WEBVTT 00:00:00.962 --> 00:00:10.820 - I will call to order this meeting of the special fiscal committee council for Wednesday, October 8th. 00:00:10.820 --> 00:00:20.582 - And we have here on Zoom, I'll let you introduce yourselves. Committee members on Zoom, we have. I'm 00:00:20.582 --> 00:00:28.894 - Dave Rollo. We will increase your volume so we can hear you. Dave Rollo, I'm present. 00:00:29.730 --> 00:00:41.034 - Isaka, sorry, I'm present. I hope he's fast forward. And it's about people's mess. We also have Mark 00:00:41.034 --> 00:00:52.785 - Holden and Deputy Clerk Bossley and Administrator or attorney later and Deputy Administrator or attorney 00:00:52.785 --> 00:00:57.374 - later. And our controller Jessica. Okay. 00:00:57.730 --> 00:01:11.543 - We have no public in the group, so we have a few on my end. Any provisions to the committee member talk 00:01:11.543 --> 00:01:23.230 - or post for the agenda? Yeah, that looks okay. Yes, ma'am. Okay. Well, let's move on to 00:01:24.546 --> 00:01:33.030 - So adding salaries for elected officials, of course, we're going to have a conversation, another conversation 00:01:33.030 --> 00:01:40.821 - tonight during the special session of council. We have the responses from the survey that I sent out 00:01:40.821 --> 00:01:48.842 - last Friday. So I thought we could take a look at that and see if there are any preliminary conclusions 00:01:48.842 --> 00:01:53.470 - or suggestions for what we need to really focus on tonight. 00:01:54.530 --> 00:02:02.466 - Um, so we did have all nine council members respond. Some people didn't answer all the questions. Um, 00:02:02.466 --> 00:02:10.246 - but I think there's some interesting data there. Maybe, um, but we're back up to know the number of 00:02:10.246 --> 00:02:18.027 - questions. But the last question is that my question about the COLA only phrase, and I think was it 00:02:18.027 --> 00:02:23.006 - like eight of eight of nine people or seven or nine of us said, 00:02:23.874 --> 00:02:30.850 - Yes to that question, I think. So it might be somewhat of a, you know, maybe there's not a lot per se 00:02:30.850 --> 00:02:38.099 - to discuss for this cycle. It seems that most people are of the opinion that this is something to address 00:02:38.099 --> 00:02:44.939 - it here. But then, so it's all like, okay, so my proposal right now is actually almost that we work 00:02:44.939 --> 00:02:51.846 - backwards on the farm rather than, see what I'm saying? Because the question before that was when do 00:02:51.846 --> 00:02:53.214 - you do that change? 00:02:53.346 --> 00:03:00.793 - I'm doing this remembering that I might be wrong, but when you do a change and we have, there were some 00:03:00.793 --> 00:03:07.953 - various proposals there on what that looks like. Right. It was number six out of 10 that, you know, 00:03:07.953 --> 00:03:15.257 - in the uncertain financial future or do you think elected officials should receive at most a two plus 00:03:15.257 --> 00:03:21.630 - seven percent COLA? And we have seven yes and two no. So that's pretty clear. Right. So, 00:03:22.818 --> 00:03:35.238 - But I think the data is useful for the framing of the conversation to come. And then there's some suggestion 00:03:35.238 --> 00:03:46.974 - about when that conversation should happen. Believe my thinking. But it's also worth discussing later. 00:03:47.330 --> 00:03:54.806 - this concept of number one and maybe putting it backwards instead, because then I would start by talking 00:03:54.806 --> 00:04:02.069 - about what we actually have to produce, which is the OMS, and then work backwards to like, how should 00:04:02.069 --> 00:04:09.546 - this be done in future years? But there's also a majority, six out of nine, should have some value space 00:04:09.546 --> 00:04:17.022 - in the people method. And there's not clear agreement that the method that we came up with last year is, 00:04:18.402 --> 00:04:28.590 - the premier option, though most people did agree with principles established last year. I don't remember 00:04:28.590 --> 00:04:38.292 - if we were neutral about them. So that would be part of the discussion that we might also take more 00:04:38.292 --> 00:04:48.286 - than one year. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Agreed. And I also want to say that I invited the clerk and the mayor 00:04:48.610 --> 00:04:56.556 - groups to present tonight, you know, to make a statement about their vision of their own salaries and 00:04:56.556 --> 00:05:04.423 - other applicable comments related to that. And then also participate in the discussion part of those 00:05:04.423 --> 00:05:12.213 - they seen, like as is applicable, you know, in terms of like what it said, you have some indecisive 00:05:12.213 --> 00:05:17.822 - lines, say the thing. Like. Yeah, that's what I thought. I'm not gonna. 00:05:18.050 --> 00:05:24.801 - I'm not going to tell you that you have to participate in discussion, and I'm not going to say you can't 00:05:24.801 --> 00:05:31.552 - be there, so whatever. I think it raises an interesting point, actually, which is, again, thinking about 00:05:31.552 --> 00:05:38.238 - starting backwards and then forwards. And there are some other things about pegging. I think we've seen 00:05:38.238 --> 00:05:45.118 - a really interesting conversation about pegging our student mayor. But it actually raises the point, then, 00:05:45.442 --> 00:05:51.563 - As relates to the mayor and the clerk, we have a very expansive list of reasons for our own, for our 00:05:51.563 --> 00:05:57.623 - own justification. And then we get to theirs and it's like some considerations, you know? So, so we 00:05:57.623 --> 00:06:03.804 - might think about this year too. It's like, how did we, you know, especially if that is, if those are 00:06:03.804 --> 00:06:09.986 - weighty decisions that then influence, you know, other things, I mean, maybe, maybe we really need to 00:06:09.986 --> 00:06:14.046 - build out a little bit clearer. How do you set the mayor's salary? 00:06:16.834 --> 00:06:22.889 - Yes. I know this wasn't inherently the time where I was invited to chime in, but I would like to ask 00:06:22.889 --> 00:06:29.063 - a question in terms of structuring the salary ordinances, which might help in terms of your discussion 00:06:29.063 --> 00:06:35.118 - as well as we move forward. There are other cities and towns that separate out the salary ordinances 00:06:35.118 --> 00:06:40.094 - for each of the elected official groups. So you'll see the mayoral salary separate 00:06:40.354 --> 00:06:46.827 - as one ordinance, and then the first salary ordinance, and then the council member's salary ordinance, 00:06:46.827 --> 00:06:53.237 - Bloomington has tended to treat them as one big grouping. But even now, when you're talking about the 00:06:53.237 --> 00:06:59.836 - framework, council member Asari was talking about how you have a lot of information for council members, 00:06:59.836 --> 00:07:06.372 - and not as much, and not as much, and it might help in that also. I'm probably gonna get the same point 00:07:06.372 --> 00:07:10.206 - again for the larger council, but my point is basically that 00:07:10.594 --> 00:07:19.411 - some of the issues where if you get into a sticking point over a particular grouping of salary or salaries, 00:07:19.411 --> 00:07:27.656 - that will actually ease up any functions and you don't have to go to places of dividing the question 00:07:27.656 --> 00:07:36.065 - and running into everybody getting vetoed. It could just be one salary. I said that poorly. Okay. That 00:07:36.065 --> 00:07:37.534 - makes more sense. 00:07:38.306 --> 00:07:44.841 - I feel like it's to play it back to you to make sure that we got it though. I mean, yes. It's a waste 00:07:44.841 --> 00:07:51.505 - of time. I think that as long as everybody's kind of nodding and saying, yeah, you understood my point. 00:07:51.505 --> 00:07:58.104 - Three organs doesn't set a lot of organs. Yep. Same 10 minutes. Because then these organs have to have 00:07:58.104 --> 00:08:03.486 - like their own rational and their own rationale and their own stuff attached to it. 00:08:04.290 --> 00:08:11.691 - Well, it's similar to the concept under various rules, too, like dividing question. Right. But in the 00:08:11.691 --> 00:08:19.019 - form of them. Yeah, especially I think another this ties into another question of should they really 00:08:19.019 --> 00:08:26.710 - be considered as a property? Right. Should the council member salaries be a percentage of mayor salaries? 00:08:26.710 --> 00:08:33.022 - What sort of can they really relate to each other or not? Because I don't think that's 00:08:33.538 --> 00:08:45.912 - been agreed upon by the majority of the council. We're close. Yeah, so for tonight, we might, I mean, 00:08:45.912 --> 00:08:58.408 - also depending on what we hear from the mayor and what further we might hear from the clerk. We could, 00:08:58.408 --> 00:09:02.654 - you know, underline the point that 00:09:04.866 --> 00:09:14.550 - seven out of nine council members saying that we shouldn't increase elected official salaries beyond 00:09:14.550 --> 00:09:24.138 - OWA. So that may kind of settle it for this year. But then, so at least we can get that timely work 00:09:24.138 --> 00:09:34.014 - done and we can talk about where to go from here. So I think ESOT had a lot of good ideas in here that 00:09:34.274 --> 00:09:48.249 - would really merit more time for consideration and understanding conversation about. And I think others 00:09:48.249 --> 00:09:59.806 - may also have more ideas that just didn't come out in the survey. I still don't know. 00:10:00.130 --> 00:10:07.989 - Isabel and I have talked in outside of just informally on them. It's just brainstorming on different 00:10:07.989 --> 00:10:15.848 - approaches possible here. I think that the way that I'm thinking about it right now is Michael, even 00:10:15.848 --> 00:10:21.918 - within our framework that I think it's admirable that we created a framework. 00:10:22.402 --> 00:10:30.671 - Each of the things though has significant drawbacks of, and so that's part of the question is like, 00:10:30.671 --> 00:10:39.271 - how do we address, and I'm not getting now, I'm saying things poorly, which is not a comment. I'm like, 00:10:39.271 --> 00:10:47.541 - what, you know, but it's like, how do we, it's like, how do we, how do you address the drawbacks in 00:10:47.541 --> 00:10:51.262 - the design of this in ways that don't create 00:10:51.970 --> 00:10:57.877 - problems that we can't get out of is I think part of the like I think that's part of the issue with 00:10:57.877 --> 00:11:04.019 - the salary ordinance is that you can't reduce it fundamentally so so it's like so if we make a decision 00:11:04.019 --> 00:11:10.221 - that's that's based on even if it's it's an open and all these things like there's going to be drawbacks 00:11:10.221 --> 00:11:11.934 - to to our views right and so 00:11:12.386 --> 00:11:17.531 - And then I try to outline some of those as best as possible in my response to you. I'm like, yeah, 00:11:17.531 --> 00:11:22.780 - like this, like, I get this, I get where we're coming from in surface level, I get it, but these are 00:11:22.780 --> 00:11:28.133 - some of the problems with it, right? And so that's what I'm trying to wrestle with is like, as you set 00:11:28.133 --> 00:11:33.746 - these, how do you do it in a way that doesn't set us up to be in this, you know, like moral hazard category 00:11:33.746 --> 00:11:39.202 - or we're in a workplace where we're suddenly paying city council members, you know, $50,000 or something 00:11:39.202 --> 00:11:39.774 - like that. 00:11:39.938 --> 00:11:46.260 - And there's no, there's no way you can't change that. That's, you know, which, which I suspect is similar 00:11:46.260 --> 00:11:52.462 - to probably what happened in like Gary or something like that, right? That it's not like they have very 00:11:52.462 --> 00:11:58.546 - high salaries for, you know, their university. Yeah, it was recent. I think that, um, last year doing 00:11:58.546 --> 00:12:04.629 - that research, they, uh, did it because they really wanted to attract the high quality people because 00:12:04.629 --> 00:12:09.758 - they were having such, I mean, it's such serious issues and struggles and challenges. 00:12:10.114 --> 00:12:17.117 - that they really had some. And the argument here is like, I get that. And I think that there are some, 00:12:17.117 --> 00:12:24.187 - as we heard last year, there's some evidence that, or at least that there's some academic evidence that 00:12:24.187 --> 00:12:30.238 - says maybe that works. There's others that says it doesn't work. So we have some sort of 00:12:30.402 --> 00:12:37.793 - the, the jury's out there. However, we can't go back on it is the, is the challenge. So it's like, we 00:12:37.793 --> 00:12:45.401 - can't hide it. Let's see, let's see what this does. Exactly. Where we could see how that's done in Gary. 00:12:45.401 --> 00:12:52.646 - I mean, I think it's recent, but I think it's, you know, like, like you happen to remember what the 00:12:52.646 --> 00:12:56.414 - Gary, um, I can pull it up. So like when that went, 00:12:56.674 --> 00:13:02.247 - When it when that increase happened because I know there was a big increase, but I think that it was 00:13:02.247 --> 00:13:07.819 - within like the last five or so years so and so I don't know if. But then, but then it's part of the 00:13:07.819 --> 00:13:13.502 - conversation that I think it's that's lost and I did raise this in my in my thing, albeit not well is. 00:13:14.018 --> 00:13:22.670 - What we, we don't discuss and I think we can change on a year to year basis, up and down is benefits 00:13:22.670 --> 00:13:29.694 - for the position so you know like can you think of a broader benefit package that 00:13:30.114 --> 00:13:36.088 - you know, that maybe changes what it means to be having counseling. And obviously, like, we don't talk 00:13:36.088 --> 00:13:41.888 - about the fact that we have the option of getting health insurance, for example, but, you know, are 00:13:41.888 --> 00:13:47.746 - there other things that might fit in, you know, that other city employees get that we may not have a 00:13:47.746 --> 00:13:53.662 - conversation of saying, actually, maybe that's what you can send to counsel to make up for, you know, 00:13:53.662 --> 00:13:59.230 - the significant amount of work. It's not, you know, direct pay, as it were, but it's, you know, 00:13:59.362 --> 00:14:04.430 - But I don't know if that's an area that we haven't much explored. That's true. And that's kind 00:14:04.430 --> 00:14:09.925 - of interesting. But I would still say if the salary isn't enough to actually, say, meet a minimum cost 00:14:09.925 --> 00:14:15.259 - of living, then you're going to have to have another job, or at least write a job in the household. 00:14:15.259 --> 00:14:21.074 - So it's like, I don't have any current council members who are taking advantage of the city health insurance 00:14:21.074 --> 00:14:26.622 - versus the health insurance that might be provided by their other full-time job or their spouse's other 00:14:26.622 --> 00:14:27.422 - full-time job. 00:14:27.682 --> 00:14:35.591 - Exactly. My guess is that it's a minority of council members right now just because of the nature of 00:14:35.591 --> 00:14:43.577 - the way that we set up salaries. And the way, I mean, like in most places provide health insurance in 00:14:43.577 --> 00:14:51.408 - terms of full-time jobs. Yeah. Well, I mean, I take advantage of it, too, because I know some staff 00:14:51.408 --> 00:14:55.166 - doesn't provide health insurance. Right, right. 00:14:56.514 --> 00:15:05.146 - No, I don't have the. No, I don't have it readily available. And I think, just for the purposes of pursuing 00:15:05.146 --> 00:15:12.899 - that I think council members get the full city benefits that other full time sitting posted. No, 00:15:12.899 --> 00:15:17.854 - there's no, we don't. What don't you get. Now we can't get a. 00:15:18.306 --> 00:15:31.424 - Why did you start there? But the thing we don't get is this $20. I don't think you get contributions 00:15:31.424 --> 00:15:40.126 - to the HSA. Do you guys want to see? No, I don't think so. Do you? 00:15:40.418 --> 00:15:48.156 - Yeah, you sure. No, like, we can't, we can't do last I check and I feel like these things are flaps. 00:15:48.156 --> 00:15:56.047 - I think that HR just various things. Um, but so with some of those like extra like health and wellness 00:15:56.047 --> 00:15:57.886 - kind of benefits. Yeah. 00:15:58.306 --> 00:16:04.419 - Those are different because I have to get some of those. Yeah. Or some of the retirement things as well. 00:16:04.419 --> 00:16:10.357 - Reimbursement. Yeah, we don't get retirement. No. Yeah, I had to pay for reimbursement. I don't think 00:16:10.357 --> 00:16:16.238 - it took me too long to get a health plan. Last I knew, because I looked into that at some point, and 00:16:16.238 --> 00:16:22.176 - now I'm kind of like, I don't know. Do we get that? That's one of those that I'm already going to get 00:16:22.176 --> 00:16:27.998 - changed again. Which one? The health plan. Oh, yeah. We get to use the health plan. I'm used to it. 00:16:29.026 --> 00:16:35.815 - That's interesting, because when I looked into that and couldn't, they were like, I showed up and they 00:16:35.815 --> 00:16:42.538 - saw me. There's some real lack of clarity there. And I was actually just thinking about that recently 00:16:42.538 --> 00:16:49.590 - because they sent out that email around vaccination encouragement. And I was like, oh, that's interesting. 00:16:49.590 --> 00:16:56.181 - I wonder if I actually applied for that or not. I wonder too. And I thought about asking, and I was 00:16:56.181 --> 00:16:58.686 - like, I don't even know if I want to. 00:17:00.002 --> 00:17:09.456 - I thought you guys had all of the basic health benefits. I didn't think about the massage or gym or 00:17:09.456 --> 00:17:19.193 - bicycle reimbursements. I don't know if they still do the bicycle thing or not, which a lot of council 00:17:19.193 --> 00:17:29.214 - members do benefit from. Sorry. I would like to ask Dave, because Dave was one of the, if you don't mind, 00:17:29.538 --> 00:17:37.850 - You don't have to answer, Dave, but you were one of the three council members who said no to the question 00:17:37.850 --> 00:17:45.928 - about, should the council create a value-based and repeatable method for sending salaries? Do you mind 00:17:45.928 --> 00:17:53.848 - expounding on that a little bit? I'm just trying to understand that response. Did I say no or that I 00:17:53.848 --> 00:17:59.102 - was neutral? You said no. It was the very first question, I think. 00:18:03.842 --> 00:18:15.499 - Um, sorry, I'm trying to find my scrolling down to mine. Um, I think that, um, so I'm not opposed to 00:18:15.499 --> 00:18:27.272 - it per se, but I think that what was lacking is that comparisons with peers was not part of this. Um, 00:18:27.272 --> 00:18:28.542 - let's see. 00:18:29.506 --> 00:18:38.627 - Well, that first question was about, should there be one at all? Not necessarily the one that was created 00:18:38.627 --> 00:18:47.489 - last year. Should there be one at all? I was also cognizant of maybe what this calls for is, and we've 00:18:47.489 --> 00:18:56.524 - done this in the past, is outside consultants to evaluate as opposed to the council. But that did happen 00:18:56.524 --> 00:18:57.470 - last year. 00:18:58.594 --> 00:19:08.929 - They did get the consultation last year. Well, yeah, that was a consultation, I guess. If a values-based 00:19:08.929 --> 00:19:18.871 - means of setting salaries should be incorporated, then I think it's something maybe to work out with 00:19:18.871 --> 00:19:26.942 - the consultant. Say this is the method that should be deployed. So I think that's 00:19:27.650 --> 00:19:36.514 - where I was considering that, you know, should the council do it or should it be really up to objective 00:19:36.514 --> 00:19:45.207 - body? Okay. So you're not fundamentally opposed to establishing a values-based and repeatable method? 00:19:45.207 --> 00:19:53.816 - No. Yeah. You know, if I would, you know, could have expounded, it might have been clearer and maybe 00:19:53.816 --> 00:19:57.310 - I can say that this evening. Okay. Yeah. 00:19:58.338 --> 00:20:10.107 - Just for the record, I think my other major reticence to the proposal that was made last year was one 00:20:10.107 --> 00:20:21.645 - was process. The discussion was overshadowed by the manner it came to the attention of the majority 00:20:21.645 --> 00:20:28.222 - of the council. It just landed in our laps as opposed to 00:20:28.706 --> 00:20:38.402 - a committee report that would, in other words, there was a resolution there as opposed to a committee 00:20:38.402 --> 00:20:48.384 - report that then we could have discussed a bit before proceeding. That was one thing that worked against 00:20:48.384 --> 00:20:58.270 - a fair hearing in a sense on the $45,000 proposal. The other one was, again, the comparison with peers. 00:20:58.594 --> 00:21:08.737 - Either most equivalent cities have gotten it wrong, and then there should be evidence for that because 00:21:08.737 --> 00:21:18.978 - we would be an outlier, or we in some way are very unique. We stand apart from our equivalent municipal 00:21:18.978 --> 00:21:27.742 - legislative peers, and that could be the case too. Those are things worth exploring, but 00:21:28.290 --> 00:21:40.541 - Those are my main sticking points when it comes to a significant increase in council salary. I think 00:21:40.541 --> 00:21:52.913 - that did come across with integrating all your responses. Any other ideas for tonight so we can focus 00:21:52.913 --> 00:21:57.886 - on that whole lighting breeze like that. 00:21:57.986 --> 00:22:08.195 - We are first and then kind of discuss where to go from here. Which I have a feeling is fiscal committee 00:22:08.195 --> 00:22:18.208 - go do something else. Well, remind me what our timeline is for it. We don't have to do this until the 00:22:18.208 --> 00:22:23.902 - end of the year. Is that right? For the actual ordinance? 00:22:24.130 --> 00:22:29.819 - It's supposed to be on like December 3rd or something. But I think that that was one of the things last 00:22:29.819 --> 00:22:35.399 - year is that it was probably, what, around late September? Yeah. That it was like, oh, you have to do 00:22:35.399 --> 00:22:40.923 - this. Oh, make this group. And, oh, like, yeah, work with the consultants. And, oh, so I mean, Dave, 00:22:40.923 --> 00:22:46.503 - I appreciate you going like, yeah, we didn't get a report after that. There really wasn't time. Like, 00:22:46.503 --> 00:22:51.262 - there literally wasn't a meeting before between those kinds of, because it really was. 00:22:51.618 --> 00:22:59.389 - We were trying to pack a lot into a short period of time. And let's be clear, the reason was that for 00:22:59.389 --> 00:23:07.388 - decades, we were not doing our job for Indiana code. We were letting the administration bring bill work. 00:23:07.388 --> 00:23:15.083 - Right. And just without much discussion. And so last year, we're like, wait a minute, we're supposed 00:23:15.083 --> 00:23:19.806 - to be doing this ourselves. So at least we've corrected that. 00:23:20.066 --> 00:23:26.268 - Well, and I think on the bright side. Right. I think there's really like good reasons to have a body 00:23:26.268 --> 00:23:32.531 - and can I be the ones to do it? Because then you have this whole like debate back and forth. Like you 00:23:32.531 --> 00:23:38.733 - and the lateral person setting our salaries. But I think then it does get really, really potentially 00:23:38.733 --> 00:23:45.058 - complicated and potential. So the fact that like other city councils across the state maybe are still, 00:23:45.058 --> 00:23:48.190 - you know, around this same number, because I mean, 00:23:48.354 --> 00:23:58.609 - how many of them have had significant increases because it is so intense to have these kinds of discussions 00:23:58.609 --> 00:24:08.200 - or you just default to, you know, a mayor as an executive kind of doing it for you. So if we look at 00:24:08.200 --> 00:24:17.886 - question eight, also that kind of indicates, you know, if we do consider an increase beyond the COLA, 00:24:19.970 --> 00:24:28.751 - Should it be done in 2027 for the new council term? Should it be done in 2026 to take effect when somebody 00:24:28.751 --> 00:24:37.450 - decides whether or not to run for council? So we do have some answers there that may dictate the timeline 00:24:37.450 --> 00:24:45.903 - for establishing a systematic way of deciding this. Except that both of those have more nos than yeses 00:24:45.903 --> 00:24:49.022 - in both of those places. That's true. 00:24:49.250 --> 00:24:55.731 - And I frankly said no to both of them. I don't think that I'm going to ever back myself into this corner 00:24:55.731 --> 00:25:01.904 - where I say something should only be done on certain years. Like that I, you know, it's like, well, 00:25:01.904 --> 00:25:08.323 - no, I don't, you know, I think that, I think that it needs, I think that things generally speaking need 00:25:08.323 --> 00:25:14.681 - to be done when they need to be done. And that may or may not fall near like that. I frankly wish that 00:25:14.681 --> 00:25:18.014 - the last term council had dealt with the salary thing 00:25:18.274 --> 00:25:26.207 - because the majority of them are cycling off, but they were not willing to do that. I wouldn't say they 00:25:26.207 --> 00:25:33.988 - weren't willing, I think they didn't realize. I've had conversations about it early enough, or at the 00:25:33.988 --> 00:25:41.769 - half end, and there was, from what I understood, a couple people that I talked to not willing to kind 00:25:41.769 --> 00:25:45.278 - of rock that boat and have that conversation. 00:25:47.138 --> 00:25:55.703 - All right, well, it's almost, excuse me if we can get back. Oh, no, sorry. I can say it at night. I'll 00:25:55.703 --> 00:26:04.517 - just say it at night, but thank you. I'm just cognizant of the time because we only had until 2.30 today, 00:26:04.517 --> 00:26:12.832 - I believe. I do have to leave at 2.30. I knew somebody had to. So I think this was helpful to frame 00:26:12.832 --> 00:26:15.742 - tonight's discussion a little bit. 00:26:16.642 --> 00:26:26.929 - Um, controller's updates. You did provide us with the reports. I included a fund balance report as of 00:26:26.929 --> 00:26:37.316 - a couple of days ago. And so that just is the cash balance of every, the beginning balances of January 00:26:37.316 --> 00:26:45.182 - 1st. The debits are the, um, is the revenue and credits are the expenditures. 00:26:45.474 --> 00:26:54.965 - in ending balance. I was trying to make the math work and I thought debit is expenditure because that's 00:26:54.965 --> 00:27:04.274 - the plain English but it's reversed. It's reversed. I was like, this is not. This is maddening, yeah. 00:27:04.274 --> 00:27:14.130 - So what are debits? So debits in this report are the revenues and credits are the expenditures. It depends, 00:27:14.130 --> 00:27:15.134 - it's just, 00:27:16.066 --> 00:27:29.094 - Yeah. Why is that? That's because there's debits and credits mean different things. If it's a cash account 00:27:29.094 --> 00:27:41.513 - versus an expense account, like there's lots of different kinds of accounts in accounting and in cash 00:27:41.513 --> 00:27:42.974 - accounting. 00:27:43.714 --> 00:27:53.130 - This is a running report off a cash account. It's really boring accounting rules. It's just accounting 00:27:53.130 --> 00:28:02.728 - rules. It will never make sense. It just is what it is. This doesn't include a lot of things. It doesn't 00:28:02.728 --> 00:28:11.230 - include revenues we haven't received yet like property taxes. It doesn't include the budget. 00:28:11.586 --> 00:28:20.184 - It doesn't include expenses that are budgeted that haven't been spent yet. Is the income tax, have we 00:28:20.184 --> 00:28:28.614 - received all of that, or is that also- That's monthly. No, it's in months. Yeah, that's monthly. So 00:28:28.614 --> 00:28:37.297 - this is just as of the, that's what a fund balance, that's really what we can do for fund balance. And 00:28:37.297 --> 00:28:38.814 - then I wanted to, 00:28:39.906 --> 00:28:49.356 - Well, before I move on, do you have any questions for me about this report? I will say that I was at, 00:28:49.356 --> 00:28:59.363 - you guys asked me to conclude consolidated TIF, and there's, or TIFs, there's consolidated TIF, Kinzer-Prow 00:28:59.363 --> 00:29:08.350 - TIF, and the Bloomington Meridian TIF. The consolidated TIF receives about 17 million in revenue 00:29:08.482 --> 00:29:15.796 - I mean, that is controlled by the RDC. It's a board appointed by the mayor and the city council. Do 00:29:15.796 --> 00:29:23.623 - you want to share for the public who are watching her? I am not logged into this meeting. Maybe somebody's 00:29:23.623 --> 00:29:31.230 - read this law. Do you guys want to put the packet up? Or do you guys want me to share it? We can always 00:29:31.230 --> 00:29:37.886 - help you. Yeah, I don't know what you want us to do. Starts on page 39 of the packet, yes. 00:29:39.330 --> 00:29:49.823 - I'll start at the packet. I included on bond, bond proceed funds like fund 4653, 2016 city geo bond 00:29:49.823 --> 00:30:00.420 - proceeds. The city has projects still happening there. Are all the bonds in this list? Yes. Okay. So 00:30:00.420 --> 00:30:07.870 - the bicentennial bonds are still projects going on there. But not CDU. 00:30:09.186 --> 00:30:19.669 - No, not CDU. I didn't include any of their funds. And just to clarify, I'm the one who asked for this 00:30:19.669 --> 00:30:29.947 - list. And I appreciate it. I think it just helps us to understand where we are at this point of the 00:30:29.947 --> 00:30:37.758 - year and the fact that there are revenues that come in at different points. 00:30:38.818 --> 00:30:46.998 - So you said the expenditures column, does that include what's it called? Money that is earmarked? 00:30:46.998 --> 00:30:55.679 - Does not. What are those called? I would just call them budgeted expenses. Okay. But like where there's 00:30:55.679 --> 00:31:04.026 - already a PO, but it hasn't been paid. Oh, open POs? No, it does not include that either. Okay. No, 00:31:04.026 --> 00:31:07.198 - it only includes actual expenditures. 00:31:08.002 --> 00:31:16.715 - And this is a full list of funds. It's the funds that have budgets in them. It's the funds that we use. 00:31:16.715 --> 00:31:25.261 - There are a lot more funds that we are not using. And actually, let's see, I actually didn't include, 00:31:25.261 --> 00:31:33.639 - there's bond payment funds, a fund that just gets property tax deposited into it, and then it zeros 00:31:33.639 --> 00:31:36.990 - out when we can make the bond payments. 00:31:37.634 --> 00:31:48.003 - I didn't include those. There's nothing happens in those funds except where it makes a home thinking. 00:31:48.003 --> 00:31:58.168 - Dave, do you have a question? Yes. Well, it's a question regarding the consolidated TIF. Jessica, I 00:31:58.168 --> 00:32:06.910 - just said this in the past and I think other council members concurred with this that 00:32:07.234 --> 00:32:16.983 - The consolidated TIF is a pretty big area and it's deriving tax revenue from throughout the TIF, but 00:32:16.983 --> 00:32:26.925 - probably in certain areas more than others. But the expenditures, I really don't have an idea of where 00:32:26.925 --> 00:32:35.902 - they are mapped. And I think that it might be useful in the future for all of us to see on a 00:32:36.066 --> 00:32:43.160 - actual physical map where the Tourette taxes are derived and where they are spent and for equity purposes 00:32:43.160 --> 00:32:50.320 - to make sure that this TIF, it's covering areas, but are we taking revenue from one area and we're putting 00:32:50.320 --> 00:32:57.012 - it somewhere else? I mean, surely we're doing that to some extent and maybe necessary, but it would 00:32:57.012 --> 00:33:03.838 - be just good to visualize that. Is that something that you're interested in or that we could achieve? 00:33:04.258 --> 00:33:12.096 - Yes, we can definitely achieve that. I can present that next time we meet. We've done that work. We 00:33:12.096 --> 00:33:19.935 - haven't made a map, but I can tell you the projects that we did in 2024 in the TIF, and there's not 00:33:19.935 --> 00:33:27.852 - that many, so it's just a handful. First Street reconstruction around Hopewell. B-Line's, the B-Line 00:33:27.852 --> 00:33:31.614 - multi-use path by connecting it to 17th Street. 00:33:31.746 --> 00:33:40.269 - The 17th street reconstruction project and hope, um, Hopewell East doing all the site work and prep 00:33:40.269 --> 00:33:48.791 - and Hopewell East, um, building the tech center that called the forge, um, other, other work in the 00:33:48.791 --> 00:33:57.569 - trades district, um, related to the infrastructure, building those roads and sidewalks and maintaining 00:33:57.569 --> 00:34:00.126 - the mill. Um, let's see here. 00:34:00.962 --> 00:34:08.441 - Those are pretty much the projects that we did last year. So it was mainly around Hopewell, the 17th 00:34:08.441 --> 00:34:16.291 - Street reconstruction and the V-Line and then the trades district and the Pets Center. But I can present, 00:34:16.291 --> 00:34:23.696 - yeah, I can keep that in mind to present that on a map and show you the numbers. Okay, just a quick 00:34:23.696 --> 00:34:29.694 - follow-up. I heard through the grapevine from somebody that we had failed to get 00:34:29.858 --> 00:34:37.329 - state funding for Hopewell Street construction that we had missed a deadline or something and that there 00:34:37.329 --> 00:34:44.658 - is there any. I know that we are getting in that reimbursement for a lot of the road construction that 00:34:44.658 --> 00:34:51.773 - we're doing there. I think all the projects have some level of state reimbursement, and I think one 00:34:51.773 --> 00:34:59.102 - of the road projects there, the Jackson Street project that's going on now, I believe has ready funds. 00:34:59.650 --> 00:35:09.267 - I'm awarded to it. We didn't fail to get available funds from the state that we were allocated. 00:35:09.267 --> 00:35:19.486 - I got it. Dave, I think that's an MPO question. It's a great MPO question. MPO is actually presenting 00:35:19.486 --> 00:35:28.702 - to council during the report time on the 22nd. Great. Thank you for that. I look forward to 00:35:29.090 --> 00:35:36.763 - seeing such a map, I think will be very helpful for us. No problem. Great. Thanks. So Dave, I thought 00:35:36.763 --> 00:35:44.436 - part of your question, maybe I misunderstood, part of your question was also you wanted to know where 00:35:44.436 --> 00:35:51.657 - the property tax, increased property tax revenue was coming from. Is that right? And that would 00:35:51.657 --> 00:35:57.374 - be interesting to me. Like, where are we actually getting most of the money 00:35:57.570 --> 00:36:05.457 - into the TIFF that we are then spending on. Yeah. Well, yeah, that was part of it. Where is it derived 00:36:05.457 --> 00:36:13.574 - and where does it end up? Yeah, is that, these are all to do desktop? Yes. I'll pull, I can pull personal 00:36:13.574 --> 00:36:21.078 - numbers. I'm exchanging that assessed value and ask GIS to make a heat map. Cool, that'd be cool. 00:36:21.078 --> 00:36:26.974 - Heat map, yeah. That would be nice if you could see the other thing, though. 00:36:28.002 --> 00:36:36.552 - That moved over. Yeah, it's nice for me. I have a question about the funds. I've heard them talking 00:36:36.552 --> 00:36:45.273 - about the TIF. Yes. Thanks. What's going on with our vehicle highway fund, which isn't negative? Yes, 00:36:45.273 --> 00:36:53.054 - that stood out to me. That has revenues that come in every month, and I think that they've 00:36:53.154 --> 00:36:59.936 - They spent on, they've been spending their budget, especially in the supplies and other services line 00:36:59.936 --> 00:37:06.651 - faster than the revenues from the state have come in. So hopefully by the end of the year that those 00:37:06.651 --> 00:37:13.499 - revenues from the state will catch up with the spending in the other categories. Well, I hope for what 00:37:13.499 --> 00:37:20.147 - you mean. That's how it was fleshed in. Yes. The state tells us normal because like, are there more 00:37:20.147 --> 00:37:22.142 - expenditures say during like, 00:37:22.274 --> 00:37:29.583 - A prime kind of baiting and construction season. Right. Less elsewhere. Exactly. So we expect those 00:37:29.583 --> 00:37:37.256 - expenses to start really sloping downwards, then the revenues will stay roughly the same. Yeah, exactly. 00:37:37.256 --> 00:37:44.565 - And is that from gas and meat taxes? Yes, that is gas tax and excise tax. Those are all revenues in 00:37:44.565 --> 00:37:50.558 - that fund. Gas tax and excise tax. Excise you pay when you register your vehicle. 00:37:50.946 --> 00:38:01.509 - That's good. And that's based on like the county or like down to the city like just the county. That's 00:38:01.509 --> 00:38:11.867 - only based on the county. Okay. So you share that with the county based on population? I think based 00:38:11.867 --> 00:38:18.430 - on lane miles. Based on lane miles. It's the technical term for 00:38:18.530 --> 00:38:28.529 - Yeah. Yeah. In your jurisdiction. Yes, it's not. Three things. One is why we spent any money from the 00:38:28.529 --> 00:38:38.430 - rainy day fund. Why haven't we? Why haven't we? That's no zero. Oh, zero. You said at the beginning. 00:38:38.530 --> 00:38:46.321 - Slipped, okay, got it. And then you said that in the beginning, I still looked at it again and saw exactly 00:38:46.321 --> 00:38:53.603 - what I wanted to see. The second thing about the pension fund, so for fire employees, maybe just as 00:38:53.603 --> 00:39:01.176 - an open-ended question, what is this fund? This is a good question. Sorry, the other part of the bottom 00:39:01.176 --> 00:39:03.870 - of your question. This one, however. 00:39:06.370 --> 00:39:15.240 - We keep a cash balance in there and we pay the police and we pay the police and fire pensions and then 00:39:15.240 --> 00:39:24.283 - we submit what we pay to the state and the state reimburses us. Okay, so this goes, so there's a larger, 00:39:24.283 --> 00:39:33.153 - there's a larger state fund that we basically transferred this money into every year or? No, we, well, 00:39:33.153 --> 00:39:35.134 - let's see. We pay not, 00:39:35.298 --> 00:39:42.240 - To get into the details, I'm going to have to bring Kelly in. I don't know exactly if we pay the state 00:39:42.240 --> 00:39:49.384 - or if we pay the insurance company that pays the pensions. I have a feeling we pay the insurance company. 00:39:49.384 --> 00:39:56.259 - But these are what we collect from their paychecks toward pension? No, we don't collect anything from 00:39:56.259 --> 00:40:01.246 - any. And also, this is for past pensions. It's quite low, though, for the 00:40:01.378 --> 00:40:07.483 - And this is, this is what it always runs. This is what it is. And I actually don't have, don't know 00:40:07.483 --> 00:40:13.650 - a lot, a super lot about like how many, how many are on the plan? How many are we paying? What's the 00:40:13.650 --> 00:40:20.000 - average amount? The plan is discontinued, right? This is only for people who retire. This is like, yes, 00:40:20.000 --> 00:40:26.288 - this is for a discontinued plan. Oh, I didn't realize. So please currently don't have, don't get state 00:40:26.288 --> 00:40:27.326 - funded pensions. 00:40:28.002 --> 00:40:33.576 - because I thought that this was a whole these people do these are people that used to work for us and 00:40:33.576 --> 00:40:39.204 - they're still on the old plan and then we also have the city pay into the state the big state plan for 00:40:39.204 --> 00:40:44.286 - the people who are current okay okay so there's got it that's a separate that kind of so I'm 00:40:44.610 --> 00:40:50.701 - Okay, but I didn't understand that there was a state separate thing now, because I knew that there was 00:40:50.701 --> 00:40:56.911 - this big question about when people, because it used to be that you could only change a city's one cent, 00:40:56.911 --> 00:41:03.298 - still keep your pension or something like that, and that changed last, I don't know, ten years or something 00:41:03.298 --> 00:41:09.212 - like that, which has been a big thing for recruitment and it's caused us a lot of problems, because 00:41:09.212 --> 00:41:10.750 - people could go anywhere. 00:41:10.882 --> 00:41:17.610 - And so this is actually a past fund that no longer, so this just runs at this amount to fund, but at 00:41:17.610 --> 00:41:24.539 - some point in some far off future, this will stop being a thing. And this just currently transfers from 00:41:24.539 --> 00:41:31.267 - where? From general fund every year or? No, it's just the cash balance that's in this fund, the cash 00:41:31.267 --> 00:41:38.462 - that is in this fund sits here and it's sort of like a closed loop. Hopefully the idea is that cash balance 00:41:38.658 --> 00:41:46.438 - There's always there. So we make a payment and then we're reimbursed. Reimbursed from the state. Yes. 00:41:46.438 --> 00:41:54.065 - Got it. So the only revenue is revenue from the state. Got it. And like this kind of funds distorts 00:41:54.065 --> 00:42:01.920 - our budget because it's included in our budget. It's included in our budget. So things like this don't 00:42:01.920 --> 00:42:06.878 - cost us any money, but they are included. Got it. Good question. 00:42:07.618 --> 00:42:14.492 - I don't have a good answer for that. The new fire police pension. So is there not another fund for that? 00:42:14.492 --> 00:42:21.104 - Like, I mean, maybe it's new enough that we don't. It doesn't need its own fine. That we don't, what 00:42:21.104 --> 00:42:28.043 - we do is we take that out of their salary lines, like in the general fund and just send that to a payment 00:42:28.043 --> 00:42:30.334 - that we just send up to the state. 00:42:30.690 --> 00:42:38.529 - and the state hold it, and the state administers all those payments. So now somebody retires. Somebody 00:42:38.529 --> 00:42:46.216 - retires, then they just deal directly to the state, and we are not admitted yet. Exactly. That feels 00:42:46.216 --> 00:42:53.598 - more efficient. Yes. And then with Jack Hopkins, does this reflect the current appropriation for 00:42:53.762 --> 00:43:00.715 - this coming year or what, what that, that, what does that say? There are no appropriations in here. 00:43:00.715 --> 00:43:07.946 - This is just saying this is how much money we've sent out this year. Like you may have, you may be done 00:43:07.946 --> 00:43:15.177 - with all your meetings and you've awarded all of your money that was budgeted to you or to Jack Hopkins 00:43:15.177 --> 00:43:22.686 - this year, but this is only how much has been sent out, but paid out so far. So far this year. Yeah. Right. 00:43:23.234 --> 00:43:29.836 - So there's like 200 and some thousand that people have not submitted receipts for re-personing there. 00:43:29.836 --> 00:43:36.438 - And plus there's some, some cushion of their. Yeah. Yeah. Which we, which, which I think last year we 00:43:36.438 --> 00:43:43.169 - spent some of, this year we proposed to, but didn't have to. See, I think that it's just like last year 00:43:43.169 --> 00:43:49.642 - to spend some of, but I don't think the receipts actually came in. Which is I think how the cushion 00:43:49.642 --> 00:43:51.454 - gets created, right? Right. 00:43:51.714 --> 00:43:59.140 - Yeah, there might be a little bit of cushion, but that for Jack Hopkins, it says 115,000, what you started, 00:43:59.140 --> 00:44:06.016 - that could be deceptive because there could be open POs in a relax that hasn't been fully paid yet. 00:44:06.016 --> 00:44:13.511 - I think that they're supposed to submit receipts by March or something. There should be anything outstanding 00:44:13.511 --> 00:44:20.663 - in that account. That makes sense, March. That's like my memory from like over a year ago. Yeah, that's 00:44:20.663 --> 00:44:21.694 - what I recall. 00:44:21.826 --> 00:44:32.719 - by the end of the year, but then we'll give an extension. Yeah. And we review those reverted funds. 00:44:32.719 --> 00:44:43.722 - Right. Right. You guys know about it. It wasn't all extended. Right. Right. All right. Oh, Dave, you 00:44:43.722 --> 00:44:49.822 - have another question? How about? Yeah, just a comment. 00:44:50.018 --> 00:44:58.266 - Jennifer Crosley and I discussed this a little bit, but not nearly enough, and she had the great idea, 00:44:58.266 --> 00:45:06.274 - and I think maybe others did too, that we might want to consider uniting the Sophia Travis and Jack 00:45:06.274 --> 00:45:14.603 - Hopkins funding for various purposes. We could discuss those. I don't want to get into the weeds today, 00:45:14.603 --> 00:45:17.726 - but it might be something to consider. 00:45:18.626 --> 00:45:25.229 - you know, to not duplicate services or not to get into a situation where we would be competing 00:45:25.229 --> 00:45:32.526 - or inappropriate funding going to one place or another and it, you know, gets complicated in that sense. 00:45:32.526 --> 00:45:39.963 - So anyway, I hope you and I talked about it too. I know this has been batted around by a number of people, 00:45:39.963 --> 00:45:47.678 - but I just wanted to bring that up as a, because I don't know if the administration is considering it as well. 00:45:50.658 --> 00:45:57.935 - Yeah, that's just kind of the earliest stages of figuring out what kind of collaboration can exist in 00:45:57.935 --> 00:46:05.426 - terms of, because it's two separate entities and two separate funds and how exactly that can work. We're 00:46:05.426 --> 00:46:12.704 - still at the stage of our attorneys making sure that we can't do anything at all before we move on to 00:46:12.704 --> 00:46:19.838 - the stage of committees getting together to talk about practical and logistical ways to collaborate 00:46:20.642 --> 00:46:29.249 - to make the whole thing as efficient as possible for, honestly, for the organizations that are... Yeah, 00:46:29.249 --> 00:46:37.857 - I mean, just generally speaking, it makes sense to me because, you know, this is social service funding 00:46:37.857 --> 00:46:46.133 - for the community and it doesn't, you know, the boundaries are kind of arbitrary in that sense. So, 00:46:46.133 --> 00:46:49.278 - and just for efficiency sake and for, 00:46:49.442 --> 00:46:57.791 - of what I mentioned before. I think it's something worth exploring. Thanks. And thank you, Jennifer, 00:46:57.791 --> 00:47:06.223 - for bringing that to my attention. I have another question for Jessica. The Meridian TIF, that spider 00:47:06.223 --> 00:47:14.654 - TIF for the high-speed digital access, are we ever getting money from that? Like, how does that work? 00:47:14.654 --> 00:47:18.622 - We should be getting money from that next year. 00:47:18.946 --> 00:47:28.581 - And the way that agreement is written, that is when we get that TIF money, 95% of what we receive, we 00:47:28.581 --> 00:47:38.311 - give back to the company that is installing that. So back to Meridium or M Street Fiber. And we should 00:47:38.311 --> 00:47:46.718 - start receiving it next year. We have to give 95% of it back? That's the agreement. Yep. 00:47:48.386 --> 00:47:56.265 - So it was part of the incentive package to get Maria to do it? Yes. I think- For how long did it get 00:47:56.265 --> 00:48:04.533 - designed? Is there a- I believe it's for the life of the TIF. But well, I believe it's for, well, that's, 00:48:04.533 --> 00:48:11.866 - the term is in the contract, the term in the contract, and I believe it's 20 years, but Rick, 00:48:11.866 --> 00:48:16.702 - that's a, I can ask for it, can give back to you. It's for a, 00:48:18.178 --> 00:48:28.076 - like the terminal bond. So a TIF is the additional property tax revenue after an investment. So how 00:48:28.076 --> 00:48:38.171 - does that work for a Spider TIF? For the Spider TIF, the property taxes are collected on the personal 00:48:38.171 --> 00:48:46.782 - property is the fiber that's underground and they have to file the property tax return 00:48:47.266 --> 00:48:53.346 - claiming that property and its value. And then that will generate a tax bill. And then that tax bill 00:48:53.346 --> 00:48:59.366 - will be collected in the TIF. We will get it. We'll get it as a separate deposit, separate from all 00:48:59.366 --> 00:49:05.386 - of our other property taxes. It'll go into this fund, separate, and then we have to send it back to 00:49:05.386 --> 00:49:11.526 - the company. So who's paying that property tax? The company is paying the property. So we're going to 00:49:11.526 --> 00:49:16.222 - basically... And then we're getting 95% of it back? It's basically abatement. 00:49:17.314 --> 00:49:24.442 - of property tax abatement. Okay. On business personal property. Correct. Oh correct. Only on the business 00:49:24.442 --> 00:49:31.300 - personal property. Because they're working directly. Correct. So they're paying us property tax based 00:49:31.300 --> 00:49:38.024 - on those improvements and then we're giving 95% of it back to them. And then what happens after the 00:49:38.024 --> 00:49:45.018 - life of the contract? Like do they still pay those property taxes but it goes into our the general fund 00:49:45.018 --> 00:49:47.102 - instead of going back to them? 00:49:47.266 --> 00:49:53.393 - No, it'll always go into the TIF. I'm actually not exactly sure what happens after the life of a contract. 00:49:53.393 --> 00:49:59.290 - I'll have to look at that in the contract. I would like to give the public an opportunity for comment. 00:49:59.290 --> 00:50:05.131 - I'm sorry I didn't have that on the agenda, but I think it makes sense. I didn't really know what the 00:50:05.131 --> 00:50:10.971 - controller would be bringing, so I didn't put it on the agenda. But is there any number of the public 00:50:10.971 --> 00:50:13.662 - who would like to make a comment at this time? 00:50:21.090 --> 00:50:30.474 - We need to use the raise hand function again. I don't see any. So we have six minutes of Jessica's time 00:50:30.474 --> 00:50:39.768 - left. Do you want to tell us a little bit about sanitation or should we save that for next time? I can 00:50:39.768 --> 00:50:49.694 - start with sanitation. I wanted to start by giving you the information as it stands now. It shows you what we 00:50:50.306 --> 00:51:03.627 - what our expected revenue means this year. And our expected total expenses this year, 2025 in the middle 00:51:03.627 --> 00:51:16.694 - of that chart. And the deficit this year would be 1.5 million. That was interesting at the time. Yeah. 00:51:16.694 --> 00:51:19.358 - So some things that, 00:51:20.514 --> 00:51:28.906 - that jump out is that recycling is free, but recycling definitely has a cost to it. Some other things 00:51:28.906 --> 00:51:37.216 - that aren't in this chart. Recycling is free, but it definitely has a cost. It doesn't split out the 00:51:37.216 --> 00:51:45.772 - recycling versus. Yeah, and that's something that we want to bring to you. We want to bring to you what 00:51:45.772 --> 00:51:49.886 - the actual costs of each side of the program are. 00:51:50.786 --> 00:51:56.812 - Also, there's costs, there's capital costs that are not included in this. They're not even included 00:51:56.812 --> 00:52:03.079 - in the budget. Sanitation trucks are not even included in the budget. We're really skating on thin ice. 00:52:03.079 --> 00:52:09.104 - In the budget, that would be just sort of like breaking down. If something happens, we kind of have 00:52:09.104 --> 00:52:15.070 - to just try to find a place to purchase a sanitation truck because we'll cannibalize another fund. 00:52:15.170 --> 00:52:21.864 - We have the vehicle replacement fund that has 500,000 budgeted in it. We could use that. Sometimes there's 00:52:21.864 --> 00:52:28.433 - extra money somewhere else in public works that we use for something that they plan for that they didn't 00:52:28.433 --> 00:52:34.814 - spend, or they forego something that they needed in order to pay for a sanitation truck. They also do 00:52:34.814 --> 00:52:41.133 - have facilities too. This is just like a drop in the bucket of all the information about sanitation. 00:52:41.133 --> 00:52:44.574 - I was hoping to start with this and maybe let you guys 00:52:44.802 --> 00:52:51.959 - Tell me what your questions would be like, or we could talk about, you know, things like we need to 00:52:51.959 --> 00:52:59.117 - know what the actual expenses are for recycling. We need to know what the actual, you know, kind of 00:52:59.117 --> 00:53:06.345 - how we want things broken down because I'm working with sanitation to develop, you know, our new rig 00:53:06.345 --> 00:53:12.286 - structure. So we need the cost of recycling, we need the cost of trash to pick up. 00:53:13.090 --> 00:53:19.932 - We need all the items that are listed above. And then if we could at Brown and Hays, we need 00:53:19.932 --> 00:53:27.951 - those expenditures too much. Yeah. I'm really interested too in modeling out some different price mechanics, 00:53:27.951 --> 00:53:35.455 - particularly, and thinking a little bit about demographics. So like this number that mass 35 gallons, 00:53:35.455 --> 00:53:36.926 - you know, whatever, 00:53:37.026 --> 00:53:43.800 - I know that there's been some proposals of trying to institute like a pay as you throw program or something 00:53:43.800 --> 00:53:50.511 - like that, where you, under the idea that some ways that we structure it might be a little bit regressive, 00:53:50.511 --> 00:53:56.908 - particularly on renters. So I'd be really interested in being able to model out, okay, hey, if we did 00:53:56.908 --> 00:54:03.180 - this, this is who it affects it, I think is sort of important in many ways. So how it's spread out, 00:54:03.180 --> 00:54:07.006 - I'm most particularly thinking about renters and homeowners. 00:54:07.170 --> 00:54:14.088 - in this context. That's what we used to do is pay as you throw. And so we can work on that. I've asked 00:54:14.088 --> 00:54:20.804 - sanitation about that too. And they said that we used to do that and it really did not work. Right, 00:54:20.804 --> 00:54:27.654 - right, right, right, right. But we can also, we do have like a program that a person can apply for to 00:54:27.654 --> 00:54:34.505 - waive their sanitation, like a low income program. Yeah. Yeah. To waive their water bill, sewer bill, 00:54:34.505 --> 00:54:36.318 - and sanitation bill. Yeah. 00:54:36.642 --> 00:54:45.308 - Dave, do you have a question? More of a statement. I'm agreeable to this idea, pay as you throw, just 00:54:45.308 --> 00:54:54.314 - simply because it follows the adage, show me the incentive, I'll show you the outcome. That is, if people 00:54:54.314 --> 00:55:02.810 - are incentivized to reduce their waste, then we'll have less volume going to landfill, which is our 00:55:02.810 --> 00:55:04.254 - overriding goal. 00:55:04.514 --> 00:55:10.779 - And then another means to reduce volume I would think would be to encourage people to compost because 00:55:10.779 --> 00:55:16.983 - a lot of food waste goes to the landfill I think still. And that means that there's a lot of methane 00:55:16.983 --> 00:55:23.187 - being produced in that landfill. And then the last thing I want to say is I've always been intrigued 00:55:23.187 --> 00:55:29.329 - by this idea that we might want to explore at least reopening the landfill. So we have control over 00:55:29.329 --> 00:55:34.366 - our own waste stream. So just want to throw out those ideas. I know time's short. 00:55:34.818 --> 00:55:44.166 - Well, you have to talk to Tom McClassen. I don't think that's feasible. I'm on the waste reduction board 00:55:44.166 --> 00:55:53.247 - and that landfill is on a very strictly controlled timeline with item. And so to reopen, I just think 00:55:53.247 --> 00:55:59.390 - it would be a very, very, very heavy lift. Also, I wanted to mention 00:56:00.130 --> 00:56:07.015 - But sorry, I didn't mean to diss what you said, Dave. I understand your perspective and it would be 00:56:07.015 --> 00:56:13.901 - nice to not have, you know, pay for hauling and diesel fuel to haul it to the Menorah River. As far 00:56:13.901 --> 00:56:20.786 - as pay as you throw, I've been asking Adam Weissen every year for like eight years if we can do it. 00:56:20.786 --> 00:56:25.950 - And he's always said it's not feasible. I think it would be too expensive. 00:56:26.274 --> 00:56:31.940 - it would be for each row, it would be so expensive to make it work. I think that that's essentially 00:56:31.940 --> 00:56:37.832 - the problem. My point was less to argue about that, more to say that when we're having the conversation 00:56:37.832 --> 00:56:43.611 - about rates, what would be greatest to be able to have them in the full spectrum of possibilities, so 00:56:43.611 --> 00:56:49.276 - that we always understand it's that antithesis of, OK, if we didn't do this, we get it. We're going 00:56:49.276 --> 00:56:54.942 - to lose a lot of money, and then we can't pay for lots of things. Great. But then there's also the, 00:56:55.074 --> 00:57:02.317 - We evaluated three different options and this is how we arrived at the best choice is to raise the 96 00:57:02.317 --> 00:57:09.844 - gallons by X, right? Because there's also been people who presented at City Council about other diversion 00:57:09.844 --> 00:57:17.300 - things, this free cycle program as an example. And it would be really interesting to model out, is there 00:57:17.300 --> 00:57:25.040 - some investment that we can make as a city where we could lower the cost of sanitation while also increasing 00:57:25.040 --> 00:57:31.276 - You know outcomes that we're really interested in those type of conversations, which goes to Dave's 00:57:31.276 --> 00:57:37.575 - framework of like you actually maybe it's reopening a thing or, you know, so so and I don't know all 00:57:37.575 --> 00:57:43.874 - of the possibilities in that framework but but just so that we don't just look at this just from the 00:57:43.874 --> 00:57:50.110 - percentage of, you know, how many cents do we raise per person, you know, to meet our, our deficit. 00:57:50.914 --> 00:57:56.884 - want to make sure that, even though I'm interested in those cost differences between like, well, how 00:57:56.884 --> 00:58:02.853 - much does recycling cost, how much does trash cost, et cetera, et cetera. But there's also, like, if 00:58:02.853 --> 00:58:09.118 - we have a larger overall goal of diversion out of landfills anywhere, we do want to incentivize recycling 00:58:09.118 --> 00:58:13.374 - and composting and some of these other things. And so if we simply say, 00:58:13.506 --> 00:58:22.292 - charge for recycling what it actually costs that could then de-incentivize people to recycle them. Because 00:58:22.292 --> 00:58:30.913 - then you go like, well, am I going to have a full one of these or two half empty things? And so in terms 00:58:30.913 --> 00:58:38.878 - of assessment, not only the numbers, but also some of that kind of information in terms of like, 00:58:38.978 --> 00:58:46.893 - Yeah, like, and I'm sure that there's studies about, you know, incentivizing, like, does it increase 00:58:46.893 --> 00:58:54.886 - people's rate of recycling to call it free, even if you're charging more for the other other parts of 00:58:54.886 --> 00:59:02.800 - the waste stream. There's got to be some studies somewhere that talk about that kind of that kind of 00:59:02.800 --> 00:59:04.446 - psychological stuff. 00:59:07.490 --> 00:59:15.791 - We'll do our best, the best we can getting those numbers that we don't and they have. I'd also like 00:59:15.791 --> 00:59:24.092 - to know how long our current contract is for public is because the waste reduction district entered 00:59:24.092 --> 00:59:32.891 - into a new contract with Romney this year where they're actually paying us for some recyclable materials. 00:59:32.891 --> 00:59:37.374 - And so it might be wise to renegotiate our contracts. 00:59:38.338 --> 00:59:45.892 - Alright, made notes, composting, pay as you grow, reopen our landfill. I did write that down. How long 00:59:45.892 --> 00:59:53.372 - is our current contract with the public? We were talking about like how much does recycling cost, how 00:59:53.372 --> 00:59:57.406 - much does trash cost, and then how much money would we 00:59:57.634 --> 01:00:03.464 - How much would composting reduce trash pickup? And I think the problem there is that they still are 01:00:03.464 --> 01:00:09.469 - going to run all their routes. So it's kind of like, we still have the same number of trucks, the same 01:00:09.469 --> 01:00:15.357 - amount of gas, the same number of people. And not some of those like, I mean, so like right now I'll 01:00:15.357 --> 01:00:21.304 - just call out our household because I live in, right? We have the largest recycled bin, but that also 01:00:21.304 --> 01:00:27.134 - means that probably 90% of the time it's half sold every week. So, you know, is there some kind of, 01:00:28.034 --> 01:00:34.928 - Like could we somehow switch to an every other, every other week pickup? Like could recycling be picked 01:00:34.928 --> 01:00:41.689 - up every other week? What would that save? Is most of our expenses from running the trucks or is most 01:00:41.689 --> 01:00:48.450 - of our expenses from actually like getting rid of the items? And so like, would it then ultimately be 01:00:48.450 --> 01:00:55.742 - more cost effective for me as the person to have the largest bin for the pickup every other week or have the, 01:00:55.842 --> 01:01:02.197 - smallest bit of the pickup every week. And like, how does that like work out in terms of, you know, 01:01:02.197 --> 01:01:08.742 - maybe, you know, having some real alternative systems to what we have now. Okay. So is the most of our 01:01:08.742 --> 01:01:14.969 - expenses from running the trucks, I mean, like just operations, right. Or is it from the cost of, 01:01:14.969 --> 01:01:21.705 - you know, getting the price wasn't in the trash with the larger question of, you know, should we consider 01:01:21.705 --> 01:01:23.294 - every other week? Right. 01:01:23.842 --> 01:01:38.027 - So either for trash or recycling. Rout efficiency. Yeah. Reduction. All right. Great. This is great 01:01:38.027 --> 01:01:52.638 - conversation. This is exactly what I needed. Thank you. Thank you. Appreciate you bringing that to us. 01:01:53.954 --> 01:02:06.089 - All righty. Thank you guys. Let me know if you need anything after the meeting. I got to be able to, 01:02:06.089 --> 01:02:18.224 - I'm sorry. Oh, okay. See you tonight. Can the other three committee members stay? Yeah. Okay. So the 01:02:18.224 --> 01:02:23.390 - next item is improving the budget process. 01:02:24.866 --> 01:02:32.242 - Um, and this is kind of like a broken record at this point. And then what do we do next? And they've 01:02:32.242 --> 01:02:39.764 - turned out how they spread today. And I really would like to, at some point we have all these outcomes 01:02:39.764 --> 01:02:47.505 - we want. We need to rank them at some point, which is most important outcome. Um, because we have limited 01:02:47.505 --> 01:02:53.566 - that money and we need to prioritize at some point, make those hard decisions. Um, 01:02:54.530 --> 01:03:03.599 - And then I think we need more public engagement in general. We had, I feel like we had fewer people 01:03:03.599 --> 01:03:13.121 - talk during budget hearings than ever before this. Of us or the public. Of the public, yeah. Maybe both. 01:03:13.121 --> 01:03:20.286 - Maybe both, yeah. So anyway, wanted to throw that out there, see what you all. 01:03:22.114 --> 01:03:31.437 - I'll start on both of those questions. First, in terms of the, sorry, in terms of the public engagement, 01:03:31.437 --> 01:03:40.316 - you know, the, in many ways, I think, and I mean, I saw on the call, you know, Kevin Keough or Eric 01:03:40.316 --> 01:03:48.574 - are on the call, who I think have been super engaged and so grateful for all of their, yeah, 01:03:48.770 --> 01:03:56.621 - I detailed reading of our documents, and it's been wonderful, very helpful. The points that I was making 01:03:56.621 --> 01:04:04.546 - during budget hearings is that the way that the budget was presented this year made that quite difficult. 01:04:04.546 --> 01:04:12.098 - That was a heavy lift, I think, in many ways, for the general public. And so that may be one area to 01:04:12.098 --> 01:04:17.182 - think about in terms of engagement and how things have broken down. 01:04:17.346 --> 01:04:24.639 - And then in terms of us of us prioritizing it might be interesting for us to think about. And then what 01:04:24.639 --> 01:04:28.286 - I think just came out of this conversation is that. 01:04:28.450 --> 01:04:36.279 - Our outcomes are not all like we're comparing apples and oranges sometimes, because if you look at outcomes 01:04:36.279 --> 01:04:43.818 - across the board, some of the things we might care about, sidewalks, sanitation, may be funded by other 01:04:43.818 --> 01:04:51.140 - streams that you don't want to compare to things, or maybe you do, but how do we deal with comparing 01:04:51.140 --> 01:04:57.374 - them to things that are in the general fund? You see what I'm saying? So like we may, 01:04:57.794 --> 01:05:05.900 - need to think about some categorization of priorities of outcomes or something like that. And then I 01:05:05.900 --> 01:05:14.007 - think there's something you've been getting at this whole year that just is a lot clearer to me now, 01:05:14.007 --> 01:05:22.675 - like a clear mapping between funds and outcomes, right? Like we have, let's use parking data as an example. 01:05:22.675 --> 01:05:26.046 - We have $6 million in parking data funds, 01:05:26.210 --> 01:05:36.658 - And here's the thing we can use for it to do with it. And then what are our outcomes that are associated 01:05:36.658 --> 01:05:47.106 - with that fund and how do those fit into the broader outcome? So that makes the next step in interfacing 01:05:47.106 --> 01:05:56.062 - the priorities and the outcomes. Right, we kind of have to identify what are the fundable 01:05:56.514 --> 01:06:06.492 - Right. What, what things have dedicated revenues that go towards them, right, separate that from the 01:06:06.492 --> 01:06:16.471 - more fungible. Right. Right. And then, and then maybe I mean maybe an improvement, but this year ESP 01:06:16.471 --> 01:06:20.126 - budget as an example, I mean we have 01:06:20.258 --> 01:06:28.673 - I think a lot of engagement on this question of, well, actually, we've moved a lot of things onto EDIT, 01:06:28.673 --> 01:06:37.006 - or we've moved a lot of things outside of which could have structured a good way. We wanted this money 01:06:37.006 --> 01:06:45.502 - for these outcomes. So explain directly to us why moving this salary to that is leading to that outcome. 01:06:46.178 --> 01:06:52.360 - rather than, well, this is money that was available. This is justifiable use of paper. Are you referring 01:06:52.360 --> 01:06:58.306 - to the plan for the 80 lead when the council approved the 80 lead? Correct. And then, and I might be 01:06:58.306 --> 01:07:04.311 - mis-speaking, but this year ESD budget chose to move certain things on to, but maybe it wasn't the 80 01:07:04.311 --> 01:07:10.375 - lead fund. What was the fund that they, the 80 lead, right? And they put some salaries on the 80 lead. 01:07:10.375 --> 01:07:12.318 - Yeah. Like there was a bunch of, 01:07:12.802 --> 01:07:18.487 - a bunch of stuff whenever you need various departments. And then for, you know, we might say, well, 01:07:18.487 --> 01:07:24.400 - wait, we probably missed an opportunity there to align with outcomes. Right. Right. Because I was that, 01:07:24.400 --> 01:07:30.199 - I mean, when council approved that, that was the closest, we've got a very clear example of actually, 01:07:30.199 --> 01:07:36.169 - this is what we want to spend this on at least, you know, that's, you know, two and a half steps towards 01:07:36.169 --> 01:07:42.366 - kind of a solid outcome is that you're like, you sort of, you sort of the areas that we're spending this on, 01:07:47.650 --> 01:07:58.183 - Right. That was in former council and former mayor. Right. And I think it's just kind of gone out the 01:07:58.183 --> 01:08:08.717 - window. Right. Right. Which I'm not blaming anybody for. The reason they have to follow the 222 plan. 01:08:08.717 --> 01:08:15.326 - But you're right. When I look back, that was an exercise. Yeah. 01:08:20.322 --> 01:08:27.597 - So maybe that's pulling on the thread of I think the work we started here, which is we spent a lot of 01:08:27.597 --> 01:08:34.873 - time this year looking at funds. So maybe it's that. It's like a fund by fund. I think if that works, 01:08:34.873 --> 01:08:42.005 - at least for some of the smaller funds. I don't think that works as well for the general fund. It's 01:08:42.005 --> 01:08:49.566 - the general fund where everything gets dumped back. But the general fund is- It's all the other. Correct. 01:08:49.762 --> 01:08:55.977 - But that's why I'm saying that we have to separate, we have to separate what we might think of as, 01:08:55.977 --> 01:09:02.318 - I mean, we had this one just now, you brought it up, but I think super quickly. With sanitation, the 01:09:02.318 --> 01:09:08.784 - question is not just in and out. There's also a question of some things that we may wish to invest in, 01:09:08.784 --> 01:09:12.990 - and recycling may be one of those things. And so if we were to set 01:09:13.378 --> 01:09:21.271 - within sanitation, we say, well, what are the outcomes of sanitation? We want less things going into 01:09:21.271 --> 01:09:29.477 - landfills. We want less food waste. We want more recycling, better quality recycling. And so less costs, 01:09:29.477 --> 01:09:37.918 - happier drivers. We can think of a lot of things that we might want. Then when we have the conversation of, 01:09:38.114 --> 01:09:44.687 - Do we raise or do we invest or do we, we have a friend to go to that we're saying, well, these are things 01:09:44.687 --> 01:09:51.198 - we want to achieve. So first and foremost does increasing the amount, which is the literal conversation, 01:09:51.198 --> 01:09:57.585 - right? If we charge more for this, yes, it will solve one of our problems, but it might create another 01:09:57.585 --> 01:10:03.910 - one that's contrary to an outcome that we want to see. Right. We don't, one outcome for sanitation is 01:10:03.910 --> 01:10:05.150 - we want things that 01:10:05.346 --> 01:10:18.243 - Yes, exactly. Exactly. Exactly. And then we can within sanitation say number one priority for us is 01:10:18.243 --> 01:10:25.982 - trash gets picked up. You know, we can spend a lot of time. 01:10:26.178 --> 01:10:33.009 - Wait, that's our number one priority. Number two is, you know, or maybe number one is diversion of things 01:10:33.009 --> 01:10:39.518 - or whatever. I think no rats is a good number. Yeah, exactly. There's so many public offices related 01:10:39.518 --> 01:10:46.091 - to it. Exactly, exactly, exactly. And I think what I'm trying to say overall with these illustrations 01:10:46.091 --> 01:10:52.600 - is that a lot of these conversations, the reason why they're so hard is because we pull from so many 01:10:52.600 --> 01:10:56.144 - places for a lot of, so we ended up having these like, 01:10:56.144 --> 01:11:02.466 - You know, so we, I think we've done a good job of counseling, these are things that we all want to see 01:11:02.466 --> 01:11:08.542 - here are some priorities, but then they become so up here, because, because like yeah we all want. 01:11:09.378 --> 01:11:14.357 - You know, safety. Right. Right. And then, but then we struggle to have the conversation of what do we 01:11:14.357 --> 01:11:19.385 - mean by public safety, because we're not actually tying it. And it's like, well, this gets money, that 01:11:19.385 --> 01:11:24.364 - gets money, and the other things, and this, and the salaries, and the, right. So, so if we can get to 01:11:24.364 --> 01:11:29.587 - actually at a fund by fund level, and maybe, maybe there's an argument that actually we should proliferate 01:11:29.587 --> 01:11:34.078 - more funds, right. Because it's easier to have a conversation about what does this fund do? 01:11:34.594 --> 01:11:41.468 - And those get funded from the general fund in many cases, they may not have to be, you know, revenue 01:11:41.468 --> 01:11:48.410 - producing things, but it's just that if you want to spend money on X, it comes from this fund so that 01:11:48.410 --> 01:11:55.352 - we can track outcomes really clearly. That might be a good question for Jessica about like, you know, 01:11:55.352 --> 01:12:02.430 - if there's some reason we don't want to have more funds, for example. I almost feel like I need like a, 01:12:02.978 --> 01:12:09.763 - A physical exercise like what we have note cards with. Here's our outcomes. Here are the funds. Here's 01:12:09.763 --> 01:12:16.483 - how I get from A to B and we have to put them on a big table. Yes. I feel like I need that to wrap my 01:12:16.483 --> 01:12:23.400 - head around. Yes, I agree with you. And one of the questions I was having today, don't go ahead. I think 01:12:23.400 --> 01:12:29.988 - that that's one of the things that the public needs too, honestly. Yes. Increase public engagement. 01:12:29.988 --> 01:12:30.910 - I mean, and I 01:12:31.234 --> 01:12:42.056 - I mean, we called out Mr. Pio and Eric. It is really, really challenging to engage with these documents. 01:12:42.056 --> 01:12:52.362 - And then, you know, what are your parents, right? It takes a really high level of comprehension and 01:12:52.362 --> 01:12:55.454 - processing and a lot of time. 01:12:55.586 --> 01:13:01.982 - If we have that high level, then it doesn't take so much time. And if you don't, then it takes a whole 01:13:01.982 --> 01:13:07.881 - lot more time to understand exactly what it is it's talking about. And the average person does 01:13:07.881 --> 01:13:14.153 - not necessarily have the time that they would need in order to really properly engage with this. And 01:13:14.153 --> 01:13:20.486 - so having some other kind of public engagement opportunity that is less related to 400-page documents 01:13:20.486 --> 01:13:22.846 - and more related to something that is 01:13:24.226 --> 01:13:34.873 - A more hands on or a smaller question. Then it, you know, like the smaller question like categorizing 01:13:34.873 --> 01:13:38.526 - as a smaller question, but I mean, 01:13:38.658 --> 01:13:44.822 - It's like the prioritization of outcomes. It's way easier to go, okay, here's a list of six things. 01:13:44.822 --> 01:13:51.047 - Let's talk about those six things. Because those six things fit on a list that's this big as opposed 01:13:51.047 --> 01:13:57.519 - to a 400 page document. And so that kind of public engagement activity, which I think is something that, 01:13:57.519 --> 01:14:03.683 - because of how our calendar works. So, you know, those ideas for budget calendar, you know, I think 01:14:03.683 --> 01:14:07.998 - that those need to be worked in throughout the whole year. This like, 01:14:08.098 --> 01:14:15.985 - community kind of budget activity. And I remember it was the local progress in 2023 that talked about 01:14:15.985 --> 01:14:24.103 - Chicago and how Chicago has done some outreach around budgeting and about, you know, like give everybody 01:14:24.103 --> 01:14:29.438 - a dollar and like how do you split that up between these categories. 01:14:29.922 --> 01:14:37.026 - I'll bet it was Boston and Chicago. But if you had a progress conference, it was specifically Chicago 01:14:37.026 --> 01:14:44.269 - games as part of a budget presentation, like they talked about what they had done. And they might also, 01:14:44.269 --> 01:14:51.443 - are they on a two-year budget too? I feel like maybe that's part of it is that that was, yeah, I think 01:14:51.443 --> 01:14:58.407 - that that was helpful in terms of how they were able to do these public events and things that have 01:14:58.407 --> 01:14:59.870 - lasted for too long. 01:15:00.258 --> 01:15:07.013 - I feel like I remember us having, maybe not in this committee, but the controller was there. She said 01:15:07.013 --> 01:15:13.966 - that the chamber budget really, really hard for us to do, especially right now, just because our revenue 01:15:13.966 --> 01:15:20.589 - forecast is so uncertain. But having some other public engagement around the concept of budget that 01:15:20.589 --> 01:15:27.277 - isn't just reading these spreadsheets. And I think you raise a really good point too, which in terms 01:15:27.277 --> 01:15:28.734 - of public engagement, 01:15:28.866 --> 01:15:36.286 - Multiple good points. So I'm just reacting and to, you know, to finger them, if you will, whatever the one is 01:15:36.546 --> 01:15:41.463 - We don't need to think about public engagement as the whole of council has to do this, which becomes 01:15:41.463 --> 01:15:46.428 - a heavy lift. It's hard to get with these calendars. We only have a handful of times where we can and 01:15:46.428 --> 01:15:51.393 - so on. That may be something that we take on as a committee that we can put on and we can be a little 01:15:51.393 --> 01:15:56.456 - bit more flexible when we put these type of things on. And then, of course, council members are welcome 01:15:56.456 --> 01:16:00.350 - to come to them. And then we can just notice that if people say they're coming. 01:16:00.930 --> 01:16:07.891 - The so that's one thought to is really saying back to your point, like if we were to talk about, and 01:16:07.891 --> 01:16:15.058 - this is something we've we've on Council and our general meetings had like we've given like Mrs on this 01:16:15.058 --> 01:16:19.262 - program where you sort of said it just in passing, like, oh, 01:16:19.554 --> 01:16:24.490 - Maybe we could spend the money and parking meters for, you know, somebody was throw out a thing. Right. 01:16:24.490 --> 01:16:29.283 - And so these conversations we've had, and then somebody else will go, Oh, I think we can only use it 01:16:29.283 --> 01:16:31.134 - on but and so we leave it there. Okay. 01:16:31.234 --> 01:16:38.426 - That would be a really fun way to have a conversation with the public where we go, let's just look at 01:16:38.426 --> 01:16:45.547 - the parking meter fund. Here's on paper what the allowable uses are. And then there's this floating, 01:16:45.547 --> 01:16:52.739 - the attention was downtown or something like that. But people might have way more creative ideas than 01:16:52.739 --> 01:16:59.790 - us who are always looking at everything closely. They might go, I mean, to me, what I'd love to see 01:16:59.790 --> 01:17:01.200 - downtown is a brah. 01:17:01.200 --> 01:17:07.208 - have a really interesting conversation about, well, how might you spend this much money? And how much 01:17:07.208 --> 01:17:13.334 - would you leave in the fund? If we were spending it on this, would you approve us increasing the amount 01:17:13.334 --> 01:17:19.225 - of costs that cost the park downtown? And it helps us have all of those type of conversations. So I 01:17:19.225 --> 01:17:25.174 - love this idea of focusing in rather than like, what would you do with $165 million? It's like, what 01:17:25.174 --> 01:17:28.414 - would you do with this fund with these three purposes? 01:17:29.602 --> 01:17:36.719 - that's much more feasible. And it could be the start of a broader conversation. Yeah. And you could 01:17:36.719 --> 01:17:44.191 - imagine us doing, you know, imagine 10 of these where we take two funds each time. And we're like, we're 01:17:44.191 --> 01:17:51.593 - talking about parking fund and, you know, sanitation affected by it. And next week we're talking about, 01:17:51.593 --> 01:17:55.934 - you know. Well, and I think that that's also something that, 01:17:56.994 --> 01:18:03.864 - we could collaborate with them. I mean, those would be really, really, I mean, I think it would be really, 01:18:03.864 --> 01:18:10.285 - really important in those that we said all council doesn't have to be there. Yeah, it could just be 01:18:10.285 --> 01:18:17.156 - fiscal committee as kind of, you know, leading these, but I think that getting the administration involved 01:18:17.156 --> 01:18:23.641 - is really key in that collaboration between entities and they have so much to add ultimately on like 01:18:23.641 --> 01:18:25.310 - what they set the budget. 01:18:25.506 --> 01:18:36.103 - And so us getting that input as counsel is in some ways not as impactful as them getting that input 01:18:36.103 --> 01:18:47.230 - in terms of budget setting. Right, Tom. It's fantastic. OK, well, let's check in with the public comment 01:18:47.230 --> 01:18:55.390 - on improving the budget process. Of course, this is an ongoing conversation. 01:18:55.746 --> 01:19:06.900 - British any conclusions here, but any public would like to offer a comment at this time, please raise 01:19:06.900 --> 01:19:18.053 - your hand. Well, see any. So should we just maybe put this higher up on the agenda for next time with 01:19:18.053 --> 01:19:22.974 - Jessica here and maybe also invite Gretchen? 01:19:23.234 --> 01:19:31.404 - Yeah, I think so. And then that would be, you know, the idea of spending a budget calendar for 2026 01:19:31.404 --> 01:19:39.738 - is, you know, like maybe having a goal of having that kind of public engagement opportunity quarterly 01:19:39.738 --> 01:19:47.990 - or something. And so that you really need to not only need a floor of those ideas for next year, I'm 01:19:47.990 --> 01:19:51.422 - sure that you start to start to like now. 01:19:51.586 --> 01:19:57.831 - Well, I wrote them down as two categories, looking at a specific fund and the possibilities of that 01:19:57.831 --> 01:20:04.575 - fund and brainstorming, and then that idea of if we increase the fee, what would you support the additional 01:20:04.575 --> 01:20:10.819 - revenues being spent on? For sanitation, that's... Well, that's pretty obvious. Well, we're shoring 01:20:10.819 --> 01:20:17.251 - up what it costs, but then that's free, not general fund money. So what would you support that general 01:20:17.251 --> 01:20:18.750 - fund money that we need 01:20:19.042 --> 01:20:27.797 - That's a good point. Being used for and able to support other services. I mean, we might be in a budget 01:20:27.797 --> 01:20:36.467 - situation out there. I mean, it's hard to know about a situation we would be in, say, next year. Yeah. 01:20:36.467 --> 01:20:45.222 - You know, it's like, if we don't have this general fund money, then we can't, you know, pay everybody's 01:20:45.222 --> 01:20:48.926 - salary. You know what I mean? But yeah. OK. 01:20:51.586 --> 01:20:58.682 - Picture meetings, I don't think we have a next meeting scheduled. I think we've been doing it these 01:20:58.682 --> 01:21:05.777 - months. You mentioned that you had some still marked on your calendar. We're doing that every other 01:21:05.777 --> 01:21:12.873 - week or so. Yeah, I have those every other Wednesday. Wednesdays are usually very good for me. When 01:21:12.873 --> 01:21:20.111 - is that next one then? Two weeks from now, or do we need a meeting? We probably do need a meeting two 01:21:20.111 --> 01:21:21.246 - weeks from now. 01:21:22.082 --> 01:21:30.234 - to consign the salary ordinance? Yeah, I have a hold on my calendar from two to three on Wednesday the 01:21:30.234 --> 01:21:38.545 - 22nd. I can do other times than just those days. That works for you. Does that work for you? Not really. 01:21:38.545 --> 01:21:46.380 - I mean, I could skip a webinar. I don't know. I don't know. A webinar. I don't know. I don't know. 01:21:46.380 --> 01:21:50.654 - On the 230. Are you thinking that you'd like a draft? 01:21:51.330 --> 01:22:03.061 - elected officers, for the next. It depends on how it goes tonight. Okay, sure. Yeah, probably. 01:22:03.061 --> 01:22:15.038 - What about now? Yeah, we'll do one or two weeks from now, so the week of the 20th. Morning 27th. 01:22:15.170 --> 01:22:24.710 - I could do that. I have a 10 a.m. that I can't miss. So I could do like a super like eight or so. I 01:22:24.710 --> 01:22:34.917 - don't know what time people start working. Okay, what does your morning look like? First office on October 01:22:34.917 --> 01:22:41.118 - 22nd in the morning? I would rather not do anything today, yeah. 01:22:41.666 --> 01:22:48.753 - I have availability of 21st, if you guys have availability of 21st. What time? I could do... That's 01:22:48.753 --> 01:22:55.983 - the day that I essentially start at one and don't finish until after five. Yeah, you don't want to do 01:22:55.983 --> 01:23:03.425 - that. I sometimes have to add things on either end of that day, but it's not my favorite day. What about 01:23:03.425 --> 01:23:10.583 - Thursday, the 23rd around lunchtime? Well, and I can do something on Wednesday morning. I just don't 01:23:10.583 --> 01:23:11.646 - want to do it. 01:23:12.514 --> 01:23:19.346 - And yeah, my only concern is I have to like, I have this meeting at time that I can't, I can't be late 01:23:19.346 --> 01:23:26.111 - for an account move. And so a little 1045, but then I have another one at noon. I could, I could skip 01:23:26.111 --> 01:23:32.811 - or move the noon. So I just don't have a lot of flexibility that particular Wednesday. I usually do. 01:23:32.811 --> 01:23:37.918 - Um, I should, I could do, but you have, you have every one 30 and one to 30. 01:23:38.626 --> 01:23:47.373 - any any opposition to meeting before a council meeting like like closer to like four thirty or five 01:23:47.373 --> 01:23:56.732 - thirty it's hard for for for attorneys right um so yeah okay if i could be if i could be virtually talking 01:23:56.732 --> 01:24:05.566 - about your availability on thursday oh thursday yeah i could do thursday anytime i'm leaving i would 01:24:05.566 --> 01:24:08.190 - have to leave that on the two 01:24:08.674 --> 01:24:14.536 - in the afternoon or first day of the semester. It's based on packing and preparation. Well, what if 01:24:14.536 --> 01:24:20.807 - we do the morning of the 22nd, but I'll just join virtually? But Dave will probably have to join virtually 01:24:20.807 --> 01:24:26.669 - as well. Dave will not be able to join virtually. Oh, he can't anymore. He has to be in person. No, 01:24:26.669 --> 01:24:32.941 - actually, that's part of the reason why I came back up. And you should be cautious about joining virtually 01:24:32.941 --> 01:24:37.630 - because you're pushing at the 50% for this committee. For this committee. Yeah. 01:24:37.762 --> 01:24:47.461 - Not for, obviously. It's hard. So should we go back to Thursday morning? What about Tuesday? Oh, that's 01:24:47.461 --> 01:24:57.252 - your hard day. Well, what time on Tuesday? I'm wide open on Tuesday until I can move my 11. I'm actually 01:24:57.252 --> 01:25:05.086 - wide open until 2 o'clock at the moment. Well, I could just start my Tuesday at 11. 01:25:08.450 --> 01:25:19.548 - Do you want to do 11 on Tuesday? Tuesday. Yes, okay. And the parks office, do we want that on Tuesday? 01:25:19.548 --> 01:25:30.968 - 21st of October. Well, um, that counts then. I think, oh, I'll be about, then I'll have to be um, Sophia. 01:25:30.968 --> 01:25:33.662 - I'm going to assume yes, 01:25:34.146 --> 01:25:42.645 - And if something's wrong, I'll let you know within a couple of hours with apologies, but I think this. 01:25:42.645 --> 01:25:51.144 - We have to check with Dave, I think. All good. All right, I'll check with Dave and the club clerk will 01:25:51.144 --> 01:25:59.478 - confirm and go get that scheduled, hopefully. And so you say you need to be in person? Yep. And Dave 01:25:59.478 --> 01:26:03.934 - will have to be in person. I will go to do two hours. 01:26:04.066 --> 01:26:13.491 - Um, to recreate that would be a little bit of a shorter meeting I can do. Usually do an hour and a half. 01:26:13.491 --> 01:26:22.646 - Yeah, I have it for an hour and a half. And yes, um, clerk staff can be here on the 21st of November. 01:26:22.646 --> 01:26:30.814 - Thank you. So I will ask Dave in person. Okay, any other final thoughts before we adjourn? 01:26:35.010 --> 01:26:44.282 - Um, did we want to try to get the. The controller here at the back as well. Yes. I will ask. So maybe 01:26:44.282 --> 01:26:54.190 - we should have a second, second option. So this is the second option Thursday morning then are you available 01:26:54.190 --> 01:27:03.280 - Thursday morning? I kind of do early Thursday when I can do like Thursday. Like we're out that same 01:27:03.280 --> 01:27:04.734 - time I believe. 01:27:04.834 --> 01:27:16.790 - Yeah, I can do that any time, but we know about that. So that's maybe a second second choice as well. 01:27:16.790 --> 01:27:29.566 - When you ask people, is the clerk available during that window? October 23rd at 11, would that be an option? 01:27:30.562 --> 01:27:37.866 - Yes, or somewhere in that you let somebody with that. So, yeah, are you available that day too? Yeah. 01:27:37.866 --> 01:27:45.313 - Okay, I'll check with the others. And I do apologize. The agenda for this meeting didn't say one thirty 01:27:45.313 --> 01:27:52.473 - to two thirty, because it was in my mind that somebody couldn't go past two thirty and it must have 01:27:52.473 --> 01:28:00.350 - been Dave. So hopefully. That's didn't annoy anybody that much was three. I appreciate it though, because we. 01:28:00.514 --> 01:28:08.768 - I think we had it. It was on the calendar invitation. I felt free. I felt free. Yeah. I should just 01:28:08.768 --> 01:28:13.886 - not put any times on. All right. We are adjourned. Thank you.