HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026 08 24 Public Input - Documents provided by Tim WansburyTiPbbllc
ry, itV)
M name is Tim Wansbur . I live at 149 Nandina Terrace. I would also like
v v
to speak this evening on Amendment 3. Let me start by saying that I fully
concur with Mr. Gallo's comments.
I believe the commission has a responsibility to explain to residents
before we go to the polls this fall, how Amendment 3, if it passes, will
impact city finances and potentially affect the quality of life in this city for
years to come.
It's clear from social media that many voters in the state plan to vote in
favor of the amendment. When asked if they have concerns about the
potential impact on local budgets, many express the belief that local
budgets are full of wasteful or excessive spending, that taxpayers
deserve a break, and therefore they are going to vote in favor of the
amendment.
With that as the backdrop, I think local officials need to set the record
straight. And this is critical because should the amendment pass and
become part of the state constitution, it will be virtually impossible to
make any significant changes in the future.
The $4.5 million cut by 2028 reduces the city's property tax revenues back
to 2020 levels. The cut reduces funding for the General Fund by about 16%
from the 2026 baseline.
If the amendment passes, commissioners will consider various options.
Do they raise millage rates or implement new service fees? Do they
shuffle money from other parts of the budget into the General Fund? Or
do we just suck it up and make painful cuts to the budget.
One option would be to simply salami -slice the cut and apply a 16%
reduction to each department budget.
First, we eliminate $120,000 from the funds used to pay the mayor, the
commissioners, and the city manager.
Next, we cut $1.8 million from the police department where 83% of the
budget is directly related to personnel costs. A cut like this would require
a significant reduction in personnel, maybe as many as 15 people from
the police department.
Next, we cut $525,000 from the Parks and Recreation budget where again,
50% of that budget is directly related to personnel costs. It too would
result in additional personnel reductions.
My numbers may be off, or this option may be too extreme, but the basic
questions remain.
• How will the amendment affect city finances?
• Will we raise taxes or implement new fees in order to replace lost
revenues?
• Can the city shift resources from other parts of the budget into the
General Fund?
• Which department budgets will be cut and how will the cuts affect
future services?
• And finally, what's the most likely course of action?
The bottom -line is if the commissioners tell us, "We've got this." Don't
worry about tax increases or new fees or cuts in services, then I'm all in
for Amendment 3.
But if there are going to be major problems, then I want to know what they
are before I go to the polls in November.
Therefore, I request that commissioners provide answers to these
questions as soon as possible.
Thank you for letting me speak this evening.