I wrote wrap-ups for the first workshop as well as the second and third. Not much changed for the first public hearing and vote. The only proposed change adopted at first reading was Council member Hurtak’s to use $1.3 million from the parking reserves to fund the next phase of the HART Route 1 pilot. The funding will support maintaining its current 15 minute frequency as well extending the frequency to evenings and weekend days. It was approved unanimously as was the first reading of the budget adoption.

What do I think of the budget itself? I haven’t looked at it closely. I didn’t think there was a lot to play around with to start with. The real flexibility this year came from identifying the unspent funds from FY24. The final tally was $25.8 million, however $14 million of that went to replenish hurricane funds. The remaining $11.8 million was debated by council, landing at splitting the funds between paving, sidewalks, stormwater, and hurricane assistance grants. At some point by January FY25 will close out and we’ll see if there’s anything left over.

Speaking of paving though, I think appropriating a total of $41 million to resurfacing is setting the mobility department up for failure. There’s $4.5 million of approved but unspent funds in their budget already, another $5 million from the aforementioned FY24 surplus, AND $9 million in FY26. That’s not counting the $21 million earmarked for specific roads to be funded from the agreement with the county on how to spend the All for Transportation partial tax refund. The mayor on several occasions attempted to scale back how much to budget for resurfacing to be met with pushback from council. Council member Clendenin led the charge. They could have scaled the FY26 budget back to $5 million (oh no, only $37 million in paving) and had $4 million to fund the non-profits they all agree do good work in the community and moved up the Yellow Jackets Little Project to this fiscal year instead of a token move from FY28 to FY27. There would still be 2 million to work with. Instead, we get Council member Viera afraid to step up and say where the funding should come from; instead trying to push that off onto staff. Back to pitting the community against each other fighting over who deserves to be funded. Folks, we are talking about a million dollars between what was funded last year and this year. The Yellow Jackets are a cause advocated for by Council woman Henderson. That it’s not in the budget this year is a disservice to her memory.

The key point I want to make is this is a budget adoption. For the pat 4 years there’s been this constant refrain of “the mayor’s budget.” Eradicating that phrase from the talking points of council members outside of the time between when it’s presented and first reading is my primary goal. It’s the city’s budget. Adopted by council to take responsibility for. They have had ample opportunity to suggest changes if they think any line item, any project is a poor use of city funds or should be deprioritized over a different project. If there’s something so egregious in the budget they can’t support, don’t vote for the budget or 5 year Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Otherwise, you think it’s fine and we move forward. No surprises. No finger pointing. Own the budget, make sure it’s being followed through responsibly. Start planning for next year. Less looking back and arguing over what was already approved and start being proactive for this council’s last budget. There should be a sense of responsibility to leave the next mayor and council in a better place than you found it.