HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026 01 21 Public input - Documents submitted by Art GalloInput to the City Clerk on 18 January 2026 concerning the upcoming TLBD Special
Meeting scheduled for 21 January 2026
Christian: Tim Wansbury and I want to provide this below feedback to you concerning
the latest briefing to the TLBD for consideration in advance of the TLBD Special
Meeting on Wednesday, 21 January. Please understand that our goal here is to help
ensure Staff and TLBD success. Nothing else.
Request that you please forward this email to whoever on City Staff that you feel needs
to see it.
There was much work completed to create the subject briefing, and it is not our intention
to criticize that hard work. However, it is our belief that this briefing is not sufficient for
the TLBD Advisory Committee to be able to take or to recommend any meaningful
actions. When taking this briefing on its own merit, it just does not provide the TLBD
with the information it needs to make good, informed recommendations to the City.
We are not sure that the City is ready to have this Special Meeting with the TLBD on
Wednesday. The City may want to consider postponing it.
Here are some points for Staff consideration:
1. TLBD Requirements — We compared the summary slides which address TLBD
requirements in the latest 21 Jan 26 TLBD brief (Slide #27) to the summary slide
presented to the TLBD on 21 May 25 (slide #15). Here is what we notice:
21 May 2025
21 January
2026
Re -landscaping WS Blvd medians
$1,104,000
$526,800
Monument renovation and relandscaping
$500,000
$86,000
- Tuscora monument and median
$155,000
$49,000
- West WS Blvd
$225,000
$0
- Small monuments renovation
$0
$18,000
- Main Entrance lighting
$0
$19,000
North Fountain
$176,000
$176,000
Street Signs
$50,000
$50,000
Total
$1,830,000
$838,800
Basically, the new briefing states that $575K is needed for the medians and the Tuscora
monument renovation; $37K for monuments and lighting; $176K for fountains (which
was briefed last year as a "soft" number); and $50K for signage. Total is
—$838K. (That's a 54% reduction, —$1 M in about nine months.) The briefer stated in
May the numbers being presented were good numbers recently verified with potential
contractors.
Also, with regards to the May presentation, the briefer stated the $176K number for the
fountains was overstated since it included assumptions that were no longer valid and
the $50K for signage is something TLBD will have to plan for every couple of years.
The previous estimate for the Tuscora monument and median was $155K. According to
the new slide, it's now $49K.
You will note that there is a difference of $991,200 in requirements. The briefing should
address how there can be almost a $1 Mil difference in requirements from May 2025 to
January 2026. We recommend this significant reduction in requirements be explained
to the TLBD, especially since the numbers presented in May had been verified with
contractors and the numbers were used to justify the request for a 100% increase in the
assessment fee.
The brief as it currently sits indicates an overestimation in our requirements from last
May. From our perspective, a requirement is always a requirement. We may not
have the budget to support all of the requirements, but even an unfunded requirement is
still a requirement. (This is also why prioritization of requirements is so important.)
An explanation of the reduction in requirements (and therefore budget) needs to
be explained to the TLBD Advisory Committee. These figures are different from
what was used to brief the Commission last year. The $1.83M requirement was a major
factor commissioners considered in making their decision regarding the request for a
100% increase in the annual assessment.
Said another way, we understand that the TLBD requested assessment was less than
what was received, but what requirements have changed to support the planned 2026
work as shown in the chart above? What requirements changed from May 2025?
2. The commission's decision to increase the assessment by 25% produced
approximately $175K in additional revenue in 2026. However, the final slide (#27) of
the current briefing states there is only $75,000 available for the Assessment District
rehabilitation in 2026. This needs to be explained to the TLBD Advisory Committee.
3. There doesn't appear to be any plan to discuss a comprehensive strategy or a plan
for how TLBD will address the many requirements in the community. This is a glaring
shortfall that we have tried to impress during our public comments to the commission in
September and at the last TLBD quarterly meeting in November. The TLBD committee
should be able to review a proposed strategy and consider possible courses of action
(COA). A solid strategic plan must document requirements not only for 2026, but also
the next 3 to 5 years, for the TLBD Advisory Committee to make meaningful
recommendations to the City. The TLBD needs a written strategic plan to use as a
foundational basis for all of their decision making.
2
Discussions Wednesday evening should include: (1) a review of all of the requirements
in priority order for 2026; (2) a review of the plan for 2026 that addresses the
requirements which can and cannot be currently funded; and (3), the TLBD approved
strategic plan for the next 3 to 5 years that can be used for budget justification
purposes. It can also be used as a tool to help justify any future Assessment District
Increases.
All of this documentation is needed for the TLBD to be able provide good, informed
recommendations to the City on how to spend our valuable resources.
4. The TLBD budget must also establish a reserve account for unanticipated
maintenance issues that have to be addressed. This issue has been discussed at
previous Advisory Committee meetings, but there is nothing on the agenda to talk about
reserves on Wednesday evening. The reserve account could start small, but can be
adjusted as needed as more data becomes available to the Staff and the TLBD. This is
not good in our opinion.
5. The work that is discussed in the current slides for 2026 is documented at too high a
level and lacks the necessary and specific requirement details for the TLBD to take any
action on. For example, the briefing slide on "Small Monuments" (Slide #24) does not
identify any of the small monuments, nor does it even list how many small monuments
that there are in the City. (Is there any work planned for the two small monuments on
Vistawilla?) ...All that this slide presents is a requirement for $18,000 as "Understory
Replacements" (not sure what that is) in 2026. ...No plants, no lighting, and no Irrigation
work is planned. ...The TLBD is left to guess on what future requirements may
entail. They cannot provide the City adequate recommendations based on this limited
information.
6. We would expect all of the planned work (requirements) intended to be done would
be prioritized by the Staff to assist the TLBD in deciding what work (requirements) can
be postponed or eliminated due to any funding shortfalls.
Since the maintenance details are lacking and nothing is prioritized, the TLBD lacks the
information it needs to make informed recommendations to the City as to what
requirements to fund, delay, or eliminate.
We also recommend that accompanying this presentation should be the long range
(next 3 to 5 years) strategic plan that goes into the anticipated required work details,
and establishes priorities for that same work. Then a budget can be made to address
the requirements by priority. It will become very evident what requirements the City can
afford to do now.
This added data will be very useful for the Staff (and the TLBD) and greatly assist in
monitoring planned work vs budget.
It will also be very beneficial when the next Assessment District adjustment will have to
be brought before the Commission and the General Public. To be clear, we believe that
3
this current briefing does not represent a strategic plan, and nor does the five-year
budget that was briefed last year. A budget is made after the requirements are set
by priority, and then a timeline to meet those requirements is made. Things that
are of lower priority with no assigned budget, can be delayed or eliminated by the
TLBD. But they are all still TLBD requirements and must somehow be accounted for.
7. Lastly, the specific Assessment District Approved Funding should also be addressed
(at least at a very high level) to make sure that this is documented for the Public
understanding as well as for keeping everyone on the same page. For example,
something like this can be added to the briefing:
Year/ERUs/Total per ERU/Yearly Budget (Estimates as of January 2026)
2025 / 4,375.85 / $120 / $525,102
2026 / 4,375.85 / $160 / $700,136 (Not including $75,000 currently available???)
2027 / 4,375.85 / $200 / $875,170
2028 / 4,375.85 / $220 / $962,687
These are our comments based on reviewing the subject briefing to the TLBD. They
are presented with only good intentions, and to assist Staff and the TLBD as they
perform the hard work. We want the TLBD and the Staff to be successful, and it is our
hope that these comments will be received in that light.
Thank you. Art Gallo & Tim Wansbury
151