing market. Prices are softening, homes sitting longer. We can't keep pretending everything is
fine while digging deeper into taxpayers pockets and expecting them to carry the burden. It's time to cut inefficiencies, trim the fat, and get back to basics, fixing our infrastructure and protecting
housing affordability. Because let's be honest, we can't fund every program in the world. But if our streets are flooding, our buildings are crumbling, and our residents can't afford to stay
here, then what good is it, we already know the major we are we are already the only major city in Florida that's losing population. Let that sink in for a minute. And why?
Because people can't afford to live here anymore. That should shake every single one of us awake. And before I close, I want to make sure the voices of residents who couldn't be here tonight are still heard. I'd like
to read into the record some of their comments. real concerns from people who may not be able to stand at this podium or be able to call into Zoom and want their voices represented. I'm just going to pick a few. Good morning. I have been a resident of
Miami Beach for 22 years and have seen how we are being forced out of the city because of the high cost of HOAs, fees, and taxes. I'm close to retirement and would like to continue living in Miami Beach, but if these costs continue to rise, I will be forced out as well.
Please keep in mind when voting for this military tonight. Hello everyone. As everyone knows, property values have decreased significantly since CO outbreak during which Miami real estate prospered. My proposed property value decreased
from last year, but my taxes will increase. Please explain that. If I have one vote, I vote against this tax increase. My name is Gershon Sepin and I'm born and raised in Miami Beach. My family and I are owner occupants in the Lake View
neighborhood. I also own a condo at South Beach. It is rented to a really wonderful couple, a doctor and a nutritionist who are great tenants and just really great people. They exemplify who any city would wish as residents. The city's proposal to raise property
taxes is a burden on people like myself, our tenants, also lifelong South Florida residents. Here's why. Despite a few years of increased rents, the real estate market has started to soften. Maybe not for the ultra rich, but
definitely for us regular folk. 6 months ago, I lowered the rent of my unit, a rate that was competitive to begin with, in order to keep my tenants from leaving. There is no chance I'll be able to pass these costs on for the next several years, even if I wanted to. The city of Miami Beach needs to figure out
how to reduce waste and government bloat, not keep taxing its constituents. Please let me know what we can do to prevent this increase from happening. I have a whole stack of this, okay? A whole stack. And for those of you who are complaining about waiting to the
11th hour, let me remind you March 19th, 2025. This is an item that I sponsored. Referral to the Finance and Economic Resiliency Committee to discuss implementing a flat budget with a CPI adjustment to fully fund infrastructure,
lower property taxes, and control general fund spending. Where is that? Where is that? I have another one. Hold on. And I have another one. >> June 25th. >> Budget retreat meeting. >> June 25th. June 25th. >> You didn't even show up to the budget retreat meetings. Two of them.
>> Excuse me. I am speaking. Excuse me. I'm speaking. >> Don't interrupt me. >> Referral to the Finance and Economic Committee to discuss possible institution of a temporary hiring freeze for non-essential positions. Where are these? Where are these? They're not
being called. No one is taking up on them. And so for anyone here to sit and lecture me that I'm waiting till the 11th hour is ridiculous and it's offensive and it's offensive to the voters here. Now, you know,
I can see why the state of Florida wants to cut property taxes. I can see that. I can see why. Because we just keep on spending and spending and spending and then for us to say, "Well, it's the 11th hour. I'm ready to stay here all night and save $20 million. I don't know about you guys, but I could stay here all night and
figure out exactly what we can do to save $20 million. Maybe we save $10 million. Maybe we cut it in half. Let's do it. I I don't mind. I have nowhere to go. I'm here. I want to save I want to save the city some money. And I can I
can start with a perfect I can start with a perfect example. And this is just the tip of the iceberg. Okay. Cultural Arts Council grant recommendations for fiscal year 2425.
For those of you listening, do you know that we spend a million dollars a year in giving cultural institutions grants from the city of Miami Beach? 600,000 of that goes to out of the city
groups. Ballet, Flamco, Larosa, Armor Dance Theater, Miami Hispanic Ballet Group, Peter London Global Company, Italian Film Festival, Miami Short Film Festival. I I mean, there's a whole
list. We spend $600,000 a year. And worse, we have to hire someone full-time pension and benefits to give these these grants out every year. And it ends up being the same amount of money every single year.
Every single year, we give out the same thing. And we have to pay someone a full pension and and benefit salary just to give out this money. We spend a million dollars a year. We can cut this today. Okay. What other things do we spend on that's ridiculous?
Just the other day, we talked about that just excuse me just the other day we spend we spend we spend money on we listen we know when I first got elected the one thing >> the chair of the meeting >> if you actually want to
>> cut spending as I suggested and as I started last budget meeting why don't we go through instead of just calling them out >> let's go right now I'm ready to stay you guys ready to stay I'm I'm ready to stay right now and save money >> I am giving every single one of my
colleagues the chance to be heard. And as I said last meeting, as I did last meeting, okay, as I spent the time during these retreats and meeting with our CFO and meeting with our city
manager, I did that. Did you? Okay. I went line item by line item talking about what we could cut. And we're going to go through on a line item by line item basis. So what I'm suggesting, you raise a lot of good points. If there are
things that we should be cutting and this is the process that I laid out last meeting, propose it and we take a vote. It's very simple. We put together the items that have been recommended and if we keep them, people can vote to
keep them to delete them, people can vote to delete them. And while I didn't mean to cut you off, instead of just talking about it, let's actually put legislation just as we started doing last meeting and continue that.
>> Am I Am I allowed to speak now? >> Yes. You continue? No. Commissioner Fernandez and Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez. >> I think Commissioner is going to finish. >> You said you're going to finish. >> Commissioner Suarez, are you? >> Yeah. What?
>> You're going to finish and then I go. Look, I I I'm sorry if I seem a little passionate about this, okay? Um, I knocked on over 5,000 doors and a lot of it was in North Beach
and there was a lot of people that would just cry on my shoulder and say, "I've lived here all my whole life and I can't afford to live here." and what what can you help me with? And so,
excuse me when I get upset when someone says this is not a tax increase. It is a tax increase. It's only going with inflation. It's double the inflation rate. And we have a
balanced budget. That's a state mandate. Those are not things to be proud of. I think would be proud of is if we can go back to the rolled back millage rate of 5.5114 and we figure out how exactly we're
going to cut whatever bloated fat that we don't need anymore that isn't going to be added to our infrastructure capital improvements that then I'm ready to roll up my sleeves here and and figure out what we
can remove. Okay, I'm I'm very passionate about this. Sorry I let it get get the best of me, but you know, I I understand this is you may think that this is the 11th hour, but I just read to you
two items that I've been talking about since June and March, and I was dismissed. I think it was on a slide that uh staff has put and said this is why that we can't do this, you know. Um
there's there's just so much waste here and it's sick. It's sickening. It's sickening. And and and I think listen I I think above and beyond what what we can cut, I think we need to look deeper and find out exactly what more can we
cut. And I and I want to remember every I want everyone to remember a large part of this is because of the union contracts. Okay? They were a significant part of this.
I was the only one who really railed against this these contracts because I saw what was coming and and I want everyone to know I want the police officers to know this is this is not me going after police pay. I
wanted to have a contract that's more fair and balanced to the city, that's more merit-based, that doesn't automatically give pay increases because at this rate, we cannot sustain our government. So, look, uh, Commissioner Magazine, this is your
meeting. I'm here to I I I'd like to if it's this is $20 million, let's find $20 million to cut today. I mean, there's some really lowhanging fruit like sister cities. I don't know how much we spend on sister cities and trips. I mean, that's ridiculous. The the uh the
Chamber of Commerce used to make do with I think $10,000. I I don't know, Jason, how much are we spending on sister cities now? >> We have to check >> roughly. What are we spending on sister cities and their trips and and and and hosting delegations? I think it's to the
tune of at least $100,000. And that's something that we're going to be spending every year. We don't need to do that. Okay? We don't need to spend a million dollars a year on >> just to correct the record because now you're lying. It's $40,000. And I'd also
be remiss if not sharing what a phony our colleague is. Thanks to him, he cost the city taxpayers $10 million to the homeless trust because he took something off the ballot while the voters were in the process of voting. And as a result
of that big bomb with the county, guess what happened? It's going to cost us in the future over $80 million. We had to clean up that mess thanks to him. So let him be here phony acting all righteous, but it's not true. He's cost us more
than any other commissioner on the day. >> If I could be allowed to continue. Thank you. Actually, what that was was a 1% additional tax on our small businesses that I wanted to repeal so that it wouldn't go to another
government agency where they would have spent money and nothing would have been able to come into return. >> And instead, we had to pay $10 million thanks to you. Thank you. >> And also, for the record, it was a ballot item that voters were supposed to vote on. It was not the commission's
purview to make that decision. It was in the voters's hands during an active election. Let's just set the record straight. I don't disagree with the the premise that maybe there was a better way to address the problem. No one's disputing that. The process in which it
was taken off during an active election and then relationships blown up instead of working together to make things better, I think is the point that's being made here. If if I'm the villain for opposing height and rate increases and taxes on our small businesses and
residents, I I guess I'm that villain. I I don't know why >> costing us $8 million. >> One at a time. One at a time, please. >> I I Excuse me. I'm asking to speak. I've been afforded to speak. Please wait your turn. Okay.
So, and look, >> no, but but Commissioner, I will say when a and a comment is made and there's a point of order to make a correction, that is allowed and that's why I allowed it to go. >> Commissioner Suarez, >> again, if I'm the bad guy for opposing tax increases to unjustly other
government bureaucrats in in the county, which by the way would have was supposed to sign an agreement with us that they were going to give us all the money back. They did not. and I averted a disaster for an infinite tax to our residents and our
small businesses. >> So that again, let me finish, please. Excuse me, Commissioner Bot. Commissioner Bot, >> just for the record, nobody's disputing that there were major problems with agreements that didn't get signed and all kinds of things and issues. Nobody's
disputing those facts. Nobody's saying you're a villain for trying to make things better, but taking it out of the hands of the voters where it had been put by law by the way all of us. We agreed to the language on the ballot.
>> Let's not let's not relay that. I just made the point. >> I just want us >> I just want for the record to I want the record to be reflected accurately. That's all. >> Commissioner Suarez and please Commissioner Suarez, let's try. >> Thank you. I look,
>> Commissioner Fernandez is next. I >> I I'd like us >> I'd like us all to stay here and figure out what other things we can cut that is un completely unnecessary for our our taxpayers. I'm I'm It's 5:00
5 or 5:30. I'm 6:00. I'm I'm ready to stay at least a couple hours and figure that out. I don't know about you guys, but I it doesn't matter if this is the 11th hour. This is our last opportunity to save taxes. >> Commissioner Fernandez. Thank you, Mr.
Mayor. Um, you know, one of the things that that residents tell us all the time, especially when they move from other areas to Miami Beach, is the services that they get, the level of service that they get, the responsiveness that they receive. I know
that um in unincorporated day county where I grew up and where my parents live um you know when they've had to call for police service they might not get a police officer sent to their home today if their car gets broken into. They might get someone sent
tomorrow to do an afterthe-ffect report. They don't get the parks that Miami Beach residents get. They don't get the educational enhancements that the students in Miami Beach get through the general fund that we all
pay, which goes above and beyond what the school system provides. They don't get the level of sanitation that Miami Beach residents get. They don't get the extra trolley services that Miami Beach
residents get. They don't get the um they don't get the um the grass cut as frequently on the swailes and public areas as frequently as Miami Beach residents get. They don't get the level of homeless uh services the way the
Miami Beach uh residents get it. In other areas, homeless numbers have gone up. In Miami Beach, they have gone down. In 2023, we were at 235 homeless individuals. Today, we've
dropped those numbers to 122. We get services in Miami Beach. I call them concurge services that no other government in South Florida offers its residents because its residents have
asked for these services. That's why that's why we have this budget. Um, >> Mr. Manager, under the budget that we have today before us today,
what is the average increase that the average homestead property would be experiencing? >> So, we have two numbers presented in our budget. >> What is the average increase? >> So, the average increase for a median
homesteaded home is $51. for the average home price, which includes um all of the homes that may be significantly higher in price, that
average would be $149. >> $149. >> Twothirds of our residents are renters. >> I'm sure I didn't interrupt you. >> So, you know, this so we we have to put it into into perspective. year after
year. I understand this accumulates and it affects uh affordability in our city and I think we're we're all concerned about that. But ultimately, we need to continue making sure that our budget provides for a safe city, a clean city, a resilient city, that provides for the
cultural programming that our residents are asking for. That provides for the educational services our residents are asking for. That provides for the new trolley that our residents are are asking for or improved headways or, you know, we want shared use paths that all these things have to get paid for
somewhere. And it's not projects that we bring forward. It's all projects that the community comes asking us to advance. Before we really go into the weeds about fiscal year 26, I want to know where we are in fiscal year 25.
Where do we stand today as it relates to fiscal year 25? Are we running at a deficit in fiscal year 25? Are we are we running at a surplus? Where do we stand today? because I want to make sure that we get fiscal year 25 in order and
squared away before we start talking about fiscal year 26. So, where do we stand today as it relates to fiscal year 25? If >> I could ask our CFO and our um budget director to answer that. >> Sure. >> Uh sure. Thank you. Uh commissioner, uh
based on the Q3 uh projection, we're projecting to have approximately 11.899 899 million of a surplus in the general fund for FY25. >> So we project that as part we project that as part of the current
fiscal year we're going to have $11 million in surplus. >> Correct. >> Okay. Is that after we meet our obligations with reserves or is that or or do we need to set money aside after those $11 million for reserves? >> That's after we set aside for reserves.
So after reserves, we have $11 million surplus in the current fiscal year. >> Projected. >> Projected. Yes. >> Projected. That money does not belong to us. That money belongs to whom? To the taxpayers, to the residents of the city
of Miami Beach. And I think as we head into the next fiscal year and we see well, you know, we're keeping the millage flat, but we don't control we don't control the property valuations. Your if your taxes go up, it's because there's another government that's
independent of the city that values your properties. And that's an elected position. And that elected position is the one that determines your property value. And that is what is making your property taxes go up. It's not our millage rate. Our millage rate has been
flat. It is the other elected offices that are causing your property taxes to go up. And there is a process to appeal that and to challenge that valuation. But today, we are sitting here with $11 million
that don't belong to us, Mr. Manager. And I firmly believe that that $11 million, given everything we have heard from our constituents today, from our residents and those who have placed their trust in us, should be going back to the residents of the city of Miami Beach. Do we have a mechanism of getting
this surplus and sending it back to our residents? >> So, I would have to re rely on the city attorney. So about 20 years ago, the city had done a a a dividend that went back to
homeowners and used surpluses to to fund those dividends. So that would be a mechanism if this body wanted to uh go down that path uh to to send money back to some of our residents. I mean, as I see it today, if we get these $11
million and we send these $11 million back to these people that are going to be experiencing a $149 increase because of the of the budget that we have in in front of us, those same people who are going to be experiencing that $149 increase, if we were to send this these
$11 million back to them, they could potentially be getting in the mail a $700 refund from the city of Miami each. >> Sign me up. >> And that's money that doesn't belong to us. That is money that belongs to the residents, to the taxpayers of our city.
And we cannot go into a new fiscal year telling residents, hey, listen, your tax bill might go up, not because of us, but because of another government without sending back to the residents the surplus money that we collected from them. So, I would like to make a motion
today to to direct our administration, our city manager, our city attorney to work on policy so that this $11 million that we collected extra because this is extra money that we collected that we did not spend that is their money that
we send it back to the residents of of our city. >> Can I call Prime with you? >> Yeah, 100. Anyone that wants to join me? anyone >> can I just how this works if this goes to just and I'm not challenging I'm just trying to understand this goes back to
homesteaded so is there a way that because a lot of our residents are renters so >> how do we >> I think maybe staff figures that out and comes to commissioner Rosen Gonzalez >> if you really want to help the majority of people who live here and rent here
then we would just roll back the millage rate in tune to those $11 million I I completely disagree with you because when you roll back the village >> rate I I didn't interrupt. I Let me Let me explain to Let me explain why to you. >> If you send this out, it's going to go
to the property owner like he said, but the but the increase, the 10% increase, okay, or whatever that that you know that average increase is going to be is going to be passed on to the renter. And if you send that money out to the landlords,
um they're not necessarily going to see it. But if you roll back the millage rate, then we put ourselves in a position to not have such a bloated budget and we will have to cut uh in coming years. Like if you then you're
doing everybody a favor year-over-year what we should do if we were to roll back for the 11 mill to account for these 11 million, what would the new millage rate be? And then we could actually lower the millage rate, lower the tax rate for everyone and then you
know the renters will not be getting this increase passed on. >> Well, but then you have to do that as part of the discussion of the next of the next fiscal year. But I'm saying in the current fiscal year today, >> yes, but if you keep the millage rate the same, you are in effect taxing everyone. Even if you send back a check,
you're still taxing the majority of people who live in the city in these commercial rental properties. So, you're not helping the people who rent. You're just helping landlords across the city that probably um don't need that money. I mean, I I I just want to find
something that that makes sense. And if you cut the mill if you cut the millage rate this year, okay, then you really are doing us a service because next year um even if we were to maintain it the same, we would be at a lower um budget. We'd be cutting it by $1 million. And
can I wait? I I this is the first time that >> I was making a motion. I was in the middle of making a motion stepped in the middle. >> This motion to me doesn't make that much sense. >> I know but it's still a motion that's on the table on that second >> which I've seconded Jason. Can you provide us some guidance here?
>> Yeah, thank you. Um commissioners, so I think of the my understanding of the idea is to use the 25 surplus which we're using the number 11 million uh to send a rebate check. like I I recall it 20 years ago getting getting my check uh
as as a new homeowner. Um that yeah, that would go to homesteaded uh properties. The concern obviously is if you just say don't send back a rebate check, but use that one-time money to reduce a recurring revenue of such substantial amounts in the millillage
would probably will 100% seriously exasperate a deficit issue we'll have in the future going on. So it would make the 27 budget um extremely difficult. It would probably have some radical roll backs of >> but we can get surpluses. Again, if we
have surplus, if we collect surplus, we can send it back to the residents. And if I can, commissioner, I think that that's what the commissioners did 20 years ago is they used I think as the the the city attorney said, it's a one-time money because if the money is not there, you don't have to do it or you determine there's other purposes because we have, you know, commission
policy that surplus is used for capital dollars. But if the commission determines that a better and highest use this year because of the circumstances of what's going on in the world, it's better to not allocate those dollars to capital programs. They could override their policy and distribute as a one-time rebate. But cutting it as a
recurring is extremely >> and I'm and I'm all for setting putting a set aside because tenants you all know how much I have advocated for tenants since my first day as an elected official. Advocating for tenants has been core to the work that I have done
as as a commissioner. And perhaps we can put a set aside we can get a set aside of the $11 million um to uh to to work on an assistance for for tenants. We would have to speak with our city attorney if we can do that or
not. >> I think between now and the October 29 meeting, we could look at a number of different options >> along those lines. >> Okay. >> All right. So, I I would like us to to make a motion on this because I think >> Well, we have a motion in a second, so we can call.
>> Can I just give more clarity first, Mr. CFO? >> Uh, so essentially to roll back the millage, we'd need about 17 million. >> It would be >> 21 million. I think the motion that's on the the table is is not looking at the current millage which again I think as
the mayor said we we have a balanced budget a budget that was uh actually in surplus in July and we actually cut an additional $2.5 million I think a lot of it you know based on discussions with yourself so uh we actually did do cuts uh in the general fund resort tax of
$2.5 million and uh so I think that that has that budget set but the um the idea would be using the one-time dollars from the 25 surplus projected that we have so that in November when it is materialized um that that 11 let's say the number is
exactly 11 million that 11 million could be determined to be used I guess either as a resident uh homestead resident rebate or some other type of business. What we could also do right now, and you hit the nail on the head, >> you made a point that
>> we've already cut $2.5 million in this budget process, right? And we have an $11 million surplus. So, if we would pass this motion to send back a rebate check for our surplus, every single dollar that we go through
tonight, every single dollar that we go, you know what? We don't want the guy in the garage teaching karate class for $330. That goes back to our residents, right? So, right now, we're starting with $11 million.
And every decision that we make up here tonight to reduce further that rebate check to our residents gets even larger. >> But that would be next year's rebate check because this is next year's budget. >> You are right. Yep. But >> but but I take the point. Yes. >> I know, Commissioner. I know we've had
discussions that if there was going to be any adjustments from the additional uh reduction efficiency line items that there was you had interest in having that set aside as additional budget stabilization to ensure that the 27 budget which we may think have more difficulties be more successful in being
balanced and not have to roll back uh you know programs public safety and things along those lines. So that that could be a way that a commission could go if they decide to go down some of these line item cuts. >> Yeah. And Commissioner Rosing is I I will just caveat that the county found
found themselves in this position where it was either last year or two years ago they rode back their millage rate >> and then they had a $400 million hole that was disastrous. >> It's a very politically popular thing to do and it's a very dangerous thing because in essence we're putting future
future bodies. We are eventually we're all facing a term limit but then people come in and they need to deliver services and then raising the millage rate is always difficult. I I don't I don't think I think when we have this extra money we need to deliver to the
public. We need to build the public's trust and we need to show them okay we collected this money we had extra money it doesn't belong to us rather than spending it on something shiny and new. We're going to go ahead and we're going to send it back to you because we want you to know, we respect you. We
understand. We have we have condominium owners, homesteaded owners of condominiums in our city who are facing incredible challenges, incredible challenges with assessments. If we can send them, you know, and and we protect
this $1 million is about $700 that we will be sending to these property owners, that's going to help a lot of people in our city. That is we have a lot of people who are living paycheck to paycheck and in facing immense and mounting costs because of all these new
regulations that have been imposed on condominiums. Look at what's happening to the Raven. I mean the Raven literally he's he's he's facing you know literally foreclosure you know with with a GoFundMe. You know $776 would make a tremendous difference to someone like
the Raven. >> Yeah. So, you know, to to your to your point, Commissioner, um there are, you know, everyone thinks of condo owners as being wealthy people, but there are plenty of people who bought condos here 20, 30 years ago or inherited from their parents and, you know, and and have a a
lovely place to call home in Miami Beach, but they are not super wealthy people. and they are facing the challenges that everybody who lives in Miami Beach faces where sure they have a place that's their own but they still have to deal with the assessments and the condo fees and the insurance rates
that the state is not really taking a great doing great job of managing how to do that in a more equitable and stepped manner. Right? So all of a sudden people who thought they had their finances more or less under control, they had a steady job or retirement and but now they're
being blindsided. So, let's let's remember when we talk about condo owners that it's not just wealthy condo owners. Sure, there are plenty of those and I'm not overly worried about those folks. I'm really worried about the folks who've been living here for 30 years um and all of a sudden have to find you
know resources to on fixed incomes in some cases or um you know on jobs where they don't get 30% raises every year um to to try to to fill the hole. And to your point, Commissioner Fernandez, um it's not just that that elected
officials face term limits and it's the next elected officials to be worried about more. And I think this is what you were getting at. The bigger issue I think is that um it puts future residents at risk because yeah, elected
officials will have to make the hard choices and we'll have to pay the taxes, but at the end of the day, the the residents will have to decide, do they want their trash picked up once a week or every two weeks, right? Or do they are they okay with fire department folks coming in 15 to 20 minutes instead of 3
to seven minutes? or you know we used to have an incredible flourishing arts and culture scene here in Miami Beach which generates a huge amount of economic development. I mean you just have to look at the numbers. I know there are a lot of folks who think it's not useful but but if you look at the generated
income and revenue to the city from arts and culture um uh institutions it makes a huge difference. So, I don't want to put future residents, whether it's in 2 years, four years, or 15 years, in the situation of having to give up things that they chose to move to Miami Beach
for or are very happy to be paying their taxes for like a park or, you know, the fact that their kid can go to a really pretty good public school. >> Yeah, we do have a motion to second, but Commissioner Fernandez. >> Yeah. And and I just want to add >> to that, you know, when you tie the hands of the community and the future
that way. I've seen this happen in other communities actually right here in Miami Day County where they went in and a body years ago lowered the millage rate quite tremendously. Then the future bodies that came in had to provide services and
they didn't they were phased okay well we don't want to incre increase millage. What did they have to end up doing? They had to go to the perimeters. They had to increase the folios, increase the tax base in order to meet the ants meat. They had to go in and overdevelop in
essence their community in order to then generate the taxes that they needed in order to provide the services. And that's how communities have had to deal with this around South Florida when they've gone gone in and lowered their property taxes. They lowered their
property taxes. But then years later, the new government when they where they need to figure out, okay, well, how do we make ends meet? Well, the way that they make ends meet is by increasing the amount of folios and pon which they leverage taxes. That's not something that in Miami Beach we believe in doing
because we believe in maintaining a low-scale community. We we believe in maintaining the character of our community and we never want to put the community in that situation. We want to leave a legacy, a legacy that we are a lowcale, a beautiful art deco community
that is not overdeveloped. And those are the challenges that other communities throughout South Florida have have faced and the difficult decisions they've had to deal with. Um, so anyways, I I I made a motion. I think I think we should direct our our city administration and
our city attorney to work on policy to bring forward so that this surplus money that we have is not our monies is the resident's money and we should be sending it back to to them and if there's a way to put a set aside for it
to assist tenants I would like us to explore that and to bring them back at the next meeting. Commission wait. Commissioner Suarez and Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez. >> Thank you. I I I think the most fair way to do that is to roll back the military. I don't know if we want to have a set
aside for a process of giving to tenants, some tenants. I don't think we should be cherrypicking. I think if we're going to help homestead, we should also help non-homesteaded people. Like I said, twothirds of our residents >> are renters here. And some of these
renters have been here for 20, 30 years. they're not going to be a, you know, to to say that, well, you know, maybe they're going to get it with some set aside. I think the most fair thing to do and the most uh clear and transparent thing to do is to roll back the
military. And so, look, not only that, not only the $11 million, but I think we should find nine extra million dollars to cut and and and make so that it's 20 total and and then use that to lower back the mil and use that number to use back the
um excuse me, to roll back the millage rate to to $20 million. So, if we have 11 that we have a surplus, let's find nine. I'm sure we can figure that out today. and and then let's roll back the military so everyone gets a uh a benefit
to this to to what we're doing today. >> But but this but this motion relates to fiscal year 25 and of these $11 million that we have in fiscal year 25. It's not about fiscal year 26. is about sending the this extra dollars that we've
collected and that we project to have by the end of the quarter, sending that back to the residents because I think I think before we tell people, hey, listen, you might be encountering an an average increase of $149 uh dollars, we need to tell them, well, what are we
going to do with the extra money that we already collected from you? And that's money that we've already collected that we anticipate having extra of. And I think the only right thing to to do is, you know, we're really looking to take care of our taxpayers is we're going to
send you the money back. It's not ours. It should be yours to keep. Especially when utilities, uh, people have called about utilities. Well, by the way, that utility increase, it's not our utility increase. The city of Miami Beach, we put a freeze on the utility rate
increase. That is Miami Day County. That is a pass through rate, not from the city of Miami Beach. your if your utility rate is going up, it's because that's being passed through to you by Miami Day County. And by the way, we someone called during the public comments about her her building taxes
going up. She lives in that building. She could be getting a homestead exception for the part of the building that she's living in. She has not sought that homestead exception. and I've made my office available to her to help her get that homestead exception for the
portion of the building that she's living in. And she she's decided not to do that. And that's why her property taxes are going up so much because she's not benefiting from services that are available to her. And if her rent roll is going down, there's also a process to
appeal her property value to decrease the amount of taxes that that she should be paying. And that's Valerie. And I spoken to Valerie about this and I told Valerie to contact our office because we would help her with that. >> I did that for my own property taxes and got it significantly. Commissioner Rosen
Gonzalez, let's call the vote. >> Is there a way to issue a check to renters too? Is there a way to find out who our resident renters are and who our homesteaded renters are and then issue a check to everyone >> talking about? >> I could say that the from the homesteaded properties, we would have
that information through the property tax rules. But as for who's a tenant, the government does not track uh who tenants are uh in this city. So we would not have any kind of comprehensive list uh about that. Could a tenant assistance
program be created in somewhere where people would register and such? I guess that could be a possibility, but that would take some work, I think, to figure out the parameters of said program. >> And I will say, Mr. CFO, it is actually much more equitable doing a rebate because if we roll back the millillage
if we're truly concerned about renters, right? That just goes to the landlords. We have no idea if they go and pass that through. When I had a landlord, that guy wasn't going to pass it through to me if he got a few hundred of cost savings. But if we are sending dividend checks,
rebate checks because we did tighten our belts in 25. We made tough decisions enough perhaps not, but we're down that track and we're going to make even more, but we did tighten our belts and we have $11 million that we can send back. We
can send it directly to the residents because if we roll back the millillage, that just goes to the landlords and there's no guarantee if that gets passed through to the actual people that are paying those rental checks. And by the way, when we do a roll back rate, you end up cutting services. Services
ultimately that are for the most vulnerable people who the reality are is that those are tenants. A lot of the people who benefit from the programs that a roll back rate would cut would in
fact be some of the most vulnerable populations in Miami Beach. And that is part of what we need to keep in mind if we really are concerned about tenants. Tenants live for the most part they're living with
fixed incomes and they depend on the afterchool programs that we provide. They depend on the meal services that our city provides. They don't get to experience cultural programming if it's not for some of the cultural public
benefits that our city offers. So when we roll back the rate, yes, by one part we might say we are helping tenants. Make no mistake about it, when you roll back the rate, you're also taking away a lot of services from the tenants as
well. >> I I'd like to chime in. I mean, >> and then let's call the vote. >> Yeah. Look, it's >> when you lower taxes, everyone benefits. I I I just it's it's crazy to me to say that we need to raise taxes so that
people can have more benefits. I mean, sure, it's great, but at the end of the day, everyone wants to just save more money. That's that's everyone, you know, it's it's not a program that they can benefit from. These are these are
dollars that people need to eat and survive, okay? Like, I want to do something that's more beneficial. And and look, Commissioner, I I'm I'm still a little lost here. This $11 million is for 25. What are we going to do for next year?
>> So, what are we going to do to cut back the taxes for next year? >> And and I just want to make sure that Jason here just said there's no way to find out who's a tenant and how do we rebate that? But I know that if you roll
back the millage rate, yes, some landlords may say, I I'm not going to carry that on. I just read on the record Gershon, he says, you know, he loves his tenants. He wants to keep them there. And it certainly sounds like he's going to be the one to not pass on those costs
that by rolling back the millillage. So, I mean, to to blanketly say that, oh, well, you know, all landlords are not going to pass on these cost savings is I it's it's just immature. I I think when you want to do something, you want to do
it in a fair way. Let's do it do it in a fair way by rolling back the millage rate. I mean, look, just what kind of win do you think is going to happen out of this meeting if we come out saying, "Yes, we're going to we're going to raise taxes for 26, but we're giving
back a one-time trick pony for for 25." People want to know that we're lowering taxes, and we're going to have to figure out how to do that. Let's do that so everyone benefits. And I don't want to have a set up a program where we don't even know who twothirds of the of the of
the renters are that get this that this rebate check. We have to do it the most fair way. >> Commissioner, >> that's why rolling back the military. >> Commissioner Suarez. >> Sure. >> Do you support doing the refund back as it relates to fiscal year 25? Because my point is before we talk about 26, we
need to dispense with 25 and we are projected to to have an an 11 million surplus. And that's what we're talking about. Before we talk about next year, what are we going to do with the money that we have left over from this year? And what I'm saying is that money doesn't belong to us, belongs to our
residents. Let's send it back to our residents who gave us this money at the end of the day. >> And I'm fully supportive, but I think it should be to all both homesteaded and non-homesteaded. And the best way to do that is for the military >> to roll back the mill rate 425.
>> Well, and can I ask a clarification? If these two things are seemingly mutually exclusive, right? We can't do them both. So if we did it through a roll back of the millage rate, that would actually just be for next year. So are would our taxpayers get any immediate relief if
you change the millage rate? It would be reflective for their bill that they pay at the end of November through March depending on when you pay property taxes. But again, if you lower the if you lower the the millillage, uh we're going to be cutting recurring expenditures right now from the budget.
But just to be clear, this November or November 26th? >> This November. >> Yeah, this November. Uh but I believe that the commissioner's idea about using the one-time surplus that will be appropriated in November, uh if that goes forward, that we'll be able to also same thing be able to cut checks back to
um the homesteaded residents sometime during the fiscal year. We have to cut 14,000 >> homesteaded residents. >> So, okay. So, let's put this into into perspective. In Miami Beach, we have 55,289 folios. Okay. >> What was it?
>> 55,289. We collect property taxes from 55,289 folios. We have 14,173 of those that are homesteaded. So, we can do two things. We can either
choose to get this surplus that we have that the residents have paid to the city and divide it with our 14,173 homesteaded property owners that are our residents that live here full-time that
deal with the impacts of tourism and all the special events. Or we can give it to the 55,289 folios in Miami Beach. That might include the multi-millionaire developer. That might include the property owner
that is keeping their property abandoned. You might be sending it back to a landlord who I guarantee you the landlord is not going to pass it back down to the tenant. There's no landlord that I know that the moment they've they they have their rent at a certain
height, unless the market forces them to bring it down, they're not going to say, "Oh, thank you, city of Miami Beach. You sent me a check for $198. I'm going to divide that check between my 12 tenants, and I'm going to send each one of my 12
tenants $16 because you you sent us this money back." They're not going to do that. They're not going to do that. But we know that today we can say that this money that doesn't belong to us, we can give it back to the full-time residents. Many of them they're dealing with special assessments. They're dealing
with increased insurance costs. They deal with the impacts of special events. They deal with the impacts of of tourism. This money belongs to them. >> You just said it. 14,500. There's 80,000 residents in Miami Beach. That's an
eighth. I I mean, you only I understand that, but you only want to give the benefit to an eighth of the people that live here. I I don't I think it should be more fair. I think if we're going to do this >> Well, first of all, do do we need to do this at this meeting? Can we have a special meeting to discuss this
particular uh rebate back? >> I think today we just have to discuss 2026, >> if I can, Commissioner. the uh 25 surplus gets dealt with at a special commission meeting at the end of November when we deal with the rollover uh funds. Well, that's when they would be appropriated.
>> Then let's do that. Commissioner Fernett is if you want to we can have more time to bake this out perhaps in a special finance meeting and discuss that. >> But we have a motion to second. So we're going to take the vote. Well, you want to do you want to withdraw your motion and and and maybe refer to
>> I think I want to know what we're what we're doing with these 11 million from this year with the money that we have right now that belongs to the residents before we start talking about money that we still don't even >> we have until what November what Jason >> there the November there's a November
special commission meeting where the uh surplus gets appropriated. We can we can make a res commissioner. We can make a resolution today to uh have this item come up at the November special meeting for a rebate to for the 2025
uh year. And we don't have to decide right now who and who cherrypick who gets it, but we can certainly say >> I think we need to agree that this money does not belong to us. >> This money should go back to the community before we talk about next
year's budget. I think we need to make sure that we are clear this money that we have right now should be going back to the community. Commissioner Bot. >> So, um I believe there's a motion on the table for an item to be discussed. >> That's right. Um at the October meeting
to hash that to recommend that the administration come back with a recommendation on how to do this. And I think that would be the appropriate time in advance of the November deadline to hash this out. I mean, we have a full year's budget to talk about and uh you
know, I I think we're going to need all the time we we can have. I think there is uh enough support to continue this conversation. >> Um and I would like to be added as a sponsor if if that's okay. >> Sure. >> And um and so I think there's a a a
motion in a second. So let's let's >> The motion second is to pass it today. I want to make sure it's a referral. >> We can't pass it today. We have to do it with the close out of the budget. But I think we need to give direction because this requires logistics and they need direction so that they can figure out
how they're going to do it. So I think we need to decide to today do we want to do this so that they can come back to us at the next meeting with the plan on how to get it done. But this is not our money. And if we're really talking about finding efficiencies, it starts by
telling the people that we want to that we need to tax them an extra $149 that we can send them back $776 because that's that's that's a position we're in today. We can actually be sending them back this money that belongs to them.
>> Commissioner Magazine, then Ralph, call the vote. >> Mr. CFO, I just need a quick primer on on how taxes work, >> right? >> You pay them. We have, oh, trust me, I know we have $55,000 folios and we have
$11 million in surplus. So, if we would send back a dividend or rebate check for every folio, it's essentially $200 per household. >> So, those people, >> not per household, perfolio, >> perfolio.
>> So, that might include shopping centers, that might include empty hotels, that might include short-term rentals. So if we limited it to residential, right, we're under no obligation to do a rebate to commercial folios. So it would actually be even more.
>> What about struggling businesses? >> You know, what about the mom and pop shops who are also struggling like on LinkedIn? >> So I'm going to continue um >> they don't pay property tax >> if we essentially do a rebate check there, right? How taxes work in the
progressive nature of them. the impoverished people that cried on my friend and colleagueu's shoulder in North Beach, they would get a $200 at minimum check if we actually rolled back millillage, right? Aren't the people
living in these 40,50 hundred million homes going to see a lion share of the savings? And those poor people up in North Beach, they're not going to get that $200 savings, right? They're going to get $15.
Okay, that's the way taxes work. Okay, it'll be the multi- multi-millionaire developer CEOs living in the $75 million homes that are saving a rounding error for them. Okay, but it's going to be
significant for everybody else. But those people up in North Beach who I knocked on their doors as well and I went into their homes and they made me cafe. They're not going to be seeing a $200 dividend because when they're renting one, there's no guarantee that
that money gets passed through to them. And even if it does, the way progressive taxes work, the lion share of savings is going to be seen by the 0.1% and the minimous amount is going to flow through to our friends that are struggling the most. Commissioner, just
to that point, yes, property taxes are progressive tax. So yes, the it's all based on the value of your home. So if you have a $100 million home or $10 million home, you pay more taxes versus someone that may have a a homes that you know a property that's taxed that 100,000 or 200,000 or 300,000 or 4,000
will pay proportionately less. So that is correct. If there was a tax rate reduction, the majority of the dollars would go progressively down from the top. >> I just want us to remember we today have individuals who can no longer afford to live in the city. homeowners that live
in condominiums who they want to sell their units. They can't even they can't find buyers to buy their units. They're dealing with tremendous assessments and this money can help these people make ends meet at
a time when the market is working against them and the market is working against these individuals. We have a lot of people on fixed incomes and I think this this is going to help a lot of those individuals who call us who call us and say, "What can you do to help me with my special assessment? I can't
afford this. I'm being priced out." Well, here's something. This is Is it the greatest thing? Is it the biggest assistance we can give them? No. But it's their money. It's their money that we can put back in their pocket. And I don't think we should be holding it from them. I think there it belongs best in
their pockets. >> But Mr. Sure. >> It's >> Look, >> call the vote, Ralph. >> Well, go ahead, Commissioner. Commissioner Suarez. >> Okay. >> You do realize I hope I'm I think I'm
relaying what residents are thinking. We're where we've all made good points. Really good points, but it's being repetitive at this point. So, let's Commissioner Suarez, let's call the vote. >> Let's Let's get in good standing. What is the motion? >> Raphael, one.
The motion is >> to direct the city administration to work with the city attorney's office to come back at the October meeting with a game plan to return the 11 million or the anticipated approximately $1 million surplus to homesteaded properties. And
if there's a way to build in something for renters, we will look into doing that. I think I I only get on board if we're able to essentially spread that to residential folios, right? I don't want it just going to given the point I just
made. >> I don't want it just going to homesteaded. >> And I'll amend my motion to to include that so we can work on that. >> Let's work on the on the item so we can bring it at our next meeting. Well, what would be the difference between a residential folio that you're saying and
a homesteaded property? Homestead just means that somebody lives there full-time. That is a residential portfolio. You mean like renters, too? Is that what you >> Yeah, I want to include renters. I don't want to include the Fountain Blue. >> Okay. But there they can't homestead a commercial property. You can't >> No, but if we only include homesteaded
residents, then our renters are going to get no dividend check or rebate. But how how are you going to spend a check to renters if we don't know who they are? >> If we do just >> we have residential folios, correct? And well, I mean, listen, we're not going to
figure this out from the days. That's part of the referral. >> This is a direction to ask them to put together this plan so that they can bring it at the next meeting. But we in essence are agreeing that this extra money, we're not going to spend it for something else. We are agreeing that this extra money, we want to direct it
to send it back to the community, back to the people who paid it, our residents and taxpayers, and for them to come back with the most appropriate way for us as the steward and the fiduciaries of that money to give it back to those who entrusted this money on us. And that's
that's what we're saying today. This money doesn't belong to us. We're not going to keep it. We were able to operate a more efficient government this year than what we anticipated, which is why we have an extra 11 million that we that we weren't counting on. And because of that, we're going to send it back.
So, come back at the next meeting with the plan with a game plan on how to most fairly and equitably get this back to our residents. >> Add me as a sponsor. >> Um, so we're all co-sponsoring. I just want to say, Commissioner Fernandez,
that was a that was brilliant. I didn't even know that we had that $11 million >> in reserves. I thought, you know, >> it's not reserves, though. It's surplus. It's surplus. >> We're not We're meeting our reserves. We have commission policy that 25% has to go to our reserves. We're meeting our
reserves. This is beyond the reserves. This is not ours. This is the taxpayers. >> And commissioner, we're actually exceeding our reserve policy. Correct. On both the general fund and the resort tax where we have out uh for two months and we're actually exceeding
that uh for three months for the resort taxes. Correct. >> The the policy is to have three months, two months as the emergency reserve is a requirement and then the one month goal 25%. So in total we do meet the goal and the require uh the requirement and the goal. >> Y but we have our highest general fund
reserves and the last two years the highest resort tax reserves. >> Correct. Correct. Well, I think you've seen the rise of a lot of single family homes that are assessed and being built right now at $30 million, $40 million, $50 million. North Bay Road alone, I
think, has something like $1.8 billion in value valuations. And we're seeing that right now in these new constructions. So, I the residents are definitely going to benefit from that. >> Okay. Can we call the vote? >> That's exactly what we're going to do.
>> Ralph, take it away. Yes, sir. So, I have a motion by Commissioner Fernandez, second there by Mayor Miner. Uh, I've I've heard that Mayor Miner is listed as a co-prime sponsor. Everyone else is listed as a co-sponsor. >> I'm a co-prime as well. >> Me, too. Me, too. >> We make everyone a co-prime.
>> Co-prime everyone. >> Well, actually, you should answer that. >> I'm fine. We are one body and we work in unison. >> So, having said that, all in favor, please say I. >> I. >> Anyone opposed? The motion is approved. 70. The item will come back on October 29th.
>> Thank you, colleagues. >> Thank you, Commissioner Fernandez. >> Good idea. >> R 7A, first item on the agenda. >> Yes, sir. R7A is a resolution the mayor, city commissioner of city beach for adopting one the final advalor mill of 5.8702 mills for fiscal year 2026 for
general operating purposes, which is 6 and 510 uh more than the roll back rate of 5.5114 mills. And two, the debt service milit rate of 0.2779 2779 Mills. This is a second reading public hearing. It is item R7A.
>> Commissioner Magazine. So if for those following at home, uh last meeting uh and in our budget discussions leading up to this, we directed the city manager to identify government efficiencies and cost savings
metrics. And Mr. CFO, correct me if I'm wrong, but we went essentially line item by line item through that. I worked closely with your team. I know you worked with other commissioners and we identified over $2.5 million of this budget that we cut. Is that correct?
>> Correct. Our general fund and resour tax 2 and a half million. There was a few hundred,000 in other funds. I think the total will be 2.75 across all funds, but >> that is not one-time payments. every single year going forward because of those items that we identified those are the recurring cost savings each and
every year we have already cut correct and what I suggested or actually gave direction to uh last meeting is let's keep going because like I said this is the taxpayer money okay so while me and my friend and colleague had a pretty
heated debate it really centered on how we went about this not about the premise of doing so and I I think you've seen a pretty aligned commission in putting forward some of these measures. Now, I do believe how this process is laid out,
we may be limited just because of the granularity that we have, >> but given the directive that I made during the budget process, we have exhibit E right here of more money that we are able to spend uh save going forward for 2026.
And I think we collectively agreed that we would essentially go item by item and take a vote on what stays and what goes. Is that your understanding? Your understanding, Mr. City Badger, >> that is my understanding >> and that works with my colleagues here.
>> We're essentially >> Yep. >> Can I most organizations create their budgets in the summer, correct? Dependent on the fact that they are budgeted in our budget. So, if we begin
cutting these items right now, are all the organizations that we support going to have a budget hole? And I think it's very fair to to point out because, you know, there's this boogeyman of the tax increase, but when
you look at our overall budget this year, the main increases came from police and fire. Um police were um let's see $15 million and then fire was
10,743,000. So you know uh 25 $26 million in increase nearly twice um nearly twice the mill is it's all coming from it's all going to police and fire. I would like to point out some
things before we start cutting line by line because I looked at this budget very holistically. You know, code compliance went down by 1% this year, okay? And we only spend we're only going to spend $7.5 million
on code compliance. When we heap so much on them, meanwhile, you have police at $166 million, 20 times code code compliance. It's kind of crazy if you think about that allocation. I just want to put
everything in perspective for you. We have 132 million budgeted for our fire department. In comparison, code compliance is only 7.5 million. One other thing that I would like to point out is one of the areas where I think we
need more people than ever before is uh our capital improvements because we're having a lot of problems uh in that department finishing these projects. I mean, I know that they're working so hard and I'm not blaming that department, but we're seeing a decrease. We're spending less in code compliance.
We're eliminating positions in code compliance. All our entire public works is $18 million. When we start to nickel and dime these budgets, these line items right now, when people have done their budgets, it's disingenuous because when
those contracts >> were signed, the city manager needed to come to us and say, "This is going to bloat your budget by 26 your operating budget by $26 million." And you know, we said, "Oh, this is going to add 7 million here." But when I looked at the
actual numbers of the $26 million operating bloat that will grow year-over-year, that represents um 9% for fire and 10% for police. Now, I don't know if those were additional positions or if this was just part of the the contract, but those are huge
numbers. I'm not saying that I want to cut any um police officers salary, but did we know that when we signed these contracts and the administration that went in and you know negotiated these contracts that these were going to swell
the budget the way that they were to the point where every other department um is kind of reeling and because when I look at every other department apart from legal by the way legal got an additional 5% but you were probably the
only budget the uh city clerk got 2.8% increase but the city manager's office took a hit of 9%. So you cut 9% from your budget. Finance took 6% decrease. Um most of our departments, marketing and communication
had a budget decrease, you know. So across the city we've slashed um a lot of departments. I want to say thank goodness facilities management was not slashed and you added money there. But I wanted to know why is code compliance so anemic and why is why are
we not adding more to code when we expect so much of our code compliance department. >> So I'm assuming that question is for me commissioner. Um I'm going to tell you that we work very closely with all of our department heads. We do ask a lot of
all of our departments and they are all out there many times much more than 40 hours a week delivering services for our community. And I work very closely with all of them to try to figure out how to rightsize to deliver the services that
the residents expect and that you all have directed me to provide. And so I this is my recommendation to move forward with this budget as presented that has what I believe is the
appropriate amount of services based on the expectations and my understanding of the direction of this commission. >> Okay, Mr. Chair, >> Commissioner Suarez. >> Uh Eric, how much new revenue are we getting back from the new properties
that are coming online? What's the new tax base on that? >> So, I believe there was a billion dollars in new construction. Um, Jason or Tamika, can you answer what is a billion dollars in new construction generate in additional revenue?
>> It was $4 million, but I'm just going off the top of my head. >> I have to give us a second. >> It could just be the one project was $4 million or new constru this year was about four and a half million.
I mean, simple math, 5.8 mills times a billion dollars is $5.8 million. But >> I I just want to double check that my math is right. >> Yeah, I think five >> 6.1 because it was a little over a billion. It was a billion48.
>> Okay. So, we're getting we're getting six and a half extra million dollars a year because of properties coming online, right? Yet, we're still going to increase property taxes because our property
taxes are going up. I understand that comes from another department or another elected official. What I'm suggesting is let's roll back the millage rate so that we're at the baseline millage rate of
>> Yeah. >> 5.5114. and we save the we we we save our our everyone in the city these taxes. >> Um >> I feel like this would be at the expense
of every art, cultural, social service organization. >> People need to feed people need to feed themselves right now. They're they're trying to make rent. I mean I understand >> float in some areas. >> I understand. Listen, I understand it. It's nice. It's a nice thing to have, but remember we're a billion dollar
billion dollar budget for 80,000 residents. That's crazy. Okay, like just think about this. >> You can't sit here and try to nickel and dime,000 here, 60,000 there when you have $26 million in labor union contracts that are fairly fairly loaded.
>> This is a conversation about priorities. The priorities are infrastructure, resiliency, home affordability. It's not arts and culture. We're in a different time now. That might have been the case 10 years ago under like comm under Mayor
Gelber, but we have a different set of priorities. Our priorities are keeping Miami Beach residents in their homes, making sure they can eat. It's not so that they can go to a show. They want to have more money to save. It's as simple as that. like it's a priority and and
and again we have how much in capital improvement projects do we have Jason? How much how much do we have? >> 138 million. >> How much? >> Well, in the budget it's 138 million >> over the course of all capital improvement projects. >> Unfunded is 1.3 billion.
>> $1.3 billion in unfunded capital improve. Well, minus the 138, >> right? >> Water. That's a priority that everyone in Miami Beach is going to benefit from. I'm sorry, but not everyone is going to benefit from going to a show at an arts
and culture destination. I'm sorry. This is your nickel and dimension at the big picture of salary. Can I finish Can I finish, please? I'm I'm speaking. Excuse me. I'm actually the fire department 72 73% of the budget.
>> I did not interrupt you out of control. >> I did not interrupt you. I'm simply saying But it's disingenuous to say that when you have the >> It's not disingenuous. I'm simply saying we have a priority. Please. Okay. Commissioner Suarez, Commissioner Bot, then Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez, please. In that order.
>> Thank you. Our priorities now are different than the priorities we had 10 years ago. The priorities we have now is affordability first and foremost. And then there's infrastructure. Okay. So, anything else? It's not our responsibility as a government to
provide arts and culture. It's our It's our responsibility for clean and safe. That's it. Clean and safe. Everything else is extra. It's as simple as that. What are our priorities as a government? We have a billion dollar budget for 80,000 residents. I'm not picking and
choosing. I'm simply saying this is my priority. My priority is is the basics function of government. >> Cleanliness, safety, resiliency. Commissioner Bot. >> So Jason, um I I have a couple of
questions for you. So I'm just letting everybody know so people don't jump in as I get my answers and then have a follow-up question. Um, so we have a an 82,000 person city and we have a billion dollar budget. But
if you compared us to any other 82 person 82,000 person city in, you know, I don't know, Michigan or New Mexico, we have to our budget has to cover what
happens on Super Bowl weekend when it's hosted here. And our budget has to cover art Basil and our budget not not the arts and culture component. I'm not talking about that. Um but we have to cover um when water palooa comes in. We
have to cover when the sea the seafood um soie wine and food festival comes in when um when for Memorial Day we've got the air and sea show, right? So we're not necessarily paying for that. Although we do as a city choose to use
some of our taxpayer dollars for those things because we believe that the economic benefit that we get on the the ROI that we get on the monies that we invest to help those events happen here in the city is worth the money. We
wouldn't be doing it if we thought it was a lost leader, right? We're not doing it out of the kindness of our heart. We're doing it because we think that having the air and sea show come in for for 2 or 3 days in um in over Memorial Day weekend generates a lot of
money for the city that we wouldn't get any other way. Is that a correct statement? I just want to make sure. I >> I think in holistically, yes. And I think what you might be speaking to is we have the 80 to 85,000 residents we have, but my understanding is on any given weekend, we're more of a city of a
quarter million >> or high impact up to half a billion during during high impact weekends and everything. So you're right. I'm sure if you took this city and you plunked it in Idaho uh for 80 or 85,000, the budget overall would be smaller. But again,
this isn't just also to the general fund. You know, you're having parking funds, water and sewer, storm water. we have many different services that the government provides. Um but yes, it is definitely impacted by the fact that we are servicing a much larger community than the 80,000 >> right and I think that really is
something that we as a community both elected officials on this day and the residents who are listening need to remember because listen I ran for office and I said it because it's it sounds crazy on its face. We have a billion dollar budget for less than 90,000 people living here. Yeah, that would be
terrible. But the fact of the matter is on any given weekend we're 250,000 people here who maybe don't live here, but god forbid there's an emergency and we we need police to be able to respond. And also thankfully there aren't emergencies very often, but we need
police to make sure that the crowds are behaving the way they're supposed to and the fire department is there to make sure that if somebody gets heat stroke, they are going to be taken care of. I'm not I'm not in any way saying that negotiations going forward can't be
different and more stringent. As a matter of fact, it seems like um my colleagues don't remember the very robust and very contentious um negotiations we had about these very issues saying that these contracts historically have not been what we think is is good enough because we don't get
the accountability. You were great about that. you were really great about that saying we want more accountability for the um uh for the amount of money that we're spending and the conversation that we had at the time was everybody agreed.
I mean, I wasn't privy to the fire department one, but Chief Jones was sitting at the table saying, "Yeah, there should be more accountability, and this is the first step to move us to that." Right? So, I just want to I just want people to remember that when we say
this this um you know, billion dollar budget, 82,000 residents, that is a true statement, but it's not the entirety of the truth, right? So, just because there's a fact that's true doesn't make it the only fact that's true. And I think that that needs to be something
that we remember. Again, um it's not to say that we don't have opportunities to do things differently and better. Um and that is what we are all moving towards. You know, uh on the FUR committee that I very proudly sit on with Joe. I think you do a phenomenal job of identifying
opportunities to make things better without blowing things up, which is a real skill because a lot of a lot of us would like to blow things up and start from scratch, but that's not real. you can't blow it up because you still have to go to work the next day and people need to be able to count on the lights
coming on and water flushing uh in their toilets. Um so that that's one thing. The other thing I want to say because it comes up as a um um as a bogey man all the time and I I think it's dangerous to
have this be a bogey man. We're using the term arts and culture like it is um toxic waste. Like I don't want that in my backyard. It's gross. But the fact of the matter is that tox that that arts and culture helps kids learn better.
It's proven. Don't don't take my word for it. Study it. Look it up on Google. See what STEM and STEAM does for kids um academic performance. And we help underwrite that. We don't fund it exclusively. We don't spend a lot of money on it, but we do spend some. It's why people move to Miami Beach because
our schools are better than in its surrounding areas. Are they as good as we want them to be? They will never be because we're always going to want them to be better, but they're better than most communities. And I'm really proud of that and you guys should be too because a community is about not just what's happening now, but what's
happening with our next generation, right? So, um, arts and culture also brings in a huge amount of money to the city. And I know people like to say it's just not true. Who needs arts and culture? But again, don't don't take my word for it. Do the research. Look it
up. Look it up. You know, we have people and I you know, are there some organizations that shouldn't get funded? Let's take a look at that. That is a very valid conversation. But I can tell you that a lot of people who choose to move to Miami, uh, to Miami Beach, part
of what they're choosing is to be able to come and go out to dinner at a a nice restaurant, whether that's a really fancy restaurant or if it's a little bentanita, they're equally fabulous, and either walk to a free concert someplace or walk to a show on Lincoln Road. There
are lots of different ways to do arts and culture that are for the community, for our kids, for our residents, for our visitors. And that is what makes Miami Beach a destination that people want to come live here for and also want to come and spend their dollars here on
vacation. And if we start um this narrow-minded view of there is nothing else to be funded in this city other than infrastructure. That is a problem because then we lose the mechanism by which a lot of the infrastructure gets funded. Right? If
people stop coming here, if people start moving stop moving their businesses here, if which again Joe can take credit for that, we've got a new business coming here with 200 super high paid employees, right? If that stops happening, then who's going to pay for
the sewer pipes that need replacing? >> Guess who's guess who's going to have to get their taxes raised? We are. Right. So, I I really I want us to be mindful and I I I share the frustrations that my colleagues have
about the infrastructure um not getting funded as quickly as it should. It like it should have been done years ago. And guess who is finally taking the foot off the brake? Is the people sitting here today and that's great, but it's going to take time.
Also, by the way, let's not forget that if we all won the lotto and could fund everything tomorrow, can you imagine what trying to get from point A to point B in Miami Beach would be like, you we'd all need to buy, you know, hovercraft for everybody because you wouldn't be able to drive anywhere, you know? So,
let's let's be smart about what we're trying to do here. We are trying to find ways to cut money in next year's budget going forward in ways that won't destroy, blow up. We are trying to give money back. We know we have well we are
uh expecting to have 11 million dollars that we are going to talk about how to redistribute back to our residents. I think that's great. So let's do it in a way that that will not blow things up for future generations. My last question for you, Jason, is because I've heard
it. We've talked about it multiple times already, but I'm not sure everybody has heard it. If we cut the millage rate for 2026, that is a cut for one year that will grow and balloon and do damage for years to come. And somebody will it's kicking
the can down the road because somebody will have to figure out how we're going to fill that hole in two, three, four years when it balloons. Is that a correct understanding? >> Yes, correct. I believe yes, Commissioner, that's correct. I think that's what Commissioner Fernandez was alluding to earlier on the earlier discussion is when you uh lower that
millage or you succumb to that pressure sometimes you have to lower to a roll back rate it could definitely could exasperate budgetary issues going forward especially in a in in a scenario and I've had long discussions with commissioner magazine about you know the concerns with 27 or 28 is though we
don't know that we'll be in a deficit it may be more likely and that we are in an environment where we have decreasing increases to our property property value which is why some discussions we've had and I think we're going to have it on the the budget item next uh which would be to keep the millillage the same and then in the budget maybe makes if I
think the commissioner's intent is to make some reductions to keep that money set aside for >> and Mr. CFO in fact and Mr. city attorney, we can't bifurcate between rolling back commercial versus residential rates. Correct. >> Correct. You can't be discriminatory in your property taxes.
>> So if we actually >> I'm so sorry. >> Do the implement commissioner Fernandez mechanism going forward. >> I'm sorry. The FIA doesn't need tax relief. >> The Fountain Blue doesn't need tax relief, right? But we can essentially
then send any surplus that we have back to our residents, homesteaded and non-homesteaded, right? And give that tax relief where it truly belongs. And and that is a noble effort. That that is our Miami Beach residents.
>> Mayor, may I may I Thank you. And I'd like to respond a couple things that Commissioner Pop raised. I I am I'm concerned about the people already living here, not the people who are moving here. The people who are living here are experiencing flooding
and affordable housing issues. Okay? Once a year with a rainstorm, many homes on Alton Road, they get flooded in up 2 in into their home. That's who I'm more concerned about. I'm more concerned about the people who are already here,
not the people who are going to come. Because if we don't fix the infrastructure in Miami Beach, no one's going to want to live here and then we're going to have an even bigger problem. So, I want to make sure that our priorities are correct. We have
serious resiliency issues that we need to deal with that are much more of a priority than arts and culture. Second, uh, Commissioner Magazine, I don't agree. Okay. I do not agree. I do not
think that we should be creating a way of picking winners and losers. If we're going to uh lower the taxes or roll back the tax rate, everyone benefits. And yes, there's going to be people who uh
in in in businesses that benefit from this. There's going to be people who um who are renting that hopefully they get passed back passed through like uh Gershon just said in his email. >> But we want to be fair. We cannot be win. We cannot be picking winners and
losers with some government entity that decides who gets a rebate and who doesn't. The most simple fair way of doing this is just lowering taxes. Everyone benefits. And we want and and to say there there's there's struggling
businesses out there that need uh assistance and what if what if the taxes for the fight become so unbearable that they close down and then you have an empty property and that's that that's about to happen to the Good Time Hotel. Is the Good Time Hotel going to benefit
from this? No. What's going to happen is they're going to they're going to go out of business because taxes are are going up extremely high for them. and then you're going to have another vacant property sitting in Miami Beach. I think the most reasonable straightforward way
is we roll back the millage rate, okay, at to to at least what this year is. And then we'll have to find a way to make it work. It's it's the most fair way to do that. >> Well, how about we see where we can get
right as we've been proposing. We have cut two and a half million dollars already from 2026 budget and we have exhibit E here. One of the challenges of all of a sudden sitting here today and examining whether we roll back the
millillage is and full disclosure, Mr. CFO, not throwing you guys under the bus, but we've gotten in fights back and forth that we don't have an itemized budget, right? So, aside from our enhancements or the 1% reduction in
efficiencies, we don't have that granularity. I don't know how much the Aaron Seash show costs, right? I can't pull up our budget and say Aaron Sea Show, I don't like it. Let's cut $200,000. I'm using that obviously as an example. I love the Aaron Sea Show and I
don't know what it costs. But that's the problem is we don't have an itemized budget. And we brought this up in the June hearing. But that's one of the constraints here and that's how it gets to a billion dollar budget because we don't know what has been built up over the years and that's not acceptable and
is not going to continue. And there's legislation already coming on the books to produce that. And we've talked about this throughout the summer. But if we would sit here and say, "Well, let's roll back the military." It's not as if we would get a say in where that comes
from. Might come from arts and culture. It might come from infrastructure. It might come from So we don't have that granularity. The only thing that we have kind of in front of us is this exhibit E. We've already cut $2.5 million and we have several more million dollars that
we can consider. But further than that, you know, I I don't see how we get to a bridge of $27 million. Now, we've all sat up here, made our uh points known. I think we start going through line item by line item about what can be removed
from this budget. What is this bloat that we can I say start attacking but continue attacking because we've already began doing so over the past several months. Uh so with that I'd like to turn it over to you to kind of go item by item. Uh sure commissioner if I could
just ask is this item is technically the millillage in its own separate public hearing and I think the discussion we were here was really about the second item on the budget because I think the intention was any adjustments here reduction-wise would be set aside for a budget um stabilization for next year. Uh it may be just procedurally because
this is a budget hearing we have to be very specific in how we do things. um unless if unless the intention doesn't reduce the millillage is the deal with the millillage discuss public hearing and the and the vote on the millillage and then through the budget. >> This is kind of a chicken and the egg, right? We we want to go through >> if you want to have that discussion here
that's fine. >> Yeah. Why why don't we do that before we even entertain that? We have to see what we can cut. >> Okay. I I do believe commissioner I don't have you because there is it is quite a long document but I believe when you and I briefed there were a number of items that you had identified. I think about a dozen or so uh that you felt
that were not as impacting to residents uh that were able to do. So I don't know if you >> it is but to be fair that was just me and all my colleagues should have a say right. So I think we don't spend 10 minutes discussing adnauseum but we sit
here and say okay eliminate one vacant full-time field inspector. Uh it says the um the adjustment will contribute to a more streamlined and effective operation ensuring we continue to meet our objectives effectively and we aim to
maintain service quality while achieving cost savings. >> Yes, sir. There's been a a vacant position in there for quite a while as my understanding and that's why that was profered up by that department. So if the commission wants to uh to do that we can go ahead and uh >> it's been vacant and
>> we can go ahead and accept that. So, okay, I'll vote in favor of removing that. >> Of which >> number one, >> are we gonna be able to see this document? >> The fields inspector for CIP. >> The attachment E is in your budget book,
>> page 149. >> And so, are we going uh as it relates to the impact for this year, I guess we are assuming a year one impact, >> correct? >> Okay. So, is that's a $70,000 efficiency, >> correct? We would denote all of those adjust all those adjustments and keep
track of those and then what we'll do is I guess repeat them at the end and say the you know when we get to the operating budget operating budget is amendment as by and I have a couple other items by the way that the commission I think there was interest from the 17th for me to bring up to add uh but however you'd like to proceed. >> Well, can I okay if we're not rolling
the millage rate back and we have a balanced budget then why are we going through this exercise? Because we can still reduce the mill without rolling back the budget because if we all social services really I mean city clerk's office, city
manager's office >> like the real time Spanish captioning for city commission meetings. I don't know that anyone has ever told me that they've seen Spanish closed captioning on the city. >> They might have told me in Spanish and I couldn't understand. >> Yeah, but that option is still there. If somebody does need the captions in Spanish, then they can have it. And I
know that a lot of our residents who are American citizens don't speak English. >> So there are people that use that. There are consequences to these actions. You can eliminate, for example, some public notices for the Miami Herald, but you do that at the cost of not having any press
or independent objective watchdog in our government. We no longer have um a a Miami Herald reporter because of this. What does that mean? you eliminated, you know, $60,000 and we have no press in Miami Beach. It doesn't make any sense at all.
>> As a proud Cuban American, I can tell you that I do not know of a single person in our Hispanic community that watches our commission meetings in the Spanish closed captioning. And that's $36,000 right there. So, we're spending $36,000 on something that I do not know
of a single resident in our Hispanic community that uses this. Well, let let's go on. >> Commissioner Dominguez, Commissioner Dominguez, >> just real quick, like on number three, the interpreter services for special magistrate, the special magistrate reached out to me and said, "We need this or let's go one by one."
>> $1,000. >> Yeah. Let's go one by one. So, you say, "Okay, item number one. >> I think I have item number." >> Eliminate a vacant position. I I'm a yes to eliminate that. >> Hearing no, no objection. We keep number one reduction. >> Can we just call a roll for each one?
>> Okay, Joe. >> Yeah. Yes. To eliminate. >> Yes. Yes. >> So on item number one, uh all in favor of eliminating item number one, please say I. >> I. >> Anyone opposed? >> Item number one is remove 70.
>> And let's just go down the line. Number two. >> Number two. I just have an idea. Um I'm not a fan of AI, but this seems like it would be a perfect use for AI. Is that not something >> The problem The problem with that is uh that we're speaking in English. that has
to be translated into right now the way it works be a live person >> Friday >> who in other words it's there is no such service right now that we know of that will translate real time because it's real time >> yeah every resident in Miami Beach deserves to have access um to
understanding our meetings and I know that there are many of our residents that do not speak English that watch our meetings I guarantee you that function is being used sometimes and And I don't and I think that the public has the
right to be able to understand an item if it's affecting them and for some reason we might not they might not have access to that. I I disagree in the in the big scheme of things. >> I I do I do know somebody who uses it as well. I'm I'm going to support to keep it. But >> Mr. City clerk want to call the role if
you if you feel that there are people who who use I just think we know that with like Siri does live translation from any language from English to any we have Portuguese uh we have Brazilian residents here who
only speak Portuguese this doesn't address them but Siri does address there's technology that people already have agree let's skip it well no you call the rule So in item number two, all in favor of
eliminating it, please say I. >> I. >> I heard one. Is that correct? So 61. The item is not eliminated. >> The next item is interpreter services specialist hearings item number three. >> Change my vote. Yes. To eliminate.
>> Wait, it is I'm sorry. >> Sorry. So it's 52 on item two. >> To eliminate >> to eliminate. >> Five to eliminate. >> It is not eliminated. >> Is not Wait, is it five in favor? We're going to be voting yes to eliminate. >> Correct. >> Each item a yes vote is to eliminate.
>> Two. Okay. Yeah. Got it. Two five. Sorry. >> Three. $1,000. If he said it's really needed, it's a,000 bucks. >> No. So, mind you, for three, we have enough budget left based on the usage that we could eliminate one. >> We're not eliminating that. >> Okay.
>> Our suggestion to eliminate it because we >> So, you're okay with that? >> You're okay with that? based on the usage today, >> we could eliminate $1,000 from that. >> So that is that is getting eliminated. >> What is >> number three? >> But it's not getting eliminated the service. Based on what you have budgeted
and based on my usage, I can cut $1,000 and still provide the same. >> We're eliminating the $1,000, not the service. >> Okay. >> So item number three, all in favor of removing that item, please say I. >> I. No. >> I'm sorry. No.
It's one to six eliminated. So item three is eliminated. >> Okay. >> And I'm going to keep going. There are 66 items. >> There's 66 items. >> Just uh we're going to do one by one. Do my best to We're here. We're here. >> We have one shot at this. Okay.
>> Just got to finish by 11:59 and 59 seconds. Right. >> We're here. We have one shot at this. as a as a as a if I can make a suggestion. Can we start with the most impact? We don't have to start with line one. Maybe we >> start in order of sorted this way.
>> They're by department. I don't have them by they're not dated by impact. Um keep going. We're making progress quicker. And just to clarify, all these motions, my understanding is per the for the commissioner is these items we set aside for budget stabilization for next year. That is the interest and where we're
going to save that money because you're going to get double money. You're going to get set aside recurring money for 27 and this onetime cash will be set aside for it. So you're getting a double on that. So I just want to make sure that we're clear. Yes. >> Thank you. Uh so advertising for public notices number four
>> based on publications online. We could eliminate that without any >> I all in favor of >> so I >> there are still people that read paper publications. you are ignoring an entire demographic of senior citizens and I think it is wrong.
>> Don't we don't Doesn't the clerk um send notices to the senior centers? >> Yes. >> Okay. So, >> yeah, but what about people don't live in senior centers? What if I'm a 75year-old who gets the Miami Herald who lives in a condominium on the beach? Now, they don't deserve to get public
notice. >> Only 2,000 Herald subscribers. >> $30,000 per year. So that thousands of our revenue got a billion budget get ads. This is wrong. I think we should billion dollars that to to start cutting 1,000
and you're cutting from >> we're going line by line. >> You're cutting from seniors. You're cutting the Hispanic community. I just don't understand what this exercise is. I mean, if we Let's go to the larger items that have impact. >> This was offered. We're going to get
there. But this is this list. I think we have to be realistic. This list is in alphabetical order. And as we go through this alphabetical order, there's going to be high ticket items. If we ever make it to item number eight, we're going to see something that's $400,000, which I
don't support us cutting, but but we're still in item number four. And we've been doing this exercise for a while. So, we will be more efficient with our time. We could spend more time debating what order we go in than actually going through the items. Everybody here would like to cut advertising services uh for
public notices that will affect a senior population uh that gets newspapers. >> Ralph, can you call the vote? >> Is that what we're voting on right now? Because I have a real problem with this. >> Ralph, at the last meeting, you explained to us that the notices that went to the newspaper were often a wrong
and took weeks. I I just want to make sure that what you said, if you can repeat it quickly, uh if that applies to this item. >> Yes. And you say what you >> So, couple of issues. uh it we have if we send it to the Miami Herald or to who
whatever newspaper we have to send these weeks in advance >> so this gives us that leeway number two >> and online is immediate >> it's it's immediate it is constant meaning it's not removed the newspaper once you get it today you throw away your newspaper you're not getting that
notice these are constant we are delivering also to the senior centers the public libraries the senior your housing. So, we deliver these paper copies also uh mind you and we've eliminated any errors because we can fix
them immediately. >> Well, what would the cost be to deliver to every senior citizen over the age of 75? >> That's a policy of this. >> Well, I mean, I think you have to you have to think about that before you eliminate before you just completely
eliminate an entire sector of the population. I don't think we're eliminating a sector of the population. >> I think you are because I think a lot of people don't. I mean, I know my mother, for example, who's 83, she gets the Miami Herald. >> She reads the Miami Herald. Her notices
are in the Miami Herald. So, if so then >> they don't get those notices. And she doesn't live in a senior center. >> Anyone also who wishes to get this via email, we would do that. Via mail, we would do. >> They don't She doesn't email anymore. So
I what my point is is that I think that this $30,000 in public notice for a sector of the population that gets the newspaper is not going to make or break us. But it does send a message that we're agist.
>> Can we skip it? >> Yes. >> Mind you, you've already directed me to do this. >> Yeah. >> This is just the savings from your prior action. >> We're accepting our savings. Yeah, we've already voted on. >> I know, but I'm just recating the fact that I really disagree with this.
>> You've actually already direction. >> So, we've already voted on this. >> I I'm so lost on this at this time. Yes. >> Number six. >> Num number five. >> So, number four was accepted. >> Yes. >> Number five, newspaper subscriptions. >> I >> I think we're hearing a majority. We'll
show it accepted. >> Uh reduction in the operating expenditures for the city manager office. It's a collection of various expenditures uh the city manager was profering up. >> Yeah. I >> I >> Okay. The operating expenditures for the geo bond program management division of the
city manager's office. >> I hearing no objections. >> Seven is accepted. >> Yes. >> Uh code compliance department number eight. >> Uh the reduction in a number of positions specifically related to short-term rental investigation unit.
>> No. >> No. >> No. Well, not accepting that. Uh, next one, co- compliance. The number of positions specifically to do co- compliance in the entertainment district. >> No. >> No. >> Got it. >> Jason, if you could say the numbers because that helps us out. >> And that was number eight. Number nine.
>> I know, but when we do the minutes, it helps. Okay. >> Thank you, R. Uh, number 10. Uh, eliminate one vacant full-time co-compliance officer position. One position. >> Yes. No. >> No. >> No. >> Okay. So, that was >> How long has that position been vacant?
I think it's a rolling kind of consideration that every department from time to time has. >> It's rolling. >> It's rolling. So there's sometimes it'll be full, sometimes it will be eliminated. At the time or as of right now, there is one vacant position currently. >> As many as we can afford. >> Okay. I think hearing the consensus
which I think we're okay with consensus is that we will show that not not added. Number 11, uh reduce funding for small business incubator accelerator program. Number 11. >> No. >> No. >> No. Okay. Thank you. Number 12, uh eliminating the community satisfaction
survey. >> Yes. >> Can we just do it instead of every two years, can we do it every four years and effectuate some changes that way, some savings that way? >> Can I just how we fund it is that that is funded annually but done every two years. It's about $100,000. And to have
budgetary smoothness, we do 50/50. If you wanted to make it every four years, we'd reduce it to $25,000 annual funding. So you could do a partial there which reduced the funding to 25,000 if you wanted to move to an every four year cycle. >> Good having a sort of a >> is that correct? >> An objective temperature.
>> They they use this data. Departments actually use this data when they create their budgets and positions. I'm a no on this. >> So could we amend this the uh half this and move it to every four years? >> Years. >> Let's let's split the baby three years. >> Three,000. Okay. So we will show that as
a uh the reduction of >> 25,000. >> No, that would go to every four years. So be reduction of 13,000. >> Reduction of 13,000 approximately 13,000. >> Uh and we're going to move that to every four uh three years.
Okay, that was number 12. Number 13, finance. These are all citywide grants, so I'll I'll move kind of quickly on these. Uh grant funding for Boys and Girls Club. No. >> No. >> Hearing consensus? No. Grant funding for Douglas Gardens Community Mental Health Center?
>> No. >> No. >> Okay. Grant funding for FIU Jewish Museum. >> No. >> Grant funding for Jewish Community Services of South Florida? >> No. >> No. >> Grant funding for BM Beach Chamber Visitor Center. >> No. >> No.
>> Sorry, I'm haven't been doing the numbers rough. Uh, now we're on 18. Uh, grant funding for Bammy Beach Community Health Center. >> No. Number 19, grand funding for Miami Beach Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce. >> No. >> No. >> Okay. >> Grand funding for Miami Beach Watersports. Number 20.
>> What is this? >> What is that? >> Shane Shane Watersports. >> Oh, no. Shane Robinson. >> We're not cutting that. >> No. Okay. Thank you. Number 21. Granding for Miami Design Preservation League. >> No. >> Okay. Grand Funding for Orange Bowl
Committee. >> No. >> No. What do what do we get for it? >> Yeah, >> the college championship. >> Yeah, it's it's related to our contribution towards uh the >> Oh, but it's but it's not every it's >> Yeah, it's an annual it's an annual contribution to keep the organization
running and then if there's like a big one, we'll come back they'll come back with a different discussion, but this is our small very small annual allocation. >> So, this basically keeps our our um our hat in the ring for consideration to host it. >> Yes. This helps fund our our
contribution. It's like our dues to be considered. >> Very >> I think you get invited to a Christmas party someplace and >> dra that's what we're keeping this for. That's what we're keeping this for. I'm not going to vote for it. >> That's not why we're keeping it. We're
keeping it so that we get cons so that we're consideration for what did you say Jason? The orange bull college football championship game >> for the championship. Eric is so if we eliminated this committee we would not be in consideration to get the orange bowl.
>> So it means that we >> millions of dollars of economic benefit would be down the drain from 17,000 something doesn't add up there. >> I don't know that it would completely eliminate us but it would erode our ability for the orange bowl committee to pursue these events.
>> How often do we get them? >> We have it >> uh we have it this year and then I believe we have it again in three years. We get them every few years. >> Who comprises the Orange Bowl Committee? >> So, it it's a notfor-profit group that um is has been in place for a long time.
They're they're basically they serve as as our sports committee in South Florida. >> Do we need this to have our head in the ring? Your assessment? >> Yes. >> I I am not recommending cutting any of these things. I think they all bring value, but this one in particular, I
think for $17,000, the kind of economic value that we bring to the city when we bring the College Football National Championship game is >> huge. And every other municipality contributes to this. It's, you know, just >> Okay. >> Legacy thing. >> All right. Uh, number 23, grand funding
for the South Florida Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. Number 23. Hearing no. Uh, number 24, grant funding for Unidabad Meals program. >> No. No. >> No. Uh, number 25, Pridelines Youth Safe
Space Program. Number 25. >> No. >> No. >> Okay. Number 26, Pride Lines Miami Beach Project Safe Program. >> Can you talk through the difference between the two? >> Yes. Let me see here. The Pride Lines. Uh, let me see here.
The Pryines's youth is 25,000 provides support for project safe LGBQ A+ youth in crisis providing safe drop-in services and case management that promote stability, independence, access to services. I believe the real difference is the age groups.
>> It's ch age groups. I believe it's children versus young adults. >> Ch the two different group two different groups. one is more focused because of the my public schools I believe removed some of their services and we stepped in there but there was an existing program I think related to to young adults
>> so that's they're getting two different groups there >> so I think that was good uh common threads number 27 >> no common threads is an afterchool program in our recreational department that teaches children how to cook and and and and healthy foods so I would say
no because the impact for the $19,000 is it impacts thousands of kids. >> Yep. >> Okay, we'll show that. Not accepted. Number 28. Uh eliminate a the education manager position, Steam Plus program, and private charter school program. No. >> No.
>> Okay. I have no uh a reduction in >> What's the education manager position? What is What is that position? >> That was a position that was added last year to when we when the commission expanded outside of the realm of of public schools services for uh Steam Plus and all these other programs. We
there was a position added to manage the I forget it's like a dozen or two dozen private charter religious schools that are going to get all of these programs. So there's a chunk of money to run the steam plus program which we took back from the bass as an efficiency and uh and are going to run all the programs
that are outside into the public schools. Basically you just expanded so many of the programs and staffing was needed to run these dozens of programs. >> But so to clarify this is not a position that's being funded at $600,000. >> No it's a pile It's a position plus >> No, I want I want that on the record
because the way it's written here, it it looks like it's you know the the position is being eliminated. The cost savings is $625,000. So it's the position let's let's say $50,000 or 45 whatever >> it would be is this would be a really good example of something that
commissioner uh magazine myself and Tama have had a discussion about program budgeting. This is program budgeting. >> Okay. Yeah. So, this but this is a an example of >> we don't even know because if we're saying do we want to cut $500,000 for this enhanced education initiative? No.
Could would we prefer to be able to disperse those funds throughout the community to the schools who we have voted on to support without having to hire an additional full-time person? I think we would all be in agreement that that would be the preferred way to do it. But we can't make that discussion. We can't make that decision because it's
lumped in as one item. So how can we vote on this if we don't know what you know what the percentage is of the position versus the the dispersement of the funds? >> I think what the reason is it's together is that you need that position to run these programs. So if you're eliminating
the position you must eliminate the programs. That's why it's presented in >> this was this was a significant increase in the workload for that program when we brought in all of the private and charter schools in addition to the public schools. >> Didn't we discuss this at the last
meeting? actually this specific position that parents were reaching out to us concerned that this position was not going to be funded and we made a commitment at this table to fund this position because of the impact it has with the funding.
>> That was the conversation that you and I had on this day at the last meeting. Yes. >> All right. So, let's keep it. >> Okay. So, we'll show that. Uh number 29 was a reduction on elimination reduction in the prek scholarship program to the 2024 level. >> No. >> No. >> No. Okay.
>> For the benefit of the public, so far we've found $141,500 of efficiencies. >> Number 30, uh, eliminate ocean rescue boat coverage. Number 30, fire department. >> What? Hang on a sec.
>> No. >> No. That's a public safety issue. No. >> Number 31 is also the next two are fire department. Number 31, eliminate one vacant full-time uh training officer. Firefighter one position. number 31. >> So, I I'm going to step in here, right?
We haven't cut anything. We've cut from a variety of of different departments and with 100% respect, chief, uh we haven't done anything throughout the budget process for fire
and we we we need to because police and fire are part 62% of our overall budget. We've reigned in I think a few hundred,000 of police. Is that correct? Uh throughout this process, >> we cut um >> 600 >> $600,000
>> $600,000 over time. And if I may, at the very I think the very very last item, which is under resour tax because they're joined, there is a fire item. Really, it's overtime there. >> You know, I I'll leave it to the chief. If this is the one that fire can offer up, that's the one fire can offer up, right? I I don't know the title. I don't
know whatever, but I'm hardressed to think that we can't find I'm I'm actually giving the confidence that I know we can continue to operate this fine department with men and women to put their lives on the line with a simple $200,000 cost savings, which
turns into $331,000. Now, if it's this position or any other that the chief, you know, deems is the best to offer up, that's essentially what I'm voting for. I'll put my confidence in her saying whatever the position is to achieve this cost
savings. I trust her judgment. So, I'll vote yes for this. It's not really because of the specific position. It's okay. We're we're going to all share in some of this reduction and I'll leave it to the chief's best judgment that that's
what fire is able to kind of pro offer. >> Mr. Chair, I see we have two positions in the fire department. One is fire training program and the other one is in the fire prevention program. I know that our administration is not recommending touching either of these programs. But
from your perspective uh chief, if if we had to cut in one of these two, which one would you believe is to me I wouldn't want to touch anything that's prevention. Uh but you know can can you
deal without this position? I need feedback guidance from you. >> So um good afternoon chief of fire chief night. >> So in the in the in the one position that you are recommending that is a position that I was awarded last year
when I came before you to you know see all the amount of training that we've assumed in the last several years. FEMA government has been imposing a lot of training for the hazardous aspect of it. Um, and as far as the planning uh
position, that was a position that we will be resuming um with the savings and revenue that we'll be collecting from our pre-fire planning inspections. So to that point, we have
generated uh $5.1 million in the last year above of what we were generating last year with these extra positions. This position was because the state statute reduced our turnaround for permits from 30 to 15
days and the gentleman had just uh vacated the position uh approximately 60 days when you came and asked me. And then yesterday, we also saved $8,000 cuz you had said anything is enough. $8,000
in a ConX trailer that we were using to store extra equipment. So yesterday they picked it up. So that was an extra savings as well. So, if I had to pick one, I would say that we either um reduce the pre-fire planning one because
I know that I'll be able to generate the revenue or um the reduction of the high impact funding from the resort tax, we'll be able to save another $75,000. >> So, if I can't help to facilitate if there's an interest in having a reduction of the fire department, I've
had a discussion with the chief, the one that if if we were asked to to have something in there, it's actually item 66. um which um we're at we would be okay with a $75,000 reduction not touching uh funding for spring break services at this time but Memorial Day.
So just like we did with the police at reciprocity between the two public safety department main public safety departments uh we could do we could do that. So that would be a preference if we were required to make a cut. >> I appreciate you offering being frank about that. It's it's a shared sacrifice. It's not something we want to
do across the board but that's how we get to a billion dollar budget. There's we could say positive things about each of these. You know, everything at one point had merit. It's just you you've heard loud and clear where the conversation goes. So, I appreciate you giving your input. Um and I'll follow the lead on that of uh we're going to
choose one using 66. >> Okay. So, if I if I can >> So, so which line item are we? >> So, 30 31 32 I'll propose to keep and then with the chief's direction 66 eliminate. But in just to clarify in in
the packet 66 says $150,000. That's not all coming from fire. >> No, the the the hund the number 66 is is fire, but what it is it's it's across multiple programs as you see listed out. Halloween, New Year's, Memorial Day, and spring break. I think we would be okay being uh reciprocal with the police
department where we made some reductions in overtime. So we I think we are we'll be okay with a $75,000 reduction on item 66 which would reduce the some of the overtime specific for Memorial Day only. >> Okay, perfect. >> Yeah. So see >> 75K from from 66,
>> right? So 66 will be 75,000. Okay, thank you. Check mark. >> Let me go back. Uh housing community services item 33 mobile food pantry program number 33. >> No. >> No. Uh, number 34, reclassify existing CDBG
program projects coordinator to a ministry of services manager position and reallocating a ministry of services manager position. Number 34. Yes. >> Yeah. How long has this position been vacant for? >> I would ask Alba's going to come up and answer that one.
>> And really, we're just kind of reclassifying to a low lower salary level. Correct. >> I think it's moving it to a grant funded position. >> Yes. Good evening. Alpadare Office of Housing and Community Services. It is currently not vacant, but the um person who is holding the position now has
resigned and so we will be reclassifying. >> Okay. So, if we if we've removed this here, what happens? >> We would um reclassify it to a supports manager and we would fund it through um federal and state dollars.
>> Okay. So, we still achieve the outcome of the position. There's no impact on the services being provided to the public. >> No. Can I then I'm fine with it. >> But by reclassifying with federal dollars, it's not going to affect any of our rental assistance programs or any of our other programs.
>> Not at all. >> Okay. >> Okay. So, that's another 62. >> So, we'll show that one accepted. Number 34. >> Just addicting, huh, Commissioner? >> That's great. >> Okay. Number >> 278500. Uh, number 35, marketing communications.
I I think this one was discussed last time. Um, the the daily media clips. I think there was interest in keeping that. Um, so I'll go with the Yes. But could put me on an island. And I know I'm throwing Liss under the bus after she helped me. Yeah. Get something. >> I read those every day.
>> I do read them, but I that's internal to us. Correct. I I would support I would support cutting it. It doesn't benefit the residents at all, >> but it it it's useful because we then can use that information to generate benefits for the city and therefore the residents. Like you can use, hey, you
know, for instance, I'm I'm working to find sponsors for the blue zones. And so when I find something in those clips, I send by the way, we just got mentioned about this thing. And then they're like, oh, we're super interested. Let's talk about it. It's a small dollar amount. It is valuable. I would suggest we do not
cut it. >> Okay. I don't have consensus here. So maybe just remarket. >> Um I don't know. I I do read them and sometimes they are valuable, but I also do I just do searches on things that I'm interested and I find the same articles. >> Don't you want to see what the trends are for each and I do my searches,
>> Mr. City Clerk? Maybe. >> This is on number 35. The question is going to be to keep to keep >> it. Yes, we're keeping. >> No, let's be consistent where any yes vote is to eliminate. Right. That's what we've been doing. >> To eliminate Commissioner Bot.
>> No. to eliminate Commissioner Dominguez. >> No. >> Commissioner Fernandez. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez. >> Yeah. >> To uh >> Daily Media Clips >> to limit the med the Daily Media Clips
subscription. A vote of yes is to remove it. To a vote of no is to keep it. So we're now in Commissioner Magazine. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Suarez. >> A vote of no is to keep it. >> A vote of no is to keep it. >> Yes. Mayor Miner.
>> Yes. >> So I have four to eliminate. >> Okay. >> It is eliminated. This is number 35. >> We'll show 35 eliminated. Uh number 36 reduce the My Beach magazine printing and mailing for uh this would reduce it from four to
two times a year. The magazine >> believe that is our number one. It's rated as our number one guide that our residents use. >> That is my understanding that that uh the community satisfaction survey I think may bring that data. But if we didn't have one of those, >> we'll know less often. Well, we can't validate that.
>> We wouldn't know that this is >> um so >> I'm going to support keeping it. I I think our our residents, our senior residents, people do read it. >> Okay. I think we're okay. Seeing consensus there. We'll move on. Uh number 37, eliminate printing of the annual proposed and adopted budget
books. >> Number 37. >> You mean this book, >> correct? So we reduce that means we would no longer print the hard copies. >> That's the two capital. It It's accessible. We can all pull it up. >> It is digital. >> You can email. >> Yeah. >> Yes, it's digital. >> If I want it printed, you guys can print
it. I can make a request. >> No, >> he's not joking. >> Wait, so is it the three books in color >> or is it the the one book? >> It's all three. >> It's all three twice a year. The proposed one you get at the end of August, early September, and then the
primary one you'll get in Novemberish. >> How about the f Can we just get rid of the proposed? because the proposal is a very temporary document yet we get the full Bible and let's just do the final adopted budget because that is our contract with the public of how we're going to use
their dollars. So, let's print a copy of the final adopted budget because once we approve the budget, the proposed one, this is wasted paper. >> So, let's not print the proposed one anymore. So, that's a that would slash it in half. >> Yes. So if that if that's okay, if
there's a consensus, we could remove the funding for the proposed budget book, but we would still would print the adopted budget book that was $6,000. >> Yeah, exactly. >> But that 6,000 would be in the 27 >> just to tell the timing of the funding and everything. But if we're okay with that, I think that's fine. We'll remove
the funding for the proposed and we will continue to print the adopted. So that we'll call that like a partial acceptance. Uh we have a number of parks and recck programs number 38. Uh senior programming number 38. We discussed this a bit last time. Uh reducing down the
number one >> hearing. No cons. No. Uh interested in eliminating. We'll show it kept. >> This is at the four per year or three per year. >> 87 I think is for all of them, but there was discussion about a $18,000 one time. Would you I think all had that discussion at the last meeting and
decided to not do that and kept all of the the senior programs. >> Oh, so we it wasn't to go down to three, it was to go to >> correct. There was a lot of discussion on this one and I think you landed at not moving the removing any funding at all and keeping the existing program. >> Okay.
>> Uh number 39, senior enhanced transportation services. >> Keep >> we're good on keeping it. Okay. Uh for senior scenes program number 40. >> Nothing. No. >> Yeah. Keep it.
>> Keeping it. Okay. Not accepting that reduction. Uh 41 sca small scale events number 41. >> No eliminating that. >> We're good with that. Not hearing any conflict. We will >> You hate the Easter Bunny. That's
>> I have photos with Santa. This is terrible. >> Who Who would say that? Oh my god. Thank you. Number 42, summer camp field trips transportation. Number 42. >> No. >> No. >> Number 43, playground review. Number 43.
>> What's that? >> It's the camp. It's the end of the year. Uh, listen. I'm biased cuz I attended it. My daughter participates. >> That's the Filmore, right? >> Yeah. At the Fillmore. It's incredible. >> All right. We're going to show keep not accepting the not there's no
recommendation. Sorry, not accepting the reduction. Uh, number 44, Veterans Day parade and event. >> Okay. Uh, 45, the employee Halloween event. >> No. >> No. >> Yes. >> I think there's >> that's for the morale of our employees
who dedicate a lot. >> We went through them. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Uh, number 46, playtime program. >> No. What is it? >> What is it? >> Preschool. Preschool program >> and camp for tots. No.
>> Camp for number 47. Camp for tots. >> No. >> Okay. Number 48, the Soul Vegan Festival. >> Number 48. >> So, can we John, can I ask you? I don't I mean, >> no. >> Can we just um because I know it's it's
been really popular and getting better every year and it's a thing, but 50 grand I mean there there aren't that many organizations that we give that much money to sponsor. So, can we reduce the funding and have them figure out how to come back to us?
>> Abs. Absolutely. If that's what we end up with, I'll I'll go to um the the promoter and I'll work with him and his group on what can we do for whatever you budget. >> Yeah, let's do that because it, you know, I know that it is um >> it's broadened its appeal and it's it's
gaining traction. So, let's let's how about for this year try 15 and then see what happens as as it grows. Like the goal >> I'm not going to support this because this is part of our programming that we do um as part of Black History Month and
this is part of our diversity in as as a city and but I do not support lowering the funding of this of this event >> and and they can't do the event with $15,000. >> Okay. So, let's do it to 30,000. Can they do Can you do the event? I I don't
support I don't want to lose this event. I'm trying to figure out how how we get to four. Well, we just >> we don't have a lot of events that highlight >> I agree. >> African-American culture, Caribbean culture, and this is what this event highlights. >> I understand. >> And I am not going to support touching any funding, removing any.
>> So, how do we get to four? >> What do you mean four? >> Four votes to keep it. >> Keep it. >> Well, the four of us >> Okay, great. >> Okay. So, we are keeping We're We're not You're not We're keeping that. >> Not okay. We're keeping. >> Got it. Number 49.
>> No funding, right? >> Yeah. Uh uh 49, holiday lights at Scott Rackal. >> We're not eliminating >> eliminate that. >> No, >> not except not doing that one. Okay. Number 50, citywide health and wellness initiatives. This is resident programs.
>> Oh, keep >> Okay. Keeping >> what? Okay. But what this is too because we have we have we have uh health and wellness recreational programs at the parks. I need to know because I think we have different categories and different lines of health and wellness events with
the parks. So I want to understand what's the difference between them. >> These are the events that we hold through the parks and recreation department like the Chris the pull-up jam that's coming up in October with Chris Herrera that a lot of you have attended. We did a an offshoot community based when poo was happening. We've
worked with them to do something um for the for the public. It's things like >> Where's the money spent, John? Because those things seem pretty just organic to me. Yeah, I I've been at them. They're fun, but where does that 50 grand go? >> Oh, I read the breakdown, but you know, staffing >> like a dollar for every pull-up. Girls
volleyball, teen basketball. I don't want to. >> Either do I, but like any of the where it's spent because they all just seem organic, right? It's >> right. There's quite a few in this list. It's not just one event. So if you divide 50 by seven, it's it's that a whole lot of money. Cindy, do you have
line items? >> Yeah, of course I want to keep these things. I'm not going to vote to eliminate them. I I'm just curious on >> the These are easy pop quizzes. They go toward operating expenses like awards, trophies, supplies, um water, um snacks,
fruits that we give out, things of that nature. >> Can we find sponsorship for that? like Pepsi, like we have a contract with PepsiCo. Can't PepsiCo provide the water for that? Can we find a sponsor to do the award? You know,
>> the Equinox pull-up jam. >> Yeah, the Equinox pull-up jam award. You know, >> absolutely. >> If I may, what maybe could happen direction-wise is I think the budget would have to remain, but the parks department could be directed to explore sponsorship opportunities. >> I like the word explore because if they
don't come, >> right? So, so there may be some savings in the next year's budget where they come back and say, "Hey, by the way, this was um we do program budgeting." Uh they have this 1150,000. Maybe next year it says $42,000 and go, "Oh, reduced by 8,000." They found sponsors for $8,000
worth of program. >> John, are these events well attended? >> Yes. Because our community base, we're not looking for 10,000. >> Volleyball tournament, team basketball tournament. Come on. Those are fun. Those are >> Yeah. We do a program proposal and close out. We don't continue failing programs. So anything we continue to do did well
the year before. >> You guys are incredible. >> So if you're okay with that, we could we can keep we could keep this item in but direction be the parts that sponsorship. >> Any opportunities for sponsorships that the commission's >> I mean Pepsi should be Pepsi is part of Pepsi Freed. They should be able to provide all the food and drink that we
are offering. They've got enough in their portfolio. So and we have a very lucrative they have a very lucrative contract with us. So that should eliminate a few grand right off the top and then you know let's just keep working on it together. >> Okay. So we'll show just um to help
Ralph out. Uh number 50 will be staying but uh the the administration will explore sponsorship opportunities on item 50. Okay, John, for 51, have we ever explored with like our uh beach vendors if you know they'd be able to use some of their man and woman power to
help out with uh the beachfront restrooms >> with the rest quarters? No, we've always taken care of that with our janitorial contract. >> We need to have those high span clean. >> No, I agree with that. I'm just saying can the private sector do it better for
less? >> The private sector is is doing it. They're not That's right. It's our janitorial contract, not city staff that does this. >> Okay. Yeah. So, it's private sector. It's already outsourced. >> But, but this is um enhanced for high impact weekends, right? This is not every day. >> Every day. >> I mean, I'm looking at it enhanced
services during high impact periods. >> We have we have porters in two different occasions. High impact, which a lot of times we get some money through resort tax to pay for that. But then imagine everything that happens that that's not resort tax qualifying. We will pay out of our operating budget to go have a porter. maybe the restrooms at Unidaf,
for example, who need some you need a special porter there on site and we we don't we we're very cautious with with that service and it's usually because of of safety or there's something go going on at that moment. We're doing a special event at Altoar. We're want we're going
to want a porter there during that event. That would be that would probably a general fund example, not a resort tax example. >> Okay. >> All right. So, we're keeping the porter. 51 will show keeping uh keeping with the parks theme. We're almost done with you, John.
>> Uh 52, uh dog waste, bags, and stations. Number 52. >> No, >> Sammy says no. >> Okay, >> we'll be keeping that. Um number 53 is uh got two pieces to it. Uh eliminating 15 parks part- timerrs. There's 13
vacant seasonal inclusionary aids and also two vacant recreational leader ones. John, could you Oh, sorry, Commissioner, but it from what I got from you, this wouldn't cause any disruption. These are kind of like floating positions. We're not eliminating any current staff or
things like that. >> We have the need for a great number of inclusionary aids, but the truth is we're we're very rarely able to fill them. So, they've been historically vacant, so we wouldn't see a reduction in in what we're offering right now. So
we designed this program for children with special needs and they need a inclusionary aids. >> So and nobody else does this. This is a very very special program with for children with um autism disabilities. >> What have we been able to fill these positions? >> That's the problem. >> How long have we have it funded for?
>> Oh my gosh. >> I will tell you that since I've been here, this is my third budget. I think that we funded in the past too a couple of inclusion areas and we had a lot of discussions with park staff being very passionate about that particular element of our community the special needs children and the spe the needs there for those programs. So I think the
commission has actually added enhancements the past year two couple years to add funding towards >> we have 15 and so are we budgeting for too many? Maybe we need to budget for less. Well, I think that's what to speak with John. >> We we have a full inclusionary recreation program, meaning that you're,
you know, that they're they're mainstreamed into the program and some some of these children either need a one-on-one shadow or maybe two or three onone shadow as part of the inclusionary. So, our goal is we could we could use these these folks based on the number of special needs participants
we have, but we put them on the list because we've just been unable to fill them. We prefer not to have it on the list, but we would be dishonest in saying that we fill them this year. >> So, Jean, if I could help, is if you if you kept the maybe not the part two the the two Reagan WCK leaders, but the 13
inclusionary aids, if you actually fill those positions, you'll be able to bring more people in. There's people waiting as soon as you hire people >> or they're in without >> enough. But what this doesn't address is the fact that we can't fill the like obviously if if we had these spots and
they were filled and we were using them that would be amazing because that's the goal. But if we're holding money in the budget for spots that we historically have not been able to fill and and I would suggest that if you find somebody you like, you know, finally you find somebody to fill one of these spots,
bring it to us as a budget enhancement, I think you'd have unanimous support to to add it as a budget enhancement. But if we're holding $200,000 that is never being used, >> maybe I was going to say maybe you could split it and do uh six cut six of the uh
inclusionary aids and one of the leaders. >> If the dynamics changed and all of a sudden there's a flood on the marketplace of of people who want these jobs and let's have this conversation again. >> We put them all on >> six and one. Cut it in half. >> We put them all on the table, but I I prefer six and one. And then if we don't
fill these six by next year, I'll be standing here telling you another you went by and we we didn't. >> So this would reduce the budget of it from 200,000 to 100. >> Well, six. Yeah, approximately. >> It's not that they that they're not able to be filled. It's that there isn't a disabled child that needs the shadow,
but should that disabled child arrive at the program, you have to have the position open. >> I think he has six. So if he fills these six, it needs more. The next budget cycle isn't that far away, believe it or not. It happens very quickly. So, uh, the parks department would just add a an
enhancement and say we filled those six and actually we think we can go more. Um, so if if it's okay, I think this seems to be a consensus to cut six inclusionary part- timerrs and one of the two wck leader ones. Is that correct? >> Yes, >> we're good. We're good with that. >> Yeah.
>> Okay. So, we will show uh six number 53. Six of the inclusionary aids and one of the wreck leader ones. That's number 53. Number 54 inter mural baseball program. 54. >> No. >> Yeah. >> Well, but this won't affect the
operation. If we take a this if we do this reduction, it's not going to affect the program. Is that right? >> Right. If if I may commissioner. So, we we budget as if the program was full. Every camp, every clinic, every season. And historically,
it's not full to this extent. So, by examining the numbers, we feel as though if we cut 50, it wouldn't affect the program. This may be another case that if the program grows, I can come back to you at a finance meeting mid year. >> So we can continue providing the program
without affecting the program at all. >> So and also I'd like to volunteer the mayor who is a huge baseball fan and was a player and if you need >> is still a player >> throw out the first pitch the Marlins game on a regular basis. So you got your guy right here. >> All right. Perfect. All right. So we can
eliminate this. >> I'll take that volunteer. >> Okay. So we'll show number 54 accepted. All right. Thank you, John. Uh, moving on to planning. Uh, number 55, uh, elimination of the historic preservation board and associated positions. I'm summarizing it.
>> How is this going to affect applications going before the Historic Preservation Board? We know that people complain a lot of times about the time, about the process, and delays in getting their applications heard. Will this delay
applications before the board? Mr. Planning Director? >> Yeah. Okay. the next couple of month ones I think all blend together. >> Uh yeah, because of the elimination of staff, >> I will not support anything that will delay businesses in our city getting their approvals. And both positions, the
principal planner and >> these are filled positions. Corct and so the recommendations we have previously received didn't we receive recommendations and requests for more positions in these departments in order to handle the processing of these
applications quicker. >> So just to be clear I think that this item is talking about elimination of the boards themselves. >> Oh no we cannot touch this no. >> All right we'll show we want you to stay
here but I have a feeling questions on the next ones. Number 55. Eric, you turn that around. Eric, >> 55 discussion. >> 57 or 58. No. >> Okay. Speeding along here. 57. 58. Thank you so much. >> No.
>> Uh, police department. Uh, number 59. Uh, overtime reduction of various existing overtime details. Number 59. And if just to for your edification, there are nine individual sub elements to this. Uh, one through nine. You'll see in the description. uh ranging at
different dollar values. >> And I'll just speak here. You know, it was a moment for all of us to be very proud um in the past few weeks that for the first time in some time, our police department is fully staffed. Yes. So, we are priding ourselves on public safety.
And you see the enhancements, the increases that did happen to our budget. We're almost entirely exclusively driven by police and public safety. Now that we are at full capacity, one of the benefits and things that we should look to do is actually pulling back on some
of the overtime costs, right? That's not unique for police. Same thing for fire. When you get to a full staffing level, by definition, you should be able to uh save on some of the uh overtime costs. And I commend the chief and his staff for putting forward some of these um
sensible solutions. And we would never be discussing this if we weren't one a safer city than we were. >> That's right. >> Okay. >> And two, we're fully staffed. So, we don't need that added capacity uh that we would have needed in years past. So, I'm going to be yes on this.
>> Just again to clarify, there are nine specific overtime details. So, if this was removed, the whole thing or any individual, that specific overtime detail would end. >> I would like to call our chief to see if there's anything here that's specifically important. You say we have the neighborhood resource officer for
homeless enforcement activities. I am not going to support touching that. >> Yeah, we could take these uh peacemail. >> But rolling loud, it doesn't even exist anymore. >> Hey, that is the the guy from office space that's down in the garage that we
Milton that we don't know about. >> Good evening, Mayor. Commissioner Wayne Jones, police chief. Um, coincidentally, um, uh, Commissioner Magazine, Rolling Loud is the one thing we we certain we can live without. It doesn't exist, um, in the traditional sense. It existed in
a number of years ago when it did bring a lot of issues to the city. We had to staff up significantly to address those issues. Uh, those issues don't exist anymore. So, we can live without that. >> The ODA TOPS program. >> Mhm. this. So if we So
we have $30,000 for the TOPS program. >> Yes. >> Okay. We shouldn't be touching that. >> I'd rather not. >> Okay. So we're not touching that. >> What? I'm sorry. What are we not touching? >> Number one. >> Number one. >> Yeah. Agreed. >> Number two is the traffic traffic congestion mitigation.
>> We cannot touch that. >> Okay. Rolling loud. I think clearly you can that no longer exists. So we can >> That's That's 100,000. >> That's 100,000 right there. What is for >> Cooper testing? What's that? >> Um that's a test administered to our
police officers on an annual basis. We check we test their physical agility. Uh make sure they can um do the physical. What's that? >> Run a mile under 10 minutes. >> Do you have this on video? >> That was that fast. What's that, sir? >> Do you have this on video? >> Um no.
>> We can make money selling the >> charge admission. >> Yeah. >> All right. So we need this. We can't touch that in essence. >> Well, no, cuz it it seems like you'd still be doing it, but just with fewer proctors, if I'm reading this correctly, >> uh, we could find some smart ways to
possibly do it all with on duty staffing. Um, as it stands right now, we have to run through the entire organization in a limited period of time. Um, each time we're pulling people of the regular duties, particularly like
in patrol, per se. Um, ideally we'd want to backfill those positions for the time it takes them to go through the testing process, but we can find some smart ways to do um more efficient job. >> Yeah, I appreciate that. I I think that would be good. >> Yeah. >> All right. So, we can That's 10,000 right there.
>> Keep track. >> We're getting rid of the Cooper testing. >> Yeah. Um, no, it we're just uh reallocating >> the resources. >> They're still doing the testing. >> They're just being more they're going to be more efficient in how they do it. >> And for five, Mr. I believe this was your initiative, correct? Mr. Mayor,
which is incredible. And we're still keeping this. We're just essentially changing the cycling. >> And I So the the program that I had brought was the civilian volunteer patrol, which is sort of the extra. This is the citizens policing academy, >> right? >> It's a citizen policing academy,
something we've done for decades, quite frankly, have hundreds and hundreds of alumni that went through the the program. It's a six week uh program that rotates um every six weeks. um would rather keep that program. It really helps us connect with our community in
ways that um we wouldn't be able to do so without >> we're going to take your guidance. >> All right. So, we're going to keep that. >> So, we know the NRO for homelessness. We got to keep >> keep number six. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Number seven, the report processing unit records.
>> Delays of how long? like are we talking a day or two or two months >> for >> the um report processing unit records? >> It it varies. I I can tell you we're in a process right now of uh going through um an update upgrade in our records
management system. Once that's done, this would be eliminated totally. >> How long is it going to take for you to transition over? Because I know that's a bear. >> Yeah, that that's a tech uh issue we're going through. I can't give you that is beyond my expertise. So this will be eliminated once that transition is made.
>> Two years >> estimated. >> So do we need to keep this for now? >> For now. Yes. But that that's going to be phased out at some point in their future. >> Okay. >> Unit support task technical services $25,000. >> Is there a way to reallocate existing
resources to do this work? I mean, as we're as we're going through and prioritizing the use of drones and LPRs and cameras to then say, "Oh, we got them, but they're broken, so we can't use them." Seems really one step forward, two steps back.
>> Yeah. So, u, as you know, we've been talking a lot about being more efficient across the board, using technology, leveraging it to work smarter, um, not harder. Um, these, again, this is one of those things I think over time will just, um, phase itself out of the
process. We'll keep it for now. >> What's this 25,000? So, what does this 20? Is this an enhancement or what is this 25,000 here? >> No, it's B b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b basically support the unit um officers that work in the unit to do the maintenance in some cases to the the tech that we have.
>> But this funds a position. I mean, what does the 25,000 do? >> It spends overtime. >> Oh, it's overtime. Yeah. >> Yeah. Not a position. >> Got it. So like when we need to deploy an LPR uh during I don't know some special event this this is probably what
we use. >> It depends. It may be including simple uh things as um bringing a product in um dealing with it maintaining it. >> Okay. >> So it varies. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Look, it's a small cost. I
remember going to the the art center and hearing about how the people who started this were literally climbing the polls and jerry things themselves. So I think we're a far cry happily a far cry from that. >> So Chief, I'll ask you on number nine. >> It's a big number, right? Obviously this
is something very important, specific uh investigative and I was probably a beneficiary personally at a personal level. I I can't commend the men and women of your department enough. They they truly put their lives on the line for me and I'm sure you can say that to dozens or hundreds of other people each
year in our city. I'm going to turn it over to you. Uh we are fully staffed now. Now that we're fully staffed, does it still require overtime? If you say it does, I'm going to take your word on it. But you also see where all this is going
and you know would love your help and leadership if you're able to say we're fully staffed. We don't need this overtime business. >> We're not as much of this. I mean, can we split split the difference? And >> so, um, we are fully staffed. Something I'm really really proud of. Um, on
paper, all of our positions are fil butt coming. Not a good poker. >> There is a butt. Um, on paper, all positions are filled. Uh, but some of the young police officers who hired uh just last Monday, those folks have to go through a training process. Um, best case scenario, it takes them about a
year or so before they're on the road doing police work by themselves. what which point a lot of this overtime staffing overtime will be reduced. The overtime you're referring to though this is reactionary overtime. For example, if you have a rash of burglaries in a given
area of the city uh during the overnight shift um you may have to staff up on a moment's notice to sort of address those issues. So this is sort of reactionary overtime that we can't really predict. >> I'll take your lead on that. Thank you. >> So we eliminated $110,000 from 59. Is
that correct? So yes, 59 will show sub 59-3 and 59-4 special events rolling loud and the Cooper testing to be eliminated from 59. >> So that brings us to $559,500 that we've found sufficient >> coupled with uh last meeting that's $3
million. >> There you go. >> Uh number 60 county crime lab staffing number 60. >> So I would ask this was originally funded at 200,000 that our commission I brought this forward. Um, I've I've reduced it to down to this 50,000. So,
what it is is the uh I've had conversations with our sheriff uh and the state attorney's office. They the county has done a better job of staffing the crime lab, but it's still imperfect. And essentially, this position would allow the city of Miami Beach to hire
and embed someone who would test Miami Beach drug arrest cuz some of the cases were being dismissed because the drugs weren't being tested. So what what I'm saying though, this was originally 200,000. We've already now cut it down to 50. >> So this is not to cut the program. This
is because the contract hasn't been signed and so when it does get signed, there's going to be a delay in when the funds get spent. So it's still so you could eliminate the entire 200,000 theoretically if you just were did not want to move forward with the program. What this would just do is it just delays the funding because if it was
200, this just gives a quarter worth because it's going to take a lot of roll in. This would be one time, not recurring. >> Right. But what I'm what I what I'm mentioning is that when this was initially approved by our commission, it was for two positions. >> Based on my conversations with the sheriff's office and the state
attorney's office, we can we can fulfill what we're trying to do with one position. >> So, is a contract negotiated for two people right now or for one person? >> Well, the contract hasn't been signed yet. >> Well, no, no, but but you know, is it presumed to cover one or two? >> Good evening, Wayne Jones again. Um
originally a contract was negotiated uh still being negotiated for for two people. Uh the idea was for those analysts to prioritize our drug cases from money B so we can get greater conviction. Um but I understand that there's still some issues in legal in
terms of the language um what we want in terms of what the um the lab is asking for. >> But it's not so I'm not I'm not worried about when the contract gets sound. I'm confident it will. But I think what what the question is is if it was originally predicated on the need to have two
people to accomplish it, but now what we're hearing from the mayor's conversations with the the the sheriff is that they're doing a better job on their end. So we now only need to supplement with one person. Therefore, the contract doesn't need to be for two people. It needs to be for one person, >> right?
>> So we would need to recalibrate the contract >> to come down to that level of one person. >> Well, the contract hasn't been signed. >> No, I understand. I understand that. Well, we just have to adjust the funding downward obviously, but the contract hasn't been signed yet. The language can be updated. Yeah. >> So, the contract is currently going to
be when it gets signed currently going to be for how many dollars? >> We can adjust it down with for one. >> That's what I'm saying. Is that reflected in here someplace? >> No, it is not. But if that's the the will, I guess we'd be moving it. That would give you we do a $100,000 recurring reduction. So, you'd have
$100,000 and that's enough to fund the one position. Correct. >> Yes. So, let's do that. So that would be a modification of that. >> So >> well the question is because we've been modifying right now it's the 200,000 in fiscal year 2027. So that this modification won't even impact
>> No, that would be 27. So in the 26 budget >> in the 26 budget we have $200,000 for this. This eliminate this elimination would reduce it one time to 150. Then 27 would drop back to 200. But if what I'm hearing is that there is on a recurring
basis only a need for uh $100,000 per year, we could rem reduce the recurring amount from 200 to 100. So number 60 would reflect a $100,000 recurring reduction if that's what I'm hearing. I think that's what I'm hearing. >> Yeah. Because that gets you what needs
you s. >> Yeah. Um number 60. >> So if we can we'll show number 60. I think there's consensus there to reduce uh to to accept it, but to modify it to $100,000 per year recurring, which would still
>> 27. Effective 2027 effective 26. >> 26. Okay. >> It would be effective immediately. Um so they'd have the $100,000 to sign that contract tomorrow. Yeah, it could be tomorrow. Uh October 1st and that would allow them to fill that position immediately. Okay. So, we will show
number 60 uh being a $100,000 recurring, which would still leave $100,000 recurring in the budget for one full-time position for this program. >> Okay. >> Uh number 61, Miami Beach Community CAT program operating expenditures. Number
61. >> The police department before I mess with the cat less. Keep it. >> Okay, we we'll show we'll show that being kept. Number 62, elimination of decorative street light maintenance. >> No, >> no, no, no, no, no. >> Okay. Uh, number 63, uh, eliminate the
film incentive program and the position that goes along with that. >> Number 63, it >> can anybody address how much revenue that brings into the city? >> Yeah, I think I think >> I mean, I think we fought a long time to get that back on its feet because >> I think there's some issues with that
program. I think and so that's what I want to know because I thought that we had lost a lot of television and programming um television film production in the city of Miami Beach for a number of years and it hurt our small businesses who do the craft catering and you know props and makeup
and all that kind of stuff. So can you illuminate what what this all is? >> Sure. Thank you commissioner. So, we work as a trifecta with Miami Date County, uh, City of Miami, and the GMCBB to help promote film. Since, um, the state cut that funding many years ago,
uh, it's been challenging, uh, to say the least with the performance of this fund. We've had it since 2018, uh, we had to diversify it in order to get, um, some more use out of it. We have yet to have any major film production apply for
it. So, the way that it works is if you have um a $25,000 spend in the city of Miami Beach uh for three days and you shoot here, you get a $10,000 cash rebate. So, Netflix, you know, those big productions, it's not worth it for them. So, we've been doing more programs like,
you know, um different films. >> If I could catch you up, I I'd rather save our dry powder if it's truly needed as opposed to just putting out a few bucks here and there. If something truly substantial, you have our I don't want to say commitment, but you have our
faith. If something big comes along, bring it to us. Don't just shut it off. But giving out $10,000 for every Tom, Dick, and Harry might not be our best use of the money. >> Got this. >> If I think I'm hearing consensus that we the we'll accept and eliminate item 63.
>> Is this a filled position? >> I believe so. >> Yes. It would diminish uh some of the duties of that have to do with the film incentive and the rest would be then absorbed by the rest of the team. >> Yeah. Okay. So, I think we'll show
consensus on 63 being uh being eliminated. And rounding on to the last page, uh this is resort tax, but we we shift everything back to general fund. Uh back to co- compliance uh code number 64 the short-term rental investigation unit of
co- compliance. >> No. >> Okay. >> No. >> We need more of these >> hearing a no. Uh number 65 uh entertainment district staff for co- compliance. >> No. >> Keep the >> keeping that. >> We we need that.
>> Okay. And we already did 66. We are at the end of attachment E. >> So the grand total of subsection. >> So, what's the grand total between the 2 million last time and today? >> Uh, it was about two and a half million between resort tax and uh um and general
fund and I think >> we're at 793,500 cut. >> Is that all right? >> I'm sorry, what >> the Well, what we just cut right now was 793500 >> and that's from the overall budget cuz like things like the CIP aren't technically general fund. Um, so but
still that's almost $800,000 $3.5 million that we saved over the past two weeks >> and and and headcounts. >> Yeah. >> And and I will say the one thing unlike last budget year, every time we cut a
program, we would say, "Oh, we just saved $70,000 here. I need 80,000 over here." And we wound up costing ourselves money. here we truly saved our budget our taxpayers $ three.5 million. So commissioner to that point I think for this part we've
wrapped up that'll be part of the second item the budget. So we will that's what I'll I have a couple of other items when we get to that to discuss additions and some adjustments but we that's why we'll say approve the budget as amended as discussed uh when we get when we get to that and these dollars on all these cuts
uh you know as as championed by the commissioner magazine will be set aside to really help us out for for 27 for a budget stabilization uh reserve for that which is a really really good news for anyone who's got concern on 27 u that's really good so that is that so I think
we're Still back at item one, which is the millillage itself. >> Could and this is for the city attorney. Excuse me. Could I read item three, R 7B, and we could do the public hearing on both items? >> Sure.
>> Okay. R7B is a resolution of the mayor and city commissioner of the city of Miami Beach, Florida, adopting the final budget for general geo debt service, city center RDA, adorum, taxes, North Beach, CRA, Adorum, taxes, enterprise interval, internal service, and special revenue funds for fiscal year 2026
R7B. It is a second reading public hearing. >> Mr. Mayor, >> Commissioner Fernandez, >> so what is the total that we're saving between the first exercise and the exercise we did today? Approximately 3.5 million. >> 3.5 million, >> right? >> 3.5 million.
>> Right. So the 2.5 was already uh in the budget uh as approved by commission. >> And what does that translate to in terms of millage? >> So the original 2.5 was already built into the millage rate and the 793 would
be a reduction of 0155 millc. >> Mr. Sure. >> That's I would say if if we have the ability to uh incorporate that reduction of the millillage into the budget, it's it's showing the direction that we're going in as a as a government that we're
going to be going year after year to find efficiencies and we find when we find those efficiencies, whether it be at the end of the fiscal year, we return that to our residents. And when we go through the budget process, as we find efficiencies, we reduce our millage. I'd like to make a motion to reduce our
millage by the efficiency that we found. >> Second. >> If I can. The I know the commissioner's motions on all those cuts were specific to be set aside for the 27 budget stabilization. So that the 27 budget wouldn't be a problem. If we cut that village, that'll that will just, you
know, obviously can cause budgetary problems. >> Mr. I know we had some pre- discussion with this and I tip my hand that I would be supportive of that given what we've heard from our residents here today um and the discussion on the deis. I'm
going to support uh the motion that's on the table here because this isn't a one-time thing. This is going to be a recurring theme that I'm at least going to look to implement throughout the year. it it was a theme this past year and the only
reason why we're able to send money back to our taxpayers is because we've been diligent on this all year. So, I want to continue on in that trend. And listen, we're going to be facing a tough budget next year because not only are the same costs there, but you can just feel
property values throughout the region going down and we'd be doing a dereliction of duty if we don't start preparing for that. Right? We've discussed things and um I know Commissioner Suarez, you said we didn't call it FK the the hiring freeze item, but I actually do think that we
discussed I don't think we termed it that, but we had this discussion with you in public, Mr. City Manager, about only being the highest of high priorities. And I I think you would come back to us for that, but I'm getting a bit off topic here
>> if you will. >> Mr. CFO. I know I told you uh tip my hand that I'd like to support any excess in the uh go forward stability fund, but I'm going to be supportive of rolling back the millage rate uh to an applicable level here uh reflecting
these costs that we just made. So >> what would we have a reduced mill rate? >> I'm sorry. >> What would be the reduced rate? >> They're calculating that now on the fly. >> Mr. Mayor, >> based on these reductions, >> I'd like to ask Jason. So despite I think we saved around 3
million in some efficiencies, are we are we raising taxes for 2026? >> The millage rate the tax rate is not changing. >> Are we raising taxes for 2026? >> I I think what your question really is
relates to every individual and I can't really state you know specifically to every individual person. Will the city collect more taxes, property taxes? Yes. So, everyone got this notice. Okay, it says city of Miami Beach notice of proposed tax increase.
Proposed tax increase. Initially proposed tax levy 330 million. This year's proposed tax levy 354 million. Okay, this is a tax increase. This is from this this is from the state. So
again, are we increasing taxes for 2026 despite the 3 million that we're saving in efficient in efficiencies? >> Yes, the overall taxes will be going up in with this and that's incorrect. We're not >> Wait, wait one second. Can I finish raising their taxes on that?
>> Is the city raising the taxes or is that tax? >> It's a property appraiser. The property appraiser is the one that is doing >> question. Is the city of Miami Beach raising >> no >> taxes? No. Technically, yes, because we're going to pay more. I'm asking I'm asking this is finance 101.
>> We're not raising the millage rate, but for example, my assessed value is going to increase by 3%. Will I be paying the same mill rate? Will I be paying the same mill rate on the question I asked? Well, that is a tax increase. That's the propert. That's the property appraiser.
70% of our property taxes don't stay in Miami Beach. Many residents don't know that. It goes out to the school board. It goes out to the county. Can you hand >> Is the city of Miami Beach raising taxes? >> How would you want to respond? >> Well, I would just say the tax rate is remaining the same.
>> That's a flat answer. The tax rate is lower. >> The overall tax we're actually lowering our lowering the tax rate. We are lower rate. Yes. But will the average homeowner be paying more based on >> But that's not our fault. That is a market condition. If if the market
changes, if property values go down, then are they going to be paying? We don't control the market. That is an effect of the market. That is not the city of Miami Beach saying, "We want to come in and tax you more." We don't control the market. That is >> May I finish my train of thought?
>> That's not That's the market and that's the property appraiser >> who determined that. That's not us. True, >> Commissioner Suarez. Thank you, Jason >> and colleagues. >> This is from the state of Florida. It
says city of Miami Beach. This is not the date county. This says city of Miami Beach notice of proposed tax increase. >> You just said it's in the state of Florida. >> Let me ask you, here's another good question. Why do we need a 57th vote as
opposed to a simple majority, Mr. City Attorney? >> Why do we need a five Why do we need a 57 vote as opposed to a simple 47 vote majority to pass this >> this particular item? Well, the statute
provides that if the if the city does not adopt the roll back rate, if you go up to 110% of the roll back rate, you need 2/3, which in this case would be 57s. If you exceed 110%, then you would need a unanimous vote.
>> Correct? So, in in essence, we are increasing the taxes as from last year, the roll back rate. Is that correct? >> The Well, the millage rate >> I've been asked about the millage rate.
>> Those are the taxes we control. >> Are we increasing the roll back rate? The roll back rate would be a lower rate. >> The milit Yes. The roll. >> We are not decreasing mill rate, but we are not increasing the millage rate. >> Right. We're not decreasing to the to the roll back level, but we are reducing
based on what happened tonight. We are reducing the tax rate. >> Exactly. And my my issue is that this is unsustainable. We're going to be going through this every year after year. And for the last two hours, we were, you know, nickeling and dimming these programs.
And what did we save? 3 million. Again, our budget is a billion dollar. We're increasing our taxes by $24 million. That is that is what is written here from the state of Florida. It's a
proposed tax increase. So, I'm not going to be in favor of this. Okay. I think we need to cut more. I think we need to cut a lot more from this. I already gave one example where we can save a million dollars annually. >> I I have a question, Commissioner. To
your point, >> a roll back rate. How much money do we need to save in order to achieve a roll back rate? >> $21 million. >> $21 million. >> 24. >> 24. >> 21. >> Or 21. Okay. Well, this is
>> you brought us a million dollars. >> I just want to make sure we're on the same page, >> but I just want to I just want to know if if we do not adopt the budget, the reduced budget that we have today, which reduces the millage rate on our taxpayers, what is the alternative? Where do we
find an additional? We already found $3 million. What is your proposal to save another $18 million? I know you pointed to $1 million from the cultural organizations. Where are the other $17 million? Where do we cut another $17 million?
>> I I can think of another $700,000 that we can that we can save. This year we have um a a second aid at the mayor and commission. We've just we have now for the first time in the history of Miami Beach a second aid. I don't think we
need a second aid. I don't have a second aid. Commissioner Bot doesn't have a second aid. That's that's something that we personally can do. Wait, but I think I can keep going. But wait, wait. But I think didn't we fund the extra legislative position for Tallahassee
from Commissioner Suarez's >> uh second aid budget? >> We did. >> I believe we did. >> Okay. So, I mean, we didn't You don't have a second aid, but you the proposal came to have >> Well, I'd like the city manager to
clarify. I believe we did or we did because I certainly don't see it out of the mayor and commission budget. >> We did. >> So, yes, that was that was the um the way that we were able to fund that additional position for the legislative
affairs. >> I do not have a second. >> May May I ask you a question? I'm not attacking. >> Listen, I I I can Well, listen. I can I can continue on. I I mean there's there's >> Look, guys, >> but how do we get to the 21 million? I mean, what
>> So, I'd like I maybe we put it on staff, Jason. Yeah. >> Eric, how do we save how do we save another $18 million? >> I I guess Commissioner Suarez, I'm not attacking. I'm not going back and forth. I'm having a man-to-man conversation like adults, right? I don't disagree with your premise here, but what I'm
disagreeing with is the process and procedure where how do we just like you saw what it took to just cut $3 million and if we would have started this in June, I'd be all on board. >> I started this in March. >> I asked for this in March. I and it
hasn't been called and it was dismissed again. March 19th, 2025, referral to the Finance and Economic Resiliency Committee to discuss implementing a flat budget with a CPI adjustment to fully fund infrastructure, lower property taxes, and control general fund spending. Right? >> I I brought this up and amongst other
things and it was dismissed and I what am I supposed to do? Just go along with what's going on right now? I'm sorry. And and to say that this is happening at the 11th hour by Commissioner Sors is false. I've been bringing this up. Okay, Jason,
how can we save $18 million today? >> I think that that's a question that I could answer here on on the fly. That's a I think as the commissioner was stating, that's a long in-depth discussion that obviously would majorly impact programs, staffing, public safety, and things like that. But um on here in the second budget hearing,
that's an extremely difficult uh lift to do. >> Okay. Can we save at least a million dollars from the cultural arts grants recommendations? >> That's not my decision. That's up to the commission. >> Is it possible? >> If the commission uh wants to eliminate
that funding for one year or recurring and then redirect that to a different purpose because that's resort tax funded um by by resolution that temp I think it's 10% of the one one of the 1% uh goes towards the CAC. Um, that's the
commission's uh purview. >> Okay. Can we can we fund can we uh remove funding from other programs that you can think of off off the top of your head? >> We can remove funding for any program. We just went through $7 million uh and of that >> above and beyond what what is in here
because I believe this was what staff was picked out. Correct. There could be other issu there could be other items that was not presented in today's meeting. >> Correct. >> Yes. But how can we how can we responsibly without having you know this was great.
It took a little while to get there, but it was great because we could look at each item and say, "Oh, this, you know, even within this item, there's one thing I want to keep and one thing that we can get rid of. Can we talk to the experts, the department heads, say what works? Can we split the baby?" This was a really good exercise, painful though it
might have been in the beginning. And I think it's a great direction to move forward. So, I would do this, you know, starting in May when our budget process starts again. I think this is brilliant. To do that now on the fly without any backup material, without any without
this to keep going for $17 million is irresponsible. Who knows what we might cut by accident? I don't disagree with the premise. I don't want to be misconstrued or misqued or taken out of context. Let me be clear for the record. I agree with the notion that a billion
dollar budget is a lot for this city. Even though I understand very well that it's not just for the 82,000 people who live here year round. It's for the half a million who show up every month, right? At least one weekend a month is a high impact weekend it feels like. And some months they're all high impact
weekends. So I get it. I think we are all unanimously in support of the premise that we need to do better on this budget and we are taking steps to do that. This year is the first step. next year will be another step. But to say on the fly with no backup without
this to to to have our conversations is wildly irresponsible and I know my colleague will say it is irresponsible to not do it. I understand that point of view, but I am not comfortable saying, "Yeah, you know what? We don't need to buy this new fire truck or we don't need
to, you know, fix the roof on on wherever because I don't know. We're not having that conversation with the facts the way we are here." And if we had a second document like this that would turn up, you know, here's another $20 million. I would be very happy to stay here until 11:00, 59 minutes and 59
seconds to go through that. But we don't have it. So, I'm not willing to accidentally cut something that is going to end up being terribly irresponsible because that is not how we do things. I I know that there have been items that are that you are frustrated that haven't
been called and I I sense that and I respect that. We all have items that haven't been called over the course of the year. It's how it goes. We have you know hundreds of items on the agenda every month and our we have commission committee meetings where we don't even get through the items from month to
month but that is not the only way to support what you are trying to accomplish and I I say you to all of us the way to support what you are trying to accomplish which we are trying to accomplish is go to the the budget
retreat to go bring it up again at um at at the commission meeting to um speak with the city manager and ask the staff to work on it. There are lots of different avenues and I'm just saying it is not the prudent, wise, fiscally responsible or or fiduciary way to
manage the city's budget on behalf of the public safety and the best interests of our residents. And I know people are hurting. I know it's rough out there. And I'm not being cavalier about that. We all share the same goal. We just have different approaches on how to do it. and to say that the only way to do it is
the way you're recommending by cutting $20 million without the facts in front of us. I'm saying that's not that's not careful and that is not wise. >> By the way, wait, I just want to add the only thing that we're paying extra for
this year are are police and fire that we know that we need. That is the entire budget increase. police we have and we can I think I think I think even you can agree and I don't think there's anything wrong commissioner that there is a lot of fat and bloat in our government
>> and to say that yes police and fire they they've negotiated to get the extra 14 million but that's not to say of all the other expenses that we're paying that are unnecessary I think even you mentioned that there's and sanitation
you have a you have a you have a sweeper but it takes five people. It takes five people to manage that person. I mean, you're what the problem is. We have staff. Staff tells us, "Hey, look, this is what we can cut and we have to take their word for it." I got elected
because I don't trust staff. Okay? I got elected because staff at the time did something against the residents. Now, I'm not saying that Erica is against the residents, but I certainly don't believe that there's more. There's not more to cut.
>> I think stop. I think that >> I don't need to stop. Look, I don't need to stop and I don't appreciate you telling me to stop because this is a this is a serious issue and yes, this is the 11th hour. But if if if our city
manager and our CFO is telling us, well, you know, there's there's not much bloat, then how about we how about we make a motion and we have the state of Florida Doge come here and then audit our books. Why don't we do that? I make a motion right now to have Doge, the state of Florida Doge, to come in here
and audit our books and see where we can cut real efficiencies, inefficiencies in our government. Am I going to have a second on that? >> Do you even recognize the the consequences of some of the things that you're proposing?
>> Yes. Saving money. What would be the consequences potentially of having an outside agency coming in? >> I think we're going to I don't think we need a motion for it. >> What's that?
>> Go ahead. >> If I may, we we've already had um all I think all municipalities have already had multiple information requests. We provided uh an initial request that was received many months ago and there was a follow-up one that we received um asking for a detailed breakdown a very detailed
series of Excel spreadsheets that we provided very close to really what the we already provided to the state an annual basis called the AFR. So the state had a lot of that data already. >> So what's being proposed has already been done with >> the providing and sharing all of the detailed data that the state has requested. Yes, that's all. What I'm
proposing is we request that we get we get audited. I want to have a full audit. The state of Florida has created a new department for this. Let's take advantage of it. This is all it's only advisory that it's not going to somehow
uh cause any harm to our city or our residents. It is an advisory role. What's wrong with that? Well, unlike any other city in Florida, the voters of the city of Miami Beach created an inspector general office whose purpose it is to
identify fraud, waste, and abuse on a full-time basis. That is something that none of the other cities in Florida that are being doed has. Miami Beach has that inside its government. Any one of us
might be investigated at any given moment. We don't even know it. The books of every department might be being looked at right now by the inspector general and they don't even know it because we have this independent arm, non-political arm of our government led,
by the way, >> by the former public corruption prosecutor >> from the state attorney's office. led, by the way, by the former executive director of the Miami Day County Commission on Public E on ethics and public trust. That's the person who is
looking for fraud, waste, and abuse in our government. And that's something that no other municipality >> in Florida has. In addition to that, we are responding to Doge. I mean, Doge, as our CFO mentioned, Doge has asked for documents. And of course, we're not going to withhold anything because at
the end of the day, when people look at our budget, yes, there's of course a lot of areas, a lot of fat that we can trim, but I will repeat, we provide so many more services
than what any other city offers its residents that we almost like when you start to go cut, you're going to have people coming back and telling you, well, why aren't why don't we have the service anymore? Why don't we have that route anymore? Why don't we have that
parks program anymore? Why don't we have this event anymore? That's what's going to happen. And so, you know, the Doge thing, it's happening. They're looking at our government in addition to the fact that we have on a full-time basis
the inspector general who is constantly looking at our government. Where is the inspector general today offering any sort of cuts to inefficiencies? I I haven't heard any where where where is that? I'm simply saying why don't we have why don't we
have why don't we have an independent audit of our of our city finances? What's I what's the problem with that? >> I mean this is not political. This is just a real audit from an outside agency. They're willing to do it. our
our annual reports have to be audited by an outside agency. Correct. >> Yes, we actually go through several different uh au required external audits. Yes, we go through several different external audits. >> Those are statemandated, >> right? >> With that, I'm sorry. >> Those are statemandated.
>> They're just it's part for the course obviously. But what I'm saying is we still have this issue where we're going to be raising taxes. Okay. despite however many audits, a request for information from the state is happening. What I'm saying is why don't we have an
independent audit of all of our expenditures? It the state of Florida is willing to do it for us and then we'll have a report of what we can cut, what we can't, and then at the end of the day, we can decide what we want to keep and not. >> Why don't you just direct our inspector
general to give us an internal audit and that way he can come back to us. he can go. >> I mean, I don't know where the inspector general is in today. I mean, again, you know, I haven't heard the inspector general bring up any sort of wasteful things during our budget process. So, I
I mean, I don't mean to put them on >> through the course. I mean, we brought up an item with dealing with the uh with the the marina operator that we're we're discussing potential. >> You're constantly giving us reports. >> The Yeah, constantly. I mean, he sends we get them in our emails. We have a motion. We don't have a second. If we don't have a second, then we move us a
motion. >> And and let me >> The motion is to have Florida >> Florida doge to come in and audit our our city finances. >> And and again, this is being genuine. I'm not getting in some back and forth with you, but let's take the premise that okay, you don't so much trust city
staff, if we would roll back the millage rate, right, we put those cuts entirely in their hands because we don't have a line item by line item budget. what I'll support from you right now. If you want to sit here, I will second it if you
want to direct it. If you want to go out and uh instruct our city manager to come up with another comprehensive cost cutting analysis where we're saving $5 million, $10 million, $15 million, $20 million, I'll support
that. But if we just sit here tonight and go roll back the millage rate, we lose any type of discretion or control about where that gets cut. We just put that over in the hands of city staff to say go cut $20 million. We have no idea
and no say whether they're doing it from city uh >> well they can't do that. They they it has to be approved by us. >> They have to >> if we mandated that they would have to roll back the millage rate. You have to >> suggest to us and prove it.
>> That doesn't come back. I don't know. >> We would we would have to amend the budget today to match the mill rate. >> Right. Right. So, we have no and that's why I was saying I don't disagree with your premise and and and I don't think any of you do. Okay. But when I see a
million dollars spent on this, at least $600,000 of of our taxpayer dollars going to art programs who are not even based in Miami Beach. How come city staff didn't recommend this? How come you didn't recommend this, Eric?
because this is a very clear commission direction to allocate a percentage of the 1% quality of life resort tax >> from one year from when did this when was this commission directive? >> Uh 2018. >> I think the last time it was updated was
probably in 2018. >> So do you guys see what's going on? We have these resolutions. You have these mandates from God knows how long and we keep spending and city staff isn't coming to us with a recommendation. and be like, "Well, you know, listen, this is from 2018. You may want to revisit
this." >> You know what? I It's It's It's frustrating because city staff doesn't even, you know, other than Jason. >> He our city manager doesn't live in the city. He's he's not he he doesn't if he if he
has the if he wants to if he wants to bring up items like this to cut it it it it benefits not only our residents, the commissioners, but also city staff but also the city manager. >> Okay. And so,
you know, you have you have resolutions and priorities from, I don't know, a decade ago, two decades, two decades ago, and we're still paying for it. And I don't necessarily think that staff is is doing a great job in and bringing this up for cuts.
>> So, Commissioner, I I agree with you. Okay. And I've said >> I do think there's some shenanigans in us not getting that insight. So, I'll make a I was going to wait until our commission meeting in October. I'll put a motion on the table here directing
city staff to come back to us with a line item by line item basis. And then if you want to dedicate an entire day for a FK meeting and go budget item by budget item, I am all for that. That's how we get to the true bloat, right? But
right now, we don't have that in front of us. And that's part of my frustration. It's not so much with you. I've had this out with our finance team for two months now. >> I'm right there with you. I'm frustrated. There's there's so much I mean, remember when I got elected, the first thing that it was a bud budget
amendment and they wanted to spend $250,000 on like 10 cameras. That's just the tip of the iceberg. I mean, you know, like it's so sad that, you know, we spend two hours nickeling dimming programs that are are probably good. They're they're great, you know, and and
I don't want to cut funding from these programs because they generally they do a good job, but at the end of the day, there's so much stuff going on on in city staff where they don't necessarily want to tell you what what we can and can't cut.
>> Well, there's a motion on the table if somebody wants to second it for us to get that granularity because, correct me if I'm wrong, but I need this on the record actually. Do we have line item by line item granularity? When I say we, the commission for this year's budget,
line item by line item granularity into our budget, our operating budget. >> Nope. You have a condensed version in your budget book. Um, >> do you see do you see what's happening? They have a they have a condensed version. What is that? What does that mean? That's what they decide that we
they want to cut. I know this and I've been fighting this fight against them for two months >> and this is the commission that changes it >> and we have to go forward from here because today is the day that we have to adopt a adopt a budget by 11:59 p.m. So today is
the day that this government changes the way that it budgets itself. Today's the day where this government says to its city administration, we want the the granular granularity of a line item by line item budget where we know where
every single dollar is going and we move forward to the future that way. And if along that process we find areas where if we sit down and we have that special fork meeting that you're suggesting, Mr. here uh to look at certain areas. We can always do a mid-year budget amendment
>> a midyear budget amendment where we can go back and say okay we found areas where perhaps we had budgeted for stuff that we no longer need. Let's amend the budget and not uh proceed with those expenditures. We can do that in a much more methodical way
>> sitting down and looking at these actual >> I don't trust us to audit ourselves. I'm sorry. I just don't trust us. When I mean excuse me when I mean when I mean audit ourselves I mean the city staff. I just don't trust it because
because you know >> commissioner us as the fk as the finance and economic resiliency committee looking line item by line item which are the items which we feel we can keep and no longer keep so that once we identify
in a responsible way and vet these line items on a responsible way and say okay we've identified $10 million of programs that we feel 10 years ago it may have been a priority but Today when we have environmental considerations and
infrastructure we much rather not do that. >> But the cost the cost savings are not just programs we fund. It is how the administration functions. It is what the same reason why there's five overhead
administrative people for one street sweeper which is commissioner Gonzalez has always campaigned on. And that is those details that add up are are what we constitute as government bloat. And I
don't and I don't think I don't think that us elected official lay people are going to be equipped to handle that. We're not going to be able to say like, oh well, you need two people here and three three administrative staff. That's not something that we can do. That has to be done by staff. And and we just
went over the fact that the staff I don't think has done a good job in presenting more budget cuts. I the the government doesn't like to shrink itself. The government likes to grow and I don't trust this government to
shrink itself. I I'm what I'd like to do is I'd like to trust another agency to come in here and audit us. And if I don't have a second on here for just a simple audit as an advisory role, this is a really sad day. >> Commissioner, I'll tell you, you know,
you brought up before the the police union contract, which by the way was heavily negotiated, we got concessions that has never been in our contract. What what what and what's so dangerous about what you propose is that potentially if we had not agreed to that contract, we would have hit an impass.
And what we were told and I had reached out to other departments around the country when you have that happen not only does morale sink but potentially officers stand back. I had trust that our department will not do that but our morale in our police department is really high right now. We're getting
tremendous productivity and I'll give a lot of credit to our police chief and we're at full staffing. the there's consequences to actions that if you take that when you're trying to save a couple of bucks will cost this city millions.
>> I'm not trying to save a couple. I'm trying to save $24 million. >> Okay. >> Thank you, Mayor. So, um Joe, you have a Sorry, Commissioner M. Vice Mayor, your highness. Um you have a motion on the table to to direct the administration to
do just hang on a second to do a granular budget. and I want to make sure that's a thing that that we can execute. So, I I know it's a thing we can execute. I want to make sure you have enough time. I will second that and I'd like to be a co-sponsor with you if you would have me. I think it's a good idea
and it's something that we've been talking about for months and all evening tonight. And I you know I I feel like um the thing that gets lost in this conversation is that we all agree that things need to change and we are maligning staff for doing things the way
they have always done things because that has been the direction here to for right so we're saying we're not it is being said of staff it is being suggested that something shady is going on and I don't feel comfortable with that. >> I never said anything shady is going on.
I I I just excuse me. I do want to correct the record. I'm not saying that anything shady is going on. I never said that. I am simply saying that there is >> extreme government bloat in in this city. Okay. And and and let's talk about
let's you wanted to correct the record. You're done now for a second, please. So I can finish my sentence. >> Okay. My point is we are going to collectively as a commission and staff change the way this
government operates. That is not an easy thing to do. As you have just said, government doesn't like to shrink itself. So we are here together in this chamber. The entire senior staff is here to try to figure out how to do this better going forward.
So this year, unlike last year or any years in the past, we've actually cut $3.5 million from the proposed >> from the prop proposed budget. And we are actually decreasing our millillage
in a way that won't leave us in a hole to figure out how to pay for sanitation in 3 years. I think that's a damn good day's work. Is it cutting $20 million? It is not. Do we want to find a way going forward to cut our budget? We do.
And that is going to be the driving mission of our finance committee and our commission and our staff who I think really gets the memo, right? So, let us take the steps that we need to do in a
responsible way. Let's give you the two months or whatever it's going to take to get the um six months. I don't know it. But we're but in time for the next budget process so that we can start looking at a granular level both going forward and also for the year that we
will be in and any savings that we can realize will be realized. We've done it before. And also in case anybody in this room forgets what happens when the state comes in to tell us how to do things. Does anybody know about live local?
Does anybody know about Senate Bill 180? We are a very responsible city in terms of what we think we want to do for our city. Do we get it right every time? We do not. Can we do it better? Of course we always can. Does it work well when we
are preempted by the state ever? Tell me. I mean, I'm happy to hear if somebody here thinks that preeemption by the state is a good way for us to manage this city, which is not the same as unincorporated Dade and is not the
same as western um counties that are mostly agricultural. We are a weird little city. We are a 7mi stretch of sand in the middle of the ocean that has historic properties and really diverse populations and offers things that no other city does the way we do. And that
is not a cookie cutter thing. So let's do it in a responsible way. Let's do it. No one's arguing with that. Let's do it. But let's do it in a responsible way. Commissioner is >> Yeah. Can we move forward? It's 9:00 at night. We're not going to cut $20
million from the budget. We know how the budget grew. In the future, what you could do for next year is say, you know what, we can only have the budget grow by CPI. Okay? And that way you set parameters. All right? so that we don't overgrow anything and you give clear direction to
the administration that we can grow you know CPI plus 1% or something like that that way you know that that it's not out of control um so let's move this forward correct somebody want to make a motion >> and Jason but quickly for the audit
>> I will say unequivocally if the state reaches out or continues to reach out >> I want full cooperation right full cooperation Yeah, we I just want to be absolutely clear about that, right? It's not something I hide from. In fact,
>> why don't we ask them? >> I would welcome it, right? Whether I'm going to ask them, I I I don't know. It sounds They've already looked at our books, so it sounds ceremonious, but I want to be very clear. I want to fully cooperate. >> What exactly?
>> We have a motion and no second. We're going to move on to the item. Also, we have a motion and a second. Didn't you make a motion on your village? Yeah, I made a motion to the reduced millage rate. >> So, let's let's vote on that if I can real quick. I think we might have to read some of the record because we're adjusting the the millage down. So,
>> the mill rate would be adopted at 5.8560 for the operating mill. The debt service would remain the same. >> 5.8 >> 560. >> Wait, 5.8560. So, right now it's 5.872.
We're going to go down by 0.0142. >> That's the general fund. >> So the budget, so the millage is going to be 5.8 5.8 560. Currently before this adjustment, it was at 5.8702.
So to be clear, what we're making a motion on is actually for the first time in three years despite budgetary pressures because of the cost savings we've identified throughout the year. >> We're not stopping here, but we are
actually reducing our general fund mill rate >> in addition to agreeing to return $11 million to the public. >> But that's not true. We're we're it is unequivocally true that we are for
the first time in three years reducing our millage rate. I is that not true. It's the proposed mill rate that we're >> what Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez just mentioned. Isn't it well more than 3 years? >> Yeah. If I if I can, there's a couple of points I wanted to make is that yes, the
the if you're looking at the operating millage, you know, not the voter recommended geo bond or if we're not looking at the capital one. So, if we're just looking at what we call like general operating, uh, which has been the general operating has been at 5663 for back to 22. The last reduction I'm
looking at would probably back in 201819 was the last time that operating was reduced. though close to 10 years there's been there'll be a reduction in that operating millillage really the general operating >> and if anyone wants to join me as a co-sponsor of that motion you're
>> I'm joined as a co-prime if >> yeah public the public hearing is >> public hearing I have three individuals on zoom uh requesting to speak this just for the record these this is public hearing on items R7A and R7B
uh Karen Lucas, please state your name, address, and you have two minutes. >> Uh, yes. I I wanted to speak about the property tax. Is that okay? Can you hear me? >> Yes, go ahead. >> Okay. Um, I came to Miami Beach in 2021.
At the time, I looked at my my uh expenses. I'm I actually ended up being the treasurer of this boutique building in Miami Beach, but I am a nonomesteader. Okay. Okay. So, I'm a non-homestead and I started at 3500
um a year in property tax. If indeed my non-homestead goes up 10% every year, in 10 years I will be paying $8,252 in property tax. That's over 135%
increase. That 10% increase every single year is not sustainable. And I don't rent my place when I'm not there. We have three or four of us who are non-h homesteaders in our building and none of us rent our place when we're not there.
So we are taking the full burden of this and it's just completely unsustainable. Um the other point I want to make is around the loan program for special assessments. Uh that's been critical for people. There are people suffering out
there who can't afford special assessments and therefore they are putting things like roof replacements on hold. Their places are leaking and and the insurance goes up another $15,000 a year or more because they simply can't
afford to do it and make people pay a $12,000 special assessment. So any way in which you can help folks with a special assessment loan will help them to get their properties up to snuff. so that uh they can continue to uh live and
operate in Miami Beach. Anyways, thank you very much for listening to me. >> Thank you, Karen. >> Our next public speaker is Wayne Roberts. Mr. Roberts, go ahead. >> Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. Um uh you know, I I love the conversation.
Um the the homestead uh uh people that live in Miami Beach have a deal at 3%. Because they can never basically have an increase beyond unless they change the millage rate rate up. They can't have a greater increase than 3% annual. It is
the the commercial property owners, not even owners, the businesses because most leases uh in commercial property have um writers attached to it in the lease that says you are responsible for any increase in taxes. So it's passed down
on a commercial basis those those storefronts that are closing uh that the one of the drivers the main drivers I wouldn't say main drivers but certainly a big driver >> is the 10% increase they're receiving every year in um in in in those those uh
real estate taxes. >> Um as well as the non-homesteaders. Um it does impact uh uh homestead properties in the sense that uh because a lot of people are are not homesteaded uh the price of real estate and condos
are declining. We're not raising rising as much as they should uh because of the tax consequence for for non-homesteaded properties when they take they take possession and it resets, right? Unless you you're transferring the homestead to the property that you're moving to. uh
the property value, the assessed value starts at the highest number possible, which is the full assessed value. Even if you do homestead, you have to wait years before you get, you know, substantial advantage. So, uh it's a complicated issue. Um it certainly is
impacting our downtown areas with this 10% effect as well as businesses in in commercial buildings. If you're a dentist, you're still paying those 10% increases in real estate taxes. Um, and so, >> uh, Homestead is great. >> Thank you, Mr. Roberts.
>> Our next public speaker is Daniel. Daniel, state your name, address. You have two minutes. >> Yes. Thank you, commissioners and the public. Daniel Serald, candidate for Miami Beach Commission Group One, number 132 on the ballot. Anyone who has ever been on a board or has any significant
managerial experience knows that you don't miss the treat. That is where you set the priorities for the organization. It is financial malpractice to do that particularly from a vice chair of the
finance committee and we are all suffering tonight through this painfully long meeting due to one woefully unprepared commissioner and the neverending micromanaging of another. This might work in sunny Isles, but a
worldclass city like Miami Beach, we deserve more prepared and qualified leadership. Thank you to the commissioners with the level heads who helped and tax reduction. I hope you will get the credit for it. Homeowners are being
squeezed as are renters. Alex Fernandez and others, great job. and you did it all without having to start a negative mudsling campaign. By the way, if you'd like to save another 800,000 immediately tonight, someone can make a motion to
cancel the money for Wadza Palooa Fitness Festival, which at this point is a luxury, not a necessity. Our our citizens should have that extra 800,000 in the rebate for residents. So, I'm looking for a leader to make that motion
tonight. Let's continue this work based on truth, facts, respect, and focusing on our residents. If you'd like to learn more about my campaign, visit danielformmiami.org. Thank you. >> Our next public speaker is Paula. Paula,
state your name, address. You have two minutes. >> Paula Allen. Uh, two addresses, 345 Ocean Drive and also 100 Meridian Avenue. I would like to um the first lady who spoke about the uh non-homestead
uh property taxes. So I have um I transferred and did the portability to my other condo, the smaller 345 Ocean Drive. And um that was all fine. That worked. And the other one at 100
Meridian, I'd been paying 7,000 a year. And I'd been homesteaded on that one since 2008 up until 2025. It went from $7,000 to 17 in one year just from taking off the homestead. And I can't I did uh contest
it or whatever. I did fill out paperwork for that. So that that's quite a burden. So I've got one homesteaded where I'm paying about seven grand. And then I've got another non-homesteaded that's another 17,000. I don't rent that one out. So, yeah. And then assessments.
Let's go about that. So, uh, $42,000 assessment, what in 2022 for where I live now, uh, just passed last week, another $10,900 assessment for the same place that I live now. Next year for the fire sprinkler requirement, it'll probably be
about 12 to $15,000. So we're, you know, for a very small 650 ft unit in a 50-year-old building approaching 70 grand in assessments in less than 5 years. So yeah, that's where money should be. You know, if you want to be about grants and stuff, give it to the
citizens and residents that have lived here 20 plus years that need it for those kind of things. Not, and I agree, not art projects to other cities. Speaking of which, I appreciate all the time that y'all take and I know that it was tough. David Suarez, I do thank you
for bringing this up because we wouldn't have gone through or y'all would not have gone through this painful exercise as you described it to save the money. >> Our next public speaker is Lori Bakum. Lori, say your name, address, you have
two minutes. >> Hello everyone. Thank you so much for all your time and service to our community. I'm here on behalf of Power Access and the South Beach Dazz Festival and arts and culture nonprofits in
general in our city. I moved to Miami Beach in 1992 and in several roles both as just a resident, a volunteer and now as a true advocate and um for the South Beach Jazz
Festival Power Access. want to say that arts and culture have really been at the forefront of both our quality of life and the rising of Miami Beach as a
world-class city. We really give back. And I'm not just talking about our organization, but all nonprofits that work within our city. Our South Beach Jazz Festival and our year round programming, 90% of which is
free, is funded about 20% through grants and sponsorships by City Miami Beach. The rest comes in through private donations, business donations, and community support. I feel like we are just the
a flag of all the nonprofits in this city which do great work and I hope that that's recognized because it's both an economic driver and a quality of life driver which most of these things happen
for free for our residents but also creating tourism dollars that also benefit our residents and businesses. Thank you so much for your support. >> Thank you. There are no other public speakers on Zoom and I see no one in the audience.
>> So, there's a few motions uh on the table. Get the easy one out of the way. I have a motion uh directing city staff to come back not 6 months in a Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. If I if I could just to clarify because we've had several different discussions on budgetary
structural budgetary changes and last we had spoken was that uh going forward for the 27 budget we would because it's a very long process to reconfigure uh how we do program budgeting versus the the existing model and we're completely supportive of that specifically as we're
talking about property taxes. So it would be general funded resort tax to going forward for next year's budget. something usually doesn't have value to do necessarily every single year but periodically the city has done program budgeting in the past. So yeah, we would be absolutely supportive of doing uh
program budgeting which gives you that like that reg granularity there. Um just giving you a detailed budget line items finance or operating expenses that you're not going to get the that I think um that nuances of because very technical but from a program budget perspective you were absolutely
supportive for next year doing a program budget for the general fund resort tax. You have the entire >> I think what you see up here I don't know if there's appetite to wait for next year. I get that that's a big ask. >> I have a question on motion. How is that different than a zerobased budget? >> Zerobased budget means when you provide
the budget documents to the individual departments and correct me I'm wrong is that you you give it to them with zeros in it and they just build their budget up. So they're just going to look at last year's budget. It's not a it's a it's kind of an older budget process that I don't really has fallen out of favor. um it's not really uh one that
what you guys have been talking about is program budgeting kind of like you saw with those cuts where you said like I'll give you the example a position with a bunch of bunch of people okay well then you could cut that program as it as it were um so that would really be I think what you've always been talking about is
program budgeting but to go back and redo the entire 26 budget from a program budget perspective >> but that that's not zerobased budgeting zerobased budgeting is all these additional dollars that we saw tonight it's whatever Whatever you produce and you don't spend, then that is the
excess. I believe that's what zerobased budgeting is, isn't it? >> No. No. >> Basically start from scratch each year. >> Exactly. >> Your income minus your expenses, savings, and debt payments have to equal zero each month. That's what the zerobased budget is, right? >> Well, that's what the budget we have now
is that we we have >> you know, we have these surpluses, which is what we spent tonight going over surplus here, you know, here and 20,000 there. So if you did practice a zerobased budget, you would eliminate all those additional expenses. If you were to implement something like a
zerobased budget for a few months, then come back to us in 60 or 90 days and say, "Okay, we've been zerobased budgeting for 90 days. Here are the surplus funds in our department." And then we could easily see what those surplus funds were. >> If I can, that's not zerobased
budgeting, but what you describe, we already do on a quarterly basis. And that's the quarterly uh LTC budget to actual that the uh budget department produces. It's a lot of work for all the departments, but that's put out every single quarter to show you what the surplus is. It all of the funds uh that we have and that goes to the
commissioner Fernando's discussion about why he, you know, was aware that there's, you know, over 11 million projected in the general fund uh surplus. So that is already done. And that is a very uh I agree that that is a very good and transparent uh document and I always I know when I met with the
the aids and the new commissioners when you came in and with the new aids when they came in we always say we're going to read there's many LTCs that go out. That's a very important LTC to read. It's long. It's many many many many pages long but it does have a lot of really good valuable information in there. So that's what you should refer
to the finance committee and then you can go through that and if you wanted to >> the first quarterly projection document would be out in mid for Q1 would end December. We would have that ready in early February February. >> Late February >> because with a zero base budget I mean you start at zero. >> Yeah.
>> And then you come in with your essentials. This is the essentials to keep the government running and to deliver our basic services. And then it gives us the ability as policy makers to determine okay everything beyond the essential and basic service of
government. We get to then go through and make policy decisions on those which is where I believe in the direction that this commission is going to find efficiencies. You know I feel that that's where that this body feels is is the best place to start at I think for
for next year is from a position of zero. If if I if I may ch if I might chime in, uh, Commissioner, yes. Um, but there are inefficiencies within programs in in the city staff that really we don't have an eye to,
right? Like I'm I'm going to bring up the sweeper again. You have a sweeper and then there's five administrative people for that sweeper. How do we how do you catch that? How do you catch that there's going to be 15 cameras for $250 million where that wouldn't have been an
amendment, but that's an a line item that we just aren't privy to because, you know, we're we we can't we can't go line literally line item by line item for some of these expenses. >> So, it's you know,
at the end of the day, you have to trust your staff that they're being efficient. And at this point, I I I don't know. I I think there's certainly room for improvement uh in in our in the way we have our structure of our government. >> Wholeheartedly agree. Tamika or Jason,
let me ask you a question, Mr. City Manager. I hate consultants, so it nauseates me. I'm even asking this in a way to save money, but this is a way to save money. How much would an Ernson Young or something like that charge to
come in and do an efficiency analysis? I know the city of Chicago has a report that's being commissioned and it's actually so telling the truth that the mayor won't release it. >> I'm not sure how to estimate that off the top of my head. I know
>> a couple like $200,000. Is that a few million dollars? >> Probably in the millions. I know the the commission directed the police department to do a staffing uh report which was done by an outside consultant reported back to commission and those recommendations were to add staff. Um and internal audit is under our uh
inspector general. Um so I mean I'm not to put any uh any rough estimate what a consulting firm like Bane or Ernston Young >> if I can I think North Village did something similar and spent two million >> on a full organizational study.
>> Joe Joe can you go to the microphone please? I have a question along those lines. I mean, the reason you have your job here, Joe, is and and you and I have talked about things like, has anyone ever looked into this or, you know, are you working on that? And you're like, well, we could, but it needs to be directed by
commission. I I think is that sometime I guess it depends on the thing that needs to be investigated. So, could we as a commission direct the IG to do a an analysis of of um efficiency or is that beyond
>> sort of the scope of what you guys do? >> I mean, I'll be honest with you. We've got six tax auditors who audit there's 3,000, you know, resort tax auditor accounts in the city. We barely scratch the surface with 200. We've got three
internal auditors and we're always two years behind in terms of what we want to audit. Okay. Could could we actually do the entire city if with more more personnel? I'd love to do it, but I don't expect that to happen. >> We're not in the business of adding FTEEs right now. >> Right. I understand that. Well, you
know, we look at we look at programs, we look at contracts, we look at expenditures >> to to take on the entire city, it take my my entire staff probably to >> abandon the rest of our work. That's I'd love to do more. I really would. So, you rais a good point. >> It's not realistic.
>> You raised a really good point, uh, Joe. So, you're auditing not the city. You're auditing primarily other businesses who deal with the city. >> No, no, we a we audit contracts, but we also audit programs in the city, you
know, that that that are going on. And we, you know, look into sometimes problems that have occurred in in specific departments or, you know, we do we do look at city operations. We look at city compliance. We look at contractors uh compliance. >> And so what you were over there, you
were mentioning that Commissioner Magazine brought up an item or an idea for Ernest Young to come in roughly. What would that cost? >> Well, >> as I said, we we did we we looked there was there was a a company I forget where it was that did a did something like this in California to with with I think
a city roughly the same. I think it was it was about a half a million dollars uh to do. How long did that take? I >> I don't I don't know the details of that, but I mean, it's something that's, you know, it's something that's worth considering. I'm I'm skeptical often
times myself of big of big forms coming in like that, but uh >> consensus from the body. I'm sorry. The consensus for the body is and I agree. We got a we have motions on the table. Let's um >> which uh do we have an order of priority >> for the motions?
>> The city attorney. >> Sure. I believe um the motion to decrease the millage rate which was made by Commissioner Fernandez and seconded by Commissioner Magazine would have to be adopted prior to adoption of the budget. >> Call the vote. C
>> can you just line up what's on the table? So for the first time since 201819 we're actually voting right now on a reduction in our millage rate. Thank you. >> Correct. where this will be a millage rate reduction on the general fund >> and I'd like to be listed as a co-prime.
>> Anyone else? I >> think we all >> all of us. Yeah. So all co-prime >> is on the reduction of the millage to I believe it was 5.8560. >> Yes. >> This is a mill item and we just need to hear everybody's um response
individually. >> But the reduced mill rate is 5.8560. Is that correct? >> That's correct. >> Yeah. So and Mr. Mayor, before we finally vote, I I just want to thank my colleagues. I know this is very difficult, okay?
I I certainly do not take joy in being this difficult. Um I'm not playing politics. These are people's money. And you know I I I believe when we when we have a tax it it
it should be thoroughly debated because I think if we didn't have this discussion it would have been a simple 45minute meeting. You know I really got to hand it to every one of you. Thank you. I I really appreciate you spending your time. We got here at 5:00. It is
now 9:30 and you we have we have real positive wins out of this. We're having a rebate that Commissioner Fernandez has brought forward. That's excellent. We lowered the millage rate since 2018. Um, you know, we have program level
budgeting. And so, look, as contentious as this may be, I I want to thank you. I I certainly um I'm not trying to make things difficult. I didn't I didn't want to stay here till 9:30, but we got some wins out of this. I'm going to be
supportive. Okay. Um, and I and I want to I really want to extend a heartfelt thank you to to to all of you for for for going through this because listen, now that now the residents know that we are really analyzing this and we we
actually care. We want to we want to go we want to do what's best for for for their their wallets. So, um, I really appreciate it, Mr. Mayor. >> Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Suarez. So on the on the decrease of the of the millillage, I have to do a roll call. So
I'm going to do it alphabetically. Commissioner Bot, >> yes. >> Commissioner Dominguez, >> yes. >> Commissioner Fernandez, >> yes. >> Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez, >> yes. >> Vice Mayor Magazine, >> yes. >> Commissioner Suarez, >> yes. >> Mayor Miner, >> yes.
>> Item is approved. Now we do R7A. >> That was A. >> That was A. So okay. >> Yeah, this is this would be B. Uh for the budget. I just have to I I allude I know we I I we we requested briefings of anyone have and we discussed this with a few people. So there's a couple of items
that were uh approved uh at the September 17th commission meeting. Um and I'm going to read them. These are items that we would amend the budget as as uh presented. So it'll be a motion to approve the an amended budget. These affect primarily non-general fund
budgets, but I'm just going to go through them very quickly, and you'll recall these all from the resolutions you passed. Uh, one is $50,000 for the water quality study. This is all the Park View Island resolution um for the water and sewer fund. 21,000 for weekly water testing in the Parkview canal from
the storm water fund. Uh expediting the comprehensive uh infrastructure study for North Beach, which will be refunded in the future, but 363,000 for water and sewer. seed money for the nano pubble technology of 250,000 from storm water.
Uh art week enhanced transportation which was a permit commission for 130,000 from the uh from the transportation fund. And just the last item unless we have more discussion on it uh was the commission had asked on just uh to sharpen the pencil on the
wellness program. Um and if the commission is amicable with the pencil was sharpened and to reduce those keeping the classes but but uh keeping them at the level that we're doing them now and we could actually reduce that allocation by $20,000. So if the commission >> the item
>> yeah if they commission we can add those six items to amend the operating budget. >> Okay. >> So have a motion by Commissioner Fernandez on R 7B seconded by Commissioner Suarez. It is as amended. All in favor please say I. I. Anyone
opposed? Hearing none. R 7B is approved as amended. R 7A was approved as amended. R7 C. R7C is a resolution board of directors of the Normandy Shores Local Government Neighborhood Improvement District adopting the final ADA lower mill of 0.7305
mills for fiscal year 2026 for the Normandy Shores Local Government Neighborhood Improvement District which is 1 and 3/10 and 3/10 more than the rolled back rate of 0.7208 mills. It is a second reading public hearing. I see no one on Zoom and no one
in the audience. I heard Commissioner Fernandez and second by Commissioner Suarez. >> Commissioner Bot. >> I just I need a voice vote. >> Okay, so this is on R7C. Uh a voice vote. I'm going to do again reverse alphabetical this time. Sorz,
Commissioner Suarez, >> yes. >> Commissioner Magazine, >> yes. >> Commissioner Rosa Gonzalez, >> yes. >> Commissioner Fernandez, >> yes. >> Commissioner Dominguez, >> yes. >> Commissioner Bach, >> yes. >> Mayor Miner, >> yes. >> Carries at R 7C. >> R 7D. R7D is a resolution may a resolution board of directors of the
Normandy Shores Local Government Neighborhood Improvement District adopting the final operating budget for fiscal year 2026. It is item R7D and the second reading public hearing item. >> Second. >> Okay. I heard Commissioner Fernandez and I heard Commissioner Bot. I u I could just do a voice vote.
>> Um yes, but it's a public hearing. >> This is on R 7D. All in favor of public hearing public hearing. >> There's a public hearing. >> I'm sorry. Yes, it is a public hearing. I see no one in Zoom and I see no one in the audience again for R7C. There was no one in Zoom, no one in the audience requesting to speak. This is an R7D. All in favor, please say I.
>> I. >> Anyone opposed? Hearing none. R7D is adopted. >> R7E. >> I move it. >> One second. >> Is a resolution of the mayor, city commissioner of city of Miami Beach, Florida, adopting the final capital improvement plan for fiscal year 2026, 2030. Uh, and adopting the city of Miami
Beach final capital budget for fiscal year 2026. It is a second reading public hearing. I see no one in Zoom, no one in the audience on R7E. Who made the motion? Please. Commissioner. >> Commissioner Bot. Seconded by Commissioner Fernandez. >> Commissioner Bot. Seconded by Commissioner Fernandez. All in favor of R7E, please say I.
>> Anyone opposed? Hearing none. R7E is approved. >> R7F. >> R7F is a joint item with U. R7F is adopt final North Beach CRA operating budgets for fiscal year 2026. R7F. >> Second.
So I would just add here because we are reducing the the millillage rates, it will reduce the revenues to the RDA and the CRA. So we would just approve it as amended. >> As amended to reflect the reduction of the millillage. >> Correct. >> Thank you. >> So I heard a motion by Commissioner Fernandez. I believe I heard a second by
Commissioner Bach. >> Yep. >> This is a this is not a public hearing. It is item R7F as amended. All in favor, please say I. >> I. Any opposed? Hearing none, R7F is approved as amended.
>> RDA items, >> RDA items, we're recessing as a city commission and uh we are recon reconvening as a the north the RDA. Uh item number one is adopt fiscal year 2026 through 2030 RDA capital
improvement plan fiscal year 2026 RDA capital budget. >> Move >> as amended. >> As amended to reflect the reduction of mill. >> No, no, I'm sorry, not the capital. >> Next one. So RDA1 is as is. I heard a motion by Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by the mayor, I believe. Are
you sure? >> Okay. RDA1. All in favor, please say I. >> I. >> Anyone opposed? >> Hearing none. The item is approved as is. That was RDA1. RDA 2 is adopt final city city center RDA operating budgets for fiscal year
2026. That is as amended. >> Move. >> Second. >> So RDA2, Commissioner Fernandez. Uh seconded by Commissioner Bot, RDA2. All in favor, please say I. I. >> Anyone opposed? Hearing none. The item
is approved as amended. We are now we're reset. We're terminating the RDA meeting. We are now uh reconvening as the North Beach Community Redevelopment Agency. This is adopt final North Beach CRA operating budget for fiscal year 2026. It was a joint item with R7F
>> as as amended. I move it. >> Second. So, uh, NBC1 as amended. I heard Commissioner Bot, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez. Uh, all in favor, please say I. >> I. >> Anyone opposed? Birthbeat CRA item one
is approved as amended. >> Thank you to all my colleagues. This uh we got through and we this is an historic budget as uh as we just heard uh from some of my colleagues. We have returned surplus funds. We have reduced
the millage rate for the first time in almost 10 years and uh it's kudos to our commission but also our city administration Eric Jason Tama obviously you you bear the the lion's work on on the finance our chair of the budget
finance committee Joe Magazine but really it's every department in the city we cannot lose sight that this is a joint effort by every single department in our city to make sure that we were able to keep our our budget in line balance the budget as we're statutory required and returning funds to
taxpayers. So, thank you everyone. Kudos. This is a this is a big day. >> Happy new fiscal year. >> Yes. >> And I would like to say one other thing. You know, you guys have a really hard job. All of the department heads and the city manager have a really hard job in this city in particular because we get
our fingers in the pies all the time and we usually do it on the fly, right? So we try a lot of us try to do it ahead of the times ahead of time so that we can all be prepared and there's no surprises but inevitably at least once during meetings something like this happens but
this meeting was almost 5 hours of you being put on your back feet and some of the department heads being put on their back feet to defend decisions to explain decisions. Nobody sat here unprepared. Nobody got pissed off at things that
were said or intimated. I, you know, agree or disagree on the merits of the topic, we're always going to have a little bit of back and forth and that what that's what makes things better when we all push and pull to make things better. But I have to commend you guys like really seriously that the folks who
come up here and and do the work of the city a really care and b you know are consumate professionals. >> I really so thank you. It it's complicated. It's hard and you you it's a pleasure working with you even when I
don't agree with you because you guys are consumate professionals and I don't take that for granted because it's not always the case and it's far too rare in this world across the board. So thank you. >> Thank you Alex. >> Our our city manager would like to have
the last word. >> Yeah, I don't need the last word but I just wanted to say thank you to all of you for the deliberate discussion tonight. I think that was very helpful. And I want to say a huge thank you to the entire administrative team, our office in management and budget that has
put in countless hours in trying to bring this all together. This is the culmination of 10 months of their work along with all of the departments and I think it showed tonight in the progress that we were able to make and the detail that we were
able to describe. So, thank you >> and we got it done with more than two hours to spare. So, and the >> and do we have the next budget meeting uh that for for 27? Like when's that scheduled? Like tomorrow? >> It'll be March. >> The commitment to always do better for the future remains, but with lots of
gratitude to this incredibly amazing team, Mr. Manager. Thank you. >> Thank you all. Meeting adjourned. >> Thank you.