Central to the meeting was the debate over Resolution Number 20249, which proposed a millage rate of 3.2. This rate was a point of contention, with some council members advocating for it to provide tax relief to residents, while others worried it might compromise the city’s financial stability. The proposed rate of 3.2 was identified as a reduction from the current rate, with projections indicating it might lead to a revenue loss of $259,000 for the general fund. One council member pointed out that the financial adjustments would allow money to remain within households, citing examples such as a savings of about $45 on a $300,000 home and roughly $70 to $80 on a $500,000 home.

However, concerns were raised about maintaining a healthy budget. One member emphasized the need to keep the budget robust to ensure financial health amid rising costs and inflation. The importance of having a reserve fund for emergencies, particularly in light of recent hurricanes and delays in FEMA reimbursements, was a recurring theme. The discussion noted that the city was still awaiting funds from previous disasters, specifically Hurricane Ian, and concerns were raised about FEMA’s current lack of available funds.

The council members engaged in a detailed examination of the city’s contingency funds, with figures indicating an undesignated unobligated reserve of approximately $3.2 million set aside for emergencies.

The conversation also touched upon the city’s operating budget, with a focus on expenditures for the fiscal years 2021-2022 and 2022-2023. The budget for 2022-2023 was roughly $37 million overall, with specific attention to the operating and personnel expenses. As of July, total expenditures were reported as approximately $17.7 million against a budgeted amount of about $22.3 million for the general fund. This figure raised questions about the city’s financial health, particularly the operating expenses, which had been budgeted at $13.1 million. Concerns were voiced about potential deficits, given that revenue was approximately $15.6 million while expenditures were $17.3 million, leading to a deficit.

The council members reviewed historical data on contingency expenditures from previous years. The current budget proposed a contingency of $1.5 million, which includes funds for various special revenue and enterprise accounts, with a portion allocated to the general fund and the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA).

The discussion also focused on the Capital Improvement Program (CIP), specifically addressing the Civic Hub project and other planned improvements that had been moved to future fiscal years. Approximately $2.2 million in general fund projects had been postponed, including a new fire vehicle and various parks and recreation department needs. The council debated the necessity of addressing immediate community issues such as stormwater management and flooding rather than allocating funds to projects like the Civic Hub.

Ultimately, the council voted on Resolution 20249, which passed with a 3-2 vote, setting the millage rate at 3.2. The subsequent agenda item involved Ordinance Number 19-2024, which entailed adopting the annual budget for various city funds. The city attorney clarified that the ordinance would require adjustments in light of the newly approved millage rate. The council proposed adopting the new millage rate but faced differing opinions. One member expressed concerns, suggesting that settling at 3.2 might jeopardize financial stability, advocating instead for a 3.31 rate.