When the streaming is fixed, I'm going to call the meeting to order. Raio. >> Commissioner Joseph >> present. >> Vice Mayor Lama >> here. >> Mayor Setchin >> here. >> For the record, Commissioner Viscara is
not here and neither is Commissioner Cyverson. Okay, before we >> Thank you. Before we start the meeting, um, as everyone knows, today is September 11th. This is a very somber day, 24 years ago. Today, a very horrible thing happened. Almost 3,000 people lost their lives. Um so I just
want to take a moment um to remember those people a moment of silence and to add to that um I want to also say that um yesterday a very horrible horrible thing happened um to our country. Someone that was a huge patriot, someone
that really understood the concept of um disagreeing without being disagreeable. um a very religious person, Charlie Kirk, a Christian who supported Israel who supported um discourse, was murdered. So, I'd like to also
include him in that moment of silence. If everyone could just take a moment, >> I'd just like to add one more thing if I could that uh there were 50,000 deaths um in the after 911. >> Thank you. So we have to pray for those
people as well. >> Thank you. We can all rise for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and
justice for all. >> We're not uh having the um the opening statement, correct? >> No. >> Okay. So, this is a short meeting. Uh we have very few people in the audience, but again, I'm going to remind everyone um this is a place where we do business. I'm asking everyone to please remember
um that you have three minutes to speak if you're going to be speaking. Um and and please, like I said earlier, we can disagree without being disagreeable. This goes for the um commission as well. I think that we normally do a very good job of that. >> Um go ahead, Maria.
>> Okay. The first item on the agenda is the mill resolution. It's 3A. It's a resolution adopting the city of Saniel's beach final ad valorum tax millage levy rate at 1.700 mills per $1,000 of taxable assessed
value which is 1.55% more than the roll back rate of 1.6741 mills for fiscal year 2025 2026. >> Do we have any public speakers? >> Uh no ma'am. >> Okay. Do we have any comments from the commission? >> I have a comment.
>> Go ahead. >> Okay. So I would like to say that I was uh the lead person responsible for the millillage decrease and for me and um I had gone through the
budget last year's this year's and I believe that um the um millillage rate reduction was well within uh what the city could handle.
uh finance-wise these um reductions here on that um where it's stated that we need to now h have a deficit and we have to eliminate certain items. I don't
believe that that is absolutely true and it's unfounded and I would like to have had Tiffany here to question her firsthand. But since uh that does not occur, I just want to put it on the record that I
don't believe that these numbers are true in any regard. >> Okay. Thank you. Take a motion. >> So move. >> I need a second. Second. >> Mauricio, we're going to take a >> Yes.
>> Commissioner Joseph. >> Yes. >> Vice Mayor Lama. >> Yes. >> Mayor Fetchan. >> Yes. >> The ordinance passes three to uh two to one. >> Okay. >> 3B is an ordinance of the city commission of the city. >> Two to one.
>> Three. >> Three. >> Two to one. >> Oh, okay. Yeah. >> Sorry. Go ahead. >> It's 30. I'm sorry. It's 30. Yeah. >> Okay. 3B is an ordinance of the city commission of the city of Sanos Beach, Florida, adopting an operating capital improvement budget for the fiscal year
commencing October 1st, 2025 through September 30th, 2026 pursuant to section 200.65 65 of the Florida statutes. Authorizing expenditures of funds established by the budget, authorizing incumbrances, authorizing issuance of checks, providing for grants and gifts,
providing for local and federal law enforcement trust funds, providing for post audit, providing for servability, and providing for an effective date. >> Okay. Do we have any public speakers? >> We do. Stephen Hirs, >> Stephen Hirs, 17201 Collins.
Uh, at the first budget meeting last week, I suggested to the commission about adopting a performance-based municipal budget moving forward. A perfect example why is after public comments were concluded last week, the commissioners asked the city manager
questions and for clarification about what programs were being reduced or eliminated to achieve the millage rate reduction from 1.8 to 1.7. However, there was no discussion or explanation why these specific programs
were chosen to be reduced. One of the strongest arguments in favor of performance-based budgeting occurs where there is a revenue reduction for any cause necessitating programmatic budget reductions. It provides accurate, measurable information to identify
budget reductions that are least impactful to our residents. By way of comparison, using traditional budgeting under the current system, the city manager typically responds to make reductions by trimming line items or adopting across the board
cuts. The commission then sees a thinner budget, but has little clarity about which services will suffer or what identified impact the cuts will actually have on residents. Using performance-based budgeting, instead of
asking where can we cut dollars, the process asks which programs deliver the most value for the dollar. The commission then uh each program or service then is tied to measurable outcomes such as response times for our
police, park maintenance satisfaction, permit turnaround times, and storm water resilience benchmarks. When revenue drops, such as a millage roll back, performance-based budgeting allows the city manager and the commission to do
three things. Identify lower performing or non-essential programs that could be scaled back or limited with the least impact on community priorities. Two, preserve funding for high impact programs that residents most value. And
three, communicate transparency with residents about what services may change, backed by data instead of politics or guesswork. A performance-based budget would give both the city manager and the commission a
data-driven framework for making smart, transparent, targeted reductions whenever revenues are constrained. It avoids blanket reductions and instead targets low impact or underperforming services.
The budget process benefits the commission, the city manager, city staff, and the public by getting the best return on every tax dollar. Thank you for allowing me to speak. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.
Lyall Rose Browse. My name is Lyall Browse. I'd like to actually direct my question >> just uh uh your uh address for the record, please. >> 200 Sunny Isles Boulevard. >> Thank you. >> I'd like to actually direct my questions
to uh Stan Morris. Um first, could you please >> Sir, I just want to remind you that um everything is through the chair. >> Okay. So, I'll address it to you. >> Okay. We don't go back and forth, though. This is your time. >> All right. First, I'd like to update us on the current balance of the city's
reserve funds. Having a clear picture of this reserves is important to evaluate how much flexibility we have truly with this year's budget. Second, I want to raise a concern about the staffing allocation. Last year, the city budgeted for 48 positions. This year, the city proposed
60. From what I can see, there's no immediate plans to hire that many additional people. That raises the question, why are we allocating funds for 12 more positions than we've historically had? To me, this makes it seem like we're patting the budget, and it's harder for
residents to understand where the money is actually going. I'd really like to hear the reasoning behind the increase. Is there a long-term hiring plans or are these placeholder numbers for future needs? It would be helpful to explain that. Otherwise, it seems more reasonable and transparent to budget closer to actual staffing levels,
perhaps allowing for a modest increase, but not jumping all the positions at once. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> That's it. No more speakers. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> Um any comments from the commission? >> Mayor. >> Yeah. I'd just like to um kind of reiterate a little bit of what we discussed last time uh specifically the drone program and some of the the the cuts that were handed to us. So
throughout the year just to obviously I mean we have budgeted 60 60 staff positions. Um we don't know exactly if all of those are going to be filled when they're going to be filled. So it looks like it's fluid. So, let's see what we
could do so those cuts are not implemented or they're mitigated as much as possible, especially a drone. Anything that has to do with with safety and the FIFA watch party, >> please go ahead.
>> Yes, thank you. We have taken all of your notes and comments from before and we're looking at all of those potential items. >> Okay. All right. Yeah. Thank you. >> Okay. I'm going to make a make a motion. >> I would like to say something as well.
>> Please go ahead. >> So, at the time that I proposed uh 1.7 military, the city manager came back with I believe it was 1.725 or something. What was it exactly that
you came back with? >> Go ahead. >> I don't recall the exact number, >> but there was a number that was below 1.8 that you had said that you could settle on as opposed to the 1.7.
>> Yes, I believe it was a little bit lower than the 1.8. >> Okay. So, if we had settled on that number, even though it was below 1.8, 8 there would not have been any of these reductions. Is that what you're trying to say now?
>> No, there still would have been cuts. My recommendation >> my recommendation was still for the 1.8 and still is for the 1.8, but the direction of the commission was to lower to 1.7. So, we implemented cuts from new
programs that were presented. I see. But with working around the numbers and uh which I like I said I don't believe that they're accurate or you know that there are some numbers that are fudged. Um so that's that would have been okay
but with the 1.7 this is what we come to which as I said I don't believe that these are accurate or necessary. So for me, I'm quite satisfied with my
decision and we had two other commissioners that went along with my proposal for the 1.7. So at some point I know I know I wasn't twisting their arm, but there must have been something they were thinking about in order to also go
along with the 1.7. And when they think about it, they have to also be thinking, how is it that all of a sudden with all of the city's reserves that all of a sudden we have a
a deficit that leads us to these um these numbers? I just I wish that and we have to make some provision that we can ask if in in these regards uh to have her present so
she'd be questioned directly in the future for me. I don't trust these numbers. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh, Commissioner Joseph, I just want to remind um everyone uh that's perhaps watching um
and and for the record that we have multiple meetings where we do have an opportunity to speak to to Tiffany. Um and I think that it is a very unfair statement to say that her numbers are fudged or incorrect. Um she's got a very high reputation and uh she's been
working here for many years. So that's an unfair statement. >> Are these her numbers? I don't even No one has her numbers. Tiffany's responsible for the for creating the budget. But with with that being said, um again um I had actually said to to
the manager that perhaps to make it easier for people to understand because although we've done this for many years for for next year, we will make it much more obvious when these uh conversations are being had so that more people can participate. We did have um people participate this time. Some of them are
in the audience so they can attest to that as well. But um you know I don't want to rehatch what we've already uh discussed and uh certainly for the record we've all had the opportunity to have these conversations um at since I
think the first one was March I believe that was the very first meeting. Um so this is certainly this is not our second budget meeting. This is just the the completion of it. >> For me I'm quite comfortable with having the military reduced to the benefit of the residents. >> Thank you.
Go ahead. >> I'd like to mention a point. I mean, when when we're doing budget and I think that moving forward, um, something that we could do is look at different scenarios based on different milit rates, right? So, we could have a clear picture because last time that we were
here, you know, we had mentioned it was like spur of the moment, you had mentioned 1.7, then you mentioned 1.6. So I think that we collectively can go in and say okay let's look at scenario
where we go with 1.7 1.65 and take a deep look at different programs that may need to be cut. So it's you know it's modeling basically. So I think that we should moving forward um work on something like that perhaps.
So, yeah. >> Well, that would that would uh cause the city manager and uh the other departments to work more closely with us, which doesn't occur at this time. >> Well, regardless, I think that that I
think it will give it will give us more time. It will give us a little bit more information, a clear picture on what's needs to be done, how things could be tweaked or not. And then it will give also the
staff you know a better clear or more time as well to to work on those different you know projections or or or budgets based on our directive you know. So we tell them listen please do three
different types of models modelings and we take it from there and I think that way you know we avoid some of the surprises or some of that you know tension or friction. I think that's a good way to approach it moving forward.
So just >> because I I like to see also too, you know, I like to have a I mean when I'm working on my home budget, you know, I >> you do different modeling, right? Or if you're doing >> Let me just I'm going to interrupt. I normally try not to do this, but I just
want to again clarify this is this this way of budgeting has been uh and please correct me if I'm wrong, Mr. City Manager. the way that the city has basically budgeted since its inception. I believe the previous city manager is here and so are previous elected officials. Um there's nothing uh
necessarily very different. In fact, I think that it is more inclusive because we've had more opportunities for the public. If we decide uh which I don't disagree with you to change how we're doing it, then we can absolutely do that as a commission and have a real workshop
to have those discussions. I don't think we should just start saying I want you know >> no but I think that during our workshops say okay how about if we go with 1.7 or 1.75 or >> right and I and I think that that's >> what would that entail
>> I think that that's why we should do a better job us on the deis of doing more research and being ready to have those conversations when we're having the workshops rather than doing it at the tail end when it's already you know done. So, you know, let's say for the record that we are all are going to do,
you know, more to, you know, really understand what the timeline is and how much time we have to do this because it's not forever, right? We have to, you know, >> yeah, one point we got to make vote on. >> Yeah. >> Actually, I just like to say that I did do my research. I went over uh several
years of books and we could have actually gone down to 1.6 six and not have any issues with uh this year's budget. The city can could have well afforded to go down to 1.6. We're
>> a rich city. We have um a huge number a huge amount of reserves. Um the uh interest rates will be going down but that's you know that's will affect everyone. Well, look, okay. I
>> but we uh still we um have plenty of money coming in from uh development on the east side that isn't taken into account right now. So, we are in one of
in better shape of um many many many cities around us. >> I totally agree. Um but I think that we also have to be responsible for future commissions to come that we don't put them in a position where uh we make it very challenging for them to maintain the level of service um that
>> we're not even close to having any issue. So that's ludicrous even to suggest that >> I I'm not suggesting that. What I'm saying is is that we have to rely on on the staff that we have given this job to uh which is the director of finance. So,
>> but we don't have input from the We don't have >> any back and forth with the staff. >> That's what I'm trying to get at. We need to have more input. >> We have plenty of input. Please, Mr. City Manager. Well, Commissioner Viscar, >> I was just going to say to the couple of
points that were brought up. Firstly, we started the budget process in March. We built the budget based on the visioning of the commission. We don't build the budget in a vacuum to say that it's not transparent. We have the budget posted
online and you all were involved in the process from the very beginning. We built the budget based on your direction. So, you've had plenty of opportunity for input. We've incorporated those changes. We built the budget based on 1.8. You directed to
1.7. So naturally we went back and looked and reduced from the budget the new programs that we had proposed. So that's how you ended up with the budget where you are today. >> Thank you. All right. Um with that I
will take a motion. >> So moved. >> I need a second please. >> Second. Mauricio. >> Just need to know for the record that Commissioner Viscara is here now. So, Vice Mayor Lama,
>> yes. >> Commissioner Joseph, >> no. >> Commissioner Viscara, >> yes. >> Mayor Setchan, >> yes. >> The ordinance passes 3 to one. >> Great. Thank you. With nothing else on the agenda, meeting is adjourned. Thank
you.