I spoke to a couple of veterans because normally we, at the commission meetings, we honor our veterans. And these two veterans that I spoke to that I wanted to recognize, both of them came back with the same information, that they didn't want to be recognized individually, that the military is a team effort and that we should all give thanks to all of our military, both former and active. So tonight I would ask that you please pray for all our former military. Some came home, some didn't. To those that did come home, welcome home. And those that are active, we pray that they will continue to stay safe and keep us safe. Let's bow our heads. Heavenly Father, we ask that you shine your light tonight on this commission, on the people that are here, our citizens, and on the staff to make proper, worthwhile, heartfelt, compassionate decisions. And it's in Jesus' name we pray. Amen. All right. This time we're going to go to additions and deletions. Presentations, awards, and reports. We have a proclamation for Dalton High School girls' flat football. So Commissioner Santiago, and if the rest of the commission can please meet me on the floor. Thank you. At this time, if I can have our school representative, Ruben Colon, and his wife, along with the flag football team and our coach, Myra. If you can just join us up front, please. While you're making your way up front, I'm going to give the microphone to Ruben Colon just to say a few words. Good evening, commission, mayor, citizens, neighbors. Today, it is quite the honor to recognize our Deltona High flag football girls' team. Now, this isn't just any team. Hold on. I'll find a spot over here. This isn't just any team. I was introduced to flag football, had never been to a flag football game, and went to my first flag football game. And I will tell you that it was life-changing. Few people know this, but these young ladies represented our city, Deltona, with an impressive 20-0 record locally. They won the regional championship. They won. Yep. They deserve it. They won the five-star tournament championship. And they went on to the state semifinals, where they ended with a 20-1 season. These are our Wolves from Deltona High. Let's give them a round of applause. In addition to that, as Ms. Maida would call them, Coach Maida, Ms. Maida received the Coach of the Year Award from USA Today, Tayshia, which, as described by the announcers at the semifinal game, I thought this was super cool. They said it was like watching the military, left, left, left, right, left, because you're not catching her. And she also is the quarterback of the team. And so she led, along with Coach, the efforts to bring this victory to our community. And she also won Player of the Year from USA Today. And then, if they keep going, we have a lot to be proud of these young ladies. They also received Female Team of the Year. From all the sports that are played, they received that representing our city here in Deltona. So let's give them a round of applause. And for those of you guys that don't know, flag football is one of the fastest-growing sports. There are scholarships available. You are going to play where? She's going to college to play flag football. Anybody else that's here committed? Olivia is going. Oh, she's going to share a few words with us. I'm going to college at Southern Union State. There you go. Woo-hoo! On a scholarship for flag football. So, you know what? I would put this team in front of many of our male teams without a doubt. They won't catch them because they go. So, again, congratulations and thank you to the city. I know many of you have come out to the games. Anybody who follows me on Facebook knows I was totally, I was totally, I mean, we went to every game after. I think we started, like, on the 10th game when they played Pine Ridge, and we went to every game after that. And so it was super exciting, and we're looking forward to next season. And we invite our citizens to come out and support them. Again, a lot of folks don't know about flag football and the growth that it's had. And so next year, I'm hoping we'll see more folks out there supporting our girls. So, you all will help me do that next year even more. And so she calls them the dream team, and you can see why. So I'm going to hand the microphone over to Commissioner, and she will read the proclamation. Thank you so much, Ruben. Really quick, I do have a few words myself. It'll be quick, I promise. It is really, truly an honor for you guys to be here. Incredible young athletes who have made our community proud. Your hard work, discipline, and your teamwork and dedication on the field have led to an extraordinary achievement. Championships are not won overnight. They are earned through commitment, perseverance, and believing in one another. To the players, coaches, the families, supporters of the Deltona High School champions, thank you for representing our city with pride and excellence. Your success inspires others and reminds us all what we can accomplish through determination and teamwork. Congratulations on an outstanding season. I'm very proud of you. We're all very proud of you. And with that said, I'm going to read the proclamation. In honor of the Deltona High School girls flag football team, whereas the city of Deltona believes that student-athletes are an important part of the Deltona community, and whereas the 2026 Deltona High School girls flag football team achieved the level of five-star champions, district champions, and regional champions, and many more that's not listed here, whereas under the leadership of coach Mayra Matos, the Deltona High School girls flag football team finished the season with a 20-1 record and won the state semifinalist title overall. And whereas the accomplishments of these female athletes are admired and respected by the Deltona community, and whereas the city of Deltona would like to recognize the 2026 Deltona High School girls flag football team for representing the Deltona community in such a positive way, and congratulate them on their semifinalist state championship title. Now, therefore, we, the mayor and commission of the city of Deltona, wish to convey the very special recognition by the way of this proclamation to the 2026 Deltona High School girls flag football team executed this first day of June, 2026. Thank you. Congratulations. All right. And we're going to give them just a few minutes for those that are stepping out. And as the ladies that are stepping out, I'm going to start calling on Cassie Landron, the president of the Volusia County Hispanic Association, to start coming forward so we can work on the, so we can go to a presentation. Please give us just one minute. Thank you, ladies. One more big round of applause for the ladies. And thank you to our school board member, Ruben Colon, for taking time out of his day for coming in, as always, to represent our students. He always does a great job. All right, Ms. Landron, if you want to start pressing the green button. Well, it's not green. It's green after I, there you go. All right, we're going to go ahead and get started. Go ahead. Good evening, Honorable Mayor, distinguished members of the city commission, and fellow citizens of Deltona. Thank you for your time tonight. I want to be highly respectful of our schedule, so I will get right to the heart of why we are here. As a proud Hispanic American who served eight years active duty in the United States Air Force and who grew up in a Hispanic-dominant community in Orlando, where our culture was beautifully embraced, this mission is deeply personal to me. We want to continue to uphold, share, and protect our love and traditions with our community, while driving a tangible, profound impact at the exact same time. For 30 years, the Volusia County Hispanic Association has done just that. Our organization was founded in 1995 by local Hispanic leaders who envisioned a unified voice for our community. For over three decades, we have worked hand-in-hand with cities like Deltona to bridge cultural gaps, promote education, and ensure that our families have the vital resources they need to thrive. We believe that a strong cultural identity builds a stronger, more resilient city for everyone. Our vision is a Volusia County where the Hispanic community thrives. But let's look at the reality of our city today. According to the latest U.S. Census, the Hispanic population right here in the city has reached a staggering 41%. We are nearly half of this beautiful city. While our community may technically have equal access on paper, the reality is that many families lack the knowledge of these opportunities. That is why our mission is so critical. We don't just exist to celebrate culture. We exist to actively dismantle those communication barriers, fostering civic participation and empowering the Hispanic community of Volusia County through programs, events, and partnerships that strengthen the entire fabric of our diverse community. Speaking of partnerships, every summer, we join hands with you, the city of Deltona, at the Center at Deltona for our annual back-to-school bash. Through this initiative, we equip over 1,500 local children yearly. We don't just give out backpacks and school supplies. We provide free haircuts, health screenings, and create a joyful environment. Most importantly, we connect families with educational resources and community services in a way that overcomes any language barrier, ensuring Deltona kids start the school year ready to succeed. Culture is our heartbeat. The Latin Arts and Music Festival is the crown jewel of our annual programming and stands as the largest Hispanic cultural event in Volusia County. It brings thousands of attendees together right here to experience authentic cuisine, live music, artisan vendors, traditional dancing, and meet small local businesses and resources. It is a vibrant, unifying celebration that highlights the beauty and energy of our heritage, welcoming neighbors from all walks of life to share in our historic traditions. During the holidays, we bring the magic of a traditional Puerto Rican holiday celebration right to the Deltona Amphitheater with parrandas and el anfiteatro. Featuring live music, traditional food, dancing, goodie bags, Santa, and bike donations, this event captures the unmistakable, generous, festive spirit of the season. It transforms our local space into a hub of warmth and tight-knit community during the holidays. We also round out our major annual gatherings with two crucial initiatives, both the annual Mayor's Winter Ball and the Voices of Vision International Women's Day event, where partnerships added as brand-new events this past year. Because they were so impactful, we fully intend to do both of them again. We deeply value collaboration for projects we believe align with our core mission and values. The Mayor's Winter Ball is an elegant fundraising gala with a very specific noble purpose. Last year, we raised $11,000 towards the expansion of the Harris-Saxon Building, understanding it would benefit our children who are members of the Boys and Girls Club. This was also near and dear to my heart because I, too, was a kid who grew up at my local club, the Englewood Center, to be exact. We are proud to announce that proceeds from the upcoming Mayor's Ball will be raised to support American Legion Post 255. This funding will directly help bring their incredible project to life at Veterans Memorial Park. As a veteran myself, it is an honor to use our platform to stand by those who served. Over our 30-year history, oh, sorry about that, the Voices of Vision event partners with a Hispanic and woman-owned business out of downtown DeLand, Vision and Heals, to bring together industry leaders to provide practical growth strategies for women in all walks of life and seeking a space where personal and professional growth is celebrated. Over our 30-year history, we have hosted several signature events and impacted thousands of families. Our events draw diverse attendees, boost local spending at small businesses, and provide local vendors an accessible opportunity to showcase and sell their products, strengthening Deltona's economy from the ground up. But I want to tell you what those numbers actually mean in practice. Our public cultural events allow us to kill many birds with one stone. They create an amazing environment for community and celebration, but the leftover funds raised allow us to approve spending on quiet, critical causes we believe matter most. For example, this past winter was one of the coldest we've experienced in a very long time. Because of the support that we have had in the past, we were able to step in and buy winter jackets for local children in desperate need. When the leaders in action, elective class at Deltona High School lacked the budget to provide professional attire for their students, we stepped up and donated 85 polos so these young leaders could confidently focus on leadership, professionalism, career development, and volunteerism. We don't stop there. Through our incredible collaboration with the local firefighters, we provided immediate monetary relief to a local family whose house tragically burnt down. Through that same partnership, we funded an emergency one-night stay for a vulnerable young man found wandering in crisis. We've provided generous donations to families in need, and we acted as a proud venue sponsor for Renee's Resources, providing a dedicated space for young adults, aged 17 to 25, to obtain the critical life skills training needed to successfully bridge the gap between high school and adulthood. This is the quiet work. This is the heart of Volusia County Hispanic Association. This brings me to the core reason we are presenting to you tonight. With our Hispanic community making up over 40% of Deltona, and as we approach our monumental 30th anniversary, we are planning a special 30th anniversary gala to celebrate and honor the loyal partners who have sustained our mission all these years. Tonight, we are officially asking the city of Deltona to partner with us for this milestone gala as our venue sponsor at the Center at Deltona on October 16th. Let's stand together to celebrate three decades of unity, culture, and life-changing community impact, and lay the groundwork to ensure every single family in our city has the knowledge and resources to thrive. Thank you, Commission, and thank you to the citizens of Deltona for your time, your hearts, and your continued support. Thank you. Is there any questions or comments from anybody on the dais? Commissioner Santiago? Thank you, Mayor. I have a few things to say in regards to the Volusia County Hispanic Association because it's no, everybody knows I used to be a volunteer and a board member for many, many years when our previous, Zenaida Denizak, our commissioner, was involved back then. It's the heart and soul of this community, and like she said, it's not just about the signature events. It is about, it's not just about back-to-school fair. It's not about the Latin Festival. It's about partnering with other organizations that we help out that you don't see on Facebook or on social media. It's the families that need help, the children that need the jackets, the phone calls we get from the fire department to help a citizen in need. That is what makes this organization special. And, yes, we should and highly recommend that we partner with them for this 30th celebration. Commissioner Arnabek? Do we know specifically what the needs are for the partnering, what they're looking, what are you looking for to partner? We're looking to have the event on October 16th at the center, so specifically for the venue to be covered. Okay. All right, so can we get consent to put it on the next commission, regular commission meeting? We usually don't vote in presentations, as you know, but we can have it added on. Commissioner Santiago, go ahead. Just really quick. I think when Perla from MyDeltona Magazine made the presentation, I believe we did a consensus right then and there, so I'm asking for a consensus now. Commissioner Novick? I'd like the opportunity to get with the city manager, discuss a little bit, see what we're looking at, but I'm okay with putting it on the next agenda for a final decision. And I would like to make a comment as well. Okay. I apologize, Commissioner Howington. Go ahead. I agree with Commissioner Novick. I would like to have an opportunity to speak with the city manager as well. Okay. So, Commissioner Santiago, we're going to go ahead and have consensus to put it on the next commission meeting. All those in favor to add their request to the next commission meeting, all in favor say yes. Yes. All opposed? Yes. Okay. Opposed was Commissioner Howington? No. I said that yes, I agreed. Yes, agreed. Okay. You were opposed? Yes. Okay. So, the opposed was Commissioner Santiago. So, the majority has it. It'll be on the next commission meeting. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Landrum. All right. There is no Delta in a community event announcements to be made. I'm now going to go to the consent agenda item. Is there any comments for the consent agenda? Commissioner Harriet? I'll make a motion to approve the consent agenda items as presented. There's a motion by Commissioner Harriet. Commissioner Nottingham? Second. There's a second by Commissioner Novick. Is there any commissioner comments? And as courtesy, we always start with the person that's online. So, Commissioner Howington, do you have any comments or questions? No, I do not. Okay. Can we please go for a vote? The motion was to approve. Oh, got it. Okay. So, we're going to do a verbal because we have somebody online. Vice Mayor doesn't have an iPad, by the way. That's why she's saying it. So, if I can please have the city clerk go down the roll. Commissioner Caldwell? Yes. Commissioner Harriet? Commissioner Howington? Yes. Commissioner Novick? Yes. Commissioner Santiago? Yes. Vice Mayor Villa-Vasquez? Yes. Mayor Villa? Yes. 7-0. Motion passes unanimously. This time we're going to go into ordinances and public hearings. We're going to public hearing A. If I can please have the city attorney read the ordinance. Thank you, Mayor. This is ordinance number 12-2026, an ordinance of the City of Deltona, Florida, amending Article 2, Fire Rescue Impact Fee, Article 3, Park Impact Fee, Article 4, Transportation Impact Fee, and Article 5, Law Enforcement Impact Fee, and creating Article 6, Municipal Impact Fee, within Chapter 94, Impact Fee of the Code of Ordinances, adopting updated impact fees for fire rescue, parks, transportation, law enforcement, and municipal, based on the 2026 Impact Fee Study, prepared by Raftela's Financial Consultants, Incorporated, making legislative findings, including extraordinary circumstances. Justifying an exemption from the phase-in limitations of Section 116, Spot 31801 of the Florida Statutes, providing for codification, severability, conflicts, and an effective date. This is first reading of this ordinance. Thank you. We're going to hear presentation from Jordan. Then we'll go to public comment. Then we'll go to a motion and a second. Then we'll go to discussion amongst the commission. Jordan, please. Good evening, Mayor, City Commission. So tonight's item is the presentation of the 2026 Municipal Impact Fee Study, which we started about a year ago. Impact fees are one-time fees paid by new development and are used to fund growth-related capital facilities and infrastructure. The city retained Raftela's financial consultants to conduct an independent review of the city's impact fee program. The study evaluated projected growth, existing levels of service, current facilities, and future capital needs. At this time, I'd like to introduce Sean with Raftela's financial consultants, who will present the study and answer any questions the commission may have. Good evening, Mayor and Commissioners. For the record, my name is Sean Ocasio. I'm with Raftela's financial consultants. I've been the project lead coordinating with the city on the Municipal Impact Fee Study. As a part of that study, we're looking at your police impact fees, fire impact fees, parks and recreation, transportation, and then a new fee for general administrative facilities. I appreciate the opportunity to work with you all, small item. I actually spent a number of years when I was little. I grew up in Deltona, so back in the early 90s. I was on Weatherford and Kerrydale, and I do have family that still lives here. So when the opportunity came up that I could work with the city, I was pretty excited to take it on. But with that being said, the goal of the presentation tonight, just as a quick agenda, we're going to go over a little bit of background on impact fees, what they are, who pays them, what they can be used for, the method of calculation used in our study, as well as some of the major assumptions, and then the calculated fees. So with that, what are impact fees? Like Jordan mentioned, these are fees that are paid by new development and redevelopment to the community. So it's not being paid by existing residents. This is new growth to the community. And these fees are because as new growth comes in, it's presenting new demands for facilities and for services. So these fees are specifically designed in order to recover the cost of major capital investment, and it's a function of what department we're looking at. So in the case of, let's say, the fire department, this would be associated with the cost of facilities, apparatus, and major equipment, police department facilities, parks and recreation facilities, and amenities, and so on. These fees, they can be used to pay for growth-related facilities, so they are restricted towards that purpose for new growth and expansion-related capital needs for the city, not for existing operations or maintenance-type items. In terms of the benefits of impact fees, having them in your community, so what's important about these fees is they're, to the extent they're calculated and designed in a manner that's recovering the full capital cost that is required to provide service to growth, So having these fees in place and at the appropriate level is important because that way, essentially what you're linking is that as growth comes into the community, it's then paying for its share of the capital facilities that it's demanding from the city in order to develop. So to the extent you have these fees in place and at the right level, it helps mitigate the burden on existing residents because otherwise, if you have all these capital projects that you need to accomplish and you don't have the fees in place to support that, then all things being equal, those capital-related costs would then fall to your existing residents as opposed to the growth that's requiring a portion of these investments. So these are, they're very important to have in the community. Again, this is an additional funding source that can go towards growth-related capital, help keep rates and fees down and so on. In terms of impact fee criteria, so just a little bit of primer, they have to be, the fees have to be based on the capital cost associated with providing growth, and then the revenues that come in from those capital impact fees then have to be used on those growth-related projects. So it's just this link to make sure that the money coming in associated with the projects then goes towards those items. They have to be based on reasonable levels of service, they can't be used to fund operations, they can't be used to recover any service deficiencies. Again, this is associated with growth and its impact to the community, so those fees have to be used for those purposes. Some high-level legal considerations, the basis for impact fees and their related criteria are established in the Florida statutes and relevant case law. There's the Florida Impact Fee Act, that's essentially the section of the Florida statutes that governs all the rules on impact fees. This is a very complex and continually changing section of the Florida statutes, so we do recommend that the city always continue to consult with its legal counsel in order to maintain compliance with the rules as they're changing. And especially over the past five, six years, these rules have been changing a lot, just repeatedly. There's actually changes slated to take effect also in July, and there were some that just took place in October. So it's always a moving area. In terms of the fee calculation methodology, I won't go essentially on a high-level basis. What we're trying to design is a cost-per-unit fee that would be applied to either residential property or non-residential property. And so what we're looking at is developing the cost side of the analysis, that is, the city's investment in infrastructure and facilities. So major capital facilities, you know, fire stations, fire apparatus, those big-ticket items, and then that, as it relates to the projected growth in population and dwelling units over time, essentially it's the cost divided by the units gives us a fee. That's kind of the short version of a fee calculation there. So with that in mind, the portion of the analysis relates to a growth forecast. We look at Census Bureau information for your history. We look at Bureau of Economic and Business Research, some other sources, Florida Housing Data Clearinghouse, I mentioned the census, to develop a forecast over time. We also are, you know, use information from your city's planning department as well for growth projections over the near-term 10-year period. So this growth forecast that you see here on the slide, going from a current estimated population of about 98, almost 99,000 persons through 2050 to about almost 115,000 persons. Our window that we're looking at right now in the near-term is through 2035, so that's about 109,000 persons. That's an average rate of growth of about 1% per year on the residential side. On the non-residential side, that's where more growth seems to be projected based on your development information. With that, that's about an average of about 5% per year projected over the next 10 years. So some significant growth for the community is projected over that horizon of time. One of the items in the design of the residential fee just has to do with estimated occupancy. So when we look at a fee for a residential single-family property versus a residential multifamily property on a per-dwelling unit basis, we look at Census Bureau information in order to develop the relationship there. So looking at that information from the past five years of Census information from the ACS survey, single-family is estimated at 2.88 persons per residential dwelling unit, and multifamily units are about 2.63 persons per unit. The only reason I mention this item is when we look at the fees as we move forward, what you'll see is the single-family fee is higher than the multifamily fee, and the reason for that is this relationship that you see here, the difference between these occupancy factors. So essentially, if a single-family residence represents one, then a multifamily unit would be about 91% of that. So that's the relationship you'll see in all the fees. Just for some scale there, also, your current fees are assumed based on about a 54% relationship instead of 91. So that Census Bureau data that we used shows that that change in relative relationship, because, again, we're trying to make sure we get all the right numbers in there. As far as this slide here, functional population, this particular method is just used in the development of the transportation, or what we're going to be calling the complete streets impact fee analysis. Essentially, what it relates to, in summary, is the idea that non-residential land uses differ in their character, and so their potential impact and demand for city services. So an example might be, if you're looking at non-residential properties, let's say a supermarket versus a storage facility, maybe their equivalent size. However, the supermarket is going to have more persons going through that, more trips generated associated with that, and therefore more potential demand for, let's say, fire or police service. And so what this method allows for is to try to recognize those differences between non-residential land uses and try to account for their costs accordingly. Now, the city has a method in its current fees that differentiates for this, and so we're sticking with that. We're just streamlining the number of land uses, and I'll mention that in just a moment here. So starting with the police analysis, police service is provided by Volusia County Sheriff's Office. The level of service that is currently being provided in the community is about one officer per 1,000 residents, based on the data that we've been provided. So that's a total of about 103 FTEs, or about 100 sworn positions, as of the projected numbers. So you're currently providing a level of service of one officer per 1,000. In terms of total existing investment, again, I mentioned on the front end, you know, we're looking at your capital costs and capital investment. So total existing investment, total planned future investment, we look at all those costs that are projected, and then we look at that and we pair it down to what costs are includable in an impact fee analysis, because there are restrictions there. And with that, the total net costs that are included in the calculation are about $6.7 million. So with that $6.7 million, we then essentially split those costs between residential and non-residential related. In order to do that, we look at the call data for the sheriff's data for response calls. As a proxy for demand, we're looking at property appraiser records in terms of developed square footage, so that there's property components of the weighting, and then also some other commuter inflow information from the Census Bureau as a proxy for where people spend their time. So with that, the costs are allocated about 81% to residential, about 19% to non-residential, and so when we take those costs allocated accordingly and divide through by our future population that I had mentioned a moment ago, you get a cost, you'll see here, $49.64 per person and $13 per square foot. So since we're taking those and then we're applying them to housing units, those are those, remember the persons per unit factors I mentioned previously, that's where we, this is where we scale them up. So your existing fee for police impact fees right now on a per-thousand-square-foot basis is $63 even, and that's the same fee applied to residential and to non-residential right now. The calculated fees from the analysis would be a single-family dwelling unit fee of $143, a multifamily dwelling unit fee of $130, and then the non-residential fee of $130 per thousand square feet. One of the changes in the approach you may have noticed is on the residential side, your current methodology is based on the per-thousand-square-feet of the property. In this case, it would be changing it to a per-unit approach. So if it's a single-family unit, it has a fee versus a multifamily unit, and that change holds through across the various fees we're looking at. So I figure I explained it on this one. I can advance through the similar items a little quicker. In terms of overall comparability for these fees, you'll see here on this comparison, we looked at a survey of over a dozen communities, which you'll find right now your existing fee is on the lower end of that, at $119 and change when we convert that to a single-family unit dwelling. The average of the survey is about $442, $443 per dwelling unit, and you'll notice there's some on the very high end at over $1,000 per unit. The reason there's this big disparity across all of these comparables in the survey has to do with a lot of different factors. So it can be a function of just something as simple as when was the last time one of these communities even looked at their impact fees, right? It could be a very dated number. Another factor could be how much grant funding did they receive or how much donations or contributions did they receive. Also, what level of fee did that community choose to adopt? They may have a cost analysis that said, you know, adopt X, and they may have chosen to adopt something lower. So the comparison doesn't show a lot of those moving parts in the background. The other thing is that on the higher end, a lot of these communities that you'll see, I'll use Apopka as the example since it's the highest one here, is these are communities that are, you know, more recently updating their fees, and they're also putting a lot of investment into the relevant departments. And in the case of the city of Apopka here, they're putting in a new public safety facility for their police and fire departments, and that's a very significant cost. Those costs are associated with providing the service to growth, and so when they did their impact fee analysis, that raised their impact fees materially, as you'll see here. So a lot of the communities that are experiencing significant increases in impact fees is because they're more recently updated, and there's a lot more investment being put into those facilities to provide the service to growth. Switching gears to fire, in terms of the level of service being provided, the city of Autona's fire department has an ISO rating class of 2-2X rating. There's currently 107 full-time persons associated with the department, about 90 of them are firefighting and rescue personnel. So that's currently funding about .91 firefighters per 1,000 of population, and we've assumed that for the purposes of the analysis, that that rating would be preserved as the level of service as we move forward in time. In terms of total investment here, you know, current total investment is about $17 million, total planned future investment based on the capital plan. You have quite a robust capital plan. It includes station upgrades, a new station, fleet enhancements, and so on. That's about $93 million. However, when we look at what we can include in the fee analysis, that's a total net recognized cost of about $48 million when we adjust for all the items that have to come out. So same method here. So I'll just go through this one quickly. You know, that $48 million in recognizable cost comes to about $377 per person or 70 cents per square foot within the fee proposal going from $123 per 1,000 square feet to $1,086 per dwelling unit. So there's the change in terms there, and then $991 per multifamily unit. And then on the non-residential side, the calculated fee would be $700 from the $123 level. Again, these are significant increases associated with the funding of capital improvements in order to provide the service. So what you'll see here on this comparison chart, just like the other one, the existing fee for what would be the equivalent of a single-family unit is $233, $234 per unit. You'd be going to, like I mentioned, $1,086 per unit. It's a very significant increase there. But what I would note here is, you know, while you're on the upper end of the comparison for this particular fee at the calculated level, again, this also relates back to other communities updating their fees are moving to the right side of the comparison here. You know, just anecdotally, the city of Sanford is currently engaged in an impact fee study and will likely experience an increase in their fees. City of Winter Garden is looking to conduct a study as well. So these other communities that are on this comparison are also engaged in the process that you all have engaged in in order to look at their capital needs, look at the service to provide service to growth, and then what those costs are going to be. Parks and Recreation, your current level of service based on your adopted comp plan is 4.5 acres per 1,000. The city currently owns about 705 acres of parks and related space. So that's a current level of service that you're actually providing more like 7.1 acres per 1,000. So you're exceeding your open space requirements there. And that's provided across 24 different locations and facilities that include amenities like outdoor parks, community centers, ball field, trails, skate park, tennis courts, et cetera. In terms of the investment that we're looking at, the total plan future investment from the capital plan that was provided was about $21.6 million. Of that, when we look at what we can actually include for an impact fee, that's about $11 million of cost. So if we take that to a cost per person, that's about $686 per person. When we account for those occupancy factors, again, on a per-unit basis, that would mean that your current fee of $1,539.90 would increase to 1976 at the fully calculated level. That's an increase of about 28%. The multifamily fee would go from $830.50 to about $1,804 at the fully calculated level. Comparison here, again, same idea. You see the survey average of about $1,239 per residential dwelling unit. Again, some of these impact fees that are shown for some of the middle communities, they're either actively engaged in a project or looking to engage in a project, so it's likely their position will also move, so the relative positions may be preserved. General government and administrative services, I think that's what's being written as a municipal impact fee when it comes to the ordinance was the language being used. Existing investment that we're looking at, total includable investment specific to City Hall and for public works, the portions of public works that aren't associated with utilities, that's a total net investment recognized of about $13.4 million when we pare down all of the other costs that have to be excluded there. In terms of planned total future investment, the capital plan is just under $3 million. Of that $3 million plan, we're including about $347,000 worth of project costs that were includable for the fee, so that's a total investment of about $13.4 million. When we adjust for population and what's includable, it comes to about $13.1 million. That's included in the analysis, and then we take those costs, split them, get to a cost per unit, just like I mentioned on the prior slides. It's about $105 for a person, $0.16 per square foot. That would be a calculated fee of $302 for a single-family dwelling and $276 for a multifamily dwelling, and then $160 per 1,000 square feet for non-residential square footage. These are new fees, so the city currently does not charge an impact fee for this particular one, so this would just be new implementation of a fee. In terms of comparability, this type of impact fee isn't charged quite as often as we see for police and fire or transportation, so the survey size is a bit smaller here. You'll see the average on the survey for the communities that did have it was $613, $614 per dwelling unit, so you're coming in less than that at $302. Moving on to transportation, so right now the city has a transportation impact fee. Transportation mainly focuses on just movement of vehicles throughout the city, whereas what we're calling a complete streets approach focuses on moving people through the use of pedestrian, bike, transit, and also vehicles, so it's a little bit more comprehensive look at the program. With that, one of the things we're recommending is that the name be changed from transportation to complete streets to more accurately represent what the costs are that are being accounted for in this item. We're using an incremental approach, just like on the park side, so that's looking at your capital plan. And I mentioned early on one of the things we're also recommending is streamlining the number of non-residential land uses. Currently the city has 15 non-residential subcategories, from things like a restaurant with a drive-thru, movie theater, hotel room, things like that, and consolidating that down into about five land uses. The reason for that is it helps with administrative simplicity in terms of implementing these fees and tracking them, while also still maintaining some equity so that you still have the ability to differentiate between non-residential land uses and apportioned costs fairly there. And total future investment for capital improvements, that is allocable to growth from the analysis, about $6.7 million. So the fees are based on that $6.7 million number apportioned. You get $5.43 per person or $48 per unit. And then you'll see on this slide here, I'll just look at single family. Existing fee right now is $1,044. That fee would be increasing to $1,563 per dwelling unit. The other categories you'll see here on the non-residential side would actually be decreasing instead of increasing. The reason for that has to do with there's a lot more growth projected on the non-residential side in terms of developed square footage. And so, like I mentioned at the beginning, it's a cost per unit. If the units go up and the costs are the same number, it dilutes it down. So in this case, those fees would be decreasing there. In terms of the comparison here, you'll see the average fee is about $2,425 for the surveyed communities. There is a typo on this slide that I apologize for. That says $1,558, but it should be the $1,563. So still the same position, but I do apologize for missing that there. But that would be your relative position at the full level for a single family dwelling unit. So in a name to wrap things up, I know this is a long slideshow, so I'm trying to go fast. So I apologize if it feels a little bit rushed. Here we would have the residential fees. It's a busy schedule here, but you'll see the fee type and then the residential land use type. You'll see the existing fee per dwelling unit. You'll see the calculated full fee per dwelling unit, the dollar change, and then the percentage change accordingly. So as I mentioned, all these fees generally are increasing with the exception of the administrative fee because that's a new one, so that one's just a new implementation. In total, your single family fee for a new residential developed unit would be $2,937.30. That's the current total fee for all of these items. That would be a calculated basis. That would be $5,070, an increase of about 72%, 73%. Again, one thing I want to mention here is the reason for that significant increase is a function of the investment that the community is trying to put in into these various services and departments. Again, there's significant investment in the fire department in terms of upgrades to stations. There's a new station as a part of that plan and the related apparatus for the police department. There's a substation that's planned that's a significant investment in order to provide police service through the county to the community. Parks and recreation, there's investment planned in order to provide facilities and then transportation as well. So you have a lot of costs that are going to serve growth, and so as a function of that, these fees are also calculated to increase. Here are the non-residential fees. You'll see for police, fire, those are increasing. For general administrative, again, it's a first-time implementation. And then for the complete streets fees, you see that those are all decreases, again, for the reason I mentioned before, having to do with the growth and the investment. So taking all that on a combined basis, essentially layering all of those different survey charts that we had throughout the presentation and putting them all in one, what you'll see is here's the $2,900 existing fee, the $5,070 fully calculated fee as it relates to the survey average of just under $5,300 per residential dwelling unit. You know, one thing I'll mention again, just to kind of make it a drumbeat, the reason there's such a variance in these has to do with the level of investment, the time of the how dated is the current fee, level of grant funding, what level of fee did their elected officials choose to implement, and so on. So with that in mind and those fees, one of the things I want to mention is the Florida statutes do have limitations with respect to increasing impact fees. The rules in the statute are, in what I'll call a standard environment, are that if you're proposing an increase between or up to 25 percent, then that increase has to be phased in over a two-year period of time. If you're proposing an increase greater than 25 percent and up to 50 percent, then that increase has to be phased in over a four-year period of time. And to the extent you're proposing an increase that's greater than 50 percent, then you're capped at that 50 percent level. So it would be the maximum fee under normal conditions would be a 50 percent increase phased in evenly over a four-year period of time. However, there is a provision in the statute that if the city elects to have a legislative finding of extraordinary circumstances, then you can potentially exceed those phasing requirements or the fee maximum, that 50 percent cap. So, and I'll mention that in just a moment. One other thing to be mindful of here is that you can't increase impact fees more than once every four years. So that's another item. So with that, the city has prepared an analysis of factors associated with the extraordinary circumstances. It's staff and its legal counsel have developed an implementation strategy in order to implement the fully calculated fees in the current proposal over a two-year period of time to get to that fully calculated level in order to support all of the growth-related costs being funded from growth. The city had the two publicly required workshops associated with extraordinary circumstance-related implementation. I believe those were on June 8th and June 17th. And the, and the, so with that, you have, you know, those options before you've gone through the protocols of the extraordinary circumstance approach. One thing I did want to mention here, though, was just ahead of this meeting, staff told me that what would be another proposal that they would be willing to bring forward is instead of a two-year phase into this fee level, a four-year phase into this fee level. And that is, you know, allowed under the extraordinary circumstance approach. I would defer to legal counsel on implementation and strategy, but as a plain read of it, a four-year phase-in period can also be an option here instead of the two-year in order to provide time to build up to these fees for the development community. So in conclusion, you know, adopt, the proposal would be adopt the calculated impact fees either over the two- or four-year period of time based on staff and its legal counsel's implementation strategy. Again, these fees are paid by new growth. They're not paid by existing residents, and these are to pay for the cost of growth and the impact that growth has on the community in terms of its demand for public services and facilities and those sorts of items. Another recommendation is that the city continue to manage this program over time. Again, the statute says you can't do an increase more than once every four years, but it would be a good idea to make sure that you're on a four-year cycle to keep pace with the costs of your capital and everything, just so that if either growth changes or capital needs change, the fees can adopt accordingly and make sure that they're capturing everything that the city needs them to capture. So I tried to speed run through that. I know it was 40-something slides, but if there's any questions or anything, I'd be happy to answer them. Thank you. Yeah, we're going to go to a motion, a second, then we'll go to public comment, and then if you stay there, we'll have questions, I'm sure. Yes, sir. So at this time, I'll answer. I'd like to make a motion. Go ahead, Commissioner Howington. I motion to approve Ordinance No. 12-2026 for a two-year implementation as written. There's a motion by Commissioner Howington. Is there a second on the dais, Commissioner Novick? Second. All right. At this time, do we have any public comment? Allison Root, please. All right. Good evening, Mayor, Commissioners, and staff. My name is Allison Root, longtime Deltona resident and executive officer of the VBIA, and I appreciate the opportunity to speak tonight regarding the proposed impact fee ordinance. I want to be clear that I am not here to argue that impact fees should never be increased. Impact fees are an important tool to ensure that growth contributes toward growth-related infrastructure. My concern tonight is whether the extraordinary circumstances standard established by Florida law has been met. First, I am concerned about the process. The agenda materials state that the city has conducted the two workshops required under Florida Statute 163 for extraordinary circumstances. However, one of those workshops is listed as June 17th, which has not yet occurred. I would respectfully ask the commission to ensure that all statutory requirements have been completed before relying on an extraordinary circumstance exemption. Second, the demonstrated need analysis identifies aging infrastructure and deferred maintenance as extraordinary circumstances. But impact fees are intended to fund growth-related capacity, not maintenance of existing facilities, or the correction of past infrastructure deficiencies. Those would be deficiencies that have already been identified in this room for things such as fire that new growth that's projected is not the cause of. It's the lack of updating your fees for 10 years. Existing residents have already paid taxes and fees to support those facilities. Third, the analysis repeatedly cites population growth, development activity, and increased service demands. Yet the Florida Attorney General recently concluded that ordinary population growth does not constitute an extraordinary circumstance. Growth is actually what impact fees are designed to address through the normal statutory process. Finally, Deltona's own materials describe this growth as anticipated, planned, and part of the city's long-term planning efforts. Planned growth is not the same as highly unusual or extraordinary event. If growth is expected and forecasted, it should be addressed through normal planning and budgeting, not by bypassing the statutory phase-in protections established by the Florida legislator. I respectfully ask that the Commission take a close look at whether the circumstances being presented tonight are truly extraordinary and whether all of the necessary steps have been completed before moving forward. Thank you for your time and consideration. Thank you. Courtney Cross-Burgos, please. Courtney Cross-Burgos. Excuse me. Yes. I also wonder about the June 17th, which I guess is Wednesday. You guys are going to vote before you have the second part of the workshop that you have to have? And I find it a little strange that somebody that's supposed to be a group, not the one person, but supposed to be so attention to detail that they didn't catch that before saying that they've both been held. But anyway, I have a question about why there's such a difference that the law enforcement is hardly going up at all, but the fire rescue is going up a lot. I would think that would be kind of more equal. You know, we definitely need fire rescue, absolutely. But we also need police. And they're actually the lowest percentage, which is kind of, like I said, I'm not looking at the dollar value. I'm looking at the actual percentage. And it's like crazy, the difference. I'm really worried that it's not. And, again, well, I don't know how they based it. I listened to what he said, but I didn't really grasp it totally. But I think we need to bring in more for the police as well because we have a lot of new people, and we're getting more new people. The other question I get is with the commercial, we went from 16 categories to five, and all of them are getting lowered. I thought the whole point of this, well, not the whole point, but most of it, was to bring in commercial. That's all we ever say is that we want more commercial to get a bigger commercial tax base and so on and so forth. So this is all commercial, and they're paying less. How does that put it right back on the residents again? I know not me, but the new residents that are coming in, why aren't we having them pay more? When we want a bigger commercial base, is that a way of giving them a tax break or something? I don't know. It doesn't look right to me. I'd like to hear the second meeting. Thank you. Kathy Bryan, please. Good evening, Kathy Bryan, Deltona. I'm going to say that that proposed census increase seems way, way underrated by only 15,000 people in the next 25 years. Not the way people have been pouring into Florida. You know, the whole thing with impact fees, and I know we've talked about this a lot, about that you guys were working on this and stuff like that. The bottom line is it's going to get passed on to the people moving here because the developers won't eat it ever. And is it, you know, the cost of housing is already so high. Are people going to be able to afford it, even if they are getting part of their property taxes knocked off? People are going to be really surprised, I think, by how much they're still paying per year. So I guess my question is, is can we go in a little bit slower? And can the city cut the fat? And I know we've got fat. I have no doubt that everybody's got fat that they can trim when it comes to the budget. So start looking real hard at tradeoffs, what has to be done for residents and safety versus what we'd like to have done. They were also talking about the single family unit being around 1,900 square feet. I guess that's an average. A lot of the newer homes, I think, are a lot bigger than that, so I don't know how accurate that is. I also have some concerns about the change from square footage to single-family dwellings. When it comes to impact on fire and police, going to a single-family dwelling for a crime or a fire just seems like it's a whole lot less than it would be if it was at an apartment building or something like that. That's just, I don't know, my humble opinion, just thinking out loud. I don't know. I think read everything and think about this before you do anything, and then our attorneys can advise you what's legal and what's not legal on this. So thank you. Thank you. Albert Bryan, please. A few years ago when we talked about impact fees and there was nothing done about it, the big concern was defending the impact fees once we raised them. One of the questions I have is it states that every four years you need a review. Is that every four years after you first start raising them or at the end of the time that you fully initiate all of the impact fees? The other thing I can have concern about is the concern back then was can we defend it in court? And the big thing back then was if we go over more than 125 percent, we can't defend it in court, no matter what the extraordinary circumstances is. And yet I see 469 percent. Can we defend that in court? I don't know. And I believe that is a question that needs to be answered because, granted, we need impact fees to go up. But if it's going to cost us $10 million to defend it in court, then where are we at? Thank you. That's it, Mayor. I'm going to go ahead and get started because I don't see anybody else on the podium. This is going to be directed to city attorneys. Hopefully that will quench a couple of the questions. Can we get answers to the four-year review process? When does that timer start? The one that I had a lot of questions about was the two-meeting requirement where we're having the next meeting on the 17th and we're having this meeting today. And then finally being able to defend anything above 120 percent. So I'll start off with that and now everybody is kind of chiming in. So Jemma, please. Yeah, thank you. I'll have to ask you again to restate your first question, but let me answer your second and third. Sure. We are required to have two public workshops before adoption of the ordinance. This ordinance is not adopted until second and final reading. So tonight is first reading. It is not adopted tonight. And we included it here, the date, June 17th, 2026, because we knew that's when the workshop was and that is before the second and final reading and adoption. So we are fully in compliance with respect to the two dates of the workshop. And again, we were aware of this and included it in the language. It's page three of five, a third paragraph down if anyone wants to follow along, but it states it right there clearly. With respect to extraordinary circumstances, if this commission makes a legislative finding and we believe that there is evidence to do so, certainly I'll defer to our expert here with respect to the conversation he had so far and a very good presentation about this. But it is our position and we have a legal basis, a legally sufficient basis to define the circumstances that we've outlined as extraordinary circumstances. And if extraordinary circumstances are found and this ordinance is adopted unanimously, then we are permitted to adopt the full amounts recommended in the study, which is above, as you said, above the percent. So extraordinary circumstances are what trigger that, that is critical. It's outlined in the statute. It's outlined in the law. And again, as long as that legislative finding is made, which again, when you vote for this and you approve this, if you approve this as drafted, you will be making that legislative finding, in which case we are certainly well within the law with respect to adopting at the current rates as outlined in the study. The first question was, when does the timer start for the four-year review? Is it after we implement the fees or is there a time specific that we have to do the reviews of the increase of the impact fees? And that might be a Jordan question, but... I think that's a question for our consultant with respect to the timing. I'd have to check the statute, but I believe it's from when the first increase is implemented. So after the first increase is implemented. And then that starts the timer on the four-year window. Perfect. Thank you so much. We're going to go ahead and get started with Commissioner Howington because she is on Zoom. And we usually start with the person that's not here. So Commissioner Howington, then Commissioner Santiago. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So first I'd like to thank staff and Raphatilis for bringing this information back to us. I know it's been a long haul trying to pull this all together. Been being in the works for quite some time. Last week I actually met with city staff and I was informed that the last in-depth study that was completed on impact fees was completed in 2007. In 2015 there was a small adjustment made, but the study was not as in-depth as what was completed in 2007. So I'd like for possibly Mr. Smith to correct me if I'm wrong. However, I believe the extraordinary circumstances are not specifically tied directly to how many services we have to account for needing, but rather the fact that our impact fees have not kept pace. And given the fact that we are almost 20 years from the last substantial study completed, that is what created the extraordinary circumstances. Is that correct? Commissioner, you are correct in terms of the last time the study was updated. And in terms of extraordinary circumstances, staff did an analysis and we used population growth and development activity, rising construction costs, public safety operational needs, and increased service demands for extraordinary circumstances. Okay, thank you. And then with that, you know, I was just kind of looking at the past development history over about the past four years-ish. We've put in, I believe, four RPUDs that I think totaled about 1,000 housing units. And if this study that we are looking at implementing today had been implemented before those 1,000 houses had been built, the city should have collected approximately $2.1 million more to cover the cost of new infrastructure driven by those new houses. So at this time we're kind of already operating at a deficit. But if we roll that forward and look at our current planning and development, I believe we have somewhere around 4,000 or more, potentially 4,300 housing units in the hopper kind of waiting to come through at various stages of planning. And if that's the case, the increase that's being proposed today for those 4,000 residential units would account for almost $8.5 million in new infrastructure needs that are tied directly to those new dwelling units. If we don't implement this today, that $8.5 million in infrastructure will still be needed when that new construction comes to town. But the difference is, is it will have to be paid by our existing residents. So with that said, that's a very big concern that we don't want that $8.5 million that is being identified from this study as a necessity for new infrastructure related to the new development to fall on our existing residents. And it's my understanding that in order for the extraordinary circumstances to be accepted tonight, it has to be a unanimous vote of the commission. So if one person disagrees, then this cost, this $8.5 million would fall on the backs of our existing residents if those 4,000 residential units that are in the planning schedule today come to fruition. Is that correct? Just a point of order. That is not correct. Today does not have to be unanimous. The final has to be unanimous. I just want to correct that. The adoption has to be correct. Yes, Mayor. Okay. So tonight doesn't have to be unanimous, but the next vote has to be unanimous? That's correct. Yes, Mayor. Okay. Thank you. And then, let's see. I was also under the impression at the last budget approval session that there was discussion that the sheriff had talked about needing to increase our fees to $20 million, but he was able to back it down, and we only incurred $16 million for our total fees. If that's the case, this study would be estimated based on our current rate of $16 million for our sheriff's services. Is that correct? So the impact fees are based on the cost of capital, not the cost of annual operations. So it wouldn't be associated with that. Okay. So the actual cost of needing the new officers and things like that, that wouldn't be accounted for? Right. Just the capital facilities that are in the plan associated with growth. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Let's see if I have anything else. I think that is pretty much captures what I have for tonight. My concern is just significantly that if the last in-depth study was done in 2007, our community has had a lot of growth that has not been paying their fair share, and we need to make sure that we don't continue to repeat that going forward. And $8.5 million is a lot of money to leave on the table when we have potentially 4,000 new units coming to Deltona that we're aware of that could potentially come to fruition within the next four years. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Howington. Commissioner Santiago, and then Vice Mayor Avila Vasquez. Thank you, Mayor. Right. I'm all about new development and builders paying for, you know, to ensure growth. They pay for the new growth. Right. This increase is, I believe, is way too high. It's way too much money. I think we need to find some kind of balance in between. From 29, 30, 7, 30, which we currently pay, right, and I had asked staff to, well, what are the other cities paying? What do we compare to to other cities? We were right there, one of the top three cities that pay the highest in impact fees. But when it comes back at $5,070, a 73% increase, that's a concern. And the reason I say that is because the builders are going to collect it, but guess who's going to pay for it? It's the new homeowners that are going to pay for it. And there goes the price of these homes. And the impact that we do receive, it's for new capital improvement. It's not going to help with our infrastructure. We can't use it for our current infrastructure. It would have to be for new growth, new roads. Is that not correct? That is correct, Commissioner. Okay. So, yeah, I cannot approve this with that amount of money, a 400-and-something percent increase on just fire. That's way too much. I think we need to go back and take a look at it, maybe phase it in. I just don't think that this amount of money right away, again, with trying to make home affordable for families out there, I just don't, I cannot approve this today unless there's some kind of change, some kind of phase-in that we can look maybe the first, second year, maybe the third year, take a look at it. Commissioner, would you be amenable to a four-year phase-in? We can take a look at that. I can, if we change the motion and by the second reading in the workshop, we can take a look at a phase-in. Yes. Okay. All right. Thank you. Vice Mayor Avila-Vasquez and Commissioner Colwell. Thank you, Mayor. Chair, so I have, I'm concerned with the impact fees that are going to be on the shoulders of the residents. And I don't know if anybody has thought about this, but there is going to be a vote in November to get rid of real estate tax. And we know for a fact that those funds have to come from somewhere else. So we have no idea how this, and we know it's going to pass. From what I hear, we know it's going to pass because some people don't understand what kind of effects it's going to have down the line. So my question for the impact fees that our residents are going to pay, is there something down the pipe that we can offer our residents to help them pay this increase that is going to come their way? And it's, what is it, $500 on the fire? So, Vice Mayor, just for clarification, existing residents do not pay the impact fees. This is the impact fees, but you have something in here for fire department and for something else? It's all impact fees. It's all for new growth, any new growth coming into the city. New residential, new businesses would pay the impact fee. This does not impact. The impact that it does have to existing residences, we're shifting the impact. They won't, current residents will not be paying for the new growth. This does not impact existing residents. Okay. But we still have to think of the new residents, right? There's still going to be residents of the city of Deltona. I have something else in here. I'm not sure if the U-Highs, do you have a map of where you plan on spending these impact fees if it passes? Do you have an idea of where they're going to be spent? Because I know it's not going to be in the normal residential areas that are in need of repair. So, you know exactly where it's going to be? Where the impact fees would be spent. Are going to be spent. It would be part of the capital improvement program. For new residents, for new development. Impact fees have to pay for new growth. So, an expansion of a park, expansion of a fire station, road widening, a new road. That's where the impact fee money would go. New sidewalks, adding new trails. So, anything that contributes to new growth, that's what impact fees would pay for. Okay. Okay, thank you. We may have something for later, but thank you. Commissioner Caldwell and Commissioner Novick. Yes, I have some concerns about the significant reduction in the non-residential transportation impact fees. How did we come to that conclusion? By your estimate, we're expected capital growth of 5% to 10% of non-residential. What has changed in that from our previous prediction? Well, I can't speak to the prior fee calculation. I wasn't a part of that analysis. So, the methods and assumptions that were used to derive the city's current fees, I can't opine on. But as far as why we're seeing the decrease as it compares to that in terms of just the numbers, is there's the portion of the capital improvement program that can be included in the impact fees, about, I think, $6.8 million or so, I think is what the slide had there, and the growth that's being experienced and projected to be experienced over time. One of the things I mentioned on the slide related to population and square footage growth, while the residential population is projected at about 1% per year, the non-residential growth was projected at about 5% per year based on the city's planning data for developed square footage over the next 10-year period. And so, essentially, that $6.8 million cost number is split between residential and non-residential and then allocated among the change in square footage, and that change in square footage is very high. So, all things being equal, it dilutes the cost on a per-unit basis. As far as how the cost per unit was derived previously, I couldn't say. But impact fees are supposed to go to road widening, as you just said, expansion, things like that. So, I'm going to use Amazon, for example. What would be the prediction on how much more road use would be used if we put another Amazon in there? We're talking deliveries to the store from tractor-trailers, more truck vehicles going out to deliver to households. That wouldn't put a big impact on our infrastructure, on our roads and stuff? Could it have an impact? Absolutely. The issue is the fees in the analysis have to be based on what the localized cost data is and the cost data that was provided to us as a part of the capital improvement program and those related projects that Jordan was mentioning, whether it's sidewalks, lighting improvements, intersections, or road widenings, those sorts of things. The capital plan that the city has of that plan, only about $6.8 million, was associated with growth, and so that's what is allocable. So, we have to design the fee based on what the costs that are in the plan are provided to us. If there's a bigger impact, I could imagine, and perhaps a subsequent update that the city might conduct, if those capital needs became more significant, then potentially at that point in time, a higher fee might be feasible. But at this point in time, based on the costs that we have, that would be the fee that's calculated. I would like to see no reduction in that. I mean, I don't understand why we would even reduce that at this point. That's all I have. Commissioner Knobbick? Thank you, Mayor. I have several questions. So, when exactly are these impact fees collected? So, if you take a residential subdivision that's coming in, the developer is the one that has the overall site plan. They develop the site. They prepare the site. Stormwater is brought in. Roads are put in. Sidewalks may be put in. Most all of that is done by the developer. Then you have a builder that comes in behind the developer that may or may not be associated with that company. And then, at the time that the building permit is pulled for a residential home, then those impact fees would be tacked on to that building permit, correct? Yes. The impact fees are paid at the issuance of the building permit. All of them? Yes, sir. All of the impact fees are not paid until a structural building permit is pulled. Is that by law or is that by our ordinance? I believe the statute says that you can't force the payment of an impact fee before the issuance of a building permit. It is by statute. Okay. So, our hands are tied with that, even though there's a substantial impact that occurs prior to the residential building permit being pulled. That's correct, sir. Okay. All right. You already answered my question about the four years comp plan. Let's talk about parks. The target level of service you said was 4.5 acres per thousand. Jordan, does that change at all in what we're looking at with the new comp plan, or are we still on pace with 4.5 acres per thousand? Commissioner, I do not have that information for you at this time because we're still going through the update, but I can hopefully get that to you before a second reading. So, for the consultant, then, is there a potential change if we adopt a comp plan that changes that level of service that obviously is part of your calculation, so I'm going to have to assume it probably would, correct? To the extent that there are projects, costs in there that would be associated with raising that level of service from what you're currently providing today, which is about 7.1 acres per thousand, let's say you were to raise it to 8 or to 10 or something. To the extent you have additional projects added to the capital plan associated with meeting those land requirements, those costs would have to be excluded from the analysis. So, at first blush, I would say there's probably no change because we couldn't include those additional costs anyway because they would be considered in a form remedying an existing deficiency if you feel that. Jordan, can we just take a look at that before second reading and get some clarification if we're still constant with that number of what we're anticipating in the comp plan? Extraordinary circumstances by far exist here. I don't think there's any question with that. One of the questions that somebody said about the anticipated, or I'm paced with the anticipated population growth or something to that effect, the number of people is consistent. Providing the level of service, the cost has dramatically increased. As an example, years ago when I was purchasing fire trucks and involved in purchasing fire trucks for the fire department, for an engine, we were probably somewhere around $700,000 to $800,000 for a fire truck. In one year, because of EPA standards and stuff that came out, the cost of the diesel engine in that truck went up over $200,000 just in one year. The inflation because of an EPA regulation. So you can't just say that we're on par. There's an inflation factor with the cost of delivering those services and equipment that has to be purchased. I'll take us back a little bit in a history lesson here. I could not disagree more with Commissioner Santiago tonight on the cost that's involved. If somebody chooses to buy, if a future resident chooses to buy a home, they know what they're getting into. They know what the cost is. We have no responsibility to trying to make that new construction more attractive to a market. That's not our job. Our job is to ensure that the strain put on our already overburdened infrastructure by new development is not causing our existing long-time residents to have to pay the burden of that new construction. Take you back to the half-cent sales tax. The absent sales tax was designed to provide for infrastructure and for transportation. And it failed in Volusia County. And one of the biggest arguments that caused it to fail was people said, let the impact fees pay for it. They're the ones that are causing the problem. The developers are causing the problem. The developers are willing to pay this money. They are willing to pay the increase in the impact fees. And, yes, it will get passed on in the cost of purchasing a new home. But nobody's forcing anybody to come in and buy that home. A person qualifies for a loan. They choose to live here for a variety of reasons. Recreation, medical, schools, restaurants. All of those things attract them to making the price of a home. If you go across the river to Seminole County, you buy the exact same house in Seminole County, it costs you $20,000 to $30,000 more. Why? Because they have the infrastructure. They're providing the higher level of service. We need to look at the level of service that this commission wants to provide to all of our residents, present and future, and make it a more attractive community. Impact fees will help attract the things that new residents want to have out of a community they're moving to. So we need to declare tonight that the extraordinary circumstances do exist because of circumstances that occurred prior to things that we did as a commission, even prior to when I was on the commission the last time. It goes back further than that. It predates 2012, as Commissioner Howington said. 2007, I think, was the year that she threw out there. You can't keep kicking this can down the road and expect it to get cheaper or be less impactful. This commission needs to not be worried about the election in November. Set the standard. Set the price. Make it be paid by the future development that wants to come in and do business with the community. They are not opposed to paying these higher fees. They want to have a community that is well-built, that's well-protected, that doesn't flood, that has good fire protection. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Commissioner Novick. All right. Commissioner Howington, and we're at 830, Mark, so go ahead, Commissioner Howington. I'll make it quick. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Just to put this into perspective, the incremental increase is just above $2,100. When people come into the community and are looking at a new-build construction home, they're looking at paying anywhere from between $300,000 to about $600,000 for that house. As we all know, the developer and the builder will pass along the cost, but what you're really looking at is an incremental cost of $2,000 being added on to a $300,000 purchase. Most developers and builders will offer a credit back to buyers that usually is anywhere between $5,000 to $20,000. In that instance, and I just went through this three years ago and made these same decisions, that $2,000 would not have changed my mind in buying a house. So I just wanted to put this into perspective of what the incremental increase is and that it is – we are talking about $2,000. If somebody has a 30-year mortgage, that's essentially $70 a year that that person is being impacted with. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Howington. I'm going to go ahead and call the vote. We have a motion by Commissioner Dorey Howington and a second by Commissioner Chris Nobick. And if the city clerk can please call the roll on the vote. Commissioner Caldwell? Yes. Commissioner Harriot? Yes. Commissioner Howington? Yes. Commissioner Nobick? Yes. Commissioner Santiago? No. Vice Mayor Villa-Vasquez? Yes. Mayor Villa? Yes. 6-1. All right. The motion moves on to the second and final reading. All right. This time we're going to go to city attorney comments. No comments, Mayor. Thank you. City manager comments. Just a few. Thank you, Mayor. Number one, answering a couple of questions here. You do not have to actually say your name and address at the microphone when you make a comment. It's nice and helpful for the clerk, but it is not mandatory just to correct that. Number two, we often say this. If residents have questions, certainly the easiest place is to ask staff during the week or any time while we're in the office rather than bringing questions to the commission, which are usually answered by the staff. So if you're really looking for a quick answer, which, for example, the $300,000 is a carryover, will be a carryover from this year. The restrooms that we're asked about are not $600,000. If it wasn't done this year, it's going to be carried over. It's the same $300,000. Good news. The M114 armored carrier, I just received pictures today. It was just loaded up on a truck from the 1960s. The M114 is on its way to Deltona from Virginia. I mentioned at an earlier meeting, showed photographs. It looks outstanding, or it will, at least, when we're done renovating it. We were awarded the armored carrier by the government to be displayed at our Veterans Park, so it should be just a couple of few days until we get it into the park, and then we'll renovate it and have some celebrations around that. So that's a wonderful thing for our Veterans and Veterans Park. And just the last thing, just a happy birthday to Vice Mayor Mertza Avila-Vasquez. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. This time we're going to go to City Commission comments and requests. If there's any commissioners, if you can please just hit your light. And I want to make sure I get the ones that have not had a chance to speak first. So Vice Mayor Avila-Vasquez, happy birthday, and you are the first one up. Thank you, everyone, for the birthday wishes. First of all, I wasn't in the last meeting, I think, the last commissioner meeting, but I really want to give a big shout-out to Post 255 for that wonderful event that they did on Memorial Day. I think this is the biggest attendance that we've seen in the Veterans Park. And so I want to give a big shout-out to Pedro and Janice and Hurst and their members, their volunteers, for putting such a great event together. I also want to give a shout-out, and I'm going to be picky here, to Vima for their memorial bike ride. We started here and ended in the land. We had over 30 law enforcers escorting all the other bikers to the land, and we gave a check for over $4,000 to a Sheriff's Department deputy who got injured during the veteran stand-down that was hit by a car while they were blocking traffic to allow the walls to be escorted to the center. So a big shout-out to our escorters. And the best part about it is that the law enforcement escorters were from all the police stations and the Sheriff's Department of Volusia County. This is the first time I've heard it's happened in any city in Volusia County. So kudos to Deltona. Also, I just want to let everybody know that this Saturday, it is Juneteenth at Dewey Boster. I believe it's at 10 o'clock it starts. I'm not sure. I don't have it in front of me. But it is at 10 o'clock, so 10 to 2. Thank you, Commissioner Navig. And I just want to say thank you to everyone and enjoy the rest of the week. Oh, by the way, I noticed we have a little pond growing outside with all the rain when I was getting off the car, so we might see ducks swimming around there. Thank you. Commissioner Navig? Right again. There you go. Okay. Going back to one of the questions Mr. Bryant just walked out, when we were on charter review, the committee did ask to have some at-large seats looking at at-large seats, and the commission chose not to do that at the time and put that forth as a charter question. But I would be supportive of a charter question going on the ballot at some point to look at at least adding one other at-large seat, possibly all, but at least one being the vice mayor's seat and have it on an opposite election cycle of the mayor. But certainly I would support changing any of the seats to at-large. Doc, I would like to have something that I've just come up with a name, Doc's Dashboard. It would be an update given at commission meetings to address some of the questions, like the Lake Teresa Basin, where you want to insert that in the agenda is up to you. And lastly, I want to inform the commission, I was approached by some of the residents in my district out on the Collins Road Riggs area. There's a 40-acre parcel of property that's referred to as the pit, and there's another 70-acre parcel. I've been working with the manager just the last several days and some of the staff looking into the possibility of creating a conservation corridor out there, looking in a way to purchase that property, Echo Funds or Volusia Forever Funds, and creating a conservation corridor out there just south of the Lake Butler and some of those wetlands that are out there. So if you hear conversation about that, that's something I'm working on, and we'll see where that conservation area goes. Okay? Thank you. Commissioner Howington, you're the only one I can see on my board, so did you have any final comments? I just wanted to ask the city manager, I believe back in April I had asked for a budget bridge for the park project, budget to the amendment bridge, so we can kind of see where the funds were when they were budgeted and then where they were transferred to through the various amendment processes. Because Campbell Park workout equipment was approved long ago, I believe late 2024, the Dewey bathrooms are kind of rolling over. So if I could get that budget bridge, that would be wonderful, and that is all I have for tonight. Okay. Well, everyone have a good night. The meeting is adjourned.