Good evening. Welcome to the city commission final budget continued meeting September 30th, 2025 at 6 PM. Calling this meeting to order starting with the invocation from Pastor Malberry and pledge of allegiance led by Commissioner Davis.
>> Good evening everyone. Father, again, thank you for this day. We thank you for how good you've been all day long. We thank you because you brought us together once again for another meeting. We pray God that your hand will be upon us to give wisdom and guidance in
everything we do. We pray God that you will have your way in this budget meeting, God, that you will let your will be done and let your kingdom come. We thank you in advance. We praise you in Jesus name. Amen.
>> Amen. >> Please join me in the pledge of allegiance. I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the for it stands nationy and justice for all.
>> Roll call, please. Madam clerk, >> Davis present [Music] >> present. >> Here >> present. >> Present.
All here. And we have quorum. I'm going to open the floor up to public comments for any items not specifically listed on the agenda. Is there anybody here for public comments for general items? Seeing no public comments, we're going to move on to public hearings. The
second to uh yeah, adopting of the millage rate and budget for fiscal year 2025 2026. Introduction to public hearing for city of Palaca fiscal year 2025 2026 final millage and budget. The Palaca City
Commission convenes the final public hearing on the city of Palaca fiscal year 2025 2026 millage rates and final budget as required by Florida statutes chapter 129 and 200 and as advertised in the truth and millillage trim notices.
If anyone in our audience is here for the purpose of contesting their assess assessment, a petition, a petition for adjustment with the value adjustment board needed to have been filed by 5:00 PM Wednesday, September 9, 2025, as stated in the trim notice is sent via
first class mail by the county's property appraiser to every taxpayer on the property value assessment realm. For those in attendance this evening wishing to address the commission, citizens comments will be taken following the overview of the final budget by the finance director. The finance director,
Santel Tia, will now present an explanation of the proposed and roll back millage rates. >> Good evening. Can everyone hear me? >> Yes. Mayor and Commission, this evening we will take a few actions related to the
adoption of the proposed millage rate and budget for the fiscal year ending September 30th, 2026. Tonight, tonight's hearing is a continuation of the second public hearing required to be held per Florida statutes prior to the adoption of the
final mill rate and budget by taxing authority. As such, this is the final budget hearing and a final adoption of the millage rates and budgets will be considered tonight. Florida statutes requires the name of the taxing authority, the millage rate to be
levied, the roll back rate and the percentage change over roll back rate be publicly announced. In addition, one of the requirements of the truth in millillage reg legislation is to provide information about why proposed millage
rates differ from the roll back millage rates. Roll back millage rate is defined as the millage rate which exclusives of new construction additions to structure deletions and property added due to geographic boundary changes will provide
the same advalorum tax revenue each for each taxing authority as was levied during the prior year. The trim process requires that a notice of tax increase be advertised when the current year proposed aggregate millage
rate exceeds the calculated aggregate roll back millage rate. The aggregate roll back millage rate is calculated by dividing the prior year adjusted property tax revenue by the current year taxable property value multiplied by
1,000. The current year taxable value does not include new construction and tax increment CRA values for the fiscal year 2025 2026 budget. The aggregate proposed operating millage for the city
of Palaca is 6.2397 mills which is the same as the roll back rate of 6.2397 mills. the increase in property tax revenue. Sorry, this is not an increase.
This is no changes in in property tax at all. Just want to make note of that. Um and the this is inclusive of personnel costs, operating costs, capital expenses as well as grant matches. Mar and Commission, the total final
budget for the fiscal year 2025 2026 is $85,592,317. I am happy to answer any questions pertaining to the changes or on the budget before you currently. >> Are there any questions for the members of the commission? >> I just want to I have a question.
>> Go ahead. Um based on the conversation that we had in our last meeting with regards to this particular roll back rate that there would be a decrease in the amount of taxes that are paid. Correct.
>> But in the statement that you made that it's no change. I just want to make sure that there's clarity with regards to when you made the statement closer to the part um where there was a the increase in property tax revenue. I just want to make sure that that's
>> there is no increase in property tax revenue. We're using the same millage rate as last year. Um well equivalent to last year which is the 6.2397 2397 mills, which means there's a 0% um
change in in property tax. So, we're collecting the same amount that we collected last year, if that makes sense. However, there is a decrease in the Avalor revenues compared to the
budget that we had last time we met. I think that's the what I wanted to >> that's what I know you want to understand that there that we did decrease the avalorum revenue by 118,000 correct 567
that is the decrease from the 6.4 rate to the 6.2397 2397 >> Commissioner Davis. >> So for no change to occur based on
um expected revenue with the roll back rate, where did the additional $118,567 come from? >> We reduced um I'm just going to go line by line. >> I'll answer it. Okay. Go ahead.
>> Okay. The change if I may. >> Go right ahead. >> The change came from uh decreasing the as we decreased the Avalor revenue by that 118,567. We still had to maintain or try to maintain the integrity of the general
fund and not impact or decrease various departments. We were able to achieve that by increasing the transfer from uh better place fund to the um general fund. So that's where it came from. A a
decrease of storm water. We decreased storm water expenses which we had not spent in the prior year. Prior year we had a budget of 150,000. This year we were able even with the decrease to have 483,000
to spend in storm water. So that is where we decrease that storm water account. >> Further questions commission commission bor. >> Yeah. Well my understanding would be if we were going to keep it flat the 6.4
flat that would that would have um been an increase based on the property values. Mhm. >> The property value would have given us an additional $118,000 plus dollars. >> Yeah. Correct. >> But the fact that the 6.2
xxx uh the roll back rate produced the same amount as what we u our last year's budget the roll back would have produced the same budget as last year last fiscal year. So
therefore, you know, we we we we we didn't in we we wouldn't have increased or we didn't lose anything. So basically, it's all it's it's basically kind of like a an offset for per se. >> So that I think that's where we the 6.2
whatever we're going back to the same what we had last year. So there's no in the the property values was the difference. Exactly. So what the roll back rate does is even though property value increase it takes us back to
receive the I don't know how to say it prorational amount or something like that. >> Yeah. The so the roll back rate you receive the the amount that you would have received because given that the property tax
value has increased >> we would have got $118,000 plus dollars more >> right so the roll back rate takes us to a zero change >> correct >> okay so that's what we did so now by us going back to the roll back rate we did
not increase our property tax for our citizens Correct. It's a flat. >> Yes, sir. >> And taking the funds from the better place, putting them in the general fund. You did explain where that money was coming from. And that won't have a negative impact for us. We feel
confident that that's not going to have a negative impact. >> It will not it maintain the integrity of both funds >> and it's an allowable use of the bit of place. >> Yes. Yes. >> Anybody else have any questions? Well, my only thing I got to comment, but it
it should have we should have not had to to to touch anything in my op. That's just my opinion on that. But I'm just saying if if we produce the same thing as we did last year, we shouldn't have to take monies from no other fund to
bounce. I mean, unless we I have to probably sit on the side with you guys and help me understand that better. We'll be more than happy to sit with you. >> Any other questions? >> You got any questions, Commissioner Jones?
>> Commission. >> So, >> I know we talked about starting this budgeting process earlier in the for the upcoming year. One of the things I, you know,
I am I have some I'm disappointed. Let me just say that. I'm disappointed that a lot of work was done and that we got down to our second vote to determine that we needed to do something differently. Um,
it's it may be the right thing to do, it may not, but I think timeliness is important because of the work that it requires to do this work at the last
minute. And so I just want to be on the record for saying that I do believe that our residents need a perceived win. I'm still trying to process what that
looks like. If it's roll do having a roll back rate, so be it. But again, I'm disappointed in the timeliness that we chose to address this. And if there are concerns, I hope that we can bring those
up sooner and make sure we understand. The other thing I want to make sure is that when this is communicated to the public that we clearly communicate what is occurring, what has occurred, and why it has occurred. One of the things I see
continuously in comments is confusion. And I think we have to look at that when we're weighing comments from the public because it still seems to be some confusion with our constituents between
city taxes, county taxes, school board taxes, what the city is responsible for, how it impacts them. Um, so I do hope we have the opportunity to clearly communicate
whether that is in the local newspaper, on our city website, and anywhere we can because the one lesson I get from all of this is that education is important. And we can only educate as much as
people will read that information. But it is critical that we produce clear and accurate and a reasonable explanation of what these taxes are and what they represent.
So, I just want to have that on the record. Thank you, >> Mayor. >> Um, go ahead. Um, I agree with uh, Commissioner Davis on the latter part, but I I don't know if she was on the call at the time when we had the
discussion with regards to the roll back. There was some um there was a little bit of discussion that took place that it wasn't thoroughly explained in the manner that we got it when we had that brief conversation. So, I think that's where it came in. But I'm in
total agreement um with bringing the budget and that was going to be one of the statements that I made during commissioner comments that we go ahead and set when we want to have it come back before the commission so that we can start the process so that there's no
room for when you think it should be brought before us and when it needs to be brought before us. So I want that to be a decision that we collectively make um as we move forward so that we won't find ourselves in this position before and I
think Miss Pierre has committed several times every time she's stand up there to make sure that this process moving forward h would be a reflection of what the commission desires. So I want to make sure that she has the direction prior to us leaving here today as we
move forward. I also mentioned at the last meeting that I think it's very important once we have these workshop dates that we uh make every effort to attend unless of course there's an illness or family crisis but I that's a commitment we all need to make um because that didn't happen we were not
not everybody was able to attend all of them and I think that's when we have to iron out these things and not wait till the 11th hour as we have again um and I think the whole process is confusing if we if some folks in the commission didn't have an understanding of the
difference between the roll back rate and the millage rate um of 6 what what happened there then that if we're confused then certainly the community it's not clear to the community and they are we are paying multiple entities taxes including St. John's water
management district as well as the others mentioned. So yeah, any clarification would be helpful I think for folks. Education is key. >> And mayor, if I may, I think one of the confusions and I'm going to say this is a lot of times the headlines or the
comments that are made um with Palaka Daily News can cause a lot of confusion because a lot of people do not subscribe to the Palaca Daily News. So they're feeding off of that little insert that
could possibly be taken into um that can be taken wrong. So I think as we begin to put things out there that I say it all the time that we do it in a campaign manner to make sure that there is it's one thing to provide the education but
it's the one it's another thing to make sure that people are actually utilizing or reading the information that we're put out there. So, I think that's probably one of the major disconnects is a lot of people don't subscribe and they are only going by what they see instead
of reading the articles or they're feeding off of other comments that are made. >> Any other comments or questions? >> I have one here. >> Go ahead, Commissioner. uh as uh Mission Davis mentioned about the proceed
uh savings that we're given and Commissioner Campbell tagged on it um for clarity and as you guys just explained it it seemed like a little twist even tonight
um as far as where the money is actually where the savings actually is coming from and uh it didn't appear to be a savings. It appears to be we took money from better place. That's what
you said, right Miss Cardi? So the money the overage is coming from better place. We didn't say unless I'm perceiving it wrong. Is that the same as this board uh as we just was
explaining this? I need to know because if I'm no longer feeling this way, I need a special education session on the budget because that that did not appear to be what our goal was as far as being
able to the direct. I know we gave direction early on. We say we waited till the 12th hour, but we gave some direction from those diets early on. And uh Commissioner Bor, you know, mentioned it. He had documentation about some of
the cuts that we were looking to be made and it was pushed back to us to make the cuts after giving directive. Uh but we're here now and we wanted to make it clear that we wasn't at a 7% 7 mil.
We're not at the 6.4. We are at the roll back. roll back should reflect some savings to our constituents who pays the taxes, not only city, water management, school
district, county. And so we wanted to give them a reprieve as well because our constituents are getting taxed to death. So we made that clear early on. we wouldn't be here tonight on a
continuence of something that we did meet five other times on. Um so I I I wanted to say that because it appears that we hadn't been doing what we needed to on this dice but we have given those directions. So again the perception
I I really need feedback from this commission to tell me if if I'm right or am I I'm going to leave here tonight feeling the same way. I felt love at night. Does anybody want to respond to that have any comments
>> in terms of >> not knowing in terms of not for sure like the direction or >> the true say? Well, all of it basically what I was clarify >> what I'm cl trying to clarify is
we said that the money came from the the savings that we the 118 >> five change >> five yes came from better place money >> right and that's because better place
you know already is budgeted to transfer funds into the general fund better places are already budgeted that way. So when I looked at uh or we looked at all of the funds, we looked at
general fund and we also because that revenue is in general fund. So we could have uh reduced general fund one of the departmental expenses or we can also look at revenue streams that finance the
general fund. One of the revenue streams are in fact transfers from Better Place. So in reviewing Better Place, you can see there were items that were funded or budgeted. In the prior year, we didn't
even spend $1. So storm water was one of those items. And this year for this budget, initially it was budgeted for 600,000. So that would be the automatic you know in that particular analysis that would
be an option to say okay we didn't spend anything anyway we are trying to begin spending in storm water and so that is where that transfer came from but that is a natural transfer that is already in place
>> it was easy but when we say let's examine these budget requests and the funding There are some areas that we had areas of opportunity where we could actually have made some cuts that concerned the
some commissioners up here that we kind of say, "Hey, can we look at this? Why are we putting money here and why it's being requested?" And we had questions on it that never was answered, Miss Carter. So, I wanted that to be bought up because later on
in a few months, we're going to do some hires. We're going to do some purchases and we're going to wonder what where that money came from. Go ahead, >> Commissioner Davis. Go ahead. >> So, I just want to take a different
approach here throughout this budgeting process. Um, and I I hope I don't oversimplify what I'm about to say. As the new commissioner, when the information was presented,
it seemed very black and white to me. So, our process, generally speaking, was we asked our department to submit their request. We took all the requests in,
they justified, we reviewed them. that was considered and this is my understanding so if there are areas I'm speaking that's not correct please correct me that information was taken in for the basis
of creating the draft budget >> correct >> we had a couple of several iterations of that but at some point we had the departments come in and after that point their requests were considered in the draft budget we reviewed it had some
negotiations back and forth, had opportunity to disagree, provide input, see what needed to change. Um, some changes were made. I think we all had the ability and opportunity to provide
that input. When that input was given, finance came back with a number of projected expenses based on that draft.
In order to meet those projected expenses, recommendations were made and we had several options. One was a 7% mill. Seven mills. >> That's correct. I'm sorry I keep saying
percent seven mills correct. >> Um I think there was a 6 something 6.4 and then the roll back rate. >> I just remember seeing those options. I also understand that part of the process
is for the temporary meal rate to be set. Whatever number that is we came up with it's the maximum that it could be. But we have the opportunity based on further budget workshops and decisions
we made to lower. But that is the max it would be. I intentionally and deliberately made the motion for it to be seven at that point. Not that I thought it would be or I would have
voted for it to be permanently, but because the finance team came with a recommendation and that gave them opportunity to go back based on our feedback
>> tweak knowing that our goal was never to have an increased and I'm going to put an asterisk by increased an increased meal. rate. My understanding is 6.4
would be the current I'm sorry the the meal rate for today roll back was this 6.2 to blah blah which means and I took and again this is where I hope I'm not oversimplifying and I took understood that roll back
rate but to be the rate that would generate revenue equal to what was generated in the current year >> correct >> that's my understanding >> to that okay
>> to oversimplifying I do know because I I don't want to get in the weeds yet. >> Based on that information, I went and looked at the last draft budget to make sure it was in line
with the discussion we had as I understood it. That that I can only speak for what I understood and I saw that it was in line. Um so to that point when I look at the
first meeting where we were to consider voting on the permanent rate 6.4 to me seemed reasonable based on the decisions we had the discussions and
where we landed. While technically it would result in an increase because of a point in time, I do want to say that not because we're saying to
increase it, a point in time. Nothing is stat time is not static. And so this is we're going into 2025, 2026. There are some increases in cost of some things. There are some things we want to do differently.
In my mind, taking all of that into consideration and considering the difference between the roll back rate and 6.4, yes, it is $118,000
in advorum taxes to the city. Relatively speaking, that is a small amount, especially when you consider it in relation to a the savings for taxpaying
homeowners, which was, if I'm not mistaken, approximately 20 something dollars. >> $29 >> for the year for a homeowner, >> a solder a month. So, I'm taking that to say
I took all of that into perspective and clearly and intentionally voted for the 6.4 for and I get that and when I mentioned earlier about our citizens having a win
and it it may be I don't want to minimize anything here any decrease I don't want to minimize but $29 per year per homeowner at a cost to the city for $118,000
and I believe we did great due diligence in prioritizing what needed to be done and made cuts in some places and increases in others. I believe we listened to our department heads and considered the work they needed to do.
I believe we made a good decision and I so that's where I know I'm talking a lot but I want to be clear about this because there's so much confusion surrounding it. The bottom line is I want to say being a novice commissioner
based on what was explained by finance the information provided to me I believe I clearly understood the impact of rolled back versus 6.4 for versus these budgets we had opportunity
to review and provide feedback on. I personally believe we had all the information needed and again I can only speak for myself on what I requested in the conversation I had. So I do want to just offer that perspective as well.
Thank you. >> Thank you, Commissioner Blum. >> Yeah. Yeah. Well, when we when we talk about the overall cumulative uh impact of what started last year, uh know Commissioner Jones had led that effort
with trying to get a somewhat of a reduction last year with uh the fire feeding dead 2.46 on the fire side and down to 2.43. Um that resulted in just that little quick one resulted in $79,000 which is
still is not a lot of money but at the same time it it it produced almost $20 uh difference on each uh individual's uh taxes compile with this year. So you got 79,000 last year. Then this year if you
get the 118 18,000 you're up to 197. So that's 200,000 in two years. So then there's another uh and I asked the um finance group to be uh very very creative in the way that we can look at
some a number of things and we came up with another $700 and something thousand at one point but it kind of dropped down to a little bit less than that. So we had various ways that we could reduce provide some form of of relief
not just only abalorum side of the house but through other things. We just learned that some of the projects that was in the better place plan had not been activated in some time. So constantly having that money tied up or
whatever, we can do something better with those funds if they're not already allocated and dedicated to those projects. Again, here was another $500 and some thousand dollars that we got. And then there's other things that Miss Carter and I spoke about uh on numerous
occasions that we have some options that that we could provide some relief. So, I know it may look like the 11,000, but I've been working on this thing for well over 8 or 9 months. And um again, so it
didn't it didn't come to fruition during that time period. But now we're able to see some of it. And we might get additional once the new year started based on the creativity that went into this new little thing that we just had a meeting the other day. So again, we I
want to if if I can possibly provide any savings to any taxpayer, as long as we're not reducing services or losing staff, that's a win for everybody. And so that's that that's my aim is no aim to
cut services, no aim to cut staff, but at the same time, if there's some areas where we can provide relief to people who are the taxpayers who you look at some of those tax bills and I've seen it and I've sent those things in people
taxes on the fire side, you got to look at and analyze that stuff. It's it's pretty high because it's going on to assess value. is not going on where you get relief on the homestead side where you get exemptions. And so that's what
we got to understand about how this tax and stuff work. >> Thank you, Miss Cotty. >> Yes. I was just going to say um with the 118,000 we will be providing at least $29.75,
you know, reduction to each taxable parcel. Also, uh, Commissioner Borum is correct and Jones that we have met on several occasions and Davis and Campbell we have met. And, uh, finance is going to be a lot more communicative
and, uh, creative with trying to find ways to reduce, you know, what our taxpayers are uh, experiencing. We have been working very closely with Mr. Lawson and uh so we'll hopefully implement some of that with the next uh
budget year, but also in this budget year, we'll look at items that we're not spending, you know, as much as we would like and hopefully we can come back and bring some alternatives to the commissioner. So, we'll make sure that not only that
is sent to you, but that we also have an opportunity in this setting to discuss it better. I want to make sure that we level set our roles and responsibilities as well. I can't imagine I've never been a city
manager or finance director of a municipality. However, I do know that as uh my fellow commissioners have said, they've met and at requested information, requested things to occur.
No one and and I may be stating the obvious, but again, part of this I'm looking to be corrected if I'm off base. No one commissioner comes to tell you what to do. I I know. Don't please just
listen to me first, Miss Cardi. That's not our jobs. That's not our role. And we don't have that level of authority. We do come and provide feedback as it sounds like has occurred. But I want to be
clear that for any department head, you have the expertise. Yes. Consider the request. provide the information requested, but we need recommendations,
rationale, >> and if we disagree, we need to clearly understand the consequences of the decisions that we potentially may make. And what I do hear, I believe, is that based on some
of the requests, we have not received all of that. And there have been instances where we've made decisions based on what we think you've given us or not given us where we don't understand the consequences. So, what I'm saying is there may be an
opportunity that when you hear us asking questions from our perspective, dealing with constituents, knowing the role we have, making sure we can translate that information to you so
we can be u make good decisions for our citizens and our city. I hope that you hear that we're looking for empowerment from our staff >> to at least provide information
that may include in some cases a consequence. Commissioners, I hear you. >> Just understand this is the impact. And I think that would help us all tremendously because you guys are the experts. We're trying to marry the two.
So, I hope that makes sense what I'm saying. Thank you, >> Commissioner Campbell. >> Um, Mayor, I think the commentary that has transpired is definitely been beneficial, but I want us to be mindful of um the portion of the script that
we're on was more so if we had questions, then I think we've been providing direction. >> Um, and I think >> and so I do believe that it's time to move on to the back to the get back to the point of why we're here and it's the
6.2 um xxx and then we will be able to provide them the the direction that we desire. Um but I just don't want us to lose so much so we I don't want us to lose focus of why we're here but then we
can think of a game plan of how we want to move forward. And with that said, I will now like to invite citizens to comment on the fiscal year 2025 2026 proposed millage rates and final budget. Please come forward to the podium if you wish to address the commission. Fill out a yellow speaker card that can be found
in the back of the room. Miss Kitchens, >> Allegra Kitchens, Palaca, Florida. First of all, it's to the 11th hour. Kudos. Better late than never. As a citizen, I do I don't do too badly. Right now, I'm working at a part-time job. I'm getting $40 a week and it will last till the end
of October. Then I'm going to be scrambling. It sounds like not much to you guys, but it's a lot to me. I have had neighbors and friends and still have neighbors and friends. $29 a month is their two or three prescriptions. They go without their heart medication because they can't afford it. At $10, that $29 means nothing to people that
get a lot of money. But for people on a fixed income, that $29 is their life. So, it means a lot. When the millage goes up, their taxes go up. When the millage stays the same at 6.4, for when the assessed value goes up as required by law then the taxes go up because the
assessed value went up. The roll back helps when the mill when the assessed value goes up and you do the roll back then the taxes don't increase. The value increases but the taxes don't. And as far as that 6.239 239. Your current budget is $85,592,312.
The roll back rate will cost you $118,567. That is chicken feed compared to your big budget. And as far as the departments, there are no cuts being made. Miss Cardi andor the finance director, they found an overage in the better place plan fund. That better
place plan fund is sitting there to be used for something. is specified of what it can be used for it. They have taken money out of that to help offset the roll back. It's a no-brainer. Give the taxpayers a break. Even if it was only $5 a month or $5 a year, you all maybe
don't understand, some of you all do. The poor people in this city are struggling. So, please do the roll back. And let me tell you this, there's only one thing that the taxpayers care about. One thing in this world, and this is their taxes being lowered. They don't
care what the reason is. If they see their tax bill going down and they see that their taxes are going to go down, that's all they care about. They don't care what the reason is. So, I think it's a win-win. And as far as saving there, yes, there's places you can cut a little bit more money. Your special event funds, 30,000 for a class A,
20,000 for a B, 10,000 for a C. That's 60,000 right there. Your special events funds that you personally have, $5,000 each, that's 25,000. That would be 65,000 of the out of the 118. But we don't need to do that. We're taking it to a better place plan. So let's go with
the roll back. Help the citizens. It's win-win, isn't it? Thank you. >> Thank you. Is there anybody else here for public comment? Seeing now none, I will now close a public comment section of this hearing. Finance director, Miss Frontel, please.
Mayor and Commission, the budget document before you, the fiscal year 2526 final budget, includes appropriations described earlier. Any additional adjustments to this budget can be made by motion at this time.
Commission, any adjustments to be made to the budget document must be made by motion now. If there are no adjustments, they should be made and approved by motion at this time. If there are no adjustments, rather, no motion need be made. Any adjustments? Okay. Thank you.
Pierre >> mayor and commission Florida statutes require the commission to adopt the millage rates prior to the adopting the related budget. As such before you is resolution number 2025 R124. This resolution includes the total
general fund millage rate for fiscal year 202526 is 6.2397 which is lower than the 6.4 400 mills from fiscal year 2425. Madame clerks,
you want me to read the resolution? I can read it if you want. >> Resolution. >> Yeah. Do you want me to read it? >> If you want to. A resolution of the city commission of the city of Palaca, Putnham County, Florida, adopting the final operating millage rate for the purpose of levering of ad valorum taxes
for the city of Palaca, Putnham County for fiscal year 2025 2026 and providing for scribers errors. I'll make a motion that we approve resolution number 2025 R1 124 adopting a
final meal rate for the fiscal year ending September 30 2026 >> second motion is second. Any further discussion? Seeing none, I'm going to open the floor to public comment. Is anybody here for public comment? Seeing no close to
public nom comment rather roll call, please madam clerk. >> Commissioner Davis. No. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Nay.
Um the budget was adopted with the fiscal I mean with the millage rate of 6.2397. Um we're back to findings. Miss Miss Shanto, >> mayor and commission, subsequent to the commission adopting the fiscal year 202526 mill rate, you must then adopt
the corresponding fiscal year 2025 2026 um budget. Before you is resolution 2025R125, which will adopt the final budget for the fiscal year ending September 30th, 2026, pursuant to the provisions of
chapter 200, Florida statutes. A resolution of the city of Palaca adopting the final budget for fiscal year 2025 2026 providing for severability providing for an effective date and providing for script errors. >> Move to approve resolution 2025R125
adopting the final budget for the fiscal year ending September 30th 2026. >> Second. >> We have a motion to second. Any further discussion? Seeing none, I'll open for the floor to public comment. Is there anybody here for public comment? Seeing no one public comment. Roll call,
please. Madam clerk. >> Commissioner Campbell. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Jones. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> No. >> Nay.
The budget was approved with majority vote. We are concluding this public hearing. Miss Pier, >> mayor and commission. The budget related to related business for this evening's public hearing is complete. Thank you to every department head that has assisted
in the process. This concludes the final trim public hearing. Thank you. >> Any further commissioner comments? >> I have some comments. First and the first one is dealing with the roll call. Can you be consistent on the roll call
because on certain items the role it has to change? >> The best way to do a um roll call is to change it every time so it's not the same person. >> I have never heard Commissioner War be first. >> Well, I guess I have I've been I've been first couple. Yeah.
>> If if if it hasn't changed it change, but it seems to be um we'd be more random then if that's >> right. And that's what I had asked too also that you just if you're gonna do it um but when I spoke with the clerk she
said well she go from top to bottom or bottom to the top and I said well you you need some randomness uh along those lines if you want to do that to be fair because basically you're going in two different orders you got and then you never really touch three and four. So I think if we're going to do it and be
fair I think we need to do it um in that regard. I I know in the past they've always done it from seat 1 2 3 4 in the mayor li. So that's the way it has always been done and that's the way it was done and then it changed. So that's
just my two cents >> with that. Do we have a motion to >> Mayor I just have one quick thing. May we put on the uh commission agenda since we did not necessarily have the discussion tonight of how we would like to move forth with the budget for the next fiscal year,
>> the workshops. Yeah. >> Thank you. Do you have a motion to adjurnn? >> Thank you.