Good afternoon, everyone. Welcome to the first finance committee of this council year, Tuesday, July 21st. We'll go ahead and start off with introductions, starting with Ms. Norris.
Brittany Norris for the administration. Colleen Hampsey, Council Research. Mary Stifopoulos, Office of General Counsel. Heather Reber, Council Auditor's Office.
Philip Peterson, Council Auditor. For the first time, Rachman Johnson, District 14, and I feel like I'm at the big kids table. Thank you.
Good afternoon, Chris Miller at Large Group 5. Will Lane in District 3.
Terrence Freeman at Large Group 1. Mike Gay, District 2, and for the first time.
Randy White, District 12. Nick Howland at Large Group 3, just visiting.
All right. Good afternoon, everyone. Excited about this year. We actually, other than myself, I think I'm the only one here today that was on finance last year, but pretty excited about the team we have here. We have two former council presidents, a lot of experience down here as well. Excited. I think this may be the first time in council history you have a council president and a finance chair who have quite a bit of experience in the corporate finance. So two MBAs, what could go wrong? So excited about that as well. And so just really excited for this year. I'm sure it'll be a challenging year. Each year we always hear, oh, this is going to be the hardest budget ever. That's how it usually works. The next year's budget should always be your hardest budget and making sure we're making a smart decision. So with that,
I'll turn it over to our council president. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I couldn't agree more. What a terrific and experienced group of council people on this committee. And I'm excited to see what you'll do this week, rather, sorry, this year, particularly in August as we go through the budget. To your point about two MBAs, that's probably the biggest fear of Philip and Heather because they're thinking, oh boy, they're going to think they know what they're talking about and ask the stupidest questions, right? But who knows? I'm just really pleased with this committee. And I think you guys will do a fantastic job. We all know kind of the challenges that we face with the November property tax relief referendum. We know what it could lead to. And we know that we probably have to think about how to respond now to prepare in the eventuality that that referendum does pass because it won't affect this council year, but it will affect the next council year, probably to the soon of about $200 million. And the year after that, another $100 million. So that's the kind of thing that when we know that's coming, the responsible thing to do is to start preparing now. And I know that everyone on this committee shares those thoughts. And with that, over to you,
Mr. Chair. It's going to be a great year. Thank you, Council President. For every good MBA out there, we need at least three or four good CPAs to help clean up the aftermath of decisions we may make. So look forward to working even closer with our auto staff this year. A couple of housekeeping things. So this year I will allow public comment. I'll allow it at the beginning of the meeting and I'll allow it for two minutes. And again, it'll be on an item on the agenda that we'll be taking action on or that's on a second read for those remarks. Reminder of the new rules. So Councilman Boylan talked about the new rules in rules yesterday. Again, I will take excusals on a first come, first serve basis. So please let myself, my ECA know with plenty of advanced notice, if you do have a conflict coming up so we can plan around that, obviously for the specific purpose of keeping decorum and just a common courtesy, if you need to use the restroom, whatever, that's fine. Just come tap me on the shoulder again, just so we are keeping a quorum while we are in here. Let's see. I think that's most of the housekeeping stuff. One thing I want to say, Council President, yesterday you had a great line I wrote down that you said, just talking about focus on civility, disagreement is inevitable, disrespect is not. So I love that. I hope that we approach everything in a very civil manner this year. Going back to my submarine days, one of my captains had a line said, be bold, be decisive, and be nice. And if you can get along with 180 people on a submarine for months, we can get along up here for the next couple of months as we go through the budget process. And that includes the guests that we're going to have come talk to us. We have a lot of guests that come here, talk about their initiatives for proposal. So that'll be something contagious to stress that we have a tone of civility as we go through this budget process. And again, just that's a great line. Disagreements inevitable, disrespect is not. So final thing I'll say before we get rolling on the agenda, finance, it's a lot of work. And again, I know I have some former finance, both chairs and council presidents, but I encourage everyone just to please do your homework ahead of time. The finance committee meetings are not the place to learn about a bill for the first time. It's for us to discuss and debate it. So just encouraging everyone, talk to the auditors, talk to the bill sponsor, assuming obviously it's not a council member, but just talk to you who you need to know to get educated on that bill ahead of time so we can use this time wisely and have good debate on those bills and ultimately vote how we think is best for the city of Jacksonville and our taxpayers. So with that, anybody got any questions or comments before we get rolling in today's agenda? All right. So the order for today, I'm going to review the agenda first. Then we're going to have Mr. Paul Harden. We're going to have an in and out emergency at Tuesday's council meeting. Paul's going to give us about a two minute overview of that. Phillip Peterson is going to talk us about the other in and out emergency next Tuesday, which is the millage rate resolution, which for those new on finance, this is a standard resolution we do at the first council meeting of every year. Then we're going to do all agenda items except for it's National Travis Jeffrey Day. He has five or six items of his annual bills, and we'll take those up all together to make those our last items of the day. And then I'm going to, again, the budget's barely over 24 hours. I was going to share some of my thoughts that I have going into the budget process this year. And certainly if anyone has any questions or comments on that as a committee, we can talk about that a little more at the end too. So I'm going to go through the bills. We do have a lot that are on deferred. If you are the bill sponsor for any of these, I would encourage you to do what you can to bring it to a conclusion or withdraw it, because a lot of these have been on here a while. So item 1, 2024-0627 is deferred. 2024-0966 is deferred. Item 3, 2026-0361 deferred at Council Member White's request. 2025-0775 deferred at Council Member Carlucci's request. Item 5, 2026-227 deferred at Council Member Diamond's request. Item 6, 2026-318 deferred at Council Member Johnson's request. Item 7, 2026-320 deferred at Council Member White's request. Item 8, 2026-0377 deferred at Council Member Johnson's request. And item 9, 2026-0445 will amend and move that one. Item 10, 2026-448, the first Jeffrey bill will amend and move that. Item 11, 2026-449 amend and move that. Item 12, 2026-0453 will amend and move that. Item 12, 2026-04453 will amend and move that. I will have one question for the administration, because I'd ask for more information about that one in rules and have not received it yet. Item 13, 2026-489, we will amend and move that. Item 14, 2026-490 will amend and move. 2026-491 amend and move. And then 2026-493 will amend and move that one. Item 17, 2026-494 will amend and move that one. And item 18, 2026-495 amend and move. And 2026-496-497 will move the first one, amend the second one. And then getting close to the end, 2026-498 will amend that one. And then the last action for today, 2026-499, the last of the Jeffrey bills will amend and move. Just so I can read into the record on second read, we have 0535, 036, 037, 038, 0539, 541, 542, 543, and 552. So those are the bills on first and second read. Do I have any public comment cards today? No, I do not have any public comment cards. Great. Well, Mr. Paul Harden, it is your time to
educate us on this in and out emergency. I'll go quick. Paul Harden, 1431 River Place Boulevard. We have pending a piece of legislation to amend a submerged land lease on a parcel of land the city is getting from the state near the Four Seasons and the office building in the North Bank Riverwalk. We want to use that land for the first football game, and we need to get it out as an emergency through the council at the Tuesday night meeting. We hope to have an in and out at that meeting. I've come to the committee meetings this week to make myself available for any questions anybody might have between now and the Tuesday night meeting or at the meeting today. I know the auditor, oh, there's Phillip. I didn't know he was here. I've been calling you. Hello. So if you have any questions today, certainly I'm prepared to answer them. If you have questions that come up between now and Tuesday night, if it's possible, I'd like to respond to them before then so that we can move the legislation out on that Tuesday night meeting. I'll be happy to
answer any questions. Anyone in the queue for Mr. Harden? Okay. The only question I had for Mr. Peterson, I know there was still some back and forth. Just again, my understanding, this is simply a lease amendment with no increase one way or another to city costs, but I think that was being
looked at by your staff. Correct, Phillip? To the chair, to the chair. I've reviewed the draft legislation in the submerged land lease. I've sent some questions to Mr. Harden and to the OGC attorney, and I will confirm, right now I'm, will confirm that there's no cost to the city, but right now I believe there is no cost to the city, but I will get that for you. Okay. Thank you, Ms. Reber, and if
you could just let, just let me know if you find something in your research that looks like there is some sort of cost change one way or another. So, okay. Anybody else for Mr. Harden? Doesn't look like it. So we will, we'll move on from that. Thank you, Mr. Harden. Thanks for being here and educating us. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Peterson, time for you to talk about the next in and out
resolution. Yes, sir. Through the chair of the committee. So at Tuesday's council meeting, there will be a bill before you, 2026-500. That is the rollback rate resolution. It needs to be voted out as an in and out emergency so that you can meet the requirements within state statute of notifying the property appraiser of the rollback millage rates, the proposed millage rates, and then also the public hearing that will be held in September. This year, it's on September 8th. It's your first council meeting in September before you approve the tentative millage rates. All of that information is required to be transmitted to the property appraiser by August 4th. And since this is your only council meeting from the time you get the budget until August 4th, it's done as an in and out emergency. You could also hold a special council meeting if you wanted to, but that's not been needed in the past. The rollback rate resolution will transmit that information. It only requires a majority to pass, but it does set the high watermark for what the proposed millage can be for next year's budget. And so the mayor has proposed millage rates that are equivalent of what the council passed last year. No changes there. And council members White and Freeman may remember former council auditors have historically recommended an increase in the proposed millage rates because, once again, that is your high watermark. So once you pass that bill, you cannot raise the millage again without going through a very costly and tedious process that's done by the supervisor or rather by the property appraiser. So former council auditors have recommended an increase to give yourself some cushion. We've had the budget for 24 hours, just as you have. So we may come across instances where there are gigantic holes or unfunded programs, you name it. There's a lot of things that will be discovered over the next four weeks. But I do not feel that's necessary given the state of our reserves. Our reserves are very healthy. We are well above the 17% recommended rate from the GFOA. We're in that mid-20s. So I don't believe that's necessary. If we do find problems, you could fill it with reserves or you could also cut other programs that have been included in the proposed budget. But just wanted to make you aware that that bill will come up Tuesday night for an in-and-out emergency vote. If you have any questions between now and then, happy to answer and get with me and
we'll get through that. Thank you, Mr. Peterson. Councilman Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Through the chair to Mr. Peterson. Just curious, and I'm glad you brought that up at where we were as far as the reserves are concerned. The question I have, though, is kind of like having seen a couple budget cycles and they've, like you said, the auditors have recommended it. Would you recommend, I know you said at this point, not right now, but should, better to be safe than sorry, should we go with something a little more and then make sure we lower it then? Or I just wouldn't want to get to the spot where you said, like, we'd have to go through that process. Is that conventional wisdom?
Thank you. Through the chair to Council Member Johnson. That's exactly the reason that former councilors have recommended that increase. Typically, it's been a recommendation of an additional eighth mil or additional quarter mil, depending on where we are. Our reserves are at probably the healthiest they have ever been in the history of the city of Jacksonville. This was a practice that was started in the probably late 90s when our reserves were in the 20 to $40 million range with a billion dollar budget. We're well, well above that. So, at this point, I don't think it's necessary. We have obviously not gone through all the details of the budget, but we have seen items, increases here and decreases there. And at this point, nothing is standing out as a giant hole that needs to be filled. So, given that and the state of our reserves, I don't think that
it's necessary this year. Thank you, Mr. Peterson. And just to add a couple things here, again, for the first-timers on finance, this is something we do every year. And Mr. Peterson, he will certainly reach out to us. Basically, it would have to be a large budgetary mathematical mistake at this point, because the budget is set. And I intend to support that resolution with this year's military. We're in the unique situation that the voters are going to have a say on something that is much more magnitude-wise than anything we could do with, well, I guess we could, but with our millage rate. So, I intend to support the resolution as it will be submitted on Tuesday night. Anything else, Mr. Peterson? All right. I have no one in the queue, so we will get going on the agenda now. Since I already read them out in the beginning, we are going to jump and start on, let's see, it is item number nine, which is 2026-0445. I have an amendment. I got a motion and a second on the amendment. I have no one in the queue. All those in favor of the amendment, say aye. Any opposed, say nay. Amendment passes. Can I get motions? I got a motion and second on the bill as amended. I have no one in the queue. Open the ballot. Record your vote.
Six J's, zero nays.
By our actions, we have passed 2026-0445. Going to skip over item 10 so we can bundle all of those bills at the end, as well as 11. Item 12, 2026-0453. Can I get a motion to withdraw? I got a motion and a second on withdrawal. Ms. Norris, this came up from both me and Council Member Salem in rules yesterday about what was the reason for the withdrawal. When I first saw this, when it was going through committee in the prior council year, this was essentially to cure some of the negative fund balances as well as how we're going to spend some of their capture money. If you could just get me and the entire rules committee just in an email format, just the reason and the details behind the withdrawal.
Yes, I can email you. I can also try to speak to it now. Go ahead. I don't have an MBA and I'm not a CPA. So we actually just filed a bill, I believe will be introduced next week, that uses that unassigned fund balance, as you guys had determined in legislation earlier this year, to go into a contingency account. This bill hits that floor, so we're withdrawing it and we will handle those negative fund balances another way.
Thank you, Ms. Norris. So essentially, it's my legislation that's requiring the withdrawal, so we can put it into the, I forget what we renamed that account, but essentially using the recapture dollars to match up against any currently unfunded cash completion grants. So I'm the problem, it's me. So got it. So with that, we got a motion and a second to withdraw. Open the ballot, record your vote.
Six yay, zero nays.
By our actions, we have withdrawal on item number 12-2026-0453. Item 13-2026-489. Can I get a motion and second on the amendment? Ms. Reber, can you explain the amendment?
The amendment will revise the bill title and Section 1 title to reference the sections of Chapter 86 that are being amended and to also clarify that there is an addition of a mayor's liaison. And it's going to correct the language in Section 86.103b to reflect that the liaison is designated and not appointed.
Thank you. I see no one in the key. All those who have heard of the amendment, say aye. Aye. Any opposed to say nay. Amendment passes. Got a motion and second. On the bill, as amended, Council Member Freeman first, then Council Member Miller.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I did not use my usual statement when I'm serving on one of the committees that's getting something, the first bite of the apple, which is I reserve the right to change my mind if more information comes. I watched neighborhoods yesterday and I heard some dissenting voices on this, and one in particular being someone who has the most institutional knowledge up here. And that was from Council Member Carlucci. And the points that he raised are the exact same ones that I had and concerns when you have someone, be it a council member as a liaison that is getting overly involved, or if it's someone from the administration coming. For those who did not see rules yesterday, I must put this out there, and you're going to hear this as a repetitive statement that I make. This seems like they're picking winners and losers. And I do understand where Council Member Peluso is going with this because they've been in line since 2025. I get that. And I will fully understand that and be an advocate for you. I've only been in line since I filed a bill a year ago, right, as well, but after his. Why are they picking and choosing which council member they want to execute on? And I want to make sure, I want to make sure that this body understands that. Because we've been clearly told with mine with the microgrants that we pass appropriations, they do execution. Now they brought up that JSEB is a different model. They forgot to mention that it did go to public service grants. It went first to ITD in their hands to do a program for kids from our urban community. And I'll just say it, black kids, the same kids that did it two years ago, an amazing dashboard. We took pictures in the atrium on the first day of school. I sent that money for those kids to do the same type of thing again. They refused to do it. I moved it to public service grants, said, hey, help the nonprofit space. They said they don't have the capacity to do it. You all heard that. I'm like, wow, you don't have the capacity to help people? So then I moved it to JSEB. Because in the first commercial, the mayor said jobs, small business, number one priority. And it got asked there. And that board wrote a letter saying that they demand those dollars be released. So when I see this bill coming now, saying they want to put a liaison because they haven't gotten money, which if that's what it takes for me to get it, then I want one on every board. I want one on every board if that's what it takes for politics to get taken out of this process and for people to be served. So I'm going to stay principled. And I'm sorry, Mr. Peluso, because this was one time where I thought we were going to align. And I was there. And then I heard Councilman Carlucci yesterday, and he brought up some really good points. And so I'm back to where I started from. I can't support this right now. If we're not going to treat every council member equally, I'm not going to do it. If we're not going to treat our citizens equally, because the 200,000 that they're saying that they're missing out on, same things happening with the 200,000 for the citizens that I was doing. So with that, I just want to put that on the record why I'm going to be voting no.
Councilmember Miller, then I'm going to go to the bill sponsor, and then I'll come to you, Ms. Norris.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have three things I just wanted to cover. I just wanted to explain why I voted no earlier in neighborhoods. And I still haven't heard it yet. But my main reason for voting no is I don't see that this legislation changes anything. The administration and our liaison and our council can move forward with any suggested legislation that they believe is appropriate to bring before this body. And they don't need someone in writing with the administration to be able to do that. And as I pointed out, in neighborhoods, Dr. Tracy Polson had been designated way back in the beginning of the administration's time as the point person for homeless-related issues for the administration. So everyone knows who the person is that's looking into the homeless matters for the administration. So I just don't see what this changes. And because it's so simple, there's no process, there are no specifics laid out. Here's what will happen and how. And here's what will happen for these amounts and types of recommended uses of the funds, but not for these, like over $100,000. Obviously, they have to come back to the council because of the legislation this body passed. I don't see the specifics in there. That's the second reason. And the third is along the lines of what was already mentioned by past President Freeman and was addressed by one of our earlier speakers in neighborhoods. Are we going to do this for every board, every commission? Do we need to have legislation that says, who's your point person for the administration? We do it for the council. The president does it every year. And so we know who that person is for every one of these bodies. But I don't understand why we need legislation to be able to make sure someone from the administration is actively engaged and addressing issues on their behalf and moving forward with things that the homeless commission has said they would like to move forward. And so I just don't get it. Will I be crushed if this goes through? No, absolutely not. But it just doesn't make any sense to me. And so those are my three reasons why I won't be supporting it. Thank you.
Bill Sponsor. Thank you, Chair. And thank you for everyone's comments. I think I have thoughts on a few of them. But the first thing I will say is the HIC asked me to do this. I'm their liaison. They wanted help. They've been in very deep need of help. There's been a lot of confusion on how to move forward. This is not some concoction out of my mind, nor is it meant to be some sort of, I don't know, anything to create consternation amongst the body. It's just to help this commission that we created to the point of a point person, as Council Member Miller had just sort of said, you know, whether it's Dr. Polson or somebody else, a point person is not codified. This codifies that there will be a point person for future years, like there will be future mayors. And we don't know if those mayors are going to care about the homelessness commission like this mayor does right now. The city might be in a very different position later. So you want to codify those things, I believe, to help ensure that future iterations of what the city of Jacksonville's government looks like has that point person. And now it's determined that there would be a point person. Tracy Polson's doing it now because it was a big issue, I think, coming into this administration. We don't know what the city's going to look like in a couple years. Economy might be great. Everyone's living on yachts. I don't know. But at the very least, we now ensure that there will be a codified point person, a liaison. I also do want to, I'm going to ask Ms. McGillis to kind of step in in a moment, provide a little bit more clarity on why, you know, this body does have such the limitations that it does and how this does make the process better. But I do think to the point of what Council Member Miller had mentioned, I would like to see, it would be good to have like a much more codified version of how dollars come out. However, this is part of that process. To the point of what Council Member Freeman had brought up involved, involving the grants department, everything else. I mean, that's, that's, that is not what this, this bill is not intended to, to wade into those waters. And I think the issue back during that conversation was about if the grants department was overburdened and could they handle more stuff. This wouldn't, I don't even think this touches the grants department. So, so I think it's a little bit apples and oranges. Um, but, but second, no, but, but this doesn't, this doesn't have the grants. The grants department right now has no relationship with the HIC. That's been, if anything, there's, there's been kind of a problem here, but Ms. McGillis, if you don't mind kind of, kind of jumping in and saving me
here. Well, before we get her, uh, Ms. Norris. Okay. Council Member Freeman, you get to quickly respond the, uh, we are filling up the queue here quickly. And thank you. And I'm only responding because he,
referred to me by name, which is fine. I only use grants because that's what they used yesterday. And please, verify, go back and run the tape. They said the grants department is different and JSEB doesn't deal with grants. That's why I use that. Had they not said that, I wouldn't have said it. That's all
I want to put on the record. Thank you. Ms. Norris. Thank you, Chair. Uh, through the chair to the body, and I imagine Ms. McGillis will speak to this much more eloquently than I can. Um, there is a process dictated in the code about how the HIC makes their recommendations. And going through that, we found the hole. There's an opportunity for HIC to make, to assign funds to a type of use that can be carried out by a department head. They submit a memo, all that stuff. Um, it's under a certain amount. I can't remember if it's a hundred thousand. Then it has to become legislation, right? But as far as that administrative communication, that was not happening. So the HIC by code is an advisory body to both the administration and to the council. The council has a liaison. The sheriff has a liaison. The mayor is missing someone who can specifically go, go to administrative leadership and dictate HIC has made this recommendation. This memo needs to happen. These actions need to be taken. So this is truly just filling in a hole in that process that's currently dictated by code as a request by the HIC. It has nothing to do with moving money around. The trust fund from which they make recommendations has its own method of being filled up. We don't believe we have control over that. Um, so this is truly just filling in a hole we found going by the process as it's currently codified. Mr.
Palouse said, does that satisfy what you wanted Ms. McGillis to talk about? Or do you still want her to recite part of it? Microphone, please. Through the chair. I think Ms. McGillis could say
it even better than how Ms. Norris said it. So I'd like to, I'd like to see if there's any, uh,
any more, uh, gaps that you might want to fill in. Ms. McGillis, do you have anything to educate us on?
Uh, to the chair, um, through the chair to the committee, the, the number one issue as Ms. Norris was speaking about is the mechanism under which these funds are used. They, um, HIC is a purely recommending body. They cannot appropriate, appropriate, they cannot allocate at all. They're recommending body to both the mayor and city council. There is currently, uh, probably a need to have a better codified process about how those recommendations go to the mayor's office, how those recommendations go to city council. But the number one thing that has occurred over this past year is when the funds have been recommended and, um, they are, have been a city council has appropriated money into the homelessness initiative, special revenue fund of section one, one, one, nine, two, zero. Then those funds, so long as they're less than $100,000, those funds can simply be used pursuant to a department memo and never see city council again. So what has occurred is that the HIC has made recommendations and then there is absolutely no information as to what is happening, by whom, in what process, any of those recommendations are being effectuated, if they're being effectuated at all. So the request of the HIC was, and in working with the administration, was to have a non-voting representation, representation by the administration with knowledge of what any of the departments have asked for from the homelessness initiative special revenue fund. Who's using the dollars is the question that would be answered by this position? Council Member Gay. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um,
initially I voted for this in, in, in rules, uh, but we had quite the, uh, back and forth on it and, uh, the comments made about, uh, JSEP, uh, you know, but, and I responded, you know, back to date, they are in the same situation. Uh, now this information that, uh, Council Miller has brought to the forefront, uh, you know, made, made me look at this thing in, in a whole different, whole different light. Right. And, and, and I understand there's a hole, but fixing this one hole, don't fix all the other holes. And I think, you know, just cause we fixed one tire on the car and the other three tires are flat, the car ain't going to go. And so we need to look at fixing all the holes that needs to be fixed, uh, and not just one, uh, department, uh, like Councilman, Councilman Freeman said about JSEP. Uh, uh, that's, I, I've heard that, you know, all through last year in neighborhoods, uh, the, uh, struggles that it was having, uh, getting the, getting the money out and where the grants were sitting there and, uh, JSEP sent a letter requesting the money be released and it didn't get released. And it's just an ongoing problem where I think we need to not look at just filling this one hole, but look at correcting this as a whole. So I, as this is, I, I, I'll, uh, concur with the, uh, Councilman Miller, Miller and, uh, Councilman Freeman that, uh, I think we don't need to move forward with this and it needs to go back and, uh, be, be re-looked at. So I won't be supporting
it at this time. Thank you. Councilman Miller, then Johnson, then hopefully the last speaker,
Councilmember Peluso. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yeah, just real, real quick. I just want to ask of what's been talked about that they would like to see happen. What cannot happen right now without someone listed in the legislation as the administrative or administration's rep to the commission? What cannot happen now that will be able to happen if they name someone in writing? I, I just, I just don't see that. Um, they can do all the things that have been mentioned right now. It's just a matter of wanting to do those things to support the commission. That's really what this is, what, what this should be about. Um, so I, I just, and again, this goes through, I'm really okay with it, but it, but it just, there isn't a whole lot of stuff there. And I'd like to see if we're going to pass a legislation, piece of legislation, let's pass something that really does improve things the whole way across the board for process systems. It makes it really clear for future changes that may occur in, in leadership. So I just, I, there just isn't much there. And I, and really it doesn't change anything on ability to take action on things that the HIC recommends. Doesn't change a thing. It just names a person, um, who's already been listening in, occasionally going to the meetings. Um, so yeah, again, I, I just don't see the reason for it. So um, thank you, Mr. Chair. Councilman Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Could I get an answer to
Councilman Miller's question? Um, I don't know who that goes to, because he said, what does it change? I think that's a great question. Like if the person is named, how does that change things?
Absolutely. So formalizing that position gives it the authority to, uh, work between departments. So one thing we're having right now, HIC, and remember this is a commission of volunteers who do not know the legislative process, who have no idea what a term sheet is, who does not know what it means to manage a contract. Those are things, those are, um, subject matter experts can speak to that throughout our city, right? So HIC, the bills you actually see going before you now, um, HIC made those recommendations to those organizations for those programs. It was the administration who hopped in at the last minute and helped to actually correct the term sheets. There were a lot of issues and do the best we could to bring you a legal good product to be able to vote on and to understand what's happening. Um, the HIC had no awareness that that process was required. We do have staff that supports that commission in a role of like noticing meetings, taking minutes and stuff, but the nitty gritty of actually getting legislation passed or term sheets executed is not something that they are familiar with. And so we need someone who's a little bit more, uh, in a more authoritative role who can either assign that work or can help navigate it through the different processes of the administration, or if it becomes legislation, navigate it through the
legislative body. Through the chair. I don't want to go back and forth, but that's not what I see. I'm looking here. Kenny Logsdon, Nealita Maharaj, Kaylee Jones, and Chanel Chen are the four staff members that are assigned. Uh, Nealita Maharaj is literally a contract compliance manager. How does she not
understand the process? She can help with contract compliance, but the actual creation of that term sheet and getting it to a point where it can be executed. And I guess PO is cutting all that stuff. That is so she wouldn't understand that process. She might have, I will not speak for her, but this
is a much more, uh, that's what it's confusing to me because it seems like redundancy and not to go back and forth on that. But the other part of this is, and I have a question, uh, and thank you for that, Ms. Norris, uh, through the chair, if this process, is there a way for us to amend this? And maybe this is a Mary and, um, question, I'm not sure, or Shannon, if, if, is there a way for us to, because I, I see where Councilman Freeman is going. Why don't all boards and commissions have the designated liaison? If, if you're going to do it kind of like I'm to use a colloquialism, if it's good for the goose,
it's good for the gander. Why doesn't everyone have one? I think it would depend on the founding code for that, that board commission advisory body. I think it would vary based on each. So why are we picking this one? This one, we identified a problem going through the process, and they were wholly unaware of what next steps to take, how to transmit their recommendations. And so this is one that we can easily fix. That's not to say that all the other boards and commissions don't have issues and aren't worthy of having solutions offered. And ideally, we will work to get to them or work together to find those solutions. But this is the solution we've determined, at least in the short term for this commission, that will help them get their recommendations on the street faster. Thank you, Mr. Chair. All right. Next,
Councilmember Peluso. And I will say, I'll have some comments at the end, but we are talking about some problems that are one level up right now. And we're kind of getting away from the exact bill. But Councilmember Peluso, then Councilman Freeman, and then I'll have some comments.
Thank you, Chair. And thank you for that commentary, because I think that's important. I mean, the first thing I'll say is this does change things for the commission. First off, do we think the commission's doing a great job right now? Do we think that it's executing exactly how we wanted? I don't. I've been the liaison. This is something that they've asked us to help them with. And providing an additional person who's now codified is going to help do that. And I think we can have better processes moving forward. I think we can absolutely shape how the HIC operates a lot better. I think that's something they want. I think it's something we want. But I don't see why this this bill before us now, which they've asked for this help, I don't really get why there's even a little bit of, I don't know, heartburn over it. It's very bizarre to me. But just kind of ask yourself that. You think right now the HIC is operating the way it's supposed to? You love it? This is what you want? I mean, but it does, Councilmember Miller, but it does. And it does based on what you've heard from the director and from the attorney who's been working on this for the past two years. There are massive gaps in communication that this will help fill. And in stabilizing this commission and provide more long-term sustainability, it'll hopefully allow for them to really kind of get their legs up from under them. I don't want to waste more time on us going to meetings in the HIC and for there to be the consistent, have the dollars been spent yet? Hey, have these things happened? So I'm sorry. It's just a little bit frustrating. I'm a little surprised. And I don't know how JSEB works. I don't know how any other stuff works because I don't follow that process nearly as much. But the HIC, this body created. I don't think we created JSEB, the JSEB commission or boards or whatever. We didn't create PSG. We didn't create CSG. We created the HIC. So why would we not want to do everything in our power to make sure that it's running as best as possible? And right now this is the first step and we can go to future steps after that. I'm happy to do it. But please vote this up and hopefully, hopefully I answer enough questions. And if you have any more, ask Ms. McGillis.
Councillor Freeman. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I just, all I want to do is just correct the record. First, I want to take us to the very first budget the mayor did. And the H, this commission that he's talking about, I want to remind everyone, and I don't pat myself on the back often, but this is a piece, this came out of the work of the initiatives I had as president. Affordable housing, homelessness, access to health care. Those are all things that I championed. Council Member Boylan led this committee. This was a product of it. So I want everybody to understand that. So I'm not against this project or this, this conversation. But if you think about it, the first budget, I tried to take three million out and put the money on the street right away. And you all first term didn't quite understand the makeup of things. And I said, government is slow. And the vote happens. With 10 votes, you can move a mountain. We didn't get 10 votes then. That money did not go on the street until that following May, that following May. And so now I'm hearing the same issue again with the same committee. 2025, legislation's been passed, whatever money's been appropriated, and the money's not on on the street. Now we talk about JSEB. And so I want to just finish with this. And I was going to ask who staffs the meetings, but I believe now Ms. Norris said that they staffed the meeting. Through the chair to Ms. Shannon, can you tell me what is the difference between, because yesterday they said that the difference between the JSEB and, and the reason why I'm doing this is because the question's been asked, what's the consistency like? This is not the only one that stands like this. So if it's not, let's fix them all. So can you tell us real quick what the difference is between the structure of JSEB, and they make recommendations, and they currently have money, and the structure of this committee that was formed after JSEB, and they make recommendations, and they have money? What's the difference in, and what this bill of legislation is asking for?
Go ahead.
To the chair and through the chair to the committee. The number one difference as I see it, because I also staff the JSEB monitoring committee, and I'm assuming that's, you're speaking of the JSEB monitoring committee and not the JSEB program. But the JSEB monitoring committee, the, in 126, is their exclusive, their scope is, well, how is the JSEB program being effectuated? Are the goals being met? If they're not being met, is there a why? Is it a funding why? Is it, is it a numbers why? Are their goals wrong? Type of thing. And at every single JSEB meeting, the program is present. So you have the, the person to answer, the proverbial person to answer in front of that monitoring committee every single meeting. The difference is at HIC, their scope is to make recommendations to both city council and the mayor's office. Specifically in chapter 86, it reads of making recommendations to the mayor's office for the mayor's budget.
So thank you. Do we have documentation of who in the mayor's office attends those meetings? Because I would love to know their, their attendance record. Because it sounds like to me that there's not someone at the table that's supposed to be at the table to process this memo that seems a very simple thing to do. And now, because that person is not there, we're going to file legislation that now picks winners and losers out of one scenario where there may be others. And I don't think that this is needed then. Am I, am I, am I accurate by saying that there should be someone from the mayor's office at these meetings based on what you just said? Through the chair to Councilmember
Freeman, you are exactly on point. And that I believe is the actual purpose of this piece of legislation is to designate someone from the administration, a knowledged person from the administration to be the person at the table to answer what's happening with the funds.
Councilmember Freeman. Thank you. And through the chair to Shannon. Thank you so much for that, Ms. McGillis. So in reality, what I just heard is that the administration just needs to appoint somebody. They don't need, they don't need, well, first of all, well, we, we pass bills with appropriations and they don't execute. So what, what makes this any different in my opinion? To me, this is simply saying they need to determine who they want to go. I would like to get those records, legislative services, if you can help me identify who's been attending those meetings over the last, for 2025, every meeting they've had, I would like to know who the mayor's representative has been there. Because that's who should be in front of us right now, explaining why this commission is not having their voices heard. That's led us to this piece here. That's giving us, making Mr. Peluso be the grunt of this. And you shouldn't be, because I would be advocating for a board if I were on it. And I'll probably be advocating for one a little later on. But that's what it sounds like to me. So I'm voting against it. I'm done.
But that's the question. Call the question. All right. I'd like to welcome Councilmember Salem. I got Councilmember Arias in the queue, but I'm guessing that's an IT issue. And it's Councilmember Salem, who I believe will be our final speaker. It's the fourth time I've thought that there. So we'll go.
Let's see how it goes. Thank you, Chair. I was driving around in my car, listening to this. And I came back because I felt so strongly about this. In rules, I was the only person that voted against this. And let me tell you why. And Council, former past President Freeman, just for the first time, I think really hit on it. Nothing prevents the mayor from just saying, Brittany Norris, I want you to attend the HIC and make sure things get done, just like any other board or commission. I think to have legislation to do this, it's just like the president of the council did. I did it. Randy did it. Terrence did it. You don't need legislation. You just need someone to say, go to these meetings, facilitate whatever they want to get done, work with the liaison to do that. That's all you need. You don't need all this legislation. Thank you, Mr.
Chair, for allowing me to say that. Thank you, Councilmember Salem. We appreciate your feedback. All right. So now no one else in the queue. I'm going to say a couple of things. First off, Councilmember Poliso, I totally get you are carrying this as the liaison only. A couple years ago, I was the Public Service Grants Council liaison, and I carried a bill that, on their behalf, that then I and others heavily amended. So I get it that we have to do a good job being the liaisons. I'm going to support this because I'm just looking at the black and white of this one bill. However, we all need to take note of some of the issues raised here. I started writing them down. My three years in, I feel like and I have a higher bar than others to get approval to spend money. But once I spend or once I approve it, I feel like it takes forever to those dollars to get out there. So just in the past couple of days, some of the ones that have come up, certainly JSEB, CBA, which Councilmember Poliso, I still know how much, if any, we've given to the east side, frankly, and it's been a while now. There's a nonprofit in my district got something approved and took them almost the next year to get money. I had an issue with UNF. I've heard the mayor complain about how long it takes to get money out the door once we approve something as well. So again, it's not just a this bill type issue. It's a more systemic thing in my mind that from the time we actually approve something, it takes forever for that money to get out there. So when I make the decision that I approve of something to be spent, I want the money to get out there at least as soon as it can, so it can make a difference. So again, I think it's probably a more administration-led issue here, but just whatever we can do to get more clarity on how we can either help or what the administration is doing from the time that we approve something. We can get the contracts done, we can get the grants out there, whatever it is, so at least what we have approved, we get out there to help make a difference in whatever way we approved it for. So with that, no one else in the queue, open the ballot,
record your vote. Two yays, four nays.
Buyer Actions, item 13-2026-0489 fails. So it passed rules, I believe it passed neighborhoods, it failed finance, so it won't have to be discharged, it'll just be on the agenda on Tuesday night for a final vote. With that, we're going to skip the next two items, and then item 16, a bill in finance with a dollar sign attached to it. Item 16-2026-493, can I get a motion on the amendment? Got a motion, second on the amendment. No one in the queue. All those for the amendment, say aye. Aye. Any opposed say nay. Amendment passes. Got a motion, second on the bill, as amended. No one in the queue. Open the ballot, record your vote. You two work it out. Six jays, zero nays. Buyer Actions, we have passed 2026-493. We'll skip 17 and we'll go to 18-2026-495. Can I get a motion on the amendment? Got a motion, second on the amendment. No one in the queue. The amendment's pretty self-explanatory. All those in favor of the amendment, say aye. Aye. Any opposed, say nay. Amendment passes. Got a motion, second on the bill, as amended. No one in the queue. Open the ballot, record your vote. Six jays, zero nays. Buyer Actions, we have passed 2026-495. Item 19-2026-496. I got a motion, second on the bill. I have no one in the queue. Open the ballot, record your vote. Six jays, zero nays. Buyer Actions, we have passed 2026-496. We'll skip item 20 and come back to it. We'll skip 21 and 22. So I believe we've completed every action item except the Travis Jeffrey bills. So we'll go back. The first one of those is item 14. And Mr. Jeffrey, I know you're standing by. If I could, I'm going to speak for all the bills. We talked about these in rules. And as a reminder from my colleagues that, again, we do a lot of bills in a given year, we do these bills every year. I talked to both Travis Jeffrey as well as the auditors. There is nothing inconsistent or different with these years, with these bills than in prior years. These are not general fund dollars. These are what we call the, I believe, empowerment housing grants. So again, Mr. Jeffrey is here. If you have any questions, I do believe these have gone through all previous committees unanimously to this point. So with that, item 14, 2026-490, can I get a motion on the amendment? Got a motion and second on the amendment. No one in the queue. All those in favor of the amendment, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed, say nay. Amendment passes. Got a motion and second on the bill as amended. I have no one in the queue. Open the ballot. Record your vote. Six yays, zero nays. Item 14, 2026-490 passes. Item 15, 2026-491. Got a motion and second on the amendment. No one in the queue. All those in favor of the amendment, please say aye. Any opposed, say nay. Amendment passes. Got a motion and second on the bill as amended. No one in the queue. Open the ballot. Record your vote. Six jays, zero nays. By our actions, 2026-491 passes. Item 17, I believe, the next one. 2025-494. Got a motion and second on the amendment. No one in the queue. All those in favor of the amendment, say aye. Aye. Any opposed, say nay. Amendment passes. Got a motion and second on the bill as amended. Open the ballot. Record your vote. Six yays, zero nays. By our actions, 2026-494 passes. On to item, let's see, 20, 2026-497. Got a motion and second on the amendment. No one in the queue. All those in favor of the amendment, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed, say nay. Amendment passes. Got a motion and second on the bill as amended. No one in the queue. Open the ballot. Record your vote. Six Jays, zero nays. By our actions, 2026-497 passes. Item 21, 2026-498. Got a motion and second on the amendment. No one in the queue. All those in favor of the amendment, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed, say nay. Amendment passes. Got a motion and second on the bill as amended. No one in the queue. Open the ballot. Record your vote. Six jays, zero nays. By our actions, 2026-498 passes. Item 22, 2026-499. Can I get a motion on the amendment? No one in the queue. All those in favor of the amendment, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed, say nay. Amendment passes. Got a motion and second on the bill as amended. No one in the queue. Open the ballot. Record your vote. Thank you, Mr.
Jeffrey. Did you have something to say, Mr. Jeffrey? Six jays, zero nays. By our actions, we have
passed 2026-499. Mr. Jeffrey. Travis Jeffrey, Housing and Community Development Division. Sorry. You missed two bills, number 10 and number 11. I missed two? Oh. I didn't turn it back enough. Okay. I want to thank you for making it easier for me. I was wondering why you were coming up here, because it's not a good idea to come up here after we voted yes on everything. So item 10, 2026-448. Can I get a motion on the amendment? Got a motion and second on the amendment. All those in favor of the amendment, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed, say nay. Amendment passes. Got a motion and second on the bill as amended. Open the ballot. Record your vote. Six jays, zero nays. Nays. By our actions, we passed 2026-448. And item 11, 2026-449. Got a motion and second on the amendment. No one in the queue. All those in favor of the amendment, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed, say nay. Amendment passes. Got a motion and second on the bill as amended. Open the ballot. Record your vote. Six jays, zero nays. By our actions, 2026-449 passes. All right. There's still people out there in the crowd. Did I miss any other bills? I think we are done with action items. Go ahead. Okay, sure. So do you want to speak now, Council Member Freeman? I was going to kind of go over some original
budget thoughts. Sure. This will be brief. Through the chair to legislative services, there were a couple requests made for information. I know the chair asked for emails to be sent regarding, and I think that was to the administration. I asked for the record of attendance. Who do we ask that information from? Through the chair to Ms. Hampsey, can you email it to all of us? Because I think come next Tuesday on the board, we're going to need that piece of information to really come to a good conclusion on this bill. You've seen some of us kind of waver back and forward. So just knowing who the liaisons that have been appointed or the people who've been told from the council side or from the administration side are attending. Thank you. All right. All right.
So I thought I'd just take this time again. The budget is a little over 24 hours released to us, and I know it kind of gets quiet the first week, and that's because we have a great auditing staff that's going to take a look at everything. So I just want to share some thoughts, different things I've heard so far, things I've seen, and kind of how I see the budget process going. So our council president has installation. He laid out three principles. Is it core? Is it duplicative? And do we have the cash for it? And I think, to be honest, that's kind of what I haven't articulated like that. But I think a lot of us, that's how we've always thought. So I don't really think there's going to be a huge difference in how we go through the line item approach. What I've been saying, especially with the uncertainty of November 3rd, is when a company, when you're running a private company, you're facing a revenue deficit, there's a couple things you want to do. One is to hang on to cash, and you don't want to start anything new, especially something if it's expense only, with no revenue opportunities. So that's going to be something that I think we keep a mind on, certainly when it comes to looking at new things that are in the budget. We got a couple Eagle Scouts up here, so excited to serve with you, Council Member Gay. But one of the phrases we learned was, be prepared. And Council President Howland said that phrase as well when he was down here. We don't know what November 3rd is going to bring us. But I want to make sure that we are prepared for that. Council President also mentioned as installation, a desire for a lot of 17 to 2 votes. And I want to take that one step further. I'm hoping that the budget as amended by finance leaves this body on a 7-0 vote. So I know we're going to, we're not going to have perfect 7-0 votes on every amendment. But my goal is at the end of the day, we will be 7-0 to forward the budget to the full Council. And I'm also hoping for a minimal amount of floor amendments. Last year, there were a lot of floor amendments that added a lot of money to the budget. And I know I was consistent with how I voted on them. But the will of the body, we added some money back. And as part of that, we've been working together for four years now, some of you guys longer together. And I think we know what'll get 10 votes and what won't in Council. So again, we've had fights in the past just to get overturned by the full Council. So I'll certainly, I want to be cognizant of that. If we're thinking about not putting something in that we know is just going to be a floor amendment, it will just have to have discussion on that. I will not support any word only amendments as part of the budget process. We know where that got us last year. Again, I think any amendments that come through the budget process needs to have some sort of tie. It needs to have a budgetary dollar tie to the budget. And so that's what I will certainly be pushing. So in terms of success, again, what I'll be looking at is if the referendum passes, it's going to be out of our non-public safety areas. So to me, one of the things I want to try to get to, and I know the auditors are looking at kind of where it is right now. But again, we've been growing. All governments grow in general. But if ever there was a year to kind of hang out on a plateau, it's this year. Because again, our non-public safety spin, let's aim to keep it roughly flat to what it was last year, because we know we may have to reduce it. And if the referendum passes, it's going to be from our non-public safety part of our budget, which is, it was 832 million last year. I know the auditors are still trying to reconcile and everything to see what the total non-public safety number is in the budget as submitted. So let's see where I am with my notes here. So again, you're going to hear me say that phrase, let's kind of rest on the plateau this year with our non-public safety spend. It's not the year to grow at all that part of the budget. Initial detailed thoughts that I had on the budget. And again, when I see something I like, I'll say that. And when I see something I don't like, I'll say that as well. The capital improvement plan, I was glad to see that was down by nearly a hundred million dollars. The past couple of years, I've been one of the more vocal ones about how we've had all these generational projects that we seem to have had to do within a couple years. And there's ones that make the news like the stadium. There's ones that never make the news like the hundred million dollar plus downtown bulkhead projects. So all these things that have a lifespan of 30 to 50 years, we've happened to do them in a short period of time here. So I do think we're on the back end of our capital improvement plans. So I was glad to see it go down a hundred million. And by my math, our debt expense in this budget actually came down a little bit versus what we had to pay last year. So good to see that. However, within the CIP, there is a long list of projects with substantial changes. So I want to make sure we look at all those projects. And to be fair, there's also some projects with reduced funding needs. So I want to make sure that those projects that we previously approved, especially if it's a project that has a very steep cost increase and hasn't started yet, we need to re-debate those. Again, just to make sure that we may have been on board with this project when it was 10 million. But if it's 25 million now, do we still feel as strongly about it? So I know I asked the others yesterday, can you help us kind of put this together? What are the projects that have significant cost increases year over a year on the CIP? Last year by a four to three vote, the finance committee also increased the mayor's CIP proposal. I want to make sure we do not increase it again this year. So I think it's 587 or close to that. I certainly don't want to go above that, but I also want to make sure that we're looking at all the projects that are in there, the same as we look at every line item within the operating budget. Operating budget. So kind of the headline was it is only a one percent increase first last year. So by far the smallest year over year increase. Property taxes went up 71 million, total expenses only went up 23 million. And so again, coming off a year prior, there's 130 million year over year increase. So much less significant year over year increase. And I said, I think the daily record quoted me, I was happy to see that government's growing in the right areas. There's 68 net new positions, but there's actually 74 new first responders in six non-public safety job eliminations. And again, we're going to go through that every department we're going to look at. But again, at least the headline on the head count, please to see that. And due to council member Miller and Lane and different pieces of legislation, all economic incentives or incentives appear to be budgeted for as well. And I know that's something the auditors are verifying as well. So that being said, now for the focus areas, non-departmental spend. You've heard myself and others on finance talk about this a couple years. That really has been and non-departmental spend is essentially nonprofits and incentives. That's the big chunk of it. So that'll still be the big focus area for this year. I did send the administration a number of questions already on some of the new things that we didn't have in the budget prior year. I mean, I will keep an open mind on everything, but also at the same time, I reiterate it, I don't want to see this be a year that we start a lot of new things that we haven't done in the past, certainly just with the revenue uncertainty out there. Let's see. The auditors, I did ask them to put together if they can help us just kind of simplify a table. Hey, everything you find that is new in the budget, whether it's non-departmental, whether it's an enhancement, whatever, just so we have that. So that can really become a primary focus when we're talking about this. Hey, what is new in this budget? Group Health Fund. Again, there's a meeting pending on that. And I'd asked, or I will ask Council Member Salem to be heavily involved in that. It does look like there were some changes made and we're going to get briefed on that. Group Health was a big concern voiced by a lot of us this past year. Last year's budget, we had to use over 20 million to plug it. And again, it's a touchy topic, right? That the easy button is you increase premiums, but Council Member Salem went the extra step. And we partnered with a group called the Bailey Group to come in with some ideas on what can we do to reduce the cost without necessarily having it to be a direct pass through to our citizens. So looking forward to learning more about that. Looking again at the non-public safety departments, we'll scrutinize all the enhancements just like we do every year. I want to make sure that we are spending our time proportional to the size of the budgets. A great example of this is we always talk more about the mayor's office, $5 million budget than Steve Long's $70 million budget. Sorry to call you out there, Steve. But I just want to make sure again, we're going to have to focus on the material size budgets. And I think as the Finance Committee, I just want to make sure we are looking at where the actual dollars are and doing our deep dive in those areas specifically. I mean, I'm sure we're going to scrutinize the mayor's budget as well. I plan on looking at our city council budget just as closely, but I do think it's those bigger departments. We want to make sure that we're comfortable with every line item in that. Departmental lapse, last year we added a 2% across the board lapse. We will have a discussion on if we want to do that again. And again, that'll be a group discussion. Personally, I like the lapse idea because it gives motivation to large department leaders to beat what their budget was because they have to come back to us to ask for the rest of it. I do think one thing I'd like to do a little bit differently this year, if we do a lapse, we did across the board every department, whether you had a $500,000 department or a $50 million department, I'd like to focus on the larger departments because it's not worth OGC's time, the auditor's time, list of services time, if that 2% is a very small dollar amount. So again, and by all means, this is going to be a team activity. I'm not saying this is how it's going to be. I'm just sharing some of my initial thoughts, finishing the third year on finance, and now fourth as finance chair. And then again, going through the budget process, I've been trying to hit the theme. I don't think we're going to do much different than we've done every year. Every year we go line by line. We look at every capital project. We look at every departmental spend line. The only thing different this year is there's the November 3rd uncertainty. So normally, when we go through a department budget, we either approve as is, we can remove items, we can put below the line. We've done that for a couple things. In fact, there's pending legislation now that has to do with, I believe it's a downtown park item that we had put below the line in last year's budget. And they're ready to come back to us, give us more information and talk about what that money is going to be used for. And then we'll decide whether to bring current year budget dollars above the line. So that's certainly, I can see us doing that on some items as well. But one additional thing we may do this year, and I'll credit Mr. Peterson with this. Mr. Peterson, he worked with some others as well. We've talked to Mr. Weinstein about this. I believe OGC's reviewed this mechanism. There is a way that we can simply put something contingent on the referendum vote. And what I'm thinking we may want to do this for is on some of our larger buckets of non-profit dollars. Because again, I said at the beginning, the one thing you want to make sure is that you have cash available when going into revenue uncertainty. And this will be a mechanism that, okay, we're comfortable giving X amount of dollars now, but let's revisit this based on what that is. We're going to have to retool pretty fast. And the good news is, the referendum vote is on day 34 of next budget year. So it's not like it's going to, whether it passes or fails, there's almost a whole year left for us to pivot and do what we need to do. Because again, at the end of the day, we're going to have a balanced budget one day or one way or another. But more to come on that, that is just an additional tool we'll have to where something can essentially get a contingent approval based on that vote. So just want to throw that out there now. And I'm sure Mr. Peterson and myself will talk more about this as we get into that. Independent authorities. So am I allowed to say who my favorite independent authority is or? Okay, gotcha. Can I go the opposite? Okay. Well, so independent authorities, my biggest thing is I want to make sure you guys take every independent authority up on their opportunity to pre-beat with them. They are complex budgets. So want to make sure if JEA, JEA, whoever, just make sure you review their budget with them. Because again, I want this to be the time of the budget hearing that we debate changes and have broader discussions on that. Just not that we're seeing these budgets for the first time because JEA's budget by itself, I think $2.6 billion. It's larger than the other money that we're going to spend weeks going through. So just want to make sure that you guys do take the opportunity to pre-meet. And then JEA, just for my colleagues that may not have paid as close attention last week, where basically the result of that board meeting last week was they added 30 days to hopefully work out some sort of agreement. Otherwise, we'll probably get guidance on how we're going to need to handle that budget, because I have to look at the schedule. That 30-day period may not be before we had them on the schedule to begin with. So JEA, we may need to be a little bit flexible on the timing of when we get that budget hearing. And at the board meeting, it was brought up, they said their budget was more complicated than others. And so that is why they have 90 minutes. They got more time than the other independent authorities, because they, like some of the other groups we deal with, do have complicated budgets. So want to make sure they got plenty of time for that. So I know that was a lot, but y'all know me, I don't have social media. So this is really the only place I can share my budget thoughts. So with that, any questions, comments, or anything? Council Member Miller.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to echo what you and a couple others have said. I mean, I think we have a great, diverse, experienced group here that experiences both on council and in the corporate world, civilian world, military world. There's a lot of people with a lot of solid, big budget experience. And so I think I'm excited. I'm excited. I know these challenges are here, but that's why we're here to take on those challenges, work with the excellent staff we have. And I believe it's going to be a great year. I really do. And I'm just, I'm just grateful to be part of this body here on, on the finance committee, um, this year. And, uh, I just had one question. Um, who are the MBAs? Uh, me and council member Howland. Okay. Me too. No, it's, it's not from the army though, is it? It's, uh, no, actually it's from a university in California. Anyhow, but it was on an air, it was on an air base. How about that? No, um, back, back to my original point. I, I really, uh, appreciate everyone who's here. I know everyone's going to do the homework and, um, I, I just know we're going to make it a good year working with all the parties involved in the stakeholders. And, um, I really, really look forward to it. I look forward to those, those sessions, um, because of who the team is here, uh, that's together, uh, that we're going to be teaming with. So thank you,
Mr. Chair. Council member Johnson, three MBAs and a PhD. Very brief. Um, thank you, Mr. Chair. I will say, uh, the question I keep getting and I'm sure all the others is my first time. So I'm sure you all have gotten that question as well, uh, from the media, the community. What do you think? What's in the budget? What is it? And to be honest, I want to say it publicly. We, it's been, as you said, just over 24 hours, this is a multi-billion dollar budget and we just haven't had the chance to really dig into it fully. But in the parts that I've looked at, Mr. Chair, I echo a lot of what you're saying. Uh, but I want to say something that I do appreciate this two billion dollar budget increasing by only one percent. But I also understand that there are more people living in Jacksonville this year than they were last year. And as such, um, our responsibility is determined, uh, or is to to determine if the government capacity needs to be at a space that is taking care of all of our people. And one of the things that I kind of talk about over and over, I know I've seen it in my district is the fact that we have a consumer affairs department with a head count of 1.5. And this particular department is also charged with, um, human trafficking and, in monitoring those things. And I find it really hard to see. So while I'm not looking to add any head count or to expand government, I also want to make sure that we are taking care of people. Um, and I also want to understand, uh, want to underscore, I really appreciate the fact that we are going away with the deferred maintenance thing, uh, that we're trying to get away from that because even though the maintenance on those things are deferred, what it means is they will cause larger problems, uh, in the future. And so I don't want that to be something that future councils have to deal with. And finally, um, I think these investments, I know I've, you know, being very strategic with the CBA dollars that I've been granted for my district, uh, but programming as well as infrastructure are things that we must, you know, focus on. And one of the things that I came up with as I was pouring through the budget last night, late, late, late, um, that's going to be my North Star is our job is to make sure that, uh, the budget reflects the values of this community. And so I, that was kind of like the North Star. I want to make sure that it's not just numbers, but every number is about a person. Thank you. Thank you. I have no one
else in the key. So with that, we are adjourned.