Good afternoon. Welcome to the Charlotte County Board of County Commissioners focus area workshop on infrastructure for May 22nd, 2025. Let the record show all commissioners are present. If you will, please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which distance, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Okay, Mr. Flores, any comments before we get started? Just a quick one, Mr. Chair, commissioner. So this is our strategic focus area workshop on all things infrastructure. So ties in, it's been a busy week with the three prior Workshops immediately have had helps us frame the budget a little bit more So again, we look forward to some good comments and discussion from you. Thank you. Thank you. Mrs. Lisby you're recognized good afternoon commissioners Brantteen Lisby assistant budget director for the record welcome to your third Strategic Focus Area workshop for the 2627 budget process on infrastructure. Our mission for infrastructure is to build and maintain countywide infrastructure that needs our evolving needs and enhances our community appearance, improves public safety and protects our natural resources. For today's agenda, we're going to start by looking at what types of infrastructure we're speaking of. We'll look at financial trends associated with the strategic focus area and then we'll discuss your goals and initiatives around infrastructure. Okay, so when we're going to speak of infrastructure, we have a lot of it. So just to put it into different categories for public works, we're looking at road miles maintained at close to over 2,000 miles. Traffic signals, 120 saltwater canals, 123. For the utility, we have close to 3,000 miles of sewer lines and water lines, reclaim lines and then close to 5,000 fire hydrants as well. For community services we have a number of parks so 65 parks, we have sports fields and courts 78 and then we have acres of parks and preserve land at close to 5,300. So this is just a summarized list commissioners. It doesn't include everything that we have as infrastructure, but just think it's important to put it in perspective when we're speaking to infrastructure. The amount of infrastructure that we do have speaks to this graph, which is what we bring to you each year, which shows that our budget is more capital than operating currently. So you could see that we are currently, Infiscal Year 25, have a budget of 56% capital and 44% operating. For financial trends related to infrastructure, today we're gonna focus on the following divisions. We have community services, parks and ball field maintenance, all of facilities, radio from public safety, for public works, we have engineering and road maintenance, and then we have MPO included as well. So, in addition to our budget, that's more capital than operating already. So, 50% or 6% of our budget being capital. We also attribute close to 20% of our operating budget to infrastructure as well. So you can see here when you're comparing all four of your focus areas, infrastructure is approximately 19 to 20% there. commissioners the blue bars provide a breakdown by department of what makes up that 19% for infrastructure. When we speak to revenue sources for infrastructure, charges for services make up 31% of this pie. These are the charges from the MSBUs for the work, the reimbursable work programs that public works performs as well as our radio fees. We have other taxes which includes gas tax. And then we have general revenues that supports divisions such as facilities and community services. And this graph really shows you the revenue versus expenditures for each one of those departments and divisions that we mentioned. You could see general revenue supports parks and ball field maintenance as well as for our facilities. And we've worked really hard over the last budget cycle to get public works in a very stable condition. So you could see their green bar and their red bar align very close now. Okay, so moving on to historical trends, this is the Total Expenditures by Department for once again, the divisions that we're looking at today. I do wanna point out out the variation in fiscal year 22 so you could see that dip in the bar for 22. We're expenditures that were offset by cares funding for facilities for modifications to different facilities. So including those safety protocols that we added into the facilities as well as additional cleaning and sanitizing and then we had lower capital costs that year as well. For the FTEs by department, as you can see we did have an uptick going from 23 to 24. Once again this was when we were working on the initiative to optimize the organization based on levels of service. And this was primarily for public works. It had been quite some time since public works had requested positions. So this was to align them with many years of going without new position request. To provide information on how we compare to other counties. We have graph data from the 2023 annual comprehensive financial report on the dollar spent per capita on transportation. As you could see based off this graph we are on the higher side that's attributed to the GDC and how we were developed building the infrastructure before we had the population here to support that. So you could see that the cost to maintain our transportation has been higher. Yes, sir. Thank you. Yeah, what might be helpful, because that's interesting, and makes sense, is if we could have just maybe another line underneath the bars that gives one piece of information, which is the population of each one of these counties at a certain date, beginning of this year, whatever is beaver, you know. And then the number of lane miles in each one of these counties at a certain date, beginning of the year, whatever is beaver, and then the number of lane miles in each one of those counties, because I think that would give me better perspective to kind of figure out. You know, we've got 2,000 miles, maybe somebody has a lot less, a lot more, that would be helpful. Thank you. When you compare us to FTEs per thousand for transportation, you can see we're much more online with our neighboring counties. And then this is the population data that we used to create those graphs as well as information from the actors for each one of the neighboring counties. So moving on to your strategic focus area. The bold goals that have been set for the organization for infrastructure are listed here. We have four goals this cycle. So today we're going to look at defined levels of maintenance by 2027, develop and implement the local transportation plan. We're going to touch on defining and maintaining the between capital and operating budgets and then with the funding and completion of the capital needs assessment, the R2031. So now I'll invite Tara Brady to speak to levels of maintenance. Good afternoon, commissioners. Tara Brady, administration, the strategic asset manager. All right, so levels of maintenance, we're going to develop levels of maintenance for all of our assets, for all of our facilities with a focus on the preservation of the asset taking into consideration the balance between quality, timeliness, and costs. So in doing this, we're working on the full implementation of the City Works Asset Management Computer Maintenance Software System. We're creating and implementing the Countywide Strategic Asset Management Plan. We will be developing departmental asset strategies and developing asset class plans. So what we've done so far since last time that we've spoken, departments that are our live with city works public works was the first in 22 23 was utilities HVAC division of facilities went the beginning of 24 and as of January Everyone is online basically except for the jail with the CCSO We're working with a technical issue on that Asset management charter policy and the strategic plan have all been adopted. We're continuing doing staff training in asset management. So what we will be continued to do is we will continue with a review of the three divisions that are already in the citywork software implementation and then move on to the next phase which will include community services, public safety and some more integrations that we think will be very beneficial. We're gonna upgrade our GIS to include ARC indoors for all of our vertical assets, so that we have the 3D indoor model for those. Continue with training. We'll start implementing those strategies and objectives of the SAMH that was approved last July. Work on the department asset strategies as well as asset class plans and then just continue to monitor, measure and report. One thing that we can show the data with our finances is with the implementation of city works and the way that for public works we build out the work orders based on the asset itself. That's what triggers the funding mechanism instead of somebody picking it. In FY25, the first five months of the year, we have been able to build 1.9 million more to the MSBUs back than we were in the same time frame of FY24. So a lot of reasons that is staff training, getting things done, maybe some more projects, but a large part of that is that the way that we are now able to track that better. And with that. You have a question for you? Yes, sir. In terms of the vendor and implementation, are we still Going to see change orders or anything like that. I have no contract right now open with anybody We will put in a review We're gonna ask Trimbo to actually come in and look at the software itself that's their software and then for that next one It will be a whole new project for you to see. It's funded in the project already but we do not have an open contract. There will be a whole new contract developed and it will be developed so that you do not get all of those change orders like you did last time. Mr. Dordy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You mentioned increased reimbursement from the MSB use. I would guess that that benefits transportation trust and general fund too, right? Because engineering, I'm assuming we're reimbursing the general fund for the engineering work that takes place within an MSB. Yes. Good. That's the way we were hoping to do it. Yes. I was very excited when I saw that. Very good. That's good news. How are we handling annual software support and updates with City Works? So we're actually getting ready to do a upgrade to the next City Works 23. It's called. And we're actually doing that in in house. Alan March is our enterprise asset person in the GIS team and we're doing that implementation but annual software maintenance I believe and I'll get you the figures I believe it's 120,000 year for the software. Yeah, because the annual fee we pay typically includes any software upgrades at no charge. I'll have to look at the IT contract off the top of my head I don't know but I and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead a transportation plan, a lot of this stuff that we're doing is stuff that we've been doing. But we're trying to take a more aggressive approach to some of the local stuff that we're dealing with, local neighborhood type things. So that's kind of what this talks about. So as we've mentioned previously, the roadway level of service, the Charlotte County has adopted a level of service D. We collect data every year. It's super important that we had emphasized this previously, that it's not necessarily an entire road. We literally break it down into segments, because certain segments may fall out of concurrency other sooner than other sections. So I can give you an example. Hillsboro is starting to come online with the development that's happening up there in Northport and at the, you know, north of the part of our county. So if you look in the CIP, CNA, and the long-range transportation plan, there's a portion of Hillsboro that's probably gonna need to be four lane before the entirety of it. That's not to say that we couldn't do that, but just that's just an example of what we're talking about when we say segments of road. When we do these counts, we not only get the current counts in the level of service, but we also try to project using software that allows us to like look into the future and see what we got so that we can kind of Sometimes when you get development in a specific area that ramps up like say burn store You can start really analyze that before it gets before you get too far behind it And again, these are then rolled into the CNA once they come online They're part of the long-range transportation plan that goes in the CNA and then goes in the CIP Commission Dordy Thank you, Mr. German.. Just curious, you know, Hillsboro just using Hillsboro as an example. So in city works, we have that broken up in those seconds. City works, we have it broken. Asset management in general, do we have it broken down in those seconds your time? City works has it broken down far more tighter. Well, I think that's good. far more tighter than we have it in the segments that we do count on. But for sure, it's broken up into smaller portions. I'd be curious, Mr. Flores, just to take an example of something like that, we'll get it distributed to all of board members, just to see as an example, Hillsborough or Kings Highway, whatever, if they've been done, how has it broken down? And so in what you're saying, I think Tara could probably speak to, well I can speak to Tara, but I think you would agree we could probably give you a section that shows guard rail underground pipes like stormwater and show you all the assets that we have in an area. How it's broken down? Sure. That's all., one of the things that we're trying to take out of this and now emphasizing on the next page is when we look at intersection improvements, we do a lot of data collection and again some of that's helpful with the new technology that we have including the cameras where it used to be a person that would sit in intersection and take counts for pedestrian movements and right turn movements. We have cameras now they can do that almost in real time. We then analyze that data and we make recommendations from the data and then we put together a prioritization list and then based on traffic volume crash data and available funding we move project forward again with you all's input in that. The main thing that we want to take away from here is that it's data driven decisions. Like Tara had mentioned with the asset management program, as funding, as costs go up, population explodes, trying to stretch our dollar further with the stuff with the programs that we have. It's imperative that we're not over, over putting work into one section or one area and instead of replacing an asset, continuing to work on it. So that's what we're doing with the asset management program in city works, but we're also trying to do this with transportation related decisions. We're trying to make sure that we're providing everyone with transparent data so they can see why we're doing the things that we're doing and that's why we're moving forward. And again, it's all a big program. You got the long range transportation plan. You got the CNA and then you got the CIP and then as those things come online, you start seeing real time with the costs are. And again, having emphasized this a couple times this week, a lot of times there's pressure from everybody, my own family, pressures me like why aren't we doing this to this road. We would love to be way out ahead of things. The reality of it is if we're too far up, we, first off, as we pointed out this week, there's funding deltas with the projects that we've identified in the CNA and the CIP. Trying to be super progressive thinkers, that would even extend that delta. But we're certainly looking at things like that and trying to make sure that you all are confident that we're evaluating those things and that we're getting that information so that, again, we can make that a driven decisions so that we can also have the developers that are making some of these impacts help pay for these for that growth. And again impact from substantial growth we're certainly seeing that and as we've said before more vehicles on the road due to growth there's never going to be less traffic on the road than there is today moving forward. The premise of these programs is to keep traffic moving and keep the citizen safe. As a reminder, this has happened a lot this week. It doesn't take much. A construction project, an accident or two accidents and you definitely see impacts to our local transportation network because we're at that cusp of being really strained on that. But again, we don't want to move forward with projects unless there's data to support so that we can identify the funding to move forward. And I'll just give an example of that. At one time here recently, within the last couple years, we put together a pilot program to do the traffic calming. Because we were getting a lot of, as people come here, there's so many cars on the street. So we put together a pilot program, you all authorized it, we put it in. But the actual data, in most cases, doesn't support the traffic calming. It pushes the issues to other neighborhoods, it causes speeding between the traffic speed bumps. So that's an example of using data to say, okay, that pilot program is not successful. We're needing to move cars every way we can, so we, with you guys as approval, we recently stopped doing that. Speaking of which, I would mention, I think we handed out a brief this week about fruitland as a perfect example. That there was a huge outcry to put speed bumps there, and we're looking at other things that we can do, but the reality is it's exacerbated in this issue. It's pushed it in the neighborhoods and we're getting requests all over out there. So the request that with a memo that we give you all is that we're hoping to, at some point in the near future, and we'll make sure that we project this to the public and you all that we're hoping to remove those. So that's all I have. Any questions? Thank you, John. Precene, let's be assistant budget director for the record. Your third goal is to find and maintain balance between capital and operating budgets. Commissioners, we bring you pieces of this and elements of this throughout the budget process in each one of your workshops. So as you know, just to recap what we've done so far as part of this budget process, we brought you an update as part of the public services workshop on emergency medical services, as well as the fine and forfeiture fund. As recently as Tuesday, you saw the Fire MSBU fund as part of the MSBU workshop, as well as this morning we focused on the utility and the financials associated with the utility funds. And then for your fourth bold goal, we're going to focus on the capital component as we look to funding of the capital needs assessment. In addition, as part of this budget process, we did introduce a new tool for the organization to help us to adapt to the growth in the community and to properly prepare for the future. So we created a long range operational and staffing plan. And as you know, we incorporated information from Metro Forecasting, as well as department-specific studies. In addition to needs identified by the departments for capital, staffing, and to maintain their levels of service. For staffing, we identified the needed positions by two categories. So we looked at service delivery and then infrastructure. For the divisions that we're looking at today, this is the service delivery positions that were identified as part of this process. So to touch on the community services positions because of the volume of them, I do want to recap and provide some history. So as you know, last budget cycle, we focus on the needs identified as part of the standard of CUBBER for public safety and the manpower audit for the utility. And I have previously mentioned we looked at public works and the maintenance and operation staffing needs for them as well. For each we worked out as part of the budget cycle to create staffing plans and we identified resources to support those needs. For this cycle we're shifting gears and we're looking at the recently completed Parks Master Plan. In November community services presented information on the levels of service methodology adopted for the parks, fall fields, and recreation. They explain mode standards and define the services provided within each of those modes, and then they also attached a mode to each one of their assets for your review and consideration. And this slide comes directly from that November presentation. In addition, this was also included in that presentation, and you can see this is focusing on the ball fields and the environmental land. So based on the levels of services that were set, the consultants were able to identify the staffing needs to meet those standards. This was approximately 50 positions for parks and 35 positions for recreation. Brought to you for approval in December when we finalized that Parks Master Plan. Today I just want to confirm this is still the flavor of the board that in July we need to bring you recommendations for general fund to support those positions and those in that need. In addition infrastructure positions were identified. These are the positions that are associated with the projects that we are anticipating to come online as part of the fiscal year 26 and 27 budget process. So here are those positions as well and we will build these into our recommendation for July. So moving on to our General Fund Projection. As you may remember, back in March, I did provide you an update on the General Fund Projection and this was the graph that was provided in March and what I did for this graph is I updated the fiscal year 24 information based off of unaudited actuals and then we started to prepare our assumptions for fiscal year 2526 and 27. We then started layering in different pieces of that long range operational plan and we built in the infrastructure only positions for general fund and you could see the impacts here. And then finally we took it one step further and we built in the infrastructure only positions for general fund, and you could see the impacts here. And then finally, we took it one step further and we built in those service delivery positions. Now, once again, commissioners, this is not the final product. We knew in March and I will say it again today, we are not at the point where we're making any recommendations, we'll bring that to you in July, but just felt that it was important to provide the information. Since then, we continue to update our general fund projection. So as a reminder, our assumptions that we're using currently is for advalorem revenue. We've built in a 10% increase for fiscal year 26 and 27, and then a 6.5% per year for future years. You will have more information on this shortly. We'll have our preliminary evaluations from the property or praise are in June, and then of course we'll get our final numbers in July. So we know that we still have some time and we're waiting anxiously to get more information on that revenue. For operating expenditures, we started working in the new positions and the timing for the infrastructure positions. So we know the positions were identified when we moved forward with building or completing the project. So now we know that those positions are coming on but we just tweaked the timing of them. So we've built that into the projection for general fund. We've also worked with administration to start the vetting process for the service delivery positions. So we've been meeting regularly to go through those position requests. And then in addition, we started to build in budget requests that we've been working through on items that decisions have been made on. So I've built those in as well and then the capital operating impacts for the projects that are coming online in 26 and 27. So with that commissioners, I've updated the projection for general fund and you could see that here. Here I'm providing you two different green lines. So the ending balance, the dotted line is the revised ending balance when I'm calling the loaded balance. And this is when I build in all of those positions I mentioned as part of the parks master plan. So you can see the impacts there to general fund if we build in those 85 positions for the parks. Questions on general fund projection? Yeah, I had a question about the parks and the different modes. I'm sorry, I might have missed. What's our current level of current mode? So each park, and I don't want to misspeed to this, each park has a different mode assigned to it. So I think Tommy, thanks Tommy. Good afternoon, Tommy Scott, Community Service Director. So that's a complicated answer to a simple question. Each park to Francine's point. Each park has a very specific mode that was assigned to it that we discussed during the Parks and Recreation Master Plan. I can resend you that list because we went through what the past approval was 2008. We showed you what we currently are operating, what we recommended, which you all approved. So I can recent you that information because each park is different. Yeah, because I mean obviously we're going to the budget now. We can plug the numbers into the mode and take a look at it because based on the current modes, what I'm seeing here, that we've already adopted in the master plan. It's gonna result in the FTEs, I think on slide 34. Correct. Which is significant. Yes. And if you remember during our conversations around the Parks and Markration Master Plan, we also went through an analysis of each amenity that we have in our park system. The amount of time that it takes to maintain, do safety inspections, do any repairs and maintenance on those, and then we allocated out a time allotment that we have to do that which helped us derive the difference and additional staff that is needed by mode. So if we adjust the mode, we adjust the staff, but that adjusts the maintenance and operation of each of the facilities. And I'm not disputing the wise. It's, you know, now it's time I want to take a close to look and monetize the FTEs. Certainly. And see what that looks like. Commissioner Constance. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So the 48 positions for community services that are on slide 31. The other four are in addition to that. So is that 52 new positions? I think the four for the infrastructure. So what you're seeing here are just the park's maintenance. As part of the public services presentation, is when we brought you the additional 35 positions associated with the recreation centers. And that too was included in the Parks Master Plan. I'm just trying to get numbers. So 35 plus 48 plus four more. They're different things, but they're all toward parks. I'm just so I can understand what's going to be the average salary for those positions. and from doing the math, you know, at 30,000 a piece, which, you know, we're at 1.5, I didn't even look at the other 35. I mean, you know, we're well into the $2.5 million a year. So, you know, I'm just trying to, I'm not saying I'm with the chair, and not that it's not needed, but, certainly, you know, and it's, your budget is not the biggest one. When we look, I'm glad we had that dissection so we can see where things are. But we can provide you that additional information because we've got it broken out by the positions, they're where they're going and they're in a roll-up of that amount. So that was part of our budget submittal to administration. So we can work to provide you that information along with all that backup documentation on the level of service and where each of the park modes fall out. That sounds good. Yeah, I just want to, and then maybe a global number of, like, and you never fill all your positions. But if all positions were filled, what is that annual amount that appear? Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President. Tommy real real quick on slide 31 that you have up there. Well, no, that's 35. Go back to 31. Yeah, you've got Parks Maintenance 48 for new position requests. And when you go to slide 34, it's 4. It's 34, but I don't know if that's the same thing. It's talking about optimization to meet recommended modes. Is that the same thing? Because it says 34 for park maintenance there. I'm trying to add the numbers up. I think it's the combination of both the ball fields and the park maintenance that gets closer to the 49. Yeah, that's 49. That didn't make sense either. One was taken off. and was taken off. So that's how we get to the 48. Okay, so the 15 FTE for ball field. And for maintenance. The combination of, because ball fields for us is a park maintenance position. Their focus is just more on ball field maintenance and operation, but they also oversee the park maintenance at the park they're doing. So when we say park maintenance it's a combination of both the ball field maintenance. I'll see you on this slide and the park maintenance which gets you to 49 which apparently we've lost one along the way somewhere. Okay. And which got us to 48 which is being presented. Okay. I guess I'll have to figure out which one that one was. All right. Well we lost somebody. We lost somebody. Okay. Well then you have the three special projects, maybe one of them went there. I don't know. All right, thank you. I'll come to Shad your majority, I'm sorry sir. Oh that's okay sir, I appreciate it. Yeah I just think that, yeah I agree that with the other additional information has been requested from my colleagues and I'd like to see that as well. It's just, you know I guess, you know know, hanging over our heads right now is what's going on in Tallahassee. You have to move ahead as an organization with what status quo is, but we could really be scrambling Hector big time after, you know, the next month. So I think we just need to be thinking along those lines as well as to, although these are needs based on what we've previously decided and approved, we may not have the revenues. We may have cuts in revenue, significant cuts. We're juggling to try to just keep things going. But this is all good for right now. This graph of showing updated projection, that's general fund in its entirety yeah and its entirety so we did move some public work stuff like engineering and things like that over there I'd like to see the impact of that relative to that curve that shows we're in a nose dive you know on the ending balance just so we can we can get a good handle I think it's the right way to go and really help transportation trust And we're gonna look at that in a second, but I don't see how it's split here. That's all it would be helpful But we have to we have to try to get that Obviously get that red line below the blue line After after 2627 so I mean it's it's a challenge, but We'll. We'll see what the revenue looks like in a month. Mr. Chair, if I may. To your point, Commissioner Dordy, what I will tell you is the reason that we presented this and it's part of our parks recreation master plan and we updated it was to give the board flexibility to be able to say it's times are tough, and so we need to make adjustments. So you'll see that the mode levels that allows the board to be able to adjust up or down. If you remember when we were having conversations around the recreation side and we were talking specifically about pools, the conversation was we want to do more. So we had recommended a certain mode, and the recommendation from the board was to increase that to a higher level. Again, our goal right now, we've been working to try and make ourselves whole for the amount of amenities that we have in our parks so we can maintain them to the level and standards that we have. If we need to adjust, that is why we built in this. These are just examples of the modes that are in the parks recreation master plan. This by no means is a way to handcuff the board into having to do something. It's to give you the flexibility to be able to say, here is the definition of what we want to do times or tough, we need to make adjustments. We can just adjust our level of maintenance and operation to. It's to give you the flexibility to be able to say, here is the definition of what we want to do, times are tough, we need to make adjustments, we can just adjust our level of maintenance and operation to fit what that is. So know that that's why we built it the way we did, was to give the board the flexibility to move the dial up and down. It's scalable. Yeah. And again, I guess my request is really relative to that. The whole expenditure side, Hector, is to really have that define that same way. You know, all the other departments that are pulling general fund dollars out as to where we have scalable opportunities. You know, whether it's engineering, whether it's your operations, whatever it is, so that we can adjust accordingly after we find out what those guys are going to do up in Tallahassee. Thank you, sir. Ms. Flores. Yes. Thank you, Tommy. Definitely touched on it. The level of service, those are based on the master plan, based on the community's wants, boards vision, boards policy. The other category like Francine touched on, the infrastructure-related positions from bringing new facilities online or I say, you know, flipping the lights on. Those are needed. We know we just got a time those right. And then, you know, we are seeing advantages to those systemic changes. I always like to protect the general fund, but general fund is definitely help trans trust, transportation trust fund, so those were good policy adjustments that the board made. But scalable is the key to psycho utilities discussion. You almost have like a base model and then scalable scenarios around that. So we'll certainly bring that back to you, hopefully once the revenue side picture gets clear here in the next month, We'll see. Thank you. Thank you. Yeah, I mean look our park users are very sensitive to the level of service. Absolutely. We hear it if the service isn't there, the level isn't there, the frequency of the things they like to do at the park is not there because of staffing. We get the emails and phone calls that's for sure. So we just kind of have to look at this and balance it again at budget time here and see where we need to go. All right, Francine, you recognize to continue. So in June, we'll get an update on our revenue projection and then those final numbers in July. We'll continue to work the plan for the expenditures and bring in an update in July as part of the recommended budget. Okay, moving on to public works projection. So last cycle we did make some recommendations. We were looking at transportation trust. We knew we were in need to help stabilize the fund. Staff made three recommendations and brought those to you for your approval. Those recommendations were approved and implemented. So I just want to provide you an update on the transportation trust fund when we were reviewing those recommendations were approved and implemented. So I just want to provide you an update on the Transportation Trust Fund. When we were reviewing those recommendations, we brought you the this graph here, Commissioners, where you can see, without doing anything, the balance of Transportation Trust was declining rapidly and not sustainable. And then the red dotted line was if we implemented those recommendations. Good news is that we did do that. You all made that decision and you could see that the Transportation Trust Fund, when we've updated it for fiscal year 24, and what we're projecting for 25 in the future, we're seeing it do exactly what we anticipated, which is great news. So in much better shape for transportation, trust fund. And thank you for those recommendations. It's nice to see, you know, the policy change result in the line going in the correct direction. So that was good. Sorry. So I appreciate staff bringing those recommendations forward. They've proven to be very effective. In addition as Tara mentioned we've seen success with the city work's implementation and the buildings of that as well. So that's also included in this projection as well. Okay so the next projection is the lighting district. Back in August we were reviewing the lighting district for a potential millage deduction so we brought you this graph here to provide a graphic to provide a graph on that we could support the millage deduction for the lighting district and felt comfortable with that so I just wanted to provide you an update since updating the assumptions so once again, pulling in fiscal year 24 actuals now that they've been completed, looking at 25 projections as well as the needs of the lighting district with their LED project that is ongoing right now still feel very comfortable with the lighting district. So you can see their fund balance is increasing over time, over the next through fiscal year 33. I have a question about the slide 43. I remember having a discussion about equipment leasing. How much out of the three changes we made, how much of a role did that play in straightening that line out? Was that more of a significant role that it accounted for 50% of the improvement or? Yeah, so short term, that was a short term CAFO issue. So we're seeing that on the short term to help that fund tremendously. So the way that that's working is that we are paying for the equipment needed for the new positions, the support the new positions, and the department out of the vehicle replacement fund. And then we're leasing it back to them in an internal lease. So what that did is it took the pressure off them short term to come up with the capital dollars to pay for that equipment in the next year or two, and we're spreading that out over the life of the asset. So yes I would say that eventually it's going to net to zero because they are paying that back over time but in the short term we've seen a substantial savings to that. Yeah I mean leasing obviously helps the capital you know the cash flow so I'm wondering is a strategy county why did we look at enlarging that to fleet and other areas throughout the county? So yes, I think that that's something that we definitely would wanna consider in the future. It goes along with as we grow as an organization, as the community grows, the way that we're currently doing things, moving from a role to an urban county and taking a look at that, that is definitely on our radar. Yeah, because I think when you lease, obviously you have the warranty and a lot of maybe the maintenance, maybe could potentially go away. Depending on the equipment, I'm not sure what comes with what, but. So when I speak to lease, we're leasing internally. So it's not as if we're going to a dealership and leasing the equipment. It's that we're paying for it out of a fund. And then we're calculating a leasing payment. So different pros and cons to that. Okay. Well, because I know other companies, or when you don't have the cash flow or the capital leasing is the way to go. And there's a lot of positives to that. But for private companies, they can write it off in the info every year as opposed to amateurizing it and depreciating it certain percentages. So anyway, I was just looking at it from that perspective. You know, because if we're doing something that worked out, why not roll it out internally, where we can? Yeah, thank you. Any questions on the lighting district and the update? Okay, so moving on to the landfill projection. As part of last budget cycle, we did provide you a long range projection on the landfill. Since then, I did update the assumptions. Once again, with 24 actuals, what we're seeing for 25, and then built that out through 33. I do want to point out this graph gets 2032 right now is when we're anticipating the closure and expansion on the landfill. So as you can see, you see that large spike in expenditures and the significant drop in the fund balance. However, I do want to point out we're still anticipating once we've finalized that closure and expansion that will still have a healthy fund balance of approximately $20 million for the landfill. That's still a long way to come. The land. expansion that will still have a healthy fund balance of approximately $20 million for the landfill. That's still a long way to come. The landfill we've taken steps to postpone the closure of the landfill. As you know we're doing that vertical expansion now, but we have been preparing for the closure and expansion of the landfill. We feel very comfortable with this fund and when that time comes comes, when we need to do the expansion, we'll be prepared financially to handle that. Okay, any questions on the operating budgets? Okay, moving on to the final bull goal, which is funding and completion of capital needs assessment through 2031. I want to start off with just discussing some of the complexities that come along with this bull goal during this budget cycle. Some that we've had in the past, some are more recent, but of course, as you know, we've been faced with three major hurricanes. And the way that that impacts this bold goal is, one, when staff were looking at updating the capital needs assessment that had to be taken into consideration when you're looking at the scoping of the projects, the timing of the projects, but also when we're assessing our capital maintenance plans. So the impacts on the hurricanes, the damages, the repairs to those capital maintenance plans as well. In addition, then there's hazard mitigation grants. So we introduced the hazard mitigation grants to you all last budget cycle. We've made some progress, not quite as much as we would have liked, but I can give you an update on where that's at and how some of those impacts we're going to look at today. As well as you know, we've been experiencing inflationary impacts on projects. This is not something new. You all have been handling that case by case. We talked about it as part of the utility meeting this morning as well. But then in addition, we have an impact fee rate review that's coming up. That correlates with the 2026 sales tax initiative. So I'll go over some of the assumptions for what we're looking at for impact fees and as we looked at projections for the future and things that we didn't take into consideration right now. And then of course we have those public works funding restructure. So you saw the positive side of that for the transportation trust side, but I just also want to show you the impacts on the capital side as well. So starting with the capital funding, the capital needs assessment, we're going to look at sources of revenue, we'll go over five years of history, and then we'll look at the seven-year projection, and then we'll provide you funding options. So there's several types of revenues that we'll be discussing today. We're going to go over gas tax which of course is restricted to transportation. We'll look at the capital projects millage. We're going to look at impact fees which is also restricted by category. I'll provide an update on sales tax and then we'll discuss the hazard mitigation grants as well. So gas tax commissioners, there's two components of gas tax that we'll be looking at today. There's the maintenance component that will not be used, cannot be used to support capital projects, but think it's important to review with you all because we did make some changes on how this is structured in the past. So you can see over the last five years of gas tax, this is, as you all know, this stays relatively flat year over year, but we're providing you the history from 2020 to 2024 of what was collected. I do want to point out the jump in the gas tax from 21 to 22 is because we reallocated the motor fuel portion of the ninth cent from the capital side to the maintenance side because we knew that transportation trust was in need at that time. So that's where you see that jump from collecting approximately $200,000 to $1.1 million. Unfortunately, as we mentioned, Tuesday, we did see a declining gas tax in fiscal year 24, so we actually collected less in maintenance in 24 than we did in 23. For projection purposes, we are being conservative, we're building a 1% increase. We are also looking into that state formula. We have staff working on that now. We've heard some information from some of our representatives that have interest in looking at this as well. But for today's purposes, we feel comfortable with showing you what we've shown in the past, which is a 1% increase year over year for our maintenance portion of gas tax. So close to a 10 and a half million dollars each year. Now on the other side of that, we have gas tax revenue for capital. So we have the 5 cents of local option gas tax that goes towards capital. As I mentioned, you see here 5 years of collections. Once we shifted the motor fuel portion to maintenance is when you see that drop off this information. So we're collecting approximately $4 million a year on the five cents local option. For the projection, once again, we built a 1% increase in, which will bring us to approximately $4 million a year. And what this is currently being allocated for is road and bridge capital paving. So here I'm providing you the information off of our capital maintenance plan for our road and bridge paving program. You can see fiscal year 25 through 31. It varies but right around around $4 million a year. When we offset that with the capital gas tax that we collect, we feel comfortable that this is sustainable. And our recommendation is we continue to use that capital gas tax towards this. Thanks, Tim. Yes, sir. Could we dive a little bit deeper? Because you mentioned that it dropped. It was heading up slowly, then it dropped for 24. And then in your projections, it starts to head back up again. Do you truly understand the reason for that? Or is that just what the state has handed us? And it's their magic, funny funny formula and so we don't really know how they bake the cake we just get the slice. Exactly, Commissioner, but we are looking into it. I have staff working on it. It is not a simple formula or calculation by any means. There's several formulas for different components of what is sent to us by the state. All have different allocation methodologies. So we can provide more information on that. That's right. The administration methodologies are always complex. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Very true. We should pass a resolution transparency in gas tax allocation. Charlotte Kenny's an obfuscation free zone. I mean, if you look at the 5-cent local option gas tax for 2024, that $3,882,000, am I looking at that right on slide 357? Yeah. Yeah. I mean, that doesn't even pay for like PD&E for some of these road projects let alone get to the actual road I mean, it's Doesn't even get you really into the construction, but they kicked us back three and a half years based on what? You know the level like all of a sudden it's yeah, it's yeah back to 2020 I mean it's I'm assuming it's public record that all 67 counties, we can see how they went so that everybody dropped in 24 or did a few of them balloon up. Well, how is that? Again, how is that? I'm getting looks. Yeah, we'll do a complete analysis of it, but we do have every county's allocation. Yeah. Okay, thank you Mr. Chair. I remember I talked to after I was elected, I had this conversation, I think it was with Mr. Berger, a long time ago, and I mean, I was in the gas business for 30 years, and even that, you know, I was nodding my head, okay, I get it, But real, no, I don't get it. Commission of Dirty. This has been a conversation, the methodology on the distribution of gas tax has been a conversation for decades. And I doubt that the person is even alive who came up with the original, original formula, original methodology. I'll be very pleased if we can figure it out. I'll be surprised if you do. but it would be great. But I have never been able to find anyone who could really actually tell us how it totally works. I know this category is I know how they try. But it doesn't always seem to add up when you look at that sheet. Like you say in the distribution of dollars and this guy gets this much and we get what we get. Sometimes it just doesn't make any sense. And look at the trend. Yeah, it doesn't make sense. Doesn't make any sense. I wish you're a constant. Yeah, I wish you're a constant. It's the same thing as we asked Dr. Peppie very politely, how are we getting our allocation from the state for Department of Health funds? Isn't it on a per capita basis, and he just gave us a very kind smile because nobody really understands the formula. They just decide up there how they want to give it out. It's been institutionalized and it just keeps going. He's there. Well, maybe at our next meeting for next year's legislative agenda, state agenda, we ask for clarity in the gas tax. Although we say we can always ask. Be careful what you ask for. That's the one thing. Okay. You can go ahead. Okay. Moving on to Capitol Projects Village. Commissioners, we do haveage rate of 1.2654 for our capital projects millage. Fiscal Year 25 projected revenue is a little bit over $38 million. We've built in fiscal year 26 projected revenue of $42 million, and that is based off of the same assumptions that you saw for general fun. So a 10% increase in valuation. So here you could see we've added on this page here, Advilorm Revenue from fiscal year 25 through 31 and using those same assumptions, the 10% 26, 10% in 27, 6.5% each year after that. And then based on the direction from the board, we're utilizing the advalorant dollars collected for the capital projects millage to take care of what we currently have first. So what we do is we allocate our debt service, which you can see we've included here for each year. We see a significant decrease in debt service in fiscal year 26. Yes, Murdoch Village drops off so exciting that increases the capacity for capital projects so that's exciting. I've been waiting to see that. I'm happy I could bring a tea. We also filled in our capital maintenance plan so you can see we have our technology component of that as well as the capital maintenance plan for facilities, parks, and then bridges as well. And then we have our equipment line and that's really the equipment associated with the general fund divisions that we pay directly at a capital projects. So you could see here when we take what we are anticipating in our projection, which we do believe is conservative for capital projects, knowledge, and compare that to the maintenance programs, we do have capacity in the capital projects revenue. So starting at about seven and a half million dollars and 25 is what we're anticipating and then going forward for 26 through 27 each year we've calculated that. You know when we do the ribbon cutting for Toledo Blade I know Commissioner Constance is anxiously waiting to get to that point. We need to have like a mortgage burning. There's a satisfaction I think that notice with a commercial paper. We need to have a copy of it and give it to Commissioner Cons. It's getting the middle of the intersection and just burn that and cut the ribbon. I'd be looking forward to that. Thank you. So that is what I've done here is just taking that same information and putting it on a graph for you to see visually. The blue line represents the ad valorm revenue for capital projects and then each bar has the components that we've currently utilizing that millage for and then the space between the line and the bar is the capacity for capital projects to help fund some capital projects off the capital needs assessment. But then we add in the hazard mitigation grants. So just to provide you an update on the hazard mitigation grants, we have heard that we are going to be allocated funds for the five storms that I've listed here. So Ian, Adalia, Debbie, Helene, and Melon, the ones with Ashricks or the ones where our appropriation has not been finalized. So we do feel comfortable that we will receive the $202 million of funding for Hurricane Ian and the close to $4 million for Idleia, but it's a long process and we're working through that. So we do have an appropriation for those storms. However, each project has to be approved and then we'll see what we actually get for each one of those projects if approved and we're working through that. In addition, there is a match requirement that comes along with the hazard mitigation grant. So I've listed here as well what those are. Today we're going to really focus on the Hurricane Ian hazard mitigation because those are the projects that have been identified in the window that we're going to look at today. So just keep that in mind. The others fall outside of the window that we're reviewing today. So what I've done is taken that same graph that you just saw. And now I've added the match component for Hurricane Ian hazard mitigation. That is in the dark red. I like to call it Garnet. And you can see that uses some of our capacity for the CIP that could have potentially went to for capacity. So commissioners, we have heard that there may be some other opportunities for some federal funding to offset our match requirement. BDBG disaster recovery is a potential we're still looking into that still very early on but we it is on our radar and we'll bring more information back to you on that as well. Thank you. Is that through the federal government or is that through Florida Commerce? Okay so it is the Florida Commerce Commerce portion of it. Right. That's the one we could have gotten directly, but we're not. So now we have to fight with everybody else to get it. Absolutely. Absolutely. So since we're not entitled, it didn't come to us directly and then it's a pot that's a potential. Thank you. Okay, moving on to impact fee revenue. So as I mentioned, these are the collections for impact fees over the last five years. We did touch on the transportation portion of this during Tuesday's workshop. Here we've listed the other categories and what has been collected. Each of those categories roll up into general government, except for transportation and the sheriff. So we're providing you the collections for each one of those. When we look at the projections, commissioners, we are assuming nothing changing for this time being. So we want to be conservative. We've dropped down the transportation number based off of what we're seeing for collections for fiscal year 25. So we're assuming a 17.4 million dollars of transportation impact fees. We're assuming we don't know what's going to come out of the impact fee study. So for the purposes of today, through 31, we're going to keep this flat for all of the other categories. And you could see we're anticipating potentially a $23 million total each year in impact fee collections. General government component of that is close to $3.8 million. We should already. Yeah, related to this topic, you know, eventually you have to get going on a study on impact fees. Just wondered, I thought I'd throw out the, is there a benefit? And that really needs to be analyzed as to consolidating some of these categories. And transportation probably always needs to be on its own. But do we take, have transportation facilities, public safety, maybe three categories? I don't know if that works, whether that makes sense becomes too difficult to figure out how you distribute the dollars. I don't know. The more detail might be the way we have it now, maybe the best way to go, but I just thought I'd throw that out to see, y'all could look at that and see if it, we'll make a little bit more simplistic. Yeah, we had a prior discussion about looking at the categories. Right. That's why we're shuffling the deck. Yeah, absolutely. I mean, we need to be flexible that way. Sean Cullinan, planning zoning official. Another one of my hats is Impact Feed Administrator. After a year of work, I know I wear many. After the last discussion, you had regarding Impact Feed. I've reached out to Kim. We're dusting off the RFP. So we're in discussions with administration now. Yes, it's going to be a new study. There are some bills out there that have made changes requiring even more stuff to be able to make changes to impact fees, including supermajorities and things like that. So we're letting that dust settle to see what happens with that. But when we were told it, and when you folks stated that you were ready for, you want to do the two scenarios, dust it off, because you folks know this is a good year long process. So we'll probably be putting the RFP out on the street within the next month or so. Commissioner Dory. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So I guess that's what my request would be to look at consolidation, see if there's a benefit to that. You know it doesn't if it flies in the face of what's coming down from Tallahassee You know you guys should shake it out for us, but I you know typically I would I would gravitate towards that Kind of a concept, but it may not be smart So I mean when you look at the discussions the sport has been having recently about going heavy on roads on transportation We talk about sales and other things. I think when we adopted or got rid of the discount on transportation, it must have been right around 2022 and that went into effect because you can see the receipts just blew up and got us on this upward trend. And when we look at the metro forecasts and the amount of housing units coming in, the conversation we're going to have about transportation, impact fees, the level and how do we do the categories, knowing what we see in the Metro forecasting, I can see that as a major revenue stream to backfill things like gas tax, which have essentially been flat. So I think it's going to be an important strategic conversation about those discussions, Mr. Constance. Yeah, and you bring up a great point because remember, we have to spend them in the county that they're collected. So we've got West County, doesn't have a West port, but it's just booming anyway. Mid-County Westport, so that's funding for maybe Edgewater Project, and then South County's got the connector road, so the stuff that's happening at Tucker's grade and on Bernstere Court, or so they do kind of correlate, which is good. But I think strategically we're able to, I think with legal's approval, we're able to broaden where we were running. Things can cross funding can cross the various bridges. West can go all the way to East and South, but it could go mid or back and forth. So we can jump one to one zone. And then we have gas tax, which we did with Placita. We kind of always have that to change the calculation to move something that's going to get done with gas tax dollars in the property restriction and then move the gas tax dollars to two spots. Yeah, and you'll a lot of talk about numbers that just went way over my head. I think the flexibility with the use of impact fees. Yeah, the flexibility we have with the use of impact fees throughout the county now, we can really start plugging some holes and tackling some of these road projects without being restricted by geography. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions about impact fees? Okay. Looking at local sales tax revenue in April, Rick Arthur provided you an update on the sales tax revenue. This is the graph that came from that presentation at the BCC meeting. You can see this is the history of our collections for sales tax. We did provide a projection for 24, 25 and 26. With the assumption that we're going to see a decline in 25 and 26 as hurricane repairs or tapering off as we've discussed in the past that has helped and towards our advantage when we're talking about sales tax dollars. So we are being conservative with our 25 and 26 numbers with a projection of approximately $40 million each year for that. When you look at the actual revenue that was collected for our 2020 initiative, from January 21 to October 24, we're just over $153 million. And then our projection through the remaining years of this current sales tax initiative is an additional $85.6 million. So total projected revenue for the 2020 sales tax initiative is just shy of $239 million. Can I just jump in? Yes sir. So your per year for the January through October time frame is two and three quarter years is somewhere near 41 million a year but then you're're two and a quarter years, you're at like 38 million a year. So you're getting very conservative based on what? Just being careful with under promising and over performing kind of. We always like to be conservative, but as I mentioned, we're seeing, we're starting to see this flatten a little bit as we see collections coming in. In addition, I think that the previous storm, the nature of hurricane Ian and the types of repairs, I think we saw this number increase because of that. I don't know if we'll see those same things from Elaine and Milton. I think it's going to take longer. Those are complete demos in a lot of cases that will come on maybe later. It'll be spread out over time. So all that being said, I think that we're just, we're being conservative with our, by, with our traction. Sounds good. Thank you. Mr. Chouac. Yeah, I was going to bring up that same point. You know, we've got 4,400 homes that were significantly damaged to some degree or some of those will be repaired. But there's a bunch of them being torn down in Minnesota, Kesey, great example. And those will take a long time to get back online. Some of those folks can't rebuild. So those properties are gonna change hands and then people are gonna design and so on and so forth. So it will be a long time. I think we're gonna be closer to 250 million, just so you know, so just put a pin in that and let's see if I'm right or not. Okay so commissioners what we're showing here are all of the sales tax projects associated with the 2020 initiative. This is the complete list. Some of these projects have been completed. We didn't note that. Some of them are in progress and then some are still scheduled to begin or for in 27, 28. So when you can see here what we're our approximate project cost is $226 million for the total initiative. So with that being said, based off of what we're anticipating in collections versus what we're our total projected cost are right now. We feel very comfortable we'll be able to complete all of these projects. We did discuss if there is a surplus at the end potentially using that towards the transportation projects in the future. I do want to point out and I did footnoted on the side. There are two projects that we're still really working through the scope of the project and do believe that the project estimate or the costs here may change. That's Port Charlotte Beach Community Center and Pool as well as the South County Annex replacement. So. So those are the revenue sources for capital projects. Moving on to the capital projects funding plan for the six years. Before we go into each category, I do want to know the last, since the last time you saw the CNA, which we brought to you on February 18th as part of a workshop, there have been some changes which are included in our, in our estimates today. So point them out edgewater phase four. Can you hold them one minute? I'm sorry. Can you go back to you mentioned the Port Charlotte Beach Complex. We've already adjusted those numbers and so you're still showing the old numbers here. We've got that at 25 million and I think 5 million for the pool. But yet here I think you're showing 8.8 million. We've already made those adjustments for a very long time. Most of the presentations we've been getting have the new adjusted cost. Yeah, this was based off of what was on the CNA when we brought it to you in February. So we will update them if that's the final numbers. Yeah, I mean, that's what's been presented to the board for a very long time, right? 20, 25 million and I think five for the pool because the board had that discussion about the different options they gave us and we ended up building a facility for the next 20 or 30 years. So we enlarged certain elements and the prices were adjusted accordingly. So yeah, those numbers already have the new numbers. So we need to get those plugged in, Commissioner Constance. Is this factoring in the total cost or is this factoring in the total amount that we need to come to the table with because there's insurance dollars and other things that are that are Supplanding I think there's 10 million in insurance money that wasn't there So I'm not sure what I heard was this was the CNA numbers they pulled out for the sales tax component of that yeah, so Okay, just for what the sales tax is gonna pay for but let me let me, I will double check that out. Okay, and double check on that. Commission Dordi. Yeah, it was the recent sales tax update. I think it was April 22nd or something. It was a presentation. Should have the numbers in it. That's what we got into the finished floor stuff and all that from storm surge. And it was well beyond. I've been looking at the updated numbers for the last five or six months. We've known it was 20 some odd million. So that's why I was, you know, when I looked at this and you went through it and said, eight point, I'm like, wait a minute, wait a minute. That doesn't make sense. I will verify that the total dollar amount for the sales tax portion of that. Yeah. Because that's going to change that bottom line number. Yeah. So I remember you said, we're prepared for that. Yeah. That's but we don't feel comfortable quite yet saying they'll be a surplus because we know we're still working on those projects, they have to go out to bid, things like that. Thank you. We're prepared for that. And that's why we don't feel comfortable quite yet saying there'll be a surplus because we know we're still working on those projects. They have to go out to bid things like that. So thank you. OK, so there's changes that have been made to the Capitol needs assessment. Since you last saw it on February 18th, is the edge water phase four. It was moved from 28 to 27 to align with the other edge water phases. Mid-County Annex was moved up from fiscal year 30 to 28. And then we've had two additional CIPs or projects been identified as part of this budget process. We have elevator renovations for fiscal year 26. And then we received a request from the sheriff for additional equipment to support, sheriff support Services in Hardin 911 project. And then we were able to shift the Sheriff's helicopter. We've moved that up. So that's been taken care of in this fiscal year. So not something that we need to include, it was originally slated for fiscal year 28. Question on the support services in hard 9-1-1. That's at the new facility that's under construction? Yes, that's additional equipment needed to support. Okay. All right, thank you. Okay, so this slide, commissioners, this is what you saw on Tuesday. This is the transportation projects that are identified on the Capitol needs assessment. I'm not going to spend too much time on this. This is exactly what you saw on Work Through on Tuesday. There is a total cost for these projects in the six-year window of $332 million. We went through each project in more detail on Tuesday. And When we take those expenditures and then allocate the revenues that have been identified, once again we're using those impact fees at 17.3 million dollars a year for transportation trust. We do have grants dollars associated with I believe Harborview. And then we have sales tax dollars already allocated for several projects. So we have 2014 sales tax initiative and the 2020 and then we just had a discussion on Tuesday about potentially allocating 50% potentially more to support the need to complete these projects out of the 2026 sales tax in next year. So with that we would have a tax net $18 million shortfall which I do believe we could work through once again we do have some conservative with our impact fees we talked about we even brought sales tax initiative if passed by the citizens of Charlotte County we brought that down even more than what we're seeing right now in sales tax coming in just to be conservative. Okay, so for the share of component of the Capitol needs assessment, we have four projects identified. Two are included in the 2026 sales tax extension for consideration as well as we have that additional capital project we discussed for $1.6 million for additional equipment and then we have one additional project which is a 2020 sales tax project which is district two. So total project cost in the six-year window of $21.5 million. When we look at the revenue component of this, we have the ad valorem, the $1.6 million is we do have sufficient funds in our public safety fund to offset the request for the additional equipment. So we've included that ad valorem dollar there. That is coming from the Sheriff's Millage. We have impact fees that we're collecting of close to $2 million a year for the Sheriff, as well as the already earmarked dollars for the 2020 initiative of $5.9 million. Commissioner Dordy. Yeah, I just going back to a slide, a previous slide, Francine. My memory is that when Travis of Purdue presented the District 2 office, the number was quite a bit higher than that. Okay, in that same presentation on the sales tax update. Okay, so take a look at that. I don't remember what what the number was but I think it's higher than that just cut my eye. Thank you. So the variance for the share of very feasible we're looking at a shortfall of potentially 2.11 million. Definitely something that's feasible, depending on the 2026 sales tax and what projects get recommended and approved, that could offset that as well. Questions on the sheriff? Okay, so the general government portion. So this is the remaining projects on the capital needs assessment. What we've done here is we categorize them so you can see facilities, community services, public safety, and then infrastructure compliance. So included in these total starting in fiscal year 26 are projects that have been potentially earmarked for sales tax 2026 consideration In addition, we have several projects that fall within the first two years that were still being worked for final Determination and discussion with you all as well as in fiscal year 28 We have a hundred and seventy six million dollars of projects for hazard mitigation grants for projects identified for hurricane Ian. So you could see that large dollar amount in 28 takes those projects into consideration. So for the six year total of $684 million for general government. So commissioners, if we look at the potential revenue sources here what we've done is we've added that ad valorum amount that is the remaining capital projects knowledge that we could put towards these projects. So that is that first line you're seeing each year. We do have department revenues that we had to take into consideration. So those would offset projects such as the utility facility with the assumption that the utility will fund that as well as the community development facility. We've been preparing for that as part of the building construction services fund and tourism in fiscal year 30 that they would also support their facility expansions. We've added the general government impact fees each year of close to $3.8 million. And then we've added the hazard mitigation grants, the appropriated amount from Hurricane Ian, which is that 102 million dollars. In addition, we've included anything that's already been included and approved for allocation for the sales tax initiative of 2014 and 2020. And then what we did is our final line is the additional 50% of potential sales tax for 2026. So when we take that into consideration, you could see commissioners were anticipating approximately $470 million of revenues to offset the expenditures. And unfortunately we just still have a significant shortfall here. So usually at this point in the budget process we like to come to you and say we feel comfortable with the funding plan for that six year window and we're just not, we're not there yet. So either we need to take a look at our total expenditures and go back and prioritize projects or look at options to increase revenue. My recommendation is that we spend the next few weeks working with administration. We'll look at the projects, we'll prioritize those projects. We'll know more about our revenue shortly. So once we get some preliminary numbers from the property appraiser, I'll know more about the ad Valorum line of that revenue. So we could tweak that number as well. So the recommendation is for the next steps is that we bring back to you as part of efficient and effective government on June 19th. We'll prioritize the projects, I'll adjust the revenues, and then we'll come up with a funding plan for general government projects. Mr. Constance. Thank you. The roughly 14 million for the sheriff between the jailhouse, the jail administration renovation in the warehouse on Loveland. I'm assuming that's going to come out of the general government side at the 50%. OK. That's why we didn't include it here. We double dipping it then. Right. But you've specifically broke him out for good reason. But that's folded into the okay thank you. Fisher Dordy yeah just retreat from that presentation on the 22nd the the rec center is estimated at 25 million and the pool for Charlotte Beach pool is is now estimated at 5.5. Thank you. OK. for showing the beach pool is now estimated at 5.5. Thank you. Any other questions about next steps? Okay. That completes my presentation for today commissioners. Thank you for your time. Thank you. I'm ready. Okay. We are going to move on to comments. Mr. Flores. None this afternoon. Thank you. Okay. Mr. Nolton. Nothing. Thank you. Commissioner Dory. Nothing, sir. Commissioner Constance. Mr. Commissioner. Commissioner Trux. Commissioner Doich. Nothing. Okay, I would just say for those out there listening, I went to the Brandis III ribbon cutting today. It's at a affordable housing complex at the Board of County Commissioners participated in funding in part and I I have to say it was a very impressive facility. It came out just exceeded my expectations in the quality fit and finish of the project. There was some new residence at were there, one of them spoke. You know, our participation with the city, with the housing authority and and with our other partners, I think, really paid off big time. It's an example of what you can do through a lot of hard work, sticking with it. There was some roadblocks there. It took a long time to get there. But it was wonderful. I think each and every one of us, if we were all there, would be very proud to say, I'm glad we participated. and you know, they'll be more to be more to come but you know we know difficult it is to get these across the finish line but it was definitely a very rewarding ribbon cutting. With that our agenda is complete this meeting is adjourned.