Hello, everyone. Let's get started on the Polk County Board of County Commissioners' public hearing for the year 25-26 budget agenda. We're going to call it to order and pass it over to Randy. Thank you, Mr. Chair. The first items, items A1 to A10, are items for the final rate resolutions for the special assessments for this fiscal year 2025-2026. If you recall, in July, the board adopted a certain tenant rate resolutions for this fiscal year 2025-2026 special assessments. The adoptions of these final rate resolutions presented this evening following a public hearing is the final step in the process for the assessments to be placed on the 2025 tax bill. Accordingly, there will be no further hearings on these matters, and the rates set by these resolutions adopted tonight will be the final action of the board. These are public hearings, so the public has an option to comment on each item. At this time, I will turn it over, turn over the hearings to Assistant County Attorney Noah Mylove to present the final rate resolutions. Good evening, Commissioners. Noah Mylove, Assistant County Attorney with the Polk County Attorney's Office. Item A1 is to request the board adopt the final rate resolution for the year's 2025-2026 street lighting assessments. The proposed assessments are determined by calculating the projected electric costs, maintenance charges, and administrative costs for each assessment area. The proposed assessments for all street lighting assessment areas are set out in the proposed resolution, and the county attorney's office recommends that the board adopt the proposed final rate resolution for the 2025-2026 street lighting assessments. This is a public hearing, Commissioner Chair. Okay. Ladies and gentlemen, this is a public hearing. If you wish to come forward and speak on this matter, please come forward and state your name and address, and you'll be given three minutes. Seeing none, I'm going to close the public hearing and bring it back to the board. Approval. We've got a motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Item A2 is a request for the board to adopt the final rate resolution for the Master Inwood Street Lighting MSBU for the year 2025-2026. The MSBU is created to reimburse the cost of capital improvement, electric maintenance, and administrative costs for street lighting in the Master Inwood assessment area. The costs are apportioned on a per-equivalent residential unit basis. The Master Inwood area is comprised of the former Southwest Inwood, Central Inwood, and a third newly developed Northern Edwin MSBU. Each district has a separate ERU during the period of paying off the initial capital costs, but each district will have the same ERU cost after the period of paying off the initial capital cost. The proposed assessment area for a single-family residence in the MSBU is $36 in the Southwest area, $46.12 for the Central area, and $44.09 for the Northern area. And the county attorney's office recommends the board adopt the proposed final assessment resolution for the Master Inwood Street Lighting MSBU for fiscal year 2025-2026. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, this is the public hearing. If you wish to speak on this matter, please come forward and state your name and address, and you'll be given three minutes. Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing and bring it back to the board. Move. Motion for approval. Motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion to be. Item A3 is to request the board adopt the final rate resolution for the Skyview Utility Municipal Service Benefit Unit, or MSBU, for fiscal year 2025-2026. The MSBU is created to reimburse the costs over a 20-year period for the capital improvements made to the portable water and wastewater systems for the Skyview area, so that they may be incorporated in the city of Lakeland's utility system in accordance with the court order. The costs of the capital improvements are apportioned on a per-equivalent residential connection basis, and the proposed assessment for a single-family residence is $95.28. The county attorney's office recommends the board adopt the proposed final assessment resolution for the Skyview Utility MSBU for fiscal year 2025-2026. Ladies and gentlemen, this is a public hearing. If you wish to come and speak on this matter, please come forward and state your name and address, and you'll be given three minutes. Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing and bring it back to the board. Move for approval. Got a motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Item A4 is a request for the board to adopt the final rate resolution for the Island Club West Utility MSBU for fiscal year 2025-2026. The MSBU was created to reimburse the costs over a 30-year period for the capital improvements to a portable water, reclaim water, and wastewater systems for the Island Club West development so that they may be incorporated in the county systems in accordance with the court order. The proposed assessment for each parcel is $280.88. The county attorney's office recommends the board adopt the proposed final assessment resolution for the Island Club West Utility MSBU for fiscal year 2025-2026. Ladies and gentlemen, this is the public hearing. If you wish to come forward and speak on this matter, please come forward and state your name and address, and you'll be given three minutes. Seeing none, I'll bring it back to the board for a motion. Motion for approval? Second. Got a motion and a second. All in favor? Opposed? Motion carries. Item A5 is a request for the board to adopt the final rate resolution for the East Bimini Bay Utility MSBU for fiscal year 2025-2026. The MSBU was created to reimburse the costs over a 30-year period for the capital improvements to a portable water, reclaim water, and wastewater systems for the developed portion of the Bimini Bay development so that they may be incorporated in the county systems in accordance with the court order. The proposed assessment for each parcel is $319.82, and the county attorney's office recommends the board adopt the proposed final assessment resolution for the East Bimini Bay Utility MSBU for fiscal year 2025-2026. Ladies and gentlemen, this is the public hearing. If you wish to speak on this matter, please come forward and state your name and address, and you'll be given three minutes. Seeing none, I will close the public hearing and bring it back to the board. Motion for approval? Second. Got a motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Item A6 is to request the board adopt the final rate resolution for year 2025-2026 fire services assessments. The assessments levied fund the fire rescue budget and allow Polk County to provide essential fire rescue services to citizens within the fire service district. The recommended rates for the 2025-2026 fire services assessments are set out in the proposed resolution. The proposed rates are based on a single-family residence assessments of $393. The county attorney's office recommends the board adopt the proposed final rate resolution for the 2025-2026 fire services assessments. Ladies and gentlemen, this is the public hearing. If you wish to speak on this matter, please come forward, state your name and address, and you'll be given three minutes. Thank you for having me. Or you need to give us your name and address, please. Okay. Anthony Higa, 114 K.O. Drive, North Lakeland. In regards to the fire, in 2024 and 2025, there was a 39.5% increase. And for 2014 to 2024, the average was 5.86% per year. So I'm asking that if that can be lowered because our property tax is just getting higher and higher. And being an elderly and a fixed income, it's harder. Now, Sarasota, on August 26th, wants a 14% increase for fire services. I'm just asking the board to help the seniors, especially us. And we live very frugally. So that's all I ask. Because our property taxes increases from 25%, 24 to 25. And 23 to 24 is almost 25% also. Thank you for your time. Thank you, sir. Anyone else? Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing and bring it back to the board. Second. Got a motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Item A7 is to request the board adopt the final rate resolution for 2025-26 residential waste program services assessments. The assessments collected fund the residential waste program services. The recommended rates for year 2025-26 are $281.65 for collection and $64.40 for disposal of first cart. The county attorney's office recommends the board adopt the final rate resolution for year 2025-26. Ladies and gentlemen, this is a public hearing. If you wish to come forward and speak on this matter, please come forward and you will be given three minutes. I'll give you your name and address. Seeing none, we'll close the public hearing and bring it back to the board. Motion for approval? Second. Got a motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Item A8 is to request the board adopt the final assessment resolution for nuisance abatement assessments for fiscal year 2025-26. Pursuant to Polk County Ordinance 08-047, Polk County has undertaken a program to improve various properties throughout the unincorporated area of the county by requiring the abatement of certain nuisances and for the property owner to reimburse the county for the cost of abatement. The parcels on the proposed roll are for those parcels in which the property owner has failed to reimburse the county. The county attorney's office recommends the board adopt the proposed final assessment resolution for nuisance abatement assessments for fiscal year 2025-26. Ladies and gentlemen, this is a public hearing. If you wish to speak on this matter, please come forward and state your name and address and you'll be given three minutes. Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing and bring it back to the board. Second. Got a motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Item A-9 is to request the board adopt the final assessment resolution for excessive bulk waste assessments for fiscal year 2025-26. Pursuant to Polk County Ordinance 18-016, Polk County has undertaken a program to collect excessive bulk waste after giving notice to the property owner. The parcels on the proposed roll are for those parcels in which the property owner has failed to reimburse the county for the cost of collection and disposal of excessive bulk waste. The Polk County Attorney's Office recommends the board adopt the proposed final assessment resolution for excessive bulk waste assessments for fiscal year 2025-26. Ladies and gentlemen, this is a public hearing. If you wish to speak on this matter, please come forward and state your name and address and you'll be given three minutes. Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing and bring it back to the board. Motion for approval. Second. Got a motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. The final item, A-10, does not require a public hearing. The item is to request the board designate me, Noah Milov, as assistant county attorney to certify the 2025-26 final assessment rules to the tax collector. The certification is required by September 15th, pursuant to Section 197.3632 Florida Statutes. Second. Got a motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Thank you. Thank you, Noah. Randy? Yes, sir. Next item, Mr. Chair, is B-1, to discuss the purpose of the public hearings for fiscal year 25-26 budget. Hearings are primarily for the purpose of explaining the budget, proposed tax levy, and any proposed amendments, as well as forwarding the public the opportunity to participate in the budget process. At this time, I will turn it over to County Manager, Mr. Beasley. Mr. Chair, most of the comments about the budget itself. Then I'll turn it over to Christia. She's going to give a brief presentation as well, and then I'll close with a few final comments. But what I would say, the past 12 months continue to reflect what I think are challenging growth dynamics within Polk County, and I think also that are occurring within several of our neighboring counties within Central Florida. I think coupled with continuing labor shortages, I think certain tariff inflationary impacts that are uncertain at this point, pending local revenue options being contemplated by the Florida legislature, there continues to be, I think, a tremendous amount of strain being placed on local governments throughout the state of Florida, including those in Polk County. Despite these challenges, I believe Polk County continues to be a stabilizing factor in providing core services to both businesses and citizens alike. I wanted to express my sincere appreciation to the men and women of our staff, the constitutional officers, the state court system, and the Polk County Medical Examiner's Office. I think here again, all of these entities have again worked cooperatively over the past several months in helping to prepare their respective portions of the proposed FY25-26 budget. Let me also say thanks to some citizens who have directly or indirectly participated in helping to shape this budget. By serving on citizens' advisory committees, participating in public hearings, making phone calls, sending emails, and through other social media contacts, I think their voices have been heard by certainly the senior staff and the board alike. What I would say is preparing a reasonable budget that truly reflects our community's needs and the elected board's priorities is a challenging process under normal circumstances. As we continue to assess the demands brought on by population growth, our goal of serving the businesses, the citizens, and the visitors of Polk County has not and will not be deterred. The proposed FY25-26 balance budget totals $3,464,631,333. This budget maintains the countywide general fund millage rate. This budget reflects receipt of and continued community distribution of various federal and state funds associated with our community development block grant program, our emergency solutions grant funds, our home investment partnership funds, our American Rescue Plan investment funds, and the state's housing investment partnership funds. This budget maintains the board's commitment to public safety, public health, infrastructure, technology, tourism, and community support by way of adding critical positions and maintaining current priority programs and services. Consistent with the board policy, this budget maintains a general fund operating reserve at current levels, which I think strongly continues to reflect positively on our financial solvency and our financial health. This budget will continue to make investments in technology upgrades and associated staffing in order to improve operational efficiencies and strengthen system security protocols. This budget maintains the board's commitment in the needed capital infrastructure to support public safety, public health, public water supplies, transportation capacity and intersection improvements, stormwater management and water quality improvements, as well as environmental stewardship. This budget continues to address quality of life issues that relate to community health care, behavioral health, and opioid abatement, recreation and leisure services, economic development, affordable housing, as well as Medicaid contributions. This budget expands the annual cost indexing of select fees for services and special assessments in order to avoid those larger periodic increases. This budget will allocate in excess of $68 million of one-time funds to address capital project needs towards public safety, transportation, recreation, and related support facilities. This budget will reflect an increase in the residential and commercial waste disposal fees after many years of no adjustments, all in order to address increasing operating expenses and planned capital improvements. And finally, but equally important, this budget continues to invest in our employees by way of a 4% salary increase beginning October 1, and also employees who are participating in the county's health insurance program, there will be no increase in participating employee premiums for the fourth consecutive year. So, Mr. Chair, I want to turn it over to Ms. Christia Johnson, who is the head of Polk's Budget and Management Services Division. She has a brief PowerPoint that I think will help explain the various components that make up this budget, some of the factors that are involved in accounting for the revenues and the expenses, as well as some prior year comparison data. And as upon the conclusion of her brief presentation, I'll say a few closing comments before we get into the statutory requirements of the public hearings. Christia, please. Good evening, Commissioners. This presentation serves as a high-level overview of the budget process that began back in March with the board retreat. So, some of the key takeaways are the total proposed budget. As Mr. Beasley stated, that's a $3.464 billion total budget. A component of that is the general fund budget. The total proposed general fund budget is $726 million. That's an 11.1% increase over the current year. After three consecutive years of double-digit property value growth countywide, we have now dropped back below 10%. And the countywide property value increase is 8.83%, with the unincorporated area having an increase of 6.69%. So, this slide highlights some of the significant board decisions that are reflected in this budget. First of all, no increase or decrease to the millage rate. The prior three years, during the double-digit growth, the board made the decision to lower the millage rate each one of those three years. This budget has a millage that is the same as the current year millage. The fire assessment was indexed at 5% each year, beginning in fiscal year 21-22. However, for fiscal year 25-26, that increase is $112 in order to cover 75 new positions that were added mid-year to help mitigate mandatory overtime, as well as the 108 positions that are included in the fiscal year 25-26 proposed tentative budget in the implementation of a Kelly Day. The solid waste residential assessment increased by $8.84. That is the rate that the Polk County solid waste customers are going to see on their tax bill. Finally, a comprehensive utility rate study was completed last year and implemented current year. This is just a continuation of that plan that is set to continue through 2028. One-time money is made up of the prior year audited general fund ending fund balance. To put that simply, it's actual revenue over expense for the prior year, as well as any excess revenue over expense that comes out during the budget process. So this chart is a recap of the one-time project funding that the board approved on July 11th at a work session. The total funds available totaled $70.4 million. $68.4 million was allocated to projects, and the additional $2 million was put into reserves in case of any projects that were to come up during the year. This is a slide that we show multiple times through the budget process. It compares the current year adopted millage rates and revenues to the fiscal year 2526 ad valorem revenues that are in the budget, and the gray column shows us the difference between the two. So the countywide millage rate is at the top, and that shows an additional $36.9 million of revenue in the 2526 budget versus the current year. Then below that, you see the MSTUs, and when you put all of those together, we ended up with $38.9 million in additional ad valorem revenue in the 2526 budget over the current year. It's important to note that statutorily, we have to budget anticipated revenues at 95%. Statute also requires that the script that I'm going to be reading as part of the public hearing, we have to read the 100% numbers. So these are not going to match exactly. They're going to be about 5% off. This chart breaks down the total budget by major fund group, each of which is balanced revenue to expense. The largest piece at nearly $1.5 billion is the special revenue funds. These are revenues that come in from a specific source that have to be used for a specific use. Almost a quarter of that is made up of transportation-related activities, and a few other significant pieces are impact fees at 14% and public safety at 10.2% and the indigent health care fund at 10.3%. The enterprise funds are utilities and solid waste at 52.6% and 47.4% respectively. These are areas that are financed and function like private business. They provide goods and services to external customers and in return receive payment to cover the cost of providing those goods and services. The internal service funds are fleet, IT, and employee health insurance. They provide goods and services to the internal customers, and then they are paid for those goods and services through interfund transfers. The capital fund group is where we account for general capital projects in accordance with our CIP policy, and debt service is where we account for the repayment of long-term debt that isn't payable from the enterprise funds. So the utility bonds are in the enterprise funds, not in the debt service funds. Finally, the general fund is where everything else falls, and we're going to talk a little bit more in detail about the general fund in just a moment. On July 11th, Mr. Beasley presented his balance proposed budget per statute. Since then, we completed the CIP process, received notice of some additional grant funds that we're going to be receiving, and made some necessary tweaks to get the budget finalized. So we want to show you the changes that occurred, and we broke it down by fund group. In total, the increase to the budget was 1.7% in total. Most of that is attributed to the CIP. The divisions go through a true-up process with their projects, and they assess what they're realistically going to spend before the end of the current year, and what they need to carry forward into 2526 to spend. We also expected a reimbursement payment from Hurricane Ian during the current year. However, we have not received those dollars yet, so we needed to take that revenue and put that into fiscal year 2526 as well. So in looking at the total general fund, it's about $726 million, and as you saw before, the total general fund makes up about 21% of the total budget. In order to better understand the general fund, we want to back out the transfers and the reserves, and what that leaves us with is the general fund operating expense budget, and this is what we're actually budgeting and anticipate spending during fiscal year 2526. The general fund operating budget is 7.3% higher than the current year. So the pie on the right is how the operating budget expenses are allocated, and then the pie on the left shows the revenues that cover those expenses. Funding the requests of the sheriff and the other constitutional officers and elected officials makes up about 60.2% of the operating budget expense. We also have certain mandates that we have to cover from the general fund. Some examples include the inmate outside medical, the medical examiner, the municipal CRAs, and the county audit. That leaves just under 32% for BOCC programs that are either partially or fully funded by the general fund. About 43% of the BOCC piece goes towards public safety programs. 14.5% goes to facilities maintenance. And 13.6% goes towards general county administration. A number of other divisions and programs compete for those remaining dollars. Oh, I'm sorry. I clicked too fast. On the revenue side, the majority of the funding comes from ad valorem revenue at 63%. The other taxes, that's made up of public service tax, sales tax, communication services tax, state revenue sharing, and local business tax. That's about 23%. The charges and fees in that category, about 70% of that is ambulance fees. The other 30% comes from a variety of sources. Some examples are sheriff and court fees, code enforcement, land development, business inspections, probation, and so forth. The other revenue is really everything else. Some of the larger pieces of that are the indirects, which are payments to the general fund from other divisions. Interest, scrap sales, parking garage fees, and so forth. So this is always a good news item. For the fifth consecutive year, the general fund days of operating reserves is fully funded at the maximum of the policy, which is 45 days. This covers about 85% of the total reserves within the general fund, and this represents what we would have available and unrestricted in case of emergency. Historically, we borrow from the waste reserves to pick up debris, clean up the county after a storm hits. But this would be the part that should the roof get ripped off of this building, this is what we would use in order to ensure business continuity and make sure that the county keeps on running, even if we have to do it from another location. So this shows good fiscal stewardship and planning on the board's part. It indicates excellent financial solvency and that we're well-poised should there be an emergency. Rating agencies look at this, and it helps us to get more favorable rates when we go out to borrow. Right now, we're at the very beginning of the process of refunding an existing debt issue because we can get a better rate and save some money. We also know that we're going to have to go out for borrow within the next few years in order to fund some significant projects, including the jail expansion, the Lakeland Government Center, and the Court Annex. So the Community Investment Plan, or CIP, this was presented on August 5th at a board work session. The divisions presented their proposed five-year CIP, which totaled about $1.9 billion across the five years. $793.1 million of that is included in the fiscal year 25-26 proposed tentative budget. The largest chunk of that comes from roads and drainage at 35%, followed by utilities at 22%. So this chart shows the 191 new positions that are included in the proposed tentative budget. It's broken out by category, support services and others, infrastructure, and public safety and public and environmental health. The largest portion of that does fall under public safety and fire rescue with a total of 132 positions. Our current position count is 2,426, and this is the first time that we have exceeded our prior peak of fiscal year 07-08 at 2,273. However, if you look at employees per capita, the population growth has outpaced headcount growth. Back in fiscal year 07-08, employees per 1,000 residents was 3.92. Currently, we are at 2.92, and even with the proposed positions in the fiscal year 25-26 budget, we're still only at 3.14. We don't add positions that we don't need, and we leverage technology and outside partnerships where we can, and we don't add positions that we can't justify with a solid business case. So, in closing, the total proposed tentative budget is $3,464,631,333. That concludes my portion of the presentation, and I will turn it back over to Mr. Beasley, and then we will proceed with the public hearing portion of the evening. Thank you, Christia. Mr. Chair, members of the board, members of the viewing audience, part of me wants to say, amen, holy Jesus. But what I do need to say is that Polk County continues to change. While the 25-26 proposed budget, I think, represents a substantial investment on the part of the citizens and the businesses of Polk County, I think it is truly a direct reflection of the demands for services generated by a significantly growing population and the increased cost of goods and services. These increased demands will continue, I think, to remain a significant challenge. This budget is expanding in direct relation to the various service demands generated by a growing population. Some of our traditional rural landscapes of the past continue to transition into the more urban, suburban environments. This growth dynamic continues to drive citizen and business expectations regarding the types of services we provide, the quality of those services, and the cost of those services. Finally, I wanted to thank the board for providing needed policy guidance and for allowing staff to think creatively in developing this budget. But also, I think, for having the confidence in staff to rise to the occasion during what I think are unprecedented growth years that have seldom been experienced in Polk's history. The FY24-25 proposed budget is put forth as a reasonable budget to address reasonable citizen and business expectations along with long-term board values and priorities. This proposed budget truly is a formal expression of our plans, goals, and objectives for the upcoming year and is a reflection of the services that we promise to our citizens. So, Mr. Chair, members of the board, on behalf of the county staff, on behalf of the constitutional officers and those related agencies that had involvement with this budget, we do present to you the FY25-26 balanced budget. And with that, I think we need to go ahead and transition it back to Christia and let you go through a very scripted, a very statutorily required narrative that we must go through as part of the public hearing process. So, item C is to discuss, I'm sorry, yes, ma'am, yes, those reserves are included in the general capital fund. That is part of the capital fund's slice of pie, and that is where that's located. The 2,617 includes the proposed 191 we're adding. Yes, ma'am. Christina, back to you. All right. Item C, discuss proposed tentative millage rates for fiscal year 25-26. C1, discuss the fiscal year 25-26 Board of County Commissioners' proposed tentative operating millage rate. So, under Florida statute, there are a number of items that I'm required to read into the record. Please bear with me through the next two items. Under Section C, there's a lot of data that I have to cover. On the countywide millage rate, we break out four components under the countywide millage rate. That's for internal purposes. That's board decision. From the state's perspective, we only report that aggregate millage rate. So, under Section C1, I'm only going to be reading the totals into the record because that is what is required by statute. When we get to the next portion and we talk about the MSTUs, I do have to read the entirety of each one of them as they are separate taxing authorities and those are required by statute to be read. So, the fiscal year 24-25 adopted millage rate countywide is 6.6348 mills. The fiscal year 25-26 proposed tentative millage rate is 6.6348 mills and there is no difference. The rolled back rate is the millage rate that we would have to adopt in fiscal year 25-26 in order to bring in the same amount of revenue as the current year with some allowable adjustments. The fiscal year 25-26 rolled back rate countywide is 6.3607 mills. The fiscal year 25-26 proposed tentative millage rate is 6.6348 mills. That is a difference of 0.2741 mills or 4.3%. The total rolled back rate revenue that would be generated countywide is $459,120,678. The total revenue generated by the proposed tentative millage rate is $478,905,446. That is an increase of $19,784,768 or 4.3%. The increase over the rolled back rate is necessary to maintain services within the funds that this levy applies to. Item C-2. Discuss the fiscal year 25-26 proposed tentative millage rates for the Polk County Parks Municipal Services Taxing Unit or MSTU, the Polk County Library MSTU, the Polk County Stormwater MSTU, and the Polk County Rancho Benito MSTU. The fiscal year 24-25 adopted millage rate for the Parks MSTU is 0.5286 mills. The fiscal year 25-26 proposed tentative millage rate for the Parks MSTU is 0.5286 mills. There is no difference. The fiscal year 24-25 adopted millage rate for the Parks MSTU is 0.1985 mills. The fiscal year 25-26 proposed tentative millage rate for the Parks MSTU is 0.1985 mills, and there is no difference. The fiscal year 24-25 adopted millage rate for the Stormwater MSTU is 0.0941 mills. The fiscal year 25-26 proposed tentative millage rate is 0.0941 mills. There is no difference. The fiscal year 24-25 adopted millage rate for all three of the unincorporated MSTUs is 0.8212 mills. The fiscal year 25-26 proposed tentative millage rate for the total of the three unincorporated area MSTUs is 0.8212 mills. There is no difference. The fiscal year 24-25 adopted millage rate for the Rancho Benito MSTU is 9.1272 mills. The fiscal year 25-26 proposed tentative millage rate for the Rancho Benito MSTU is 9.1272. There is no difference. The fiscal year 25-26 proposed tentative millage rate for all MSTUs in total is 9.9484 mills. There is no difference. The fiscal year 25-26 rolled back rate for the Park's MSTU is 0.5092 mills. The fiscal year 25-26 proposed tentative millage rate for the Park's MSTU is 0.5286 mills. That's a difference of 0.0194 mills, and that is a 3.8% increase. The fiscal year 25-26 rolled back rate for the library MSTU is 0.1912 mills. The fiscal year 25-26 proposed tentative millage rate is 0.1985 mills. That's a difference of 0.0073 mills. That is an increase over the rolled back rate of 3.8%. The fiscal year 25-26 rolled back rate for the stormwater MSTU is 0.0906 mills. The fiscal year 25-26 proposed tentative millage rate for the stormwater MSTU is 0.0914 mills. That's a difference of 0.0035 mills, and that is a 3.9% increase from the rolled back rate. The fiscal year 25-26 rolled back rate for the three unincorporated area MSTUs in total is 0.7910 mills. The fiscal year 25-26 proposed tentative millage rate for the total unincorporated MSTUs is 0.8212 mills. That's a difference of 0.0302 mills. That's an increase of 3.8%. The fiscal year 25-26 rolled back rate for the Rancho Benito MSTU is 8.9594 mills. The fiscal year 25-26 proposed tentative millage rate for the Rancho Benito MSTU is 9.1272. That's a difference of 0.1678 mills. That's an increase of 1.9%. The fiscal year 25-26 rolled back rate for all MSTUs is 9.7504 mills. The fiscal year 25-26 proposed tentative millage rate for all MSTUs is 9.9484 mills. That's a difference of 0.1980 mills. That's an increase of 2.0%. The fiscal year 25-26 rolled back revenue for the Park's MSTU is $20,962,893. The fiscal year 25-26 proposed tentative millage rate revenue for the Park's MSTU is $21,761,557. That's a difference of $798,664. That's an increase from the rolled back rate of 3.8%. The fiscal year 25-26 rolled back rate revenue for the Library MSTU is $7,871,377. The fiscal year 25-26 proposed tentative millage rate revenue for the Library MSTU is $8,171,905. That's a difference of $300,528. That is a 3.8% increase from the rolled back rate. The fiscal year 25-26 rolled back rate revenue for the Stormwater MSTU is $3,729,847. The fiscal year 25-26 proposed tentative millage rate revenue for the Stormwater MSTU is $3,873,936. That's a difference of $144,089. That is a 3.9% increase from the rolled back rate. The fiscal year 25-26 rolled back rate revenue for the three unincorporated MSTUs in total is $32,564,117. The fiscal year 25-26 proposed tentative millage rate revenue for the unincorporated MSTUs in total is $33,807,398. That's a difference of $1,243,281. That's a 3.8% increase from the rolled back rate. The fiscal year 25-26 rolled back rate revenue for the Rancho Benito MSTU is $9,417. The fiscal year 25-26 proposed tentative millage rate revenue for the Rancho Benito MSTU is $9,593. That's a difference of $176, and that's a 1.9% increase from the rolled back rate. The fiscal year 25-26 rolled back rate revenue for all MSTUs in total is $32,573,534. The fiscal year 25-26 proposed tentative millage rate revenue for all MSTUs is $33,816,991. That's a difference of $1,243,457. That is a 3.8% increase from the rolled back rate. The increase over the rolled back rate is necessary to maintain services within the Parks, Library, and Rancho Benito MSTU funds and to fund upcoming water quality projects and other services related to the NPDES permit as mandated by the Federal Clean Water Act in the Stormwater MSTU. Christia, before you move forward, let's just make sure the record's clear. On millage rates under fiscal year 25-26 for stormwater is 0.0941. Is that correct? Yes, 0.0941 mills. We may have heard you wrong, but we think you might have flipped four and one. Okay, I apologize. Section D, discuss the proposed tentative budget for fiscal year 25-26. Item D1, discuss the fiscal year 25-26 proposed tentative budget totaling $3,464,631,333. Item D2, discuss the fiscal year 25-26 Polk County Parks MSTU proposed tentative budget totaling $46,013,519. The Polk County Library MSTU proposed tentative budget totaling $12,074,224. I'm sorry, $224. The Polk County Stormwater MSTU proposed tentative budget totaling $14,370,000, and the Polk County Rancho Benito MSTU proposed tentative budget totaling $67,564. At this time, Mr. Chair, this is the portion for the public hearing. Ladies and gentlemen, this is a public hearing. If you wish to speak on a matter regarding the fiscal year 25-26 proposed tentative operating budget and millage rates, which include the Parks MSTU, Library MSTU, Stormwater MSTU, and Rancho Benito MSTU, you can come forward and state your name and address, and you'll be given three minutes. And I have one gentleman already signed up, Mr. Wilder. And actually, Mr. Wilder, I spoke to him, had a question regarding his trim and the value that was given. And I told him that that was probably a proper appraiser's question, and he said he was leaving, and I will follow up with him. Okay. Anyone else? Good evening. My name is Mark Plants. I live at 2707 Stephen Drive in Eagle Lake. I have two quick questions. This year's budget was $3.4 billion. What was last year's total? It was $2.985 billion. And I think I heard you right, but correct me if I'm wrong. You said you canvassed five different groups, and they laid out their plan for a number of years and gave you a figure that was $1.4 billion or $1.5 billion. Is that right? As part of our capital plan, the divisions come up with a five-year capital improvement plan. It's part of the Community Investment Program, or CIP. And that total was? $1.9 billion over the five years in total. So I think you also said that about $730 million or $750 million were this year alone. So it appears to be a little bit front-end loaded, or you expect it to be lower in subsequent years? Yes. And what would that be based on? Because you would expect that they'd have more needs, wants, and funding. It's built around execution. It's just a matter of how we execute capital projects. Some go earlier than later, but in some divisions, you see less of a capital need in the outer years. All right. Thank you, sir. Anyone else? Limited to three minutes, right? Yes. Right. Push a button to activate it? No, you're talking fine. State your name and address, please, sir. Daniel Wolf, 56 Lake Daisy Boulevard, Cypress Gardens, or Winterhaven, Florida. Is it fair to say that the majority of residential property owners will see an increase in their taxes in the next year? Mr. Chair, this is not really an answering question. If he has comments to the board that he wants you to hear, I believe that's more appropriate than an answering question. Yes, he has any specific, certain things on this agenda, but answering those type of questions is not what we're here for, sir. I mean, we're going through certain ways to get this done, and how do you want to? I mean, I think if he has comments for the board, that's appropriate, not a question and answer, back and forth. Okay. There is one thing I'm trying to get an understanding of, and I'm not sure if this is permitted or not, but I'll ask it anyway. I'm looking at property appraiser value information on my own personal sheet for my own property, and it said last year market value, this year market value. And the market value seems to have gone down, but it appears the millage rate has gone up. Do you think that I'm reading that correctly? No, I don't think you are. Okay. Are you unincorporated Polk County? I'm unincorporated Polk County. There's not a millage increase on this trim notice? Okay, there's not a millage increase on unincorporated Polk County? No. And I'll give you the numbers, and maybe you can educate me on this. $211,748 was the market value this year. The previous year it was $223, and it says here, the paperwork says, last year the assessed value for school millage was $151,941, but this year $156,347. So there's like a $5,000 difference. So you're talking about school millage? Yeah, school millage. That's a little bit different. That's under the school board? Yes. So that would be their millage rate. I'm not sure, I don't believe they're raising it, but that would be a question for the school board. Yeah, so that millage rate has not increased, sir. I mean, as a matter of fact, the last three years we lowered our millage rate. This year we did not, the last year. So the question I might have for the school millage, I should probably address that to the school board? Yes, sir. You're seeing if there's an increase for the school board, that's a whole different board. That's a different situation. Yes, sir. Okay. Well, I appreciate it, and you did answer my questions, and I have a little bit more knowledge, so I appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Have a good day. Anyone else? Seeing none, I will close the public hearing and bring it back to the board. Motion to approve the millage rates as set forth in the last few months. One second. She's going to read through that. Sorry, Commissioner Troutman. She's going to read through, make a recommendation. Yeah, on F1, right? Yes, sir. Yes. Jumping ahead. Sorry. I was hoping we could do it all in one. For the next three sections, I'm going to read the staff recommendation and then stand for the board to make a motion and approval. So, item F1, set the tentative millage rates for fiscal year 2526. Staff recommends that the board adopt the resolution establishing the fiscal year 2526 tentative operating millage rate of 6.6348 mils, which is a 4.3% increase over the rolled back rate of 6.3607 mils. The tentative millage rate of 0.5286 mils for the Polk County Parks MSTU, which is a 3.8% increase over the rolled back rate of 0.5092 mils. The tentative millage rate of 0.1985 mils for the Polk County Library MSTU, which is a 3.8% increase over the rolled back rate of 0.1912 mils. The tentative millage rate of 0.0941 mils for the Polk County Stormwater MSTU, which is a 3.9% increase over the rolled back rate of 0.0906 mils. And the tentative millage rate of 9.1272 mils for the Polk County Rancho Benito MSTU, which is a 1.9% increase over the rolled back rate of 8.9594 mils. All right. Need a motion on it? Becky. So moved. I'll fix that now. You've got quiet. Didn't know if anybody else would. Okay. We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Item G, set the tentative budget for fiscal year 2526. Staff recommends that the board adopt the resolution adopting the fiscal year 2526 tentative budget of $3,464,631,333. The fiscal year 2526 tentative budget of $46,013,519 for the Polk County Parks MSTU. The fiscal year 2526 tentative budget of $12,074,224 for the Polk County Library MSTU. The fiscal year 2526 tentative budget of $14,370,652 for the Polk County Stormwater MSTU. And the fiscal year 2526 tentative budget of $67,564 for the Polk County Rancho Benito MSTU. Move for approval. Second. Got a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Item H, set the fiscal year 2526 second public hearing date and time. Staff recommends that the board set the date, time, and place for the public hearing to adopt a final millage rate and budget on September 15th, 2025 at 6 p.m. in the commission boardroom. Second. Got a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All in favor, say aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Mr. Chair, could I just say a word of thanks to the staff here in the audience today? Your presence means a lot personally and professionally. It also means a lot to the process and the outcome. So thank you for being here. Yeah, and I'll echo that. Thank you. Thank you, everybody. Christina, y'all work very hard. Your staff, everybody there. And we thank you. I know this is a big undertaking. So thank you very much. We are adjourned.