I do not want I already have snacks. >> Sorry. Okay, we don't need this many, I don't think. How many staff people are coming? >> Okay. How much time? Turn around. Already
stair. All right, we're going to have a snack table. >> Yeah, I'm I'm sitting on the floor. >> Sitting on the floor. >> Yes, I'm sitting on. This is not very bad. >> I think we should also put a microphone
here. Be on the floor >> with crayons. >> With crayons. this way. >> I'm sitting right based or floored. >> All right, I brought some nefarious
food. coffee. >> Yeah. >> Cool. All right. Oh, what? >> Oh, your campaign check or something. >> My qualifying fee, but you know, you make an account, you know, a month ago
or whatever, and they give you a little starter checkbook. I know I'm going to need to write two checks total out of the whole thing, right? One over there, supervisor, and one over here. So, That's what I'm using, right? It's like, well, this is a book of checks that don't have my name on them and all this
kind of stuff, but if they handed you a book or how's it going? >> Very good. I I will be sitting on the floor. You're welcome to join me. I think it's weird to be in things. I'd rather have no tables and just chairs >> and I'll be on the floor. >> Take the chairs down if you want. I think they put the tables there just so
they could have the microphone. >> Okay. I'm just Oh, well, sorry. Maybe I'm not saying >> for that seems better. And if anybody wants to participate in this group activity of counting cry,
this is like an alternative thing to keep things casual. [laughter] >> But now I have told everybody in Facebook land, we will know the number of crayons in this bag. >> And I was like, hey Ernie, you want to count some crayons? And he's like, >> did [laughter] this Ernie, he he
[clears throat] made it to I think the guy's name is Mark Roer. >> He's like a science engineer. >> Oh, no. >> So, he has a formula for that stuff. >> Basically, so that's a gallon ziplock bag. >> Yeah. Right. Like you you ought to be
able to pretty easily discern how many crayons are in this bag. But I'm going to be counting them cuz there's a contest to >> play. >> Well, I'm just going to put him right back in the bag. But I did tell people that I was going
to count these crayons. If some people want to be at tables, if you like it, that's cool. But like I'm sitting on the floor. [laughter] >> But yeah, if y'all are like eating, if you're eating it up there, you need a place to put your lunch. Like
>> I was just going to eat down here. >> Yeah. If you you want to have a laptop out and be normal, that's cool. >> Okay, we'll leave it out. [laughter] Yeah, if you want to be there instead of here, but we don't need six spots at a
table, I don't think. >> About to have 100. >> Man, everybody else was guessing way better than me. I thought it was like 1,700. Like that's what my original guess was. >> Oh, they have to guess how many credits? >> Yeah, >> less than I thought. People are going
like 250 and I'm like no way. >> But if that's to a pile. >> Well, there's 10 to a pile. >> Oh, 10. >> Yeah. So, this is going to be the first hund. >> I know. Uh I had a city manager once, Mr. Zumalt.
>> And anytime we had like a jug, guess how many things are in the jug, Mr. Zoomwalk would come in and he would, you know, start calculating the cubic inches of >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
>> You know, and then he would guesstimate or the size of the candy within the jug. And I mean, he would have got it. Yeah. >> And so he would be doing all these computations and then that would come out with his number. >> He was usually close
>> five to 10. [laughter] >> Pretty good. Pretty good. I know it was, >> you know. >> Oh, it's 12:05. Are we officially on air? All right. This unofficial meeting is a call to order or something, so everyone can talk about whatever they want. I'm counting crayons.
[laughter] >> Is the microphone close enough that >> my exciting >> my exciting stuff is being captured here? I'll put it really close. >> Loud and clear. >> All right. I I will uh >> clear >> I will narrate my crayon counting activities.
>> So what what happened to the meeting with uh Babe Ruth yesterday? >> It went well. Um we came up with a solution just for >> you're not talking into the microphone. >> I'm sorry. >> Um
>> three oh you know I keep doing bundles of six and not five. Did I put 12 in here? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10. Nope. Oh, hey little man. >> Any games? >> Oh, you know what? I bet the city has
bandits, so we we can find out. Who can tell us? You don't need to be here. You got stuff to do. Useful things to do. >> Hi. >> Okay. >> Hi. >> Can you state your name and address for the record?
>> Do you know what that means? So, do you know your address? >> Wait. 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 90 100 110 >> All right. >> 111
How are you? >> 30 40. >> Wait. Okay. So, our count is at 150 so far. Boom. All right. So, you're going to have to play something else. Can you watch Netflix?
>> Official question. At this official unofficial meeting where no business will be conducted, is the city's internet that is free to the public uh cut off such that little kids cannot watch Netflix here? >> No, I mean >> or play games which what things are banned?
>> No, you can [laughter] watch you can watch stuff. >> Stop doing that. >> You can watch stuff. You just can't play games. >> Okay, so you can watch stuff, but you can't play games. That sounds just like they did it at Legoland where they probably are pulling too much internet for kids to play certain games. Stop
touching the microphone. Go do something else. Go do something else. You can stay here and count crayons, but you can't stay in here and mess with the microphone. >> All right. What? >> All right. >> All right. What's up? >> So,
all right. So, what's your issue with this? uh doing the doing these meetings about amendment three. >> Yeah. I don't want to do it. >> Why? >> Because I So we're not doing all the amendments. We're like taking one out that a lot of people in the government just don't like. So everybody knows that
we have a predisposed, you know, air quote we the majority of people that work for the government don't like it. And yeah, you're showing up to be convinced why you should also not like it. It's just >> well, >> it's insulting to >> Well, okay. So, I think the one is being
pulled out by the city because it's the one that affects the city government directly, >> but the other stuff has stuff to do. I don't even know what they are. What are the other amendments? >> There are two other ones. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> And they have something to do with taxes. >> I I was looking them up the other day, actually. >> Yeah. Nobody knows what they are cuz we're only like having a little nip.
>> The only one that people The only one that people are talking about are is amendment three. That's the only one they're um talking about. >> Okay. Bring it in. >> Yeah. Um let's see here. Yeah, but I'm glad the League of Women Voters is going to do a little thing because they're going to cover it all
and they're not a nonpartisan group and they can do the same thing but not be, you know, weird about it. >> Well, what's weird about it? So, you you are making the assumption that we're going to be biased about it. And I I
will say that the way that it was discussed briefly in that in the meeting the other day and kind of even the way uh Mr. Bose said was that >> yeah presuming a presumption that of course this is a bad idea and we need to tell everyone why it's such a bad idea
like I don't know that it's necessarily bad. So what I kind of got from him when from what he said during that meeting was that yes he did say it that way but I I believe that he was talking about this is kind of the uh we can kind of go
up to this level like if we were to talk about things with a bias we could go up to this level um but not exceeding it right and that doesn't necessarily mean that we have to be talking about this necessarily with a bias.
I think we can talk about it in a way that's factual. >> Yeah. >> And and say that, okay, well, >> to hear that >> to hear the government tell it or the government the governor tell it, right? This is going to lower all of your taxes, right?
>> Um right, even the name of the bill, save us from excessive property tax. Not anymore. >> Well, not anymore. Yesterday, right? Um right. So Meyer is going to rewrite it and you know like David Johnson said be careful what you wish for, right? But that one could go back to uh court
again. Like if he doesn't write it in a way that's um unbiased, it it just goes back to court and a judge can do it again. If you do that enough times, you're too late to be on the ballot presumably and the whole thing doesn't even count. So I would say that if they
try to be too biased at the state level, they are playing with fire, right? Uh so what what I think is important because the state has already kind of set up that oh well this is what it is and
local governments are going to come at you with scare tactics. Those the that's the language they've adopted right in their talking points big air quotes scare tactics. So they've kind of set up um an argument against what we might say about it. And so
>> who's even there? >> They the state the state government when they all get up at the podiums. I I don't I don't remember which one exactly said that. Might have been Um Meer >> um said that you know you're going to hear all the scare tactics from the I mean somebody even typed it on my Facebook scare tactics. And I was like
okay fine. Um >> I think there's a bunch of bots. Have you noticed that it's the same people there? The same names show up not just on our post but like >> oh >> yo >> I don't know >> news people. And I'm like, whoa, this person said the exact same thing. It's like me and my my kids and my D. And I was like, whoa, that's the exact same
thing. Like, that can't be a person who's actually following all these different news places typing the exact same thing every time. >> Maybe. >> Well, I don't know. I think I think sometimes people do that because they maybe aren't clever enough to type a new thing every time. >> Um, you know, or or it could be, but
>> I don't know. I I don't I don't generally think that there's >> I don't think it's going to pass. I think it's a waste of time. It's a waste of everybody's time to think about it. >> Well, >> so >> so so like it is right up until it isn't right. So I mean I'll just give you an example like from from our recent
meeting, right? The thing about the the the backend parking, right? We we went around once asking questions. And you know, I I'm always I'm always sideways on whether I'm supposed to be asking questions or having a discussion cuz like sometimes in my mind they're the same thing. Like they're leading
questions like I know what I'm getting I know what I'm getting at, right? But then when we came back around um I uh you had kind of said some stuff during the discussion time and then for me you know and uh Miss Tuker looked
over at me. She's like oh you had something else and I was thinking well like I felt like I couldn't say it earlier but then I don't know I supposed to say it now or but also on ordinances right we're only setting up the public hearing. we're not voting on it now, like should I say my thing now or should
I say it later, right? But if you knowing that it was split in the LPA, I kind of felt like I have to say my thing now because if we don't vote to set the public hearing, then it's too late, right? Like I have to like and I don't know how the others are going to vote. So like I have to say this.
>> If you didn't set the public hearing, the project died, >> right? Right. If we don't set the hearing project died, right? So, it's like, okay, well, I have to say this now because not knowing what the vote's going to be. >> And I see that the same way here. You're saying, well, this probably won't pass. But like, if if we all just
>> So, what if I don't go though? Like, seriously, what So, what if I don't go? I don't show up. And then she needs to pass. Well, so what? >> Because because you have because you have an outsized influence with the uh with the residents, right? You have a large you
have a large you have a large Facebook following and whatever. And uh you know w with your title you are the the leader of the council. >> I that's so dumb and redundant. They can come to all of our meetings. We have so many meetings all the other times. Let's
>> But they won't. But they won't. >> They're not going to go to these meetings. >> Well, they might not. That that's that's perhaps >> Nobody's going to go to a special meeting where you get nothing at all but a thing that you already know the people are going to say. >> Well, okay. So So that's probably that's I guess where I'm getting at. People know what they're going to say. So if we
say something that is not dumb and >> nobody's going to show up because it's going to be you just say if people want to know they're going to find out it's not hard >> possibly. >> Yeah. Are we counting this as a crayon? Do I have everyone's consent that we are counting this as a crayon?
>> Sorting. >> I have a question. Can you color with it? >> You can color with it. Is there >> even though it may be deformed? It's it's a crayon of crayons >> because that just seems like Yeah, that's part of a
>> part of the process. >> Does anybody have any ideas what we could do with all these perfectly fine crayons? >> I don't know. I don't think the donate places take broken crayons. >> No. No. >> Wonder if that's going to be in the minutes discussion of >> resource room. >> Resource room.
>> They have new fresh crayons in the resource room, too. They always take >> everything is fresh and new. >> They always take they take donations poofs, too. If anybody knows anybody who needs those poof balls >> or wiggly eyes, I >> Yeah. Yeah, they they take goodness. They take >> I don't know how I ended up with all
these >> discussion of googly eyes. >> Yeah. Yeah. Somebody else has taken that. Discussion of crayons. Googly eyes. >> You know, it's it's funny. I am on I am on the um >> Florida Division of Elections website. I
went to the supervisor's website first and they said for information on >> the um >> amendments go to the division of elections >> and I have yet to find it. [laughter] >> I'm still looking though. >> Yeah. And a lot of the websites are still uh like when you search for it
it's like oh 2024 amendment two or whatever. It's like it's not the right one. >> I think I found something. >> Last night I was talking to somebody and he was like oh what's new? I was like h just amendment three. This is the police foundation thing. >> Yeah. He's like, "What? What are you talking about? I don't know what that is." I'm like, "Oh, that homestead
thing." Oh, the homestead thing. Nobody knows it's got a number or anything with it. >> All right. I found I found three. One of them is known as budget stabilization fund >> and it was uh HJR5019. And
>> wait, is this one of the other two? One of the three. >> One of the other two. Yeah. And I'm trying to see if I can pull up something that it proposes an amendment to increase the amount of funds that may be retained in the budget. >> Can you talk louder? >> Yes. >> It doesn't have to be in a microphone. I
think this is a bit of a hill, but like I can't hear you. >> It proposes a an amendment to the constitution to increase the amount of funds that may be retained in the budget stabilization fund from 10% to 25% of general revenue collection. require the
legislature to transfer the lesser of 750 million or the amount required to each 25% to reach reach 25% of the general revenue collections uh each year unless certain conditions are met and allow the legislature to
withdraw the funds for critical state needs. That's what that one says. >> Unless certain criteria are met. That's really helpful. [laughter] >> Yeah. >> And 75 words. Yeah. You know, 75 words, right? Okay. So then there's an exemption
to for of tangible personal property on agricultural land from taxation. And this is proposing an amendment to exempt tangible personal property habitually located or typically present on land classified
as agricultural used in the production of agricultural products or for agurism activities and owned by the landowner or leaseholder of agricultural land from abilorum taxation. And if approved, this amendment would
apply first beginning January 1, 2027. And then of course, amendment three is the uh the third one is the homestead exception. >> So two is lowering taxes on agricultural land. >> Yes. >> All right. >> And the other one, and that's probably why nobody's talking about the budget
stabilization fund because probably no one really understands what the budget stabilization fund is. And then the other one, yeah, the exemption on agricultural. Well, I assume it's kind of like how uh we're only allowed to use >> 3% >> of of our fund balance into the balance.
>> Same thing to balance the budget. Yeah. So, >> I don't get why everybody's thinking and everybody says it uniformly, the state budget is going to be upside down in a couple years. >> I haven't understood that either. >> Come sit on the floor. Have a microphone.
>> Are What's the rule on this? Does staff have to talk into a microphone? But if there's random people around, they don't have to be in a microphone. podiums here. >> But [snorts] do do those people have to be recorded? Cuz if somebody comes in a casual way, >> I think sunshine only applies to us.
>> I think so. >> Oh, >> okay. >> So that people get transcribed too or >> Yeah, there there are people that >> Oh, everybody's being completely transcribed, but we don't transcribe our regular meetings. We're only transcribing these meetings. >> Well, no. >> Well, YouTube does it automatically.
>> Yeah. One would think. >> So >> the nature of this meeting though, I don't think we have to have people talking into a microphone. Like they can say whatever. >> It's only for the recording, >> but it's not. But if they don't want to be recorded, they could just be in the minutes as long as you can hear and we can hear. The other people can not be on
TV, right? >> I guess the other people >> I don't think that Yeah. Nobody's here. Like >> this is weird. If other people came like >> All right. So what was the question? >> Welcome all of you to our show. He asked what the other other amendments were. [snorts] >> Was something specific you were?
>> No, I I think if I understand the mayor's question correctly, she was concerned about um some statements regarding future state budgets in their forecasting deficits. >> What is the magic of that? >> The magic of that, as I can best understand it, is that's driven by their
state economists that they rely upon for their future consumption based revenue projections. So they just think sales tax is going down or >> they just think that their revenue collections over time will be going down because if you take a look at the economic cycles that we've been through over the last couple of years, they've
been predominantly driven by the government sector, meaning we've had the American Rescue Plan Act, the inflation reduction act, and we've had the COVID 19 >> uh stimulus money passed through our economy and things that well all that money is just about spent. Okay? So,
we're actually seeing a reduction uh in our consumption-based revenues. What's offsetting that is folks moving into the state of Florida. Okay? And so, spending maintaining a certain level, but unfortunately, we we're not going to
know what those levels are until these monies have actually worked all their way through the economy. And that's what the state economists are looking at, the depletion of government spending at this time. Cool. When will this be online? Because we
know how many crayons there are now. >> Oh, you do? Oh, wow. >> I'm going to not count these as long as everybody agrees that we will not count. >> We're online now. >> We are online. >> Okay, we're online. We're live. >> Mhm. >> We're live.
>> Oh, there's a cheat. If anybody goes, it'll be easier to cheat. So, I'll just leave these out here. Nobody knows how many are in the piles unless they do and then they bake things. >> All right. So, [laughter] >> okay. So, yeah, I don't >> What does it take?
>> What would it take to to to to get you on board with these uh with theformational meeting? >> Do it internal to a regular meeting. >> Why are we here? >> If we because they won't let us do this internal to a regular meeting. We could cut off our reports.
Well, I'm I'm open to it. I do the same thing no matter what if whether we're in a council meeting or if we're remotely. I think the idea was was to go go to the residents, not have the residents come to us. >> We're not going to them. They still have to leave their homes. If they want to go
to them, they can turn on YouTube live any day we we're here talking about all the things you talk about. There's no secret about whatever we're going to do. [snorts] >> So, yeah. capable. >> I don't like to waste anybody's time, mine or other people's. I I think it is a waste of my time. I think it's a waste
of anybody's time who shows up to go to the meeting because they could have just >> come to the council meeting or whatever we put out in a succinct format in a social media post or in a newsletter. It will be so succinct that in about five minutes they can know exactly what we plan to do without wasting any of their
time. If they're coming because it's a social thing, well then we need to add a social element. So, if you add a social element where I can go socialize in the back and not be like sitting like idiot on a little stool at a thing while everybody comes and it's like, why are we getting a $48 million police station?
I don't want to do that again. That was dumb and it failed miserably. And and the assumption is I'm sitting on this stool. Therefore, I must agree with the things that the city is asking for. No, I didn't agree with that. And yeah, how is that helpful for me to go and be like I'm cool if we pass amend
then three be like I'm I'm cool consolidating police and fire all the things. Well, let's let's have a paradigm shift or not. I don't care. I should say I don't care. Like whatever scenario the people pick, cool with it.
Well, so the part that I think is important is that is that people are able to understand all the different all the ramifications of each choice, right? Like if if we go and do this, then the way I look at it and the way I've been
telling it to people is that there's kind of this set of things that where we can generate and offset revenue, right? And it's not going to be just one of these things. It'll be some combination probably of all of these things, right? So, you know, we talked about how we
could turn on the the fire district, right? We'd have to do a rate study for that, right? >> Um and that becomes uh we can uh hang on a second now. The fire district can only be done
fee. True. Can only be done with fees. It's a non a fee. It's what's known as a nonadvalum assessment. >> Nonadalorum assessment. >> That's why it's which Yes, it is a fee. So essentially known as a fee. >> Yeah. Fee fee versus fee versus millage, right? Because if it was millage, it
would be the same thing. You're >> exactly it would be subject to the homestead exemptions to the save our save our homes limit, you know, everything. But as a nonadalorum fee, then it's based on a forum a formula. So that's one thing. You can raise the
millage to match, right? It wouldn't be a roll back. It'd be a roll forward like Mr. Johnson said, right? >> Possibly. Yes. >> But then that shifts the burden to commercial. Shifts the burden to uh >> the smaller group to to renters. Right. >> This is a big conversation even right
here. We don't know what it does. This is not helpful. >> But but these are the things that I Okay. What >> this is >> the place there's a disconnect is there's a place is that >> not a waste of time because I'm counting crayons but you know [laughter] >> the reason it's useful is because
there's a disconnect in what you think is going to be said and what could be said >> add a social element so I do something useful while I'm there so I don't disrespect to the concept of the whole thing it's better for me not to be there
than show up and count crayons >> that's the problem like if you have if it's done in a way that you have contempt for it, it will undermine it >> whether you intend to or not. >> Right. So, >> well, we've already had June 29th.
>> We don't want to know what it would look like to consolidate. We're definitely going to not make the fire department the size that the fire chief said to do it. Like, >> what a what a absurd thing for our colleagues to have said. At least you're like, "Oh, we're going to do the math." Oh, no, no, we're not going to do the
bath. We're going to >> I mean, it it's it is an absurd thing to say out loud, oh, the fire chief tells us we need two more stations. We won't even give them one because as long as we don't expand and do the right thing, then we do it cheaper than the county. Like, that's not
>> Is that the right thing? >> That's not why you do it. >> Oh, that's the only way we the only way we're cheaper than the county by not expanding our fire department. >> I mean, that's not you. The reason you don't expand the fire department just to stay underneath the county millillage,
that's not why you do it. You don't expand the fire department because you don't have funds because we don't have the funds. But if that's not if the right thing to do is not to not expand our fire department, then we need to do the math. I do not know how to convey this to my colleagues. And uh apparently you guys are not behind the scenes
helping people understand that there is a big problem with us going around saying, "Oh, we're cool with half as many fire stations as the as the county fire chief and the local fire chief have said, well, you know, if we were really doing it ideally, this is how many we'd have." Well, all the fire oop, sorry,
I'm keep hitting this. All the firefighters surely know this. And here we are with it the not right amount, which you know, maybe it's okay. Do I feel unsafe? No. Well, but is it the right thing to do? Maybe also no. >> Okay, >> we need to run the math. But you also >> I've never heard that said before.
>> You never You don't remember that thing where Woodward gets up here and he's like, "Hey, we need four." >> I've never heard four. I don't remember four one one over where we all said we're not going to do it because it cost too much. >> Well, >> we don't have any money and we and then we're thinking, "Oh, well, now we're going to make a fee so we can have
fitzfuls of money." But what I okay what what I remember was is that um the place where we said we weren't going to buy that piece of land was was more like well that's not really the ideal place where it really should be is over there. So what I had understood was that three is the right number but not the place
where not ideally the place where we had looked at or been offered to to buy that piece of property. Really it really made more sense over there. So I don't know that anybody was advocating for four or or maybe I misunderstood. It might have been before you were elected. Do you all remember? Um, >> possible.
>> There was a time I remember one over there, one over there. >> I remember doing a presentation and we looked at what were the holes. >> Yeah. >> There was a hole on the west side, there was a hole on the northeast. >> And >> but either one of those, you're going to end up with the count running half of it
to the county. And then when half the county, it's like why do we pay for the all these fire stations when half of the service goes to the county? There's no when you have a first response agreement like we do, it doesn't make any sense to split up the money the way we do. Like the only thing that's going to ultimately make sense and feel fair is
to do the math and figure out what what it would take to >> the other alternative might be to share the costs with the county. >> Here's the what? >> Share the costs with the county. >> Joint station of a joint station. >> So if we end up with a fire fee and then So we end up with a fire fee and they
end up with an MSTU. >> I don't know. It's there's no way to make it feel fair when everybody's paying separately for different parts allocated different ways. Like it's it's just a paradigm shift potentially. >> What what they would need to do is if they want to continue, they're going to
have to they're going to have to switch over from a millillage. >> Why do they have to do that? They don't have to do that. They're allowed to have 20 mil cap. So they have the 10 mil for the county, 10 mil for the city, the city style services that the county provides. So they can just do whatever they want. >> Yeah. their millillage is still contingent to the to the uh homestead
exemption. >> So what then they just hike the millillage up? >> They could do that, >> but they uh I can't remember what their little thing is. Let me go grab my computer real quick. I'll tell you what theirs is like 50% or whatever is homesteaded. Like you have to look at Simol County as
a whole. Like what? Oh, I guess that's not even true. We need to look at only the parts that are in the fire district. That's a thing to ask David. Can you can you like send him a note and be like, "Hey, can you do one of those sheets?" You know what I'm talking about? The sheet that says he did one for the CRA.
Uh like what percents Homestead, what percents this, that, and the other >> in the fire district. >> For the fire district. Yeah. Because that would be interesting to see what impact that would have on, >> you know, because if it's mainly commercial or you whatever the percent is, you know, y'all know the thing. >> Yeah. back to different
>> cuz the fire MSTU encompasses uninccorporated and then some of >> cities so you can't just say oh only unorporated because it's not countywide right it's got to be the district >> got cuz it's got it's got Almont in there it's got Castleberry and they're
like super great so they can like also yeah so they can so winter springs will pull it back down but Alimmon will like boost it back up with like oodles of commercial and you barely a ding on a the taxi >> it's interesting Boom. Now we know the number of crayons.
>> So, League of Women Voters is going to do their thing. >> Yeah. >> Um, and they are they going to do all three or are they just going to do a three? Okay. Okay. >> And they have y'all seen them do their thing before? They did it at my house once because they couldn't find a >> Didn't they do it at at the
>> They've done it at the town. They've done it at the They've done it all the different places. I think the League of Women Voters did U candidate speed dating years ago. That's That's the one I'm thinking. That was at the townhouse if I remember right. >> And uh I've been to it at the chamber
hadn't come in one time. This is years and years ago, but that was really really good when Desta was involved, but I I've never been to a bad League of Women Voters thing that I felt was, you know, slanted or whatever. >> Mhm. >> So they they got a good track record,
but I have been to our stuff and ours is always slanted and I like the I like the vibe. Well, maybe we should learn to do them that aren't slanted. That's kind of what I'm getting at. Like, can we do this and do a good job and and do it justice and not look like we're >> talker? I don't think everybody wants me
to be the talker. >> Well, certainly you could talk. >> I don't even know who envisioned to be the talker. I thought it was staff was going to be the talkers and council was going to glow and smile and say, "Oh, aren't they
wonderful? Had everybody on their backs. Good job. Good job. [laughter] Let's keep all these people in board." >> I I can only I can only give my thought. Okay. And my thought one and and this is something
that Patrick and I have debated. I feel like we need to explain the budget cuz people don't understand, you know, like, you know, like Yeah, right. We need to meet people. They don't care and >> they want to know if if we do this, we're going to have a fire fee. >> They care a little bit. >> Here's what the fire fee was last time.
So, probably since the costs are now >> x% higher, >> probably your fee is going to be sort of in this range. >> They they care some, but they don't know where to start when it's thinking about it, right? Yeah. So when I talk to people and they're like, "Well, you know, what
about this and what about this?" Well, you know, you can go and look at the, you know, look at the the meetings, whatever, and like, you know, they they don't generally they've generally never been on Prime Gov, like like all the kind of things, right? But they're they care enough to ask a bunch of questions when I'm at the farmers market or at
their door or whatever. So there's, you know, there there's there's so don't know and don't care are a are are a vin diagram and and there's there's there's overlap, but it's not complete, right?
There are people who care if you >> if you give them all the stuff on a silver platter. >> Yes. Right. >> And if we people are too suspicious of us, we can't hand them anything on a silver platter because everyone will think it's suspicious if it's anyone except for me. Well, that's a concern
that we have in in watching what's happening with other local governments. That's a concern we're having that whatever we say is just going to be vilified, >> right? And what you just said, they're suspicious if it's somebody other than you, right? >> Some people are perhaps. >> I mean, some people I said, well, uh,
yeah, that's true. Well, >> well, so hostile to government >> that people are probably like, well, >> you know, she's she beats everybody upside the head every now and then. Probably can believe her, >> right? And that's why I think it's
important to do something that like I I want to hear >> make it social. I want to hear >> have a tea party >> what it takes to get >> what it is that what's the right type of information for us to be saying >> if it's a Q&A that you're on board with
>> I wouldn't do any kind of presentation I would just do a Q&A like we've put out all this stuff if you guys have any questions show up at this time >> and ask some questions that's different than here we're going to spoon feed you propaganda it's like we gave you the propaganda the legally permissible
non-propaganda in all the formats that maybe you looked at, maybe you didn't. If for some reason you can't figure out where you stand on this and you have actual questions, come on and ask us. And maybe even a little thing on the online that says put in your question ahead of time in case it's a question
that like is actually a thoughtful not that people won't ask thoughtful questions, but like maybe it takes research or whatever figure. >> So So doing something that is not going to be perceived by us directed by >> not perceived as propaganda. Right.
Right. So I it it is easy. I I understand that. Yes, it's easy for it to kind of look that way when it starts like oh here we go. >> Mr. Cobb's going to tell us he needs more money cuz you know big government etc. whatever right? You know like yes there are people that are going to start
from that right? So you have to be on guard. you have to be on like on guard in your planning like you know as you um just as a as a matter of discipline of thought right that like okay we start this from you have to make something
that doesn't look like it's self- serving right yeah so those are the hardest kind of presentations I've ever had to make in business where it's like well I'm going to tell you the right answer and it turns out the right answer also benefits me so you know you have to go about it in a way that you have to
make it a lot more airtight when you know cuz sometimes cuz people want you to tell the truth right in business right >> then you go make the presentation and I'll be somewhere else until the Q&A part >> right but if >> anything that is not >> right but if you're going to be >> anything that's not audience driven I'm out >> if you're going to be unhappy with it
and you're going to be telling people it's propaganda then >> then it undermines the whole thing right so so what is the way that we can do this that you won't think it's propaganda >> we don't do a presentation >> well so we do but
>> answer questions. >> Um, so we just have one big we just say public comment. >> Mhm. >> Well, what if we just come and just do public comment? >> But but there has to be some facts to talk about, right? So like that that flyer you guys made. >> Well, the facts would be out ahead of time. I don't think anybody's going to
show up to these >> except to yell, >> but Well, that's also representative. They want to show up and yell. I mean, I'm happy >> they can show up and yell at our regular meetings. Then we have like and the whole thing cuz presumably well I I don't know are these going to be
>> videotaped cuz we'll all five be there. We're all going to interact. So I guess we got to video it, put it on YouTube and have minutes since we'll all be there. >> So So you know as well as I do that regular meetings for most people the
signal to noise ratio of what things that they care about is low. Right? because you do all this consent agenda that you know it means something to us cuz we looked at all the packet and whatever but you know it's fairly non-controversial things and goes right
through. There's no there's no like public interest part of that whereas a person might like unless you're really into >> well there's no interacting those people >> comments there's no like >> well right but but I'm saying that like you know there's times where you know
like two meetings ago like it was a it was a really great meeting because we had all these different things happen that people cared about you know rural boundary and and all that kind of stuff like that's something people care about and they watch that and they're like man okay well yeah that was cool and they had discussion and whatever and saw the different sides of and people came up and spoke and and all that. Like that's
interesting to most people, right? This last meeting we had was really not all that interesting, right? >> The beginning was name is >> uh Well, yeah. Yeah. The the art Yeah. I looked it up. >> But in general, >> that is a Luna moth. >> I know. That's >> I didn't know that was a Luna. >> That's why I I said I want the Luna and
then I ran out here and said nobody. [laughter] >> So it's native. I was like where where I love those. So I went and looked it up. I'm like where is this blue this green butterfly coming from? like, "Yeah, this is weird." And I was like, "Well, it's not." >> And they have a big um they have a big cocoon thing that's like wrapped with
like fiber or whatever and I find those in the yard sometimes. >> We looked them up and that's like Yeah. Um I I mean I've only seen a handful of them, but yeah, they are really cool. >> Yeah. >> I think they're endangered also. >> Oh, are they? >> Yeah, if I remember right.
>> And she was here >> yesterday. She was here yesterday. >> A little thing. said she was going to be here lunch hour on Tuesday. >> I think she's coming back Thursday, too. >> To what? For >> to just like do a little >> Yeah. If people walk in, she just talks about >> Oh. to just give uh give uh to her.
Yeah. Oh, that's awesome. All right. I'll try to make one of those if uh if I find out. >> Okay. So, >> signal to noise is fairly low on regular meetings for most people. So, you're saying that people could come and like watch what's in the meetings? Well, they're not going to because like the
meetings are still for them. we just get the part of the meeting and say, "Look, here's the cutouts of all the meetings we already have that have stuff that relate to this, you have to source documents." >> Well, that's a possibility, >> you know. I mean, so so what you're saying is that at a regular meeting
instead of being at the cultural center, we say, "We're going to have >> we're going to break and have a conversation, >> staff presentation or whatever." And >> presentation. Well, I guess we could, but there like a lot of comments when they say stuff and then we just look at them blankly and don't do anything to
reports like that. That's not cool, man. We can't do it kind of. >> Well, you should bring that up in your report and we can look at modifying the rules and procedures because we do what's in the rules procedures. We could we could do that differently. >> I mean, you know, kind of like winter springs, they get yelled at for an hour
at the beginning and then they get yelled at by the same people for an hour at the end. They got they got a lot and they have it if there's any ordinance or anything in the middle and people come up and yell out of beige, right? >> You know, I mean you could do we could do anything. So like I'm I'm also interested in that because people come and they give public comment and then
they leave and it's like dang it. There was one years ago and it was it was about the lights at the basketball court and and someone came to talk about it. >> People stand they like wait and wait and then they like realize we're not going to talk about it. You talked about it at the end and it was like, well, you know,
we we have to move the power and whatever and it's going to be this many days and whatever and it's going to be back and we staggered it so that we're not turning them both off at the same like you gave a really good, you know, thing. I was like, man, >> they didn't hear any of it >> and >> dang it. If we could have just talked about it at the beginning, then we would have a resident who would understand and
perhaps be happy about, you know, this this happening and uh so anyway, I I I'm interested in in stuff like that also. So um >> okay we should like but back on this thing should we put that like officially on agenda discuss interact in your report right away you can say it in your
report and get consent to put it >> on like we can just say right now hey can we have this be a discussion item or is there a rule that we have to have three people agree to make it >> well that's what's in the rules and procedures is that there has to be a majority to put something on a discussion item. All right. Well, somebody remind me to >> ask to have a discussion. >> All right. If you don't bring it up, I
will. >> Okay. I'll forget. >> Um, >> probably. Okay. Maybe not. >> So, so perhaps what you're suggesting is we have >> So, I don't think you can have no presentation. I think I think you have to start off with some facts, right? Rather than rather than, hey, we're just
going to take public comment. >> You know what would work though? Okay. So, you take the original language and put it up there, read through it, do whatever the modified language is that they're going to come up with. if it's not completely off the ballot completely by then because approved language.
>> Uh so yeah, we just wait till was when's the first one? September 16thish. >> So if it even happens. >> So we got like six weeks. >> So do both of them and be like, "Okay, here's what happened. This is not true." Like there's no guaranteed funding. Uh
like you just need to know these things are true, not true, and here's the reason it got changed. and something really really basic high level not specific to OVTO because you know these people shouldn't vote based on I mean I'm going to live here forever you might live here forever but
people should vote based on what is good policy for wherever I live my entire life whether I'm here somewhere else >> as long as it's in the state of Florida I guess. >> Yeah. So I I don't know that it I don't know that OTO getting all micro into OTO
is the right lens at all. >> Uh perhaps >> like we need to put the info out there and have it be accessible somewhere. >> There's also a sense in which like it it does it does affect cities and counties in many of the same ways. Not entirely, right? Because they have they have
different taxing authority at the county level than we do here. Um and then there's overlap and and all that kind of stuff. But um it's h it would be harder to try to make arguments about you know well if you live in unincorporated it's like this
because we don't really speak for unincorporated right we don't speak for the the county commission and what they will perhaps do to their mill but >> MSU we don't know >> right but also um what they do does
affect us so um perhaps Perhaps we could say things about both, but but what you said a minute ago, I think that that does make a lot of sense because there are things that uh are true and objective that are not obvious about it, right? So, the thing about limiting what
you can spend money on. Yeah. There's those >> there's those four bullet points about what you can spend money on and then the last four words of the last one negate all of the rest, >> right? And as long as it's not prohibited by general law. >> Not prohibited by general law. Right.
But which changes nothing. >> Well, no, it does because that's the that is the language that gives the legislature the authority to make amendment says you have to >> but they already have that authority >> and they just haven't done it, >> right? >> That that's where I say it means nothing
because they could do that today like amendment or no amendment. >> I don't know if they could or couldn't that. >> Oh, really? >> Yeah. Oh, so >> I guess they could >> with adalorum. >> They can restrict advalorum or not? >> I don't know. >> Well, they can affect it in different ways. If you think about it, they changed the way that the mill rate was
calculated could or could be approved this year. >> I mean, so >> they can they can tinker with all the rules, I think. >> But I mean, that's I mean, that's that's really >> well they can tinker with all the rules as to cities, I think, because cities are like this. You counties must exist
and they must provide certain things, but cities like completely optional entity. But but as far as telling us what we can spend money on. >> Yeah. >> I mean presumably there are things that are illegal for a government to spend money on. >> Probably. Yeah. And they could make the list bigger.
>> Yeah. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> So, so there are things like that where a person reading through that they're like, "Oh, I see what this is about. This is about making it so they can only spend on these things." Well, that's good because I don't want them to waste money on frivolous stuff. And it's like,
well, that's actually not going to happen. That's not like that's that's a thing that's not going to change and that's a part where um if if people are looking to be educated about it where we can say you know you think this and the state left this in
there so that you would be misled into thinking this and our attorney is telling you right now that that is not going to be the case. >> But it can't be somebody on our team. It can't be on team Ovito. Somebody who's neutral has to say this stuff or
nobody's going to believe. >> Oh. Uh >> well, do you believe it? >> Believe what? >> Well, I mean the thing I mean >> it was a lie. The the original ballot language contained the judge was very nice. He said statements of misfact or so
>> called it slogan. >> Well, he says the title, right? But >> but he he didn't say nowhere in there did he use the word lie. And I was like, man, I I'm just like oversimplifying it saying that the ballot language is a lie because it was. But you know, somebody ought to say that, but I can't. Well, I can say it, but I should not say that in
a formal setting. That's >> So, the ballot summary might change, but somebody actual law, >> right? But somebody who looked at the law or read an article about the law or read a preliminary article about the law before the last part got put in or whatever.
>> Um, you know, somebody who's looking at it from a fiscal conservative point of view might say, "Oh, yeah, this is all this is all great. We're limiting what government can do." Yes. >> Until the last one. Yeah. But but it's a lie, right? So So this is the thing. This this is what I'm saying. Here's an
example of something that we could >> say that the general public might not know because they're not following as closely as we are. >> That's why having this kind of thing, >> but we can say that. So we can say at a meeting, we can stream it. Like old
people can find internet. >> Uh and old people are there at night. >> They have to know that it's there. How they know this is there. Nobody's going to know this is there any more than they know any regular meeting is there. It's going to be the same time different. >> Wait, are they all at night? Are they three at night or is it or any
>> ones during the day? I thought >> we had pardon [clears throat] me. We had planned on doing uh the October session at the senior center at 11:00 a.m. >> Okay. >> During the day to utilize to target that audience and like Mr. Cup say, >> "What are people going to find out that this thing is happening?" I don't know. >> I don't know. The same way they find out
about anything else. >> Maybe it would soon get to everybody. I don't know. >> Maybe. Maybe someone will put it in her newsletter. >> I can't because then I would make my newsletter public record. >> That's true. >> Yep. >> So I can say it on my Facebook page.
>> It cost money to Megan Clinger's latest Facebook page, right? >> Huh? >> Is it the mayor page? Facebook page. >> The Megan one. >> No, I can't put it on my personal page because that's a public record, too. I don't put anything that could be a record on my personal page. >> Okay. >> And I never delete anything from my mayor page.
>> Mayor page. Yeah. All right. So, so what are the Maybe I should just ask >> are we going to have a tea party? Do we we talk about we're going to have a tea party that's social? >> Well, I No, I'm I'm asking one of the ways that we >> I can envision the 11:00 being super fun. So, I'm I am uh on tap to do a
couple of chats with senior groups between now and November. And since I'm no good at doing monologues, I said, "Hey, how about we do it on Amendment Three?" So, I I have some data now. I created a Google poll uh that nobody's filled out yet, but like so I'm going to
do it group by group and be like do you like true or false and and like maybe that would be a fun way to do it to just do like a true false people come in and like we get not like a word all but like similar idea where you just like then you kind of have the temperature of the
room like how off base from reality are people like you like is it true that you will have everything all property taxes eliminated except for schools and a lot of people believe true and then you're like okay well 40% of the people in this room think this is true when there's
like it's just not true it's just not true and then you can >> but it will be >> you can so you can like address actual issues that are sort of brought to you by the people who are in that space >> versus us pushing stuff that we don't know anybody's interested in like if you
if you see the problem with from my perspect not problem exactly the the issue to contend with is how do you fix misinformation? And you have to know what the misinformation is. And if the media and regular people, the League of Women Voters, if everybody will have
corrected the complete misunderstanding of all this and M3 stuff by the time we are to September 16th and if it's all corrected, then like what are we doing? We don't need to do anything. I think it's going to fail. >> Well, that's that's true. But, you know, much much like my example from the
meeting up there, it's like, well, I can do nothing, but I don't know if it's I have to plan for that. I have to >> plan for nothing. >> No, I have to plan for I don't know how other people are going to vote. I I have to You're saying that we should let other people do it, but we don't know that they're correct misinformation.
>> We don't know. There's Mr. Kushai if you wanted to ask him about the internet. >> Oh, yeah. Oh, nah, not that bad. >> Okay, >> we'll find out though. An official question. >> 50 ft, but not 75 ft. you were just [laughter] okay trying I'm trying to get his attention. Mike,
>> could you could you join us for a second? >> We have an official question involving gaming. [laughter] All right, for everybody watching on YouTube, we've got the IT director coming in here to answer the six-year-old's question. >> You could ask him not on the mic. Okay.
So the so uh my my [clears throat] incoming first grader has noticed that he cannot play games with the Ovito free hotspot. Are are there like limits? >> There's restrictions on >> Okay. So what are the restrictions? >> There's a lot of them. [laughter] >> He says there's a lot of them.
>> Even on the public Wi-Fi. Public Wi-Fi. >> Yeah. Public Wi-Fi. Well, I know you can't do outgoing email. So I'll come up here and I like do all my stuff and I it's waiting in my outbox and I go to a different internet connection and then release them to the wild. >> You haven't restricted. So how much bandwidth you can get?
>> So the games just take too much bandwidth >> streaming and taking away from everybody. >> Oh, he's streaming in there. >> But he's got you can stream just so much. >> Okay. >> But we also have to have the restrictions the state of Florida puts on. >> Oh, there's restrictions from the state of Florida.
>> Banned websites. >> Oh, what are the banned websites? Like what's what's we're not going to recite them here. >> The most interesting one like what's one that you would not expect? Tik Tok. Okay. No Tik Tok. Okay. >> Okay. So, but so you can check Facebook from this site, but you cannot do Tik
Tok from here. >> Even it it has limits. >> Okay. >> Interesting. >> If there's too many people on it, especially when we have an event in the park, >> Mhm. >> it takes all the bandwidth away from everybody else. >> Mhm. >> Interesting. So I think on campus on
SCPS campuses it might be possible that face is Facebook banned and one one year I heard it was banned. I don't know if it's back. >> I don't know if it's not on the Florida BMS list. >> Well, it's not on the list, but I think they might have done it anyway to keep everyone focused or something. I don't
know. Maybe maybe this was just a fluky thing and I I got wind of it and it was just one day. All right, cool. Thank you. >> Well, I'm glad it's banned because now he's doing something besides video games. [laughter] Uh, so where are we at? Oh, uh, the thing I was saying was that like if you plan for everybody else to do it and
then nobody does and or doesn't do it right or whatever and then the vote happens, you're like, "Oh, blast. I should have said the thing beforehand, right?" Cuz you don't know how it's going to go. >> We can plan to do some stuff and then re-evaluate it and maybe like not tell anybody we're going to do it until September 7th or whatever. >> Well, that's a possibility.
>> Yeah. So we just and we don't anything that involves planning it just seems like >> contrived propaganda. So like there can be no planning >> a bullet point of >> bullet point list of things that cuz cuz we [laughter] already came up with >> I don't think
>> he was the planning director you know >> I don't know but there could if there's if there's planning if there's organizing then it looks like we're trying to sway people >> but you have to start with facts. You know, go ahead. >> You've known me long enough. You know I prepare for everything. >> Yeah.
>> You prepare for you can prepare by having the old thing on a slide and the new language on a slide and start from there. We could prepare by having a Google form with a QR code so people can punch it in or they can just do a little quiz when they come in and somebody can manually add them all up to get get a
kind of an idea of the level of confusion in the room. And then you just speak to speak first to the confusing points and then do Q&A. You we don't even we don't need to like volunteer. Oh, we're 49.5% of our budget comes from
homestead apartments. Nobody cares about that. They care about me. And you know, everybody's going to come thinking only about themselves, which is, you know, fine and wonderful, but they don't they don't care about the things we're going to tell them. >> But you have to start with some kind of you have to have some kind of
background. The background is spiral out. The background is this is the language. Here's the language. The judge knocked it down. Here's why they knocked it down. >> But that's just the ballot language. I mean, the the actual amendment language is what matters, right? >> Well, I guess we can talk about the ballot language, too. The ballot
language. >> The reason it's a problem is because people think that it preserves funding for police and fire and stuff like that. No, it doesn't. And that it prevents you from raising the millillage. No, it doesn't. So there can be very basic things through the context of what was struck down and what is now here and say
you know here's why the judge said it's not true. This is not true as to O veto because the we're allowed to have this be the rate if this passes 7.9 or whatever it is. And so you know we just raise the taxes we're allowed to have fees. We're allowed to do all these
things. And but that is within the context of a very simple framework of you know here's the bad language here's the language it is and yeah because it because it makes four false statements and that's what everybody's going around
in their brain thinking oh that sounds pretty good and does sound pretty good and it's not true >> four false statements that >> so >> isn't it four false statements in that got knocked down I thought it was four >> oh you mean that were in the >> in the ballot language Yeah. But so that
is what people have seen. Nobody's looking at the law. Nobody's thinking about it very much. I think the ballot language is what we should address. >> Well, but I but I think that's part of the it's the simplified that's the simplified framework that goes on the ballot. So that's the simplified framework we should use.
>> Right. But in in the context have a five page. Nobody puts a five page sumage. >> It's in the context of the amendment language. Right. But they but people just need to see side by side like here's why it's false and nobody's really totally done. You
know who did do that? Somebody sent me works in this space. I can't remember his name now. I feel bad because he might watch this but probably not. Um and it was a comparison of Miami and the impact of Miami versus Port St. Lucy and and like the percentages and all this stuff. And I was like that's like the
iconic comparison uh for like the whole state of Florida. if you have to pick, you know, a real contrast and who's going to be beat over the head like poor Port St. Lucy because they're just they're really super spread out. Um >> I guess I don't exactly know what you
mean. I don't know that area. >> I need to go find that. Uh I need to go find that. >> Are you saying that they're more rural than I mean obviously they're really spread out and there's a lot of new growth. Not rural, but I mean >> so like from a grow strong town's perspective, it's very Ponzi scheme dependent and it's very suburban and
spread out. >> Suburban is what I was Yeah. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Okay. So, have you made any progress? [laughter] >> No. >> Well, what do you What do you think, Mr. Kelly? You're >> As long as there's a social aspect, like it needs to people will come if there's
a social thing and there's like a a if there's a happy hour, like if we did it at the golf course, >> could bring your Open bar. That would be super fun. [laughter] >> Did you say open bar? >> No, not open. You know, the bar would be open. >> The bar would be open. That's different.
I think >> people could get their own stuff at the golf course. >> Perhaps the other would have more. >> And it would be sort of interesting, right? >> You may affect attendance. If there is an open bar, [laughter] >> if there's a pay as you go, like if we if we went to >> people there, >> you you'll increase attendance.
>> Yeah. If we went to Miller's Ale House, we could say, you know, we're going to go to the This is a place people go and they eat. That's going to the people saying, "Come to the senior center at 11:00." >> Well, the seniors go to the senior center. >> Some of the seniors, the seniors willing to pay because there's nothing you can
do at the senior center. >> Only some of the residents go to Ae House, right? >> But >> that's true. >> But we could pick a place that people go. We could say Parkplace Pub. We're gonna go to food factory. And you can either you can get your drink in there. you come out there and it can like be a whole street party and we'll have like a
street party of Q&A and we'll be like, you know, on the street corner telling the good news of the taxes or something. >> The golf course is interesting because >> the golf course is very interesting, isn't it? >> We presumably wouldn't have to pay to rent it out,
>> right? I think the golf course is extremely interesting >> and it wouldn't be open anyway because it's dark. >> Yeah, >> I think the golf course would be fun. >> That that thing that we did uh that me and Keith were at. >> I don't even remember what we were talking about. Something like it was
just like a little Q&A about the conservation easement stuff that man that was you know there was alcohol involved for some of the people in attendance [laughter] and that made it way more interesting. Like if you're going to go to something that's boring. >> Yeah. >> Perhaps.
>> And at the same time, I'm worried sick over your safety. >> You know what? >> Because at the meeting at the golf course, I'm getting I'm getting people are calling me saying, "This is getting angry. This is getting violent. This is getting this." And I'm
sitting there thinking, >> "You're there. You're there. I was there." Yeah. You Yeah. You and Mr. Britain are there. Not video in the thing. >> I'm on the phone. I'm like, [laughter] let's get a police officer. You know, we we we are going back and forth. Is it time? Is it time? You know, we didn't
want we didn't want to >> escalate it. So, but at the same time, we were worried. >> There's nothing to be worried about. Never. Never thing to be worried about. But like some people had severe. >> Oh, we were. We were worried. We were worried. >> Well, but but but we don't envision
uh one of these meetings about taxes to be that way. >> I would hope not. But, you know, I that at least you can you can say, "Well, I'm going to go get a hamburger." This is like a double interesting thing because they have veggie burgers and and sweet potato fries. >> I've heard about the veggie burgers. Yes, >> they're very good.
>> They are. >> Um, >> and the sweet potato fries are very good. >> Any of these events would have an OVO PD Yes. >> presence, whether it was here. >> See, now that makes it that's a chilling effect right there. I wouldn't do >> I wouldn't do police visibly.
Well, I mean, >> and it never even occurred to me that we'd have police stationed at the cultural center like, "We're coming to talk about taxes. We're really worried you guys are going to get rowdy or that we're going to like >> There's a detail for council meetings." >> I know, but >> yeah. So, >> nobody's following me around that I'm
aware of other places. >> It's all about your safety. >> Well, >> I don't feel unsafe. I think we need to all deescalate. I'm feeling unsafe. >> Do you feel unsafe? You don't feel unsafe. >> Do you feel unsafe? [laughter] No, you delay.
>> I don't I I read articles. Now, granted, these communities are nothing like ours, but I read articles all the time about people going to people's houses, people catching them at the grocery store, people catching them at the gas station. >> Catching? What do you mean catching? People stop >> confronting.
>> Oh, >> in angrily ways. And you know, I just read one the other day where >> skin >> a well that yeah, part of that, but you know, I I get I get these things where talk about where city managers are leaving their jobs because they're
getting you know these and they use the word attack um you know out and then it affects their family because it happened in front of a child or it happened in front of the wife you know >> and >> I maybe I shouldn't belittle the
experience. I mean by all truly >> there's a lot of there's a lot of government people out there. >> It only when it's the one Yeah. >> You know when when it was my children it only happened once >> and it was when when Kendall was nine
and the police chief stepped in and and said, "Bring him into my office. I'll explain everything to him." Cuz he honestly believed that someone was going to show up at our house with a gun. because and it was all in related to
that when the gentleman showed up at schoolboard meeting and started shooting people. >> He just knew that people were going to show up at our council meeting, >> you know, and uh so that he felt better. He stopped having nightmares, >> okay,
>> so h having it at >> having at the golf course, >> having hang on having it at the golf course versus having at the cultural center, there's no there's no difference in the amount of safety. I mean because you we started talking about that and then you said you were worried about the previous meeting. It's like okay do you do you feel there's some kind of
>> that that the safety issue >> the biggest difference is is that the cultural center allows more people. >> You you're confined to a small group of people at the golf course. >> Okay. >> You know and the >> it gives us better AV. >> Yeah. I will say this that you know
there's a certain level of infrastructure it'll take for us to stream this and bring mics in and you know I don't know if the golf course has you know >> well we're doing it three times so we don't need to stream it every single time really I mean how many times do people need to hear the same thing
>> as long as we're acting within the rules set by the council >> yeah the council said stream it >> stream all of them well can't we just we don't have to stream we can just take a video post it >> that night or the next day >> the the council Can the council can change direction?
>> Council can change direction. Um so you know uh uh so to do it at the golf course at all would be a change in direction. So this would >> um if we wanted to do that it could be brought up at a meeting and then that could be brought up with it say hey well it's kind of hard to stream there also.
So is it okay if we don't stream that one but we do stream the other ones or something like that post the video later or something. >> Yeah or something. Yeah something. But do we have do we have like a mic thing that works that like a portable mic? I've got one that I could bring to something. >> Yeah,
>> cuz that that's the one thing. Had I realized at that golf course meeting that there were going to be that many people like I was expecting to just like sit down and have my burger and fries and like three people would be there, but turned out there were like 100 people there or something. Um, and there
was no PA system. So yeah, as long as we just have like a super casual PA system, as casual as having your own PA system can be, it could be anywhere. Could be the food factory. >> Yeah. Well, with council direction. >> Yeah, with council direction. >> Agreed. Just caution you against going
to >> places like that. >> What? >> There are people going to be there >> trying to have a meal with a family and may might not want to be bothered by a bunch of people showing up to talk about taxes for >> other golf course. The golf course
totally works. >> It' be after hours. >> The golf It would be at the It would otherwise be closed, right? What What time's the golf course closed? And the restaurant closes at the same time. Is that true? >> Yeah. We can't close the restaurant. Like the whole point is to have the restaurant >> be open cuz that makes it funner.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Oh. Oh. >> It makes it way funner. >> Oh, okay. Oh, so now you're talking about extended hours at the golf course restaurant. >> Yes. Yes. >> For people to >> Yes. >> buy food. >> To get food. >> Yes. because that makes it funner. Then you have like a then you have a reason
to go besides like go just going to a boring meeting to hear things you've already heard before where you've already probably made up your mind >> that presumably doesn't incur very much cost because >> well it could cover it could cover the cost of itself. >> Yeah. Well, if people buy enough food.
>> Yeah. >> But >> well, we could and it Well, >> I'd say it could cost some money. >> Yeah. >> If you have it open and people don't buy any food. >> Yeah. But if you if the meeting starts at 6:00 and you say, you know, come early to get
your food so you can be eating it. Like you go to Alma Cinema Grill, you get your food and the movie's going. Wow. >> Exciting. >> Yeah, I'm not I'm not opposed to this. I think it's an interesting idea to do one
there maybe or do a little do a coffee thing like >> this is weird because we have like tables everywhere and nobody's eating but me and sort of a little bit are >> but like >> I'm busy talking. >> Yeah. When you make it really formal and creepy then people are going to come and be like, "Oh, they're serving us up some propaganda."
>> I don't know. People come. >> But if you just like come and you're like, "Oh, I'm having some coffee. I'm going to make some tea. Yes, I drink tea, too." >> Went to that Mitchell hammock thing and there was loads of people there. Mitchell Hannah thing. >> Uh not Mitchell Hammock, sorry. McCullik went to the McCullik meeting, right? About the widening McCullik.
>> That was that's a that's a rural boundary thing. That's kind of >> very different. >> Sort of different. >> There's people who are >> anyway food and meeting and all of that stuff and people >> Wait, they had food? >> No, they did not have food.
>> Okay, I know. But at least you're near food. >> I guess you could make a >> always near food. >> Make an exciting night. Well, well then maybe we should actively encourage people to kill two bird somehow kill two birds with one stone rather than sitting still in a chair. I'm fixing to have to
move out of this chair again because I'm too short to sit in this chair. Um yeah, as long as there's some way to kill two birds with one stone. If I could take up knitting. I just don't have the patience for knitting. >> So
okay. So, yeah, anytime. >> Part of this was to talk about the plan. >> Yeah. Content. >> That's where I was going. Yeah. So, don't talk about that. >> No. >> Don't talk about what? >> Well,
>> I'm I'm asking, should we talk about >> But you would talk you would talk about it in the context of the old thing says that police and fire are going to be funded first and then we'll cut other stuff. like talk about it in the context of yes, we will get as much revenue. Here's how we will get as much revenue as before. And I keep telling people
that and they're like, "You're so mean." And no, like everyone just needs to know, well, three people on June 29th basically said, "We're going to do whatever it takes to get as much money as we did the year before." I I think that that's a oneliner. Took me less than 30 seconds to say it. We don't even
have a meeting to say, "Yeah, at least three people here are going to vote to do whatever it takes to get your money no matter what." that I don't >> like why why would a fair characterization of totally a fair characterization. >> No, I I don't not that >> there's no decrease of service.
>> Disagree with those >> with those words. Maybe perhaps >> we should >> I mean in principle >> we should distill that and get clarity on it because that's how it landed for me. Well, in principle, I I think that's the starting position is you start off
with, you know, where we are right now is what it costs to run a city, right? I mean, we we do all >> if we insist on having our own police and fire department, yeah, this is what it costs. >> So, if nobody will entertain a paradigm shift, then we will not do anything to
decrease the amount of taxes we collect. But it's probably going to cost. >> We need to tell people this, >> but it's probably going to cost very close to the same regardless of how we do it, right? >> Because >> I don't know. >> First person to to jump ship and go to the to the sheriff,
>> they will not have yet put an MSTU into place. So those people win big. >> So the first people to do it may I after so many cities do it, depending on I don't think this will pass. But if it did pass, I think that is the direction it would go. And uh eventually the
county will create an MSTU to cover that stuff. But they won't at first and we would just be like, "What jerks we are [laughter] eliminating $60 million in costs without doing anything to to bolster your budget, Simino County, but create a replacement."
>> They probably want an interlocal to do that also, right? Which would cost >> Do they have to do it? I don't know. Like what are what are the legal rules for that? It would it would >> I think with the sheriff >> there does no no no no no no no this is not where it goes. So the sheriff has to cover us. We do not have to give him any
money. We don't have to give him any more not a dime more than we pay already as residents of Simol County. >> I don't think he'll do that. >> He does not have to give us whatever we desire for that price point. But his role and his constitutional mandate is
to cover the entire county. So he would have to in his own singular judgment without our input decide how or if to shuffle the existing personnel he has with the budget the BOCC gives him. But nobody can compel us to have an interlocal or to give more money to the
sheriff or to have any kind of of agreement and the county. We cannot compel them to have an MSTU. But what I've told all of them is that they should create an MSTU because if we're going to play a game of chicken ever, it would be better to have a mechanism where whereby if somebody does opt out
of providing their own police, you automatically go into this MSTU tax district to cover that style policing. >> The the way it is with fire. Yeah. Yeah. Basically, >> when I when I looked at the statute, it said yes, he has exclusive
authority over the unincorporated. >> And if we stop saying he's kept out of here, >> but he only has I think uh >> we >> it's like a Jason authority. >> That's because we have an agency. If we
cease to have an agency, then he's allowed to come in here and he can choose not to. That's what I'm saying. He doesn't have exclusive authority over the city >> because we have have said, "Oh, don't worry. You don't have to come in here. We're just going to tax our people to high heaven to duplicate the service
that we're already paying for once." Well, not duplicate it. We are going to pay the same amount and get no discount and also pay additionally to create our own such that it is not a problem that you're not covering in here because we did this thing. That doesn't make any
rational sense. Well, I see how it could have made sense. And if we were like Orange County and had an MSTU for the people in unincorporated areas that they were paying, well, then it would be fair. But that's not how Central County set up. But yeah, consolidation and outsourcing
are different things. I do not think there's anything helpful to come of outsourcing our police. Consolidation maybe, but then we would no longer have money coming into us that's going to the sheriff. the money would go directly from the taxpayer to the BOCC who would then decide how or well if it was MSU
who would then give it all to the sheriff. But the part where we figure out how to collect it like that's not helpful to like that's just you we're an extra stop for no reason. >> They they would decide the level of service and all that kind of stuff. And if we
>> turned into a game of chicken perhaps >> if we had a game of chicken >> it would >> it would be fascinating. >> It would They would probably not treat us well. >> I think it would be >> level of service wise. >> It would not be I >> let's just say they wouldn't have the
>> they would not feel sorry for us. They would not have stinkers over there or no veto. >> They would not have the incentive to >> they got no money and it's not right. >> Who has no money? >> Well, the the sheriff does not get to set his own budget. Like oh set his own budget.
>> Yeah. He's basically he he requests of the county commission a certain amount >> and they give it to him >> and they can or they cannot but if they have >> well it went up.5 last year and >> but that was >> but that that's not for him. They were like they everybody uses law enforcement and fire as a as the excuse to raise
money for other parts of government. I think that a lot of people do not want to have MST use or MSB use because then we wouldn't be able to use >> first responsors for as our excuse to raise money for other things that are not first responders. >> Makes it more transparent.
>> It's way more transparent, right? >> There's no question about that. Trans more transparent. Yes. An MSTU would be >> way more transparent, >> of course. Yeah. >> And there should be an MSTU for the the jail because in Orange County, the county commission covers that. So even
if you're trying to compare county to county and you're looking at it, it's not it's not even the right amount. So the jail I guess it's not it a law enforcement jail are different. They're different things and courthouse law enforcement like that's a different thing than people think like oh that's
the sheriff's budget like no that's courthouse management right >> and this one is prisoner management and in other counties those things are either MSTUs or the county funds them directly and then we'll like kind of you
know allocate we'll say hey sheriff if you can take over but we're going to just the the way the money flows it's all accounting shenanigans but then you create and when once you do this then you really truly know what size is the law enforcement budget for this organization. So I I think Simino
Countyy's law enforcement budget looks artificially high because of the lack of MSTUs and the lack of transparency and the sheriff does an amazing job with, you know, the this is this is the paradigm he's been put in and here we are. But yeah, it's not right. We should have MSTUs for those three things.
Courthouse, policing style services, and jails. >> We should go public comment the BCC. >> We should go public comment the BCC. Maybe maybe all council will write an official letter. Yes. Please have MSU or something like that. >> MSCUs for jails, courthouse.
>> Yeah. >> Oversight and >> stuff, >> you know, but for them then that's >> but then then they're in the same position like what if what if we had we're not allowed to have a law enforcement MSG but if we had an MS MSU BU like the equivalent if we had a fire
fee and a police fee and we can't have the police fee then we would be like oh man we need more money for roads. Well, now what's our exc what excuse are we going to use to pull the heartstrings so we can raise taxes and have everybody not be really mad? Well, there's nothing left. Then you just have to say the price of asphalt went up and we've got
the guts to do this. And what we've always done in the past, well, I've never voted for a tax increase and you've never voted for a tax increase, but what everybody's always said in the past is, "Oh, it's for for the first responders." Well, >> um,
>> so given that those are things that we don't have any control over right now. >> I know, but isn't it fun to talk about them? >> Well, it it would be more fun to do something about them. >> It would be more fun to do >> if um if you >> what does he understand yet?
>> He's going to now watch this meeting. >> Darren Gray, does he understand it yet? Because like that was exploding my brain. >> I don't know. >> Oh my goodness. So, it's been a while. >> He needs to understand it. >> If you want to try to get council on board to writing this letter.
>> Yeah. Well, they don't want they want to have >> the at least three people on council, as I interpreted the June 29th meeting, >> are not interested in considering consolidation of police or fire. So, there is no reason for anybody to say anything. We're just going to raise
taxes to whatever it takes to stand our own two legs and do our own thing. But we all do pay county taxes and whether we consolidate or not >> then we would pay less we have a benefit that would happen. Yes. >> And from the BCC's perspective they're
looking at raising the taxes on half the county >> instead of part >> and lowering taxes for the other half of the county. >> Yeah, that's basically it. >> So, >> well, it's actually I think I calculated it up. It's like they would lower taxes
for 51% and raise taxes for 49%. So, they really ought to do it. [laughter] >> But they'd have to count up like what where where all the constituents are that vote a certain way or something. >> Political political calculus, right? Yeah. >> Oh, yes. The people they're raising
taxes on, I would say they're more red in the the unincorporated areas. So, yeah. What do you do about that? Are they going to vote them out? No. They raise taxes so much and everybody gets re >> supervisor could generate that data. >> That's true. >> Yeah. Um, okay. So,
>> okay. So, >> maybe that's a thing that could come up at the meeting. >> Okay. >> Okay. And the other thing is perhaps the golf course. >> Yeah. >> Is there anything to talk about about the content? >> The content. >> I mean, we've kind of talked about the content well of these >> Yeah. >> third uh Amendment Three meetings.
>> Um, >> having just one is weird, but nobody wants to talk about the other one. So, like don't make people listen to things they think are boring, >> right? Well, the other ones the other ones aren't city issues. This is a city issue. >> Yeah. this will affect the city in a major way,
>> right? I I think it's important that people understand that passing it does a a handful of things. One one of them is a shift, right, of tax burden. >> Yeah. >> And we're shifting tax burden to
renters. >> No, we're not not if we don't raise the taxes. So I think the pre the preface to the whole thing is council has decided that if this passes we will do whatever it takes to bring in as much money as before. Here are the ways we will do it. >> But that >> so we need to just tell everybody we're going to raise taxes. We're going to
create fees. Like that's this is what's going to be done. >> But like I said before I don't think that's a fair characterization. I don't think >> that's the only way it makes any sense. Otherwise I I support amendment three if we're just going to make it lower. Like who wouldn't support that? No matter what you are. If you're a renter, your taxes go down because it's only it's
going to be capped at 5%. Your everybody benefits if we're not going to raise taxes or create new fees. And that's >> your taxable value is only capped at 5%. You can set the millillage to whatever you want. >> Well, that's what I'm telling you that that is an important thing to say is that yes, council intends to increase
the millillage to get as much money as before. And if we >> But nobody has said that. Nobody has said that language. >> That has to be said. Like that's the whole point of the whole thing. Somebody needs to say council's going to raise the millillage, therefore all of this stuff is untrue. Not only is it hypothetically possible, but we plan to
do it. So you should plan to pay in some form or fashion collectively as the entire city the same amount of money to the city of Ovido. Some of you will pay higher taxes, some of you will pay lower taxes. They will all of the charges appear on your tax bill. Some as a millage, some as a fee, and you will all
pay collectively the same amount as before. That's a good thing to say. I think that's a place to start, right? I mean, we can't >> that after June 29th, I think that is true, but do we know if it's going to be a fee or if it's just going to be hiking
the millillage up? No. I think it's unconscionable to hike the millillage up. And doing fees is going to make all of the older people who've been homesteaded longer pay more. So, I think that's going to be a heavy lift, too. So, it's good thing this is not going to pass. [laughter]
And so we >> could say all that stuff >> in >> I mean I would love to say all the like this is fun. I I'd be glad to say all this stuff out loud in public in front of a lot of people with a microphone. >> It isn't it is interesting to say that or to hear you say that it is
unconscionable to raise millage to collect the same amount of money because of the shift >> because of the shift. >> Yeah. >> Burden that that would cause. But if if if everything was just like down and we didn't collect anymore and everybody's tax burden just went down and some people went way more down than other
people, that's okay because you're subtracting. But when you start adding unfair burdens back, that's when it gets all wonky. So the subtracting down, I'm on board. So,
um I mean you you have taxes, you have fees and you have cutting the budget, right? >> Yeah. >> Those are the ways to generate money, right? >> People who support it want the budget cut and they do not anticipate that
people will add it back. So that is the only reason to have such a meeting is to say, "Hey guys, our plan is to get as much money as before." Like there's no other reason. >> If not, all of the things they believe are true except for we will fully fund police and fire with less money at the
same level. >> People need to know that's true. >> Well, or the or the plan is to say that um we plan on cutting services in these particular ways if this passes right now. That just plays into June 29th. that was not said.
>> But you see that's big the question. So I don't think the question was asked and answered in the way that you're characterizing it. >> Okay. Well, we should ask you to answer that question before the >> 16. There is a sense in which the the way that you say it that way um
>> kind of but like I I don't I didn't >> if other people are genuinely expecting to cut the budget. >> I didn't receive the question. I didn't receive the question in a way that an answer yes or no would I believed to be
committing myself to the words that you just said. >> Well, I didn't do it. I perceived it as the other three said it's not about what I said or what I didn't say. I'm saying I did not perceive the question as to be committing myself one way or another to those words.
>> Okay. So, if everybody Okay. So we need to have a discussion of c of the whole council somewhere somehow and figure out are people is what what do people want to do because I do not want to if it passes I do not want to replace the
revenue 100%. I and I think like that needs to be distilled. Are there three votes in existence from public yeah at a public meeting I guess I don't I don't know how you do this super hypothetical thing if there are three people who are like well yeah of course we have to have our own independent police and fire
department and of course we have to have these other things so of course we have to make at least as much money as we did the year before and we can you know t tinker with our cost recoveries and all this stuff maybe we can hold it steady another year without because like we can't do another thing where we pay off
1.6 6 million in loans or whatever and save another few hundred,000 a year recurring costs. Like, we can't do that again. So, how are we going to balance the budget year over year unless we come up with more money? Like, there's going to have to be more money. >> Either that or shrink.
>> Yeah. Or shrink. >> Shrink. >> Yeah. Guesters would get a big huge kick out of that, right? He he he was tasked with a with a mission and he he executed the mission. I will give him that. So after an hour and a half, I think I
finally understand where you have been coming from on this and that is that we your impression was that we were going to give these meetings based on
what you had perceived the direction of council had been about the entirety of how we would deal with this. Yes. >> Which would be to raise taxes at the same level. >> And if that was going to be the case, then you believed that the presentation
of all of this would be to bolster that >> to justify the need to raise Yes. >> So, >> so if that is not however, I do not believe that to be the case. Okay. So perhaps and so but what what you are
implying by that also is that whatever it is that we present in these meetings kind of needs to encompass policy that has been at least in broad strokes
>> discussed >> somewhat agreed to by the council as this is how we're going forward or this is how we plan to go forward with this. But what I would say, >> but I didn't perceive that I didn't perceive
that conversation to quite be that way. >> Okay. >> Um or at least the the question you asked. >> Um and also what I know is is that when you know it's the thing I say all the time about too early to tell and then too late to do anything about it. It's a
Robertism actually. Um so uh so that part there I feel like sometimes when we have things like that particular work session was very early was very much a too early to tell >> and people well that's the way that I
perceived that others were >> I forgot to put out the chees >> that's these cheeses have been kind of springs and were not eaten I >> no thanks. >> You're definitely not.
>> The raccoon was thinking about >> Okay, but >> what I'm getting is that uh blast [laughter] >> um policy. [laughter] >> Okay. Too early to tell. >> No, too.
No. No. Well, so I think when we have those work sessions and stuff comes up the first time and we've talked about this, Mr. Cob, you know, stuff comes up and we all kind of like look at each other like, well, I don't I don't know yet, you know, and and uh it's almost like some of those work
sessions are this is kind of a first pass of it, right? You know, it's kind of like every every year when we look at >> it's been over a month. Like what progress has been made on the correction council gave since June 29th? Well, I don't think I don't think anyone in council feels like they've been tasked
to think about >> how to solve the problem. >> How to solve the problem that doesn't exist yet >> and it's never going to exist. Why are we? >> But also, but also I think that council um kind of feels like
I I I I think there's [snorts] I'm not going to say this uh I'm not going to say that this is completely true, but I'm going to say that in general a lot of times staff bring stuff to council and then we look
at it and we tweak Right. There hasn't been a staff proposal of this is how we're going to do this. Not saying that I expect there to be or would have expected there to be right now. >> There has to be before this meeting. >> So they're kind well no no working on
it. But but [laughter] I think well >> are we just showing >> I think it kind of needs to in broad strokes perhaps come from come from come from council like hey what what do you think we need to do and like if that were to come up at a work
session I I feel like staff would not really get very much direction because >> they got direction was go look into a fire fee >> go look into a lot of things. So yeah, we're open to raising the military.
>> Yeah, that that's true. The the >> that was >> well, but but high. Yeah. So go look into doesn't necessarily mean we're not going to we're going to raise the same amount of money just from different people. Uh but it does mean
look into and find out what the numbers are. >> Yeah. >> I don't think there's ever any >> How much does it cost to do a fire study though? Isn't it like at least 70,000? Probably way more. How could these possibly cost that much? >> Is it all in a spreadsheet? Like >> it is costillion dollar stuff comes out.
Every city does it exactly the same way. >> Mill is millillage. Like not not every city does it the same way. >> Okay. >> There's Yeah, there's a >> there's a different way. There's different ways to do >> Well, that's why I failed in Novito. So >> which film >> I was I was sort of on board with one
way and then Bob Pollock says out loud at that meeting remember he's like hey let's do this other one so the people in houses pay more and the people in apartment complexes pay less and I was like there it goes the whole thing's dead and sure enough that was it but I
told him I said if you don't do this formula I'm out and then so it was 41 vote to move beyond that and then I was out and the whole failed after that. And by 50, it failed because everybody
miraculously saw the folly of the stupid plan to make homeowners pay more so apartment complex owners could pay less. >> But yeah, there's a big range of big range, >> right, >> of change in fees when you calculate
formulas on on how you do it. And and >> so and and the only way we'll know how much it costs is to do an RFP. >> That's the only way we'll know. >> How much the last one cost? Do we know? >> I'd have to go back and look. >> For some reason, I thought it was like a quart million four years ago. Oh, no. I don't think it was.
>> You don't think it was that much? No, because it was like a quarter million to do our comp plan, >> you know. So, it No, it wasn't that much. >> But that impact fee study cost, you remember the one we just did? I mean, I know it's a different thing, but >> Yeah, it's a completely different thing,
>> but it's similar in the way that actually, is it all that different? Because you're saying different >> how many how much does how much does it costim? Well, because I guess the uh the impact fee is about how much capital, right, does a new
construction of this type cost? And then the fire study fee would be more like what is the operational? >> Well, it's operating and capital. Uh >> it'll it'll encompass operating and capital of right fire >> but not increase in capital >> fighting.
>> Yeah. Not increase in capital which is >> emergency what >> no you can no that can be a part of it. You can look at your CIP and include that in there. You you would want to do that >> if your if your CIP involves something like adding another fire station or something
then you build that even replacing your vehicles. >> Right. Right. Right. Yeah. >> You know, because that's not going to >> It's like with the impact fee. The impact fee, you're saying we're adding a new vehicle, not replacing an old one. We're adding >> adding a new vehicle. Yeah. >> Right. To increase our level of service.
>> Yeah. >> But in the case of the fire feed, you can replace the vehicle that's coming offline because it's too old. >> Right. Right. You know, so you do want to incorporate the fleet. You want to incorporate everything into it.
>> But it's it can't be emergency medical service. It can only be firefighting. >> Yeah. >> Fire what they call I think they call it fire suppression is what they suppression. >> Yeah, that's right. [laughter] >> You know that's right. Fire prevention. You can put your you can put your fire prevention into it, you know. But uh
it's not just can't put your ambulance. >> Right. Right. Right. >> Which I don't understand but that's okay. That's just what the courts have decided. [laughter] So, so given that
there's not going to be a plan or probably very much discussion about what we're going to do if this passes until it does pass. >> Well, then we just use this scare tactic. Shouldn't we say, "Here's the scare tactic. We're going to tell you that we could hypothetically raise the
millage rate to this. Here's what it is now. Here's what it could be. And that counts as the roll back rate to bring in the same amount of money. Or we could make it a little bit less than that and we could have a fire fee. And those are scare tactics. So we're going to be accused uh bringing everybody out to
employ our scare tactics on amendment three. >> Well, they're just fact. >> Yeah. Scare tactics. >> So well fact is to raise the same amount of money. We have these options. So this is what I started with the beginning, right? Raise raise millage fees, whatever. Mhm.
>> Um the ways that we the ways that we cut are these you know these different these are the different things we can cut. We will have to do some combination of these things.
>> We don't have to do them. We could just say >> well unless if council refuses to consider consolidating police or fire then we do have to do them I suppose. Well, that would be one of the things that would be on the list. >> It's not on the list. It was taken off
the list on June 29th. There will be no consolidation. We will own our own police and fire departments. We will have to raise money to to run them at at least 95. Is it We can't go lower than 5% lower the year before because of state law. >> We budget at 95%.
>> Well, no, we budget 95%. But I think maybe that's just the sheriff's office that's subject to this. So you can't roll back the amount of spending in law enforcement more than 5% in a given year. I think maybe check with >> it can be contested I think is what it can >> well for the sheriff. Absolutely. I
don't know that cities are is that what it is. Cities have the same mandate that we can't just be like okay we're going to have 60% as much spending for police. I believe that statute went into effect three or four years ago the where >> yeah something like that the if you
lower public safety spending uh it can be contested and cities and counties. >> Okay. >> Yeah. So we can only pull back 5%. And we're only budgeting 95% to begin with. So >> So that means we can't go to 0%.
>> I don't know if to consolidate. >> I don't know. You you have to go to Tallahass and explain yourself. I think that's only the only consequence, right? Because they can't recall blood specific blood out of a rock. >> Well, but it's not a rock. It's a
government with a taxing authority, >> but we can choose not to tax that much. You think that they're going to force us to tax people more to keep spending higher? I mean, like it's a very interesting thing. like maybe
Tallahassee would force >> is that in the amendment >> I think no that's not the this is a totally >> it's totally separate >> some version of it this came about when the whole defund the police movement >> was going on right >> so this is going back more towards the
co days >> um that this was in effect but it certainly plays a role in decision-m through this process >> so state statute is it says that we can only >> we could only by law >> go lower so much per
>> we can only lose 5% of the >> Mhm. >> uh public safety or or only police or law enforcement budget law enforcement budget >> per year. Uh I believe it's just law enforcement. We use public safety >> cuz we could deescalate over 20 years
down to >> you're you're saying that uh it doesn't say that you can't but you would have to go to Tallahassee and go before a board >> said I don't recall the the specific all the requirements but you said >> yeah there's there's something you have to >> like like that one year 2010 or whatever
maybe it was before that when Charlie Christen everybody's like oh you got to accept the roll back rate unless you write your letter explaining why you're not doing it >> and nobody wanted to write the letter and be like, "We just can't do that." So, we're not nobody. Some Ovito did not write said letter and just pulled the
taxes way down. So, I don't know why people don't want to write these letters. They just go be like, "Hey, we're going to do this. Here's our explanation. We have now suffered the political consequence of this statute." >> Well, okay.
Maybe we start with >> if a minimum three passes here are here is the set of things that can happen. >> We already did that. We had a work session and we put it on there. I stuck it on my page. I think the city has put it out there. We have list >> talking about what's going to go in the
>> the meetings. >> There's one slide. There's only one slide. You just pop that one slide up there. It's already done. There's no planning necessary. The one slide from you know what I'm talking about, right? I know exactly which one. There's one slide from the work session. You just pop it up there. Here's the choices.
Boom. You're done. >> Yeah. And and explain to people that it will be some combination of these things. >> But why would it be some combination of those that and that's a fact. I mean, it has to be some >> Well, then council needs then council needs to own that we plan to do
something to replace. >> No, no, no. It some combination could be zero of one and 100% of this other one. That That's valid, right? Yeah, >> I'm not saying that it has to be greater than zero of any particular one, >> but I'm saying that it has to be, you
know, here's the box and it has to be >> it doesn't have to be like that's the whole thing. That's what makes it propaganda that you assume that it h that we have to raise more revenue that we have to raise taxes or cutting services is part of is part of the things, right? You have you have
fees all different ways already said we will not cut. Here's the ways that here's the things that >> council already said we won't cut it. So unless I hear different >> I don't remember council saying that we will never >> that we will never cut services if um amendment three passes.
>> I heard figure out we don't we don't want to consolidate we don't want to do any costsaving measures have any kind of paradigm shift other than we own our own thing and we do whatever it takes to pay for them. We had made promises. So, I guess we could completely fire people.
Um, but if we have half as many fire stations as we're supposed to, I don't think that's happening on the fire side. I guess there may be more discretion on the police side. Uh, I don't know. I think we need to ask everybody to chime in on that. And
either the decision is there will definitely be replacement revenue or there is a reality in which there will not be replacement revenue. And people need to know if it's 100% sure that there will be a paradigm shift and that it will not simply be money that we
decide if it's going to be anything but 100% budget cuts. People need to know that council has already decided that it will not be 100% budget cuts. I think that decision has already been made. Well, I I don't know if it Yeah. I mean, I don't think a 100%
budget cuts is >> I think is wise. >> At least four people made that very clear on June 29th. It will not be 100% budget cuts. So, the only purpose of these meetings is to say, we're here to inform you that >> if you thought you were going to have
lower taxes, nope. we're going to here's how we can raise the money or here's how we can raise money. That's the only purpose, >> right? But it's it's both. There's like there are things that can be done. If you vote for amendment three, here's
going to be the result from the city. There are these five things that can happen, right? >> Mhm. >> And whatever the city the city is going to be boxed into doing some combination of those five things. >> It's not boxed. Oh, okay. As long as one of the B things is maybe we'll lower but
if council because budget cutting budget is part council's already decided will not have% budget cutting >> I don't believe that that is what council said >> then we need >> ask so we can ask >> we can ask yeah I because
I am 100% sure that four out of five council members would not entertain the thought of 100% budget cutting being the solution And it is important to say we will definitely be raising revenue in these other ways because there's at least three votes to do that.
>> I mean, will you entertain 100%? >> Yes. >> Cutting 100%. >> I would entertain that. It would be a paradigm shift, but we have a $16 million police budget. We can just say peace out. Problem solved. And we can continue to well problem is not solved
in the sense that it takes four people to change owning our own police department and people are like well I want to so so it will not happen because there are not four votes to figure out how to have law enforcement
to do the things it would it would require a paradigm shift that that at least that there are not four votes to do and it requires that under a charter. I will entertain all of the things. >> It's not my preference, but if somehow this passes, which it won't, would I
entertain it? Heck yeah. That would be the mandate of the people. They want lower taxes. They don't want us to switch a doodle it around. >> Well, but what they want is not >> same service for less money. That's what everybody wants,
>> right? But >> not one of the choices. >> But what they but what they want [laughter] is you hit the nail on the head. They want the same service, but they don't want to pay for it. >> Well, but also what they want is not necessarily compatible with what they would be
voting for, right? And what they what they think they're voting for and what they are voting for perhaps not the same thing, right? Because also because also it ballot language also what you're voting for is the clause that says that the legislature
>> shall work out a uh gradual or work out a plan or whatever to get property tax all the way down to zero. Yeah. So, you are handing the legislature now control over
this homestead exemption, which they previously did not have control over, which is why it has to go to referendum, right? You're handing them that to control to get property tax all the way down to zero. >> Without having to go to referendum. >> Without Yes. Without having to go to referendum. Tallahassee just decides.
>> How's that? >> Not passing. I don't even know why we're talking about it other than it's just kind of fun to talk about it. It's very fun because like the whole possibility of paradigm shift and like what would that look like? Boy, that's exciting, but it's not going to happen. So, there will be no paradigm shift. There will be no tax relief. There will be no nothing.
We're just going to keep on growing the size of government indefinitely. And eventually, we'll hit the 10 mill. City of Ovido will have to figure out how to consolidate because it will be budgetarily impossible for us to meet our pension obligation otherwise. And that's where this is all headed
probably. [laughter] But I mean that that's decades from now before we hit the constitutional cap >> is where what now? Five and a half. It's not bad. But we keep re rolling our geo bond
that's retired into the main millillage. But eventually that'll stop. So like not this year. >> No, we didn't do it this year. >> Okay. >> We didn't do it this year. >> I don't think we did it last year. >> We did it last year. Okay.
>> First year. So this is our first year not rolling it. >> Cool. >> We didn't do it this year. I I've noticed a number of cities are actually increasing the millillage this year to set the table for >> roll forward. What I call roll forward
or and I heard I've heard it called roll up so that they can they're setting the table for that as well. And we're doing the exact opposite. We're reducing which is interesting. Yeah, there's some If the
plan is to go up anyway, there could be wisdom in doing doing the roll up. Whatever happened to popup? >> I haven't heard. >> You know, there's one hold out, right? >> They want to go so high. >> Oh, they're uh >> Did they do it or they brought it down? >> They brought it down to half mil.
>> They they brought it down to whatever >> whatever she agreed to require her vote. >> Okay, perfect. >> Martin, is that her name? >> I don't know, but I thought that that was super interesting. Were y'all following that? That was pretty interesting. >> Yeah, they were. >> Yeah. And she's like, "Nobody's
explained to me why I need this 75." >> Uh, she wanted it to be.5. She's like, "I I I could wrap my brain around 0.5, but not 75." >> Is that I won't be able to find it readily, but Yeah. >> Yeah. All All you need is a tablet. My
Were you here? You know, my six-year-old's back in there, right? [laughter] >> So, >> is there anything else to say? No, I don't think so. >> So, what are we gonna do? >> I don't know. We're gonna have a thing at the golf course because that's fun. >> We're gonna All right. So, we're gonna raise that. >> We're gonna have a thing golf course.
We're gonna ask ask the ask our colleagues. >> Did you mean at on July 20 or June 29th when you all said we don't want to consider consolidating anything? Is your intention that we will definitely for sure not use 100% budget cuts to move
forward? >> I think the direction was for us to investigate everything. Yeah, that's the direction. That's like the super copout answer like, "Oh, Steph, you go figure it out." Well, you need you need to get us all on the record and say, >> "Please confirm the 100% budget cuts is
not your intention and that you intend to raise revenue in some other way." >> Well, yeah, but I I think I think given that we don't entirely know what that looks like, right? We don't know how many things have to get done. >> Don't be a wimp. I >> don't be a wimp. You said before, oh
yeah, we're going to we're going to have to do something. million is it? >> Own it. Own it. >> Own what? >> Own that you you would raise taxes or you would create new fees. Just be like, "Yeah, of course we would do that. That makes sense." That's fine. That's a fine position to have. >> I'm not sure you can follow I would
>> raising taxes if you're not collecting the same amount of >> revenue. But it's raising everybody's tax burden. It's raising individual property owners tax. >> Did we Did we raise taxes last year? >> So I I did ask so there's you know the t the anti-ax pledge or whatever it is. So
I asked them yeah the Northquist thing. >> Uh I asked the organization what counts as as taxes because we keep rolling the millillage over. So I always have to do the caveat of I have never voted to raise taxes collective millage rate higher >> than the previous year because it was
rolling over and I was like you know I can wrap my brain around that and it's not the roll back rate. So does it count as is raising tax? They said no it's the tax the collective tax rate. I'm like okay. So yeah >> you asked them did you get an answer? >> I did. That's the answer I got. That what was the answer that >> Oh, really?
>> I'm good. Pretty sure I got I count as never having raised taxes. Even though I would I would think a stricter reading of it would be if you don't do the roll back rate, you're raising taxes. >> I'm pretty sure I got the opposite answer. >> Oh, really? >> Yeah. Okay. Well, the person who would
have applied the punishment in this area [laughter] >> gave me the answer that I have been working with for many years. Um, >> and and I have not been [laughter] >> maybe I didn't state it the same way you did. I'll have to go back and think about
>> Yeah. [laughter] >> Um, >> okay. So, do we have a plan? >> And so, >> we can have plans because we're like on video and stuff. >> I don't think you're going to get an answer. >> I think will you commit to these things when there's not? If people will
definitely not commit will will go on the record saying we will definitely not consider outsourcing police or fire. I think that by default means that they're certainly committing to raising revenues somehow or another. I mean like you can't have both.
We can't have our own police and fire and also not have any money to pay them with because we have made promises in union contracts. So there's no way aside from just a li but like there there's hours limits there's all this stuff like there is no way >> but we can keep all those promises
without enough money if you don't I think >> if you don't have fire you're just causing somebody else your action causes somebody else to raise taxes and to raise that revenue right because that means people in the city are going to
pay the 2.7 to the county same way they do in Winter ings and it'll be a lot more than 2.7, right? Because they'll have to adjust that for this amendment 3 change. So you are >> raising an MSBU instead of a TU. >> Who knows? >> Well, so then you're not at zero either.
>> It's not at zero, but >> you're not committing to to take the entire cut in the same way, right? Because because you're just causing somebody else another taxing authority to come in and do it. as soon as we add
one or two more fire stations or we go to a 2472 work cycle for fire. >> I think these are all completely separate questions. These are all completely separate things, >> but they're not. >> Come on. No, >> this is this is like looking at what's going to happen in January when we have
union negotiations come up. >> They're absolutely going to ask for for 2472. I >> 100% guaranteed they will ask 72 and say, "Oh, there's a thing that's Florida statute that says that we should really
thoroughly consider this. >> It's not a mandate yet." Um, >> all right. >> But >> well, yeah. Okay. Nobody said that to me, but >> Oh, you didn't know that yet? That there's a state law about >> It's a state law. >> It's a state suggestion. So, there's a there's a recommendation. It's It's
stupid, >> but uh enough. >> One on three off. >> Yeah. So there's there's enough jurisdictions not too incredibly far away that are doing this that there is a a genuine concern that we may not be able to retain people if we do not move
to working 50% less a week because I think is that what amounts to roughly or is it a third less a week >> whether that happens or not >> you add an extra shift so right now we have we have what three shifts and we'd have to go to four shifts so it's going to increase the cost of personnel by 33%
minimum. So they can use the same fire trucks, but our personnel costs are up. >> But whether that happens or not, >> right, the the idea that >> you would take all of these cuts and only cut and not raise any more money. It's not really entirely true because
with fire, you would just be kicking it over to county and saying that county is taxing you that. >> It's the same. You're just shifting the tax to to blame it on somebody else. >> Our own pension. I blame it on us. I'm looking from like more of a bird's eye thing. our pension situation. We don't
have FRS. So, our the way F FRS is funded is different from our little OVTO pension, whatever we've got. And I don't know that we can toggle c can we toggle back to FRS? I don't think we can.
>> My excuse [clears throat] me, my understanding is that uh that would have to be voted on and approved by each individual member of the respective um fire departments or police departments. And I don't know why or how we got went from FRS to what we have now. Like what's the back? Do you know that you
weren't here for this but like this is a long time ago. >> It was a long time ago. I I think we I don't think the city ever had FRS. >> We never had FRS. >> I don't think it did. I think the city has always had the uh at the time it was called MMA. It was ICM ARC is what it
was. When I came to work here, >> it was a 401A plan. >> Okay. So we still kind of have that and we have police and fire police and fire have a 175 and 185 plans. >> Fire is a 175, police is 185.
>> But hypothetically somewhere along the way we could have had the entire city on FRS, right? >> It's possible. Yes. >> And I thought main employees at one point were on FRS and then we hopped over to >> whatever we have now. >> I have no knowledge of that. >> That that was before me. [clears throat]
So, I long long a long time ago. >> Yes. When I when I came to work here, it was a uh 401A plan and you could also have a 457. Um, and I believe the police pension existed, but I'm not sure about fire.
>> Okay. Well, I am hoping there's going to be state level reform for that kind of stuff because it used to be you were paid less if you were police or fire. And the reason you would accept less pay right now was because you got paid for life with your pension later on. Well,
now the the salaries are really competitive with other kinds of jobs and we still have this thing where you can retire when you're 38 years old and you know walk away with 100% of your salary for life. That's super awesome. So I
guess more maybe it's like what is it 44? Say you don't get your fire thing until you're 19 and then you do 25 years. Is it is it 25 to full vesting or >> I think it's 25. >> 45. Yeah. So you're 44. >> Wait, is that right? Yeah. 44 and you get for the rest of your life your
salary for life. >> What a deal. >> Your final ending salary. >> Five. >> Well, it's the what was the average of your last of your highest three years or something? Last two years. >> Five of the last 10 years, I believe. >> Okay. >> The high the average of the highest five of your last 10 years, >> right?
>> Yeah. None. >> But there's no >> That's a lot of words. >> Yeah. There's no cola. >> No. What? >> There's no cola. >> Yeah. >> So, whatever that number is, >> but still like if you're 44, like do you think you can go retrain and do something else for the next 20 years of your life to have a whole second career?
Absolutely. Yeah, I think you can. >> Can you go to another fire department? >> Yeah. Well, that's what everybody does. Well, that's what our our current police chief like he he's collecting his pension from Titusville after what 30 years there. And then he comes over here. >> Fire. >> Yeah. So he he's fully vested, fully
retired from Titusville. Then comes over here and is our police chief getting working on a second pension collecting pensions from all these places which you know it's it's allowed. That's industry standard and this is how it's done. So police chiefs do the same thing. So they go do a full career here. Then they go be police chief in a little town like
Ovito and click second pension and taxpayers are paying all these pensions for all these people who are young and able-bodied and stuff. I've said it on thing. You were looking at me like, "Oh, did you just say that out loud?" I did. Yes, I did. >> So, I hope the state will intervene and
figure out a way to help us deescalate the pension situation because it is not sustainable. >> Is that all is that all mandated by state law? >> Yeah. >> What's our contribution this year? >> It's like 26%. >> It's approaching 30%.
>> Right. Yeah. Our contribution is like 30 is approaching 30%. >> Are you talking about the entire the size of the budget? No, our contribution into the pensions. >> The fire though fire is approaching 30%. Um, we had the uh value.
>> Does that mean like the salaries are a million dollars when we put in 300,000? Is that what you mean by 30? Okay. >> Correct. >> And the thing is is there is an expected rate of return >> and if [cough and clears throat] they don't if they don't meet that expected rate of return, we make up the difference. >> We have to make up difference. We do. And if there's an extra, it doesn't
count for >> No. If there's an extra, we actually accumulate a receivable in the plan >> where they owe us money back and we can use that receivable to offset future expenses. >> And and a lot of times in the union negotiations, I feel like it's always like, oh, well, we we've come out ahead,
so we'll be we're willing to give that back our portion back to the city to help cover stuff, right? Like, isn't that usually part of the neg? I feel like that has been tossed in as an incentive in the past. Maybe it was for police. I don't know. It's the the
what's the police individual accounts? >> Oh, they have an an individual 401 type plan set up within their pension which they will um receive benefits from after they retire. Generally speaking, those
benefits are used to cover their healthcare expenses. >> Yeah. >> Fun stuff. All right. Are we at a stopping place? Cuz we've been at like two hours. Y'all need to like go do real work. I got a meeting. Yeah, >> I'm I'm I'm I'm late.
>> I got to go. >> All right. Thank you. >> Y'all really didn't Y'all really didn't need to be here. >> We didn't huge show. [laughter] >> Huge. >> It was educational to me. >> Oh, you have to say that. >> You know, it was No, it was it was educational to me. [laughter] I mean, that's been that's been the
whole thing. We've been trying to, you know, we're trying to figure out what to do. >> Nothing because it's not going to pass. So, [laughter] and and and we are >> Raise your hand if you think it's going to pass. Seriously, >> we're we're going through we're going through we're going we're going through
everything right now and trying to trying to come up with something that says, "Okay, this is our response." And it's Yeah, it's not easy. It It's very difficult. >> We've effectively had you toggle the switch. Is it going to be fees or is it
going to be the other thing? because you already been given a direction. We're not getting rid of police or fire. Can't go down more than 95%. >> But to to Mr. Cop's point, we've effectively had two budget processes this year. >> Good stuff. All right, start packing up the Cheezits.
>> If anybody else wants Cheezits, ask for Cheezits. >> Thank you. >> All right. home.