TRUE Commission Meeting – June 9, 2026: Audits, Bylaw Change, and Affordable Housing Proposal
Taxation Revenue and Utilization of Expenditures (TRUE) Commission Meeting – June 9, 2026
Note: The transcript provided references the meeting date as June 4, 2026. The user-directed date is June 9, 2026. This discrepancy is noted here; the summary uses the user-provided date as instructed.
The Taxation Revenue and Utilization of Expenditures (TRUE) Commission met in committee and then as a full commission on June 9, 2026, from 4:00 p.m. to approximately 5:25 p.m. The meeting covered four audit reports, an attendance enforcement action, a bylaw amendment on public comment, and a new resolution on affordable housing. Six of eleven commissioners were present, achieving quorum.
Public Comments & Testimony
- John J. Nooney (Jacksonville resident) attempted to speak about City Council Resolution 2023‑0819 and three intended donations to city trust funds (Parks Trust Fund, Veterans Trust Fund, Artificial Reef Trust Fund). He was ruled out of order for not confining remarks to agenda items and was given 40 seconds to address the resolution. He briefly stated that the resolution would increase the supply of affordable housing but argued it lacked a quality‑of‑life component, referencing the Resilient Jacksonville report on poor waterway access.
Discussion Items
-
Audit Report 832 – Stormwater Fee Follow‑up (Second Follow‑up)
Presented by the Council Auditor’s office. The original audit (April 2019) had 23 issues; after the second follow‑up, 7 issues remain. Key outstanding items: (1) policies for calculating compacted dirt as impervious area not finalized, (2) use of third‑party aerial photos to review non‑residential parcels not fully implemented, (3) incomplete applications for charitable/faith‑based stormwater fee exemptions continue to be approved. Commissioners questioned the lack of a policy timeline and the dollar amount of improper credits. The auditor agreed to research whether a policy was proposed between 2023 and 2026 but never adopted, and to determine the total dollar value of credits granted on incomplete applications. Both items are to be reported back in August 2026. -
Audit Report 906 – Employee Reimbursement Audit
Released May 15, 2026. The audit covered FY2024‑25 (2,598 reimbursement items totaling $403,865) and cash advances from February 2020 to September 2025 (36 advances totaling $22,011). Findings: Missing/incomplete policies, cash advances not timely closed (no expense reports created for $5,108; 16 of 36 advances not reported within five days of return), incorrect system configuration for meal reimbursement, former employee accounts not deactivated, and system improvements needed. Commissioners expressed concern that $5,108 in cash advances lacked any documentation and asked about repercussions. -
Attendance & Vacancy Declaration
The chair noted that Commissioners Alexandra Hoffman and Kim Pryor had missed two of three successive meetings without cause or prior excuse, triggering Article 3, Section D of the bylaws and City Ordinance §50.104. A motion to declare the seats vacant passed unanimously (6‑0). The Urban Core CPAC and Greater Arlington Beaches CPAC will be notified to fill the vacancies. -
Bylaw Amendment – Public Comment (Article 9)
Commissioner Barr proposed adding a new section allowing the public to speak for two minutes on any matter, not just agenda items. An amendment by Commissioner Lewis to keep three minutes (or less depending on number of commenters) passed by a show of hands. The amendment was then adopted, and the bylaw revision now reads: Section B – “All members of the public may speak before the TRUE Commission on any matter.” Section C – “Members of the public shall be limited to three minutes or less depending on the number of commenters.” -
Audit Report 905 – Quarterly Summary (Six Months Ending March 31, 2026)
Presented highlights for independent agencies: JEA projects a year‑end surplus of $6.3 million; JAA projects $11.2 million surplus; JTA projects an overall $2.2 million deficit (driven by the Connection/CTC division), with the bus division breaking even via cost cuts approved by JTA’s board in February 2026. The bus division had a $15 million unfavorable variance in actuals through six months but expects to offset with $13.2 million in favorable expenditure variances. The Skyway, Ferry, and engineering divisions are all projected to break even. Commissioners asked detailed questions about JTA’s divisions and the ferry’s continued operation; it was clarified that the ferry remains part of A1A and is still used. -
Audit Report 871A – Follow‑up Procurement Audit (Informal Purchase of Supplies)
First follow‑up on the original procurement audit. Fifteen original issues; six cleared, nine remain. Outstanding items: undocumented internal procurement processes, requisitions that can bypass procurement, excessive user access (18 of 22 procurement employees could single‑handedly complete a purchase; 56 users could use any funding source; 179 could submit requisitions for non‑departmental cost centers), and system configuration that allows approval by the requester’s department instead of the funding source’s department. Commissioner Carter asked whether auditors tested if excessive access was actually exploited; the auditor said it had not been part of the follow‑up testing but agreed to discuss with the audit manager. -
New Business – Resolution on Affordable Housing Using Surplus City Property
The chair presented a resolution proposing that all city‑declared surplus properties be contributed to private developers to create buildable lots for single‑family and multifamily units. After construction, the Duval County Housing Finance Authority would issue bonds to finance mortgages for homeowners and multifamily operators. The chair argued this would reduce housing cost by eliminating land cost (25‑40%) and lower financing costs via municipal bond rates, increasing affordable housing without direct taxpayer dollars. Commissioners raised concerns: existing mechanisms for property grants, impact on surrounding property values, risk of temporary fixes, and the need for more research. The motion was tabled to the August 6, 2026 meeting, with the chair to provide parcel numbers and property appraiser data for commissioner review.
Key Outcomes
- Seat Vacancies Declared: Commissioners Hoffman and Pryor were removed for non‑attendance (vote 6‑0).
- Bylaw Amendment Adopted: Public comment limited to three minutes or less on any matter.
- Resolution Tabled: The affordable housing resolution was postponed to August 2026 for further study.
- Audit Follow‑ups: The auditor will report back in August on the stormwater fee policy timeline and the dollar amount of improper credits, and will discuss with the audit manager whether to test if excessive procurement access was exploited.
- Next Meeting: August 6, 2026 (no July meeting).
Meeting Transcript
So it's 4 p.m. June 4th, 2026 call to order the taxation revenue and utilization of expenditures, the true commission. This session begins the committee meetings that will meet from 4 until 4 30, at which time we will uh reconvene as the full commission. We don't have any presentations in the um committee other than the auditors' presentations. And since we do have four audit reports, why don't we go ahead, Tommy, and get started if you would like to take this time to let's take 15 minutes, maybe go through the first two, and then we will uh under item two of the commission agenda, we will pick up the other two. How does that sound all right? Yes, sir. Uh to the chair, you want me to go through the quarterly summaries? I know that's probably uh first, or or do you want me to wait till the the commission? Let's wait till the commission at large is assembled as many of them as possible. Sure. Okay, we may not have an agenda, so may just be here to listen today. Um council auditors office released four reports since the last true commission meeting. Uh report number 832, which was the follow-up on the stormwater fee audit, uh, was released on May 14th of 2026. Uh this was the uh second follow-up on the stormwater fee. Uh the first follow-up was done back in 2023. Uh the original audit objective was to determine whether or not stormwater fees were accurately calculated, uh, which included gross amounts and any reductions, adjustments, credits, or discounts that they were you know assessed and collected. The original audit had 23 issues. Uh the first report uh there were eleven issues remaining. Uh after this follow-up, there are still seven issues remaining. The main issues that are remaining are that the um there's public works stormwater area is still finalizing some policies and procedures, uh, particularly in regard to how um how compacted dirt is calculated for impervious areas for stormwater. Uh uh, and um and then uh also regarding uh uh the utilization of third party vendors uh doing aerial photos uh to review non-residential parcels and compare that information uh to their customer billing service uh system uh that um as it relates again to compacted dirt and to identify the big differences that you see there. Those those are issues that uh we're still not uh being done on that. Uh also um the denying of incomplete applications for charitable and faith-based or organizations for for the stormwater fee calculation. Um then uh there was a fourth one that uh dealt with uh let's see. It dealt with uh applicants for pond credits uh toward stormwater fee, uh should be based on operating permits rather than a construction permit, and we found that they were that that was perhaps still happening uh as what was addressed in the original audit, and those issues are still outstanding for this follow-up. So there'll be a third follow-up on this on this. What was the date, the original date of the audit? Uh the original date of the audit was April 9th of 2019. And then there's a follow-up in 2023. Correct. And this is the second follow-up. Correct. So it would be fair to assess assume that the third follow-up will be sometime in 2029. Uh depending on workload and things like that, uh, don't have an exact date but yeah does does the city have a policy on how soon after an audit is done that all outstanding items must be resolved because at this point it'll be ten years after the initial audit probably half of the people working in that agency will be gone by then uh to my knowledge I don't believe there is a a policy of how many times um we it just depends on uh you know uh how well they are addressing the issues uh that it it because this is an administrative this is on the administrative side um uh for the on and and I know you have changes in administrations and things like that but uh there's really no set uh time limit uh it's just that at this rate we could be on our third mayor by the time this is ever resolved at well uh yes or or sometimes you know if the our recommendations if technology changes or something then recommendations no longer applicable you know uh we may just waive those but then we will have them ready for we'll we will test the new procedure with a with another full audit we won't we won't test a new procedure in a follow-up we'll test it in a yeah I have two follow-up questions but I'd like to give the other members a chance to ask a question first are there any other questions regarding this audit all right my first question is you mentioned something about how compacted soil is calculated for impermeable area well the the the point of the the follow up or to the point of the stormwater is uh the amount of the fee is calculated on the amount on the amount of impervious area that's on the property. That's what's going to create runoff correct right uh compacted dirt and I I wasn't on this audit so but a compacted dirt affects that somehow it's it's because it's denser therefore it's not as likely to be accepted absorbed water percolation right uh so uh their their um the policies on how that is calculated uh have not been finalized yet uh I believe the uh that um the public works had the policy in place but uh there was like a time um but it had not been approved yet so public department of public works has adopted a policy or has proposed a policy and it is required to be adopted by whom the city council no no it would be uh by the by the head of public works okay or the head of the stormwater area okay and when was that policy proposed uh that I do not know okay all right is it possible that it was proposed in 2019 and it was the subject of the follow-up in 2023 second um I don't believe it was proposed in 2019 um we found we recommended in the first follow up of any policies uh uh regarding second follow-up. We found that they had implemented us uh a review process, but they hadn't finalized any written policies or procedures uh those are for manual updates. It was between the first and second follow-up, I believe. Sometime between 2019 and 2023. 2023 and 2026. Okay, some time between the first and second follow-up. There uh was a proposal submitted within the department pending approval by the director of the department of public works or the division head who had to approve the policy, the division head for uh stormwater management or the department head for public. It would go to the division head and then ultimately it I think the department head as well. And there's no evidence that that policy has ever been approved or adopted, finalized, correct. So sometime between 20 uh 23 and 2026, this policy was proposed, and the department director under the current administration has never taken action. Is that a fair statement? Um I don't know. I'm not I can I don't know the dates for sure on that, so I I would hesitate to say that it was a can you research that and bring it back to us in August? Sure. Um, ask my second follow-up question.
openpublica.com