Duval DOGE Special Committee

>> Good morning. Welcome to Duval those. It's a little after 11. And let's begin with introductions to my far left. >> Calling Hamzy Council research very Plus office of General counsel and they're Bieber Council auditors office. Kim Taylor Council auditor. >> Morning Chris Miller at large group, 5 City Council, Ron Salem group too large. Good morning. Well, areas district 11. Let's do speaker cards first. I have. >> One here. And I guess there's a second one. Let's give you 2 minutes. John Scott. >> express my continued support, the work this committee is doing. Florida Doge is identified. Millions of dollars of overspending and this cursory glance it operational infrastructure expenditures highlights the problems government has when it does not appropriately prioritize spending. Whether be half a million dollars in overtime. Our roads that even the mayor doesn't know where they go. This committee must be diligent, bloated line items and handling a also believe it. This committee should expand its efforts and look at prior projects, including Abbey Skyway and Transportation utilization as a whole, which I know members of the committee have already brought up. But finally, the 2 biggest priorities that need to be discussed is development incentives. And the way we allocate spending too many of the thousands of nonprofits listed in Jacksonville. It seems more and more these projects are reprots dant without being prioritized. And I recognize that members of this committee have started to address these concerns. What the fiscal health of the city. But can continue to improve if this these things are focused on. Thank >> Thank you, MR. Scott. John Mooney. MR. Newman ef 2 Minutes. Please keep it on topic. >> The low I and John j. New Jacksonville City Council resolution 2023, 0, 1, 9 and city Council district 4 cpac, 3 school board district 3 Duval those doge our waterways. And, you know, I'm wearing my. Arrow fwc hat. It's a playoff. The Fish and Wildlife Commission. You know, the state of Florida, you know, hope you're taping You know, and so. With Duval, don't. Blake's? Fbi? The Fish Blaze Invitational. You know, we are going to have and bring to the attention of the entire state. The money that can be. Saved. By accessing our waterways. It's tourists. For marketing to the world. And I can't emphasize enough. With COUNCILMAN Areas. You know, we talked the other day jet skis. Man. We were going to be tearing it up. You know, it is going to be And so it. So what I want to share with you only down to 30 some seconds. This is the Northeast, Florida Regional Council, 7 counties. You know, it's you know, we are. Going to be marketing, you know, to the world. You know, do touch. And like i said. The fish blaze invitation. We're going to start right here. Just showing the money. That we're going to save. With our waterways. And thank you for listening let's get ready for do that. Jet ski right? Thank you, MR. Nanny. >> Just in terms of the committee, our next committee meeting in a couple weeks will to a large extent be on our health care initiative. The Bailey group has indicated they will have a fairly extensive report for us at that time on their analysis of our health care spending. So just plan all that. I've also scheduled. I don't have the date in front of me for jta to come back as well. That might be I'm just not sure. It's it's it's in the not too distant future and the next month or so jta will be back. Okay. Before we get into the report, let me just thank Kim Taylor in her staff. The council auditor, this report from Florida Dozed, I think came out Wednesday or Thursday of last week. Immediately contacted the auditors and asked them if they could analyze that that rip port as it relates to Jacksonville in a format that would be easy for us to understand. They did. I know they spent a lot of time late last weekend. We met yesterday and went through the report and they went through that Florida Doge report anywhere. It mentioned Jacksonville pull that data and they've done comparison of the left side to the right side is that showing up on the screen now? Yes, okay. Good. With that. I'll turn over to MISS Taylor and will go through this systematically just let me know if you want to comment. As we go through it, MR. Taylor. >> Thank you, MR. CHAIRMAN threw the chair to the committee and as the chair stated on your left side there, we've pulled the language so that if you have the report, you want to pull it up. But we've pulled the language exactly from the reports you have in front of you as the CHAIRMAN Indicated. For the most part, anywhere where there numbers that we could verify and look at pull trying to pull anything in. That mentioned, the city of Jacksonville said that you had that for your review. So starting with the first one and it's on based on the page. Numbers are based on the full report. So page 5 mentioned a comment about total increase and they looked at comparing 24 25 in this instance tears. 21 and also to 2017 and they 36% increase from 21. And then a 67% increase from 2017. That was looking at 10 largest cities in Florida overall. And they also mention that their their observation was that based on the data they looked at. Primarily it was not a function of law enforcement or fire fighting in emergency management and then they also mention our numbers. The numbers are correct that they reflect for are 16, 17. The numbers that they pulled or our general fund budget. And there is a distinction between that and the general Fund General Services District budget, which is what you're used to hearing about. The media will often report on that number. We're your departments are located. Your valorem revenue that 2 billion number that the you hear about for this purpose on this page. What they utilize with the general fund is a whole. So that's going to include your emergency reserve. It's going to include your property appraiser, full budget or tax collector, full budget, cetera. So general fund has a bigger meaning for this page of what they're looking at. So but their numbers absolutely correct. There. We just mentioned that when you pull the if you if you do more focused and look just at the General Fund, General Services, district numbers, collective-bargaining contingencies do come into play, which you're not going to know that looking at our budget unless you're going to see that as a contingency. So when we took that into account in in kind of pull that into the day, the what I'm gonna call Jfrd and jso budgets. There could be some differences in interpretation pending a what they count as public safety. So which is not wrong anyway, they're just maybe a difference without further contacts. We just don't know. But as far as that we need, we that. You look at just the gst, what we found for that time period of 16, 17 to 24. 25 was that the other departments budgets did increased by 46.5% in that time period and that when you look touches so in jeopardy, taking that collective-bargaining contingency, which keep in mind that was 52 Million. So is the timing of those collective bargaining agreements. And it was parked in a contingency into those were approved by council. But they were all related to public safety. So increase of 66.5 from fiscal year, 16, 17 to 24. 25. So just could be a difference there of of how that information was pulled. Not wrong. Going down to the next one on Page 6. They mention millage rates that there was in Jacksonville in nearly 95% increase since 2017. That is correct. There was from 16, 17 to 24. 25, if you look at the gross valorem revenue before which includes the cra's, it did increase by 95%. So that was accurate within the report. Any questions? Councilmember areas. >> Thank you. Taylor's. So we are obviously comparing ourselves to the 10 largest cities were one of the 10 largest cities in Florida. What is the average for the 10 largest cities and then also what is the average for Florida in general, from the city Florida to see where we compare? Because I see these numbers here. But I really don't know what we're comparing it to. >> Through chair to Councilmember Aires, the best that from the report information relying on that and not having a lot of time to pull additional data. What they indicated their review is that they saw for the 10 largest cities overall in our comparable. They saw 67% increase which when you look at our general fund is a whole which says the numbers they pulled out at about a 70% increase. So that was in line with when they looked at all of the city's comparatively overall were just mentioning as a side note, if you pull just the gst, each gets slightly different view point of public safety in But yes, we're up there in that compared to average of all the 10 largest cities. Ok? Thank you. >> Let's move on to page 2 place. >> page to if you go to page 18 in the Doge Florida Doge report. They had graph in that report that noted that city of Jacksonville's personnel spending increased. 29.7 1% or 228 Million. And they looked up four-year period. 2021 to 24. 25. Which the report indicates is in excess of the population. Growth and inflation rate combined. Were actually a little bit higher on in the concept overall, as we note here is correct. Personal cost have certainly increased within the city within that time period. We actually came up with. They had about a 25% expected. Normal increase within that time period that they had in the report. We were calculating about a 30% expected normal increase, which just slightly off but reasonable within within what they determined if, however, that for context. Using if you compare to that total were not really able to get to the 228 million that they had in the air. But the concept, as I mentioned, is correct. We pulled it based on looking at a couple of different ways. We looked at salaries in just the general fund gsd and again, this collective bargaining contingency, I think is going to play a factor and where the data or how it's represented could come up with a slightly different percentage. We're showing an overall of 39%. So those personnel salaries definitely increasing above what you would expect, the normal of what we calculated is 30%. But when broken down between jso and Jfrd we should to 42% in other departments and then approximately excuse me, 42% in Jf jso and jfrd and then about 22% increase in other departments. So that that collective-bargaining contingency, depending on how that was viewed, that 52 million material. And 24 25 that it it definitely can change those percentages. And then again, even if we looked at salaries and benefits. But again, just looking at the general fund Gst since that's where the Abbott warm revenues located you get about the same. You get about a 40% overall and then a 43% in jso Jfrd and then about a 23%. In other departments. And again, we weren't quite sure if that was just salaries are salaries and benefits. So we tried to to come up with some different scenarios. But again, overall concept is definitely correct in that that our cities personal cost have. Fairly significantly increased over that time period. I'm going to page 19 in the don't report. They mention. Wage and salary expenses increasing. They mention the city of Orlando first and then they say some early in Jacksonville salaries have ground. 71 1% more than twice the rate of benefits. So in this analysis they were looking at the salaries compared to the benefits and the time period for this one that they looked at the year 15, 16 compared to year fiscal year. 23. 24. And we were able to get reasonably close to what they determined as far as the percentage. As far as looking at it on a citywide basis. Overall. And that's taking all of the funds. So not just the not just the general fund, but citywide looking at all of the salary and benefit costs and comparing those. I do want to mention know when looking at there's some things that can help contribute to how these things are calculated based on the year that's being looked at pension reform reform has a significant role in changing our benefit cost. It's significantly reduced when you take into account that projected pension surtax that comes into play so using that 15, 16 period, you have a drop in 17, 18 in those benefits. So we just tried to pull some numbers just for reference kind of putting back in if pension reform didn't occur. And we didn't have that projected pension surtax. You would see salary still. You would have different things that come up or second. Let me just give you a couple as an example. So citywide, they're absolutely right. If you looked at it, citywide, it's about double salaries compared to benefits. If you adjust that for pension, it's very close. We have about 65% salary increase in benefits about 68%. So very recently close. When you remove that pension reform factor that greatly reduces benefits cost. If you look at just the general fund Gst overall again, salaries, yes, outpacing benefits somewhat. 68 1% versus an increase in benefits of 53%. But an error gap. And then you actually if you look at just the general fund Gst and you take into account as if pension reform did not occur and you can add back in those higher pension costs. It actually flips it and you get higher benefits benefits would be increasing at 97% versus salaries at 68%. I would say overall when we talk on these things, it's that collective bargaining contingency in the pension reform that just. When you throw that into the mix can create some some different viewpoints. But certainly there are reports accurate based on the growth that we're seeing in in personnel costs. I do want to mention, too, we have is a side note. There was a period, even public safety took it a 2% reduction at the time we had about a 10 year period where there was after Alito, 9 where wages were not increased outside of if they were promotions or some merit increases when the city from a coal was steam point. I'm even city council was frozen at that time from increases. So just a side note, they are as far as that peach yet I'd like to >> comment on that. So a 209, for 7 or 8 year period. Salaries were relatively flat. >> Through the tear to this year. Yes, other than if they were promotions. Yeah. And those types of things. So I do want to say completely flat. >> Understand special circumstances. Yes. Or from a cola standpoint, you're correct for about a 10 year period after that 2% reduction or not annual. And obviously that started with the Great Recession, which which obviously impacted all of us and continued for many years after that through the chair. You correct? It took us. >> Remember that property taxes? They can nosedive immediately. And that's what happened. And it took us good about a 10 year period to recover back to the level of the ad valorem that we were at. Prior to that recession time period. There were. >> Annual. There were a collective bargaining negotiations. But the salaries we just kept flat throughout that process. >> Through the cheer, relatively flat and all their fi from a collective-bargaining. If there were anything that kept to that a minimum. But but for most of the city, at least not on public safety. There were not the increases and even public safety took took the reduction as well. Thank Moving on. >> All Page 3 going to page 30 of the report from the Florida donors. This mentions the the Cultural Council of Greater Tax, More Cultural Services Grant program. They had asked about getting the grant authority making in the body and then. Then provided information eventually that That the city They mentioned that this is an attempt to conceal. The city's extensive support of dei, 3 grants, all that we can really verify is you know, pursuant to the code, there is a process where and this has been many years in place that the council determines an appropriation amount and then that amount is provided. You have an agreement with the Cultural Services, Green Council and from there councils not really in control of what funding is allocated to you to the various organizations. So that is something that is within within their power. They determine we basically get a list afterwards of what's awarded that we include in our budget summary report. But from there council is not involved in that process of determining those specific organizations and council members that this is probably an area that is going to need. >> In my mind, future discussion once we allocate those dollars, we really lose control of how those dollars are spent and what their spin on. And if we have concerns about particular programs that they MAY be funding, we would probably need legislation to restrict funding to those organ is too psg, whoever it might be on. Allocating those dollars. You know this, We remember during the budget process, we had a and couple of pieces items that when the budget that did not get past address some of these things that got very contentious. So if it's something that we want to change, it will require legislation and obviously 10 votes. Thank you, chair. I would assume that that legislation will probably come come here doge. >> We as a committee will create the legislation and then take it up through the regular committee process, right? Or in individual councilmember could just. Work with gc and craft it themselves either way either way. Personally, want to give this some thought have some interaction with psg and others to determine what is what is the best approach and you'll you're going to see some more specific examples of this as we go through this report. Councilmember Miller. Thank you, MR. Chair through the chair. I just think and I think this goes in line with what you mentioned about having those exchanges and that's getting more on the details. But I think it's also important for us to hear from the organizations themselves. >> Because sometimes there are dollars that are that are given and they MAY be used for the intended purpose is and then other dollars are used for the things that are mentioned. So I think it is important. We give all of the organizations an opportunity. From their perspective, what they actually did with the funds, how the funds flowed. But I agree with you, as we've seen in other areas. There are times when if we aren't, if we don't provide the oversight and have the ability to see what's actually done with those dollars. We kind of loosened things up more than we probably intended. And and so I think I think it's important for us to dig more into the details on this and thank just one overall before we go further, thank the auditors and I I also suggest we bring the inspector general folks into this process as well. So we can get into the details. But this this is a great start. So thank you very much for that. Well, I have heard from some of those organizations personally over the last. >> 72 hours or so, and you're going to see some examples of what as we get into some extra pages. So just just the patient and we'll show you some specific examples. Go ahead. MISS Taylor. Police Council member areas. Thank you, chair and kind of 2 councilmembers point. And what I said earlier. >> I think this conversation needs to have a larger format for us to have with Csgn psg. So maybe just like we do with gta. See how we could actually add them into the agenda. So we could continue this conversation further. I think it's going to require some work shopping as well, too. So just back and forth, conversation, not just this kind of standard, but just questions back and forth. So I would love to see how we can implement that in the next couple of those meetings. Thank you. This is sort of the opening opening my eyes and I'm sure other people's eyes to this issue and we can absolutely do that. This Taylor. >> Yes, Through the charity Committee continuing on Page, 34 in the report. They mentioned that the city of Jacksonville directed the Jacksonville Electric Authority to develop a plan for converting 100% of the city's non-emergency on road vehicles to ease at a cost of 105 Million. I did reach out to the administration they did provide the response that you'll see they are and they they do acknowledge that at the initiation of Je a prior to 2024. The city did enter into new cost, no obligation with jta and an external vendor to try to see on that conversion process of converting 100% of the city's non-emergency. So we're talking public safety vehicles, but the non-emergency vehicles to ease they said that was presented are if you converted all of the non can a non-emergency road vehicle, 744 of them over 15 year period, it would have been a cost of 105, which would have provided savings compared to the normal model that is in place right now with the internal combustible engine vehicles. But the city, they indicated the city's not obligated to adopt the plan. And you recall there was recent legislation that they came forward with testing the building inspection Division tv's. But there's no further commitment for them to move forward. I don't have any additional details beyond what we reviewed in the legislation related to the building inspection. We were not aware there was a citywide plan, either. So if there's any questions on that, probably best to direct to the administration, if anyone is here for that. >> How many vehicles were in that fleet management, a process that went through the budget. I 6, 7. It's what council area saying it. You know, that ms Taylor. Is that is that correct? >> Through the chair. If I can clarify, you asking number of vehicles that building inspection division? >> sorry. Did I see v's? I believe it was in the budget. As I recall. >> Yes, that one was incorporated and I think they were moving forward. With doing that. And also talking about you mean the number the sites would know that every member of vehicles. >> I accounts where area says is saying it was 6 or 7. >> I believe it's more than that. But all try pull that legislation. See if it's in there. But I believe it was more than that. But you MAY be absolutely And I just have to come from. >> Councilmember Miller. Thank you, So if I understand this correctly at this point, the only costs incurred. Were associated with. >> Coming up with that plan paid to an external vendor and not sure if we know what that amount is, but it sounds like those the only costs incurred in what's being stated. 105 million dollars that they include that in what they called waste of 199 Million. >> Through the chair to counsel Mueller, I'm not certain on that 199. We really weren't able to get back to that in total. It MAY be part of it, ok? You're absolutely right. It could be included in that total. Based on everything would imagine, it MAY be. And I will just say that this we just got this this morning. I was not aware that there was you know, overall plan for this. So we can certainly try to find out a little more detail on your questions on if anything else, as you know what's been paid, the vendor overall and what? The city's participation has been in, that we can try to get you some more detail q and I think chair that that. >> Gets to a bigger point in when you say 199 million dollars of waste, let's make sure we're comparing apples with apples instead of apples with oranges. If those were future costs, that could be incurred if the plan is implemented to me. That's not waste at this point. So I would like to see an overall list of everything that went into 199 million dollar estimate of waste for Jacksonville because right now what I'm seeing on this report only highlights somewhere around 94. 95 Million. I'd like to see the complete detailed list that went into this report that would have to come from Florida Doge. I mean, that's not going to come Well, no, I understand. I'm just saying if we want to do that due diligence and really go into the details of what they're what they're claiming I'm happy to do that. I think that's a good thing to do. But we need all information in order to do that. Thank you. This report documents what was were Jackson was mention where we could compare apples to apples. >> That's the purpose of this. Okay. I'm sorry. Councilmember area citing see you. Thank you, threw a chair to MISS Taylor. Obviously you just got this portion now. I was not aware of this either. I knew that we implemented in this budget budget public works. But I don't consider it a waste ever. Converting tv's. We're saving money on field. We're saving means some of the vehicles actually cheaper than gas vehicles as well, too. And ultimately, what I would like to see is if it is truly a ways, I want to see what the projected savings are. The projected waste is on on line item because it does a savings standpoint? Yes, it's 105 million dollars over the course of 15 years. How much will be spent over the course of 15 years? How do we not gonna be is what I want to know. I want to compare the COUNCILMAN Said what is the apples apples comparison on his part? You've got this today. Don't expect Italian but got a next time. We talk about this. We could put it as item item item. I want to know what our project the savings is to invest 105 minutes into this evening program because 744 vehicles, I guarantee you'll be saving a lot more than that over the course of 15 years. Just with fuel alone. Said I have the bees you. Everybody knows that. And I think savings and loan, I save almost $5 a month myself. Stephanie will be a big savings for us not to waste in my opinion. Thank you. Yeah, I let's continue explore this one get some more information. >> Okay. MISS Taylor fuel continue on. The rest on page. 34. >> Yes. Or you'll see another 30 peach 34 item that is regarding the Doe's identifying identifying sidewalk projects estimated cost 2 to 3 million mile compared to the fdot average of 900,000 per mile. So I don't duplicate will have comments on another capital item related to sidewalks. All covered that in just a couple pages. If that's okay. Then on page 43, they had some comments again on and kind of indicating our general fund budget are number of employees and just giving perspective all those numbers we found to be correct. We were just slightly off on the overall cap, but again, their numbers were in line with their their numbers provided in the report. Turning the page again. This was on page. 43 in the report. It mentions that Jacksonville's ad valorem revenue revenue nearly doubled in the general fund spending expanded over 70% while county population grew just 16%. We we agree. We've confirmed these amounts the population are in line with what the state has identified here. The only thing mention is that they do not include in this analysis when they're talking to 16%. It does not take inflation into account. And if you do that, there was an inflationary county. We're talking from 16, 17 to believe. 24 25 on this one. It was about a 30.0, 4, 4%, inflation increase. So if you take that multiplied by the 16% population growth, you get a the normalized are expected increase of around 51%. So certainly we agree that that spending average and again, this is general fund is a whole would include your emergency reserves in there, which as you know, even under the prior administration, there were significant steps taken to bolster that emergency reserve. So that is included in taking into account when they do get these numbers. >> even even accounting for inflation and population growth. Its. It's still 20% more than what you would expect accounting for that 50 versus 70%. >> Yes, are based on what we have collated were to summarize that. Turning to the next Peach. 44, the report this mentions were city council. They give you credit for reducing the mileage during the 25 26 budget. They mention in the report that Publix Non public safety numbers, they they recognize is an action that were reduced from 3,007 90 43,007. 68. They also recognize the committee that was set up. I'm here to try to look at all the various efficiencies and potential savings we verified. I mean, the millage rate. Absolutely correct. In that the city council did reduce it during the 25 26 budget. We were not able to exactly tied to what they. Talley has than on public safety. So I it's it's probably a way that the data was pulled. Not sure why it's different but concept wise. We agree. The jso Jfrd citywide cap. We're showing it Flat. City Council kept that flat from 24. 25 to 25. 26 overall. When you just break out those non public safety. So a concept wise agree with what just just slightly different approach. Some similar numbers on still continuing on Peach. 44, the report there, the next block. They mentioned the 76 million increase in ad valorem revenue from the prior year. That is true. Even with the millage reduction that there was a 76 million dollar increase year-over-year from 25 26 to 24. 25. They also mention for employee caps. They looked at a two-year period on this page and they said that within that two-year keeping it constrained, increased. 44 positions, we're we're off again on the totals that they have that concept wise agree. We are very close. We're one position off but agree that within that two-year period non public safety positions increased by liver 14, just looking at than on public safety. The next one each. 44 480,000 grant the Cathedral Arts Project a program that was mentioned on this page of report was a justice involved youth program. What I do want to mention is we confirm the amount there is 480,003. 56 that's awarded by the Csg Council or was awarded in. 24 25 to the Cathedral Arts Project. Of course, we don't get into the specific of the programs when we get the audit report for that won it covered salaries and it covered rent for the. Cathedral Arts Project program. So. There's not specifics that our officer even council again, you're awarding a lump sum that that Csg Council, then words to the various entities I do want to mention and I'm not sure MR. CHAIRMAN, if you would like to mention it, there's a letter that I believe was handed out >> I received some communication from the Cathedral Arts project. This justice involved in youth program costs $11,000 annually and their communication states that the Moran Family Foundation currently funds this program in its entirety. And has since the pandemic. So they're comment as they're not using our dollars to fund that. And that program delivers weekly structured visual arts instruction inside the Duval County Juvenile detention system. Instruction is provided by train teaching artists and focuses on communication cooperation, literally skills, literacy skills. Pardon me. And self-regulation through consistent engagement in a highly structured environment. Council. Various I'm sorry. >> Through the chair to MISS Taylor, these dollars obviously came from private dollars. First of all, knowing the makeup of our committee, we will that we would have identified is in the budget process and probably not been funded. Just knowing how we operate here. So it's a state that we were funding the projects. I think that's not correct. Secondly, can verify the dollars that we put into the budget for them what they were used for? You said rent and utilities is I like the line item. This stays there. And so we can say, okay, this is what we funded. Black and white. There's nothing else about it. Wright is do we have the line in the sense that the description on that it was I'm sorry. Go ahead. MISS Taylor. >> Threw the chair to councilmember areas all that City Council does is approve a lump sum appropriation in for it was 7 million in. 24. 25. That's the extent of councils involvement. And then once the cultural Services Green Council evaluates in awards, all of those, they then have agreements with each of the entities. And when we get involved, it's on the back in from the reporting standpoint and what I can tell you from the report, is our portion that 480,000 that the city funded covered salaries for staff or the cathedral arts organization and then rent for part of the space as well. >> So at what I would suggest this once we come back at a later date to have the psg csu conversation, I think part of the conversation should include we will this cultural council, whatever 7 million dollars, whatever it is, 10 million, whatever it is. And then once they decide how they're going probably those daughters, they need to come back to council so we can make sure. And there are no initiatives that we don't feel comfortable supporting. I think that will be part of the conversation. We could have that way. We can make sure that we can say, hey, 400,000 went to tours, rent and utilities and nothing else. I recommend chair. >> Yeah, that's gets it. And we're going to see other examples of this that will will prompt that same comment. But that's not the way has been done. We given the 7 million and we have lost control over that as as MISTER Taylor said, Csg gave the Cathedral Arts Project $480,356. So that's the total how that will spend it. They're saying salaries and such but I don't have that documentation. >> What I don't want to teach areas also hamstring them and saying we're gonna do your job now, let them do their job. Show us what they have. And then we just sign off on. It is not so that we can just have more Donald and then scrutinize everything they've done because obviously they put a lot of work into it just so we can make sure that the initiatives that we're funding are going towards things that we definitely want to fund. That's all it is. Thank you. Yeah, that the question would be they show us what they funded the week. >> Would we change it in any way once they funded? And that's a whole nother discussion in my mind. You can pay. MR. Taylor, continue. >> At the bottom of Page a 4 of 7. You'll see that part. 45 in really of already talked about that. That's the lump sum amount that they mentioned that went to dei were not. Of course, we're kind of in the same position that the council isn't that we don't get enough information to know what would considered the dei. They they classified 1.9 million of that total of that all that we can really confirm for you is that the 7 million was appropriated in 6 million, 7,092 dollars was awarded to programs in. 24 25. If we turn to Page 5, starting at the top there page. 45 in the Florida does report. This is where it gets into talking about the sidewalk cost. They mention a 7.5 million Dollar project free, single One Mile Sidewalk project again, fdot estimates enough that a 5 foot sidewalk on both sides of a road typically cost about 900,000 we looked through because we didn't have specifics in the report for context of what was named. We did find there is an art museum drive sidewalk projects. So kind of guessing if this is the one it does have 7.5 million that was planned funding in. 26 27 in 27. 28. But it does have me slightly different scope. This one included construction and modification to the s# # walls under the Emerson Street overpass. So my guess is that part of that, if this is this project, they MAY not have had scope information available. If you just pull from our cip. It's absolutely correct that some of the sidewalks and there's a lot of them we pulled in. 25 26 a lot of the various there's individual eyesight. Sidewalk projects by location most most of these, not all of them, but a good portion have additional scopes within them either pedestrian caught crossing signals being added in addition to the sidewalk or there's a rare road track involved that sort of thing. So just for context, without knowing which project and many of them did have additional scopes. We did reach out to public works and what they've indicated for a one mile one side of the road is what we interpreted the email to mean without any drainage piping. It's about 212,000 per mile for one side and then 640,000 if they had have to add curbing and drainage and piping that that affects the the water runoff. So without having additional contacts that that that was the best that we could pull for more cip. Please continue. I'm sorry. Councilmember. >> Just want thank you, MR. Chair to chair. Just want quick comment on that. We obviously need to get into the details to make sure that we're looking at the same thing. And, you know, you talk about the project, you did find that includes bridge construction and the modifications you talked about to the s# # was that's a whole different thing. When it comes to a project when you're talking bridge construction changing the s# # walls, that's very different from putting a simple sidewalk in place. So. You know, good initial work. And that's what we need to run down to make sure we're looking at the same things. And I know when you have 2 days coming into Jacksonville, no matter how good your team is, if we don't have these exchanges asking questions listening, which takes a lot more time than that. You sometimes can not see the whole picture and if if this is so like I said, you know, simple sidewalk and the costs associated with it are very different from also bridge construction and side walls. So we just need to continue to find out what we're really looking at here. Thank you. Councilmember area should concern you want and we can get over here. So you I through the chair on the shoulder her to MISS Taylor. I think the issue here is not so so much about the cause of the project is the fact that we get >> Categorize it the correct way on the cip. It's a sidewalk project. Yes, but it's also like COUNCILMAN Said it's a bridge project in a project by this. Shouldn't he be put on enough our party on the separated or even if we have it together? How the description that's it, what it is because Florida dot state and I mean about to see is I would also raise a red flag. But the facts are the facts. It's more than just a sidewalk. What can we do in the future to avoid this issue? >> Through the chair to councilmember areas, I think you bring up a good point because in fairness to them, this one is called Art Museum, drive sidewalks. And you do not know that includes those other items so we can talk to public works in advance of the budget because when I looked through all the other list of sidewalk projects that were named. Like I said, many of them had additional scopes as well to it. But if someone doesn't know, you pull it and it looks like it's just a sidewalk so we can try to see if there's a way within the title because they MAY still want to see it all as one One cost that will work with public works to see what we can revised for the budget. You. I think that would be very helpful. Police continue as Taylor. All right. You next one was also impeach. 45? It's the bottom page 5 of our hand out. This one mention 54 million in capital spending for bike lanes and sidewalks then provided for fire rescue in a recent capital improvement plan. So without more context from the report, we're not sure what year that they MAY have looked at. We went back all the way back to 21. 22 fiscal year through the 25. 26 Cip they only thing that we could really find. We do not see where the current year future you're spending, had total projects more. The jfrd except when we looked at the 5 year plan in this recent cip, you just past in fiscal year. 25 26. We did find where bicycle and sidewalk succeeded Jfrd by 12 Million. But we do want to mention in this gets into your point on on how things are labeled in how our cip works. We looked at total There's often you see each of the years in the cip and then there's a total cost that has all the prior year funding that's been put towards a project and future years. So you see kind of the whole picture sidewalks in particular. There's 2 that we have sidewalk curb construction repair and ada compliance Kerber Pier side wants. Those appear in the cip each and every year. So you'll see those kind accumulate. So if you put in 10 million this year in, you're going to have 10 million the next year. >> This project never falls off. These are county wide once it Stan every year. So every year that you've put in dollars, it accumulates roadway resurfacing, I think is a tone is over 200 million in total because it never falls off. Things like fire stations. Once that fire station is complete, it falls off of the cip. And so you don't see those total cost. So again, without further context from the report, that's what we're wondering. Could have maybe been looked at as well. It's just the way that that those up here where you have recurring cip projects that me kind of distort what, what what you're looking at from cities perspective. But that's all that we're able to find without further fiscal year information in further information in the report. Councilmember Miller. >> Thank you, MR. Chair through the chair. I look forward to getting the details on on this one because I they're sometimes is more to the story. And obviously everyone knows public safety. He's our number one responsibility as a city government. And I believe some of these bike lane projects are just that. If if you all. Recall and I didn't see this referenced in there and Axios report from 2023 which listed Jacksonville as 3rd having the 3rd most. Fatalities for cyclists. Along our cities in our country only surpassed by New Orleans and Tucson, Arizona. And now as for the period 2017 through 2021, and we had it was listed as 7.7 bicycle fatalities per million residents. So I bring that up to say sometimes there's more context, its our responsibility to provide those bike lanes and tried to address safety concerns that are there to allow the cyclist who be able to exercise and do what they do safely. But in the report, I saw comments about. Going to and from work and commuting. And there was a comment listed in saying Jacksonville, so spread out, it'll never be bicycle. Commuting city and and so again, I look forward to getting the details because I think you missed that safety aspect. If in fact, some of these dollars were used for creating bicycle lanes during a period when we have to take seriously those types of reports like the Axios report and the level of our bicycle fatalities. So, you know, I again, I look forward to the details. It's just step one. Let's go into those details. But sometimes there are reasons for things such as bike lanes and maybe safety related. Not only related to commuting and thank you, MR. Chair. Turning on to Page 6. >> Turning to Page 6. And what I will say is I'm not I'm not sure through the chair to Councilmember Miller, what we'd be able to get from Florida We have not reached out dollar with food. You know, committee would like us to do. But we can certainly talk about that. >> I'm going to reach out to him and provide this report and get them to see if they can respond. >> Alright, turning to the next page. 6 you'll see on page 45 of the report. They had a comment about 500,000 of with what was considered excessive overtime and they name 3 areas. They said there were 27 parks and Recs staff who at recording an average of 650 plus hours of overtime. 8 staff and traffic engineering that 700 plus hours of overtime. Each and then for perking staff who exceeded 500 hours of overtime we're able to verify the hours that they noted with in this report based on looking at the system. So that was absolutely accurate. We had to reach out to the administration because we were not sure based on the context of the report, what they viewed as excessive overtime to make that determination, the cost for am just so you have perspective, it was well over a million dollars for the cost for these employees noted so they viewed about half of that as excessive in reaching out to the administration. You'll note some of their responses there. Regarding park Syria, for example, they had to We can park and river maintenance community centers. Various items they list here. Overtime hours for special events, city sponsored programs, cetera, related to their folks for da for the public parking one. They said their regular hours, of course, are Monday through Friday. And this includes all employees that work in the parking garages, but their overtime would be related to special events. That they work for those garages. And they've also had a high level of turnover and so some of this open positions. They've had to do some overtime and then for public works during this 18 during this time period. They did also have a significant number of vacancies where they've had utilize overtime to ensure that the traffic signals or maintain. You'll Some other items listed here to a second shift every time that they've had utilized and increase for setting up detours for the Jaguar Games. So there those where their explanations that they provided on excess of 500,000 that was noted in the report. >> I'm gonna make a couple comments. One I would be concerned about the safety of the employees that are working this much over time. Mean that that is a lot. That's number one. Number 2, I'm assuming all this over time, is it time and a half? Is that correct? MISS Taylor for these types of employees? >> To that year, it should be. I'm not sure if there's any double time that could occur. But for the most part, should be time and a half. >> And the 3rd comment I would make is. Iran a 24 hour, 7 day a week business for 30 some odd years. Though those that work the weekend got a day off during the week before weekend after weekend. I'm not sure how feasible that is in some of these cases. But if you know, you're going to have an event on the weekend, I mean, you've got a plan for that. And and I I just just reading this. I don't I don't get the impression. There's a big business sense, too. Yeah. The employees work Monday through Friday. But if you've got activities on the weekend, you've got to account for that would be my comment to this councilmember areas. Thank you, chair. I mean, I'm on the same page. As you know, we have the annual calendar for events. >> One events so we should plan accordingly for special events. But here's some numbers. You know, we have 3 different departments, parks and rec traffic engineering and parking staff parks and Rec 27 employees with the total 650 hours of overtime. That's 24 hours per employee of additional overtime. Staff members for the traffic engineering 700 plus hours. That's 87 hours of overtime for those for each individual and then part parking 500 hours. That's 125 hours extra overtime for each of those 4 individuals, business sense. It doesn't make sense. Not only are we paying coming, hopper also benefits into them right in my world. Powers have this We have a staffing issue. When you hire more or outsourced and contract with staffing agencies. We'll pay a little bit more. But we do have to worry about the benefits or the safety concerns of the staff members getting overworked. So this is something that we definitely address in the next budget. I would say because to have, you know, collectively almost 2000 plus hours of overtime a year. It's beyond me. Doesn't make business sense at all. Thank you, sir. Let's remember Miller, thank you, MR. Chair to chair. I certainly agree with everything you both have said. This is one area of all possible areas that's been listed in this report. Where there is always room for improvement. And to me, it's a it's a leadership matter. >> And why do I say that there's a prime example that the inspector general office looked into this past year and that was in waste management. We had 2 individuals. Received over $100,000 in overtime pay in one year. The other one received over $50,000 in overtime pay in one year. I believe. There's some action that's still pending to address some of these things. But both individuals are no longer where they were. Previously. One is retired. I believe in the others moved on. But to me, the issue isn't. Whether or not they got that money. The issue is. Why won't able to confirm that leaders approved that over time before they took the overtime and they had a leadership decision on some of the things you to just mentioned before it actually occurred. And if this occurred in one area, voice management, there are other areas where we need to take a lot better. Look at what's going on and what does leadership doing to make those leaders ship decisions and approve the overtime and in advance of these cases that I mentioned. They couldn't prove it. They couldn't disprove it. Why? Because the documentation wasn't properly approved by leadership and it was maintained so. This is one area that that and then there will be more that I really would like us to. Look at it from a systemic kind of approach with the inspector general's office. And with us looking more in the details to see. Are we making good leadership decisions? Are we wasting taxpayer dollars on overtime? Are we putting our people at risk by unnecessarily sign him too much over time. Other things that you've mentioned so this is a good area that I think I appreciate this being in the report and we need to dig more into. >> And again, I I agree with counselor areas. The budget process is one way to clearly. And as we go through it for the 26 27 budget, I think all of us will be more focused on this for sure. And I know the inspector General watch I don't know if they're here physically, but I know they're engaged in this process and we'll see. We'll see what happens. MISTER Taylor. >> Yes, or continuing on. Also it's that second Page 6 was impeach. 45 in the report. They mention a part-time special adviser to the mayor. It was painted a rate of $105 per hour. We did confirm this is MISS Karla Miller that is in the office that is paid that that came up, of course, during the budget process when the council was deliberating their budget, that equates abuse in 25 hour work week. That's an annual salary of 136,500. Excuse me part-time salary with assuming that 25. Our work week I will mention we did note in the quarterly summary we had a couple of departments per year in that went over. The mayor's office was one of them in the part-time hours was a contributing factor to going over in that area at year. End. >> And I note through the budget process, we have scrutinize the mayor's office salaries and such and I'm sure will continue to do that. >> It's through the next one it's your last Page 6 regarding the hologram at the j It was mentioned in here that it was originally advertised as the $30,000 purchase in the price tag was closer to 75,000. Based on all the invoices that we've pulled, we do see a number close to that. We have a $66,000 number. And then per the administration. We did follow up to try to confirm or their additional cost per if the message changes or there's photo shoots with. They've indicated and this is this was covered. This was paid for ultimately by the technology solutions Department. You MAY recall initially was within the building inspections department in concerns were raised as to the funding source being used for that. But it did end up getting paid out a technology solutions and what they're indicating is Beyond Co j personnel costs used to help film some of those additional messaging that there would not be in new costs and any additional costs from the vendor. That's what they indicated this morning. >> I should also mention my assistant contacted the airport and the hello. Donna was picked up by the vendor yesterday. More comments. Okay. Please continue right on your last page. Page 7, you'll see again on page. 45 of the report. >> This is where the report gets into the Dei Front dei funded items. This is again through the courts Services, Green Council. So that's a process that you discussed where as of now council just appropriate the dollars. And then from there there were did they mention 3 specific ones? Again, the cathedral arts projects and we confirm these numbers are accurate. They mention a $57,000 to the hope that he and we're just slightly off on that one. But that's for therapeutic art and poetry to help youth a program. And then they mention 538,002 the Jacksonville Symphony. And again, we have confirmed that these amounts that they cited in the report are correct. Going on to the next one was peach. 45 and continued on page. 46 of their report they make. Mentioned a $27,000 grant to Jasmine. We did confirm we have a slightly are we actually had a higher number for the fiscal year. 24 25 we saw that the public Service Grant Council awarded 90,339 1000 to jasmine. That was in the fiscal year. 24 25 and of course, similar to the cst Funding Council is just appropriating lump sum. And then that psg council is responsible for scoring in awarding in allocating those dollars from there. Page. 46 of the report mentions that 30 million and police and fire pensions. I have been invested with Victory Park Capital. They mentioned that that is one of company that continues. It's one of our money managers for p f and that they continue to highlight their commitment to dei an esg on their website. We were able to confirm the number so we did see. And we also talked to the police and fire pension fund, folks to confirm that they do have commitment of 30 Million. Actually paid in capital. 32.2, so invested with that money manager, police and fire pension funds. And then last one we've already covered. This sighted again in the report on electric vehicles. So I won't repeat myself. There. And that's the end of our hand out anywhere that we saw really a mention of Jacksonville if there's any questions, we're happy to answer them. >> Again, I want to thank you, MR. Taylor, for your team for all the hard work they did in a very short period of time. We couldn't have done this meeting today without year. Hard work and your team's hard work. As I mentioned our next meeting in 2 weeks will be devoted substantially to the health care I will. See what we can do to bring in those appropriate vendors and have a discussion. Each of us can talk to them individually as well. And about bringing them in for some future discussions as well. Any councilmember areas you're recognized. Thank you, MR. Yeah, Taylor definitely want to thank you for for report. Florida don't just did a tremendous job. >> Providing us with a good report. And I think we helped was actually pinpoint not just for us, but also for the public to understand what exactly was in that report. Help me. So I'm thankful for that. But also I just want to give kudos to Florida. Don't want more because there's a lot of things that we go through on a daily basis here, especially during the budget process that we get overwhelmed. But having a second set of eyes actually look at some of these discrepancies helps us in this process. Just today alone, I've identified already 3 action on is that I want to take on this committee as it is. So I think the way I see it, isn't anybody out there thinking that this might have been like a tough meeting for for some people? I think if anything, it's helped out, it helps the conversation got started. So we have a lot of conversations to be held here, but I definitely want to just commend everybody for this for this work in report. Thank you. >> Councilmember Miller and then we will adjourn. Thank you, MR. Chair through the chair. >> Also, you know, Senator, I want to thank the auditors and general counsel and everyone else who's played a part in helping us. Get this information on such short notice. We really do appreciate you. And and we probably don't tell you enough, but want to make sure we recognize you for that work and enabling us to be able to do this. I also like my colleague, thanks the Florida Doge folks. I know my comments today might not have seen. I MAY not have seemed like I appreciate it. But I really do appreciate outside looks. At our business and we owe it to the taxpayers. To be good stewards of their dollars in every aspect of what we do as a government. And so anytime we get an outside look. From someone who doesn't normally operate in this space. There's goodness in aunt. And so I thank the Florida do each team for what they did. But that gives us a starting place so that we can get more into the details. And there are some things that we're going to find out. They were decisions we made and they were solid. Good decision, not waste. There will be other areas. I think we'll find out. Yes, there is room going forward that we don't repeat some of the things that have been highlighted and it will better inform going into this next budget process. Like the chair mentioned. So there's always a goodness in getting an outside. Look getting an auditor. Look, I tend to favor forensic audits over regular audits because you get into the decisions are whether good decisions made. Do we make the right decisions with the money? Not could we? Where are we allowed to spend it in this way? So again, I thank everyone involved in this process. This is good stuff. No matter what ends up coming out of this, it will better inform us to be better stewards of the taxpayers dollars here in Jacksonville. So thank you, MISTER Chair for leading this ep effort for continuing to tee up very good things for us to look at so that we MAY be better stewards. Thank you. Thank