Baring a surprise Tuesday evening council will vote to adopt the Fiscal Year 2026 (FY26) budget which begins October 1, 2025. There have been 3 workshops and a first reading since Mayor Castor presented her budget proposal on July 17. To keep the newsletter a manageable length, I’ve put my final budget thoughts in a separate post. The key point I want to make is this is a budget adoption. Council members are voting to adopt a budget proposal and accept responsibility for it going forward.
On Thursday council have a single regular meeting in the morning with a 78 item agenda, 65 requiring a vote. Which I want to reiterate is the goal here. Your voice carries the most weight before a vote. If there’s an issue you are passionate about, an agenda item you care about, tell Tampa City Council. The point of noting and highlighting items on the agenda every week is to bring awareness and encourage others to voice their opinion. Do not underestimate the power of one call, one email, one public comment. For or against your voice matters.
The first items I’ll highlight are 7 and 8. I’ve been critical of the TPD budget for vehicles and have questioned if they really need to be rotated every 5-7 years. If a bunch of 4×4 trucks are necessary for an urban police force. But I can’t complain about TPD making their first real investment into electric vehicles. 14 Chevy electric pursuit rated vehicles. Two different models priced at $46,748-$48183.36 each. In comparison 7 conventional engine Ford Intercepts purchased in March were $47,805 each. Hopefully the manufacturer will be able to deliver this time (several years ago electric vehicles were budgeted for the police department but it fell through and conventional vehicles were purchased instead.)
Item 26 is a merchant services agreement modification with Bank of America. Which reminded me that the discussion over credit card fees hasn’t been discussed through the entire budget process. When asked at the end of July why we are still paying $2.5 million in credit card fees finance staff couldn’t answer and said “you caught us flat footed.”
Items 42-44 are development agreements for infill lots owned by the city. The city conveys the land to a developer to build and “sell or rent the property to income-eligible individuals and/or families, whose annual gross income is at or below 140% of the Area Median Income (AMI).” 140% of AMI is classified as above moderate income by the federal and state housing standards. For a family of 4, that’s $146,020. For a couple it’s a household income of $116,760.
48 is the second reading to establish Charter Review Committee. Anticipate more discussion from council as to the process they intend to use to name their representatives but if you are interested in serving on the committee you should reach out to your council members now.
Finally, Item 50 I didn’t mention it for first reading, but this is the first progress I’ve seen on Station 24. Vacating a right of way between two lots that were secured for the fire station. Speaking of, item 69 will be an update from the consultant hired to manage the project. The motion is very specific to include
the latest schematic design, both internal and external, including the current total square footage; recommended stormwater solution with visual map of the water retention elements; recommended power line solution and timeline to align with TECO on final decision and cost; outcome of Grand Tree assessment; preliminary façade images; percentage of impervious surface space; number of employees that will staff the station upon initial occupancy; estimated date for public input;
There’s $20 million in the FY26 budget for station 24. It’s not a question of if, but when ground will break.
