Please ensure that you sign in first.

You can use the sign in sheets on the podium or scan the QR code on top, please.

Alex J.

Fernandez.

David Suarez.

Joseph Magazine.

City Manager Eric Carpenter.

City Attorney Ricardo J.

Dopico.

City Clerk, Rafael E.

Granado.

As a courtesy to everyone present, please silence all cell phones and electronic devices at this time.

Lobbyist disclosure reminder.

If you are a lobbyist appearing before the city commission or any city board, you must have registered with the city clerk prior to participating.

If you have not yet registered, please do so immediately.

Presentation reminder.

If you submitted a presentation within the twenty-four hours prior to the start of today's meeting, please check the computer located at the podium to ensure your file is properly loaded.

When the floor opens for public comment, please step up to the podium, speak clearly into the microphone, and begin by stating your name and address for the record.

How to participate in public meetings via Zoom.

As soon as the host grants you permission to speak, a dialog box will pop up on your screen with two options.

After you finish speaking, mute your microphone and click on the lower hand icon.

If you are joining Zoom via phone, tap the keypad icon and press star nine to notify the meeting host that you have raised your hand to speak.

After you finish sharing your comments, be sure to press star nine to lower your hand and star six to mute yourself.

Thank you for your cooperation, and thank you for participating in your local government here in the city of Miami Beach.

Another one of them was from Nick from the only one.

Please take your seats.

The meeting is about to begin.

Remember to speak into the microphone as this meeting is being recorded for public record.

Please stand by.

We are going on air in five, four, three, two, one.

Good afternoon.

Thank you for coming to our commission meeting to finalize our budget, which we are statutorily mandated to do by today.

1159 and 59 seconds.

Good afternoon, everyone.

Welcome to today's hybrid commission meeting.

The city commission is physically present in the commission chambers at Miami Beach City Hall.

1700 Conventional Center Drive, third floor.

Members of the public are invited to attend either in person or virtually.

If you're joining us virtually, here's here's how to participate.

You can log in using the Zoom app or visit the Zoom.us on your browser.

You could also call by phone at 305-224-1968.

Again, 305-224-1968 or toll-free eight eight eight four seven five four four nine nine.

The webinar ID is eight one three nine two eight five seven six seventy-one pound.

Again, the webinar ID is eight one three nine two eight five seven six seventy-one pound.

If you'd like to speak on an item during the meeting, please click the raise hand icon if in the Zoom app or press star nine on your phone.

The Zoom link, webinar ID and phone numbers stay the same for every commission meeting.

Before we begin, I'd like to go over city lobbyist regulations.

All lobbyists must register with the office of the city clerk located on the first floor of City Hall.

You do not need to register as a lobbyist if you're an expert witness giving only technical or specialized testimony.

A representative of a neighborhood association or a not-for-profit group speaking without pay or reimbursement, a public official or employee acting in your official role, someone required to appear before the board or commission for responding to a code violation or a private citizen speaking on your own behalf without compensation.

However, if you're an expert witness or representative of a neighborhood or nonprofit group, you must still submit a written disclosure form to the office of the city clerk before speaking with the commission or city staff.

These forms are available at the office of the city clerk.

There are two more important points to cover.

First, if a lobbyist gives or agrees to give anything of value at $1,000 or more to a neighborhood association or its representative in connection with a matter before the city, that can that contribution must be disclosed in writing to the city clerk.

Second, contingency fees are strictly prohibited.

Finally, if you plan to speak during the public comment session today, please ensure that you sign in first.

You can use the sign-in sheets at the podium or the ski or scan the QR codes to sign in digitally.

Thank you.

Thank you, Ralph.

Um, we're gonna start with the Sutnik hour.

Just want to tee it up.

Uh these are all public hearing items.

So uh for every item we call, and there's R7A through F.

Public will have the opportunity to speak, but also we have the open forum where you can come up and speak about the budget-related items.

Um, this is a multi-month process that we go through starting in June.

We unanimously voted on the budget and millage rate at our September 17th meeting.

Um for all those uh listening.

Our our tax rate, our millage rate is staying the same, uh, flat as it's been for the last couple of years.

And I'm proud of the work our chair has done, Commissioner Magazine, and in running our finance and budget committee and and the entire commission.

The our budget focuses uh significantly on public safety, quality of life, cleanliness, critical services, such as fire, police, code compliance, park rangers, and other safety and uh quality of life services.

So proud of the work that our commission has done to get to this point.

And uh again, having multi multi-meetings, public meetings like this, and of course, many many meetings uh on on one on one to to get to the point, and then we of course discuss it publicly in a transparent way.

And then we, of course, discuss it publicly in a transparent way.

So let's open it up to uh Sunday.

Thank you, everyone.

If you wish to speak on the Sunday on any item, please approach the podium.

I'll first call Zoom.

Omar Jimenez is our first caller on Zoom.

Please state your name, address, and you have two minutes.

Mr.

Remetas, please unmute yourself.

Good evening, everyone.

My name is Omar Jimenez.

I'm a candidate for City Commission in Group One.

Over the past five years, our city budget has grown by 45%.

This year we'll also have a record 2,330 municipal employees.

Yet year after year, the city underfunds critical infrastructure and capital projects.

Nearly 1.2 billion in projects will go unfunded over the next five years.

Well, at the same time, we're uh overspending on wasteful ventures like 31 million for a scaled back Lincoln Road project pedestrian project, hoping it brings Lincoln Road back to its heyday.

Meanwhile, residents face higher taxes, higher rents, and then affordable housing crisis.

What about the taxpayer that keep this city running?

When do we start giving back to them?

Instead of waste and higher taxes, I support rolling back the tax rate, not the increased push by staff.

The so-called balanced budget is nothing more than a farce.

We need affordable housing, fair rents, and incentives to support small businesses and infrastructure upgrades that don't bury residents under more fees.

We need the we need to invest in expansion of our stagnant economy so that we're not solely reliant on tourism and property tax dollars.

Yet year after year, we see bloated payroll and growing bureaucracy driving residents and businesses out of Miami Beach.

It's time to elect leaders who put people over special interests.

Because if we keep voting for the same establishment politics, we'll keep getting the same broken results.

It's time for a change.

We cannot keep reaching into residents' pockets to fund wasteful projects and inflated salaries.

Let's restore fiscal responsibility, address living costs, and finally make the city work for the community, not just for the insiders.

Thank you.

If there's no one in the audience wishing to speak, I'm going to go to the next caller.

Our next caller is Paula.

Paula State, your name, address, and you have two minutes.

Hi, my name is Paula Allen.

I have two addresses, 345 Ocean Drive and 100 Meridian Avenue.

Um I second what Omar just said.

You know, I think that the city, the budget is uh growing and growing, and I am all for spending money on safety and the infrastructure.

What I'm not for spending money on is extra things, arts, things, art, projects, art in public places, uh, you know, stuff that I don't I really don't get it.

You know, it just seems to be supplementing artists' uh way of life.

I'm not for that.

You know, let them do their art if they want to donate it, fine.

If people want to support the Miami City ballet, let them donate out of their own pockets.

We're tired of getting robbed as city taxpayers on stuff that benefits only a few, in my opinion.

Um it's yeah, it needs to stop and design.

I don't know these like First Street Design Project.

I don't know how much design, but I'm hearing it's millions and millions to design it.

All we really want are pumps and pipes that work.

We really don't care how pretty they are.

Get it done.

We pay all these design people.

Oh, do you want this covering or this one or a wavy or this, you know, you know what?

For what how much we paid them 100 million to design something hadn't even broke ground yet?

Too much of that stuff goes on.

Meat and bones.

That's what we need, meat and bones.

We're just tired of paying and paying and paying, and exactly some of the salaries on the city employees, if it's competitive for their experience and their education.

I've seen some that seem quite bloated, and that's that.

You know, just stop with the extra spending.

If it's not a budget item, if some group comes up and says, I want a hundred thousand for equality save.

If it's not in the budget, just like in our condo associations, if it's not in the budget, thank you, Mr.

Allen.

If you're out of time, I apologize.

Ralph, I just want to for people listening.

I just want to set the facts straight.

Um, when somebody talks about a design item for a public works project, it's not about what color it's going to be.

It's making sure that we are designing something to have the right size pipe fit into the space available for the job it's needed to do.

So I just want to make sure everyone understands because we all use design like let's design a birthday cake to look cute.

But that's not what it's used for in public works and in city budgets.

It's designed to make sure that the money that is being used from taxpayers to make our infrastructure and roads and other things that we build as a city safe and functional.

That's the design that we're talking about.

Just wanted to clarify that for the record.

Go ahead, please.

State your name address.

You have two minutes.

Thank you.

I'm Celia Gruce.

I leave 1201 20th Street, Miami Beach, Florida.

We have a spending problem.

We just spent 42 million dollars on a park that we all just visited on Sunday.

And our infrastructure is deteriorating.

We take enough taxes.

We take in enough taxes, but we just must get our spending back under control.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Our next virtual caller is Mr.

Mitch Novick.

Mr.

Novic, state your name, address, and you have two minutes.

Good evening, everybody.

Mitch Novick, 901 Collins Avenue.

I believe two to three hundred million needs to be cut from our city budget.

Since former city manager George Gonzalez departed, we've added roughly 500 new employees and have watched our budget more than double, all while quality of life and public safety have diminished.

This October, tomorrow, or within the next week, residents will see yet another automatic rate increase on their utility billing order statements.

Over the past 15 years, we've endured 17 consecutive hikes and new fees, including the monthly fire sprinkler fee.

We all know the administration is waiting in the wings to push for more whopping fee hikes and rate increases, thereby making Miami Beach even more unaffordable.

It's time to look within and stop walloping the taxpayers of this city.

Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

Again, if there's anyone who's interested in speaking, please approach the podium.

I'm gonna call uh someone with a screen name of Break Drive Break Diving.

Please state your name, address and you have two minutes.

Uh hi, my name is Monroe Mann.

Uh I was a former commissioner candidate.

I dropped out recently, but I want to share seven of my points that I think would help the city of Miami Beach.

I live at 1110 Pennsylvania Avenue, so does my mom in a different apartment, and we also own two condos that we rent.

Number one, the sidewalks are filthy.

I've moved here four years ago.

It's inexcusable.

This is not the Bronx, and you guys have massive amount of money to hire a power washer, make that happen.

Every sidewalk in the city.

Two, don't raise the taxes.

The property values have plummeted.

Uh we can't get as much rent as we could before back in 2021.

If you raise the taxes, you're just hurting everybody, landlords and tenants.

Please don't do that.

Everybody's struggling.

Three, metro mover has to come to the city.

More and more people are moving here.

And I'm sorry if people don't like it.

The traffic here is horrible already.

It's only gonna get worse.

The only solution is the metro mover, not a bus.

Metro mover that runs on its own tracks.

Number four, start finding people for marijuana use in public on the streets and sidewalks, and the second time it happens, arrest them.

Misdemeanor.

It's disgusting and it makes it this place feel very trashy.

Number five, tragedy that the movie theater's gone and there's no bookstore in Miami Beach.

The mayor keeps talking about how this is a world-class city.

It is not.

A world-class city has a major bookstore and a movie theater.

So do whatever you need to do to bring them back.

Six, the 18% required tip at restaurants is disgusting, especially for residents.

It needs to get gone for everybody, but at least if you live here, no more 18% because no one wants to go out and eat out here.

And finally, seven, you need to have a license to drive an electric bite or scooter, a regular driver's license.

You need to be follow all the traffic laws.

And I mean, people are dying.

People, someone just died at my corner about a month ago because uh he ran the red light.

It was his fault.

But thank you so much, Mr.

Thank you.

Bye-bye.

Please state your name, address you have two minutes.

Hi, my name is Ava Frankel, 70 LaGore Circle.

I'm running for commissioner in the upcoming election in group one.

Um, to the person that just spoke, we don't have a movie theater or a bookstore, but we do have a cheesecake factory.

Yay!

No, I'm just kidding, we don't need that.

Um, but on to the budget.

As we all know, Florida does not have state income taxes.

So, where do we collect revenue from sales taxes and property taxes?

And those are great, but if our sales taxes are down, which they are, at least I would think that they are, judging by the vacancies, then we need to raise our property taxes.

Now, I know that those are the two options, but I think that there are more untapped options for the city to earn revenue that we just don't even explore.

So recently we just did a $1 summer parking program to incentivize people to come spend money here.

I think we could have offered the same discount while also increasing revenue for the city.

I think that we could have potentially added a watch this advertisement for 50% off and collected from the advertisers and also offered our residents discounts.

So that's just one example of a creative solution that we can have to earn more revenue.

And then I guess I have 39 seconds left, so I'll hurry quickly.

But on to the flooding and drainage.

I really hope that in whatever comes, we see more channel drains rather than single point drains.

And I hope that we see less above ground water storage.

So the tanks that are above ground that need pumps that require electricity, which we all know electricity is one of the first to go during a hurricane, which is when we need the drainage to work the best.

I hope that we explore underground water tanks, which is feasible and possible.

So yes, thank you.

Bye, everyone.

Also, www.ava loves Miami Beach.com.

My ideas are there.

Bye!

Next public speaker is Tom McGu McGlone.

Please state your name, address, and you have two minutes.

Yes, my name is Tom McLoon.

The address is 73613th Street.

And I'll call in tonight.

Just the the mayor started the call tonight, talking about no increase in the millage rate.

But you know, we all know that numbers can be very deceiving in terms of how they're spun.

And so if I say that a number goes from one to two, it's 100%.

But what I didn't hear the mayor say regarding the budget is that it's gone from a billion to a billion one or whatever that number is because it's a really large number.

And I just asked the mayor and the commissioners, a number of who have been on for a number of terms, how much money is enough for this city?

A billion dollar budget, and you're looking for more money.

I just don't understand.

And like the other people said, and and even right now, I think there's three people in the commission, two commissioners, and the mayor who are running for office.

I haven't seen any comment from any of those people running for office about how they're gonna save money or how they're gonna cut expenses so that the average person who gets increased property taxes isn't going to be affected by what's happening with this year's budget.

And what blows my mind more than anything is that although you have a billion dollar budget, the poor government efficiency, the government is really inefficient.

I did a hundred and nine-inch kitchen renovation, and it took 13 inspections to get it done.

So if this commission or mayor aren't capable of doing it, I do think that we need new blood, or maybe we should contact Elon Musk and have Doge come in and look at the city's billion dollar budget.

Thank you very much.

Thank you so much, sir.

Go ahead, state your name, addressing you have two minutes.

Yes, my name is Walter O'Leary.

I live at 110 Washington Avenue, apartment 2213, Miami Beach, Florida, 33139.

I'm not going to speak about economics.

I do actually teach at University of Miami.

I'm on the advisory board of the economics department, and I also teach FinTech in the finance department.

This is really more of a conversation about the social fabric of Miami Beach.

And what I mean by that is that economists don't like to add in high food prices in the core PC, which was what everybody looks at in terms of inflation.

We don't like to look at rising utility rates, as Novak pointed out.

But what we do need to look at is the confluence of all these rising prices and rising costs, and a lot of not-for-profits are adjusting the budgets.

I can tell you for a fact, my alma mater, University of Chicago.

They're blending in departments, they're cutting back.

Why can't the city do the same?

Why can't we adjust according to the times?

Somebody pointed out real estate prices are no longer rising.

We need to adjust accordingly.

We cannot ask taxpayers to continue to fund projects that don't meet the needs of the taxpayers.

My point about social fabric is that we're pushing people away from Miami Beach by not controlling prices.

The confluence of rising, if you're an owner, insurance costs, HOA assessments, taxes.

If you're a renter, less quality of life, less services out there, you need to actually embrace the fact that we have to adjust with the times.

You cannot continue to tax and spend, tax and spend, tax and spend.

You need to create value.

Economics are about limited resources.

They're fine that resources.

Act accordingly.

You need to make the most with the least, and that's the reality of life.

So why not adjust like everybody else and provide better value?

Thank you, sir.

Thank you.

Our next caller is Quentin Weisberg.

State your name, address, and you have two minutes.

Good evening.

My name's Quinton Weisberg.

I live at uh 4560 Royal Palm Avenue, Miami Beach.

I've lived on Miami Beach most of my life.

Most of my family lives here.

And I just want to share my my feelings about with insurance and utility costs already rising and the streets flooding, the sidewalks being flooded.

It's it's uh just uh too much.

Um, and and to raise property taxes now.

Um I urge you not to do that and to help keep Miami Beach affordable.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Our next virtual caller is Sharon.

Please state your name, address.

Now you have two minutes.

Hi, uh, this is Sharon Weiss, uh, 233 81st Street.

Um wow, I could not believe that our budget for 80,000 people is almost one billion dollars.

That is like mind-boggling to me.

Um, I I don't know if I I don't know if anyone of you on the dais are in real estate, or if you have any clue what's going on in the real estate market.

Um, there's gonna be a massive condo crash.

You guys better tighten the belts, no time like the present to do it.

Um and and every single one of us here, taxpaying citizens.

We have a certain amount of money that comes in.

We we have to live within our means.

We have to budget ourselves.

Our mortgage company doesn't just adjust our our our payments because of a whim.

Uh the insurance company doesn't adjust a payment because of uh because of their whim.

Um we we we budget personally, and you guys should budget.

Every single one of you, I certainly hope has a budget that you stick to in your own personal lives.

Why is it when it's other people's money?

It's just an open pocket book.

Um, I urge you to roll back the millage.

Um there there's no reason for our costs to go up so much.

Um I I there's not enough time in two minutes to get into all of the ways that um you're overspending and wasting money.

Um, but it's it's it's unfathomable.

Uh you actually have have me almost unable to form coherent sentences over how puzzled and annoyed, angry, uh uh just disgusted that I am.

Please um listen to all of the uh all of the intelligent people who are calling in and sharing our thoughts with you.

Um we have to tighten our belt.

There's so much waste and fluff.

We need to cut to the bone.

Um, and you need to treat the residents who pay for all of this like partners.

Thank you so much, Ms.

Weiss.

Our next virtual caller has a screen name of Inez's iPhone.

Please state your name, address, and you have two minutes.

Inez, please unmute yourself.

Yes, yes, I unmute it.

Um, my name is Hinez Flax.

I'm at 1500 Ocean Drive, apartment 1006, Miami Beach, Florida.

I'm just calling to um agree with everyone who's spoken so far.

Just answer that question.

And I think that Miami Beach has just become unaffordable, and that you know, you need to look at your budget, and you need to look at cutting your budget instead of increasing our taxes.

Thank you very much.

Our next caller is Andrea.

Please unmute yourself, state your name and address.

Hi, my name is Andrea Speradinakos.

I live at 227 Michigan Avenue.

Uh, I'm like an over 25-year resident of Miami Beach.

And I mean, I'm just gonna ask you guys do you think that this is working right now?

Is this a successfully run city?

17 consecutive rate increases.

It's a 900 million dollar budget for 80,000 people.

We have visitors from all over the world coming here, renting uh uh hotels and eating out, and we every year have to hire more and more and more employees.

It's bloat, it's waste, and I hate to say it's maybe abuse.

It's really gross to us as citizens watching year over year our dollars being spent, we don't even know how.

So, more and more employees, I don't believe make a government more efficient.

My building, it's small, 28 units.

I just want to let you know it took us over two years to get our permit to replace our front door.

Exact same, just remade, and guess what?

In the meantime, the guy who was doing the work lost the pieces and everything.

He says, Oh, two years to get the the permit.

This is not a well-run city.

I ask you to look deep inside yourselves.

Look at yourselves in the mirror and say, Am I doing the best I can?

Have I lowered?

Can I can I cut corners more?

This is what successful businesses do.

And I ask you to be a successful business and not like a flop shop, hey, we're just spending other people's money.

I ask you to roll back the millagery and please help us.

Do not it'll just trickle down to raising rents.

You think Lincoln Road is empty now?

Wait till the taxes go up higher.

You think Washington Avenue is empty now?

This is not the way to run a successful city.

I thank you very much for your time.

Thank you.

Our next caller is Irene Bigger.

Please state your name, address, and you have two minutes.

Good afternoon, everyone.

It's Irene Bigger.

I'm at 1500 Ocean Drive in the Art Deco district.

Uh, just a couple of things.

I'm not sure if uh it's been mentioned yet, but it's very important to consider the benefits of private public partnerships.

There are many creative ways to tap into the private sector to assist us to pay for many programs in our city.

And um well, a small portion of the costs in our city, we should also look into what we are giving away versus what we are getting for the for leasing out our public spaces, um, namely you know, in the area of special events here in Miami Beach.

Uh, and just the second point I wanted to mention is I do believe there should be another review of where our tax money is going so that we can figure out how to better function um you know as a city and be more efficient and effective.

Thanks, everyone.

Thank you.

Our next caller is Valerie's iPhone.

Please state your name, address, and you have two minutes.

Um Valerio and 1580 Bay Road, Miami V.

Um, I concor with everyone that's against this hike, and I don't think that many understand what it's like to run an apartment building here.

And it is unbelievably difficult.

I mean, not only right now is there like four 200 vacant units, but my property taxes went up almost 10,000 in a few years.

And I understand, like you want to throw parties and have fun and do all these parks and all these things, but like Irene said, you need public private, you know, uh, you know, contributions.

I mean, they every single day I read about all these events and everything.

Like we need more private investment because they're benefiting, and we have to stop just spending money like drunken sail.

I mean, like we're surrounded by water, but we're not sailors, you know, and this is getting ridiculous, but thank you very much.

Have a nice night.

Thank you.

Our last caller is Janet Silverman.

Please state your name, address, and you have two minutes.

Hi, my name is Janet Silverman.

I live at 6899 Collins Avenue.

Um, I want to say for the record that I'm on the board of uh the North Beach or Allison Park Neighborhood Association, but I am speaking on my own, and hopefully I don't have to fill out a form in order to make the comments I'm going to make.

Um so, you know, I heard at the last commission meeting that like the budget is not prepared on a grounds up basis on an annual basis, that the commission really just approves enhancements and and reductions from line items that have been there for God knows how long.

And I think that part of the problem is that no one's looking at the budget on a grounds up basis.

I also learned when I was on the uh budget advisory committee that we do no benchmarking, we don't look at our costs as compared to like kind of cities to see if maybe we're spending too much on something, maybe we're not spending enough.

I don't know.

But it, you know, I just you know, I I worked in finance for a long time, and when I looked at a company I'd never seen before, the first thing I would do is go or company I never uh industry I never saw before.

I would go and say, okay, what should this line item be as a percentage of revenue or as whatever the appropriate metric was?

And we don't look at any of that.

And so I think there's a lot of probably a lot of bloat in the budget.

And I think that it could be you know better constructed.

Um that's all I have to say.

Thank you.

Thank you so much, Mayor.

That concludes subject.

Commissioner uh magazine, Vice Mayor magazine.

Well, thank you.

Um as was laid out uh tonight, we are mandated to pass a balanced budget.

And what I am uh we'll start with uh what we are proud of coming into this year.

We knew sitting in this seat last year, and we talked about it that this would be a very difficult budget year.

We had multiple union contracts that were going to be renegotiated and significantly raised, and that put us from out of the starting gate into a multi-million dollar hole.

So all throughout the year, we've been managing in a diligent fashion, knowing that there were going to be a lot of constraints uh on our budget, and that is going to continue.

I echo many of the sentiments that some people called in with.

I am going to correct the record on a uh uh whole host of things, but the overall sentiment before I got elected, I was sharing these same things, and since then I've been sharing these same things.

I don't want it to be lost on anybody.

We are taxpayers, right?

We get in minuscule amount to serve the public, and we're paying well above and beyond that in taxes.

So we have an aligned interest.

And it has been a tough battle back and forth at times with city staff and things like that.

We do need to control our spending.

And I am confident and proud of the work that's been done over this past year.

That work will not stop.

We hear loud and clear what is going on out there, and the emphasis and the priorities on more efficient and more prudent spending at a government level, enhancing our efficiencies.

And we have started many efforts to make government more efficient and better serving our taxpayers.

A government does not make widgets, it doesn't make iPhones or refrigerators, it makes money one way, taxing people.

So every dollar that we spend is money being taxed, and we have to have an even greater appreciation for where that money comes from and where that money goes.

That being said, several callers alluded to it.

I want to make this very loud and clear.

We absolutely are not raising your taxes here.

Our millage rate for three years in a row, despite many external pressures, is remaining flat.

Now, as home properties increase, yes, that percentage applied will likely increase.

That's essentially mirrors inflation for the cost pressures that we face with with the city.

But I agree that we need to do better.

And over the past several months, before this even came to the forefront, this commission, our finance committee has put directives, the staff, and we're actually going to go through this.

We have a list right here that we directed our city manager to go out, and we have a balanced budget.

We have what is mandated by law, but that wasn't good enough to us.

We wanted to find a more efficient government because we need to prepare for a rainy day.

And even if the days remain sunny, we have to respect our taxpayer money even more.

And that is part of the exercise that we're going through here tonight.

We have found multiple millions of dollars in cuts over the past several meetings.

So we are in lock step with the comments that we heard from our residents tonight.

And I think what you're going to see here tonight is an even enhanced focus on that of making government spending more efficient, because we're going to go line item by line item and see where we can better serve our community on a more efficient basis.

So I'm going to hand it over where we go with this.

Ultimately, at the end of the day, I'll ask for city man uh our city attorney, what happens if we do not pass a budget today.

Well, there could be some serious consequences to that.

Uh failure to adopt the millage rate as required by the statute could result in the loss of state funds.

Uh failure to adopt the budget, um, that's a little more nuanced, but if it results in a financial emergency and there are various um indicators that that a financial emergency has been triggered, could then result in oversight by the government uh by the governor or or by uh a legislative committee.

Um it's uh it it's an unprecedented thing.

I I know that um the CFO uh made some calls, we did some research.

I to our knowledge, there is no other municipality or local government that has failed to adopt the budget or a millage rate uh when it was supposed to.

The governor's office would come in and take over the city of Miami Beach.

It could happen uh if if a financial emergency is determined to have occurred as a result of this.

Yes.

Okay.

Excellent.

So while we have spent months on finding efforts to deliver a more efficient budget, and we're doing so without raising our millage rate for three years in a row.

To sit here the 11th hour and call for not passing a budget, or to roll back our millage rate, Mr.

CFO, that would take if we rolled back our millage rate a cut of what, 17 to 20 million dollars?

Yeah, I believe the number would be around 21 million dollars.

You know, I philosophically don't disagree that that's a good idea.

And I've led some of those conversations.

But to do so or propose that at 6 p.m., the night a budget is mandated is incredibly irresponsible.

Incredibly.

We have we've had four different budget meetings where we've all given directives to our city manager, okay?

And included in that is to find two million dollars in cost savings.

And we could go through every one of these items.

But to sit up here, we don't have the ability to roll back 20 million dollars because we couldn't even, we don't have line item by letum granularity.

And that is one thing that will be changing.

I'm bringing a legislative item.

We talked about this, much to my dismay at our sub uh at our June budget meeting.

I this is important for the public to know.

We don't have insight into every dollar of our ground up budget.

Us up here as legislators.

And that will be changing.

I'm going to be bringing the legislative item in October.

It's not grandstanding or things like that, but for us to truly know what's in our budget, we need to go dollar by dollar.

And if my colleagues want to join me in those initiatives, I am happy to lead that effort.

Yeah, I all co-sponsor with you.

But that cannot happen here at 6 p.m.

We and we talked this afternoon.

We can pass a budget keeping our millage rate flat.

And we could dedicate two hours of every single finance meeting to finding efficiencies in government.

And in fact, I have a line item or uh a legislation to sponsor turning our budget advisory committee into our budget advisory and government efficiency committee, and our FERC meetings shouldn't just be spent on how to spend money, but how to be more efficient with the money that we already take in.

Okay.

So while we are making tremendous amounts of efforts, and I've never seen this from a Miami Beach government.

I agree we turned around and we landed on a billion-dollar budget over the years.

And that is not acceptable.

I will not be okay with that, and I will continue those efforts.

But to sit here and say that we should vote no on a budget at 6 p.m.

And then have the state come in here.

But even more importantly than that, we won't be able to pay our bills tomorrow.

We won't be able to pay payroll.

We're gonna ask our police and our firefighters and our public safety officers to come in telling them they're not guaranteed a paycheck.

Okay?

Our police officers, if we vote no on this budget, have no guarantee they get a paycheck.

So we're gonna ask them to come in and keep our city safe, telling them we have no ability to pay them.

Okay?

So I hear our taxpayers loud and clear.

We all happen to be one of them, right?

And we are going to continue on these efforts to be more efficient with our budget.

And if you've seen our meetings over the past year, two years, or even when I called in, that is one of my biggest personal prerogatives.

But you have to do so in a smart fashion.

And to roll back our millage rates, if that was a true intention of this body or any individual, that would have started months ago, not at 6 p.m.

when we have to have a budget signed in six hours.

And maybe Mr.

Chair, may I comment on that?

Yes.

Um I you know, I love the fact that there are seven of us who come from different perspectives and have additive ideas to try to make the end goal better.

I mean, that's what we're all here for.

I mean, three of us ran, four of us ran at the same time to try to make things better.

Well, all of us ran it when we ran to make things better.

But but you know, David Joe and I um were elected as as neophyte commissioners to make things better because we share a lot of the concerns that we have heard today.

But I will tell you that as an elected official, one of the most important things that you can do with your platform is to advocate for the greater good.

And there are a lot of ways to be additive to the greater good.

If you think something isn't going the way you want it to, talk about it.

Come to the budget meetings, come to the workshops, come to the FERC meetings.

I couldn't make one of the budget meetings because I was at a wedding.

I called in.

I wasn't here, but I I was part of that meeting.

You better be sure of it, because that is one of the most important responsibilities we have.

We are a billion dollar business.

And if any of us is taking it lightly with performative emails, the morning of the day that we're supposed to make this official, as my colleagues said, and as I'm sure you'll hear from most of my other colleagues.

Those are real concerns that are raised, as our callers have raised, that we ran on, that we all here share, that Joe and others on this on these on the spot are working to ameliorate over the next few years.

But to put everything that we are as a city at risk for the sake of I'm not sure what the motivation is, is irresponsible.

And I think that is a disservice to the community.

You know, we we heard people talking about a 42 million dollar park that is really spectacular.

And yeah, it's expensive.

Do you know how long it took to get that park built?

Over 30 years.

And do you know how we funded it?

The taxpayers were asked, hey, we can build a park here.

This is kind of what it's gonna look like.

We're not entirely sure, but if you're interested in having a park here, it's gonna cost 30, 42 million dollars.

I don't I don't remember how much was in the geobond.

But would you like to have a park here?

And overwhelmingly, the city taxpayer said, yes, please, I will give you some more of my taxpayer dollars to fund this park.

So, yeah, it's an expensive park.

It's absolutely spectacular.

If you haven't been there, you should you know go as soon as this is over.

But we chose to tax ourselves that park.

Now that's not the same thing with everything that's in the budget, which is why there has been so much discussion about how do we see from the ground up every line item?

How do we get to the granularity?

Because there are probably things in here that are holdovers from past initiatives that are no longer necessary, or directions that we're no longer going in, or things that we no longer prioritize, and we are working to get there.

But to say, you know, at the 11th hour and the 59th minute and the 59th second, it's irresponsible to pass this budget, and we're not gonna do it, and you know, that's what's irresponsible.

Yeah, so just to echo uh some of the sentiments, again, just to reiterate, we're we're not raising the tax rate known as the as the millage rate.

We have started tightening our belts, and we're gonna continue to do so as uh Commissioner Magazine.

And that's why I'm I'm very pleased that you're chairing the the the um finance committee, and I like your name change as well.

So uh to focus on efficiencies and and we're doing that, we're gonna continue to do that.

The problem with cutting and slashing at the last minute, as I think is obvious, is we do offer some great services in our city, and I hear it all the time from our residents.

You call 911, the the phone call is answered, and police come quickly.

Fire comes quickly.

Public works, wherever department you call.

So that doesn't I I am so I am agreeing that there are efficiencies that we can do, but the wholesale cut at the last minute, we've got to be very careful because our residents rightly demand that we provide first class services, which we do.

So it has to be done uh deliberately, and we'll get it done and we'll do it.

Um and partly it's again, it's been started.

We've that's part of this process.

We mandated some cuts uh as part of this process.

And unlike I'm not gonna start naming it, but the county had to do it, the county had to slash departments and uh and a lot to get down.

We didn't have to do that because despite some of the uh extra expenditures, uh we are at the point now where we do have a balanced budget uh that if if our body uh concurs, we can pass today in compliance with state law.

Mr.

Mayor.

Commissioner Suarez.

Thank you.

You know, developers and special interest too often in City Hall get our full attention.

And the residents, the very people who live here raise families here and pay the bills here.

Feel ignored, as we've seen today.

We may hear them.

But do we really listen to them?

I'm here today to be their voice.

Today alone, over 60 Miami Beach residents emailed me.

Not a single one said, please raise my taxes.

Instead, they talked about the very same things we all worry about.

Skyrocketing housing costs, crumbling infrastructure.

And in city government that just keeps on getting bigger and more bloated.

And you don't have to take my word for it.

The truth is right in the title of the resolution.

Final ad valor millage of 5.702 mills, which is 6.5% more than the rolled back rate.

Six and a half percent.

That's more than double the official inflation rate of 2.9.

At that pace, our city budget will double in just 10 years.

Tell me.

How many families in Miami Beach can afford to double their housing spending in 10 years?

If we can't, why should government?

This kind of growth isn't just reckless, it's unsustainable.

If residents have to tighten their belts, it shows so should City Hall.

The truth is another downterm will come to Miami Beach.

We're already seeing signs in the housing market.

Prices are softening.

Home sitting longer.

We can't keep pretending everything is fine while digging deeper into taxpayers' pockets and expecting them to carry the burden.

It's time to cut inefficiencies, trim the fat, and get back to basics.

Fixing our infrastructure and protecting housing affordability.

Because let's be honest.

We can't fund every program in the world.

But if our streets are flooding, our buildings are crumbling, and our residents can't afford to stay here, then what good is it?

We already know the majority.

Let that sink in for a minute.

And why?

Because people can't afford to live here anymore.

That should shake every single one of us awake.

And before I close, I want to make sure the voices of residents who couldn't be here tonight are still heard.

I'd like to read into the record some of their comments.

Real concerns from people who may not be able to stand at this podium or be able to call into Zoom and want their voices represented.

I'm just gonna pick a few.

Please keep in mind when voting for this millagerate tonight.

Hello everyone.

As everyone knows, property values have decreased significantly since COVID outbreak during which Miami real estate prospered.

My proposed property value decreased from last year, but my taxes will increase.

Please explain that.

If I have one vote, I vote against this tax increase.

My name is Gershawn Seppen, and I'm born and raised in Miami Beach.

My family and I are owner occupants in the Lakeview neighborhood.

I also own a condo at South Beach.

It is rented to a really wonderful couple, a doctor and a nutritionist who are great tenants and just really great people.

They exemplify who any city would wish as residents.

The city's proposal to raise property taxes is a burden on people like myself, our tenants, also lifelong South Florida residents.

Here's why.

Maybe not for the ultra-rich, but definitely for us regular folk.

Six months ago, I lowered the rent of my unit, a rate that was competitive to begin with in order to keep my tenants from leaving.

There's no chance I'll be able to pass these costs on for the next several years, even if I wanted to.

The city of Miami Beach needs to figure out how to reduce waste and government bloat, not keep taxing its constituents.

Please let me know what we can do to prevent this increase from happening.

I have a whole stack of this.

Okay?

A whole stack.

And for those of you who are complaining about waiting to the 11th hour, let me remind you.

March 19th, 2025.

This is an item that I sponsored.

Referral to the Finance and Economic Resiliency Committee to discuss implementing a flat budget with a CPI adjustment to fully fund infrastructure, lower property taxes, and control general fund spending.

Where is that?

Where is that?

I have another one.

Hold on, I have another one.

June 25th.

June 25th.

You didn't even show up to the budget street meetings, too.

Excuse me.

I am speaking.

Excuse me, I'm speaking.

Don't interrupt me.

Referral to the Finance and Economic Committee to discuss possible institution of a temporary hiring freeze for non-essential positions.

Where are these?

Where are these?

They're not being called.

No one is taking up on them.

And so for anyone here to sit and lecture me that I'm waiting until the 11th hour is ridiculous.

And it's offensive.

And it's offensive to the voters here.

Now you know.

I can see why the state of Florida wants to cut property taxes.

I can see that.

I can see why.

Because we just keep on spending and spending and spending.

And then for us to say, well, it's the 11th hour, I'm ready to stay here all night and save 20 million dollars.

I don't know about you guys, but I could stay here all night and figure out exactly what we can do to save 20 million dollars.

Maybe we save 10 million dollars.

Maybe we cut it in half.

Let's do it.

I I don't mind, I have nowhere to go.

I'm here.

I want to save, I want to save the city some money.

And I can I can start with a perfect.

I could start with a perfect example, and this is just the tip of the iceberg.

Okay?

Cultural arts council grant recommendations for fiscal year 24-25.

For those of you listening, do we know that we spend a million dollars a year in giving cultural institutions grants from the city of Miami Beach?

600,000 of that goes to out of the city groups.

Ballet Flamenco La Rosa, Armor Dance Theater, Miami Hispanic Ballet Group, Peter London Global Company, Italian Film Festival, Miami Short Film Festival.

I I mean there's a whole list.

We spent $600,000 a year, and worse, we have to hire someone full-time pension and benefits to give these these grants out every year, and it ends up being the same amount of money every single year.

Every single year we give out the same thing, and we have to pay someone a full pension and benefit salary just to give out this money.

We spent a million dollars a year.

We can cut this today.

Okay?

What other things do we spend on?

That's ridiculous.

Just the other day we talked about how about we had just excuse me, just the other day, we spent uh we spent we spend money on we listen.

We're sorry, I'm not sure.

You know, when I first got elected, the one thing Suarez, the chair of the meeting was.

If you actually want to cut spending, as I suggested, and as I started last budget meeting, why don't we go through instead of just calling them out?

Let's go right now.

I'm ready to stay.

You guys ready to stay?

I'm ready to stay right now and save money.

I am giving every single one of my colleagues the chance to be heard.

And as I said last meeting, as I did last meeting, okay, as I spent the time during these retreats and meeting with our CFO and meeting with our city manager.

I did that.

Did you?

Okay?

I went line item by line item talking about what we could cut.

And we're gonna go through on a line item by line item basis.

So what I'm suggesting, you raise a lot of good points.

If there are things that we should be cutting, and this is the process that I laid out last meeting, propose it, and we take a vote.

It's very simple.

We put together the items that have been recommended, and if we keep them, people can vote to keep them.

To delete them, people can vote to delete them.

And while I didn't mean to cut you off instead of just talking about it, let's actually put legislation just as we started doing last meeting and continue that.

Am I allowed to speak now?

Yes, you should continue.

No, Commissioner Fernandez and Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez.

I think Commissioner Schwartz is gonna finish.

You're gonna finish?

Commissioner Suarez, are you gonna finish?

No, you can finish and then I go.

Look, I I'm sorry if I seem a little passionate about this.

Okay.

Um I knocked on over 5,000 doors, and a lot of it was in North Beach.

And there was a lot of people that would just cry on my shoulder and say, I've lived here all my whole life and I can't afford to live here.

And what can you help me with?

And so, excuse me when I get upset when someone says this is not a tax increase.

It is a tax increase.

It's only going with inflation.

It's double the inflation rate.

And we have a balanced budget.

That's a state mandate.

Those are not things to be proud of.

To the rolled back millage rate of 5.5114.

And we figure out how exactly we're going to cut whatever bloated fat that we don't need anymore that isn't going to be added to our infrastructure.

Capital improvements.

Okay.

I'm I'm very passionate about this.

Sorry I let it get the best of me.

But I understand this is you may think that this is the 11th hour, but I just read to you two items that I've been talking about since June and March.

And I was dismissed.

I think it was on a slide that uh staff has put and said this is why we can't do this.

You know, um there's there's just so much waste here.

And it's sick, it's sickening.

It's sickening.

And and I think, listen, I I think above and beyond what we what we can cut, I think we need to look deeper and find out exactly what more can we cut.

And I and I want to remember every I want everyone to remember a large part of this is because of the union contracts.

Okay.

They were a significant part of this.

I was the only one who really railed against this, these contracts because I saw what was coming.

And and I want everyone to know, I want the police officers to know.

This is this is not me going after police pay.

I wanted to have a contract that's more fair and balanced to the city, that's more merit-based, that doesn't automatically give pay increases, because at this rate, we cannot sustain our government.

So look, uh Commissioner Magazine, this is your meeting.

I'm here to I I I'd like to if it's this is 20 million dollars, let's find 20 million dollars to cut today.

I mean, there's some really low-hanging fruit, like sister cities.

I don't know how much we spend on sister cities and trips.

I mean, that's ridiculous.

I the the uh the chamber of commerce used to make do with I think 10,000 dollars.

I I don't know how Jason, how much are we spending on sister cities now?

We have to check it out.

Roughly, what are we spending on sister cities and their trips and and and and hosting delegations?

I think it's to the tune of uh uh at least a hundred thousand dollars, and that's something that we're gonna be spending every year.

We don't need to do that.

Okay?

We don't need to spend a million dollars a year on the phone.

But just to correct the record, because now you're lying, it's 40,000, and I'd also be remiss if not sharing what a phony our colleague is.

Thanks to him, he cost the city taxpayers 10 million dollars to the homeless trust because he took something off the ballot while the voters were in the process of voting.

And as a result of that big bomb with the county, guess what happened?

It's gonna cost us in the future over 80 million dollars.

We had to clean up that mess thanks to him.

So let him be here phony, acting all righteous, but it's not true.

He's cost us more than any other commissioner on the dais.

If I could be allowed to continue, thank you.

Actually what that was was a 1% additional tax on our small businesses that I wanted to repeal so that it wouldn't go to another government agency where they would have spent money and nothing would have been able to come into return.

And instead we had to pay 10 million dollars thanks to you.

Thank you.

And also for the record, it was a ballot item that voters were supposed to vote on.

It was not the commission's purview to make that decision.

It was in the voters' hands during an active election.

Let's just set the record straight.

I don't disagree with the the premise that maybe there was a better way to address the problem.

No one's disputing that.

The process in which it was taken off during an active election and then relationships blown up instead of working together to make things better, I think is the point that's being made here.

If if I'm the villain for opposing height and rate increases and taxes on our small businesses and residents, I'm I guess I'm that villain.

I don't know why.

One at a time one at a time, please.

Excuse me, uh I'm asking to speak.

I've been afforded to speak.

Please wait your turn.

Okay.

So look, no, but I'm not sure.

But Commissioner, I will say when a comment is made and there's a point of order to make a correction, that is allowed, and that's why I allowed it to go.

Again, if I am the bad guy for opposing tax increases to unjustly other government bureaucrats in in the county, which by the way would have was supposed to sign an agreement with us that they were going to give us all the money back.

They did not.

And I averted a disaster for an infinite tax to our residents and our small businesses.

Again, so that again, let me finish, please.

Excuse me, right?

Commissioner Bott.

Commissioner Bach.

Just for the record, nobody is disputing that there were major problems with agreements that didn't get signed and all kinds of things and issues.

Nobody is disputing those facts.

Nobody's saying you're a villain for trying to make things better.

But taking it out of the hands of the voters where it had been put by law, by by the way, all of us, we agreed to the language on the ballot.

No, and I just want to I just want for the record to I want the record to be reflected accurately.

That's all.

Commissioner Suarez.

And please, Commissioner Suarez, let's try to I look.

Commissioner Fernandez is next.

I'd like us all to stay here and figure out what other things we can cut that is completely unnecessary for our our taxpayers.

I'm I'm it's five o'clock, five or five thirty, um six o'clock.

I'm I'm ready to stay at least a couple hours and figure that out.

I don't know about you guys, but I it doesn't matter if this is the 11th hour, this is our last opportunity to save taxes.

Commissioner Fernandez.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Um, you know, one of the things that that residents tell us all the time, especially when they move from other areas to Miami Beach, is the services that they get, the level of service that they get, the responsiveness that they receive.

I know that um in unincorporated Day County, where I grew up and where my parents live, um, you know, when they've had to call for police service, they might not get a police officer sent to their home today if their car gets broken into.

They might get someone sent tomorrow to do an after-the-fact report.

They don't get the parks that Miami Beach residents get.

They don't get the educational enhancements that the students in Miami Beach get through the general fund that we all pay, which goes above and beyond what the school system provides.

They don't get the level of sanitation that Miami Beach residents get.

They don't get the extra trolley services that Miami Beach residents get.

They don't get the um they don't get the um the grass cut as frequently on the soils and public areas as frequently as Miami Beach residents get.

They don't get the level of homeless uh services the way the Miami Beach uh residents get it.

In other areas, homeless numbers have gone up in Miami Beach, they have gone down.

In 2023, we were at 235 homeless individuals today.

We've dropped those numbers to 122.

We get services in Miami Beach, I call them concierge services, that no other government in South Florida offers its residents because its residents have asked for these services.

That's why that's why we have this budget.

Um, Mr.

Manager, under the budget that we have today, before us today.

What is the average increase that the average home set of property would be experiencing?

So we have two numbers presented in our budget.

What is the average increase?

So the average increase for a median homesteaded home is $51 for the average home price, which includes um all of the homes that may be significantly higher in price, that average would be 149 dollars.

149 dollars.

Two-thirds of our residents are renters.

Commissioner, I didn't interrupt you.

So, you know, this so we we have to put it into perspective.

Year after year, I understand this accumulates and it affects uh affordability in our city, and I think we're we're all concerned about that, but ultimately we need to continue making sure that our budget provides for a safe city, a clean city, a resilient city, that provides for the cultural programming that our residents are asking for, that provides for the educational services our residents are asking for, that provides for the new trolleys that our residents are are asking for, or improved headways, or you know, we want shared use paths that all these things have to get paid for somewhere.

And it's not projects that we bring forward, it's all projects that the community comes asking us to advance.

Before we really go into the weeds about fiscal year 26, I want to know where we are in fiscal year 25.

Where do we stand today as it relates to fiscal year 25?

Are we running at a deficit in fiscal year 25?

Are we are we running at a surplus?

Where do we stand today?

Because I want to make sure that we get fiscal year 25 in order and square it away before we start talking about fiscal year 26.

So, where do we stand today as it relates to fiscal year 25?

If I could ask our CFO and our uh budget director to answer that.

Sure.

Uh sure.

Thank you.

Uh Commissioner, uh, based on the Q3 uh projection, we're projecting to have approximately 11.899 million of a surplus in the general fund for FY25.

So we project that as part of the we project that as part of the current fiscal year, we're gonna have 11 million dollars in surplus.

Correct.

Okay.

Is that after we meet our obligations with reserves?

Or is that or or do we need to set money aside after those 11 million dollars for reserves?

That's after we set aside for reserves.

So after reserves, we have 11 million dollars surplus in the current fiscal year.

Projected.

Projected, yeah.

Projected.

That money does not belong to us.

That money belongs to whom?

To the taxpayers, to the residents of the city of Miami Beach.

And I think as we head into the next fiscal year, and we see, well, you know, we're keeping the millage flat, but we don't control, we don't control the property valuations.

Your if your taxes go up, it's because there's another government that's independent of the city that values your properties.

And that's an elected position, and that elected position is the one that determines your property value, and that is what is making your property taxes go up.

It's not our millage rate, our millage rate has been flat.

It is the other elected offices that are causing your property taxes to go up.

And there is a process to appeal that and to challenge that valuation.

But today we are sitting here with 11 million dollars that don't belong to us, Mr.

Manager.

And I firmly believe that that 11 million dollars, given everything we have heard from our constituents today from our residents and those who have placed their trust in us, should be going back to the residents of the city of Miami Beach.

Do we have a mechanism of getting this surplus and sending it back to our residents?

So I would have to riff rely on the city attorney.

So about 20 years ago, the city had done a dividend that went back to homeowners and used surpluses to fund those dividends.

So that would be a mechanism if this body wanted to uh go down that path uh to to send money back to some of our residents.

I mean, as I see it today, if we get these 11 million dollars and we send these 11 million dollars back to these people that are going to be experiencing a 149 dollar increase because of the of the budget that we have in front of us, those same people who are going to be experiencing that 149 dollar increase, if we were to send this these 11 million dollars back to them, they could potentially be getting in the mail a $700 refund from the city of Miami Beach.

Sign me up.

And that's money that doesn't belong to us, that is money that belongs to the residents to the taxpayers of our city, and we cannot go into a new fiscal year telling residents, hey, listen, your tax bill might go up not because of us, but because of another government without sending back to the residents the surplus money that we collected from them.

So I would like to make a motion today to direct our administration, our city manager, our city attorney, to work on policy so that this 11 million dollars that we collected extra, because this is extra money that we collected that we did not spend that is their money that we send it back to the residents of our city.

Can I co-prime with you?

Yeah, 100%.

Anyone that has to join me.

Anyone can I have a question?

Just how this w works.

If this goes to just and I'm not challenging, I'm just trying to understand.

This goes back to homesteaded property owners.

So is there a way that because a lot of our residents are renters?

So how do we I think maybe stiff with the comes to Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez?

If you really want to help the majority of people who live here and rent here, then we would just roll back the millage rate.

In tune to those 11 million dollars.

I completely disagree with you because when you roll back the village rate.

I didn't interrupt.

I let me let me explain to you.

Let me explain why to you.

If you send this out, it's going to go to the property owner, like he said.

But the but the increase, the 10% increase, okay, or whatever that that you know, that average increase is going to be is going to be passed on to the renter.

And if you send that money out to the landlords, um they're not necessarily going to see it.

But if you roll back the millage rate, then we put ourselves in a position to not have such a bloated budget, and we will have to cut uh in coming years.

Like if you then you're doing everybody a favor year over year.

You will you what we should do if we were to roll back for the 11 million to account for these 11 million dollars, what would the new millage rate be?

And then we could actually lower the millage rate, lower the tax rate for everyone, and then you know, the renters will not be getting this increase passed on.

Well, but then you have to do that as part of the discussion of the next of the next fiscal year.

But I'm saying in the current fiscal year today.

Yes, but if you keep the millage rate the same, you are in effect taxing everyone.

Even if you send back a check, you're still taxing the majority of people who live in the city in these commercial rental properties.

So you're not helping the people who rent, you're just helping landlords across the city that probably um don't need that money.

I mean, I I I just want to find something that that makes sense.

And if you cut the mill, if you cut the millage rate this year, okay, then you really are doing a service because next year, um, even if we were to maintain it the same, we would be at a lower um budget.

We'd be cutting it by 11 million dollars.

And I think it's and can I wait?

I I this is the first time this is a good thing.

Well, I was making a motion, I was in the middle of making a motion to accept in the middle of my own.

I know, but it's still a motion that's on the table on that second.

Which I've seconded.

Jason, uh can you provide us some guidance here?

Yeah, uh, thank you.

Um Commissioners, so I think of the my understanding of the idea is to use the 25 surplus, which we're you know, we're using the number of 11 million dollars, uh, to send a rebate check.

Like I I recall it 20 years ago getting getting my check uh as a new homeowner.

Um that yeah, that would go to homesteaded uh properties.

Uh the the concern obviously is if you just say don't send back a rebate check, but use that one time money to reduce a recurring revenue of such substantial amounts in the millage would probably uh will 100% seriously exasperate uh deficit issue we'll have in the future going on.

So it would make the 27 budget um extremely difficult.

It would probably have some radical rollbacks of surplus.

But we can get surpluses again.

If we have surplus, if we collect surplus, we can send it back to the residents.

And if I can, Commissioner, I I think that that's what the commissioners did 20 years ago is they used, I think is the the the city attorney said some one-time money because if the money is not there, you don't have to do it.

Or you discern this other purposes because we have you know commission policy, the surplus is used for capital dollars.

But if the commission determines that a better highest use this year because of the circumstances of what's going on in the world, it's better to not allocate those dollars to capital programs.

They could override their policy and distribute it as a one-time rebate.

But cutting it as a recurring is extremely and I'm and I'm all for setting putting a set aside because tenants you all know how much I have advocated for tenants since my first day as an elected official advocating for tenants has been core to the work that I have done as as a commissioner, and perhaps we can put a set aside, we can get a set aside of the eleven million dollars to uh to to work on an assistance for for tenants, we would have to speak with our city attorney if we can do that or not.

I think now in the October 29 meaning we could look at a number of different options along those lines.

Okay.

All right, so I would I would like us to to to make a motion on this because I think well, we have a motion a second.

So we can call it.

Should I just give more clarity first?

Mr.

CFO.

Uh so essentially to roll back the millage, we'd need about 17 million.

It would be 21 million.

I think the motion that's on the table is is not looking at the current millage, which again the thing is the mayor said we we have a balanced budget, a budget that was uh actually in surplus in July, and we actually cut an additional two and a half million dollars.

I think a lot of it, you know, based on discussions with yourself.

So uh we actually did do cuts uh in the general fund resort tax of two and a half million dollars.

And uh so I think that that has that budget set.

But the um the idea would be using the one-time dollars from the 25 surplus projected that we have so that in November when it is materialized, um that that 11, let's say if the number is exactly 11 million, that 11 million can be determined to be used, I guess, either as a resident uh uh resident rebate or some other type of.

So what we could also do right now, and you hit the nail on the head.

Yeah.

You made a point that we've already cut two and a half million dollars in this budget process, right?

And we have an 11 million dollar surplus.

So if we would pass this motion to send back a rebate check for our surplus, every single dollar that we go through tonight, every single dollar that we go.

You know what?

We don't want the guy in the garage teaching karate class for 330 dollars.

That goes back to our residents, right?

So right now we're starting with 11 million dollars.

And every decision that we make up here tonight to reduce further, that rebate check to our residents gets even larger.

But that would be next year's rebate check.

This is next year's budget.

You are right.

Yep.

But it's but I take the point.

Yes.

Yeah, Commissioner McCann, I know we've had discussions that if there was going to be any adjustments from the additional uh reduction efficiency line items that there was a the you had interest in having that set aside as an additional budget stabilization to ensure that the 27 budget, which we may think have more difficulties, be more successful in being balanced and not have to roll back uh you know programs, public safety and things along those lines.

So that that could be a way that the commission could go if they decide to go down uh some of these line item cuts.

Yeah, and Commissioner Rosing is uh I I will just caveat that the county found found themselves in this position where it was either last year or two years ago, they wrote back their millage rate.

And then they had a 400 million dollar hole that was disastrous.

It's a very politically popular thing to do, and it's a very dangerous thing because in essence we're putting future future bodies, we're eventually we we're all facing a term limit, but then people come in and they need to deliver services, and then raising the millage rate is always difficult.

I I don't I don't think I think when we have this extra money, we need to deliver to the public, we need to build the public's trust.

And we need to show them, okay, we collected this money, we had extra money, it doesn't belong to us rather than spending it on something shiny and new.

We're gonna go ahead and we're gonna send it back to you because we want you to know we respect you, we understand.

We have we have condominium owners, homesteaded owners of condominiums in our city who are facing incredible challenges, incredible challenges with assessments.

If we can send them, you know, and and we protect this at 11 million dollars, there's about 700 that we will be sending to these property owners.

That's gonna help a lot of people in our city.

That is we have a lot of people who are living paycheck to paycheck and in facing immense and mounting costs because of all these new regulations that have been imposed on condominiums.

Look at what's happening to the Raven.

I mean, the Raven literally, he's he's he's facing you know, literally foreclosure, you know, with with a GoFundMe.

You know, $776 would make a tremendous difference to someone like the Raven.

So you know, to to your topic.

I think Commissioner Schwartz.

Um there are you know, everyone thinks of condo owners as being wealthy people, but there are plenty of people who bought condos here 20, 30 years ago or inherited from their parents and you know, and and have a a lovely place to call home in Miami Beach, but they are not super wealthy people, and they are facing the challenges that everybody who lives in Miami Beach faces, where sure they have a place that's their own, but they still have to deal with the assessments and the condo fees and the insurance rates that the state is not really taking a great doing great job of managing how to do that in a more equitable and stepped manner, right?

So all of a sudden people who thought they had their finances more or less under control, they had a steady job or retirement, and uh, but now they're being blindsided.

So let's let's remember when we talk about condo owners that it's not just wealthy condo owners.

Sure, there are plenty of those, and I'm not overly worried about those folks.

I'm really worried about the folks who've been living here for 30 years, um, and all of a sudden have to find you know resources to on fixed incomes in some cases, or um, you know, on jobs where they don't get 30 percent raises every year um to to try to fill the hole.

And to your point, Commissioner Fernandez, um it's not just that it that elected officials face term limits and it's the next elected officials to be worried about more and I think this is what you're getting at.

The bigger issue, I think, is that um it puts future residents at risk because yeah, elected officials will have to make the hard choices and will have to pay the taxes, but at the end of the day, the uh the residents will have to decide do they want their trash picked up once a week or every two weeks, right?

Or do they are they okay with fire department folks coming in 15 to 20 minutes instead of three to seven minutes?

Or you know, we used to have an incredible flourishing arts and culture scene here in Miami Beach, which generates a huge amount of economic development.

I mean, you just have to look at the numbers.

I know there are a lot of folks who think it's not useful, but but if you look at the generated income and revenue to the city from arts and culture um uh institutions, it makes a huge difference.

So I don't want to put future residents, whether it's in two years, four years, or fifteen years, in the situation of having to give up things that they chose to move to Miami Beach for or are very happy to be paying their taxes for, like a park, or you know, the fact that their kid can go to a really pretty good public school.

Yeah.

We do have a motion a second, but Commissioner Fernandez.

Yeah, and and I just want to add to that.

You know, when you tie the hands of the community in the future that way, I've seen this happen in other communities, actually, right here in Miami Dade County, where they went in and a body years ago lowered the millage rate quite tremendously.

Then the future bodies that came in had to provide services.

And they didn't they were phased, okay.

Well, we don't want to increase increase millage.

What did they have to end up doing?

They had to go to the perimeters, they had to increase the folios, increase the tax base in order to meet the ends meet.

They had to go in and overdevelop, in essence, their community in order to then generate the taxes that they needed in order to provide the services.

And that's how communities have had to deal with this around South Florida when they've gone gone in and lowered their property taxes.

They lowered their property taxes, but then years later, the new government, when they where they need to figure out, okay, well, how do we make ends meet?

Well, the way that they make ends meet is by increasing the amount of folios upon which they leverage taxes.

That's not something that in Miami Beach we believe in doing because we believe in maintaining a low-scale community.

We make we believe in maintaining the character of our community, and we never want to put the community in that situation.

We want to leave a legacy, a legacy that we are a low-scale, a beautiful art deco community that is not overdeveloped.

And those are the challenges that other communities throughout South Florida have faced and the difficult decisions they've had to deal with.

Um so anyways, I I made a motion.

I think I think we should direct our our city administration and our city uh attorney to work on policy to bring forward so that this surplus money that we have is not our money is the residents' money, and we should be sending it back to them.

And if there's a way to put a set aside forward to assist tenants, I would like us to explore that and to bring them back at the next meeting.

I think the most Commissioner Suarez and Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez.

Thank you.

I I think the most fair way to do that is to roll back to military.

I don't know if we want to have a set aside for a process of giving it to tenants, some tenants.

I don't think we should be cherry-picking.

I think if we're gonna help homesteader, we should also help non-homestead people.

Like I said, two-thirds of our residents are renters here.

And some of these renters have been here for 20, 30 years.

They're not going to be, you know, to say that, well, you know, maybe they're gonna get it with some set aside.

I think the most fair thing to do and the the most uh uh clear and transparent thing to do is to roll back the millagery.

And so look, not only that, not only the 11 million dollars, but I think we should find nine extra million dollars to cut.

And and and make so that it's 20 total.

And and then use that to lower back the mill and use that number to use back the um excuse me to roll back the millet rate to to 20 million dollars.

So if we have 11 that we have a surplus, let's find nine.

I'm sure we can figure that out today.

And then let's roll back the millager so everyone gets a uh uh a benefit to this to what we're doing today.

But but this but this motion relates to fiscal year 25 and these 11 million dollars that we have in fiscal year 25.

It's not about fiscal year 26, it's about sending the this extra dollars that we've collected and that we project to have by the end of the quarter, sending that back to the residents.

Because I think I think before we tell people, hey, listen, you might be encountering an in an average increase of 149 uh dollars.

We need to tell them, well, what are we gonna do with the extra money that we already collected from you?

And that's money that we've already collected that we anticipate having extra of.

And I think the only right thing to to do is you know, we're really looking to take care of our taxpayers is we're gonna send you the money back.

It's not ours.

It should be yours to keep, especially when utilities uh people have called about utilities.

Well, by the way, that utility increase, it's not our utility increase.

The city of Miami Beach, then we put a freeze on the utility rate increase.

That is Miami Dade County.

That is a path pass-through rate, not from the city of Miami Beach.

You're if your utility rate is going up, it's because that's being passed through to you by Miami Dade County.

And by the way, we someone called during the public comments about her building taxes going up.

She lives in that building, she could be getting a homestead exception for the part of the building that she's living in.

She has not sought that homestead exception, and I've made my office available to her to help her get that homestead exception for the portion of the building that she's living in, and she she's decided not to do that.

That's why her property taxes are going up so much, because she's not benefiting from services that are available to her.

And if her rent roll is going down, there's also a process to appeal her property value to decrease the amount of taxes that that she should be paying, and that's Valerie.

And I spoken to Valerie about this, and I told Valerie to contact our office because we would help her with that.

I did that for my own property taxes and got it decreased significantly.

Commissioner Rosen Gonzales, let's call the vote.

Is there a way to issue a check to renters too?

Is there a way to find out who our resident renters are and who our homesteaded renters are, and then issue a check to everyone talking about to it?

I could say that the from the homesteaded uh properties, we would have that information through the property tax rolls.

But as for who's a tenant, the government does not track uh who tenants are uh in this city, so we would not have any kind of comprehensive list uh about that.

Uh could a tenant assistance program be created in somewhere where people would register and such.

I guess that could be a possibility, but that would take some work, I think, to figure out the amount of set program.

And I will say, Mr.

CFO, it is actually much more equitable doing a rebate because if we roll back the millage, if we're truly concerned about renters, right?

That just goes to the landlords.

We have no idea if they go and pass that through.

When I had a landlord, that guy wasn't going to pass it through to me if he got a few hundred dollars of cost savings.

But if we are sending dividend checks, rebate checks, because we did tighten our belts in 25.

We made tough decisions.

Enough, perhaps not, but we're down that track and we're gonna make even more.

But we did tighten our belts and we have 11 million dollars that we can send back, we can send it directly to the residents because if we roll back the millage, that just goes to the landlords, and there's no guarantee if that gets passed through to the actual people that are paying those rental checks.

And by the way, when we do have a rollback rate, you end up cutting services.

Services ultimately that are for the most vulnerable people who the reality are is that those are tenants.

A lot of the people who benefit from the programs that a rollback rate would cut, would in fact be some of the most vulnerable populations in Miami Beach.

And that is part of what we need to keep in mind.

If we really are concerned about tenants, tenants live for the most part, they're living with fixed incomes, and they depend on the after-school programs that we provide.

They depend on the meal services that our city provides.

They don't get to experience cultural programming if it's not for some of the cultural public benefits that our city offers.

So when we roll back the rate, yes, by one part, we might say we are helping tenants.

Make no mistake about it.

When you roll back the rate, you're also taking away a lot of services from the tenants as well.

I I'd like to chime in.

I mean, and then let's call the vote.

Yeah, look, it's when you lower taxes, everyone benefits.

I I I just it's it's crazy to me to say that we need to raise taxes so that people can have more benefits.

I mean, sure, it's great, but at the end of the day, everyone wants to just save more money.

That's that's everyone.

You know, it's it's not a program that they can benefit from.

These are these are dollars that people need to eat and survive.

Okay, like I want to do something that's more beneficial.

And and look, uh Commissioner, I'm I'm still a little lost here.

This 11 million dollars is for 25.

What are we gonna do for next year?

So, what are we gonna do to cut back the taxes for next year?

And that's why Commissioner Magazine.

And I and I just want to make sure that Jason here just said there's no way to find out who's a tenant and how do we rebate that?

But I know that if you roll back the millage rate, yes, some landlords may say, uh I'm not gonna carry that on, but I just read on the record Gershon.

He says you know, he loves his tenants, he wants to keep them there.

And it certainly sounds like he's gonna be the one to not pass on those costs that by rolling back the millage.

So I mean, to to blanketly say that, oh well, you know, all landlords are not going to pass on these cost savings is uh it's it's just immature.

I I think when you want to do something, you want to do it in a fair way.

Let's do it, do it in a fair way by rolling back the millage rate.

I mean, look just what kind of win do you think is gonna happen out of this meeting?

If we come out saying, yes, we're gonna ro we're gonna raise taxes for 26, but we're giving back uh a one-time trick pony for for 25.

People want to know that we're lowering taxes, and we're gonna have to figure out how to do that.

Let's do that so for everyone benefits.

And I don't want to have a set up a program where we don't even know who two-thirds of the of the of the renters are that get this that that's rebate check.

We have to do it the most fair way.

Commissioner that's by rolling back the million.

Commissioner Suarez.

Sure.

Do you support doing the refund back as it relates to fiscal year 25?

Because my point is before we talk about 26, we need to dispense with 25.

And we're protected to to have an 11 million dollar surplus.

And that's what we're talking about.

Before we talk about next year, what are we gonna do with the money that we have left over from this year?

And what I'm saying is that money doesn't belong to us, belongs to our residents.

Let's send it back to our residents who gave us this money at the end of the day.

And I'm fully supportive, but I think it should be to all both homesteaded and non-homesteaded.

And the best way to do that is for the millage rate.

To roll back the millage rate for 25.

Well, and can I ask a clarification?

If these two things are seemingly mutually exclusive, right?

We can't do them both.

So if we did it through a rollback over the millage rate, that would actually just be for next year.

So are would our taxpayers get any immediate relief if you change the millage rate?

It would be reflective for their bill that they pay at the end of November through March, depending on when you pay property taxes.

But again, if you lower the if you lower the the millage, uh we're gonna be cutting recurring expenditures right now for the budget.

But just to be clear, this November or November 26th?

This November.

Yeah, this November.

Uh, but I believe that uh the commissioner's idea about using the one-time surplus that will be appropriated in November, uh, if that goes forward, that we'd be able to also same thing, be able to cut checks back to um the homesteaded residents sometime during the fiscal year.

We have to cut 14,000.

So okay, so let's put this into perspective.

In Miami Beach, we have 55,289 folios.

Okay?

What was it?

55,289.

We collect property taxes from 55,289 folios.

We have 14,173 of those that are homesteaded.

So we can do two things.

We can either choose to get this surplus that we have that the residents have paid to the city and divide it with our 14,173 homesteaded property owners that are our residents that live here full-time that deal with the impacts of tourism and all the special events, or we can give it to the 55,289 folios in Miami Beach that might include the multimillionaire developer that might include the property owner that is keeping their property abandoned.

You might be sending it back to a landlord who I guarantee you, the landlord is not gonna pass it back down to the tenant.

There's no landlord that I know that the moment they've they have their rent at a certain height, unless the market forces them to bring it down, they're not gonna say, Oh, thank you, City of Miami Beach.

You sent me a check for 198 dollars.

I'm gonna divide that check between my 12 tenants, and I'm gonna send each one of my 12 tenants $16 because you you sent us this money back.

They're not gonna do that.

They're not gonna do that.

But we know that today we can say that this money that doesn't belong to us, we can give it back to the full-time residents.

Many of them are they're dealing with special assessments, they're dealing with increased insurance costs, they deal with the impacts of special events, they deal with the impacts of tourism.

This money belongs to them.

You just said it $14,500.

There's $80,000 residents in Miami Beach.

That's an eighth.

I mean, you only have to do that.

Those are the only wanted properties.

I understand that, but you only want to give the benefit to an eighth of the people that live here.

I uh I don't.

I think it should be more fair.

I think if we're gonna do this, well, first of all, do we need to do this at this meeting?

Can we have a special meeting to discuss this particular uh rebate back?

I think today we just have to discuss 2026.

If I can, Commissioner, the uh 25 surplus gets dealt with at a special commission meeting at the end of November when we deal with the rollover uh funds.

Well, that's when they would be appropriate.

Then let's do that, Commissioner Fernandes.

If you want to we can have more time to bake this out, perhaps in a special finance meeting and discuss that.

But we have a motion a second, so we're gonna take the vote.

Well, you wanna do you want to withdraw your motion and and have and maybe refer to financial.

I want to know where we're what we're doing with these 11 million dollars from this year with the money that we have right now that belongs to the residents before we start talking about money that we still don't even have to do.

We have until what November what, Jason?

There uh there the November there's a November special commission meeting where the uh surplus gets appropriate.

We can we can make a commissioner, you we can make a resolution today to uh have this item come up at the November special meeting for a rebate to for the 2025 uh year.

And we don't have to decide right now who and who cherry pick who gets it, but we can certainly say I think we need to agree that this money does not belong to us.

This money should go back to the community before we talk about next year's budget.

I think we need to make sure that we are clear this money that we have right now should be going back to the community.

Commissioner Bach.

So um, I believe there's a motion on the table for an item to be discussed right um at the October meeting to hash that to recommend that the administration come back with a recommendation on how to do this, and I think that would be the appropriate time in advance of the November deadline to hash this out.

I mean, we have a full year's budget to talk about, and uh, you know, I I think we're gonna need all the time we we can have.

I think there is uh enough support to continue this conversation.

Um, and I would like to be added as a sponsor if if that's okay.

Sure.

And um, and so I think there's a uh uh motion and a second, so let's let's the motion is seconds to pass it today.

I want to make sure it's a referral.

We can't pass it today.

We have to do it with the close out of the budget, but I think we need to give direction because this requires logistics and they need directions so that they can figure out how they're going to do it.

So I think we need to decide today.

Do we want to do this so that they can come back to us at the next meeting with the plan on how to get it done?

But this is not our money.

And if we're really talking about finding efficiencies, it starts by telling the people that we want to that we need to tax them an extra 149 dollars that we can send them back $776.

Because that's that's that's a position we're in today.

We can actually be sending them back this money that belongs to them.

Commissioner Magazine, then Ralph Cold the vote.

Mr.

CFO, I I just need a quick primer on on how taxes work.

Right?

You pay them.

We have oh, trust me, I know.

We have 55,000 folios, and we have 11 million dollars in surplus.

So if we would send back a dividend or a rebate check for every folio, it's essentially 200 per household.

So those people, not per household portfolio.

So that might include shopping centers, that might include empty hotels, that might include short-term rentals.

So if we limited it to residential, right?

We're under no obligation to do a rebate to commercial folios.

So it would actually be even more.

What about struggling businesses?

But you know, what about the mom and pop shops who are also struggling, like on legal.

So I'm gonna continue.

Um they don't pay property taxes.

If we essentially do a rebate check there, right?

How taxes work in the progressive nature of them?

The impoverished people that cried on my friend and colleague's shoulder in North Beach.

They would get a $200 at minimum check.

If we actually rolled back millage, right?

Aren't the people living in these 40, 50, 100 million dollar homes going to see a lion's share of the savings?

And those poor people up in North Beach, they're not going to get that $200 savings, right?

They're going to get $15.

Okay?

That's the way taxes work.

Okay.

It'll be the multi, multi-millionaire developer CEOs living in the $75 million homes that are saving a rounding error for them.

Okay?

But it's going to be significant for everybody else.

But those people up in North Beach who I knocked on their doors as well.

And I went into their homes and they made me cafe cito.

They're not going to be seeing a $200 dividend.

Because when they're renting, one, there's no guarantee that that money gets passed through to them.

And even if it does, with progressive taxes work, the lion's share of savings is going to be seen by the.

So yes, the it's all based on the value of your home.

So if you have a 100 million dollar home or 10 million dollar home, you pay more taxes versus someone that may have a homesteader, you know, a property that's taxed at 100,000 or 200,000 or 300,000 or 4,000 will pay proportionately less.

So that is correct.

If there was a tax rate reduction, the majority of the dollars would go progressively down from the top.

I just want us to remember we today have individuals who can no longer afford to live in the city.

Homeowners that live in condominiums, who they want to sell their units.

They can't even, they can't find buyers to buy their units.

They're dealing with tremendous assessments.

And this money can help these people make ends meet at a time when the market is working against them.

The market is working against these individuals.

We have a lot of people on fixed incomes.

And I think this is this is going to help a lot of those individuals who call us, who call us and say, what can you do to help me with my special assessment?

I can't afford this.

I'm being priced out.

Well, here's something.

Is it the greatest thing?

Is it the biggest assistance we can give them?

No, but it's their money.

It's their money that we can put back in their pocket.

And I don't think we should be holding it from them.

I think there it belongs best in their pockets.

But Mr.

Chair.

Look, call the vote.

Ralph, oh well.

Well, go ahead, Commissioner.

Commissioner Soras.

Okay.

You do realize I hope I'm I'm I I think I'm relaying what residents are thinking.

Where we've all made good points, really good points.

But it's being repetitive at this point.

So let's Commissioner Suarez will call the vote.

Let's let's get a good standing.

What is the motion?

Rafael.

Um the motion is to direct the city administration to work with the city attorney's office to come back at the October meeting with a game plan to return the 11 million dollars or the anticipated approximately 11 million dollar surplus to home set of properties, and if there's a way to build in something for renters, we will look into doing that.

I think I I only get on board if we're able to essentially spread that to residential folios, right?

I don't want it just going to given the point I just made.

And I'll amend my motion to to include that so we can work on that.

Let's work on the on the item so that we can bring it at our next meeting.

What would be the difference between a residential folio that you're saying and a homesteaded property?

Homestead just means that somebody lives there full-time that is a residential perfectly.

You mean like renters too?

Is that what you're saying?

Yeah, I want to include renters.

I don't want to include the Fountain Blue.

Okay, but they're they can't homestead a commercial property.

We can't.

No, but if we only include homesteaded residents, then our renters are going to get no dividend check or rebate.

But how how are you gonna spend the check to renters if we don't know who they are?

If we do just we have residential folios, correct?

And well, I mean, listen, we're not going to figure this out from the days.

That's part of the referral.

This is a direction to ask them to put together this plan so that they can bring it at the next meeting.

But we, in essence, are agreeing that this extra money, we're not gonna spend it for something else.

We are agreeing that this extra money, we want to direct it to send it back to the community, back to the people who paid it, our residents and taxpayers, and for them to come back with a most appropriate way for us as the steward and the fiduciaries of that money to give it back to those who entrusted this money on us.

And that's that's what we're saying today.

This money doesn't belong to us, we're not gonna keep it.

We were able to operate a more efficient government this year than what we anticipated, which is why we have an extra 11 million dollars that we that we weren't counting on, and because of that, we're going to send it back.

So come back at the next meeting with the plan with a game plan on how to most fairly and equitably get this back to our residents.

Add me as a sponsor.

Um so we're all co-sponsoring.

I just want to say, Commissioner Fernandez, those are that was brilliant.

I didn't even know that we had that 11 dollars, 11 million in reserves.

I thought, you know, it's not reserved, so surplus.

It's surplus.

We're not we're meeting our reserves.

We have commission policy that 25 percent has to go to our reserves.

We're meeting our reserves.

This is beyond the reserves.

That this is not ours, this is the taxpayers.

And Commissioner, we're actually exceeding our reserve policy.

Correct?

On both the general fund and the resort tax, where we have out uh for two months, and we're actually exceeding that uh for three months for the resort taxes, correct?

The the policy is to have uh three months, two months as the emergency reserve is a requirement, and then the one month goal 25 percent.

So in total, we do meet the goal and the requirement uh uh the requirement and the goal.

Yep.

Well, we have our highest general fund reserves in the last two years the highest resort tax reserves correct, correct?

Well, I think you've seen the rise of a lot of single family homes that are assessed and being built right now at 30 million dollars, 40 million dollars, 50 million dollars.

North Bay Road alone, I think has something like 1.8 billion dollars in value valuations, and we're seeing that right now in these new constructions.

So I the residents are definitely going to benefit from that.

Okay, can we call the vote?

That's exactly what we're gonna do.

Ralph, take it away.

Yes, sir.

So I have a motion by Commissioner Fernandez, secondary by Mayor Minor.

Uh I've I've heard that uh Mayor Minor is listed as a co-prime sponsor, everyone else is listed as a co-sponsor.

Oh, I'm a co-prime as well.

So we make everyone a co-crime co-prime everywhere.

Actually, you should answer that.

Uh fine.

We are one body and we work in unisons.

So having said that, all in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Anyone opposed?

The motion is approved 70.

The item will come back on October 29th.

Thank you, colleagues.

Thank you.

Commissioner Fernandez.

Good idea.

R7A.

First item on the agenda.

Yes, sir.

R7A is a resolution of the mayor of city commission of the city of May Beach for adopting one to final advalore and millage of 5.8702 mills for fiscal year 2026 for general operating purposes, which is six and five tenths uh more than the rollback rate of 5.5114 mills and two the debt service millet rate of 0.279 mills.

This is a second reading public hearing.

It is item R7A.

Commissioner Magazine.

So if for those following at home, uh last meeting uh and uh in our budget discussions leading up to this, we directed the city manager to identify government efficiencies and cost savings metrics.

And Mr.

CFO, correct me if I'm wrong.

But we went essentially line item by line item through that.

I worked closely with your team.

I know you worked with other commissioners, and we identified over two and a half million dollars of this budget that we cut.

Is that correct?

Correct.

Our general fund and resort tax, two and a half million, there was a few hundred thousand dollars in other funds.

I think the total will be 2.75 across all funds.

But two and it's not one time payments every single year going forward because of those items that we identified.

Those are the recurring cost savings each and every year we have already cut.

Correct.

And what I suggested or actually gave direction to uh last meeting is let's keep going.

Because like I said, this is the taxpayer money.

Okay?

So while me and my friend and colleague had a pretty heated debate, it really centered on how we went about this, not about the premise of doing so.

And I think you've seen a pretty aligned commission in putting forward some of these measures.

Now, I do believe how this process is laid out.

We may be limited just because of the granularity that we have.

But given the directive that I made during the budget process, we have exhibit E right here of more money that we are able to spend uh save going forward for 2026.

And I think we collectively agreed that we would essentially go item by item and take a vote on what stays and what goes.

Is that your understanding?

Your understanding, Mr.

City Manager?

City Manager?

That is my understanding.

And that works with my colleagues here.

Or essentially, can I most organizations create their budgets in the summer, correct?

Dependent on the fact that they are budgeted in our budget.

So if we begin cutting these items right now, are all the organizations that we support going to have a budget whole?

And I think it's very fair to point out because you know there's this boogeyman of the tax increase.

But when you look at our overall budget this year, the main increases came from police and fire.

Um police were uh let's see, $15 million, and then fire was 10 million 743,000.

So you know, uh 25 26 million dollars in increase, all nearly twice um nearly twice the mill.

It's all coming from it's all going to police and fire.

I would like to point out some things before we start cutting line by line because I looked at this budget very holistically.

You know, code compliance went down by one percent this year, okay?

And we only spend we're only gonna spend 7.5 million dollars on code compliance when we heap so much on them.

Meanwhile, you have police at 166 million dollars, 20 times code code compliance.

It's kind of crazy if you think about that allocation.

I just want to put everything in perspective for you.

We have 132 million budgeted for our fire department in comparison, code compliance is only 7.5 million.

One other thing that I would like to point out is one of the areas where I think we need more people than ever before is uh our capital improvements because we're having a lot of problems uh in that department finishing these projects.

I mean, I know that they're working so hard, and I'm not blaming that department, but we're seeing a decrease, we're spending less in code compliance, we're eliminating positions in code compliance.

All our entire public works is 18 million dollars.

When we start to nickel and dime these budgets, these line items right now, when people have done their budgets, it's disingenuous because when those contracts were signed, the city manager needed to come to us and say this is going to bloat your budget by 26, your operating budget by 26 million dollars.

And you know, we said, oh, this is gonna add 7 million here.

But when I looked at the actual numbers of the 26 million dollar operating bloat that will grow year over year, that represents um nine percent for fire and ten percent for police.

Now I don't know if those were additional positions or if this was just part of the the contract, but those are huge numbers.

I'm not saying that I want to cut any um police officers' salary, but did we know that when we signed these contracts and the administration that went in and you know negotiated these contracts that these were going to swell the budget the way that they were to the point where every other department um is kind of reeling and it because when I look at every other department, apart from legal, by the way, legal got an additional five percent, but you were probably the only budget.

The uh city clerk got 2.8 percent increase, but the city manager's office took a hit of nine percent.

So you cut nine percent from your budget, finance took six percent decrease.

Um, most of our departments, marketing and communication had a budget decrease, you know.

So across the city, we've slashed um a lot of departments.

I want to say thank goodness facilities management was not slashed, and you added money there, but I wanted to know why is code compliance so anemic and why is why are we not adding more to code when we expect so much of our code compliance department?

So I'm assuming that question is for me, Commissioner.

Um I'm gonna tell you that we work very closely with all of our department heads.

We do ask a lot of all of our departments, and they are all out there many times much more than 40 hours a week delivering services for our community, and I work very closely with all of them to try to figure out how to write size to deliver the services that the residents expect and that you all have directed me to provide.

And so uh this is my recommendation to move forward with this budget as presented that has what I believe is the appropriate amount of services based on the expectations and my understanding of the direction of this commission.

Okay.

Mr.

Chair.

Commissioner Suarez.

Eric, how much new revenue are we getting back from the new properties that are coming online?

What's the new tax base on that?

So I believe there was a billion dollars in new construction.

Jason or Tamika, can you answer what is a billion dollars in new construction generate in additional revenue?

But I'm just going off the top of my head.

I don't have to cave.

It could just be the one project was four million dollars or new construct uh new construction this year was about four and a half million.

I mean simple math, five point eight bills times a billion dollars is five point eight million dollars.

I just want to double check that my math is right.

Yeah, I think five parts.

Okay.

So we're getting we're getting six and a half extra million dollars a year because of properties coming online, right?

Yet we're still gonna increase property taxes because our property taxes are going up.

I understand that comes from another department or another elected official.

What I'm suggesting is let's roll back the millage rate so that we're at the baseline millage rate of 5.5114.

And we save the we we we save our our uh everyone in the city these taxes.

Um I feel like this would be at the expense of every art, cultural, social service organization.

Kristen, people need to feed people need to feed themselves right now.

They're they're trying to make rent.

I mean, I think that's a good idea.

And I think you have float in some areas.

I understand.

Listen, I understand it.

It's nice, it's a nice thing to have, but remember we're a billion dollar billion dollar budget for 80,000 residents.

That's crazy.

Okay, like just think about that thing.

You can't sit here and try to nickel in time.

I'm not nicely here 60,000 there when you have 26 million dollars in labor union contracts that are fairly fairly.

It's it's loaded.

This is a conversation about priorities.

The priorities are infrastructure, resiliency, home affordability.

It's not arts and culture.

We're in a different time now.

That might have been the case 10 years ago under like commit under Mayor Gelber, but we have a different set of priorities.

Our priorities are keeping our Miami Beach residents in their homes, making sure they can eat.

It's not so that they can go to a show.

They want to have more money to save.

It's as simple as that.

Like it's a priority.

And and and again, we have how much in capital improvement projects do we have, Jason?

How much how much do we have $138 million?

How much?

Well, in the budget, it's $138 million.

Over the course of all capital improvement projects.

Unfunded is a $1.3 billion.

$1.3 billion in unfunded capital improvement.

Well, uh minus the $138.

Right.

That's the word.

That's a priority that everyone in Miami Beach is going to benefit from.

I'm sorry, but not everyone is going to benefit from going to a show at an arts and culture destination.

I'm sorry.

You're not looking at the big picture of salaries please.

Can I finish, please?

I'm I'm speaking.

Excuse me.

I'm trying to do that.

Especially the fire department.

I did not interrupt you.

I did not interrupt you.

I'm simply saying I know, but it's disingenuous to say that when you have the It's not disingenuous.

I'm simply saying we have a priority.

Please.

Okay, Commissioner Suarez, Commissioner Bot, and Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez.

Please, in that order of the question.

Thank you.

Our priorities now are different than the priorities we had 10 years ago.

The priorities we have now is affordability, first and foremost.

And then there's infrastructure.

Okay.

So anything else?

It's not our responsibility as a government to provide arts and culture.

It's our it's our responsibility for clean and safe.

That's it.

Clean and safe.

Everything else is extra.

It's as simple as that.

What are our priorities as a government?

We have a billion dollar budget for 80,000 residents.

I'm not picking and choosing.

I'm simply saying this is my priority.

My priority is the basics function of government.

Cleanliness, safety, resiliency.

Commissioner Bott.

So, Jason, um, I have a couple of questions for you.

So I'm just letting everybody know so people don't jump in as I get my answers and then have a follow-up question.

So we have a an 82,000 person city, and we have a billion dollar budget.

But if you compare it us to any other 82 person, 82,000 person city in, you know, I don't know, Michigan or New Mexico.

We have to, our budget has to cover what happens on Super Bowl weekend when it's hosted here.

And our budget has to cover Art Basel.

And our budget, not the arts and culture component, I'm not talking about that.

But we have to cover when Watapalooza comes in.

We have to cover when the C the Seafood Sobey Wine and Food Festival comes in.

When for Memorial Day, we've got the Air and C show, right?

So we're not necessarily paying for that, although we do as a city choose to use some of our taxpayer dollars for those things because we believe that the economic benefit that we get on the ROI that we get on the monies that we invest to help those events happen here in the city is worth the money.

We wouldn't be doing it if we thought it was a lost leader, right?

We're not doing it out of the kindness of our heart.

We're doing it because we think that having the Air and C show come in for two or three days in over Memorial Day weekend generates a lot of money for the city that we wouldn't get any other way.

Is that a correct statement?

I just want to make sure.

I think it holistically, yes.

And I think what you might be speaking to is we have the 80 to 85,000 residents we have.

But my understanding is on any given weekend, we're more of a city of a quarter million.

Or high impact up to half a billion during during high impact weekends and everything.

So you're right.

I'm sure if you took this city and you plunked it in Idaho for 80 or 85,000, the budget overall would be smaller.

But again, this isn't just also to the general fund.

You know, you're having parking funds, water and sewer, stormwater.

You have many different services that the government provides.

Um but yes, it is definitely impacted by the fact that we are servicing a much larger community than the 80,000.

Right, and I think that really is something that we as a community, both elected officials on this day and the residents who are listening, need to remember because listen, I ran for office and I said it because it's it sounds crazy on its face.

We have a billion dollar budget for less than 90,000 people living here.

Yeah, that would be terrible.

But the fact of the matter is on any given weekend, we're 250,000 people here who maybe don't live here, but God forbid there's an emergency, and we we need police to be able to respond.

And also, thankfully there aren't emergencies very often, but we need police to make sure that the crowds are behaving the way they're supposed to, and the fire department is there to make sure that if somebody gets heat stroke, they are going to be taken care of.

I'm not I'm not in any way saying that negotiations going forward can't be different and more stringent.

As a matter of fact, it seems like um my colleagues don't remember the very robust and very contentious um negotiations we had about these very issues, saying that these contracts historically have not been what we think is is good enough because we don't get the accountability.

You were great about that.

You were really great about that, saying we want more accountability for the um uh for the amount of money that we're spending.

And the conversation that we had at the time was everybody agreed.

I mean, I wasn't privy to the fire department one, but Chief Jones was sitting at the table saying, yeah, there should be more accountability, and this is the first step to move us to that, right?

So I just want to I just want people to remember that when we say this this um, you know, billion-dollar budget, 82,000 residents, that is a true statement, but it's not the entirety of the truth, right?

So just because there's a fact that's true doesn't make it the only fact that's true.

And I think that that needs to be something that we remember.

Again, um it's not to say that we don't have opportunities to do things differently and better, um, and that is what we are all moving towards, uh, you know, uh on the FERC committee that I very proudly sit on with Joe.

I think you do a phenomenal job of identifying opportunities to make things better without blowing things up, which is a real skill because a lot of a lot of us would like to blow things up and start from scratch, but that's not real.

You can't blow it up because you still have to go to work the next day, and people need to be able to count on the lights coming on and water flushing uh in their toilets.

Um that's one thing.

The other thing I want to say, because it comes up as a um as a bogeyman all the time, and I I think it's dangerous to have this be a bogeyman.

We're using the term arts and culture like it is um toxic waste.

Like I don't want that in my backyard.

It's gross.

But the fact of the matter is that talk that that arts and culture helps kids learn better.

It's proven.

Don't don't take my word for it.

Study it.

Look it up on Google.

See what STEM and Steam does for kids' um academic performance.

And we help underwrite that.

We don't fund it exclusively.

We don't spend a lot of money on it, but we do spend some.

It's why people move to Miami Beach because our schools are better than in its surrounding areas.

Are they as good as we want them to be?

They will never be, because we're always going to want them to be better.

But they're better than most communities, and I'm really proud of that.

And you guys should be too.

Because a community is about not just what's happening now, but what's happening with our next generation, right?

So arts and culture also brings in a huge amount of money to the city.

And I know people like to say it's just not true.

Who needs arts and culture?

But again, don't take my word for it.

Do the research.

Look it up.

Look it up.

You know, we have people, and I, you know, are there some organizations that shouldn't get funded?

Let's take a look at that.

That is a very valid conversation.

But I can tell you that a lot of people who choose to move to Miami uh to Miami Beach, part of what they're choosing is to be able to come and go out to dinner at a nice restaurant, whether that's a really fancy restaurant, or if it's a little ventanita, they're equally fabulous, and either walk to a free concert someplace or walk to a show on Lincoln Road.

There are lots of different ways to do arts and culture that are for the community, for our kids, for our residents, for our visitors.

And that is what makes Miami Beach a destination that people want to come live here for, and also want to come and spend their dollars here on vacation.

And if we start um this narrow-minded view of there is nothing else to be funded in the city other than infrastructure, that is a problem because then we lose the mechanism by which a lot of the infrastructure gets funded, right?

If people stop coming here, if people start moving, stop moving their businesses here, if which again, Joe can take credit for that.

We've got a new business coming here with 200 super high paid employees, right?

If that stops happening, then who's going to pay for the sewer pipes that need replacing?

Guess who's gonna have to get their taxes raised?

We are, right?

So I I really want us to be mindful, and I I I share the frustrations that my colleagues have about the infrastructure not getting funded as quickly as it should.

It like it should have been done years ago.

And guess who is finally taking the foot off the break?

Is the people sitting here today?

And that's great, but it's going to take time.

Also, by the way, let's not forget that if we all won the lotto and could fund everything tomorrow.

Can you imagine what trying to get from point A to point B in Miami Beach would be like?

You'd we'd all need to buy you know hovercraft for everybody because you wouldn't be able to drive anywhere.

You know, so let's let's be smart about what we're trying to do here.

We are trying to find ways to cut money in next year's budget going forward in ways that won't destroy blow up.

We are trying to give money back.

We know we have a lot, well, we are uh expecting to have an 11 million dollars that we are going to talk about how to redistribute back to our residents.

I think that's great.

So let's do it in a way that that will not blow things up for future generations.

My last question for you, Jason, is because I've heard it, we've talked about it multiple times already, but I'm not sure everybody has heard it.

If we cut the millage rate for 2026, that is a cut for one year that will grow and balloon and do damage for years to come.

And somebody will, it's kicking the can down the road because somebody will have to figure out how we're going to fill that hole in two, three, four years when it balloons.

Is that a correct understanding?

Uh yes, correct.

Uh yes, Commissioner, that's correct.

I think uh that's what Commissioner Fernandez was alluding to earlier on the earlier discussion is when you uh lower that millage or you succumb to the pressure sometimes you have to lower to a rollback rate.

It could definitely could exasperate budgetary issues going forward, especially in this in a scenario, and I've had long discussions with Commissioner Magazine about you know the concerns of 27 or 28, is though we don't know that we'll be in a deficit, it may be more likely in that we are at an environment where we have decreasing increases to our property value, which is why some discussions we've had, and I think we're gonna have it on the the budget item next, uh, which would be to keep the millage the same, and then in the budget, maybe makes if I think the commissioner's intent is to make some reductions to keep that money set aside for the same.

And Mr.

CFO, yeah.

In fact, and Mr.

City Attorney, we can't bifurcate between rolling back commercial versus residential rates, correct?

Correct.

You can't be discriminatory in your property tax.

So if we actually do the implement Commissioner Fernandez mechanism going forward, I'm sorry.

Definitely doesn't need tax relief.

The Fountain Blue doesn't need tax relief, right?

But we can essentially then send any surplus that we have back to our residents, homesteaded and non-homesteaded, right?

And give that tax relief where it truly belongs, and that is a noble effort.

That that is our Miami Beach residents.

Thank you.

And I'd like to respond to a couple of things that Commissioner Bop raised.

I I am I'm concerned about the people already living here, not the people who are moving here.

People who are living here are experiencing flooding and affordable housing issues.

Okay.

Once a year with a rainstorm, many homes on Alton Road, they get flooded.

And up two inches into their home.

That's who I'm more concerned about.

I'm more concerned about the people who are already here, not the people who are gonna come.

Because if we don't fix the infrastructure in Miami Beach, no one's gonna want to live here, and then we're gonna have an even bigger problem.

So I want to make sure that our priorities are correct.

We have serious resiliency issues that we need to deal with that are much more of a priority than arts and culture.

Second, uh Commissioner Magazine, I don't agree.

Okay?

I do not agree.

I do not think that we should be creating a way of picking winners and losers.

If we're going to uh lower the taxes or roll back the tax rate, everyone benefits.

And yes, there's going to be people who uh in and and businesses that benefit from this.

There's gonna be people who um who are renting that hopefully they get passed back, passed through, like uh Gershon just said in his email.

But we wanna be fair.

We cannot be win, we cannot be picking winners and losers with some government entity that decides who gets a rebate and who doesn't.

The most simple, fair way of doing this is just lowering taxes.

Everyone benefits.

And we want, and to say there's there's struggling businesses out there that need uh uh assistance.

And what if what if the taxes for the fighting become so unbearable that they close down and then you have an empty property?

And that's that that's about to happen to the good time hotel.

Is the good time hotel gonna uh benefit from this?

No.

What's gonna happen is they're gonna they're gonna go out of business because taxes are are going up extremely uh high for them, and then you're gonna have another vacant property sitting in Miami Beach.

I think the most reasonable, straightforward way is we roll back the millage rate, okay, at to at least what this year is.

And then we'll have to find a way to make it work.

It's just it's the most fair way to do that.

Well, how about we see where we can get, right?

As we've been proposing.

We have cut two and a half million dollars already from 2026 budget, and we have exhibit E here.

One of the challenges of all of a sudden sitting here today and examining whether we roll back the millage is and full disclosure, Mr.

CFO, not throwing you guys under the bus, but we've gotten in fights back and forth that we don't have an itemized budget, right?

So aside from our enhancements or the 1% reduction in efficiencies, we don't have that granularity.

I don't know how much the Aaron C show costs, right?

I can't pull up our budget and say, Aaron C show, I don't like it.

Let's cut 200,000.

I'm using that obviously as an example.

I love the Aaron C show, and I don't know what it costs.

But that's the problem, is we don't have an itemized budget, and we brought this up in the June hearing, but that's one of the constraints here.

And that's how it gets to a billion dollar budget because we don't know what has been built up over the years.

And that's not acceptable and is not going to continue.

And there's legislation already coming on the books to produce that.

And we've talked about this throughout the summer.

But if we would sit here and say, well, let's roll back the millage rate, it's not as if we would get a say in where that comes from.

Might come from arts and culture, it might come from infrastructure, it might come from we don't have that granularity.

The only thing that we have kind of in front of us is this exhibit E.

We've already cut two and a half million dollars and we have several more million dollars that we can consider.

But further than that, you know, I I don't see how we get to a bridge of 27 million dollars.

Now we've all set up here, made our uh points known.

I think we start going through line item by line item about what can be removed from this budget.

What is this bloat that we can I'd say start attacking but continue attacking because we've already begun doing so over the past several months.

Uh so with that, I'd like to turn it over to you to kind of go item by item.

Uh sure, Commissioner.

If I just ask is this item is technically the millage in its own separate public hearing, and I think the discussion we were here was really about the second item on the budget.

Because I think the intention was any adjustments here, reduction-wise, would be set aside for a budget um uh stabilization for next year.

Uh it may be just procedurally, because this is a budget hearing, we have to be very specific in how we do things.

Um, unless the unless the intention is to reduce the millage, is to deal with uh the millage discussion uh public hearing and the and the vote on the millage and then through the budget.

This is kind of a chicken in the egg, right?

It can be.

We we want to go through the.

But if you want to have that discussion here, that's uh yeah, that's fine.

Yeah, why why don't we do that before we even entertain that?

We have to see what we can cut.

Okay.

I do believe, Commissioner, I don't know how you because there is it is quite a long document, but I believe when we you and I briefed, there were a number of items that you would identify, I think about a dozen or so uh that you felt that were not as impacting to residents uh that we're able to do.

So I don't know if you are it is, but to be fair, that was just me.

And all my colleagues should have a say, right?

So I think we don't spend 10 minutes discussing ad nauseum, but we sit here and say, okay, eliminate one vacant full-time field inspector.

Uh it says the um the adjustment will contribute to a more streamlined and effective operation, ensuring we continue to meet our objectives effectively.

And we aim to maintain service quality while achieving cost savings.

Yes, sir.

There's been a vacant position in there for quite a while, uh, is my understanding, and that's why that was proffered up by that department.

So if the commission wants to uh to do that, we can go ahead and uh we can go ahead and accept that.

So okay, I'll vote in favor of removing that.

Number one.

Are we eliminated cash books?

Are we going to be able to see this document?

A fields inspector for CIP.

Attachment E is in your budget book.

Page 149.

And so are we going uh as it relates to the impact for DCR guess we are assuming a year one impact correct?

Okay, so that's a seventy thousand dollar efficiency.

Correct.

We would denote all of those like all those adjustments and keep track of those, and then what we'll do is I guess repeat them at the end and say the you know, the when we get to the operating budget, operating budget is amendment has by it.

I have a couple other items by the way that the commission, I think there was interest from the 17th we bring up to add.

Uh but however you'd like to proceed.

Well, can I okay?

If we're not rolling the millage rate back, and we have a balanced budget, then why are we going through this exercise?

Because we can still reduce the millage without rolling back the budget because if we're not going to be able to do that, yes, but this is all social services.

That's not true.

No, okay, there's a I mean city clerk's office, city manager's office, like the real-time Spanish captioning for city commission meetings.

I don't know that anyone has ever told me that they've seen Spanish closed captioning on the city commission.

They might have told me in Spanish and I couldn't understand.

Yeah, but that option is still there.

If somebody does need the captions in Spanish, then they can have it.

And I know that a lot of our residents who are American citizens don't speak English.

So there are people that use that.

There are consequences to these actions.

You can eliminate, for example, some public notices for the Miami Herald, but you do that at the cost of not having any press or independent objective watchdog in our government.

We no longer have um uh um a Miami Herald reporter because of this.

What does that mean?

You eliminated you know sixty thousand dollars and we have no press in Miami Beach.

It doesn't make any sense at all.

That's a proud Cuban American.

I can tell you that I do not know of a single person in our Hispanic community that watches our commission meetings and the Spanish closed captioning.

And that's $36,000 right there.

So we're spending $36,000 on something that I do not know of a single resident in our Hispanic community that uses this.

Well, let's let's go on one.

Commissioner Dominguez, Commissioner Dominguez.

Yes, just real quick, like on number three, the interpreter service for special magistrate, the special magistrate reached out to me and said we need this or 1,000 dollars.

Yeah, let's go one by one.

So you say, okay, item number one.

I think I think I have item number one.

Eliminate a vacant position.

I'm a yes to eliminate that.

Hearing no no objection, we keep number one reduction.

Can we just call a roll for each one?

Okay, Joe.

Yes.

Yes to eliminate.

Yes, yes.

So on item number one, uh in favor of eliminating item number one, please say I.

Aye.

Anyone opposed?

Item number one is removed seven zero.

And let's just go down the line.

Number two.

And number two?

I just have an idea.

Um I'm not a fan of AI, but this seems like it would be a perfect use for AI.

Is that not something the problem with that is uh that we're speaking in English?

It that has to be translated into right now, the way it works are gonna be on a live person.

Friday.

Who in other words, it's there is no such service right now that we know of that will translate real time because it's real time.

Yeah, every resident of Miami Beach deserves to have access um to understanding our meetings.

And I know that there are many of our residents that do not speak English, that watch our meetings.

I guarantee you that function is being used sometimes, and and I don't and I think that the public has the right to be able to understand an item if it's affecting them, and for some reason we might not, they might not have access to that.

I I disagree in the in the big scheme of things.

I do I do know somebody who uses it as well.

I'm gonna I'm gonna support the keep it for the Mr.

City Clerk, one call to interview if you feel that there are people who use it.

I just think we know that with like Siri, uh Siri does live translation from any language from English to any we have Portuguese.

Uh we have Brazilian residents here who only speak Portuguese.

This doesn't address them, but Siri does address it.

There's technology that people already have.

But if you're 70 years old, if you're okay if you're let's skip it.

Okay, well, no, we call the rule.

So an item number two, all in favor of eliminating it, please say aye.

Aye.

I heard one.

Is that correct?

So the item is not eliminated.

The next item is uh interpreter services, special badge rate hearings.

Item number three.

It is I'm sorry.

Sorry, so it's five, two on item two to eliminate.

To eliminate five, two eliminate.

It is not eliminated.

It's not wait, is it five in favor of the two?

We're going to be voting yes to eliminate.

Correct.

Each item, a yes vote is to eliminate.

Two five.

Okay, yeah, got it.

Two five, sorry.

Three, uh, a thousand dollars if he said it's really needed, it's a thousand.

No, so mind you, for three, we have enough budget left based on the usage that we could eliminate one.

We're not eliminating the that.

Okay.

So our suggestion to eliminate it because we can so you're okay with that?

You're okay with that based on the usage today?

We could eliminate a thousand dollars from that.

So that's that is getting eliminated.

What is number three?

But it's not getting eliminated the service based on what you have budgeted, and based on my usage, I can cut a thousand dollars and still provide the same thing.

We're eliminating the thousand dollars, not the service.

Okay, okay.

So item number three, all in favor of removing that item, please say aye.

I noticed that.

I'm sorry, no.

It's one to six eliminated.

So item three is eliminated.

Okay.

I'm gonna keep going.

There are sixty-six items.

There's sixty-six items.

This uh we're gonna do one by one and public recording.

That's the one.

We're here, we're here.

We're doing it.

We have one shot at this.

Okay.

And just gotta finish by 1159 and 59 seconds.

But we're here, we have one shot at this.

We don't have to start with line one.

Maybe we start uh in an order of this way.

They're by department.

Uh I don't have them by not coordinated by impact.

Um, just keep going.

We're making progress quicker.

Yes.

And just to clarify, all these motions, I my understanding is for the for the commissioner, is these items we set aside for budget stabilization for next year.

That is the interest and where we're gonna save that money.

Because you're gonna get double money.

You're gonna get set aside recurring money for 27 and this one-time cash will be set aside for it.

So you're getting a double on that.

So I just want to make sure that we're clear.

Place or yes.

Thank you.

Uh so advertising for public notices number four.

Based on publications online, we could eliminate that without any I.

All in favor of so I there are still people that read paper publications.

You are ignoring an entire demographic of senior citizens, and I think it is wrong.

Don't we don't doesn't the clerk um send notices to the senior centers?

Yes.

Okay.

So yeah, but what about people that don't live in senior centers?

What if I'm a 75-year-old who gets the Miami Herald who lives in a condominium on the each now they don't deserve to get public notice?

Only 2,000 herald subscriptions.

$30,000 per year.

So that thousands of our residents.

This is wrong.

There's something we should do.

In this billion dollars that to start cutting a 1,000 and you're cutting from we're going line by line.

You're cutting from seniors?

You're cutting the Hispanic community.

I just don't understand what this exercise is.

I mean, if we let's go to the larger items that have impact.

It's not a good idea.

We're gonna get there, but this is this list.

I think we have to be realistic.

This list is in alphabetical order, and as we go through this alphabetical order, there's gonna be high-ticket items.

If we ever make it to item number eight, we're gonna see something that's 400,000, which I don't support us cutting.

But we're still an item number four, and we've been doing this exercise now for a while.

So we will be more efficient with our time.

We could definitely more time debating what order we go in than actually going through the items.

Everybody here would like to cut advertising services uh for public notices that will affect a senior population uh that gets newspapers.

Ralph, can you call the votes?

Is that what we're voting on right now?

Because I have a real problem with this.

Ralph, at the last meeting you explained to us that uh the no the notices that went to the newspaper were often a wrong and took weeks.

I I just want to make sure that what you said.

If you can repeat it quickly, uh, if that applies to this item.

Yes.

Did you say what you so a couple of issues?

Uh it we have if we send it to the Miami Herald or to whoever whatever newspaper, we have to send these weeks in advance.

So this gives us that leeway.

Number two.

And online is immediate.

It's it's immediate.

It is constant, meaning it's not removed.

The newspaper, once you get it today, you throw away your newspaper, you're not getting that notice.

These are constant.

We are delivering also to the senior centers, the public libraries, the senior housing.

So we deliver these paper copies also.

Uh mind you.

And we've eliminated any errors because we can fix them immediately.

Well, what would the cost be to deliver to every senior citizen over the age of 75?

That's a policy of this.

Well, I mean, I think you have to you have to think about that before you eliminate before you just completely eliminate an entire sector of the population.

I don't think we're eliminating a sector of the population.

I think you are, because I think a lot of people don't.

I mean, I know for my mother, for example, who's 83, she gets the Miami Herald.

She reads the Miami Herald.

Her notices are in the Miami Herald.

So if so then they don't get those notices, and she doesn't live in a senior center.

Anyone also who wishes to get this via email, we would do that via mail, we're but they don't she doesn't email anymore.

So I what my point is is that I think that this $30,000 in public notice for a sector of the population that gets the newspaper is not going to make or break us, but it does send a message that we're ageist.

Can we skip it?

Yes.

Mind you, you've already directed me to do this.

Yeah.

This is just the savings from your prior.

We're accepting our savings.

Yeah, we've already voted on that.

I know, but I'm just restating the fact that I really disagree with this.

You've actually moving us in a bad direction.

So we've already voted on this.

I'll put up so lost on this at this time.

Yes.

Number six.

Number five.

So number four was accepted?

Yes.

Number five, newspaper subscriptions?

I.

Aye.

I think we're hearing a majority.

We'll show it accepted.

Uh reduction in the operating expenditures for the city manager's office.

It's a collection of various expenditures uh the city manager was proffering up.

Yeah.

I.

I.

Okay.

Reduction in the operating expenditures for the geo bond program management division of the city manager's office.

I said hearing no objections?

Seven is accepted.

Yep.

Uh co-compliance department number eight.

Uh the reduction in the number of positions specifically related to short-term rental investigation unit.

No.

No.

No.

Well, not accepting that.

Uh next one, co-compliance, the number of positions specifically to do co-compliance in the entertainment district.

No, no.

Jason, if you could say the numbers, because that helps us out.

Thank you.

And that was number eight, number nine.

I know, but when we do the minutes, it helps.

Okay.

I thank you, bro.

Uh number 10, uh, eliminate one vacant full-time co-compliance officer position one position.

Yes.

No.

No.

No.

Okay.

So that was in.

How long has that position been vacant?

I think it's a rolling kind of consideration that every department from time to time has.

It's rolling.

It's rolling.

So there's sometimes it'll be full, sometimes it'll be eliminated at the time, or as of right now, there is one vacant position currently.

As many as we can afford.

Okay.

I think hearing the consensus, which we're I think we're okay with consensus, is that we will show that not uh added.

Number 11, uh reduce funding for small business incubator accelerator program.

Number 11?

No.

No, no.

Okay.

Thank you.

Number 12, uh eliminating the community satisfaction survey.

Yes.

Can we just do it instead of every two years?

Can we do it every four years and effectuate some changes that way?

Some savings that way?

We can't just see how we fund it is that that is funded annually but done every two years.

It's about 100,000 and to have budgetary smoothness, we do 5050.

If you wanted to make it every four years, we would reduce it to 25,000 annual uh funding.

So you could do a partial there, which reduces the funding to 25,000 if you wanted to move to an every four year cycle.

Is that correct?

An objective temperature take care.

They use this data.

Departments actually use this data when they create their budgets and positions.

I'm a no on this.

So could we amend this the uh half this and move it uh every four years?

Let's let's split the baby three years.

Okay, so we'll show that as a uh the reduction of 25,000.

No, that would go to every four years.

So we have a reduction of 13,000.

Yeah, reduction of 13,000 approximately 13,000.

Uh and we're gonna move that to every four uh three years.

Okay.

That was number 12.

Number 13, finance.

These are all citywide grants, so I'll I'll move kind of quickly on these.

Uh grant funding for boys and girls club.

No, no.

Hearing consensus, no.

Grant funding for Douglas Gardens Community Mental Health Center.

No, no.

Okay.

Grant funding for uh FIU Jewish Museum.

No.

Grant funding for Jewish Community Services of South Florida.

No.

Grant funding for Bombie Beach Chamber Visitor Center.

No.

No.

Sorry, I haven't been doing the numbers rough.

Uh now we're on 18.

Uh grant funding for Bonnie Beach Community Health Center.

No.

Number 19, grant funding for Miami Beach, Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce.

No.

Okay.

Grant funding for Bonnie Beach Water Sports, number 20.

What is this?

What is that?

Shane Shane Water Sports?

Oh.

Shane Rubbing Center.

No, okay.

Thank you.

Number 21, grant funding for Miami Design Preservation League.

No.

Okay.

Grant funding for Orange Bowl Committee.

No.

No.

What do we do?

What do we get for it?

Yeah.

The college championships.

Yeah, it's it's related to our contribution towards uh the orange bowl.

But it's not every it's a good idea.

Yeah, it's an annual it's an annual contribution to keep the organization running, and then if there's like a big one, we'll come back, they'll come back with a different discussion.

But this is our small, very small annual allocation.

So this basically keeps our our um our hat in the ring for consideration to host it?

Yes.

This helps fund our our contribution.

So it's like our dues to be considered there.

I think you got invited to a Christmas party someplace and I'm not sure.

That's what we're keeping this for.

That's what we're keeping this for.

I'm not gonna vote for it.

That's not why we're keeping it.

We're keeping it so that we get considered so that we're in consideration for what did you say, Jason?

The orange bowl.

Yeah, do we get it?

College football championship game.

For the championship.

Eric, is so if we eliminated this committee, we would not be in consideration to get the orange bowl.

So it means that we have millions of dollars of economic benefit would be down the drain for 17,000.

That's something that doesn't have to be.

I don't know that it would completely eliminate us, but it would erode our ability for the orange bowl committee to pursue these events.

How often do we get them?

We have it.

Uh we have it this year, and then I believe we have it again in three years.

We get them every few years.

Who comprises the Orange Bowl Committee?

So it it's a not-for-profit group that um is has been in place for a long time.

They're they're basically they serve as as our sports committee in South Florida.

Do we need this to have our head in the ring?

Your assessment?

Yes.

I I am not recommending cutting any of these things.

I think they all bring value, but this one in particular, I think for 17,000, the kind of economic value that we bring to the city when we bring the college football national championship game is you know and every other municipality contributes to this.

It's you know, just legacy things.

All right.

Uh number 23, grant funding for the South Florida Hispanic Chamber of Commerce.

Number 23.

Hearing no.

Uh number 24, grant funding for Unidab Meals Program.

No.

Number 25, Pride Lines Youth Safe Space Program.

Number 25.

No.

No.

Okay.

Number 26, Pride Lines My Beach Project Safe Program.

Can you talk through the difference between the two?

Yes.

Let me see here.

The Pride Lines, let me see here.

The Prielines Youth is 25,000 provides support for Project Safe LGBQ.

I A plus youth in crisis, but providing safe drop-in services and case management that promotes stability, independence of access to services.

I believe the real difference is the age groups.

It's chill age groups.

I believe it's children versus young adults.

Chill.

The two different group different groups.

One is more focused because of the my public schools, I believe, removed some of their services.

And we stepped in there, but there was an existing program, I think related to young adults.

So that's they're getting two different groups there.

So I think that was good.

Common threads, number 27.

No, common threads is an after school program in our recreational department that teaches children how to cook and and healthy foods.

So I would say no, because the impact for the $19,000 is impacts thousands of kids.

Yep.

Okay, we'll show that.

No, I accept that number 28.

Uh eliminate a the education manager position, Steam Plus program, and private charter school programs.

No.

No.

Okay.

I have no uh a reduction in what's the education manager position?

What is what is that position?

There was a position that was added last year to when we when the commission expanded outside of the realm of of public schools services for uh Steam Plus and all these other programs.

We there was a position added to manage the I forget it's like a dozen or two dozen private charter religious schools that are gonna get all of these programs.

So there's a chunk of money to run the Steam Plus program, which we took back from the Bass as an efficiency, and uh and they're gonna run all the programs that are outside into the public schools.

Basically, you just expanded so many of the programs and staffing was needed to run these dozens of programs.

But so to clarify, this is not a position that's being funded at $600,000.

No, it's the pile.

It's it's a position plus the steam.

It looks like it's you know, the the positions being eliminated, the cost savings is six hundred and twenty-five thousand dollars.

So it's the position, let's let's say fifty thousand dollars or forty-five, or whatever.

It would be is it this would be a really good example of something that commissioner uh magazine, myself, and Tamika have had a discussion about program budgeting.

This is program budgeting.

Okay, so this program.

But this is a an example of we don't even know because if we're saying do we want to cut $500,000 for this enhanced education initiative?

No.

Could would we prefer to be able to disperse those funds throughout the community to the schools who we have voted on to support without having to hire an additional full-time person?

I think we would all be in agreement that that would be the preferred way to do it, but we can't make that discussion.

We can't make that decision because it's lumped in as one item.

So how can we vote on this if we don't know what you know what the percentage is of the position versus the the disbursement of the funds?

I think what the reason is it's is together is that you need that position to run these programs.

So if you're limiting the position, you must eliminate the programs.

That's why it's presented.

This was this was a significant increase in the workload for that program when we brought in all of the private and charter schools in addition to the public schools.

Didn't we discuss this at the last meeting?

Actually, this specific position that parents were reaching out to us concerned that this position was not going to be funded.

And we made a commitment at this table to fund this position because of the impact it has with the funding.

That was the conversation that you and I had on this day at the last meeting.

Yes.

Yes.

All right, so let's keep it.

Okay.

So we'll show that.

Uh number 29 was a reduction on elimination, reduction in the pre-K scholarship programs of the 2024 level.

No.

No.

No.

Okay.

For the benefit of the public so far, we've found 141,500 of efficiencies.

Number 30, uh, eliminate ocean rescue boat coverage.

Number 30, fire department.

What do you answer?

No.

No, that's public safety issue.

No.

Number 31 is also the next two are fire department.

Number 31, eliminate one vacant full-time uh training officer, firefighter one position, number 31.

So I'll I'm gonna step in here, right?

We haven't cut anything.

We've cut from a variety of of different departments and with 100% respect, chief.

Uh, we haven't done anything throughout the budget process for fire.

And we we we need to because police and fire are part, sixty-two percent of our overall budget.

We've reigned in, I think a few hundred thousand dollars of police.

Is that correct?

Uh throughout this process.

We cut um six hundred six hundred thousand dollars.

Six hundred thousand overtime.

And if I may, at the very I think the very very last item, which is under resort tax, because they're joined, there is a fire item.

Really, it's overtime there.

You know, I I'll leave it to the chief.

If this is the one that fire can offer up, that's the one fire can offer up, right?

I I don't know the title, I don't know whatever, but I'm hard pressed to think that we can't find I'm I'm actually giving the confidence that I know we can continue to operate this fine department with men and women to put their lives on the line with a simple 200,000 dollar cost savings, which turns into 331,000.

Now, if it's this position or any other that the chief, you know, deems is the best offer up, that's essentially what I'm voting for.

I'll put my confidence in her saying whatever the position is to achieve this cost savings.

I trust her judgment.

So I'll vote yes for this.

It's not really because of the specific position.

It's okay, we're we're going to all share in some of this reduction, and I'll leave it to the chief's best judgment that that's what fire is able to kind of pro-offer.

Mr.

Chair.

I see we have two positions in the fire department.

One is fire training program, and the other one is in the fire prevention program.

I know that our administration is not recommending touching either of these programs, but from your perspective, uh, Chief, if if we had to cut in one of these two, which one would you believe is and to me I wouldn't want to touch anything that's prevention?

Uh, but you know, can can you deal without this position?

I need feedback guidance from you.

So um good afternoon, Chief Abello, fire chief.

So in the in the in the one position that you are recommending, that is a position that I was awarded last year when I came before you to you know see all the amount of training that we've assumed in the last several years.

FEMA government has been imposing a lot of training for the hazardous aspect of it.

Um and as far as the planning uh position, that was uh position that we will be resuming um with the savings and revenue that we'll be collecting from our pre-fire planning inspections.

So to that point, we have generated uh five point one million dollars in the last year above of what we were generating last year with these extra positions.

This position was because the state statute reduced our turnaround for permits from 30 to 15 days, and the gentleman had just uh vacated the position uh approximately 60 days when you came and asked me.

And then yesterday we also saved $8,000 because you had said anything as you know, face $8,000 in a connection trailer that we were using to store extra equipment.

So yesterday they picked it up, so that was an extra savings as well.

So if I had to pick one, I would say that we either um reduced the pre-fire planning one because I know that I'll be able to generate the revenue, or um the reduction of the high impact funding from the resort tax will be able to save another $75,000.

So if I can't help to facilitate if there's an interest in having a reduction in the fire department, uh I've had a discussion with the chief, the one that if if we were asked to have something in there, it's actually item 66.

Um which um we would be okay with it, 75,000 reduction, not touching uh funding for spring break services at this time, but Memorial Day.

So just like we did with the police of reciprocity between the two public safety department, main public safety departments.

Uh we could do we could do that.

So that would be a preference if we were required to make a cut.

I appreciate you offering being frank about that.

It's it's a shared sacrifice, it's not something we want to do across the board, but that's how we get to a billion dollar budget.

There's we could say positive things about each of these, you know, everything at one point had merit.

It's just you you've heard loud and clear where the conversation goes, so I appreciate you giving your input.

Um and I'll follow the lead on that of uh if we're going to choose one using sixty-six.

Okay, so if I if I can so so which line item are we so 3031 32, uh I'll propose to keep and then with uh the chief's direction uh 66 eliminate but it's just to clarify in uh in the packet 66 says 150,000.

That's not all coming from fire.

No, the the the hundred the number sixty-six is is fire, but what it is it's it's across multiple programs as you see listed out Halloween New Year's Memorial Day and Spring Break.

I think we would be okay being uh reciprocal with the police department where we made some reductions in overtime.

So we I think we are we'll be okay with a $75,000 reduction on item 66, which would reduce the some of the overtime specific for Memorial Day only.

Okay, perfect.

Okay, so we've got 75k from 66.

Right.

So 66 will be 75,000.

Okay.

Thank you.

Check mark.

Let me go back.

Uh housing community services, item 33, mobile food pantry program.

Number 33.

No.

No.

Uh number 34, reclassify existing CDBG program projects coordinator to a Ministry of Services Manager position and reallocating a Ministry of Services Manager position.

Number 34.

Yes.

Yeah.

How long has this position been vacant for?

I would ask Alba's going to come up and see if we can answer that one.

And really we're just kind of reclassifying to a lowish lower salary level, correct?

I think it's moving it to a grant funded position.

Yes, good evening.

I'll put that at the Office of Housing and Community Services.

It is currently not vacant, but the um person who is holding the position now has resigned.

And so we will be reclassifying.

Okay.

So if we if we've removed this here, what happens?

We would um reclassify it to a supports manager and we would fund it through a federal and state dollars.

Okay.

So we still achieve the outcome of the position.

There's no impact on the services being provided to the public.

No.

Can I then find with it?

But by reclassifying with federal dollars, it's not going to affect any of our rental assistance programs or any of our other programs.

Not at all.

Okay.

Okay.

So that's another 62.

So we'll show that one accepted.

Number 34?

It's addicting, huh, Commissioner?

Great.

Okay.

Number 278500.

Number 35, Marketing Communications.

I think this one was discussed last time.

Um the daily media clips, I think there was interest in keeping that.

Um I'll go with the yes, but uh it could put me on an island.

And I know I'm throwing lists under the bus after she helped me.

Yeah, get something.

I read those every day.

I do read them, but uh that's internal to us, correct?

I I would support cutting.

I would support cutting it.

Yeah, it's it doesn't benefit the residents at all.

But it it's useful because we then can use that information to generate benefits for the city and therefore the residents.

Like you can use, hey, you know, for instance, I'm I'm working to find sponsors for the blue zones.

And so when I find something in those clips, I send, by the way, we just got mentioned about this thing, and then they're like, oh, we're super interested.

Let's talk about it.

It's a small dollar amount, it is valuable.

I would suggest we do not cut it.

Okay.

I don't have consensus here, so maybe just remark it.

Um I'm gonna know.

I I do read them and sometimes they are valuable, but I also do I just do searches on things that I'm interested in.

I find the same articles.

Don't you want to see what the trends are for my VPH?

I do, and I do and I do my searches.

Uh Mr.

City Clerk, maybe this is on number 35.

The question is gonna be to keep.

To keep it.

We're keeping it.

Yes.

No, let's be consistent.

Okay.

Where any yes vote is to eliminate, right?

That's what we've been doing.

To eliminate Commissioner Bottts.

No.

To eliminate Commissioner Dominguez.

No.

Commissioner Fernandez.

Yes.

Commissioner Bosan Gonzalez.

Yeah.

This is to uh Daily Media Clips.

The daily media clip subscription.

A vote of yes is to remove it to a vote of no is to keep it.

So we're now in commissioner magazine.

Yes.

Commissioner Suarez.

A vote of no is to keep it.

Yes.

Mayor Minor.

Yes.

So we'll have four to eliminate.

Okay.

It is eliminated.

This is number 35.

We'll show 35 eliminated.

Uh number 36, reduce the Miami Beach magazine printing and mailing.

This would reduce it from four to two times a year of the magazine.

I believe that is our number one.

It's rated as our number one guide that our residents use.

That is my understanding that uh the community satisfaction survey, I think, may bring that data.

And it's not even a good idea.

But if we didn't have one of those, we'll know less often.

We can't validate that.

We wouldn't know that this is I'm gonna support keeping it.

I I think our our residents, our senior residents, people do read it.

Okay.

I think we're okay, seeing consensus there, we'll move on.

Uh number 37, eliminate printing of the annual proposed and adopted budget books.

Number 37.

You mean this book?

Correct.

It'll be reduced.

That means we would no longer print the hard copies.

That's the two capsules.

It's accessible, we can all pull it up.

It is digital.

Oh, email.

Yeah.

Yes, it's digital.

If I want it printed, you guys can print it.

I can make a request.

No.

He's not joking.

Wait, so is it the three books in color?

Or is it the one book?

It's all three.

It's all three twice a year.

The proposed one you get at the end of August, early September, and then the primary one you'll get in November ish.

How about the f can we just get rid of the proposed?

Because the proposed is a very temporary document.

Yet we get the full Bible.

We could do that.

And let's just do the final adopted budget.

Because that is our contract with the public of how we're going to use their dollars.

So let's print a copy of the final adopted budget.

Because once we approve the budget, the proposed one, this is wasted paper.

So let's not print the proposed one anymore.

So that's a that would be slashing in half.

Yes.

So if that if that's okay.

If there's a consensus, we could remove the funding for the proposed budget book, but we would still would print the adopted budget book.

So is that about $6,000?

Yeah, exactly.

But that $6,000 would be in the 27%.

Just have the timing of the funding and everything.

But if we're okay with that, I think that's fine.

We'll remove the uh funding for the proposed, and we will continue to print the adopted.

So that we'll call that like a partial acceptance.

Uh we have number parks and rec' programs, number 38.

Uh senior programming, number 38.

We discussed this a bit last time, uh reducing keep down the number one.

Hearing no consent, no uh interest in eliminating, we'll show it kept.

This is at the four per year or three percent.

Eighty seven, I think is for all of them, but there was discussion about a uh $18,000 one time.

But you I think all had that discussion at the last meeting and decided to not do that and kept all of the the senior programs.

Oh, so we it wasn't to go down to three, it was to go to three.

Correct.

There was a lot of discussion on this one, and I think you landed at not moving the removing any funding at all and keeping the existing program.

Okay.

Uh number 39, senior enhanced transportation services.

Keep we're good on keeping it, okay.

Uh for senior scenes program, number 40.

Nothing.

No.

Yeah, keep it.

Keeping it.

Okay.

Not accepting that reduction.

Uh 41.

Small scale events, number 41.

I think eliminating nine.

We're good with that, not hearing any conflict.

We will be.

I know photos with Santa.

This is terrible.

Who'd who would say that?

Oh my goodness.

Thank you.

Number 42, summer camp field trips, transportation, number 42?

No.

No.

Number 43, playground review, number 43.

What's that?

It's the camp, it's the end of the year.

Uh listen, I'm biased because I attended it.

My daughter participates.

That's the filmmore, right?

Yeah, yeah.

At the filmmore, it's incredible.

Okay, yeah.

We're not gonna speak.

Yeah.

All right, we're gonna showkeeping.

Uh not accepting the record, uh, not there's no recommendation, sorry.

Not accepting the production.

Uh number 44, Veterans Day parade and event.

No.

Okay.

Uh 45, the employee Halloween event.

No.

No.

Yes.

I think there's consensus.

That's for the morale of our employees who dedicate a lot.

We went through them.

Yes.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh number 46, playtime program.

What is that?

And that what is it?

What is it?

Preschool?

Preschool program.

And Camp for Tots.

No.

Can't for number 47, Camp for Tots.

No.

Okay.

Number 48, the sole vegan festival.

Or 48.

So can we uh John?

Can I ask you?

I don't mean the can we just um because I know it's it's been really popular and getting better every year, and it's a thing.

But 50 grand, I mean we there aren't that many organizations that we give that much money to sponsor.

So can we reduce the funding and have them figure out how to come back to us?

Absolutely.

If that's what we end up with, I'll go to um the promoter, and I'll work with him and his group on what can we do for whatever you budget.

Yeah, let's do that because it you know I know that it is um it's broadened its appeal and it's it's gaining traction.

So let's let's how about for this year try 15 and then see what happens as as it grows?

Like the goal is not gonna support this because this is part of our programming that we do um as part of Black History Month, and this is part of our diversity in Sity.

And but I do not support lowering the funding of this of this event.

And they can't do that the event with $15,000.

Okay, so let's do it to $30,000.

Can they do can you do the event?

I don't support that.

I I don't want to lose this event.

I'm trying to figure out how we how would it get to four.

Well, we just we don't have a lot of events to highlight African American culture, Caribbean culture, and this is what this event highlights.

I understand.

So I am not gonna support touching any funding removed.

So how do we get to four?

What do you mean four?

Four votes to keep it.

Oh keep it.

Well, the four of us are saying that.

Oh, okay.

Okay, great.

Okay, so we are keeping, we're we're not you're not.

We're keeping that.

Okay, we're keeping we're keeping it.

Got it.

Number 49.

No funding, right?

Yeah, right.

Uh 49 holiday lights at Scott Racal.

We're not eliminating eliminate that.

No.

Not except not doing that one.

Okay.

Number 50, citywide health and wellness initiatives.

This is resident programs.

No.

Keep.

Okay, keeping.

What does okay, but what this is too, because we have we have event we have uh health and wellness recreational programs at the parks.

I need to know because I think we have different categories and different lines of health and wellness events with the parks.

So I want to understand what's the difference between them.

These are the events that we hold through the parks or recreation department, like the Chris, the pull-up jam that's coming up in October with Chris Herrera that a lot of you have attended.

We did a an offshoot community-based when water pollution was happening.

We work with them to do something for the for the public.

It's things like that.

Where's the money spent, John?

Because those things seem pretty just organic to me.

Yeah.

Yeah, I I've been at them, they're fun, but where does that 50 grand go?

Oh I read the breakdown, but you know, staffing.

Like a dollar for every pull-up, I think.

Girls, volleyball, team, basketball.

I don't want to.

Neither do I.

But and like any idea where it's spent?

Because they all just seem organic, right?

It's right.

There's quite a few in this list.

It's not just one event.

So if you have divide 50 by seven, it's it's not a whole lot of money.

Cindy, do you have line items?

Cindy.

Of course I want to keep these things.

I'm not gonna vote to eliminate them.

I I'm just curious who's the ones I think.

These are easy pop quizzes.

They go toward operating expenses like awards, trophies, supplies, um, water, uh, snacks, fruits that we give out, things like that.

Can we find sponsorship for that?

Like Pepsi, like we have a contract with PepsiCo.

Can't PepsiCo provide the water for that.

Can we find a sponsor to do the award, you know?

The equinox pull-up jam.

Yeah, the equinox pull-up jam award, you know.

Absolutely.

If I may what what maybe could happen directional wise is I think the budget would have to remain, but the parks department could be directed to explore sponsorship opportunities.

I like the word explore because if they don't come.

Right.

So there may be some savings in the next year's budget where they come back and say, hey, by the way, this was um we do program budgeting.

Uh they have this line of 50 50,000.

Maybe next year it says $42,000 ago reduced by $8,000.

They found sponsors for $8,000 for the program.

John, are these events well attended?

Yes, because our community base, we're not looking for 10 parties.

Volleyball tournament, team basketball tournament.

Come on, that's fun.

Yeah, we do a program proposal and close out.

We don't continue failing programs, so anything we continue to do did well the year before.

You guys are incredible.

So if you're okay with that, we can we can keep we could keep this item in, but direction V parks that we've got to find sponsorship.

Any opportunities for sponsorships at the commission's.

Yeah, I mean, Pepsi should be Pepsi's part of Pepsi Friedolet.

They should be able to provide all the food and drink that we are offering.

They've got enough in their portfolio.

So and we have a very lucrative, they have a very lucrative contract with us.

So that should eliminate a few grand right off the top.

And then you know let's just keep working on it together.

Okay.

So we'll show just um for to help Ralph out.

Uh number 50 will be staying, but uh the the administration will explore sponsorship opportunities on that item 50.

Okay.

John, for 51, if we ever explored with like our uh beach vendors, if you know they'd be able to use some of their men and woman power to help out with uh the beachfront restrooms with the rush reporters.

No, we've always taken care of that with our uh janitorial contract.

We need to have those backwards.

No, I don't agree with that.

I'm just saying, can the private sector do it better for less?

No, but the private sector is is doing it.

They're not self-contracted.

Right, it's our janitorial contract, not city staff that does this.

Okay.

Yeah.

So it's private sector.

It's already outsourced.

But but this is um enhanced for high impact weekends, right?

This is not every day.

This is every day.

I mean, I'm looking at it, enhanced services during high impact periods.

We have we have porters in two different locations.

High impact, which a lot of times we get money through resort tax to pay for that.

But then imagine everything that happens that that's not resort tax qualifying.

We will pay out of our operating budget to go have a porter.

Maybe the restrooms at Unidap, for example, who needs some you need a special porter there on site.

And we we don't we we're very cautious with with that service, and it's usually because of of safety, or there's something going on at that moment.

We're doing a special event at Alto Stomar.

We're wanted we're gonna want a porter there during that event.

That would be that probably a general fund example, not a resort tax example.

Okay.

All right, so we're keeping the porter.

51 will show keeping.

Uh keeping with the parks team.

We're we're almost done with you, John.

Uh 52, uh dog waste bags and stations, number 52.

No.

Sammy says now.

Okay.

We'll be keeping that.

Um got two pieces to it.

Uh eliminating 15 parks part-timers.

There's 13 vacant seasonal inclusionary aids and also two vacant recreational leader ones.

John, could you say oh sorry, Commissioner, but it from what I got from you, this wouldn't cause any disruption.

These are kind of like floating positions.

We're not eliminating uh any current staff or things like that.

We have the need for a great number of inclusionary aids, but the truth is we're we're very rarely able to fill them.

So they've been historically vacant, so we wouldn't see a reduction in in what we're offering right now.

So if we were to read this program for children with special needs and they need a inclusionary aids, but we can't and nobody else does this.

This is a very, very special program with the children with um autism disabilities.

But have we been able to fill these possessions?

That's the problem.

How long have we funded for?

Oh my gosh.

I would tell you that since I've been here, this is my third budget.

I think that we funded in the last two, a couple of inclusionary aids, and we had a lot of discussions with park staff being very passionate about that particular element of our community, the special needs children and the spec the needs that are for those programs.

So I think the commission has actually added enhancements the past year, two a couple of years to add funding towards the 15, and so are we budgeting for too many?

Maybe we need to budget for less.

Well, I think that's what this week of John is.

We have a full inclusionary recreation program, meaning that you're in you know that they're they're mainstreamed into the program, and some of these children either need a one-on-one shadow or maybe two or three on one shadow as part of the inclusionary.

So our goal is we could we could use these these folks based on the number of special needs participants we have, but we put them on the list because we've just been unable to fill to fill them.

We prefer not to have it on the list, but we would be dishonest in saying that we fill them this year.

So, John, if I could help is if you if you kept the the maybe not the part two, the the two Regan rec leaders, but the 13 inclusionary aids, if you actually fill those positions, you'd be able to bring more people in.

There's people waiting as soon as you hire people.

Or they're in without enough.

Yes.

But what this doesn't address is the fact that we can't fill the like obviously if if we had these spots and they were filled and we were using them, that would be amazing because that's the goal.

But if we're holding money in the budget for spots that we historically have not been able to fill, and and I would suggest that if you find somebody, you're like, you know, finally you find somebody to fill one of these spots, bring it to us as a budget enhancement.

I think you'd have unanimous support to to add it as a budget enhancement.

But if we're holding 200,000 that is never being used.

Never maybe uh or do six.

Yeah, we'll say maybe you could it split it and do uh six that cut six of the uh inclusionary aids and one of the recreators.

If the dynamics change and all of a sudden there's a flood on the marketplace of of people who want these jobs, then let's have this conversation again.

We put them all on the six and one cut it in half.

Yes, we put them all on the table, but I I prefer six and one.

And then if we don't fill these six by next year, I'll be standing here telling you another you went by and we we didn't.

So this would reduce a budget of it from 200,000 to 100.

Well, this is six, yeah, it's approximately.

It's not that they are that they're not able to be filled, it's that there isn't a disabled child that needs the shadow.

But should that disabled child arrive at the program, you have to have the position open.

So I think he has at least six.

So if he fills these six, it needs more.

Uh the next budget cycle isn't that far away, believe it or not, it happens very quickly.

So uh the parks department would just add a uh an enhancement and say we filled those six, and actually we think we can go more.

Um so if if it's okay, I think this seems to be a consensus to cut six inclusionary part-timers and one of the two rec leader ones.

Is that correct?

Yes.

We're good, we're good with that?

Yeah.

Okay, so we'll show uh six, number fifty-three, six of the inclusionary aids, and one of the rec leader ones.

That is number fifty-three.

Number fifty-four, uh, intramural baseball program, fifty-four.

No, yeah.

Well, but this won't affect the operation.

If we take a if this if we do this reduction, it's not gonna affect the program.

Is that right?

Right.

If if I make commissioner, so we we budget as if the program was full.

Every camp, every clinic, every season.

And historically, it's not full to this extent.

So by examining the numbers, we feel as though if we cut 50, it wouldn't affect the program.

This may be another case that if the program grows, I can come back to you to have a finance meeting mid year.

So we can continue providing the program without affecting the program at all.

Status quote so.

And also, I'd like to volunteer the mayor, who is a huge baseball fan and was a player.

And if you need it, is still a player, right?

Throw out the first pitch, the Marlins game.

I know the on a regular basis.

So you got your guy right here.

All right, perfect.

All right, so we can eliminate this.

I'll take that volunteer.

Okay, so we'll show number 54 accepted.

Uh thank you, John.

Uh moving on to planning.

Uh number 55, uh elimination of the historic preservation board and associated positions.

I'm summarizing it.

How is this going to affect applications going before the historic preservation board?

We know that people complain up a lot of times about the time about the process and delays and getting their applications heard.

Will this delay applications before the board, Mr Planning Director?

Yeah in the next couple of ones I think all blend together.

Yeah, because of the elimination of staff.

I will not support anything that will delay businesses in our city getting their approvals.

And both positions the principal planner and these are filled positions in fact.

And so the recommendations we have previously received then we receive recommendations and requests for more positions in these departments in order to handle the processing of these applications quicker.

So just to be clear I think that this item is talking about elimination of the boards themselves.

Oh no.

Yeah we cannot touch this no we might just stay here but I have a feeling questions on the next one.

Number 55.

Eric you turn that around quickly Eric.

55 discussion 57 or 55 no speeding along here 5758 thank you so much.

Police department number 59 overtime reduction of various existing overtime details number 59.

And if just uh for your edification there are nine individual sub-elements to this uh one through nine you'll see in the description uh ranging in different dollar values and and I'll just speak here you know it was a moment for all of us to be very proud um in the past few weeks that for the first time in some time our police department is fully staffed.

Yes.

So we are priding ourselves on public safety and you see the enhancements the increases that did happen to our budget were almost entirely exclusively driven by police and public safety.

Now that we are at full capacity one of the benefits and things that we should look to do is actually pulling back on some of the overtime costs right that's not unique for police the same thing for fire.

When you get to a full staffing level by definition you should be able to uh save on some of the uh overtime costs and I commend the chief and uh as staff for putting forward some of these um sensible solutions and we would never be discussing this if we weren't one a safer city than we were that's right okay and two we're fully staffed so we don't need that added capacity uh that we would have needed in years past so I'm going to be yes on this just again to clarify there are nine specific overtime details so if this was removed the whole thing or any individual that specific overtime detail would end.

I would like to call our chief to see if there's anything here that's specifically important.

You see we have the neighborhood resource officer for homeless enforcement activities.

I am not going to support touching that yeah we could take these uh piecemeal but rolling loud it it doesn't even exist anymore that is the the guy from office space that's down in the garage that we Milton that we don't know about evening Mayor Commissioner Wayne Jones police chief um coincidentally um uh commissioner magazine rolling loud is the one thing we we certain we can live without doesn't exist um in traditional sense it existed in a number of years ago when it did bring a lot of issues to the city we had to staff up significantly to address those issues uh those issues don't exist anymore so we can live without that the LDA topps program this so if we so we have thirty thousand dollars for the topps program yes okay we shouldn't be touching that I'd rather not okay so we're not touching that what I'm sorry what are we not touching number one number one yeah agreed number two is the traffic traffic congestion mitigation we cannot touch that we can agree okay rolling loud I think clearly you know we can that no longer exists so we can that's a hundred thousand that's a hundred thousand right there what is for testing what's that um that's a test administered to our police officers on an annual basis we said we test the physical agility uh make sure they can um do the physical what's that run a mile under 10 minutes you have this uh on video that fast what's that sir do you have this on video um no we can make money selling charge admission yeah all right so we need this we can't touch that in essence well no because it it seems like you'd still be doing it but just with fewer proctors if I'm reading this correctly uh we could find some smart ways to possibly do it all with on duty staffing um as it stands right now we have to run through the entire organization in a limited period of time um each time we're pulling people for of the regular GDs particularly like in patrol per se um ideally we want to backfill those positions for the time it takes them to go through the testing process but we can find some smart ways to do um more efficient job I appreciate that I I think that would be good all right so we can that's 1000 right there move

We could find some smart ways to possibly do it all with on duty staffing.

As it stands right now, we have to run through the entire organization in a limited period of time.

Each time we're pulling people for of the regular GDs, particularly like in patrol per se.

Ideally we want to backfill those positions for the time it takes them to go through the testing process, but we can find some smart ways to do more efficient jobs.

I appreciate that.

I think that would be good.

All right.

So we can that's 10,000 right there.

We're getting rid of the Cooper testing?

Yeah.

Um, it we're just uh reallocating the resources.

Yeah.

They're just being more, they're gonna be more efficient than how they do it.

And for five, Mr.

I believe this was your initiative, correct, Mr.

Mayor?

Which is incredible.

And we're still keeping this.

We're just essentially changing the cycling.

And I so the program that I had brought was the civilian volunteer patrol, which is sort of the extra.

This is the citizens' policing academy.