Apopka Mayor Nick Nesta
By Apopka Mayor Nick Nesta
There is an important conversation happening about the future of Apopka, taxes and what could happen if Amendment 3 passes. Those conversations need to happen. Residents have every right to ask where their tax dollars are going, whether the city is operating efficiently and what can be done differently if revenues become tighter.
But as we have that conversation, I hope we don't lose sight of the people who have helped build and serve this city for decades: our employees.
Many City of Apopka employees have given 10, 20 and even 30 years of their lives to this community. They didn't just read about Apopka's growth in a report. They lived it.
They watched neighborhoods get built, roads become more crowded, utility systems expand, calls for service increase and expectations for city services grow. Many were here when Apopka was a much smaller community, and they continued showing up as the city grew around them.
That deserves to be part of this discussion.
I have no problem with asking tough financial questions. In fact, I believe we should.
If overtime is increasing, let's understand why. If staffing has grown significantly in a department, let's understand what's driving it. If contracts are costing more, review them. If administrative expenses have increased, look at them. We should review pensions, benefits, staffing, management positions, outside contracts and every other major expense. That's responsible government.
But a number on a spreadsheet doesn't always tell the entire story. Comparing Apopka to another city simply because the populations are similar doesn't necessarily mean the cities have the same needs.
How large is the service area? How many calls are being handled? How much development is occurring? How many utility customers are being served? What infrastructure is the city responsible for maintaining? What services are handled by city employees rather than contracted out? Those are the questions we have to ask before drawing conclusions.
I also don't believe this has to become a choice between employees and taxpayers.
We can protect both.
If an employee spent decades working for Apopka with the understanding that certain retirement benefits would be there at the end of that career, that commitment matters. These aren't simply numbers in a pension report. They represent people who planned their lives and retirement around commitments made by their employer.
At the same time, taxpayers deserve to know those systems are sustainable and that today's decisions aren't creating financial problems for the next generation.
Both things can be true.
Why We Are Restructuring From the Top Down
This is also one of the reasons our administration has made the decision to restructure the organization beginning at the top.
If we're going to ask employees throughout the city to be more efficient, more accountable and work differently, then leadership has to be willing to look at itself first.
We shouldn't start at the bottom of the organizational chart and immediately ask which positions can be eliminated. We should start at the top and ask whether the organization makes sense.
Who is responsible for what?
Are there too many layers between an employee and the person who can make a decision?
Are departments communicating with each other? Are directors being asked to wear too many hats? Are employees doing work outside their classifications because nobody else owns it? Are we duplicating responsibilities? And when something goes wrong, is there one person clearly responsible for fixing it?
Those are the questions behind this restructuring. We are restructuring at the top so we can build a comprehensively stronger organization.
This isn't about creating titles or moving boxes around on an organizational chart. If that's all we accomplish, then we haven't accomplished anything.
It's about putting the right people in the right positions, establishing reasonable spans of control, breaking down silos between departments and making sure every employee understands where they fit into the larger mission of the city. And it's about accountability.
When a project is behind schedule, someone should own it. When a resident has a problem, someone should follow it through to a solution. When taxpayer dollars are being spent, someone should be responsible for making sure we're receiving what we paid for.
That's how we become more efficient without immediately assuming the answer is fewer employees or fewer services.
Apopka also has significant needs ahead of us. We have roads and drainage to address. We have aging infrastructure. We have water, wastewater and reclaimed-water systems that will require continued investment. We have public safety needs and a growing community that will continue placing additional demands on city services.
If Amendment 3 passes and creates additional pressure on municipal revenues, then the city will have some difficult decisions to make.
Before reducing services residents depend on, I believe we should look everywhere else first.
Look for waste. Review contracts. Examine overtime and determine what's causing it. Review management and administrative expenses. Look at vacant positions. Examine how departments are structured. Review recurring expenses. Make sure we're getting what we're paying for. Prioritize capital projects and determine what needs to happen now and what can wait.
Most importantly, use facts.
This shouldn't become an argument where one side says government spends too much and the other says nothing can be changed.
There is plenty of room in the middle for responsible management.
The employees who pick up our trash, repair water lines, maintain our streets and parks, respond to emergencies, process permits, answer residents' questions and perform hundreds of other jobs every day aren't the enemy of fiscal responsibility.
They're the people who make this city work.
That doesn't mean every position, benefit, department or expense should automatically remain exactly as it is forever. Government has an obligation to continually evaluate itself. When something isn't working, fix it. When a process no longer makes sense, change it. When money is being wasted, stop it.
But we should make those decisions carefully, based on facts and with respect for the people affected by them.
Apopka has changed dramatically, and more growth is coming. The decisions we make today aren't simply about balancing next year's budget. They're about determining what kind of organization the City of Apopka needs to be five, ten and twenty years from now.
We need a city government that is fiscally responsible. We need infrastructure capable of supporting our growth. We need residents to know their tax dollars are being respected.
And we need good employees who want to stay here and continue serving this community.
Those goals don't have to compete with each other.
Taking care of Apopka means taking care of the taxpayer. It means taking care of our infrastructure. It means planning responsibly for the future. And it means taking care of the men and women who have spent years, sometimes decades, taking care of Apopka.
That's why we're starting at the top, building the organization the right way and working our way through every level of city government.
Because before we ask our employees to change, leadership should be willing to change first.
