If anyone was expecting a flashy presentation with big, new, aspirational project announcements they were deeply disappointed after watching the mayor’s budget presentation. Those ended in 2023 after the mayor presented a budget with a proposed millage increase only to be shot down by council. No debate on how to spend the extra revenue; no discussion about future revenue models and anticipated increases in labor costs. A lot of hope was placed on sunsetting and capping CRA districts to account for their no vote—which hasn’t work out quite like they drew it up. The process that followed was an embarrassing debacle with a council that wanted to assert their power as defined in the charter while having no clue how to actually do it.

The realities of there not being much left over are starting to hit home. That was the presentation I saw. A majority of the projects mentioned were ones that have been in the works for years. What I heard from the CFO is we lag behind other major cities in Florida in property tax rates and spend more than we bring in just for police and fire. So we’re thankful putting speed cameras in school zones will bring in another $15 million. Yay I guess.

Two years later, council still doesn’t understand how the budget process works. While I believe the mayor and the administration have taken council up on doing this differently, (this is the second year the budget presentation was done a month before the required deadline per the charter) this council still wasn’t ready. Instead of taking the presentation as what it is—her proposal to council—and thanking her and staff for their time, they focused in on a couple of minor items, and in the case of Council Chair Clendenin, losing his temper (something that’s becoming common). Over a difference in opinion on $2.5 million dollars in paving. With funds from the FY24 budget. Toss in a curve ball on the recommendation of how much and how to distribute funds through the “social action and arts fund” (SAAF) and all of a sudden people forget it is a $2 billion budget with more than $700 million in the general fund. A budget proposal council could throw out the window and write their own if they were so inclined. Instead, it appears the politically expedient thing to do was focus on a couple of hot topic issues to get a sound bite in for the media watching.

Both the FY24 fund and the SAAF were discussed during the April workshop. I wrote in the wrap up

Nothing formal can be approved at a workshop, but the general consensus/straw vote on how to spend the funds…

I believe that’s where the breakdown started. Council believed that action was an official act, or at least a formal request to the administration. But there was never a motion to formally re-assign the funds (if that’s something council can even do). Seems the admin took it as a counter offer; holding off on doing anything until after the initial contract negotiations with the unions. Which was mentioned in the presentation—negotiations are ongoing. Thus they held back $2.5 million in paving. (I didn’t hear one member ask how much total was in the FY26 budget for paving.) Ultimately there needs to be some clarification of how “appropriated but unspent” funds are handled. At least council is tracking them now thanks to the efforts of Council member Hurtak. Last year they missed $9 million in additional various revenues on a consent agenda item the same day the new budget was proposed. There was no public discussion on how to spend the extra revenue, they just approved what the mayor proposed. Temper tantrum free.

As to the SAAF I wrote “Hopefully, this was productive and in the fall they might be able to give more consideration to the other 99% of the budget.” My hopes are dashed.

I haven’t had time to dig into the proposed budget, but I did want highlight the mayor seemed to budget for the street car. The city had to do some emergency funding earlier this year due to a grant sunsetting to keep the street car fare-free. During that discussion there were questions how the shortfall would be covered this fiscal year. The CRAs contribute some, but it seems the mayor is proposing fully funding the difference. Additionally, in what some might consider a surprise, it appears from the presentation there is funding proposed (including an anticipated $500,000 increase) for the fare-free Route 1. Council member Hurtak proposed it as a 1 year pilot program last fall. A thus far successful pilot. I hope council keeps these items in.

One issue I was hoping would be in the budget presentation that wasn’t, is Sulphur Springs. We still don’t have a status update on the pool. The community was expecting something would be announced by now. Instead, we find out the director of parks and recreation is leaving the city. And while later in the day—during the status update for the land use code rewrite—the topic of Sulphur Springs was touched on, it was mostly to remind everyone how much we have failed that neighborhood.

And at the end of the day? Council still doesn’t have a plan. There was a lot of discussion under new business, but what wasn’t done was set any agenda items for either of the budget workshops. No discussion of additional workshops. Nothing planned (to my knowledge) for any kind of presentation from their budget analyst. Until council understands that the administration’s job is done—they’re only going to be around to answer questions—we are going to be subject to yet another dysfunctional budget process with council members voting for a budget in which they have no idea what they are approving. Then we’ll have the same rehashed outrage next year when a contract for a project approved in the budget appears on the agenda or something they thought was in the budget isn’t.