Parks MSTU funding options and operations maintenance
What the county recorded
This item is not from the published agenda
It is a stretch of the recording that this archive identified as a separate matter — a call to order, a recess, or something taken up that the agenda does not list. There is no official title, no staff recommendation and no disposition, because the county never recorded one. Everything below is inferred.
The source document
The county’s agenda for Board of County Commissioners, Jun 19, 2025
The published PDF. Its text could not be extracted — it is an image-only scan — so nothing in it is searchable here, but it reads normally.
What was said
Machine transcription of 1h 5m of recording, with speaker names inferred from voice matching. 99% of 300 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong.
All right. Another MSTU that we need to have some dialogue around is the Parks MSTU to assist us in uh understanding what direction we need to take as we come into the trim meeting next month. So we've been talking about three different possible scenarios. Yeah. Funding capital maintenance, funding their operations, or the combination of funding their operations and their maintenance through the MSTU.
And the team did some work to update the ordinance so that way any version of these three scenarios would be allowed.
And so here we're showing you depending on uh what level that that would be set at what is the impact to your um median homeowner and so looking at uh our current median value that is roughly a hundred and seventy eight thousand is your median home value in the county um and then what that program revenue It would generate.
Well just to add uh to what we need for parks on the MSDU, we need something more than zero without advanced.
Yes.
When I when I came into office uh nine years ago We actually were behind in maintenance on twenty I think for twenty years we'd been behind like twenty million dollars and And covering that, but keep I think's coming forward or something. I think his number was in the case.
The fact of it is it is very important that we take care of these parks. We don't let 'em get behind. During COVID was not necessarily a great time for the county, but it actually for parks it helped them because parks actually got shut down to a point that they were able to take care of some of that past maintenance that hadn't been done before. 'Cause they didn't have any play or anybody. you know, working on the on their fields. So they were able to do that in house with a with a lot of their employees. Very
important, very important to citizens that these fields are kept up. Uh and I tell you people are coming to play ball here in Pasco County in recreation. So I'll let I'll let Keith talk to us, he can talk. much better at it than I can, but the fact of it is very, very important. We got other parks coming online, but we can't just keep going without maintenance fees to be able to take care of these parks. We gotta have this money for that. And Citizens
Warning. You shut down park and see what happens in a neighborhood
in
Pasco County. They'll scream and holler and be packing up our boardrooms with with people against us for that. So we need to keep 'em going and do the right thing by By keeping them up like they should be. Keith, you wanna add to it?
I feel like I've said quite a quite a lot over the last year and a half. I I was watching Jason present and uh much respect for the success of that program. And I thought, God, I wish I was talking about uh you know the success of of that. And then I thought then I was reminded by my fiscal manager that actually we we have that success. We got the GoBond back in 2018, and we've been, you know, since the last six plus years, seven Years spending about three and a half miljon on capital maintenance executing. Maybe not as stellar. That
was a
backlog. Yeah,
that was a backlog for we
didn't even make it through the whole backlog.
Correct, we didn't. But we did several projects and we met all the drawdown requirements and we've been uh making those improvements to Commissioner Oakley's point throughout the county for the last six and a half years. Um So, you know, in summary, the the the Parks Department uh budget request for twenty six is is yeah a solution to figure out this capital maintenance piece. We we did our we did our planning and we're asking for eight point two. But in addition to the capital maintenance side, we also have a budgetary request on the operational side of one point one and a half million
for the cost of goods, services, and contracts that have increased that as we continue to in order to pay our utility bills, we take away from the capital funding in order to be it not have insufficient fund fees. So I mean that's high level summary, that's the that's the parks budget request for FY twenty six.
Yes. Thank you. And so what's what's coming before you now on this slide, and really we would like to have some some more discussion on it, is Amy is outlining really a couple of options here before the board. So we have the tool, it's called the Parks MSTU that the board adopted last year. It it did not go forward. It went forward with the zero millage last year. That was for the parks maintenance piece that Keith is talking about. And so if we were to establish, if the board were to establish a millage on that to fund parks maintenance, it's that one
it's that 0.1565 number that you're seeing there. That is not currently funded today through any through any of our current budgetary processes. Right now we're able to fund Keith's operations to about the tune of about 1.2, 1.3 million, some of that handle. SOD and then some of it is also addressing backlog maintenance and other things. That's what we're able to afford with the way things are currently set up. So that would generate 8.2 million program revenue. When you see a general fund millage requirement, you notice that the general fund millage would
be an increase, correct, Amy, if we were to try to fund that out of the general fund. So you're and really you have two options there. Option one is you can increase the general fund millage and then
Or you direct us to go do it another way, in which case I'll have to cut from other programs in order to try to find find the funding in that sweet spot. So Amy is just gonna walk stepwise through those items and really one of the biggest decisions we need to know today is You know, what millage, you know, if any, does the board wish to establish on the parks MSTU? And how do we how do we address that coming into the trim? Because it is a it is a sequential function because once we eliminate that variable, then we figure out how to address any ripple
effects that that come from that. So Amy, why don't you continue to walk through this and then when we get to the end, let's let's try to have some discussion on it.
Right. So um To Mike's point, where where we're trying to get to, it's ki it's kind of twofold, right? Um what level of funding do we want to provide parks and then what is the mechanism we'd like to use to get there? Um and so both of those things give us uh clear direction on how to move forward going into the July trim meeting. So are we looking to fund some additional capital maintenance? At the full eight
point two million that Keith said he needs on an annual basis or some other version of that, right? A lesser amount, so anywhere from one to eight, what might that look like? And do we want to put that into An MSTU or do we want to find that funding somehow in the general fund? Um And so if we were to do the full eight point two in an MSTU um So the just know that
the don't hold too firm on the actual millage rates because that's assuming June first taxable assessed value, the millage rate would um modulate a little bit, but it's really that program revenue where we need to have the discussion because we'll get July 1 numbers and then depending on what revenue you'd like to see generated would tell us what would that millage rate need to be. So don't pay too much attention to millage rate at this point. But it really is so that that program revenue piece. And
so Would we like to see 8.2 million generated, some other number? Do we want operations in there? Maybe not with capital maintenance yet. Maybe that's something we build out over the years if we were to establish an MSDU and let growth get us there. Or would we want to look at the the whole picture in year one with ops? And the maintenance money.
Yeah. Yes. Well I'll jump in with both feet and make a big splash here.
I would really prefer the capital maintenance and operations all in MSTU. But I'd want those mills cut. Obviously, they'd move from the general fund over to its own, so it'd be the the difference pulled off the general fund revenue. And that that solves the generational problem. Just funding the piece will ultimately lead to a potential increase on tax. taxes. I think the restructuring
of our current general operation millage is is paramount here using the money we have. Without potentially raising taxes. to you know significantly fund the parks program in which it needs to be
well
um Just funding the maintenance the capital maintenance piece. I I I disagree with how that structure is last year, obviously. And I don't think that has the generational benefit to the park system. Uh based on money uh um as a capital maintenance and operations piece because times times get tough, you know, they're going to be the first ones to take the hit so we backslide this somewhat protects the budget for the parks department they can keep moving forward and aren't just you know, there's less distractions
uh within volatile budget years, right? And Mike Walla and I talked through this pretty heavily and we actually agree on something here uh on this he might be able to talk to it more eloquently than than I can but I'm I'm all for all in MSTU if there's you know we just pull those those millages off the general operating mill. and then let Keith and Kathy go to work and build the filled dreams that we're hoping
to build here in Pasco County.
Commissioner Oakley. I see the problem with doing that. as you can't swap millage on general fund for mi for M S T U. money for the other. because it hits every department. Every constitutional takes a hit. on that millet on the general fund millage. So there's no way to to actually do that and match it up. And do that the right way without it hurting a lot of different departments. So Mike, if there's some medium
somewhere that's a good idea, I can take a stab at that unless there's
there's a clarity
out and add comfort to
so so the way I mean there's there's some there's some structural things that that really in my opinion should should kind of kind of play out here on this. So we've got we've got the Parks MST. you and everyone's no one's wrong here. Let me let me just let me just start by saying that. I think that there is merit in in the uh in the parks budget. being in its own separate in its own separate thing, uh going going down a path with growth and allowing organic growth to take care of the parks. It it fences off that money and and protects it. Um Commissioner Oakley,
you are correct. Um when you make a reduction, uh a consequent reduction uh in the general fund uh we'll just call it the general operating millage that When you change that multiplier, you ha you do have less revenue. There is less revenue available um for other departments that you know and you've seen before that would that would that could impact public safety, that could impact other general operating um departments. Now there could be an order of operations because one of the things that we have been trying
to look at this as is we've been trying to look at the budget holistically. And if when we look at it holistically And while it it's not ready to be baked perhaps in in this year's budget, but we've we've had discussions um kind of loosely on on look, what what what does it look like if law enforcement, for example, were in its own MSTU, or what does it look like if we were to take the rescue component of the fire department and put it in its own in its own MSTU. And when you start projecting out the numbers, they they look they look better. Um
quite honestly because the public safety expenses Let's face it, they they creep up higher because there is it is a demand that our citizens require, right? They they they need adequate police, fire and rescue services, and that's that's cornerstone of infrastructure for growth. The next biggest thing they like are parks and they like roads. Yeah, I mean this is this is back this is backed with data. So I I I think all of these all of these ideas have merit. I just I I do think that the order in which we take them up you know, could could matter if if
the board is is committed to doing it. So I think the end state of these being in their own separate taxing units provides the transparency that I think the board and the public demand and look for. Um I do think um that the order in which we tackle them could could matter somewhat. So for example, if we were to you know, as you point out, you know, Commissioner Oakley, if we were to adopt a Park's image to you. And we were to cut the general operating millage this year, that's gonna create some challenges
in terms of us having to fund other budgets. Now, you give me that direction. Our job is to figure out how to make that how to make that work if that's the direction of this board. It'll be tough. But I'm not saying that it's insurmountable. But then that would be predicated on next year, probably making some decisions on, well, let's get these law enforcement MSTUs or a fire rescue MSTU on the books, because if those don't get into the books, then you could have other problems in your
general operating millage. Some of that isn't isn't completely baked right now, but it is certainly a path forward over the next two years that I think the board the board could take that would really stabilize some of the reserve problems that that we've seen. Get parks, get sheriff, get fire rescue in in their own in their own aligned buckets. Um The question the question before you today is, you know, you know, do you want to tackle this one first or do you want to take on take on the other ones first? There there's some order, there's
some order that matters, but even Even if you were to take this up and direct us. We would we would try to figure out how to make it how to make it work. And there may be short term short term pain for long term gain on that. Um or You know, we can handle it a different way. The issue with the MSTUs, as you all know, is I I need uh not me, excuse me. We the the law requires that we have unanimous consent to establish a millage um on those. And so If the board is not united in that at this time, then we need to come back with
other plans. I I I just need to know that.
Well I know we need the maintenance fee for the parks. I n I know that's there. And I know we always seem to have a an issue With the the amount Sheriff gets at times, but we know he needs money for for our safety and security and things in the county. I see I see us needing this park saying. But I don't wanna cut millage and cut other departments at the same time.
But
the fact of it is A tax is a tax, whether it be in In the general fund or if it's over here in a M S T U? But I can I can almost see as you were speaking The fact that it probably could be a Plan. Maybe not this year. Uh that we take And make the sheriff have his own. uh MSTU and also for the others that uh for the property operator what hip monies he gets, the
elections, all of 'em could be on their MSTU. And take drop that benefit. So a tax is a tax, one way or the other. But you can't take it away from the general fund. without maybe doing all of them at the same time. 'Cause if you do all of them at the same time they all pretty much kind of stay whole. And and they're the same tax you're putting out. So maybe there's a way to do that. I I think there might be, but that's something for accurate Amy to take care of and and and uh
and the staff, your staff mic, so but uh I can see where a picture of that would be better than when we tweaked millage to do that before it really had a had a bad effect on other people and other departments. So I was concerned about that. Uh Lisa.
Okay. So when I talk to Mike and Amy, um I I I just in good conscience can't can't vote for a a tax. I I feel like I we can't tax our citizens. Um and I asked for a plan, what does that look like coming out of um the general fund. Or you know, uh did you happen to come up with anything
So there are some There are some paths forward and depending on the level that the board would like to see funded from the general fund would help us um so like ki I'll call it low-hanging fruit, but if we're not getting any state money for the animal shelter, that could peel off some money if we wanted to keep some maintenance money. But so we can look at some of those one-time investments that we're planning to make, peel some of those back little by little and shift those over to
parks capital maintenance. Um I
I'm saying if we if we c ha if we funded parks maintenance like we did last year or this year. So you're saying it wasn't funded? Well we funded about one point three billion in terms
of payments.
Right.
Um I mean I want our parks to be great. I just like I said to you guys a million times, I I feel like we can't tax our s our citizens right now. So where else can we get money and I'm not for cutting the millage 'cause then our first responders are our first hit. So um
So like I s I was hoping we had something for this meeting where I could see if possibly we could take I I
I we need the yeah, we would need um the to really be able to come up with a good plan for you all, we would need to know what's the funding level you all would like to see. Okay. And then that helps us really identify um a couple approaches to get out of. Right, so so if we're looking at let's say In in a scenario there's no parks MSTU and we're looking to fund some capital maintenance dollars out of the general fund based off current millage rate and the status
of the universe as it exists today. Um knowing would we want to increase it by one million or five million would help us know what different options we could provide to the board to get there. Well
let me let me let me jump in here just just a second here. So Commissioner Yeager to answer to answer your question um If if the board adopted a zero millage for the parks, but said, hey, what do we what do we do with parks, right? So the recommendation would would probably be to bring forward Keith's budget as as currently slated right now, with a recommendation on what level of parks maintenance the board would like to see. And so to answer that question, I I I did have some conversations with Keith and Kathy on Keith, what do you think you could realistically execute?
Without having to bolster up, right? So that $8.2 million that he requested does include some staffing up, some ramping up in order to have the capacity to spend those dollars. So looking at it relatively conservatively at this point, we we think somewhere between three and four million is where parks could probably realistically, under their current structure, realistically execute without having to do to do anything else. So, you know, if the board if the board let's say the board were to say, hey look, you know what, we we wanna
in you know to address Commissioner Oakley's concerns, uh, you know, maybe it's look if we if we did not adopt that uh this year and we we wanted to move towards look, let's let's take care of the the public safety component. and parks and and get those things aligned all at once. 'Cause we've we've got some order of operations here is really really what the issue is saying. What what what what um um sorry, I was about to say Colonel Oakley. Uh what uh what commissioner
Field promotion, sir. It sounds good. Got a good ring to it, right?
What uh what what what Commissioner Oakley is is kind of led to led to concern because if we were to cut the general millage, then yes, this year then you would see some cuts now or reductions in in recurring revenue. They would probably have to be made up out of reserves or other other sources until next year if we could get a law enforcement MSTU and an update to the fire MSTU put forward. And then parks and you take them all and take them all at once, then you can probably do that without a whole lot of um hubbub within
uh within the general fund. So but commissioner to answer your question, uh if if there was zero, if it was set at zero and that's that's that's where we landed, we would probably recommend to fund fund Keats budget where it needed to be. and then just ask the board for some guidance on what you would like to see. If that number is three million, great. He's getting about 1.2 million right now, currently from general fund. You know, Amy made a very quick You know, look, yeah, we could take that money from the animal shelter. We didn't get money this year for it. Um, you know, live to fight another
day. That would certainly be a quick a quick fix. That's where we would look. We would look we would look to un unspent capital dollars to kind of make make those first moves and cuts. So it it can be done, Commissioner. He would just have to temper what the program would look like to to fit within that. It's kind of like what we said with paving. Right.
Quite honestly, we could do a lot of roads, or we could do some roads, but doing some was better than doing no roads. And so it's the same when it comes to the park maintenance. Doing doing a little bit more of than what we're currently doing. Is a great thing and it is a win for parks and we would we would take that happily.
Okay, so
I hope that answers your question. I I
I'm I'm gonna disagree that I I feel we have a responsibility m to maintain our parks and Keith's been limping along with Pretty much nothing for quite a number of years.
Yeah.
I look at where we are in affordability. I think our residents I think our residents want our parks. I think I I mean they are screaming for that little league park in Bexley. They are, look at what's happening over at VO uh Connected City and VOPH. They want their parks. So I I am 100% in fully funding Key's request, which I think is a conservative request. And
if we're not going to fund maintenance, we shouldn't be bringing on any of these parks. Because we cannot build a park and then not take care of it. Drive by Mitchell Field and take a look at it. Drive along the Sun Coast and look at the wooden rail along the side on the Suncoast Trail. It's falling apart. Um there's gaps in it. It and it's that's that's That's the pre that's the uh presentation of our county when people are coming through from other counties south. You drive through Hernando, the
Sun Coast Trail looks lovely and you get to Pasco has fallen apart. I mean it it's obvious there's a lack of maintenance going on. So Um I think that we should be funding at a minimum His um eight million dollars uh of maintenance. And I think if we put it to the public they would fund it. They would wanna fund it.
So if I could ask ask on that, I mean again there's there's options to do that. So You know, right now we are not funding that in in your current general operating millage. You know, is does the board want to consider and don't don't throw tomatoes at me, d you know, an increase in the general millage in order to cover that, or do we want to take that from other sources or other programs or reserves?
Uh much lower than any other county per capita.
I'm just offering it. I think we're
already to the bone. And so we You know, we we have a responsibility to Fund government and uh Commissioner Oakley wants to speak. So I'm not willing to cut the sheriff or the fire department. Or um any other program. I think it we're already at minimum. So Uh I I was for the MSTU. If I don't mind I don't mind his idea of putting the whole parks budget budget over in an MSTU as
long as it includes the eight million dollars. Um I mean and that's gotta be a little bit of an increase. So. Commissioner Oakley. Yeah, I
go on. I I guarantee if we put this up on a referendum to vote for the for the people and cit and citizen of Pasco County to vote. I guarantee they would pass that. Hands down. There's I mean we just had another park. We bought uh the land for another park at two rivers. And it's it's a good thing and it's coming and I spoke yesterday at uh Two Rivers for their ground breaking of uh landing of two your two rivers.
uh very good turnout of people there and all and they're doing a great job. A good open space got a little bit of a little bit of a little landscaping, got got trees. Diameter wise, probably five five inch trees are putting in. I mean there these are huge oak trees gonna be coming in there. They got their bay heads very open and very large lots in there. It's it's a very nice project. So but they got a new park coming. Somebody's got to take care of it. It's our park. We bought the land to
put the park there. So that park's gonna be called uh Bob Thomas.
Oh really?
Bob Thomas Memorial Park. Was Robert there? At the New Rivers. No, Robert wasn't there. It's not on the park today, on yesterday. That was setting up of the new development itself. But the park could come later that we'll be presenting that and having a I'm sure we'll have a groundbreaking for that. So But it's a lot of good things. But there's people are wanting every time we start a new season of whether it be soccer or baseball or whatever, I get a phone call. Oh, I don't get enough time on the fields. I ha I haven't got enough. We don't have enough
fields. There's n and there's almost not enough time in the day to put 'em on there. But the fact of it is when you got so much play and so many people demanding to have park space It costs money to keep it up and if we don't give money to the parks to do it. Then shame on us. We're not doing the right thing for our citizens.
And and I wanna
citizens won't.
I I agree, but I wanna remind you all that um now that I'm an older person and I don't play softball and soccer anymore I want parks for me too. I want wonderful trails to go walk on or bike on or uh shaded trees to have a picnic under. I mean we we need to think of all generations when we talk about our parks. So Um And we don't have com Commissioner Mariano here to weigh in on anything.
I have a I just have a comment. I
mean,
I feel like some of this, you
know,
was created because, you know, just take take the cap. We weren't taxing all these these big companies coming in Um and our our firehouses weren't being funded all the way because because of that tax money and now it's like okay now we we've taken the cap off or about to take the cap off and now And talking about impact fee? Yeah, for these for these big huge companies coming in. So I I I just feel like it I I love parks. I
mean I have kids. I love parks. I want beautiful parks. You go to other counties, we have beautiful parks. I just I I hate having that fall on the citizens. That's all. I hate having a tax. Um I I j I really wish somehow we could figure it out. Um for the next couple of years. I mean I'm not hearing that from anybody else. Um I'm not for cutting the millage. Um I want nice parks. I I just feel like this is just this
is just something that's kind of happened because of maybe some poor decisions in the past.
Well, um you know what ha what happened in the past was this county got stuck in the early two thousands, um when they rolled and rolled and rolled the millens back. And you know, we've always been a conservative county. They rolled it very far back, And then Save Our Homes came in and it's taken decades to recover from that. Um so but I think going back to the slide that Amy had up before Which shows you where we sit as
far as taxing our citizens in the state. We're a very, very low tax county. But we can't stay at the bottom. And provide services. And we can't stay at the bottom and fund our sheriff's office the way we want to. We it's And no one wants to raise the tax. Um I personally think MSTUs are a great way to go. Uh Because you know exactly where that money's going, it's dedicated and uh we could tell our citizens That's right. Penny for That
dollar, what is it, forty four dollars a year for how much is eight million. A year on an MSTU per For
$111 on the paper.
I it's twenty-five dollars a year? What is it? Because you've got forty-four a year. That's operation and
maintenance.
No, I I think it's just capital maintenance is forty four dollars a year,
is that
right?
Twenty dollars.
But if you just look at y trying to get Keith whole, if we take the operations and the other out and we move it over, that's just a There's no difference in just you're just putting it in a different pot. Which I'm I'm fine with that, but we have to add Maintenance money.
It's in it. It would be in it. Mr. Chairman Mariano
Yeah, uh okay. Uh Weightman and then
Commissioner Oakley. So Commissioner Yeager, I agree with you, believe me. Yeah, no no. I had no problem before you came on holding the board till ten o'clock at night as a f freshman commissioner, uh as chief remembers and His his troops storming out and boxing MSTUs in in Texas. So I appreciate and a hundred percent agree with you. And the reason I didn't support the maintenance tax last year is because
like you, if I'm gonna support a tax It's gonna have to be a true generational benefit to our county citizens. And we all know our county has grown younger by twenty years. Since COVID. And so My thought process was with the all encompassing PARC MSTU the point six two three five mils. we would pull that off the general fund millage. So essentially reducing the general fund millage Point six two three five.
move that over into its own so it's it's unilateral. There's no tax increase. And if we needed to There's no secret. I'm all for spending down reserves. If the county has money, we spend it, because it's the only business in the world that will have a boatload of revenue coming in the following year. So I'm not afraid of spending down our reserve money, especially if we're to cover the eight million dollar shortfall for the 12 months, and then he's back key so when he's growing. And then what that does is there's no net
tax increase to the people. It is the same principle for the sheriff and what the fire guys are doing. The fire's just extra, but with what the with the with the potential public safety M STU. And then it protects that budget. That budget's blown out of control. Fund that fund is growing at a healthy rate. We can reduce that millage rate and cut it back. But essentially then if if we're you know say three mils it's it's essentially it's a it's a tax reduction. If we do the maintenance tax. that's
a tax that would be over and above our courage millage. So it would be That would in my opinion would be a tax increase. It wouldn't be net neutral. And so that's why I'm I'm such a advocate for the all in parts tax if we pull That full millage rate off the general fund millage. And move it over and then Keith can go to work. Well, Mike Karbala and speaking with him was fully comfortable with this plan and he still had
flexibility within his budget to figure out the wiggle room of what people need. Again, that's where the reserves come into play. I'm comfortable spending those reserves down. That's why the taxpayers give us the money is to to spend it and use it, not hold it in a savings account, in my opinion. And I I I think I think that's that's the healthy way to go. Key team can be off and running. The residents I think would appreciate it. And it's just again, it's just you we we live twelve months out of time here, right? And if
something Doesn't it? predict as accurate Amy says, which I think it'll be pretty accurate. Then we come in hopefully next year. and and and work together and and tweak it to make it right because the demand is clearly there for this and the and this restructuring. The generational impact I think it will have for our residents in our park system. I don't even know how to how to measure it, but I think if we were to support the all in plan
and then balance the budget the way that we need to. Yeah. I just ten, twenty years down the line, I think this board could look look back and go, Wow, we we really did the right thing, restructuring our budget, because as budget we're kind of managing it in my opinion, the same old way as it's bun been done for a long, long time. And so I looked at our budget and said, how can we restructure it and make that dollar go further? And by moving you know, dollar for dollar into its own MSTU. Keith's budget will go further.
The same thing for public safety MSTU, which the Sheriff has endorsed. Again, pull those millage rates and the sheriff supports this. Pull that millage for his own MSTU, take that millage, pull it off the general operating millage rate. No tax increase. His budget's protected. He can go to work. The sheriff's not distracted. From the politics of a budget, he can focus on sheriffing. I think also it'd be a tool that when the sheriff retires it would help be a recruitment tool for
a new sheriff to come in because they would be comfortable with the budget structure and not necessarily be just you know have to focus on the politics around his or her budget when that time comes. It's like hey we have a board that supports us. Sports are funding mechanism. It also give the opportunity again if that fund is growing at a healthy rate Sheriff could come in and bless hey you can reduce my millage. I have all I need and it'd be a tax reduction. And so it's just restructuring pieces of the pie in my opinion. And I think these are the the generational changes good
impact that we can make. With with restructuring our budget for generations to come by doing this without increasing our taxes.
Okay, Commissioner Oakley.
Okay.
Um If we took the millage or took the millage it for the MSTU, a medium hole, we take parks out of our general fund. Well it's just Is there a way? And w if we're gonna reduce some millage on on the general fund to make each person like the Sheriff's Department the whole And be able to still do that, pulling out that MSTU. Sounds to me like there's gonna be a little bit of a a tax Increase over on the
maintenance part. But My real concerns when you drop in the military, it my concerns is making those holes that are left in the general fund. So so they're not left. Holding a bag of like that one tweet we made before, thinking that was gonna be a good deal. It took six hundred thousand away from the sheriff's office and that's a lot of money. So and it takes away forever.
Before you answer, I I I I wanna add on kinda add on to what you're saying. And and I I lo I like Keith's budget growing organically for himself. But I want to get him some more money. No one likes raising taxes. Um, so I want to throw out some ideas. If we started to do that I'd be okay with that if we got Keith some more money this year. So I hate to see that animal services money go away, but maybe that's an option. But I also know
that maybe we could make a pledge here that you know the money that Don't tell me you programmed it already. The money that um
we programmed it already
that Senator Fasano um you know what he bring gives to us, sometimes we get some money back. We give it to Keith. Um if we if we do come in over nine point five or whatever we're at You know, and and we have some extra money there, he gets a big portion of it. And let's build up his kitty for this year so he's not starting at zero.
Mike and I did talk about that. Like a any extra revenue we had, you know what I'm saying, we throw towards parks.
Yeah.
So I'll I'll address that and then I'll address Commissioner Oakley's um thing. So with with regards to we do do revenue projections on on what um tax collector gives back to us. Now sometimes those Sometimes he brings in more than what those projections show. So if if we have a projection, let's just say uh we've projected I don't know, do you know offhand what we projected for this year?
Not offhand, but Dan can pull up.
I'm just gonna I'm gonna give a fake number right now. Let's say that number's two and a half million dollars. If if we projected uh that coming back Am I close?
Four and a half.
Oh, we projected four and a half.
For all
No, not really. Not really. Quite the opposite, actually. No, it's already
accounted for.
So we've accounted for four and a half million for the easy. Oh, in the budget
already?
Yes. Yes. But
that's from all
So if if the tax collector were to come back with, say, five million or four point six million. I I would understand that to mean take that extra hundred thousand, half a million, and we we plow it into parks through a budget amendment or something like that. That understood, understood. Just know that we we set a number um and if it's over that number then yeah, of course. Otherwise we're building into these other budget assumptions. So back to Commissioner Oakley's uh Commissioner Oakley's point. So Commissioner Oakley's point, um and I think we saw it we saw it the first year when we talked about the uh when we made
the haircut on the on the general operating millage and and that that pain was spread equally, yes the sheriff's budget was impacted by six hundred thousand. So if
but that wasn't fair. That was done So quickly. That was What do you mean? We were there until
10 hours.
No, no, no. The cocktail naption math wouldn't be the moment. It was late. People were tired. My fault.
But I'm not I'm not I'm not using it to point blank. I'm just saying it's a it's it's it's just a factual mathematic thing that that happens.
That's right. It got serious come game day and I think now we know hey there it this could potentially happen. And so it's healthy to have that conversation now where That scenario, that conversation never happened.
Right.
It was Quick draw, McGraw. Correct. That was a learning lesson. And we were able to fix it. Senator Fasano came in and we rang the bell for him and we fixed it, but now we're able to have these. great conversations and dialogue of how we spend the people's money and plan on these real scenarios that we know can potentially happen. So that's To use that as a
As as the prime example, I think that'd be a little bit of a
Sorry, I was just feeding off of of what what Commissioner Oakley had mentioned in his statement. Um the the the the simple fact is is when there is a reduction in the general operating millage, there is. Amy, can you please go to the the slide where you show that
up for a while but she stayed with the
house?
Dan, would you please go to the slide that shows the uh revenue um where it shows the new revenue slide?
But again, Mike, if we were to understand the commercial industrial sites coming on, this could help us make the this is a decision.
And let me I'll touch on that in a second because Commissioner Yeager sort of alluded to the same thing uh wrong way down.
Can you give it a little more context, please?
Uh the your revenue slide that shows new revenue, thirty seven million, whatever the number was.
Keep going there. That's it. Okay. So I think Commissioner Oakley, this is the point you're trying to make here, is that if if we were if the board were to adopt a Parks MSTU and some sort of commensurate cut in the general fund, whether it's dollar for dollar or some other number, your net increase in property tax number will change because your multiplier is different. So your millage is currently at seven four two nine two
or
around there. Um originally you'll remember two years ago was at 767. And we it was that was it's been reduced two years in a row.
Good work, team.
Um but and and so to that and so to that point, your net increase in property taxes, that number will be some number lower than thirty-seven million um based on how we currently allocate money. Those other numbers would also change in the downward direction. So the question is, is if we do make a reduction, how do you make up for those numbers? Commissioner Weightman here has suggested spend it out of reserves. that that's a policy decision on on what we what we want our reserve levels to be. I don't you know I We've
we've seen we've seen the need for reserves as a result of the hurricanes. Um, you know, um I I I won't get into that discussion. We've we've we you gotta you just you just gotta be gotta be careful. It's a calculated risk. The uh and so and then that number of what's available to BCC and the fund constitutionals also drops. And so you're looking at next slide please.
Next slide. Next slide. Next slide. Next slide.
You've got these numbers. You know, these are these are kind of these other other expenses and pressures that are out there that would rely on that $15 million that that would that would decrease, right? And so It it becomes a you know it becomes it's a policy decision on how to how to fund and how to set how to set those numbers. So One of the things early on that that we were talking about and I I look at this now through through the lens of you know you know Commissioner Weightman and having discussions with all of the board members um even in the sheriff
being supportive an of an MSTU is if we take care of our Big rocks. Go back two slides.
No, I'm sorry. It was just go forward one. And that's that public safety component, which is their biggest draw out of that. You know, right now we're focused on an MSTU that hand that that really kind of operates in that green area. We're talking about MSTUs that operate in that purple area. If we're going to be looking at cutting general operating millage and and coming up with new ways to transparently fund different programs My advice is focus on the purple area first. You get the purple area taken care of. That provides you maneuver space to handle
the green areas, possibly even other areas, depending on how this board wants to go. We haven't established those yet, but I think, you know, again, if we begin with the end in mind, you certainly can tackle the green area first. But then there would have to be some alignment on this board's part to really be committed to addressing the purple areas next year. Otherwise you could find yourself in some some fiscal structure.
And what does that mean? What does that mean exactly?
What what I what I'm saying is is perhaps you should look at adopting a law enforcement MSTU and a rescue MSTU perhaps first. and then and then work your way into parks. But I go to the right-of-way. But
then how would Keith get his
maintenance?
It would either be status quo or this board can can direct me. Look, I I can take some if you want to tell me Give Keith four million dollars to do deferred parks maintenance and the additional one and a half that he needs for the operations. I we we will uh even if we have to cancel the animal project or one time capital projects or pull from reserves, that's your policy decision. We can make that work. For this year.
Mike, to be to be accurate, I think I think staff started with parts. as a dipping your toe in the water to see how this M STU funding way of funding departments would work. Correct. It was less bold than jumping all in, I think, on a public safety M STU. Would you say that's I
would I would say that I would say that's accurate, yes sir.
Yeah. So Look, I'm for transformative changes with this budget and transformative changes in how we fund certain departments and key departments. I don't like having to give forty percent of all new revenue to any department. It handcuffs this board whether they want to choose to reduce millage rate it it it or how we s wanna structure different departments and how we fund them to have a handshake agreement of okay we have the forty percent of all new revenue year after year I I just to
be bound Like that I I don't I don't like what it does. I think it it it eliminates or in or or inhibits creative thinking on how we structure our budget to to do better for our county with the dollars that we have. And I think through the parks discussion, I think that's what's led Chase, I think you agree. Led to the sheriff saying, Oh it this is this could really work for us. And it would take the distraction of us and sheriff and the four forty
percent and yada yada yada that's gone on for years and years and years and many other between boards and sheriffs around the state. It would take that distraction out. That's moved over. It's doing its thing. It allows the sheriff to department to go and do what it needs to do and then allows us to really focus on the money that we truly have. and how we want to break up that piece of the pie. I feel like the forty percent really handcuffs this board. um and how we want to to fund whether it be roads or
parks or or or whatever. So I mean I'm I'm all for these big transformational changes to our budget, uh as long as it's you know we're cutting Well, you know, millage rate for millage rate moving moving from A to B. And then um, you know, seeing seeing how it looks looks from there. And we have again we have the reserves. I'm not afraid to spend 'em. We have a big reimbursement coming. We live twelve months at a time. There's more money coming in the next year. The public we take the money from the
public and they expect us to spend their money. So Hey, that's what we're here for. There's no department in here that's not asking for more and more money, right? Right, Mike? So let's let's spend it and give give the folks what they're what they're wanting. If if the board wants to tackle public safety M STU, heck, I'm I'm all for willing to have that that conversation and and move forward and pausing Peace. But I mean I'm I'm That's kinda my thoughts and feelings
on this matter, so
I wish Jack was here.
Well I think Amy's got a lot on her plates, what I think.
Well uh what does it take to get to and that you know, you know I've been advocating for an MST for the sheriff for a long time. I'm glad to see he's there now apparently. Um but have we missed deadlines to set that up for this year? Yes.
Yes. Yeah,
so we can't do that.
But we can vote in policy. But we could bring we could bring items back with regards to fire, with regards to law enforcement, and you can adopt that and then it would show up on next year's uh next year's trim and you know you can set a millage then.
I mean we know. Three quarters of the battle is is getting the policy passing the ordinance. That's that's it. A hurdle, but I think there seems to be an alignment there. At least we can set the policy and if it's set at zero, that's fine, but the policy is set. But
you can adopt the ordinance by three votes. You could you have to establish the millage by five. I was gonna argue on your three-quarter argument.
No, but you can't you can't you can't set a millage without having the ordinance passed. That's true. That is correct. That's truly the process. So But I don't
know that it's the most difficult or third one to the point.
He
was
arguing you're three quarters of the battle. I can be the battle. Right. Yeah. You want to sit next to me, Jeff?
Commissioner Oakley, do you have any thoughts on uh pausing and doing the purple MSTU's first. I I I see the logic and what the county administrator is saying because Those are critical.
I think we've s actually started the conversation we need to have. And I think going forward with that will would be great. Uh I think we need to do the best we can for parks this year.
Agreed.
And then then set a plan that we work out so we're not down to the wire and said, Oh, we gotta do this and this and it not work out right. I'd like to see numbers from Amy Accord. Yeah, no surprises on budget. Come up with those numbers and and how those scenarios should look and give us a better ways. Intelligent decision with good information backing is is the best route to go. Not just haphazardly do something.
We don't want to hurt any department.
Kathy, then me. So
I just got a question. So Kathy Pearson assistant coming ministry of public services. So I I just want um ask a question so I fully understand. So if we pause the MSTU for parks this year, we've them a certain amount of money that's a one-shot deal and we're back at the same boat asking again next year. That's what I'm asking. Well
that's
what
that's what I'm about to talk about. So that's what I'm thinking too. If if we're if we're gonna do say the law enforcement MSTU and and you wanted to add a fire I would
like to add I would like to modify the fire to include rescue. Rescue is
not
in
there. Those are those are the same numbers just pulled out into their own silo, right? Um, so why can't we do all of them? At the same time. We don't have to pause for Parks for a year, do we?
Well so part of the problem is is well this is this is this is what uh County Attorney talks about with the challenge.
the the challenge because you know uh for example i if if we were to and this is what commissioner oakley has pointed out as well if we Establish a millage that we want, you are in in effect raising taxes unless you make a commensurate cut somewhere else. What I'm saying is that by making and by making that cut in general operating, you will adversely affect other areas of the operation. You know, which which would include other you know public safety, uh libraries, other
other pieces of the puzzle. That's why I I recommend tackling the purple area first because those are your largest expenses that come out of your general revenue, truthfully. Uh there also, as Commissioner Weightman pointed out, you've you've got some some some rules that you've put in place. and and and deals, you know, that that sort of complicated. They make it less simple. And so by simplifying Those parts, Commissioner Yeah. You can you can more directly address you know parks you know in terms of an MSTU and
get there. And so what what I think I'm hearing the board say is look we can stop gap parks this year and then we tackle all three MSTUs next year in a way that that gets structured with no adverse impact to the taxpayer.
Right. I like that. Yeah. The benefit to the taxpayer is transformative and generational. If I think if we do this.
Well there's you know there's there's impacts to everything we do. Uh but
I'll remind I'll remind the board too that uh we we that's that is a again to establish a millage is is always a unanimous vote. I'm not sensing unanim unanimity here on on a Parks MSTU this year necessarily, but I am I am sensing broader support for bringing forward. Forward, you know, perhaps later this year, a couple MSTUs and a you know change to that one, and then looking at it as the budget process. kind of building our budget around structuring these transformatively here, these these these three new taxing units uh
and then making the adjustments within our general government. Because it's our our public safety expenses increase at a much much faster rate uh than than probably our general government expenses do anyway. Notwithstanding parks.
If we're gonna just set up a the ordinance policies potentially. So we would have Another standard budget year is what I'm hearing you say. So if if that's the case, if we're not if we're gonna potentially stay status quo, then that gives this board the ability because money's compounding. Then I'd want to see in a uh reduction down in the general operating notes.
For this year. So I would say the only challenge to that the only challenge to that would be that uh in order to fund portions of parks, uh we'd either need to find the money from other programs or withdraw from reserves. That's a policy decision. But I I know where you sit on it, I don't know where the rest of the board sits on.
Yeah, dude can't do that. I mean
I'm not for lowering uh Um the millage I'm I I think if we keep it status quo quo um and try and find as much money for parks as we can this year. Um I mean I'm not a fan of dipping into reserves but for a one time Um To help Keith get where he needs to be. Um and if we don't fund the animal services, you know, if we're just taking money and saying, hey, you know what, parks is a priority to this board. Um
I support that. I mean I I I want to have the best I I want to have the best parks. And I'm also for, you know, next year looking at the Sheriff's Office having its own MSTU and and parks as well.
Well I'll be advocating for a reduction in general operating military. So I hope accurate Amy and others can help find a way to reduce taxes. From
which department do you want to cut it from?
Well, that's what we're doing. What service
do you want to cut?
We're
already
twenty-eight. So
already
of pork spending that's listed in this, just so you know. It's it's gonna be a it's uh probably an uncomfortable conversation, but there's five hundred thousand dollars there. And there's other areas that which is a little bit more than a little bit. we can modify and and do it. And I think that if that's the direction that we'll go, it gives Mike and Amy the opportunity to look a little further and bring something back for us. So you know, ask ask, you know, we all comb through it. Can we have another discussion? and see what we
may or may not want to do.
Commissioner Oakley.
The problem I have in that is is we're pretty flat budget, so And I think all our departments called the mic have have come back with very good budget restraints on themselves, uh brand forward to uh be pretty flat this year. Uh I appreciate 'em all doing that because the money's gonna be very tight this year. Um cutting back millage. I I can't do that 'cause I don't want to give up any services for my citizens.
Yeah, we're already
and I don't think they wanna give up services either. And to do that, that's what you're doing.
And I just to piggyback on the Everything's
getting more in inflation's involved here and everything's getting more expensive. We're still way lower in tax property taxes in our county than we are in our neighboring counties.
Most of the state. Especially and pretty much
oh yeah. Most of the
state. Florida's incredibly expensive and there's only so many twenty dollar hamburgers people can buy. So if we're gonna stay status quo I think it's incumbent upon us as staff to figure out. how to reduce millage for people if there's a way to do it. Because just because it stays flat Their values are going to go up, it's going to pay three percent or commercial property is going to go up ten percent and they're gonna pass that on to the consumer. So if there's any ability to hold that down a hair. That's the That's
I think it's incumbent upon us and our obligation to try to find some level of relief for our businesses and our property owners.
Our businesses are gonna get some relief this year, uh, because of the uh business tax receipts that They won't be collecting so they are they are seeing some relief. And I think
Oh I want to say something.
Yeah, go go.
No, I I think if we just refer to the pie when we talk about um reducing the millage, I mean The our first responders are gonna be the ones taking the hit off of that and and feeling that. And we're a growing county. We're just talking about our growth. Like how do we expect them to do their job if we're saying, hey, you need to do your job With more people and less money. That that's how I look at that.
But you're you're assuming we're cutting their budgets. That's not the conversation that we're having. Well
then who But you're saying you're cut you wanna cut the military.
more, then
how do you think
they're not affected?
That means we look at the uh
cut the road paving program? Cut.
Again, if this is the direction we're going. What
department here do you want to cut?
Well, there's parks. There's libraries. Oh, we're gonna
cut
parks and libraries. But this again But this goes back to my point of the parks MSTU. Well you
can you can take them out in your districts.
So this goes back for parks. This goes back to the parks MSTU and how that fund compounds. So when we have difficult conversations like this. You see what happened automatically? This is my whole rationale. behind the parts. MSTU behind the sheriff's MSTU is when we start having conversations like this, it's like, oh, let's automatically go to the low hanging fruit. But he's in his own silo, he's kind of exited from the conversation. there.
But all these other guys are going oh oh oh you're gonna cut our budgets. So if we narrow narrow the pie pie chart there to you can you wanna r reduce the millage then And you're not taking it out of purple and you're not taking it out of green. Well that's
not the direction I thought we were going today. So now I'm not sure.
Well you're saying you want to reduce you know I don't I don't want to have one of those board meetings where we are we're there till two in the morning because
Well we wouldn't on the general on the we this the regular way we wouldn't we wouldn't have to pack lunches.
I'm br I'm bringing my magazine and my snack just to be prepared. Um Okay. What you know, we don't have Commissioner Mariano here. I know that's coming. But listen we all philosophically this is a very conservative question. We we get it. That's why we are ranked where we are. And I think we our staff works incredibly hard. And our our departments, I think, work harder than any other county in the state to provide the level of service we do for the amount of money
we we receive and it's it's shown that we're a great county to live in and we're cheap as heck. So I feel our citizens are getting a great return on their investment. And we are very, very mindful of any every penny we take in. So the only place I see where there's some pork, sorry Mike. Oh is that not you, Mike, the is we're all, you know, you're doing two and a half percent rate wage increases. Mm there's this discussion
there for five and I think I think we all need to be around two point five. And I don't know what that means in his office. Maybe it's insignificant, but I would like to see if we can talk with probably praiser about something something in about, you know, tightening our belts.
His budget is approved by Department of Revenue, correct?
Well let's still talk to him. Because it's still our general revenue money, right?
Yep. Okay Chairman something something it's important to pull to to point out, and this has been a fun project with accurate Amy and and her team. Boy, it's stuck, isn't it? Is the Thank you. Commissioner Oakley.
I was thinking
Ad
Valore.
So We started this when we first came on the unfunded mandate. Project. And we're today in this budget coming up, we're $13,758,643 in unfunded mandates that come down from the state. And these unfunded mandates that come down from the state are truly, you know, those handcuff us quite a bit. So as we Learn and understand and this is across all all departments from the sheriff's office and you
name it every all the unfunded mandates that our taxpayer has to pay for that come down from the state of Florida. I think it's important as we understand these mandates and its impact to the taxpayer and it's in and how it impacts our ability to make taxing policy on our county. that we work with our delegation and talk with them as their you know, maybe there's an ability for them to tweak something during session. And if that were to happen, that's just as big of a win as getting an appropriation or Or you know, good policy done. Um, but you know, almost 14
million dollars this year, that that's a game changer in some of our conversation. It's probably just
like it's up here
currently.
Oh yeah, so um bold and italicized things our state mandates for us to pay anything that is not bold or italicized is at the board's discretion.
Yeah, and so the half a million. Discretionary spending five hundred and five thousand is is below it. But the thirteen plus million in in unfunded mandates is I think an important conversation that that we start having with our delegation. To see, especially with the conversation the state had about property taxes and how to fund things. I mean, they're the reason why we're spending. Almost fourteen mil and it keeps seemingly keeps growing every year.
Commissioner Oakley's online they may not be able to hear you if you just please
so
thank you.
Um to your point, um I want to make sure uh Amy, did you receive the email that I sent to him about the hit to our budget from the reduction in the business tax receipts and is that accounted for in the budget?
Um
No, I don't think this one is accounted for yet.
So and and to your point, right, we we have we we are, you know, structurally you know, our our expenses are are higher than what our revenues are are coming in. So, you know, top line removals. Again, you know, I think the question, you know, to your point, Commissioner, is you know if if if the board wants to make a reduction in the millage it probably comes from reserves. I mean that that's really it. I don't know.
Well you're already and you're already hitting the
use of no reserve. I say no to
that.
So I I just again I that that's I just do this out there as as just a statement. So So I I you know, just this is this has really been good conversation, I mean, for us and and for the team and understanding and you know and having a transformational path forward is amazing. Um and and so I think I think I've got enough guidance to to to bring some stuff back for trim. Um I don't you know uh Chair, uh however you wanna continue to go, we we can either talk more about this, but I can
come up with some recommendations and thoughts on what that could look like. whether or not you want to adopt them that that's a whole nother you know whole nother discussion but sim you know we we will be responsive to that. Um so that's
Yeah. So I think it's been a Great budget meeting. Any Any other uh
We still have a few more things that we just want to cover in terms of capital, but that's the
courthouse.
Okay.