Okay, it is 6:30. We're going to start the um the special city commission meeting. So, we'll do a call to order. >> The roll call.
>> Roll call. >> Commissioner Stson >> here. Commissioner Joseph >> present. >> Commissioner Viscara >> here. >> Vice Mayor Lama >> here. >> For the record, Mayor Spetchin had emergency and won't be able to attend. >> Emergency.
>> Uh, so we have a quorum, sir. >> Okay. So, we'll do this pledge of allegiance. David, you want to lead us? Yeah. >> To the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One
nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Okay. So, tonight we uh have one item. Um you like to read the resolution? >> Yes, sir. >> Please. >> 3A is a resolution of the city of
Sunnyal Beach establishing the city of Sunny Al Beach proposed advalorum tax mill levy rate at 1.800 800 MS per $1,000 of taxable assessed value which is 7.52% more than the roll back rate of 1.6741
mills for fiscal year 2025 2026. >> Okay. Would you like to um make some comments, Mr. City Manager? >> Yes, Vice Mayor. Thank you, Vice Mayor, members of the commission. The purpose of this meeting tonight is to set our
tenative millage rate. This has to be done tonight as it is as it is due to the property appraiser tomorrow. Please note that our millage rate may our excuse me our millage rate
may be lowered during our public budget hearing but not raised based on the setting of the tenative millillage tonight. At our last meeting, our proposed rate of 1.8 mills was stalled.
Since that meeting, I've met with you and asked me to look further into our budget. I have done that, and I'm pleased to report now that I can recommend a reduced budget to 1.75 mills.
These cuts represent almost a million dollars. Therefore, I'm asking for a motion to approve the setting of our tenative millage rate at 1.75 mills. >> Okay. All right. Thank you. Um, any public comment?
>> No, sir. >> No. Okay. Who would you like to Who would like to start? Anybody have any comments? >> I will start discussion. Okay. And I just ask that um once I have the floor, I'm allowed to continue uninterrupted
with all of my questions. I know sometimes I'm interrupted by the mayor, but she's not here tonight, so there shouldn't be an issue. >> Okay, go go go ahead, Jerry. >> Thank you. Okay, so earlier today, I wrote to uh Stan, our city manager.
>> Jerry, talk into the mic. Get the mic closer. Earlier today, I wrote to Stan, our city manager, asking if Tiffany would be here tonight, and he told me she would not. So, I have some questions uh to ask of the city manager,
and then I can um propose my suggestion for the military. So, Mr. Manager, um I had written to you with certain questions. Are are you prepared with those responses? Vice Mayor.
>> Yes. Go ahead. >> Yes, Commissioner. You gave me a number of different requests for information earlier today, none of which would have been able to be compiled by this evening. >> Now, if Tiffany had been here, she would
could readily answer those questions, correct? >> No, she could not. >> Why would that be? >> Because it's a substantial amount of information that you've asked. >> Okay. So let's go over what I had asked. I had asked for
um numbers from 2023 to 2024, 2024 to 2025 and then uh projected figures for 2025 to 2026. So regarding those years, what I was
asking for was the dollar amount in reserves. Now that's that's easily obtainable. It's not is it not? >> You asked for a number of projections which >> we
let's that's 2025 2026 but let's uh get to the 2023 2024 reserves. That's a number that's easily obtainable. Correct. >> There's certain things yes we can give you. >> Okay. So would you would you be able to
obtain that? >> We'll happily provide that to you. Yes. Before our first budget hearing. Yes. >> So yeah, but we're trying to come to a figure tonight. >> Yes. We started our you may >> we started, as you know, we started our
budget hearings in April and the information you requested was earlier today. So all of this information could have been asked and answered at our workshops any prior meeting before today. So what I'm asking
for tonight is to set our millillage >> okay >> at 1.75. Okay. >> If you would like to propose something different then you're welcome to do that. >> Okay. So at this point I would like to propose >> a milit rate of 1.6 six
based on my um figures that I've looked at and worked through uh regarding the 2023 2024 reserves in um 2024 2025. The city has been in
excellent shape even though uh we had some commissioners and the city manager that uh viewed um the city as being to be more cautious but uh being cautious
and regarding the economy that's been in excellent shape and uh our projections show that um the federal government and Sunny Isles in particular will be in excellent shape for the upcoming year.
And uh with what we have coming in from interest and from uh interest from the development uh figures, I believe that uh $4 million to lower the military to
four to two point to uh 1.6 is not a big number. uh for the city to contribute since this is the resident's money and we're only the conservators of of those funds that
we have an obligation to give back when we can to the residents and in that regard um I make a recommendation to have the mill rate be at 1.6 rather than 1.75. You may.
You have any comments? >> No, sir. >> No. Okay. Anyone else would like to go? >> No. Would >> you like to go >> regarding the 1.6? No. >> Okay. All right. Um,
Stan, I I have a question. So, ju just to clarify a couple things. So, historically, we've been lowering the military. Okay. We did it in the past couple of years. I mean historically if you see the history you see it that that we have been lowering it and um what I
would like to ask the city manager and you mentioned that in your opening statement is can we push the millage rate from the 1.75 a little bit lower? You know uh are there is there any more wiggle room
where we could perhaps cut a little bit more so we could bring it lower? not the 1.6. I think that we need to be a little cautious. That's that's lower than the roll back rate. So, um, can we bring it down to like a 1.72 or even to
a 1.7? I think what my suggestion keeping in mind that we could always lower the millillage after the setting of the tenative millage would be to set the tenative millage at the rate that
I've suggested and then in between now and the time when we have our first budget hearing I can look at the numbers further if that's the will of the commission. Okay. >> What? Okay.
>> Just sorry just to just to finish keeping in mind that we can always lower the millage but I cannot raise it based on what your direction is tonight. >> Understood. Okay. >> Go ahead.
>> Yeah. >> In between when is the next meeting? What would be the in between? What would be that timing that we have to play with in between? >> I believe it's the first week of September. Okay. September 3rd.
>> September 3rd. Okay. Thank you. So, if we're going I understand that you're recommending the 1.8 based on the months and months of work by the the staff whose job it is to solely think about these things. So I I understand that and
you understand that there there is some wiggle room and but we can't just be throwing out numbers like I could stand here and say let's make it 1.0 um but I'm not basing that on anything.
So any numbers that I think we're going to uh to consider at the next if we're looking to lower which I think I'm okay with but I need to understand what we're giving up. So if it's 75 or 72 or seven or
whatever uh it it comes with a cost in terms of services or things that we're not going to buy or people that we're not going to hire. So, if we're going to um have different recommendations,
I'd like to know what the cost in options would be for that. Does that make sense? Like going forward, if it's 1.7, well, these are the things that we would cut, you know, to to um what do you call it to justify that, right? And
if it's 1.75, you know, these are the things. Was that something that you would that you could do, >> Vice Mayor? >> Go ahead. >> Yes. In between now and when our first public budget hearing is, I could run a scenario.
>> That's the word I was looking for. Thank you. scenarios >> 1.75 versus 1.72 versus 1.70 and my proposed cuts after meeting with the finance department and give you
specificity on what we would remove from the budget pending those different rates. >> I would like that. I would like to see that. >> Okay. When it comes to the budget, I mean, what what id like to see obviously is we
need to run the numbers. Uh I would like make to make decisions based on on just you know uh no information. Uh so but but I know that as a fact perhap you know we have for instance we have open positions that have not been filled for
a couple of years. So at this point we're at 60s something perhaps more or less right. So take a a a a real look to see if within that year or within the next fiscal year, are we going to be
able to fill those positions? I know that we need to plan ahead. Maybe we we will be able to fill those, but take a hard look at that and take a hard look at perhaps other expenses that we budget for and see if we could get him closer
to what the um actual expenses or the reality is and see how we could cut that from the budget without obviously affecting uh services. So that's what I have in mind and maybe you could run
some scenarios for us and uh we could take a look at that in our me next meeting >> again. >> Yeah. Anyone else? >> But that that just goes to my point, Alex, like if if we lower it, then one of the things maybe we're not cutting a
service, but then you're cutting a higher, you know, that we haven't hired yet. But >> no, understood. But I I'm just trying because every year we have a budget set at at this much and then our expenses come in lower and that has been the case
ever since I've been here. So I'm just trying to get the budget closer >> to to to that perhaps. Right. I understand that these are projections uh and we need to do our due diligence, but see how we could perhaps um take a a
harder look and be able to lower the millage rate maybe to a 1.7, you know, 1.72. We'll see. And I understand the time constraint we're under. So, um you know, we need to transmit this by
tomorrow. We have a deadline. So, with that being said, I just ask each one of you to consider that and like uh the city manager said, we could always lower the uh millage rate uh for our next commission meeting.
All right. So, with that being said, who like to make a motion? >> I'll make a motion. >> Okay. for the 175 with the expectation that we're going to get the scenarios uh to see if we can lower it in September.
>> Any seconds? >> I mean, >> I would like to make a motion. >> Okay. But no, we have a motion on the floor right now. >> Motion right now. So, we have to resolve one. There was no second. >> No, I'll second it. >> Mhm. >> You have to pass the gavvel. >> You gave
>> pass me now. >> The pro the theoretical gavvel. >> Yeah. >> I'll second the motion. >> Okay. So, let me just go through a roll call. >> Commissioner Styverent. >> No.
>> Commissioner Joseph, >> no. >> Commissioner Viscaro, >> yes. >> Vice May Lama, >> yes. The ordinance is 2 to two. It fails. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Now,
>> so I would like to make an additional motion. >> Hold on. I would like to make a comment. >> Mr. City Attorney, can you explain the uh consequence of this when it comes to the mil? >> Well, if if it fails, you have to convey some sort of millage rate to the
property appraiser by tomorrow. Mhm. >> If you don't decide that number amongst yourself, you're relegated to the roll back rate from last year. And with again, you can always lower, but it's extremely difficult to raise between now
and your you can raise it. You could try to raise it at your first uh budget hearing in early September, but it's very costly because the property appraiser at that point has to send by registered mail notices to every
single taxpayer in the city >> comparing what the lower rate was to the higher rate. So, it's an expensive proposition to do that. >> Okay. >> Um that's all you're relegated to. you have to transmit a number by tomorrow and if
you don't decide on a number it's going to be decided for you by the uh by state statute. >> Okay. So just to note the roll back rate is 1.6741. Okay. So
Mr. City Manager you have any comments? Well, I think if you were to look back at my our original our first meeting where I recommended 1.8, >> I think that's a better starting point to work our way backwards. So, I'm
concerned with making it any lower because we can't raise it. So, based on that, I think I would like I understand the 1.75, but I would like to ask for original 1.8
and then come back with scenarios. >> So, we will have to make um another motion, correct? >> Put another motion. Okay. >> The first motion failed, so you'd have >> Okay. Yes. >> So, all right. So, you wanted to make a
motion, Jerry? >> Yes, I would like to make a motion. >> Okay. Uh may he go ahead and make a motion? Sure. >> Okay. Go ahead. I would like to make a motion for the military at 1.7. >> Okay.
Any second? >> I'm going to have to think about this one because the um because 1.7 is the goal. Like I'm not against the 1.7. I just need to see I would feel better. >> My 1.7 if I can say is a compromise.
>> I was talking Jerry. You didn't want to be interrupted. Please don't interrupt me. Um, I'm not against the 1.7, but we don't have we don't have the scenario to support that. We're just throwing out numbers. I don't think that's responsible.
>> Um, I think it's better to preserve our options and get data. You're asking me to just I have >> I like I'm still talking. That's fine. >> Uh, you're asking me to,
you know, I can just say, "How about 1.74?" I don't I don't know what that means in terms of of what if we're doing things responsibly, what that would mean in terms of, let's say, the positions that we wouldn't hire. I want to make that kind of informed position. Um,
well, 175 was was knocked out. I don't think anybody wants 1.8, made. But if 175 was a recommendation, we can make a motion for 1.7 1.751 or whatever. Uh to preserve the options to make informed decisions. Uh
that's that's what I would like. >> May I speak? >> Yeah, go ahead. >> Thank you. So, I've gone over the figures. I've asked for the city manager to give me additional information which
did not happen tonight. Um, but there are figures out there to show evidence that the city is in excellent financial shape which I know is your concern and I would not be making any recommendation if I thought that it
would ever put the city in any type of jeopardy. But we have millions and millions in reserve. We have uh projects that >> Hold on, Jerry. Um return to here. It's it's a little difficult. Thank you. Go
ahead. >> We have millions and millions in reserve. We have uh the city is is not near any type of jeopardy as far as cutting any um events or projects as Commissioner
Verscara was worried about. That's not that would never be the case. We're in excellent financial shape. If Tiffany were here, she would be able to answer those questions. I'd asked her to be here tonight, but the city manager said she would not. Um,
and I believe that the questions that I had written to the city manager for him to have available this evening, he could have easily had, but for some reason, we don't have those answers. Uh but I know
absolutely for from my experience and from going over the numbers myself that 1.7 is a millage rate that no one can be worried that the city would ever be um
forfeiting any amount that is not a valid amount for us to spend and give back to the residents. And you may be right about that, Jerry, but I don't have the the data to support that. The information we were given was
what 1.8 and then the recommendation, the post number crunching was 1.75, which we're moving in the right direction. And the point here is we can still land at 1.7. I'm not saying it's impossible. It may very well be possible, but I want to I want to make
an informed decision. And I don't mean this in a disrespectful way, Jerry, but I can't just take your word for it. That's I'm still speaking. >> I can't just take your word for it >> because I have to do my due diligence, too. Now, I didn't come in here with
with the expectation that I for 1.7, right? I didn't I didn't do that. But I'm not against it. I think you can still we can still get there, but we have to be responsible about how we get there. We've always been responsible.
We've been responsible in past years and last year we were told, "Oh, we have to be extremely careful that the city um could be in financial jeopardy," which was never the case. And you know, we tried to lower the millage rate even
lower last year. And I believe that 1.6 is a valid mill rate for this city. Um, considering the amount of money we have, the amount of money we have coming in, and you know, like I said, this is the
resident's money and they if we can afford it, they deserve to have it back >> and I don't disagree with you. >> All right, Fabola, do you have any comments? >> No. >> Just clarification for the public. Uh, Tiffan is our finance director. So, you
guys know when we talk about Tiffany, that's it. >> All right. So, so we're in a predicament here because we need to transmit this um tentative millage rate by tomorrow. >> Well, >> and we're only four right now. Okay. So,
we have the option to vote on 1.75. Okay. And then >> have the scenarios >> got voted down already. >> Well, can we can we propose it again or we need to wait? >> No, you can propose it again. >> Yeah. Okay. >> We could be a reconsideration.
>> We could be a reconsideration. Okay. So, >> just I'm sorry. Just to clarify, the motion was for 1.7, not 1.5. 1.75. The motion was for 1.7, not 1.75. >> No, no, no. >> And it failed. >> No, yours was for 1.8.
>> No, it was 1.75. >> No, we haven't vote for 1.8 yet. 1.8 is what Stan said. >> Yeah, the first was 1.75. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So, actually, I believe 1.7 is still out there. >> Well, nobody
>> We're still waiting for a second. >> Nobody second that. >> Well, we're still waiting for a second. >> Yeah. Okay. Any seconds? >> Any seconds? >> No. Well, apparently you haven't gone over the budget book as I have.
>> Okay. Um All right. So, >> and just if I can reiterate, >> yes, >> this is just the transmitt of your tentative rate, your true proposed millage rate is going to be decided
>> in early September. This is just to get the ball rolling with the property appraisers office. >> Well, we want to get the ball rolling on the right foot. >> All right. Hold on. >> You have very little leeway, >> Jerry. And then >> once once you do a tentative you have as
you correctly stated you have leeway to reduce it further. You just don't have the option necessarily the other way. So again this is just a preliminary transmitt of a proposed millage rate. You are going to actually
decide a proposed millage rate at your next hearing in early September. And then at that point you'll have another hearing where you're actually going to finalize that mill rate. So this is for transmittal purposes really. >> Okay. >> I understand that. >> Yeah. >> And vice mayor.
>> So all right. So would anybody like to make a reconsider a motion for a millage rate of 1.75? >> I will restate the motion. >> Okay. Any seconds?
Okay. So, with that being said, going back to what the city attorney said, we'll have to transmit the um the roll back rate. Is that understood? >> Vice Mayor? >> Yes. >> Can I ask for a vote on my original
proposal of the 1.8? that in mind going back and looking at it and bringing you scenarios prior to our first budget hearing. >> I mean, we could do that, but nobody's even I mean, not even 1.75 is at this
point. So, I I >> I mean, I can make it, but >> yeah, >> I would like to say that this is quite unfortunate because uh we should have had Susan here tonight. we should have had um Tiffany here in order to have a
valid meeting. And this is just quite unfortunate. And this is just for for me this is just signaling that uh for for something that uh this the
commission should be able should be uh the the people that make the that set the uh millage rate not the city manager. But it seems like the city manager is trying to be in control of
this and it's just wrong. Well, >> I should have had answers to my questions that I had written earlier, and it's just unfortunate. >> Jerry, let's stick to the subject uh right now and and see how we could >> well >> be in compliance and transmit this by
tomorrow. >> I'm willing to sit here till midnight. >> All right. So, so >> Jerry, again, I don't want to do this because I'm doing this >> without the information. >> Well, you have the same book that I have.
>> Hear me out, please. Uh, I do have the same book that you have, and I come to different conclusions than what you have concluded, which is not unusual for us. Okay. Um, but I'm willing to propose what what's the middle point? 1.25 25
one point not two5 what I say >> one point 1.725 >> 725 is that what the is that what the middle point would be >> that would be >> my god I'm writing seven point okay sorry 1.725 okay >> I think that's a middle point
um I don't want to do that because I'm I'm not um I don't think it's the most responsible thing in the world but I think it's insanely irresponsible to not make a decision at all. So, um
I guess I would make that motion. 1.725 >> and yes, I'm sorry, I have the gabble now. >> Okay. Sorry. >> So, Commissioner Vascara, you you realize that >> we have a motion on the on the floor right now. >> Well, >> yeah. All right. We have a motion on the
floor. So, city attorney, may he comment, [Music] >> go ahead. >> You have a second. Do you have a second on the motion? >> I I I I'll second the motion. She's got the gobble.
>> Okay. No second vote. [Music] Commissioner Cyson, >> no. >> Commissioner Joseph, >> no. >> Commissioner Viscaro, >> yes. >> Vice May Lama, >> yes.
>> The motion fails. Tutu, >> you you may talk now, Jerry. >> Okay. So you realize that the dollar difference to the city from going from two 1.725
to 1.7 is only and Stan you can verify is what $200,000 or less >> no no we're talking about percentage points now not not we're talking about
from 1 7 1.725 to 1.7. So it's less than $200,000. Correct >> approximately >> because one point is 2 million, right?
>> Approximately. Yes. >> But Jerry, my my issue is not necessarily the dollar amount. I understand that it's compared to I'm still speaking. >> Um my issue is not that it's 200,000 or
300,000. I understand that by our numbers that's not a big deal. I understand that. >> My still I'm still speaking. >> My objection is to doing so with no data in front of me. I don't think that's
responsible. I'm putting myself out there to try and meet you halfway because more irresponsible is not passing the we the a number at all. So I am trying to meet you halfway. I'm trying to think this is which this is
literally our one job as commissioners. Everything else that we do is nice but our one job is to pass millage and budget. So we're we're failing here. So, I'm willing to meet you halfway and I'm done speaking. Okay.
>> Okay. Uh, hold on. We're past. Can I answer? >> No. Hold on. I need answer. Jerry, >> I need something to say. We're past 30 minutes, so I need to have consensus so we could continue. >> Motion to continue. >> All right. All right. Okay. Now you go.
Commissioner Vascara, you have the same budget book from 2023, 2024, 2024, 2025 that I've been looking at and reviewing. Have you not reviewed those budget books? >> What is your pointer?
>> So then you should feel as confident as I do that we're not at any tragic situation here. We can e the city can easily afford the additional $200,000 to get down to 1.7
>> and 1.6 even. >> And I don't >> there's no loss of any events or anything that we that we've budgeted for in the last two years. >> All right, let let me let me hold on. Go ahead. Go ahead. And all of that is it
something I want to hear from uh these are questions that should have been raised at the budget workshops or in in you know not today like today where it's it's putting the pressure because it's a meeting because it's in public because
we understand this is politicking. These are things if you had questions, if you needed data, you've been looking at these books, right, for the past three years, then you could have asked the questions at some point earlier than today. So, we could have gotten answers so we could be making informed
decisions. But instead, instead instead >> um I'm put in a position where I just have to take your word for it and and that's not fair to me. But what we can do, >> okay, >> is we can >> vote on something and work on lowering
it. I am not against that. I want to lower it, but I want to lower it >> with information. >> Again, I'd like to make a comment. Hold on. I need to answer tentative transmitt. We need to do that by tomorrow.
>> I don't see anything wrong with going with 1.725 and then we come back and lower it to 1.7 or you know um whatever it might be. Okay. So, but we need to transmit this by tomorrow. I think that
the I agree with you in a way, Jerry, where the monetary the the money is between 1.725, 1.75 and 1.7 might not be too much. Not even for the residents. It's not a big difference, Jerry. The I mean, we made the um we
made the calculations the previous year. It is not a lot of money, you know. So, you know, we need to take into consideration that we need to stay >> not the time frame to give back to the residents. >> It's not a lot of money per household
>> from a 1.72. >> But that's not even the point. Okay. So, we don't it's their money. >> No, no, it's their money. I'm not saying that. But what I'm trying to say is that we have a deadline by tomorrow and we could always come back and lower it to 1.7 and you could propose even lower
like you had done before. But we need to abide by the deadline. >> But it doesn't do me any good if the the commissioners that need to make the decisions look over the the budget books and they don't understand what they're
looking at and they don't feel confident. >> Um I I I would like to correct you. I do look at the budget books and I understand the budget books. So I wouldn't make those assumptions. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Well, then you know the same that I know. Well, I just told you, but I like
we could always we could always go come back in September and lower the millage rate. Right now, it's a tentative mill rate that we need to transmit. Okay. So, keeping that in mind, we should go ahead vote for it. Again, we're in a
predicament because we're only four right now. >> Well, then I'll make a motion for again for 1.7 and that's a compromise. So, do I have a second? >> You know what, Jerry? I'll second it.
I'll second it. I'll second it. Against my better judgment, I will second it. >> Okay. >> Thank you, >> Commissioner Stson. >> No, >> Commissioner Joseph. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Viscaro?
>> Yes. >> Vice May Lama? Yes. I mean, >> but I I'd like to make a comment though, Jerry. You you compromise on what? >> Compromise on what? You said that you're that's a compromise. >> Going down to 1.6.
>> No, because last time you said 1.7, so I don't see that as a compromise. Okay. >> Well, I >> you need to consider what we say as well. Okay. And you need to be >> I further reviewed the records and I was looking tonight to have verification from the city manager which he did not
come prepared unfortunately. >> You didn't have time to prepare >> but at the next meeting no I I wrote to him early enough in the day >> to have those numbers and they were easily obtainable. So the at the next meeting we will have everyone here Susan
Tiffany to answer those questions and possibly get it down to the 1.6 that I know we can afford without question. >> All right. So we can transmit 1.7. >> Yes. The resolution passes.
>> Right. >> Because last time you said 1.7, now you said 1.6. So you're you're a little bit all over the place. >> 1.7. And you can still lower it. >> You could still lower it from 1.8, Jerry. You can lower it from 1.7 to five. That was the whole point of this. >> But you see, now we're guaranteed to not
be able to go up to 1.8. >> We're not going to go. We were never going to still go down. That was clear. After we go over, I think we said we're open to 1.7. We just want Yeah. Yeah, that's fine. 1.7. I mean, >> the reality is that >> I second the motion to adjurnn, but I'm
not the mayor right now. Sorry. Go ahead. >> Hold on. Hold on. I'm in charge. Yes, you are. >> Yeah. Motion to adjurnn. >> Second. >> Second. >> Thank you.