I will call to order this meeting of the special fiscal committee council for Wednesday, October 8th.
And we have here on Zoom, I'll let you introduce yourselves. Committee members on Zoom, we have. I'm
Dave Rollo. We will increase your volume so we can hear you. Dave Rollo, I'm present.
Isaka, sorry, I'm present. I hope he's fast forward. And it's about people's mess. We also have Mark
Holden and Deputy Clerk Bossley and Administrator or attorney later and Deputy Administrator or attorney
later. And our controller Jessica. Okay.
We have no public in the group, so we have a few on my end. Any provisions to the committee member talk
or post for the agenda? Yeah, that looks okay. Yes, ma'am. Okay. Well, let's move on to
So adding salaries for elected officials, of course, we're going to have a conversation, another conversation
tonight during the special session of council. We have the responses from the survey that I sent out
last Friday. So I thought we could take a look at that and see if there are any preliminary conclusions
or suggestions for what we need to really focus on tonight.
Um, so we did have all nine council members respond. Some people didn't answer all the questions. Um,
but I think there's some interesting data there. Maybe, um, but we're back up to know the number of
questions. But the last question is that my question about the COLA only phrase, and I think was it
like eight of eight of nine people or seven or nine of us said,
Yes to that question, I think. So it might be somewhat of a, you know, maybe there's not a lot per se
to discuss for this cycle. It seems that most people are of the opinion that this is something to address
it here. But then, so it's all like, okay, so my proposal right now is actually almost that we work
backwards on the farm rather than, see what I'm saying? Because the question before that was when do
you do that change?
I'm doing this remembering that I might be wrong, but when you do a change and we have, there were some
various proposals there on what that looks like. Right. It was number six out of 10 that, you know,
in the uncertain financial future or do you think elected officials should receive at most a two plus
seven percent COLA? And we have seven yes and two no. So that's pretty clear. Right. So,
But I think the data is useful for the framing of the conversation to come. And then there's some suggestion
about when that conversation should happen. Believe my thinking. But it's also worth discussing later.
this concept of number one and maybe putting it backwards instead, because then I would start by talking
about what we actually have to produce, which is the OMS, and then work backwards to like, how should
this be done in future years? But there's also a majority, six out of nine, should have some value space
in the people method. And there's not clear agreement that the method that we came up with last year is,
the premier option, though most people did agree with principles established last year. I don't remember
if we were neutral about them. So that would be part of the discussion that we might also take more
than one year. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Agreed. And I also want to say that I invited the clerk and the mayor
groups to present tonight, you know, to make a statement about their vision of their own salaries and
other applicable comments related to that. And then also participate in the discussion part of those
they seen, like as is applicable, you know, in terms of like what it said, you have some indecisive
lines, say the thing. Like. Yeah, that's what I thought. I'm not gonna.
I'm not going to tell you that you have to participate in discussion, and I'm not going to say you can't
be there, so whatever. I think it raises an interesting point, actually, which is, again, thinking about
starting backwards and then forwards. And there are some other things about pegging. I think we've seen
a really interesting conversation about pegging our student mayor. But it actually raises the point, then,
As relates to the mayor and the clerk, we have a very expansive list of reasons for our own, for our
own justification. And then we get to theirs and it's like some considerations, you know? So, so we
might think about this year too. It's like, how did we, you know, especially if that is, if those are
weighty decisions that then influence, you know, other things, I mean, maybe, maybe we really need to
build out a little bit clearer. How do you set the mayor's salary?
Yes. I know this wasn't inherently the time where I was invited to chime in, but I would like to ask
a question in terms of structuring the salary ordinances, which might help in terms of your discussion
as well as we move forward. There are other cities and towns that separate out the salary ordinances
for each of the elected official groups. So you'll see the mayoral salary separate
as one ordinance, and then the first salary ordinance, and then the council member's salary ordinance,
Bloomington has tended to treat them as one big grouping. But even now, when you're talking about the
framework, council member Asari was talking about how you have a lot of information for council members,
and not as much, and not as much, and it might help in that also. I'm probably gonna get the same point
again for the larger council, but my point is basically that
some of the issues where if you get into a sticking point over a particular grouping of salary or salaries,
that will actually ease up any functions and you don't have to go to places of dividing the question
and running into everybody getting vetoed. It could just be one salary. I said that poorly. Okay. That
makes more sense.
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
of time. I think that as long as everybody's kind of nodding and saying, yeah, you understood my point.
Three organs doesn't set a lot of organs. Yep. Same 10 minutes. Because then these organs have to have
like their own rational and their own rationale and their own stuff attached to it.
Well, it's similar to the concept under various rules, too, like dividing question. Right. But in the
form of them. Yeah, especially I think another this ties into another question of should they really
be considered as a property? Right. Should the council member salaries be a percentage of mayor salaries?
What sort of can they really relate to each other or not? Because I don't think that's
been agreed upon by the majority of the council. We're close. Yeah, so for tonight, we might, I mean,
also depending on what we hear from the mayor and what further we might hear from the clerk. We could,
you know, underline the point that
seven out of nine council members saying that we shouldn't increase elected official salaries beyond
OWA. So that may kind of settle it for this year. But then, so at least we can get that timely work
done and we can talk about where to go from here. So I think ESOT had a lot of good ideas in here that
would really merit more time for consideration and understanding conversation about. And I think others
may also have more ideas that just didn't come out in the survey. I still don't know.
Isabel and I have talked in outside of just informally on them. It's just brainstorming on different
approaches possible here. I think that the way that I'm thinking about it right now is Michael, even
within our framework that I think it's admirable that we created a framework.
Each of the things though has significant drawbacks of, and so that's part of the question is like,
how do we address, and I'm not getting now, I'm saying things poorly, which is not a comment. I'm like,
what, you know, but it's like, how do we, it's like, how do we, how do you address the drawbacks in
the design of this in ways that don't create
problems that we can't get out of is I think part of the like I think that's part of the issue with
the salary ordinance is that you can't reduce it fundamentally so so it's like so if we make a decision
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
to to our views right and so
And then I try to outline some of those as best as possible in my response to you. I'm like, yeah,
like this, like, I get this, I get where we're coming from in surface level, I get it, but these are
some of the problems with it, right? And so that's what I'm trying to wrestle with is like, as you set
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
or we're in a workplace where we're suddenly paying city council members, you know, $50,000 or something
like that.
And there's no, there's no way you can't change that. That's, you know, which, which I suspect is similar
to probably what happened in like Gary or something like that, right? That it's not like they have very
high salaries for, you know, their university. Yeah, it was recent. I think that, um, last year doing
that research, they, uh, did it because they really wanted to attract the high quality people because
they were having such, I mean, it's such serious issues and struggles and challenges.
that they really had some. And the argument here is like, I get that. And I think that there are some,
as we heard last year, there's some evidence that, or at least that there's some academic evidence that
says maybe that works. There's others that says it doesn't work. So we have some sort of
the, the jury's out there. However, we can't go back on it is the, is the challenge. So it's like, we
can't hide it. Let's see, let's see what this does. Exactly. Where we could see how that's done in Gary.
I mean, I think it's recent, but I think it's, you know, like, like you happen to remember what the
Gary, um, I can pull it up. So like when that went,
When it when that increase happened because I know there was a big increase, but I think that it was
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
conversation that I think it's that's lost and I did raise this in my in my thing, albeit not well is.
What we, we don't discuss and I think we can change on a year to year basis, up and down is benefits
for the position so you know like can you think of a broader benefit package that
you know, that maybe changes what it means to be having counseling. And obviously, like, we don't talk
about the fact that we have the option of getting health insurance, for example, but, you know, are
there other things that might fit in, you know, that other city employees get that we may not have a
conversation of saying, actually, maybe that's what you can send to counsel to make up for, you know,
the significant amount of work. It's not, you know, direct pay, as it were, but it's, you know,
But I don't know if that's an area that we haven't much explored. That's true. And that's kind
of interesting. But I would still say if the salary isn't enough to actually, say, meet a minimum cost
of living, then you're going to have to have another job, or at least write a job in the household.
So it's like, I don't have any current council members who are taking advantage of the city health insurance
versus the health insurance that might be provided by their other full-time job or their spouse's other
full-time job.
Exactly. My guess is that it's a minority of council members right now just because of the nature of
the way that we set up salaries. And the way, I mean, like in most places provide health insurance in
terms of full-time jobs. Yeah. Well, I mean, I take advantage of it, too, because I know some staff
doesn't provide health insurance. Right, right.
No, I don't have the. No, I don't have it readily available. And I think, just for the purposes of pursuing
that I think council members get the full city benefits that other full time sitting posted. No,
there's no, we don't. What don't you get. Now we can't get a.
Why did you start there? But the thing we don't get is this $20. I don't think you get contributions
to the HSA. Do you guys want to see? No, I don't think so. Do you?
Yeah, you sure. No, like, we can't, we can't do last I check and I feel like these things are flaps.
I think that HR just various things. Um, but so with some of those like extra like health and wellness
kind of benefits. Yeah.
Those are different because I have to get some of those. Yeah. Or some of the retirement things as well.
Reimbursement. Yeah, we don't get retirement. No. Yeah, I had to pay for reimbursement. I don't think
it took me too long to get a health plan. Last I knew, because I looked into that at some point, and
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
changed again. Which one? The health plan. Oh, yeah. We get to use the health plan. I'm used to it.
That's interesting, because when I looked into that and couldn't, they were like, I showed up and they
saw me. There's some real lack of clarity there. And I was actually just thinking about that recently
because they sent out that email around vaccination encouragement. And I was like, oh, that's interesting.
I wonder if I actually applied for that or not. I wonder too. And I thought about asking, and I was
like, I don't even know if I want to.
I thought you guys had all of the basic health benefits. I didn't think about the massage or gym or
bicycle reimbursements. I don't know if they still do the bicycle thing or not, which a lot of council
members do benefit from. Sorry. I would like to ask Dave, because Dave was one of the, if you don't mind,
You don't have to answer, Dave, but you were one of the three council members who said no to the question
about, should the council create a value-based and repeatable method for sending salaries? Do you mind
expounding on that a little bit? I'm just trying to understand that response. Did I say no or that I
was neutral? You said no. It was the very first question, I think.
Um, sorry, I'm trying to find my scrolling down to mine. Um, I think that, um, so I'm not opposed to
it per se, but I think that what was lacking is that comparisons with peers was not part of this. Um,
let's see.
Well, that first question was about, should there be one at all? Not necessarily the one that was created
last year. Should there be one at all? I was also cognizant of maybe what this calls for is, and we've
done this in the past, is outside consultants to evaluate as opposed to the council. But that did happen
last year.
They did get the consultation last year. Well, yeah, that was a consultation, I guess. If a values-based
means of setting salaries should be incorporated, then I think it's something maybe to work out with
the consultant. Say this is the method that should be deployed. So I think that's
where I was considering that, you know, should the council do it or should it be really up to objective
body? Okay. So you're not fundamentally opposed to establishing a values-based and repeatable method?
No. Yeah. You know, if I would, you know, could have expounded, it might have been clearer and maybe
I can say that this evening. Okay. Yeah.
Just for the record, I think my other major reticence to the proposal that was made last year was one
was process. The discussion was overshadowed by the manner it came to the attention of the majority
of the council. It just landed in our laps as opposed to
a committee report that would, in other words, there was a resolution there as opposed to a committee
report that then we could have discussed a bit before proceeding. That was one thing that worked against
a fair hearing in a sense on the $45,000 proposal. The other one was, again, the comparison with peers.
Either most equivalent cities have gotten it wrong, and then there should be evidence for that because
we would be an outlier, or we in some way are very unique. We stand apart from our equivalent municipal
legislative peers, and that could be the case too. Those are things worth exploring, but
Those are my main sticking points when it comes to a significant increase in council salary. I think
that did come across with integrating all your responses. Any other ideas for tonight so we can focus
on that whole lighting breeze like that.
We are first and then kind of discuss where to go from here. Which I have a feeling is fiscal committee
go do something else. Well, remind me what our timeline is for it. We don't have to do this until the
end of the year. Is that right? For the actual ordinance?
It's supposed to be on like December 3rd or something. But I think that that was one of the things last
year is that it was probably, what, around late September? Yeah. That it was like, oh, you have to do
this. Oh, make this group. And, oh, like, yeah, work with the consultants. And, oh, so I mean, Dave,
I appreciate you going like, yeah, we didn't get a report after that. There really wasn't time. Like,
there literally wasn't a meeting before between those kinds of, because it really was.
We were trying to pack a lot into a short period of time. And let's be clear, the reason was that for
decades, we were not doing our job for Indiana code. We were letting the administration bring bill work.
Right. And just without much discussion. And so last year, we're like, wait a minute, we're supposed
to be doing this ourselves. So at least we've corrected that.
Well, and I think on the bright side. Right. I think there's really like good reasons to have a body
and can I be the ones to do it? Because then you have this whole like debate back and forth. Like you
and the lateral person setting our salaries. But I think then it does get really, really potentially
complicated and potential. So the fact that like other city councils across the state maybe are still,
you know, around this same number, because I mean,
how many of them have had significant increases because it is so intense to have these kinds of discussions
or you just default to, you know, a mayor as an executive kind of doing it for you. So if we look at
question eight, also that kind of indicates, you know, if we do consider an increase beyond the COLA,
Should it be done in 2027 for the new council term? Should it be done in 2026 to take effect when somebody
decides whether or not to run for council? So we do have some answers there that may dictate the timeline
for establishing a systematic way of deciding this. Except that both of those have more nos than yeses
in both of those places. That's true.
And I frankly said no to both of them. I don't think that I'm going to ever back myself into this corner
where I say something should only be done on certain years. Like that I, you know, it's like, well,
no, I don't, you know, I think that, I think that it needs, I think that things generally speaking need
to be done when they need to be done. And that may or may not fall near like that. I frankly wish that
the last term council had dealt with the salary thing
because the majority of them are cycling off, but they were not willing to do that. I wouldn't say they
weren't willing, I think they didn't realize. I've had conversations about it early enough, or at the
half end, and there was, from what I understood, a couple people that I talked to not willing to kind
of rock that boat and have that conversation.
All right, well, it's almost, excuse me if we can get back. Oh, no, sorry. I can say it at night. I'll
just say it at night, but thank you. I'm just cognizant of the time because we only had until 2.30 today,
I believe. I do have to leave at 2.30. I knew somebody had to. So I think this was helpful to frame
tonight's discussion a little bit.
Um, controller's updates. You did provide us with the reports. I included a fund balance report as of
a couple of days ago. And so that just is the cash balance of every, the beginning balances of January
1st. The debits are the, um, is the revenue and credits are the expenditures.
in ending balance. I was trying to make the math work and I thought debit is expenditure because that's
the plain English but it's reversed. It's reversed. I was like, this is not. This is maddening, yeah.
So what are debits? So debits in this report are the revenues and credits are the expenditures. It depends,
it's just,
Yeah. Why is that? That's because there's debits and credits mean different things. If it's a cash account
versus an expense account, like there's lots of different kinds of accounts in accounting and in cash
accounting.
This is a running report off a cash account. It's really boring accounting rules. It's just accounting
rules. It will never make sense. It just is what it is. This doesn't include a lot of things. It doesn't
include revenues we haven't received yet like property taxes. It doesn't include the budget.
It doesn't include expenses that are budgeted that haven't been spent yet. Is the income tax, have we
received all of that, or is that also- That's monthly. No, it's in months. Yeah, that's monthly. So
this is just as of the, that's what a fund balance, that's really what we can do for fund balance. And
then I wanted to,
Well, before I move on, do you have any questions for me about this report? I will say that I was at,
you guys asked me to conclude consolidated TIF, and there's, or TIFs, there's consolidated TIF, Kinzer-Prow
TIF, and the Bloomington Meridian TIF. The consolidated TIF receives about 17 million in revenue
I mean, that is controlled by the RDC. It's a board appointed by the mayor and the city council. Do
you want to share for the public who are watching her? I am not logged into this meeting. Maybe somebody's
read this law. Do you guys want to put the packet up? Or do you guys want me to share it? We can always
help you. Yeah, I don't know what you want us to do. Starts on page 39 of the packet, yes.
I'll start at the packet. I included on bond, bond proceed funds like fund 4653, 2016 city geo bond
proceeds. The city has projects still happening there. Are all the bonds in this list? Yes. Okay. So
the bicentennial bonds are still projects going on there. But not CDU.
No, not CDU. I didn't include any of their funds. And just to clarify, I'm the one who asked for this
list. And I appreciate it. I think it just helps us to understand where we are at this point of the
year and the fact that there are revenues that come in at different points.
So you said the expenditures column, does that include what's it called? Money that is earmarked?
Does not. What are those called? I would just call them budgeted expenses. Okay. But like where there's
already a PO, but it hasn't been paid. Oh, open POs? No, it does not include that either. Okay. No,
it only includes actual expenditures.
And this is a full list of funds. It's the funds that have budgets in them. It's the funds that we use.
There are a lot more funds that we are not using. And actually, let's see, I actually didn't include,
there's bond payment funds, a fund that just gets property tax deposited into it, and then it zeros
out when we can make the bond payments.
I didn't include those. There's nothing happens in those funds except where it makes a home thinking.
Dave, do you have a question? Yes. Well, it's a question regarding the consolidated TIF. Jessica, I
just said this in the past and I think other council members concurred with this that
The consolidated TIF is a pretty big area and it's deriving tax revenue from throughout the TIF, but
probably in certain areas more than others. But the expenditures, I really don't have an idea of where
they are mapped. And I think that it might be useful in the future for all of us to see on a
actual physical map where the Tourette taxes are derived and where they are spent and for equity purposes
to make sure that this TIF, it's covering areas, but are we taking revenue from one area and we're putting
it somewhere else? I mean, surely we're doing that to some extent and maybe necessary, but it would
be just good to visualize that. Is that something that you're interested in or that we could achieve?
Yes, we can definitely achieve that. I can present that next time we meet. We've done that work. We
haven't made a map, but I can tell you the projects that we did in 2024 in the TIF, and there's not
that many, so it's just a handful. First Street reconstruction around Hopewell. B-Line's, the B-Line
multi-use path by connecting it to 17th Street.
The 17th street reconstruction project and hope, um, Hopewell East doing all the site work and prep
and Hopewell East, um, building the tech center that called the forge, um, other, other work in the
trades district, um, related to the infrastructure, building those roads and sidewalks and maintaining
the mill. Um, let's see here.
Those are pretty much the projects that we did last year. So it was mainly around Hopewell, the 17th
Street reconstruction and the V-Line and then the trades district and the Pets Center. But I can present,
yeah, I can keep that in mind to present that on a map and show you the numbers. Okay, just a quick
follow-up. I heard through the grapevine from somebody that we had failed to get
state funding for Hopewell Street construction that we had missed a deadline or something and that there
is there any. I know that we are getting in that reimbursement for a lot of the road construction that
we're doing there. I think all the projects have some level of state reimbursement, and I think one
of the road projects there, the Jackson Street project that's going on now, I believe has ready funds.
I'm awarded to it. We didn't fail to get available funds from the state that we were allocated.
I got it. Dave, I think that's an MPO question. It's a great MPO question. MPO is actually presenting
to council during the report time on the 22nd. Great. Thank you for that. I look forward to
seeing such a map, I think will be very helpful for us. No problem. Great. Thanks. So Dave, I thought
part of your question, maybe I misunderstood, part of your question was also you wanted to know where
the property tax, increased property tax revenue was coming from. Is that right? And that would
be interesting to me. Like, where are we actually getting most of the money
into the TIFF that we are then spending on. Yeah. Well, yeah, that was part of it. Where is it derived
and where does it end up? Yeah, is that, these are all to do desktop? Yes. I'll pull, I can pull personal
numbers. I'm exchanging that assessed value and ask GIS to make a heat map. Cool, that'd be cool.
Heat map, yeah. That would be nice if you could see the other thing, though.
That moved over. Yeah, it's nice for me. I have a question about the funds. I've heard them talking
about the TIF. Yes. Thanks. What's going on with our vehicle highway fund, which isn't negative? Yes,
that stood out to me. That has revenues that come in every month, and I think that they've
They spent on, they've been spending their budget, especially in the supplies and other services line
faster than the revenues from the state have come in. So hopefully by the end of the year that those
revenues from the state will catch up with the spending in the other categories. Well, I hope for what
you mean. That's how it was fleshed in. Yes. The state tells us normal because like, are there more
expenditures say during like,
A prime kind of baiting and construction season. Right. Less elsewhere. Exactly. So we expect those
expenses to start really sloping downwards, then the revenues will stay roughly the same. Yeah, exactly.
And is that from gas and meat taxes? Yes, that is gas tax and excise tax. Those are all revenues in
that fund. Gas tax and excise tax. Excise you pay when you register your vehicle.
That's good. And that's based on like the county or like down to the city like just the county. That's
only based on the county. Okay. So you share that with the county based on population? I think based
on lane miles. Based on lane miles. It's the technical term for
Yeah. Yeah. In your jurisdiction. Yes, it's not. Three things. One is why we spent any money from the
rainy day fund. Why haven't we? Why haven't we? That's no zero. Oh, zero. You said at the beginning.
Slipped, okay, got it. And then you said that in the beginning, I still looked at it again and saw exactly
what I wanted to see. The second thing about the pension fund, so for fire employees, maybe just as
an open-ended question, what is this fund? This is a good question. Sorry, the other part of the bottom
of your question. This one, however.
We keep a cash balance in there and we pay the police and we pay the police and fire pensions and then
we submit what we pay to the state and the state reimburses us. Okay, so this goes, so there's a larger,
there's a larger state fund that we basically transferred this money into every year or? No, we, well,
let's see. We pay not,
To get into the details, I'm going to have to bring Kelly in. I don't know exactly if we pay the state
or if we pay the insurance company that pays the pensions. I have a feeling we pay the insurance company.
But these are what we collect from their paychecks toward pension? No, we don't collect anything from
any. And also, this is for past pensions. It's quite low, though, for the
And this is, this is what it always runs. This is what it is. And I actually don't have, don't know
a lot, a super lot about like how many, how many are on the plan? How many are we paying? What's the
average amount? The plan is discontinued, right? This is only for people who retire. This is like, yes,
this is for a discontinued plan. Oh, I didn't realize. So please currently don't have, don't get state
funded pensions.
because I thought that this was a whole these people do these are people that used to work for us and
they're still on the old plan and then we also have the city pay into the state the big state plan for
the people who are current okay okay so there's got it that's a separate that kind of so I'm
Okay, but I didn't understand that there was a state separate thing now, because I knew that there was
this big question about when people, because it used to be that you could only change a city's one cent,
still keep your pension or something like that, and that changed last, I don't know, ten years or something
like that, which has been a big thing for recruitment and it's caused us a lot of problems, because
people could go anywhere.
And so this is actually a past fund that no longer, so this just runs at this amount to fund, but at
some point in some far off future, this will stop being a thing. And this just currently transfers from
where? From general fund every year or? No, it's just the cash balance that's in this fund, the cash
that is in this fund sits here and it's sort of like a closed loop. Hopefully the idea is that cash balance
There's always there. So we make a payment and then we're reimbursed. Reimbursed from the state. Yes.
Got it. So the only revenue is revenue from the state. Got it. And like this kind of funds distorts
our budget because it's included in our budget. It's included in our budget. So things like this don't
cost us any money, but they are included. Got it. Good question.
I don't have a good answer for that. The new fire police pension. So is there not another fund for that?
Like, I mean, maybe it's new enough that we don't. It doesn't need its own fine. That we don't, what
we do is we take that out of their salary lines, like in the general fund and just send that to a payment
that we just send up to the state.
and the state hold it, and the state administers all those payments. So now somebody retires. Somebody
retires, then they just deal directly to the state, and we are not admitted yet. Exactly. That feels
more efficient. Yes. And then with Jack Hopkins, does this reflect the current appropriation for
this coming year or what, what that, that, what does that say? There are no appropriations in here.
This is just saying this is how much money we've sent out this year. Like you may have, you may be done
with all your meetings and you've awarded all of your money that was budgeted to you or to Jack Hopkins
this year, but this is only how much has been sent out, but paid out so far. So far this year. Yeah. Right.
So there's like 200 and some thousand that people have not submitted receipts for re-personing there.
And plus there's some, some cushion of their. Yeah. Yeah. Which we, which, which I think last year we
spent some of, this year we proposed to, but didn't have to. See, I think that it's just like last year
to spend some of, but I don't think the receipts actually came in. Which is I think how the cushion
gets created, right? Right.
Yeah, there might be a little bit of cushion, but that for Jack Hopkins, it says 115,000, what you started,
that could be deceptive because there could be open POs in a relax that hasn't been fully paid yet.
I think that they're supposed to submit receipts by March or something. There should be anything outstanding
in that account. That makes sense, March. That's like my memory from like over a year ago. Yeah, that's
what I recall.
by the end of the year, but then we'll give an extension. Yeah. And we review those reverted funds.
Right. Right. You guys know about it. It wasn't all extended. Right. Right. All right. Oh, Dave, you
have another question? How about? Yeah, just a comment.
Jennifer Crosley and I discussed this a little bit, but not nearly enough, and she had the great idea,
and I think maybe others did too, that we might want to consider uniting the Sophia Travis and Jack
Hopkins funding for various purposes. We could discuss those. I don't want to get into the weeds today,
but it might be something to consider.
you know, to not duplicate services or not to get into a situation where we would be competing
or inappropriate funding going to one place or another and it, you know, gets complicated in that sense.
So anyway, I hope you and I talked about it too. I know this has been batted around by a number of people,
but I just wanted to bring that up as a, because I don't know if the administration is considering it as well.
Yeah, that's just kind of the earliest stages of figuring out what kind of collaboration can exist in
terms of, because it's two separate entities and two separate funds and how exactly that can work. We're
still at the stage of our attorneys making sure that we can't do anything at all before we move on to
the stage of committees getting together to talk about practical and logistical ways to collaborate
to make the whole thing as efficient as possible for, honestly, for the organizations that are... Yeah,
I mean, just generally speaking, it makes sense to me because, you know, this is social service funding
for the community and it doesn't, you know, the boundaries are kind of arbitrary in that sense. So,
and just for efficiency sake and for,
of what I mentioned before. I think it's something worth exploring. Thanks. And thank you, Jennifer,
for bringing that to my attention. I have another question for Jessica. The Meridian TIF, that spider
TIF for the high-speed digital access, are we ever getting money from that? Like, how does that work?
We should be getting money from that next year.
And the way that agreement is written, that is when we get that TIF money, 95% of what we receive, we
give back to the company that is installing that. So back to Meridium or M Street Fiber. And we should
start receiving it next year. We have to give 95% of it back? That's the agreement. Yep.
So it was part of the incentive package to get Maria to do it? Yes. I think- For how long did it get
designed? Is there a- I believe it's for the life of the TIF. But well, I believe it's for, well, that's,
the term is in the contract, the term in the contract, and I believe it's 20 years, but Rick,
that's a, I can ask for it, can give back to you. It's for a,
like the terminal bond. So a TIF is the additional property tax revenue after an investment. So how
does that work for a Spider TIF? For the Spider TIF, the property taxes are collected on the personal
property is the fiber that's underground and they have to file the property tax return
claiming that property and its value. And then that will generate a tax bill. And then that tax bill
will be collected in the TIF. We will get it. We'll get it as a separate deposit, separate from all
of our other property taxes. It'll go into this fund, separate, and then we have to send it back to
the company. So who's paying that property tax? The company is paying the property. So we're going to
basically... And then we're getting 95% of it back? It's basically abatement.
of property tax abatement. Okay. On business personal property. Correct. Oh correct. Only on the business
personal property. Because they're working directly. Correct. So they're paying us property tax based
on those improvements and then we're giving 95% of it back to them. And then what happens after the
life of the contract? Like do they still pay those property taxes but it goes into our the general fund
instead of going back to them?
No, it'll always go into the TIF. I'm actually not exactly sure what happens after the life of a contract.
I'll have to look at that in the contract. I would like to give the public an opportunity for comment.
I'm sorry I didn't have that on the agenda, but I think it makes sense. I didn't really know what the
controller would be bringing, so I didn't put it on the agenda. But is there any number of the public
who would like to make a comment at this time?
We need to use the raise hand function again. I don't see any. So we have six minutes of Jessica's time
left. Do you want to tell us a little bit about sanitation or should we save that for next time? I can
start with sanitation. I wanted to start by giving you the information as it stands now. It shows you what we
what our expected revenue means this year. And our expected total expenses this year, 2025 in the middle
of that chart. And the deficit this year would be 1.5 million. That was interesting at the time. Yeah.
So some things that,
that jump out is that recycling is free, but recycling definitely has a cost to it. Some other things
that aren't in this chart. Recycling is free, but it definitely has a cost. It doesn't split out the
recycling versus. Yeah, and that's something that we want to bring to you. We want to bring to you what
the actual costs of each side of the program are.
Also, there's costs, there's capital costs that are not included in this. They're not even included
in the budget. Sanitation trucks are not even included in the budget. We're really skating on thin ice.
In the budget, that would be just sort of like breaking down. If something happens, we kind of have
to just try to find a place to purchase a sanitation truck because we'll cannibalize another fund.
We have the vehicle replacement fund that has 500,000 budgeted in it. We could use that. Sometimes there's
extra money somewhere else in public works that we use for something that they plan for that they didn't
spend, or they forego something that they needed in order to pay for a sanitation truck. They also do
have facilities too. This is just like a drop in the bucket of all the information about sanitation.
I was hoping to start with this and maybe let you guys
Tell me what your questions would be like, or we could talk about, you know, things like we need to
know what the actual expenses are for recycling. We need to know what the actual, you know, kind of
how we want things broken down because I'm working with sanitation to develop, you know, our new rig
structure. So we need the cost of recycling, we need the cost of trash to pick up.
We need all the items that are listed above. And then if we could at Brown and Hays, we need
those expenditures too much. Yeah. I'm really interested too in modeling out some different price mechanics,
particularly, and thinking a little bit about demographics. So like this number that mass 35 gallons,
you know, whatever,
I know that there's been some proposals of trying to institute like a pay as you throw program or something
like that, where you, under the idea that some ways that we structure it might be a little bit regressive,
particularly on renters. So I'd be really interested in being able to model out, okay, hey, if we did
this, this is who it affects it, I think is sort of important in many ways. So how it's spread out,
I'm most particularly thinking about renters and homeowners.
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
sanitation about that too. And they said that we used to do that and it really did not work. Right,
right, right, right, right. But we can also, we do have like a program that a person can apply for to
waive their sanitation, like a low income program. Yeah. Yeah. To waive their water bill, sewer bill,
and sanitation bill. Yeah.
Dave, do you have a question? More of a statement. I'm agreeable to this idea, pay as you throw, just
simply because it follows the adage, show me the incentive, I'll show you the outcome. That is, if people
are incentivized to reduce their waste, then we'll have less volume going to landfill, which is our
overriding goal.
And then another means to reduce volume I would think would be to encourage people to compost because
a lot of food waste goes to the landfill I think still. And that means that there's a lot of methane
being produced in that landfill. And then the last thing I want to say is I've always been intrigued
by this idea that we might want to explore at least reopening the landfill. So we have control over
our own waste stream. So just want to throw out those ideas. I know time's short.
Well, you have to talk to Tom McClassen. I don't think that's feasible. I'm on the waste reduction board
and that landfill is on a very strictly controlled timeline with item. And so to reopen, I just think
it would be a very, very, very heavy lift. Also, I wanted to mention
But sorry, I didn't mean to diss what you said, Dave. I understand your perspective and it would be
nice to not have, you know, pay for hauling and diesel fuel to haul it to the Menorah River. As far
as pay as you throw, I've been asking Adam Weissen every year for like eight years if we can do it.
And he's always said it's not feasible. I think it would be too expensive.
it would be for each row, it would be so expensive to make it work. I think that that's essentially
the problem. My point was less to argue about that, more to say that when we're having the conversation
about rates, what would be greatest to be able to have them in the full spectrum of possibilities, so
that we always understand it's that antithesis of, OK, if we didn't do this, we get it. We're going
to lose a lot of money, and then we can't pay for lots of things. Great. But then there's also the,
We evaluated three different options and this is how we arrived at the best choice is to raise the 96
gallons by X, right? Because there's also been people who presented at City Council about other diversion
things, this free cycle program as an example. And it would be really interesting to model out, is there
some investment that we can make as a city where we could lower the cost of sanitation while also increasing
You know outcomes that we're really interested in those type of conversations, which goes to Dave's
framework of like you actually maybe it's reopening a thing or, you know, so so and I don't know all
of the possibilities in that framework but but just so that we don't just look at this just from the
percentage of, you know, how many cents do we raise per person, you know, to meet our, our deficit.
want to make sure that, even though I'm interested in those cost differences between like, well, how
much does recycling cost, how much does trash cost, et cetera, et cetera. But there's also, like, if
we have a larger overall goal of diversion out of landfills anywhere, we do want to incentivize recycling
and composting and some of these other things. And so if we simply say,
charge for recycling what it actually costs that could then de-incentivize people to recycle them. Because
then you go like, well, am I going to have a full one of these or two half empty things? And so in terms
of assessment, not only the numbers, but also some of that kind of information in terms of like,
Yeah, like, and I'm sure that there's studies about, you know, incentivizing, like, does it increase
people's rate of recycling to call it free, even if you're charging more for the other other parts of
the waste stream. There's got to be some studies somewhere that talk about that kind of that kind of
psychological stuff.
We'll do our best, the best we can getting those numbers that we don't and they have. I'd also like
to know how long our current contract is for public is because the waste reduction district entered
into a new contract with Romney this year where they're actually paying us for some recyclable materials.
And so it might be wise to renegotiate our contracts.
Alright, made notes, composting, pay as you grow, reopen our landfill. I did write that down. How long
is our current contract with the public? We were talking about like how much does recycling cost, how
much does trash cost, and then how much money would we
How much would composting reduce trash pickup? And I think the problem there is that they still are
going to run all their routes. So it's kind of like, we still have the same number of trucks, the same
amount of gas, the same number of people. And not some of those like, I mean, so like right now I'll
just call out our household because I live in, right? We have the largest recycled bin, but that also
means that probably 90% of the time it's half sold every week. So, you know, is there some kind of,
Like could we somehow switch to an every other, every other week pickup? Like could recycling be picked
up every other week? What would that save? Is most of our expenses from running the trucks or is most
of our expenses from actually like getting rid of the items? And so like, would it then ultimately be
more cost effective for me as the person to have the largest bin for the pickup every other week or have the,
smallest bit of the pickup every week. And like, how does that like work out in terms of, you know,
maybe, you know, having some real alternative systems to what we have now. Okay. So is the most of our
expenses from running the trucks, I mean, like just operations, right. Or is it from the cost of,
you know, getting the price wasn't in the trash with the larger question of, you know, should we consider
every other week? Right.
So either for trash or recycling. Rout efficiency. Yeah. Reduction. All right. Great. This is great
conversation. This is exactly what I needed. Thank you. Thank you. Appreciate you bringing that to us.
All righty. Thank you guys. Let me know if you need anything after the meeting. I got to be able to,
I'm sorry. Oh, okay. See you tonight. Can the other three committee members stay? Yeah. Okay. So the
next item is improving the budget process.
Um, and this is kind of like a broken record at this point. And then what do we do next? And they've
turned out how they spread today. And I really would like to, at some point we have all these outcomes
we want. We need to rank them at some point, which is most important outcome. Um, because we have limited
that money and we need to prioritize at some point, make those hard decisions. Um,
And then I think we need more public engagement in general. We had, I feel like we had fewer people
talk during budget hearings than ever before this. Of us or the public. Of the public, yeah. Maybe both.
Maybe both, yeah. So anyway, wanted to throw that out there, see what you all.
I'll start on both of those questions. First, in terms of the, sorry, in terms of the public engagement,
you know, the, in many ways, I think, and I mean, I saw on the call, you know, Kevin Keough or Eric
are on the call, who I think have been super engaged and so grateful for all of their, yeah,
I detailed reading of our documents, and it's been wonderful, very helpful. The points that I was making
during budget hearings is that the way that the budget was presented this year made that quite difficult.
That was a heavy lift, I think, in many ways, for the general public. And so that may be one area to
think about in terms of engagement and how things have broken down.
And then in terms of us of us prioritizing it might be interesting for us to think about. And then what
I think just came out of this conversation is that.
Our outcomes are not all like we're comparing apples and oranges sometimes, because if you look at outcomes
across the board, some of the things we might care about, sidewalks, sanitation, may be funded by other
streams that you don't want to compare to things, or maybe you do, but how do we deal with comparing
them to things that are in the general fund? You see what I'm saying? So like we may,
need to think about some categorization of priorities of outcomes or something like that. And then I
think there's something you've been getting at this whole year that just is a lot clearer to me now,
like a clear mapping between funds and outcomes, right? Like we have, let's use parking data as an example.
We have $6 million in parking data funds,
And here's the thing we can use for it to do with it. And then what are our outcomes that are associated
with that fund and how do those fit into the broader outcome? So that makes the next step in interfacing
the priorities and the outcomes. Right, we kind of have to identify what are the fundable
Right. What, what things have dedicated revenues that go towards them, right, separate that from the
more fungible. Right. Right. And then, and then maybe I mean maybe an improvement, but this year ESP
budget as an example, I mean we have
I think a lot of engagement on this question of, well, actually, we've moved a lot of things onto EDIT,
or we've moved a lot of things outside of which could have structured a good way. We wanted this money
for these outcomes. So explain directly to us why moving this salary to that is leading to that outcome.
rather than, well, this is money that was available. This is justifiable use of paper. Are you referring
to the plan for the 80 lead when the council approved the 80 lead? Correct. And then, and I might be
mis-speaking, but this year ESD budget chose to move certain things on to, but maybe it wasn't the 80
lead fund. What was the fund that they, the 80 lead, right? And they put some salaries on the 80 lead.
Yeah. Like there was a bunch of,
a bunch of stuff whenever you need various departments. And then for, you know, we might say, well,
wait, we probably missed an opportunity there to align with outcomes. Right. Right. Because I was that,
I mean, when council approved that, that was the closest, we've got a very clear example of actually,
this is what we want to spend this on at least, you know, that's, you know, two and a half steps towards
kind of a solid outcome is that you're like, you sort of, you sort of the areas that we're spending this on,
Right. That was in former council and former mayor. Right. And I think it's just kind of gone out the
window. Right. Right. Which I'm not blaming anybody for. The reason they have to follow the 222 plan.
But you're right. When I look back, that was an exercise. Yeah.
So maybe that's pulling on the thread of I think the work we started here, which is we spent a lot of
time this year looking at funds. So maybe it's that. It's like a fund by fund. I think if that works,
at least for some of the smaller funds. I don't think that works as well for the general fund. It's
the general fund where everything gets dumped back. But the general fund is- It's all the other. Correct.
But that's why I'm saying that we have to separate, we have to separate what we might think of as,
I mean, we had this one just now, you brought it up, but I think super quickly. With sanitation, the
question is not just in and out. There's also a question of some things that we may wish to invest in,
and recycling may be one of those things. And so if we were to set
within sanitation, we say, well, what are the outcomes of sanitation? We want less things going into
landfills. We want less food waste. We want more recycling, better quality recycling. And so less costs,
happier drivers. We can think of a lot of things that we might want. Then when we have the conversation of,
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
we want to achieve. So first and foremost does increasing the amount, which is the literal conversation,
right? If we charge more for this, yes, it will solve one of our problems, but it might create another
one that's contrary to an outcome that we want to see. Right. We don't, one outcome for sanitation is
we want things that
Yes, exactly. Exactly. Exactly. And then we can within sanitation say number one priority for us is
trash gets picked up. You know, we can spend a lot of time.
Wait, that's our number one priority. Number two is, you know, or maybe number one is diversion of things
or whatever. I think no rats is a good number. Yeah, exactly. There's so many public offices related
to it. Exactly, exactly, exactly. And I think what I'm trying to say overall with these illustrations
is that a lot of these conversations, the reason why they're so hard is because we pull from so many
places for a lot of, so we ended up having these like,
You know, so we, I think we've done a good job of counseling, these are things that we all want to see
here are some priorities, but then they become so up here, because, because like yeah we all want.
You know, safety. Right. Right. And then, but then we struggle to have the conversation of what do we
mean by public safety, because we're not actually tying it. And it's like, well, this gets money, that
gets money, and the other things, and this, and the salaries, and the, right. So, so if we can get to
actually at a fund by fund level, and maybe, maybe there's an argument that actually we should proliferate
more funds, right. Because it's easier to have a conversation about what does this fund do?
And those get funded from the general fund in many cases, they may not have to be, you know, revenue
producing things, but it's just that if you want to spend money on X, it comes from this fund so that
we can track outcomes really clearly. That might be a good question for Jessica about like, you know,
if there's some reason we don't want to have more funds, for example. I almost feel like I need like a,
A physical exercise like what we have note cards with. Here's our outcomes. Here are the funds. Here's
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
head around. Yes, I agree with you. And one of the questions I was having today, don't go ahead. I think
that that's one of the things that the public needs too, honestly. Yes. Increase public engagement.
I mean, and I
I mean, we called out Mr. Pio and Eric. It is really, really challenging to engage with these documents.
And then, you know, what are your parents, right? It takes a really high level of comprehension and
processing and a lot of time.
If we have that high level, then it doesn't take so much time. And if you don't, then it takes a whole
lot more time to understand exactly what it is it's talking about. And the average person does
not necessarily have the time that they would need in order to really properly engage with this. And
so having some other kind of public engagement opportunity that is less related to 400-page documents
and more related to something that is
A more hands on or a smaller question. Then it, you know, like the smaller question like categorizing
as a smaller question, but I mean,
It's like the prioritization of outcomes. It's way easier to go, okay, here's a list of six things.
Let's talk about those six things. Because those six things fit on a list that's this big as opposed
to a 400 page document. And so that kind of public engagement activity, which I think is something that,
because of how our calendar works. So, you know, those ideas for budget calendar, you know, I think
that those need to be worked in throughout the whole year. This like,
community kind of budget activity. And I remember it was the local progress in 2023 that talked about
Chicago and how Chicago has done some outreach around budgeting and about, you know, like give everybody
a dollar and like how do you split that up between these categories.
I'll bet it was Boston and Chicago. But if you had a progress conference, it was specifically Chicago
games as part of a budget presentation, like they talked about what they had done. And they might also,
are they on a two-year budget too? I feel like maybe that's part of it is that that was, yeah, I think
that that was helpful in terms of how they were able to do these public events and things that have
lasted for too long.
I feel like I remember us having, maybe not in this committee, but the controller was there. She said
that the chamber budget really, really hard for us to do, especially right now, just because our revenue
forecast is so uncertain. But having some other public engagement around the concept of budget that
isn't just reading these spreadsheets. And I think you raise a really good point too, which in terms
of public engagement,
Multiple good points. So I'm just reacting and to, you know, to finger them, if you will, whatever the one is
We don't need to think about public engagement as the whole of council has to do this, which becomes
a heavy lift. It's hard to get with these calendars. We only have a handful of times where we can and
so on. That may be something that we take on as a committee that we can put on and we can be a little
bit more flexible when we put these type of things on. And then, of course, council members are welcome
to come to them. And then we can just notice that if people say they're coming.
The so that's one thought to is really saying back to your point, like if we were to talk about, and
this is something we've we've on Council and our general meetings had like we've given like Mrs on this
program where you sort of said it just in passing, like, oh,
Maybe we could spend the money and parking meters for, you know, somebody was throw out a thing. Right.
And so these conversations we've had, and then somebody else will go, Oh, I think we can only use it
on but and so we leave it there. Okay.
That would be a really fun way to have a conversation with the public where we go, let's just look at
the parking meter fund. Here's on paper what the allowable uses are. And then there's this floating,
the attention was downtown or something like that. But people might have way more creative ideas than
us who are always looking at everything closely. They might go, I mean, to me, what I'd love to see
downtown is a brah.
have a really interesting conversation about, well, how might you spend this much money? And how much
would you leave in the fund? If we were spending it on this, would you approve us increasing the amount
of costs that cost the park downtown? And it helps us have all of those type of conversations. So I
love this idea of focusing in rather than like, what would you do with $165 million? It's like, what
would you do with this fund with these three purposes?
that's much more feasible. And it could be the start of a broader conversation. Yeah. And you could
imagine us doing, you know, imagine 10 of these where we take two funds each time. And we're like, we're
talking about parking fund and, you know, sanitation affected by it. And next week we're talking about,
you know. Well, and I think that that's also something that,
we could collaborate with them. I mean, those would be really, really, I mean, I think it would be really,
really important in those that we said all council doesn't have to be there. Yeah, it could just be
fiscal committee as kind of, you know, leading these, but I think that getting the administration involved
is really key in that collaboration between entities and they have so much to add ultimately on like
what they set the budget.
And so us getting that input as counsel is in some ways not as impactful as them getting that input
in terms of budget setting. Right, Tom. It's fantastic. OK, well, let's check in with the public comment
on improving the budget process. Of course, this is an ongoing conversation.
British any conclusions here, but any public would like to offer a comment at this time, please raise
your hand. Well, see any. So should we just maybe put this higher up on the agenda for next time with
Jessica here and maybe also invite Gretchen?
Yeah, I think so. And then that would be, you know, the idea of spending a budget calendar for 2026
is, you know, like maybe having a goal of having that kind of public engagement opportunity quarterly
or something. And so that you really need to not only need a floor of those ideas for next year, I'm
sure that you start to start to like now.
Well, I wrote them down as two categories, looking at a specific fund and the possibilities of that
fund and brainstorming, and then that idea of if we increase the fee, what would you support the additional
revenues being spent on? For sanitation, that's... Well, that's pretty obvious. Well, we're shoring
up what it costs, but then that's free, not general fund money. So what would you support that general
fund money that we need
That's a good point. Being used for and able to support other services. I mean, we might be in a budget
situation out there. I mean, it's hard to know about a situation we would be in, say, next year. Yeah.
You know, it's like, if we don't have this general fund money, then we can't, you know, pay everybody's
salary. You know what I mean? But yeah. OK.
Picture meetings, I don't think we have a next meeting scheduled. I think we've been doing it these
months. You mentioned that you had some still marked on your calendar. We're doing that every other
week or so. Yeah, I have those every other Wednesday. Wednesdays are usually very good for me. When
is that next one then? Two weeks from now, or do we need a meeting? We probably do need a meeting two
weeks from now.
to consign the salary ordinance? Yeah, I have a hold on my calendar from two to three on Wednesday the
22nd. I can do other times than just those days. That works for you. Does that work for you? Not really.
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.
On the 230. Are you thinking that you'd like a draft?
elected officers, for the next. It depends on how it goes tonight. Okay, sure. Yeah, probably.
What about now? Yeah, we'll do one or two weeks from now, so the week of the 20th. Morning 27th.
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
don't know what time people start working. Okay, what does your morning look like? First office on October
22nd in the morning? I would rather not do anything today, yeah.
I have availability of 21st, if you guys have availability of 21st. What time? I could do... That's
the day that I essentially start at one and don't finish until after five. Yeah, you don't want to do
that. I sometimes have to add things on either end of that day, but it's not my favorite day. What about
Thursday, the 23rd around lunchtime? Well, and I can do something on Wednesday morning. I just don't
want to do it.
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
for an account move. And so a little 1045, but then I have another one at noon. I could, I could skip
or move the noon. So I just don't have a lot of flexibility that particular Wednesday. I usually do.
Um, I should, I could do, but you have, you have every one 30 and one to 30.
any any opposition to meeting before a council meeting like like closer to like four thirty or five
thirty it's hard for for for attorneys right um so yeah okay if i could be if i could be virtually talking
about your availability on thursday oh thursday yeah i could do thursday anytime i'm leaving i would
have to leave that on the two
in the afternoon or first day of the semester. It's based on packing and preparation. Well, what if
we do the morning of the 22nd, but I'll just join virtually? But Dave will probably have to join virtually
as well. Dave will not be able to join virtually. Oh, he can't anymore. He has to be in person. No,
actually, that's part of the reason why I came back up. And you should be cautious about joining virtually
because you're pushing at the 50% for this committee. For this committee. Yeah.
Not for, obviously. It's hard. So should we go back to Thursday morning? What about Tuesday? Oh, that's
your hard day. Well, what time on Tuesday? I'm wide open on Tuesday until I can move my 11. I'm actually
wide open until 2 o'clock at the moment. Well, I could just start my Tuesday at 11.
Do you want to do 11 on Tuesday? Tuesday. Yes, okay. And the parks office, do we want that on Tuesday?
21st of October. Well, um, that counts then. I think, oh, I'll be about, then I'll have to be um, Sophia.
I'm going to assume yes,
And if something's wrong, I'll let you know within a couple of hours with apologies, but I think this.
We have to check with Dave, I think. All good. All right, I'll check with Dave and the club clerk will
confirm and go get that scheduled, hopefully. And so you say you need to be in person? Yep. And Dave
will have to be in person. I will go to do two hours.
Um, to recreate that would be a little bit of a shorter meeting I can do. Usually do an hour and a half.
Yeah, I have it for an hour and a half. And yes, um, clerk staff can be here on the 21st of November.
Thank you. So I will ask Dave in person. Okay, any other final thoughts before we adjourn?
Um, did we want to try to get the. The controller here at the back as well. Yes. I will ask. So maybe
we should have a second, second option. So this is the second option Thursday morning then are you available
Thursday morning? I kind of do early Thursday when I can do like Thursday. Like we're out that same
time I believe.
Yeah, I can do that any time, but we know about that. So that's maybe a second second choice as well.
When you ask people, is the clerk available during that window? October 23rd at 11, would that be an option?
Yes, or somewhere in that you let somebody with that. So, yeah, are you available that day too? Yeah.
Okay, I'll check with the others. And I do apologize. The agenda for this meeting didn't say one thirty
to two thirty, because it was in my mind that somebody couldn't go past two thirty and it must have
been Dave. So hopefully. That's didn't annoy anybody that much was three. I appreciate it though, because we.
I think we had it. It was on the calendar invitation. I felt free. I felt free. Yeah. I should just
not put any times on. All right. We are adjourned. Thank you.