Good evening and welcome to the final budget hearing for the City of Boko Raton. It is Monday, September 23, 2024. The time is 6 p.m. Will everyone please rise and join in the Pledge of Allegiance? I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible with liberty and justice, crawl. Ms. Siddins, will you please call the roll? Mayor Singer. Here. Deputy Mayor Drucker. Here. Council Member Nacolas. Here. Council Member Thompson. Good to be back. Council Member Wigtter. Here. All present. Thank you. The purpose of this public hearing is for re-budgeting of the fiscal year 2024-2025 budget appropriations Excuse me for the re-budgeting of the 23 24 budget appropriations for the consideration of ordinance 5704 and 5703 which will adopt final milligrates and the final budget respectively for fiscal year 24 to 2025 and as well for consideration of Resolution 91-2024 which will adopt the fiscal year 25 to 2020 2025 to 2030 capital improvements program. This point will turn to re-budgeting of the fiscal year budget appropriations and will turn to Mr. Brown. Thank you mayor Sharon McGuire on the director and Jim Zoros, the services director will discuss the rebudgets. Good evening, Mayor, Council. Chair, I'm a choir, I'm a OMB director. So normally we do a quick refresh of the budget and then we go over the rebudget items. That's okay. Thank you. I had it right. So I'm going to briefly go over the budget and we start with the mission vision and values. The vision, book, or tone, world class municipal, world class community, modern amenities and innovative innovation embrace safe, beautiful charming neighborhoods and vibrant economy enriched by exceptional, recreational, and cultural offerings. Emissioned to responsibly provide outstanding services to enhance our unique quality and the values our fairness, integrity, respect, service, trust. The strategic focus areas and priorities for this year for fiscal 25 are community safety, financially sound, vibrant economy, quality of life, world-class services, transportation and mobility and growth management. And we feel that the budget supports those priorities and focuses. The military currently for next year was proposed at 3.6596 for operating and 0.0186 for a total 3.6782 milledrate and DOM. It was slightly lower than the milledrate from last year. The revenues compared to last year are from 222, this for general fund, 222, 819 million to 2333 531. And the biggest increase would be in the advellarm taxes that was based on the values increasing. The general fund expenditures went from 222 687 million to 244 591 700 for next year. And we'll go over some of those increases. This is the revenues for next year, are 10,352, 100 more for ad for lower taxis and then some other taxes and utility taxes. There are some decreases or movements from the licenses and permit fees. Public safety to 98 400 some shared revenue and recreation services increases and then a 3.6 million dollar increase decreased from the tax increment that we had proposed that in this year to go back to the city, which had changed to increase the capital projects. The general fund increases 21,904,700 and that is a lot public safety, salaries, pension and that will, the police and fire pension increased over 5 million. There's some increases in the general employees, salaries and benefits, some increase to the payment to community redevelopment agency, vehicles increased 1.1 million, utilities, supplies, training and education, property and liability insurance increased 964,000, 115,000 increased to the beautification fund, 640,000 to the other grants and aids, and 1.1 million, 486 for new programs programs and 932,200 for new positions. The new programs for the traffic mobility and connectivity division, public art program, neighborhood street tree program, and go for tortist preserve and brother for like Wyoming improvements. In the general fund, there 10 new full-time positions. And in the other funds there's also 10 full-time new positions. And we tied those new, the new positions to the strategic focus areas. So for community safety police, there's a new police officer or CEO, CEO, homeless liaison. There's some park rangers for the quality of life also. Public safety, video security service, supervisor, network security analyst, and public safety. The new projects are public safety, de-escalation, and accountability, technology, and public safety information management system and station alerting system replacement. For financially sound, we have the HRS coordinator, purchasing technician, a grant specialist, senior buyer, business analyst, utility services, ITD to analyst. For the area of quality of life, we have the Park Rangers, which also aligns with the Community Safety. We have the Public Art Program, Neighborhood Street Tree Program, Centennial, Celebration, Breck Services Master Plan, and Sanborn Square Renovation. Under World Class Services, we have a legal specialist, flea quality assurance analyst, environmental officer, parking enforcement representative, construction project manager, permit licensing technician, maintenance supervisor, customer service field operator and quality control analyst in a broadcast video technician. Projects for world class services or the government campus master plan transit oriented community. The base building expansion, the critical infrastructure improvements, water treatment, facility improvements, wastewater upgrades replacement and, alternative energy projects. Under transportation and mobility, we have new traffic, mobility and connectivity division, downtown Paul Metal Park, road connectivity and mobility, mobility and connectivity improvements for vision zero, downtown walkability improvements, railroad crossings, a Jeffrey Street traffic improvement, CERA infrastructure expansion, Northwest Southwest 4th Avenue, widening. Under growth management, we have environmental officer, construction project manager, permit licensing technician, base building expansion, government campus master plan for transit oriented community. And then we showed that change in the fund balance based on anticipated or projected revenues at 233,531 and expenditures at 244,591,700, which would be a spend down of 11,60,700. And we would end with 79,572,900 in the general fund reserves. And those reserves are allocated for some emergency reserve and for other allocations. And that's the budget presentation. I'll be happy to answer any questions. Thank you, Mr. Guarrett. Council Member, is there any questions? Mr. Rucker. We're a quick, the environmental officer. That is not the sustainability manager. Is an additional position? Correct. That's a new position. A new position. Okay. Thank you. For the questions? All right. Seeing none, we'll continue. Go on to the rebudges. We'll proceed to rebudging, please. Okay. So we passed out some exhibits for that and just have it up on the screen. We went through and looked at some positions that had been vacant for a long time and we're not being recruited for. So we eliminated three positions, which total for the General Fund 169,800, and Stormwater Utility 82,300. So these are rebudges. So rebudges are just things either operating or there's also the CIP, things that did not happen this year but they were anticipated so they don't change the bottom of the reserves but they just move from the current year's budget to next year's budget. So they increase the expenditures but they don't change the reserves. We have CDBG that has some money that they had not been able to spend. 634 in the CVHAP in admin 37200, Florence Fuller CDC lighting for 66,000, Florence Fuller CDC security 85,200 and a little money left in the Gover Tortoise Preserve. So for total of 628,100 to be re-budgeted from the CDBG fund from ship. There's 3,241,100. From the centennial appropriations that we had made, there's 2,985,000 that we will move to next year. For a total operating of 685, 854,200. The CIP rebudgets, again, these are projects that we thought were gonna happen this year, but for various reasons did not. So they are moving to next year, public safety facilities, crime lab rehabilitation for this 360,000. Some infrastructure and security hardening for 420,000 and some renovations at city facilities for 580,000. That's 1,360,000 that will be re-budgeted in the capital improvement fund. In transportation, we had sidewalk repair project for 645,700. We'll move to next year. Beach and Park District, there's some projects of 1,90,000. And they are adding that to their budgets. Information technology has the GIS, Microsoft licensing, network computer system replacements, public safety field automated reporting system, security information system equipment, storage area, network upgrade, and some other technology updates for a total of 586,600. So and then the total is 3,682,300 of all the CIP funds. We also had asked for the any council changes to the budget. So we passed that out and and that can be up for discussion when as you see fit. And I'll be happy to answer any questions. Council members, any questions? I have one, if I can direct it to Ms. Naclas. I believe the two items we see on the screen here were brought to us by your, brought to our attention by you, is that right? Yes. All right. Can you tell us a little bit more because they did not apply through our normal process? Right. That's why I had the, I don't know if you saw the email that I asked both of them to tell me about what they do in Boca Raton even though I've known the people who run both of these nonprofits for a very long time and I'm sure most of you do too My list belief is Mike good one from crazy uncle Mike's and connected warriors is is Judy weaver and I Think that that the city that This whole program is probably just not on their radar, which is why they didn't apply. And I think they're both extremely deserving. I think they also both offer services that are not offered in the other list of nonprofits. And I think that they should be included. Thank you. I think we'll come back to that. Any further questions on that or any other part of Ms. McGuire's presentation? All right, thank you. Mr. Brown, still your park here? The next would be we've been through the final budget. So I think we're at discussion and explanation of the percentage increase of millage over the rollback rate necessary to find the budget And that is actually included in the resolutions to be an ordinance is to be adopted so then why don't we read the title of the will read ordinance 5704 in full and 5703 just the title and I just wanted to I pivoted you just in case there's anything further on re-budgeting which there is not so we'll read that we'll read that full ordinance We'll read that title and then we can continue please ordinance number 5704 and ordinance of the city of Bokoriton adopting final millage rates and living ad valorum taxes for the fiscal year beginning October 1st, 2024 and in 8 September 30th, 2025, stating the percentage by which the millage to be levied exceeds the rolled back rate. Directing the city manager or the Office of Management and Budget Director to adjust the adopted milligrates in the event of changes in the assessment role and taxable value, providing for separability, providing for a peeler, providing ineffective date. Whereas the City Council of the City of Boca Raton, Florida, has held a public hearing on a tentative budget and tentative milled rates for the 2024 through 2025 fiscal year. And as adopted a tentative budget and tentative milled rates, necessary to fund the tentative budget. And whereas the City of Bokeritone, Florida, proposes by a separate ordinance to finally adopt a budget and make appropriations for various funds for the city of Boca Raton for the fiscal year beginning October 1st, 2024 and ending September 30th, 2025. And whereas the budget as proposed will require revenues to be raised and collected by advalorem tax levy. Now therefore the city of Boca Raton here by ordains, Section 1. Revenue shall be raised and collected for the city of Booker Etone by Advalorem Taxes. For the fiscal year beginning October 1st, 2024 and ending September 30th, 2025 as follows. One, the percentage by which the millage rate to be levied exceeds the rollback rate of 3.4226 mills computed pursuant to Florida law is 6.92%, which represents the percentage increase in property taxes according to the characterization ascribed to said percentage by theilorm Tax of 3.6596 mils for operational purposes. 3. There is here by Levy.OnAll.NexemptTaxable property within the City of Booker Raton in Advilorm Tax of 0.0186 mils for debt service. 4. The total Millage Rate shall be 3. eight two mills. Five such millage shall be levied upon the dollar amount of the assessed valuation of all non-exempt taxable property in the city of Bokery tone as returned by the Palm Beach County property appraiser as shown by the 2024 assessment roll for the city allowing homestead and other lawful exemptions. All such taxes so specified in levied are ordered extended upon the assessment roll to show the tax attributable to all taxable property and shall be collected by the Palm Beach County tax collector as provided by law. Section 2, the ad valorem taxes here by Levyd are for raising funds, revenues and monies to be used, set aside and exempted for the functions and purposes of the municipal government of the city of Bokoriton, Florida, pursuant to the provisions of the city charter and the laws of the state of Florida. Section 3, pursuant to section 200.065, Florida statutes, the city manager, or in his absence, the office of management and budget director, is hereby authorized and required to adjust the adopted millage rate set forth herein, if the taxable value within the jurisdiction of the city of Bokaritone as certified by the property appraiser is that variance from the taxable value shown on the assessment role to be extended such that the tax is computed by applying the adopted rate against the certifiable taxable value are equal to the tax is computed by applying the adjusted adopted rate to the taxable value on is not available to the public. The bill is not available to the public. The bill is not available to the public. The bill is not available to the public. The bill is not available to the public. The bill is not available to the public. The bill is not available to the public. The bill is not available to the public. to trade, not later than three days after receipt of notification from the property appraiser of the aggregate change in the assessment role and taxable value, if any, from that certified. Section 4. If any section, subsection, clause, or provision of its ordinance is held in valid. The remainder shall not be affected by such invalidity. Section 5. All ordinances and resolutions or parts of ordinances and resolutions, and all sections and parts In addition to the first of the year, we will be in the first year. In addition to the first of the year, we will be in the first year. In addition to the first of the year, we will be in the first year. In addition to the first of the year, we will be in the first year. In addition to the first of the and appropriating funds for the fiscal year beginning October 1st, 2024, and ending September 30th, 2025, providing for separability, providing for repealer, providing effective date. Thank you very much, Mr. Brown. Excuse me. As noted in the an ordinance 50704, the proposed operating military is 3.6596 mils, which is 6.92% greater than the rollback rate of 3.4226. The voter approved debt service mill is 0.0186. The total proposed military is 3.6782. That concludes item D on the agenda. All right. We do have a possibility of amendments later on and I will be talking about that that may affect some of those calculations. At this floor, at this point we'll open up the floor to public comment. Anyone wishing to speak on these matters, please come forward. Last call for public comment. All right, we will close the time for public comment. Now this is an opportunity for City Council to adopt the tentative budget as it sees fit. So Council members, do you have any amendments? We'll take up non-profit separately, but just talking about the budget. Seeing none, I will mention something. So in the past, we have, you know, sometimes we've not tinkered with the tentative milled rate between the first hearing and the second hearing. Here I think there's a reason to do so because we also haven't taken out positions as part of an amendment. I spoken with Mr. Brown, Mr. Servus, Ms. McGuire. My suggestion would be, and I'll ask Mr. Servus to walk us through the math. For exhibit one, we're eliminating these positions to take that off the milled rate. And then Mr. Servus, if you tell us what impact that will have please. Yes happy to marriage in service the financial services director for the city The reduction to the general fund in accordance with with exhibit one with the reduction of a few positions is roughly a hundred and seventy,000 for the fiscal year. If we adjust the millage rate for that $170,000, that reduces the overall millage rate to 3.6734 down from 3.6782 and reduces the percentage over the rollback rate from 6.92% to 6.78%. So in effect that would take the $170,000 savings from the positions, the vacant positions that were eliminated and reduce the property tax role by that same amount. All right, thank you. And Council Member Z members, I suggested that just because when we add positions, we're eliminating positions. Let's pass that, I'd say pass that savings onto the taxpayer and that will have the side effect of changing the millage rate when you go from the rounding from 3.68 to 3.67. So, would it be appropriate for amendment there or could we just, do we amend that one off or do we take up the budget amendment if we're all in accordance, we'll just make that include that as part of the motion Mr. Brown, is that what you suggest? That will work, yes. Fine, very well. All right, further non-profit comments. All right, then let me, oh please, non-non-profit. Other than non-profit. All right, then let me oh please non nonprofit other than nonprofit All right, then can I take us through the nonprofits and if I can give a little bit background Traditionally, we've done a few things we usually worked off one council members suggestions and in my experience and before me It was always the mayor's as a kind of a baseline But I have a little bit of a tweak here because I think we see some overlap we haven't always seen. I will say that are the history even while we've all served on council even before then has been measured in terms of increases. In fact for many years only until some of us were on council did we start giving grants as a kind of a typical thing for new applicants. Usually they have to apply several years and then the baseline is usually been $1,000. I do have a clarification for Deputy Mayor Drucker. I'm guessing there might have been three typos on your rankings, specifically on lines 29, 42, and 57 instead of 11,000 for each. I'm guessing those are000,000. $1,000,000. $1,000,000. $1,000,000. $1,000,000. $1,000,000. $1,000,000. $1,000,000. $1,000,000. But I did put $1,000 when I submitted. When I put it in, I'm looking at my notes. Is your mic on? Okay. Sorry, Mayor. zero on those. That's what we wanted. You wanted 1,000 plus the board for those three. Correct. It was my mistake from this submission. I don't want it to reflect on staff because it was my fault. No worries, typos happen. But that has a salientary effect. So here's what I'd suggest. We got a lot of changes here and you can see on the score sheet. I like to go through the ones where four out of five of us rank them the same and just suggest that we consider those in mass with one possible exception. No, I think that's... Oh, let me say that these are the ones where we have existing grantees where four out of five decided to keep them the same. So they were numbers. And after I'm done, if you see one that's different, let me know. I have three, four, ten, thirteen, twenty-five, twenty-six, thirty-three, thirty-eight, forty-four, fifty-nine, and sixty-nine. I think those are all existing grantees who had, and when I say score, they were a grantee in prior years. They missed last year, but they used to apply every year. Those are prior grantees who were four of us out of the five said, keep them at the last most recent grade. Do we have an agreement just to go with those? And everybody follows there, right? If you fourth the fifth person who had a difference? You're withdrawing your number in favor of the four who seem to conclude that there was a you want to talk about it Please do so miss dr. So just so you know where I came when my thought process So we in terms of the arts and culture and then the mental health those were buckets of items and like our Florida Budget that a lot of those organizations took significant hits this year. And that's why I went with higher amounts. If you look at all the cultural organizations that ask, for example, number 10, which is Boga-Bale, I said higher just because those organizations lost a lot of their funding. And those are organizations that are directly in our city limits that are providing services in arts and culture. That's why I went higher on those. And then on the other ones that I went higher was mental health because some of the, again, it's on a rise. So I kind of went on higher on those. But I could defer, but that was why I did some of those higher and it's probably different than everybody here because I'm looking at it. But so for whatever that's for it, that's why I did that. Doesn't mean that we have to go with that. It just means I did it because those, those almost every organization in our city lost grants through the Florida budget this year. And these are small organizations that could literally be put out if you've been watching the news. So anyways, if that is anything I would try and if not I could go with the majority, not a problem. Right, thank you. Why don't we come back to that if anyone feels? Let me just walk through a few more. There were a couple other ones I wanted to highlight in particular and I'll give you rationale and we can all, if I've been, number 12, Boka Community Middle PTSA. I see we ranged from zero and I probably intended to do a thousand, there were a couple of ones where I didn't rank, but I probably would have done 1,000. Ranging from 1,000 and 9,000, I would suggest for this one, doing the standard increase of 1,000 in part because we have many PTSAs, and so if we do it for one we're probably going to set the standard across the board And let me point out that my 9000 was an error Okay, I'm certain I intended to do a thousand if it's a new applicant one that we haven't given to before I feel like the tradition has been and I've followed this myself that we gave a thousand to them so I'm happy to Change mind to a thousand which is what I intended to indicate there. Then with the others who went higher you all right with a thousand for that one? I'm fine with that. All right, thank you. All right, jumping ahead number 53. Oh, let me just explain this one. Four of us actually, a board mentioned. Four of us ranked it higher than the standard thousand and I'll tell you my rationale because I looked at three of them the same way. Myzer Park Cultural Art Center, the friends of Gumball Limbo or excuse me, the Gumball Limbo Coastal Stewards now. Actually, Gumball Limbo is not even in their name but the Coastal Stewards as we know them. And then also Gift of Life. Two of them I in the city facilities. And I thought we could do a little bit more there than just the typical thousand. Gift of life I saw a little differently because it's a national nonprofit who has a Ted quarters in Boka and a Stemsel treatment standpoint. Stemsel treatment center here. But I'm fine with just going the standard thousand if that's the will of the majority there. I just want to explain my rationale. So if I went to a thousand there, then we have four out of five on gift of life. Which number? Oh, sorry. 35. It would be 35, yes. We're just talking about gift of life, right? Well, I mentioned those three. So we can combine them all. We can take them one at a time. Why don't we take, what do I just say? I'm sorry. Give it of life. A thousand for everyone. I'll go down to a thousand and meet the majority. A thousand. Sure. That's fine. Okay. I Thought coastal stewards we had said that was four out of five and That would be one that we were given ten thousand to Yeah, and that's fine. I'll go up. I only just I asked Mr. Brown I wanted to explain my rationale if you all want to go to ten. That's fine. I asked Mr. Brown I wanted to explain my rationale if you all want to go to 10 that's fine I asked Mr. Brown he said to his knowledge we have not altered our budget Our support for that center since it went into their hands So it is the city facility. I was willing to go higher, but four of you seem to be fine with time. So I'll do the 10 Okay, and then we have the others I've, looks like six more of well then let me go to Ms. Naclis's. There's two schools of thought, one which is they didn't imply in time, do we make them wait for next year or do we give them something? You know, it's more about the precedent. If we're doing it a thousand each, I'm less concerned that we're creating a precedent, but maybe we should just decide for future years really to be, you know, put people on notice that you really do have to apply. And it's up to the will, the body here, and what they want to do. I'm fine, other way. Any thoughts? Mr. Wichita? Oh, yeah, I'm okay for the 1000 with the special notice provision for next year. I know the charities as well. And certainly they're worthy. So I would be OK with 1,000. If they're new applicants, right? Yeah. But they didn't apply it. That's the difference. They're non-applicants, but they're new applicants. They're new recipients of this rate, it sounds like. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Sorry. My food for thought is we've declined people in the past. Like last year we declined 2-1-1. We didn't award them because they came in late. And 2-1-1 is offering amazing services. Not that these organizations are not. I just think that we really need to think clearly that we don't want to suppress it. What happens after this meeting if somebody comes back to us and starts asking for money because everybody else went through the application process. Are we just going to say, just these two? I just think it opens us up for some exposure and trust me. I know both of these organizations and nothing would, I would love to give the money to them. I just feel like you have to follow the process that we have. By the way, the process that we have, we're just awarding $1,000 here and $1,000 there. We said it last year that we want to revisit this because some of these organizations, maybe skip one year, give another year, look at the ones that are really budgeting with us, but that's what I'm afraid of. But if we could get a certainty that, if we approve that, that we're not going to have to come back and revisit this, I would be in favor, but I also feel bad for people like last year, I knew multiple applicants that were denied that came to me because they didn't submit the application and everybody else submitted their applications. So kind of a little bit torn there, but just want to make sure we're not setting precedent. Thank you. You know what actually Ms. Rutgers swayed me on that. Me too, actually. I think we have to have the process. And it's not a terribly burdensome application process. We don't make them come in an interview like they used to. So I'm thinking, I think we have to send the message. I'm sorry that if you want the city to give you a contribution, you have to at least ask, just like the dozens of others did. And in the grant scheme, it's not that much money to, I think the process probably weighs out the balance of just the small thing. So you swayed me on that one, Ms. Ruck or so. Thank you. I disagree. That's right. I disagree, especially for these two because they have been in the city for so long and, well, I mean, my list of belief is fairly new, but as we know, we've all been to events at this particular establishment. They support every single nonprofit in this city. And I just think it's just not on some people's radar. It was never on mine for 12 years. When I had my own nonprofit, I never applied to the city before I was on council. I just didn't really know about it. So that's fine. I'll, whatever the, if you want to stick with the process, that's it. But I think that these are two very deserving nonprofits within our city that really deserve it, whereas some of these are in Fort Lauderdale, in West Palm, in Miami, and these, you know, I sent this to you guys because I wanted you to see who they serve in the city. I think they deserve it. I think they deserve to be on the list. And if we want to make a clear cut process for next year, then we do that, but I think they deserve it. Appreciate your advocacy. Mr. Wigter. Yeah, I mean, I agree with Council Member Nockles on this one. There are a couple instances here where the timing of the 2024 award did not work out. One of them is 211. I had no answer there. It was a typo. I put stat meaning keep the same as last year and they didn't put it in. But so in this particular instance or in the 211 instance, there was no award last year, I guess Mr. Rucker just said they were late, but this year they requested more, and so the question is, should that reset them to $1,000 because they weren't in no last year or they automatically get their previous award? So I mean, there's a procedural, there's not a 100% set process here that cannot be slightly amended. There's a custom in a tradition which the mayor has said last year and this year which you reiterated, but it's not a 100% set in stone process. So, you know, again, I don't think it's a lot, but I do agree with Miss Knockelson in terms of the ones, you know, there are a lot of amazing charities, some of which apply to five thousand cities. The American Cancer Society. God bless them. They were an amazing organization. Milo's relief is just poker retone. So I do think you could look at the things that really impact Boker-Retone a little bit more. Again, they're all worthy. We wanna give as much as we possibly can to all of these beautiful charities. And I think the ones that are actually in B Raton deserves a second deserves a second look. Mr. Mayor can I see one more thing? And also we were given the opportunity to do this amendment and we had to have it in by Friday which I had it in so that was part of the process was adding was well, I mean that's what we yeah, sorry, but that's that's we were able to add on Profits if it was a cut in stone process then we wouldn't have been able to do that Which I'm fine for next year Let me be clear these are I am certain Two deserving entities based in the city. I know both of their leadership. Typically the amendment, if a council member has a change to the budget, the amendment, in my time has never related to a nonprofit. I don't recall a single instance where a nonprofit was added by way of an amendment by a council member that didn't apply as part of what I think is a pretty well-known process. So I'm certain that these two will have a very receptive audience next year when they apply as I'm certain they will, but to me I don't think that it would be unusual for us to add it. Using this mechanism as opposed to the typical application consideration analysis process that we've normally used. Is there anything for? I think the process is not 100% great because all we're doing is awarding new applicants to certain amount. We discussed this last year. But we've never done that to Mr. Thompson's point where we just add an amendment to a nonprofit. Of course, these organizations are deserving. We know the individuals, but we also know that we've been giving out these grants and that we give the City Awards half a million plus plus in terms of grant. And my concern is that after today, if somebody comes back to us, that is in Bogorotone. There's a lot of people in Bogorotone. There's also nonprofits that not necessarily are here, but they also support our residents because our city residents go there to get the services. So it kind of, we all work together. It's like one road for all roads. All these nonprofits work together. Of course, they're deserving. Of course, I want to award them the amount of money. I just think that we're setting a precedent we've never done. First of all, by an amendment as an exhibit to a nonprofit process, that's a different process. We want to change that process, then that's a bigger conversation. That's just kind of what I felt, but obviously they're deserving. It's just not the way we've done it. Does that mean we can't change it. It's just kind of what are we opening ourselves up for if we start taking amendments to the budget that we do. We do a lot of, we do change things throughout the year. So again, it's a slippery slope. So that's what I have. Right. Two very, I think we all agree. These are two countervailing theories. I'll be the third. I think it'll have to apply for next year. It's in the grand scheme. It's not that much money for them. And they probably got some good publicity from it for what it's worth, but we're still keeping the process. Just a couple of clarifictory note with Ms. Drucker's noting that it was supposed to be a thousand and not 11,000 numbers 42 and 57 are also where you four or five saying keep it the same as last year. So then I think we should turn to ones where we have two or more people differing. Before you do mayor, I noted a couple of other errors that might help clarify some of my own errors. Thank you. Yes. One was number 31. Family Central, I'm happy to withdraw that, which means that nobody elected to award them anything so we can take that off the list. Okay. And the second one is the Hillsboro Lighthouse, which is something we're preserving. But I will seed to the will of the, not just the majority, but the super majority in which draw my $1,000 suggestion. So that would eliminate that one from consideration also. Okay. That is number 43. Very very good. I'm going to go chronologically now and stop me if I make an error please. Let's start with number one. Mr. Wigyer had already raised that point. And Mr. Wigyer, did you want to weigh in on a dollar amount or you were saying zero for last year or a thousand? No, that means keep what I have. Keep last year the same, 4,500. But last year wasn't really last year was zero. You made a point that they didn't apply. So did they get knocked down? Well, that's the question to us all is, you know, is is that part of the traditional process that if you miss an application, you go back to your old amount? The question. Yeah, when you said I'm sorry you were answering no but I Don't know if that's a yes or no question mr. Brown. Were you saying you go back to the prior amount that you had grandfather Do you started zero? I you do not started zero? You do not started zero? Yeah, right? I'd be inclined to just go back to 4500. I think that's why I put it 4,500 yeah right I figured that there was a press it looked like this happened a couple times so yeah I thought there was a precedent right we're in a court there then three and four both have the same year amounts as last year and hopefully someone is totaling the difference in price because now we're at 4,500 over the 2024 award just on number one. We get to American Disabilities Foundation. I would go a thousand, although I see majority of 2,500. We know this charity. We can have majority rule unless someone wants to speak up. I'm pleased. Sounds like the police. Go ahead, Miss necklace. So, okay, wait. That's number seven. Yeah. And you're saying leave it at 2,500? Well, let's someone wants to change. We got three votes for 25. That's my point. Yeah. Okay. So that's 2,500. I think we're net 7,000 so far. Book number 10, Ms. Drucker said she would stay put the nine, so that's no change. 12, Book of Middle, PTSA, can we all say a thousand? All right, so now we're up eight. So, might else keep the running total, please? Number 13, we're up eight. So might also keep the running total please. Number 13, we're keeping the same. Number 17, I probably meant to go a thousand as well. I would do a thousand for that. A thousand's fine if it's new and it's the custom. All right. All right, without objection, then we're up to plus nine. Diaper bank, two of us rated higher, any further discussion. They were here tonight. 24 covered south Florida. Are covering south Florida. I think it's the majority. We'll stick it three. So no change. 25, no change because four out of five of us. 26 same thing, no change. 29. So Ms. Drucker wanted to do a thousand. I would go down to a thousand then and just keep it consistent. I did 1800 just because they broke it off, but I think I'm further thought of $1,000. I'm fine with $1,000. That's fine. That's fine. All right, so that's now plus 10. 31 is off the board. 33 were all in accord at this last year's amount. 35, I'll go down to 1,000, so I think we've got four out of five for that. I want that. Yes, fine. Now we're plus 11. 37, I'll go up for, I mean, unless I sway two of you to 5,000, we'll just go to the 10. That's a big one for a new B, but you know, they are gumbo limbo We're net pardon me. I thought they got that last year. Oh, they did yeah, they got 10,000 Never mind. Then I was misreading it. Yeah, I thought it was new. Okay. No, it's the coastal stewards Then fine, we're only at net 11 still my error. So I 38 same 42 we have three of us at a thousand I could meet that as well we agree there 1000 for line 42 hard to hard yes all right so we're net plus 12. 43 is off the board. 44 is the same based on four to five of us. 48 is the same based on four to five of us. 43, 53, 53, four of us agreed to 5,000, which would be new. So that's now net plus 17. 56 is the same. 57 would is the same If the seven would be the same because mr. Rucker clarify that it's 1000 so no change actually that's a thousand more Plus 1000 yeah, right so plus 1000 on 57 net total plus 18 Score back to the prior to all the two thousand but that they used to have so that's still plus 2000 for this year Plus 20 so we're all on agreement there Showering love we only a two out of five I would say then That's how it is a majority rule zero Sweet dream makers we had two of us at five, but I can go to four We had three at four. We had three at four. We had three at four. I'll go to four. Call it four. Same as last year. No change. Velves helping heroes. You can go to a thousand on that, four out of five of those for there. That's another plus one, 21. 72, YMCA, if we all go to 1,000 on that, which is what their grant was in 23. Agreed? Okay, I can go to objection. I'm a thousand. Fine, none stated. 1,000 plus 22. Okay, I can go to objection. I'm a thousand. Fine, none stated. One thousand. Plus 22. And you, the orchestra, we had two of us rating up for 2000. It's five thousand. Thousand. It's a cultural. This record said down to a thousand. Mr. Regor, I think kind of said something similar. You define thousand. All right, so're adding a net of 22,000, which is not what percentage increase, which has been consistent with the other increases we have in our budget. So are we all good with those? All right, great. Yes, any questions? Yeah, Sharon, Jim, you have everything? I think we do. Give us just a second. We're going to give you a wrap. We can. Okay, has them. What is that? Plus 18. Pardon? Do you want me to read them up? So I actually came up with 18.5 as an increase from last year. Okay. So we came up with 18, 542. Is that the same number? Well, 18, yeah. Because we... Round it. Yeah, yeah. So yes, 18, 5 over prior year. How did you get any... I'm sorry, how did you get 42? Well, what happened? One of the, who didn't even apply this year? They got an award of 500. Oh. who didn't even apply this year? They got an award of 500. But they didn't want the full 500. So when we showed you that. They were saying 21,000 new, but we did for neglected to subtract 2,458 who came off. Yeah, that's fine. That's fine. All right, but we're all in agreement on the way you can, we're in agreement. We added 21 now, right? Do we need to recap those? Just two left. agreement we added 21 now right do we need to recap those I can't if you'd like me to just read through the list I'm happy I'm going to say then the so row number one the 4,500 yes to 2500 327,500 423,000 and Mr. Servus me yes skip the ones were if you if you have the sheet that just is the yellow skip the ones that are not in yellow Okay item rose 7 2500 If you have the sheet that just is the yellow, skip it once it are not in yellow. Okay. Item row 7, 2500, row 10, 9,000, row 12, 1000,000, row 29, 1000, row 31, 0, row 33, 15,000. Row 38, 2,500. Row 42, 1,000. Row 43, 0. Row 44, 2,000. Row 48, 14,000. Row 53, 5,000. Row 56, 5,000. Row 56, 2000. Row 57, 1000. Row 59, 2000. Row 62, 0. Row 64, 4000. Row 69, 1000. $1,000,000, row 72, 1,000, and row 73, 1,000. Sounds good to me. Great, thank you. All right. That concludes, I think we've solved the nonprofit discussion. Any other comments about the budget before we adopt a motion with the amendments that we've been talking about? Mr. Waker I Had a very good conversation with Mr. Brown about some of the thoughts on the budget and I was very pleased Mr. Brown and Mr. Zervis on all the work especially over the past year with all the work that we did in the CRA in terms of extending the CRA in terms of amending the downtown plan in terms of making sure that we keep that overage for the capital improvement project. So I just want to say to the budget team, thank you for all that hard work over the last 18 months and change because with the extension of the CRA for the next 15 years or so it's going to really make a difference in changing the infrastructure down there and I know there's a lot of work to do all those things Mr. Brown and company. And then I just, you know, just the other point is there's some things especially, you know, in light of what happened over the weekend and whatnot you know that you want to give more to police services and more of those things and I still do think that way but again the budget is also a working document right and during the course of the year if we find you know glaring exceptions or omissions in the budget that we think are necessary we could change it. So I just want to say thank you to the budget team for everything that they did so far. And I'm very very pleased with the results. Thank you. For the comments on the budget. Right. Well said, we appreciate you know we continue to be a physically responsible city with one of the lowest miller traits of any full service city in Florida And that's a source of provide especially when you compare that to the quality of services we get in them residents get in other cities. So Thank you to our city staff for making not just the budget a Living document but making sure our employees are providing outstanding services So if there's no further we already services. So if there's no further, we already closed public comment, if there are no further amendments, we'll turn to the recombitation of proposed military, which I think Mr. Service can go back over one more time, please. Happy to marry in. Let me just point to the sections of the ordinance that will be amending. So again, this is ordinance 2020 2020 hold on just a second. 50704. 5704 and section 2, subsection 1. The increase of the, well let me just read the corrected phrase the percentage by which the milledrate shall be levied exceeds the rollback rate of 3.4226 mills. Computer pursuant to floor to law is 6.78%. And then subsection four, the total milledrate shall be 3.6734 mills. Those are the two changes to the ordinance. Pretty good. We'll entertain a motion to adopt ordinance 5704 with those changes as read by Mr. Service after Mr. Brown speaks. Uh, Jim. In the ordinance, section one, we're on page two, section one, subsection two. Yep. What is the ad valorm millage by itself without the debt service. Correct. Correct. That subsection 2 should read, there is hereby levied on all non-exempt taxable properties within the city of Boca Raton and Avril M tax of 3.6548 mills for operational purposes. Very good. That clears up the three sections. Yes. Thanks. Great. So now we'll entertain a motion to adopt ordinance 5704 with those three changes as stated by Mr. Brown and Mr. Service. Do I hear motion? So moved. Thank you, sir. Second. Second. We'll give it to Ms. Naclas. Any further discussion? Do you have any other questions? Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Top 5703, incorporating the amended final budget with the specific changes on Exhibit 1, Exhibit 2, Exhibit 3, and the non-profit sheet that we just discussed and Mr. Servus recapped. Do I hear a motion to adopt that ordinance with those reflected changes? So moved. Second. Thank you. Any further discussion? Missedans please? Wickeder? Yes. Thomas? I'm excuse me Thompson Yes Singer yes necklace. Yes, Drucker. Yes motion passes five votes to zero Thank you Well that closes that portion of the public hearing on our ordinances and congratulations council members on a Great budget that does actually reduce the millage rate more than we have in prior years. So that's good and still well, even lower. We'll now turn to resolutions in other business and miss it and so please read the title of Resolution 91-2024. Resolution 91-2024. A resolution of the City of Boca Raton adopting the fiscal year 2024-2025 through 2029-2030, capital improvements program for the City of Boca Raton, providing for severability, providing for appeal or providing an effective date. Thank you, Mr. Ron. Thank you, Ms. McGuire. Well, again, review the capital improvements plan. We had a full presentation at the preliminary budget hearing. It now includes the re-budgeted amounts. And if there are any questions sharing can go through the presentation. Ms. McQuire? We don't usually do the presentation again and the presentation we did for the budget incorporated some of the highlights of the capital improvement plan and so it would be the same with the additions of the exhibit three. And the happy to answer any questions. Thank you, Councilman. Any questions? Seeing none, we'll open up the public hearing. Anyone wishing to speak on this matter? Please come forward. Last call for public comment. We will close the public hearing and we'll entertain a motion to adopt resolution 91-2024 to our hair motion. So moved. Thank you. Second. Thank you. Any further discussion? And Missedans, please. Naclas? Yes. Wigtr? Yes. Trucker? Yes. Singer? Yes. Thompson. Motion passes five votes to zero. That concludes our resolution and other business. Does anyone else have anything to add? Seeing no one speak.