WEBVTT 00:00:01.890 --> 00:00:09.945 - All right, so it seems as we are all here, I'll go ahead and call this meeting with the special fiscal 00:00:09.945 --> 00:00:17.843 - community to order on March 13th. We'll be soft-spurred on district three. Okay, for all of district 00:00:17.843 --> 00:00:25.663 - four. Awesome. It's about the maximum, Mr. Kronk. Jeff McKim, city controller. So it's being looked 00:00:25.663 --> 00:00:29.886 - out for its office. That's where we have our council. 00:00:31.106 --> 00:00:40.183 - I'm Justin Chang with the Reedy financial group. I'm Tim Schreger with Reedy financial group. Sorry, 00:00:40.183 --> 00:00:49.170 - what was that? Tim Schreger. Okay, thank you. Wonderful. Thank you guys for being here tonight. I'm 00:00:49.170 --> 00:00:53.214 - just so used to eating meetings, that's all. 00:00:53.378 --> 00:01:00.091 - First thing on the agenda is the agenda review and approval. Comptroller McCann just mentioned changing 00:01:00.091 --> 00:01:06.610 - the agenda from what was published because the Indiana General Assembly updates are going to come up 00:01:06.610 --> 00:01:13.710 - during the reading discussion. So we can just combine numbers two and three into one big kind of presentation 00:01:13.710 --> 00:01:19.326 - and question and answer and public comment period and then adjourn. I did realize that 00:01:20.674 --> 00:01:28.585 - I didn't put anything on about the calendar, any updated calendaring stuff. And I didn't put anything 00:01:28.585 --> 00:01:36.652 - in the packet about that, but does anybody have any updated calendaring stuff about this committee that 00:01:36.652 --> 00:01:44.873 - you should put on the agenda? Great, seeing none. If somebody wants to move to approve. I move to approve 00:01:44.873 --> 00:01:48.286 - the agenda for 13 March, 2026. Okay. Great. 00:01:49.602 --> 00:01:57.748 - We're all here. Can we just, everybody in favor of that, say aye. Aye. Aye. That was great. So at this 00:01:57.748 --> 00:02:05.656 - point, I'm going to turn it over to Jeff and to Justin and Tom, right? I'm going to write that down 00:02:05.656 --> 00:02:13.881 - right now and take it away. Terrific. Well, I'd love to just set the stage. We have Justin and Tim from 00:02:13.881 --> 00:02:16.254 - Reedy Financial Group who are 00:02:16.578 --> 00:02:24.511 - financial advisors at the city, and they're going to go over a couple of things that I think are going 00:02:24.511 --> 00:02:32.676 - to be really interesting to everybody and very important to us going forward, including our debt position 00:02:32.676 --> 00:02:40.378 - and local income tax, particularly with respect to the new LIT system that's right now slated to go 00:02:40.378 --> 00:02:43.998 - into effect in 2029, and property tax as well. 00:02:44.322 --> 00:02:50.208 - But very much, I think everybody's going to be very interested in what they have to say. So are you 00:02:50.208 --> 00:02:56.153 - going first, Justin or Tim? Well, really, he will be, but just to set the stage for what we're going 00:02:56.153 --> 00:03:02.157 - to be talking about, Tim's going to start out with kind of the city-wide financials, but what that'll 00:03:02.157 --> 00:03:08.514 - look like going forward, 2026 and 2027. But on these expenditures, whether we're surplusing or deficitting, 00:03:08.514 --> 00:03:10.398 - and then we're going to go into 00:03:11.138 --> 00:03:18.480 - What are the ways we could improve the city's financial provisions? Local income tax, like Jack mentioned 00:03:18.480 --> 00:03:25.683 - earlier, is going to be a big part of that. And we're going to build the House Involved Act, 1210, into 00:03:25.683 --> 00:03:32.747 - that discussion. And then we're also going to look at other tools, including the debt and potentially 00:03:32.747 --> 00:03:39.812 - part of some RDC financing capacities that the city could use to improve the city's overall financial 00:03:39.812 --> 00:03:40.574 - situation. 00:03:42.018 --> 00:03:49.642 - So I guess a little precursor set the stage to use best in this time. So we have for about a year now 00:03:49.642 --> 00:03:57.266 - been developing the city's long-term operating capital green plan. It's a five-year plan. It captures 00:03:57.266 --> 00:04:04.964 - all of the funds that we budget and gave rate. And we do revenue projections, expenditure projections, 00:04:04.964 --> 00:04:09.150 - we look at the restorable budgets, restorable revenues. 00:04:09.602 --> 00:04:17.876 - projections based on that, and we also incorporate any changes in legislation into your long-term plan. 00:04:17.876 --> 00:04:25.831 - Having said that, Justin had mentioned the, you know, I guess what is the core term to use, funding 00:04:25.831 --> 00:04:33.787 - surplus deficit. Right now in your long-term plan, you have basically for the next two years due to 00:04:33.787 --> 00:04:38.878 - SEA 1 and because of some innate choices in the budget, there's 00:04:39.106 --> 00:04:48.131 - roughly a $3 million deficit projected in your general fund. Now, as Senator-elect one ramps up, and 00:04:48.131 --> 00:04:56.441 - depending on the choices that the council is, for lack of a better term, forced to make, due 00:04:56.441 --> 00:05:04.126 - to Houseman-elect 1210 and SCA-1, that deficit could be as much as $9 million a year. 00:05:06.338 --> 00:05:13.111 - Now, one of the other things that we've done in your long-term plan is that we've identified about $7.5 00:05:13.111 --> 00:05:20.015 - million of capital outlays that the city historically has done using rough estimates. We actually removed 00:05:20.015 --> 00:05:26.919 - those capital outlays from your operating funds. So on top of the $9 million potential operating deficit, 00:05:26.919 --> 00:05:33.757 - we also have to figure out a way to fund, if it's the city's choice to continue the $7.5 million capital 00:05:33.757 --> 00:05:35.646 - outlays on average annually, 00:05:35.874 --> 00:05:46.980 - a way to fund that essentially deficit as well. So we're looking at roughly 16 and a half million dollars 00:05:46.980 --> 00:05:57.458 - of potential deficit once Senate rolled that one in the hospital, 1210 or fully ranked up, which is 00:05:57.458 --> 00:06:04.478 - roughly 2032. So how do we mitigate that and what are our options? 00:06:04.642 --> 00:06:13.498 - And Jeff, if you want to pull up to me, how soon will we pack, or how soon will that portend impact? 00:06:13.498 --> 00:06:22.353 - It should be the most recent one. Oh, it's the lit document, right? Yeah, it's the one that fades in 00:06:22.353 --> 00:06:27.614 - orders that we didn't have that in a different place. Okay. 00:06:33.922 --> 00:06:47.513 - I sent that out and well I sent out an email last week because that was what that posted yesterday after 00:06:47.513 --> 00:07:00.456 - you may have them. Oh there it is. Sorry this this um may be a problem. Do you want to join are you 00:07:00.456 --> 00:07:02.398 - wait for me or 00:07:02.978 --> 00:07:30.046 - It's not letting me have administrative access, which apparently you need to be able to share. 00:07:31.874 --> 00:07:43.601 - 13th is expected. You know, I think that we haven't been on Friday the 13th last month too, because 00:07:43.601 --> 00:07:55.798 - like February. Yeah, I've got it on my screen, it just won't let me share. It's been a really long time 00:07:55.798 --> 00:08:00.606 - since I shared my screen on Zoom too, so 00:08:00.866 --> 00:08:27.812 - We're going to talk to you as well. OK. Can I ask a question one more? Yeah. So $3 million deficit in 00:08:27.812 --> 00:08:30.718 - operation. 00:08:30.914 --> 00:08:39.727 - seven and a half to get Broadway's. What's in getting Broadway's interested? There's multiple things. 00:08:39.727 --> 00:08:48.712 - I think it's really just like ongoing vehicles, certain spending on infrastructure, just typical thing. 00:08:48.712 --> 00:08:58.302 - I do have a list that I could queue up in the long-term plan. Now, it's not always immediately obvious either. 00:08:59.522 --> 00:09:09.420 - There we go. The most common items are the road infrastructure and certain buildings. But it isn't the 00:09:09.420 --> 00:09:19.125 - same every single year with projects range. Those are the type of projects that we're talking about. 00:09:19.125 --> 00:09:28.542 - Most of that is not specific projects because a lot of your specific projects are labeled in your 00:09:28.930 --> 00:09:37.567 - in your lawns. It's really just the ongoing stuff that's needed. Deedles, certain road repairs, things 00:09:37.567 --> 00:09:45.952 - like that. That Nathan Steinberg doesn't know. Does he? Yeah. Maybe after. Yes. Well, we've got the 00:09:45.952 --> 00:09:54.422 - lit documents projected, and this is on the council website. All right, so I don't even know if it's 00:09:54.422 --> 00:09:58.782 - proven to discuss the history of Sudendol that one. 00:09:58.946 --> 00:10:06.939 - Uh, I guess I can start there. So originally when Senate rule that one became wall, which was not this 00:10:06.939 --> 00:10:14.854 - legislative session with the last, so 2025, but there was a, essentially it was separating the county 00:10:14.854 --> 00:10:23.080 - services liberate from the city and town services liberate. And also there was a separate fire and that's 00:10:23.080 --> 00:10:26.494 - liberate. And also there was an option for. 00:10:27.042 --> 00:10:33.724 - units that were under 3,500 in population that the county could set a rate for those units. So House 00:10:33.724 --> 00:10:40.736 - Enroll Act 1210 is actually now allowing any and all cities and towns to opt into the countywide services 00:10:40.736 --> 00:10:47.352 - loop rate. At the same time, the DLGS produced a different formula to calculate how that's going to 00:10:47.352 --> 00:10:53.438 - be distributed to units. I'm sorry, I think you're going to want to spell out the acronyms. 00:10:53.666 --> 00:11:01.403 - We have members like DLGF. Yeah, sorry. So DLGF, Department of Government Finance, essentially they 00:11:01.403 --> 00:11:09.218 - kind of regulate all the things that you just have to do for the budgets. That's really the best way 00:11:09.218 --> 00:11:17.342 - to describe them. They're handing assessments, all that sort of thing. They're basically the enforcement 00:11:17.342 --> 00:11:21.598 - wing of the SPOA. State Board of Accounts. Oh my gosh. 00:11:22.082 --> 00:11:30.048 - It occurs to me, I have my copy this morning. And when I say LID, I mean local income tax. So if you're 00:11:30.048 --> 00:11:37.785 - working, you pay a tax on the local side, and the state side, and the federal side, I hope. Okay, so 00:11:37.785 --> 00:11:45.521 - where was I? Okay, HEA, when I say HEA, that just means House Enrolled Act. If I say SEA, that means 00:11:45.521 --> 00:11:50.270 - Senate Enrolled Act, which is really just what portion of the 00:11:50.882 --> 00:11:59.910 - Indiana General Assembly has signed it and made a beneficial document that's in our law. So House Enrollment 00:11:59.910 --> 00:12:08.192 - 1210, again, changed the calculation for any of the units that opt in to what is now being called a 00:12:08.192 --> 00:12:16.806 - countywide municipal services local income tax rate. And that's essentially what this sheet is showing, 00:12:16.806 --> 00:12:19.870 - how that calculation is broken down. 00:12:21.058 --> 00:12:27.459 - I will say right off the bat, the good thing about this calculation is there really isn't a margin of 00:12:27.459 --> 00:12:34.299 - error. The calculation is what it is. The only margin of error you're going to see in this is the assumption 00:12:34.299 --> 00:12:40.574 - of a 1% annual total debt available in the county, 1% growth every year that we assume in that 2029 00:12:40.574 --> 00:12:46.912 - river. So really, that's going to be the only margin of error in the House and Rollback 1, House and 00:12:46.912 --> 00:12:48.606 - Rollback 1210 calculation. 00:12:50.626 --> 00:12:58.547 - So the way it works now, you will take, now actually, I will also say, I'm fairly certain the statute 00:12:58.547 --> 00:13:06.312 - didn't specifically say that it was 2020 census population. So they may be able to use the honor of 00:13:06.312 --> 00:13:14.388 - state, whatever those estimates are every year, which is now actually, sorry, the state of comptroller. 00:13:14.388 --> 00:13:18.814 - So that's called now. But I would anticipate that these, 00:13:18.978 --> 00:13:26.817 - population numbers are not going to be drastically different than the 2020 census amounts. So you take 00:13:26.817 --> 00:13:34.504 - the, you take essentially your percent of the population of all of the cities and towns, so that for 00:13:34.504 --> 00:13:42.191 - Monroe County, that's Bloomington, Ellisville, and Steinsville. Then you determine, so you determine 00:13:42.191 --> 00:13:46.910 - that percentage. And then you take that times one and a half, 00:13:48.162 --> 00:13:54.598 - So whatever your percentage is of all the cities and towns, you take that number times one and a half, 00:13:54.598 --> 00:14:00.909 - and that essentially gives you more share of that total county municipal services, local income tax. 00:14:00.909 --> 00:14:07.532 - That's how it works now. That's how it works under House and Rollback 12-2. That is not how it originally 00:14:07.532 --> 00:14:13.843 - worked. Which just passed. Which just passed in the 2026 legislative session. Correct. That will not 00:14:13.843 --> 00:14:17.342 - come on board until 2029. At least that's the way it is 00:14:17.538 --> 00:14:24.444 - worded in current statute, whether or not that gets pushed out another year, who knows, but we have 00:14:24.444 --> 00:14:31.142 - to use the assumption that it's a law, so it's going to go into effect in 2020. And it was 2028. 00:14:31.142 --> 00:14:38.669 - It was 2028, but it was pushed back a year in house and electoral activity. So once you do that calculation, 00:14:38.669 --> 00:14:46.334 - essentially what you end up with is the city essentially taking 85% of that total pool of open-air loan debts. 00:14:50.018 --> 00:14:58.736 - If you wanted to determine, and anyone from the public who has to do this, if you wanted to determine 00:14:58.736 --> 00:15:07.368 - how it came up with the total amount available, go to the state board of accounts, so the sba.in.gov 00:15:07.368 --> 00:15:14.974 - website, look at the local income tax rates, and essentially you take your current rate, 00:15:16.514 --> 00:15:23.813 - divided by, sorry, you would take the dollar amount currently that you have for Litt Certified Shares, 00:15:23.813 --> 00:15:30.899 - total county-wide, Seminole County, divided by the rate times the new rate, which would be 1.2%. So 00:15:30.899 --> 00:15:37.986 - let's say that, you know, your point, I don't know the exact number, I wanna say it's .9864 is your 00:15:37.986 --> 00:15:45.214 - rate for Certified Shares, over and over again, Certified Shares currently. So 1.2 obviously is gonna 00:15:45.214 --> 00:15:46.206 - generate more 00:15:46.786 --> 00:15:53.354 - than the current total good available for certified shareholders. Wait, the count, the line underneath 00:15:53.354 --> 00:15:59.730 - the cities, the county unincorporated. Yeah. So that's 1.5 times 38 percent cannot be 7.64 percent. 00:15:59.730 --> 00:16:06.234 - So the county unincorporated area, that would be the county's share. They actually do not get the one 00:16:06.234 --> 00:16:12.801 - and a half multiplier. All they get is the remainder that's left after the cities and towns have taken 00:16:12.801 --> 00:16:13.630 - their cover. 00:16:15.554 --> 00:16:24.105 - So let me just make sure I'm getting this right. Essentially with SEA 1, that formula for the shared 00:16:24.105 --> 00:16:32.741 - service rate was only available to very small municipalities. The balance and the county would get to 00:16:32.741 --> 00:16:41.292 - keep everything else that wasn't taken up by the small municipalities. With the new formula, now any 00:16:41.292 --> 00:16:43.070 - city can opt into it 00:16:43.490 --> 00:16:50.386 - And because of the way that the formula, because of the 1.5 multiplier, the county gets a much smaller 00:16:50.386 --> 00:16:57.147 - share and the cities and towns get a much larger share compared to the way the formula used to work. 00:16:57.147 --> 00:17:03.842 - Is that? Yes, that is exactly how it works, yeah. Okay, can I clarify too for my own understanding? 00:17:03.842 --> 00:17:10.537 - So with the original SCA-1, whatever county that they passed, Bloomington would not have gotten any 00:17:10.537 --> 00:17:12.478 - of it, but then they changed 00:17:13.122 --> 00:17:20.238 - the rules essentially, so now we will. Yes, so this specific type of global income tax, the under $3,500, 00:17:20.238 --> 00:17:27.085 - which is what it used to be. There's a lot of stuff to remember here. This essentially used to be the 00:17:27.085 --> 00:17:33.933 - lit that was available for the cities and towns that were under $3,500 in population. It's now called 00:17:33.933 --> 00:17:40.713 - a countywide municipal services rate. And yes, to your point, going to or not have gotten into that, 00:17:40.713 --> 00:17:41.854 - understand that. 00:17:44.290 --> 00:17:52.502 - Okay, and so the county gets to decide that, though. And is that up to 1.2%? This is where it gets really 00:17:52.502 --> 00:18:00.326 - interesting. This is, yeah, this is where it gets really yes and no that get to decide. There is, as 00:18:00.326 --> 00:18:08.227 - a house and roll that 1210, the county and all the cities and towns can form a task force. They don't 00:18:08.227 --> 00:18:11.326 - have to, but they can form a task force 00:18:11.746 --> 00:18:19.002 - And if there's a unanimous vote on that task force to lock in a local income tax rate for this specific 00:18:19.002 --> 00:18:26.049 - purpose, it's locked into that rate until 2031. So wouldn't it just be the county deciding the rate, 00:18:26.049 --> 00:18:33.235 - it would also be the other units. Now, whether or not a unanimous vote would be reached, we don't know 00:18:33.235 --> 00:18:39.166 - that. So. And so that would be one representative from the county, from Bloomington, 00:18:39.330 --> 00:18:45.915 - Yes, it is the fiscal officers of the cities and towns. Um and it is the one council member from the 00:18:45.915 --> 00:18:53.087 - county council makes up the voting chair that has for us. And so all of those people have to be in agreement. 00:18:53.087 --> 00:18:59.737 - It has to be names. Okay. The fiscal officers in towns. Do you need a controller or do you mean it'll 00:18:59.737 --> 00:19:06.517 - be a controller? Yes. Okay. I think there was a question on. Yeah, we were trying to figure out because 00:19:06.517 --> 00:19:08.734 - they may not have a for treasurer 00:19:09.506 --> 00:19:20.209 - Right. We were thinking they just had a town council. I'm not, don't quote me on this, but I think that 00:19:20.209 --> 00:19:30.604 - would be the town council president in that case, but maybe not. So. All right. So. So that would be 00:19:30.604 --> 00:19:38.014 - to lock in the brain for five years or. Is that four years, four years? 00:19:38.114 --> 00:19:49.009 - But that process has to occur this year. That decision has to be made by October 1st of this year. If 00:19:49.009 --> 00:20:00.224 - we don't do this task force thing, then what? You can still opt into it, but here's where it gets weird. 00:20:00.224 --> 00:20:06.846 - The way it's currently worded, the city would have to resolve 00:20:07.554 --> 00:20:14.065 - So the council would have to vote to want to hop in to this countywide municipal services rate, and 00:20:14.065 --> 00:20:20.641 - then the county would adopt that rate, which obviously is risky. So that knowing what it is, we have 00:20:20.641 --> 00:20:27.152 - to choose whether we're up to here. Yes. In that circumstance. Now, the other thing to that is, you 00:20:27.152 --> 00:20:33.988 - wouldn't have to make that decision until the first of 2028. I mean, that would be the absolute deadline 00:20:33.988 --> 00:20:35.486 - to make that decision. 00:20:36.802 --> 00:20:45.884 - You don't have to opt into it, but if you opt into it, if it's at the 1.2% rate, which is the max rate, 00:20:45.884 --> 00:20:54.792 - you stand to be in a much better position financially. Did you say October 1st? 2028. 2028, okay. And 00:20:54.792 --> 00:21:03.525 - that's if this group cannot come to a unanimous decision about it, then they're like, it's like two 00:21:03.525 --> 00:21:05.534 - paths. It's two paths. 00:21:05.698 --> 00:21:16.231 - Yeah, so it's a little congregated. Yes. So this is a task force. It is calling task force. I believe 00:21:16.231 --> 00:21:26.868 - the acronym is must. And they need to agree unanimously on what? The rate? The countywide local income 00:21:26.868 --> 00:21:35.646 - tax services rate. Yes, the maximum that rate can be is 1.2%. But the city still has 00:21:36.226 --> 00:21:43.354 - If they don't opt-in to the county-wide services, they still have the ability to implement their own, 00:21:43.354 --> 00:21:50.342 - their income tax rate on top of Bloomington residents' own. Correct. But you're going to talk about 00:21:50.342 --> 00:21:57.401 - the numbers. Yeah. If we opt-in, we would still be able to put an additional? No. No, if you opt-in, 00:21:57.401 --> 00:22:04.389 - it replaces it. That's where it gets, yeah. I will say opting in, if you opt-in, let's say the task 00:22:04.389 --> 00:22:06.206 - force doesn't go through, 00:22:06.338 --> 00:22:13.539 - You can't get a unanimous, unanimous opinion. You would still be locked in for three years. So you don't 00:22:13.539 --> 00:22:20.466 - have to make the decision until 2028, but if you do make the decision to opt in, you'll be locked in 00:22:20.466 --> 00:22:27.599 - for three years. Now, the county wouldn't be able to change it until 2031. So whatever rate they choose 00:22:27.599 --> 00:22:34.526 - would be locked in. But after 2031, every single unit has to readopt the lip rate every single year. 00:22:34.658 --> 00:22:42.631 - Oh, my God. That's the way it's worded in statute. There's a de minimis protection in there, where if 00:22:42.631 --> 00:22:50.760 - you have obligations to bonds with lit dollars, that exact amount and exact rate is like a minimum that 00:22:50.760 --> 00:22:58.732 - the BLJP will forget to adopt a lit rate. I'm sorry, you said in which scenario do we have to approve 00:22:58.732 --> 00:23:03.422 - the lit rate every year? After 2031, every unit has to read 00:23:04.482 --> 00:23:11.368 - Okay, but and before 2031? Before 2031, whatever decision you made. Task force? On whether, I mean, 00:23:11.368 --> 00:23:18.322 - task force or not. If you, essentially, if you opt in, you're stuck in that for three years. The opt 00:23:18.322 --> 00:23:25.552 - in language, is that just if we don't have the task force, then each municipality can opt in? All right, 00:23:25.552 --> 00:23:32.645 - it means you- That language also comes- It means you can opt in and Ellis will opt in because you have 00:23:32.645 --> 00:23:34.366 - a population over 3,500. 00:23:34.946 --> 00:23:43.660 - Steinsville cannot. They're under the county's control in this scenario. But when you're saying opt-in, 00:23:43.660 --> 00:23:52.375 - is that something we have to decide if the task force can not unanimously agree? Yes. If the task force 00:23:52.375 --> 00:24:00.754 - unanimously agrees, it's presumed that we are opting in? Or is that still logistically so? No, that 00:24:00.754 --> 00:24:02.430 - would be automatic. 00:24:02.786 --> 00:24:08.783 - It's automatic, but that once that decision is made, yeah, once that decision is made and sent to the 00:24:08.783 --> 00:24:14.840 - DLJF on October 1st of this year, yes, that would be the DLJF's presumption that you're locked in with 00:24:14.840 --> 00:24:20.719 - that. And so it's literally four people, one from Ellisville, one from Wilmington, Steinsville, and 00:24:20.719 --> 00:24:24.894 - County Council. That's how the bills were against. And can those folks 00:24:25.026 --> 00:24:31.711 - We'll have some conversations. Oh, absolutely. I mean, I'm a full three. And A, accelerate municipalities. 00:24:31.711 --> 00:24:38.522 - They want the cities to pass. They've been all over this. They've been instructing local units of government 00:24:38.522 --> 00:24:44.957 - to work all of the governing bodies to work together to come to that decision. But one of the problems 00:24:44.957 --> 00:24:51.268 - from the way I see it is just that because the county gets less than they would have under the other 00:24:51.268 --> 00:24:54.142 - rules, they have less of an incentive to want 00:24:54.466 --> 00:25:03.084 - uh you know to bring to the to the higher rate right that is true i will say monroe county um just based 00:25:03.084 --> 00:25:11.455 - on because we had to run every single parcel to do the city's impact we also have the county's impact 00:25:11.455 --> 00:25:19.990 - and the county is fine with just their own 1.2 percent local income tax rate they can do on top of this 00:25:19.990 --> 00:25:24.094 - so so like i said not not as much of an incentive 00:25:24.386 --> 00:25:34.242 - County and they add 1.2% above the agreed upon. So if you I keep using work often if you choose to go 00:25:34.242 --> 00:25:44.002 - down the path of going with the countywide municipal services rate. You're locked into whatever rate 00:25:44.002 --> 00:25:53.278 - that is. The county and then do their own up to 1.2% rating on all the taxpayers in the county. 00:25:53.570 --> 00:26:03.209 - that only they do. The city cannot be read. So for us, it's a fork in the road. It's either we opt into 00:26:03.209 --> 00:26:12.569 - the municipal, right, the shared municipal services countywide, or the city adopts its own literate. 00:26:12.569 --> 00:26:21.374 - But it's not public. Yes. Yes. And are you on? Go ahead. So functionally, the maximum literate 00:26:21.538 --> 00:26:29.483 - Countywide is 2.4%. If we adopted the shared 1.2 in the county cap, adopted another 1.2 on top of that. 00:26:29.483 --> 00:26:37.351 - It was actually 2.9%. 2.9, it was the other 1.5, the fire EMS. Yeah, so there's an additional 0.4% for 00:26:37.351 --> 00:26:45.143 - fire EMS that can go in there. And there's also, I believe it's up to 0.2 for non-musical units. Now, 00:26:45.143 --> 00:26:51.102 - obviously that would give us the three, so you have to cut some of them, 5.1. 00:26:51.682 --> 00:26:56.977 - And that 1.2, the county can pass on top, that would still be collecting county-wide in every county 00:26:56.977 --> 00:27:02.377 - resident, not just one incorporated. Every single county resident that's staying in the compacts would 00:27:02.377 --> 00:27:07.776 - pay that amount, and it would go to only the county. So the county, from its motivational perspective, 00:27:07.776 --> 00:27:13.543 - with respect to this shared consensus approach, they'd get less, but they have the option to pass additional. 00:27:13.543 --> 00:27:18.943 - So they can certainly make themselves whole, so to speak, to whatever level. They get more flexibility 00:27:18.943 --> 00:27:20.830 - there. The downside is they have to 00:27:21.218 --> 00:27:28.010 - justify and explain to constituents and all the rest that wife total their grade is higher, essentially. 00:27:28.010 --> 00:27:34.609 - And so there's a perception also. So yeah, okay. And you refer to making them whole. My understanding 00:27:34.609 --> 00:27:41.337 - is in the numbers you're showing is that the county would be more than whole. Yes. No matter what. It's 00:27:41.337 --> 00:27:47.935 - a poor phrase I could use, I guess. Go to what they feel like they need. Right. So we go back to what 00:27:47.935 --> 00:27:50.846 - we were saying initially about the deficits. 00:27:50.978 --> 00:27:58.246 - of the city's general fund. If we do get the opt-in, essentially what this shows is that if we opt-in 00:27:58.246 --> 00:28:05.372 - to the 1.2%, we essentially make up for the deficit. It's really close. For the first few years, we 00:28:05.372 --> 00:28:12.497 - actually completely make up for it. And later on in the years, we basically break even if we do get 00:28:12.497 --> 00:28:20.478 - the opt-in. Currently, we're at this number 41.5. That's our expected. There was no top 10, yes? Correct. Yeah. 00:28:20.962 --> 00:28:28.296 - With that, I see a one in the HEA 1210. The local income tax that we were projected to receive in 2029 00:28:28.296 --> 00:28:35.772 - is 41.5. We do get the opt-in with a max of 1.2%. We get a 48. That's an over $7 million increase, which 00:28:35.772 --> 00:28:43.035 - again, as Tim mentioned earlier, that'll more than make up. That'll just about make up for the city's 00:28:43.035 --> 00:28:47.806 - general fund deficits. So where are you doing that? Oh, I'm sorry. 00:28:48.418 --> 00:28:59.278 - It's in the very bottom. Yeah, so node five on the bottom. Yes. So, but you're saying that it would be that 1.2% 00:28:59.278 --> 00:29:08.986 - service, like income tax service rate, right? But that group could, in theory, make that lower. Yes, 00:29:08.986 --> 00:29:12.830 - absolutely. If it was a unanimous vote. 00:29:13.378 --> 00:29:20.390 - And then even if it was lower, the city would still not be able to put anything else on top of that, 00:29:20.390 --> 00:29:27.680 - right? Like you could opt into a lower rate, then we're still stuck at a lower rate. Correct. So there's 00:29:27.680 --> 00:29:34.623 - certainly some risk involved there. And I think it's important to share with them what your numbers 00:29:34.623 --> 00:29:41.566 - show if the city went our own way and adopted even to the max, the 1.2% that we're allowed to. Yes. 00:29:45.794 --> 00:29:55.362 - I guess maybe that will give me the answer to what I was swelling. Is that what was your, what were 00:29:55.362 --> 00:30:05.121 - you going to ask? All right. The last three columns there, that's where the rubber hits the road. The 00:30:05.121 --> 00:30:15.454 - city's impact is highlighted in green. Again, to Justin's point, under the countywide services lit in 2029, 00:30:15.618 --> 00:30:22.501 - Now remember, we're assuming 1% growth every year, so 26, 27, 28, 29, so that's four years of compound 00:30:22.501 --> 00:30:29.250 - 1% growth. We're sitting at about 48.9 million of local income tax that can be projected to receive. 00:30:29.250 --> 00:30:36.067 - Now again, the only margin of error in this calculation is our growth factor. The calculation is what 00:30:36.067 --> 00:30:42.014 - it is that's provided by the Department of Local Government Finance. We can't change it. 00:30:44.834 --> 00:30:52.632 - The reason why I say margin of error is because if you look to the next column, that is your projected 00:30:52.632 --> 00:31:00.734 - maximum of 2029 live. If the city does its own local income tax on only its taxpayers within its corporate 00:31:00.734 --> 00:31:08.532 - boundaries. Now, there's a margin of error in this calculation because we had to use 2020 census data. 00:31:08.532 --> 00:31:12.318 - So back into your adjusted gross income for 2020, 00:31:12.994 --> 00:31:21.206 - and then grow that to 2026 and then make an estimate between on top of that. So there's essentially 00:31:21.206 --> 00:31:29.910 - three layers of potential projecting margins of error, if that makes sense. But I'm gonna say that during 00:31:29.910 --> 00:31:38.450 - this last general assembly session, a lot of us have received information from AIM with just very rough 00:31:38.450 --> 00:31:41.406 - estimates of how much we would lose 00:31:41.730 --> 00:31:48.658 - under the current system. And we were seeing estimates of around $10 million and you're showing nine 00:31:48.658 --> 00:31:55.586 - something. So that, I mean, your estimates are close to the very rough ones that we have seen before 00:31:55.586 --> 00:32:02.583 - that. So just for clarity then, us creating our own rate, only taxes that people within our corporate 00:32:02.583 --> 00:32:09.785 - boundaries could opt in for county rate, taxes everybody in the county and then spills out the pie based 00:32:09.785 --> 00:32:10.814 - on population. 00:32:11.938 --> 00:32:20.264 - Yes, and this is publicly available information. The average adjusted gross household income is higher 00:32:20.264 --> 00:32:28.348 - in the county than in the city. So what does that translate into as far as lit revenues? Is it more 00:32:28.348 --> 00:32:31.582 - beneficial for us to carry opt-in? Yes. 00:32:31.746 --> 00:32:39.081 - So that's the opt-in is the $45 million. It's about the non-opt-in is the $32 million. And that non-opt-in 00:32:39.081 --> 00:32:46.005 - number also includes that 0.4%. That also includes the 0.4, which is under county's control as well. 00:32:46.005 --> 00:32:52.928 - Right, but the county opt-in rate does not include that 0.4%. It does not. Oh. So just so everyone's 00:32:52.928 --> 00:32:59.852 - aware, that would be an additional roughly $10 million on top of this $6 million surplus, basically, 00:32:59.852 --> 00:33:01.566 - for life, a better term. 00:33:02.178 --> 00:33:09.687 - All right, so it could potentially be, you know, as high as a $26 million difference on your local income 00:33:09.687 --> 00:33:16.771 - tax. But that would mean also that the countywide rate could be lower than 1.2%. Correct. And still 00:33:16.771 --> 00:33:23.997 - it blooms. Yeah, so there, to your point, there is some negotiation room in there, right? Because the 00:33:23.997 --> 00:33:31.294 - rate doesn't have, we don't have to max out the rate to 1.9%. So that is a good thing to keep in mind. 00:33:33.730 --> 00:33:43.987 - Just to reiterate, the county has total control over the fire EMS for what portion the city gets. The 00:33:43.987 --> 00:33:54.043 - portion the city gets is a calculation. The county doesn't have control over the distribution, they 00:33:54.043 --> 00:34:02.590 - have control over what the rate is. The distribution is by population? Yes, sort of. 00:34:03.298 --> 00:34:11.530 - Really it's the area that your fire protection serves and population. Like it's a combined. It's a combined. 00:34:11.530 --> 00:34:19.159 - It's too variable. It's too variable. Yes. Now there was, there was a rescinded rule that one, a 20X 00:34:19.159 --> 00:34:27.089 - multiplier on the service area function of that population that has been reviewed. So it's just straight 00:34:27.089 --> 00:34:31.998 - up now, 50% of the space and population, big percentage based on 00:34:33.026 --> 00:34:40.621 - service area. It used to be much more rural biased and now that bias has been. Yes. For Monroe County's 00:34:40.621 --> 00:34:48.216 - case, for the city's case, essentially, I believe it was roughly half a million dollars that would have 00:34:48.216 --> 00:34:55.738 - went to you was actually going from Monroe Fire Architecture. I understand it for that one, but that's 00:34:55.738 --> 00:35:02.238 - the wrong case. Just while we're talking about that fire EMS rate, that does or does not 00:35:02.690 --> 00:35:12.340 - include dispatch. Does anybody have an answer? I don't believe dispatch is included in the language. 00:35:12.340 --> 00:35:21.991 - It's just fire area and now emergency medical services area, so ambulance services included in that. 00:35:21.991 --> 00:35:30.686 - Which we don't have any MS, right? The county does, right? No. I mean, there's Monroe Fire 00:35:30.946 --> 00:35:39.084 - protection district does provide some DNS services. Yeah, so they would probably, so they'd probably 00:35:39.084 --> 00:35:47.223 - get a little bit of a boost there in that formula. But I don't know if it would be quite the happily 00:35:47.223 --> 00:35:55.925 - dollars that it wasn't for. But it's no substitute for PSList, because that covered the lease and dispatch. 00:35:55.925 --> 00:35:59.390 - Correct. Yeah, I mean, we found those from 00:36:01.634 --> 00:36:08.308 - either leg or property bench. Yeah. So then the county also coordinated with that. So that's just another 00:36:08.308 --> 00:36:14.856 - thing that we need to figure out. And that's a negotiating point. Yeah, that's not a negotiating point. 00:36:14.856 --> 00:36:21.340 - It's right now you guys have a state agreement with the county for PSAP and it's untenable under House 00:36:21.340 --> 00:36:25.118 - and World Act 1210. You lose $10 million in impacts. Right. 00:36:25.282 --> 00:36:32.355 - For the PSAP. For the PSAP, yeah. PSAP is gone, public safety list is gone, non-development list is 00:36:32.355 --> 00:36:39.569 - gone. It's all just one. But in terms of the lit number you have down here, which is 41 million, that 00:36:39.569 --> 00:36:46.783 - includes- That was all of your- That's all of our lit together, including PSLit. Correct. For lack of 00:36:46.783 --> 00:36:54.846 - a better word, shared or county, it was spent on a shared resource. Yes. Just to clarify the terminology we used, 00:36:55.074 --> 00:37:04.697 - PS lit is different from PSAP lit. They are two separate rates, and they're two separate funds. They 00:37:04.697 --> 00:37:14.224 - both get lost. Yeah. PSAP is new. No. No. We manage a different. It used to get thrown in a PS lit, 00:37:14.224 --> 00:37:24.990 - and now it's its own fund. But that, yeah. That's what I meant by new. It gets separated out in a different way. 00:37:25.250 --> 00:37:33.901 - I don't know that anyone's mentioned what he said is public safety access point. That's all your dispatch. 00:37:33.901 --> 00:37:42.310 - You're not only dispatched. So. So is it advisable to think about unifying the fire department? Please. 00:37:42.310 --> 00:37:50.234 - You know, right now. That different fire service service providers become. They've been unifying. 00:37:50.234 --> 00:37:53.630 - I mean, one or five protection districts. 00:37:54.082 --> 00:37:59.709 - coverage most of it is that Alexville still has their own. Alexville and Richmond Township are still 00:37:59.709 --> 00:38:05.335 - out of Richmond. I mean, Alexville provides fire service to Richmond. And then I think Bean Blossom, 00:38:05.335 --> 00:38:11.018 - I don't remember where Bean Blossom is. Like, I know there was some developments recently and I don't 00:38:11.018 --> 00:38:16.700 - remember whether they're going with Alexville or the district. Bean Blossom has signs, includes signs 00:38:16.700 --> 00:38:20.990 - of that. Yeah. Well, it just seems to me, I mean, you're already going about 00:38:21.698 --> 00:38:28.865 - population versus area coverage and things like that. And it's been trending more to the population 00:38:28.865 --> 00:38:36.176 - since it was the area. So being an incentive for the county, again, another incentive, well, being an 00:38:36.176 --> 00:38:43.415 - incentive for them to unify seems to me, it's my opinion. I don't remember the number off the top of 00:38:43.415 --> 00:38:50.654 - my head, but the Monroe Fire Protection District does serve a large percentage of county population. 00:38:51.010 --> 00:38:58.292 - obviously it's not serving the city. It's serving nearly everyone that isn't in the city. So. Can I 00:38:58.292 --> 00:39:06.229 - go back to something we said at the beginning of the meeting? Yes. You said, you've talked about a five-year 00:39:06.229 --> 00:39:13.729 - capital improvement plan. You said there's a $3 million deficit projector in the general fund. Is that 00:39:13.729 --> 00:39:20.574 - for this year? Yes, that is based on current budgets and current revenue projections we have. 00:39:20.962 --> 00:39:30.661 - That's in the general fund overall. Yes. And so we can't really make that up until this list of changes. 00:39:30.661 --> 00:39:38.974 - We can and then we will touch on that after after the conversation. There are other ways. 00:39:40.610 --> 00:39:49.040 - So we should want to make a note of time right now. Yeah, because we have an hour kind of slotted for 00:39:49.040 --> 00:39:57.553 - this kind of this meeting this morning. And we need to have a period of over time. This was all really 00:39:57.553 --> 00:40:05.900 - interesting. Yeah, sure. Should I I'm screen sharing this right now. Should I screen share something 00:40:05.900 --> 00:40:08.958 - different? Please screen share this. 00:40:09.058 --> 00:40:17.177 - Okay, there should be three pages in this one. That was initial. That was what was the original. Yes. 00:40:17.177 --> 00:40:25.216 - Okay. Um, so while we, while we pull that up, I think from the previous lit conversation, we can see 00:40:25.216 --> 00:40:33.494 - that a lot of it does hinge on the county. Um, depending on our negotiations with them, it could really 00:40:33.494 --> 00:40:35.006 - go either way. So, 00:40:35.394 --> 00:40:41.386 - What we're going to talk about next is the city's debts and how we could use that to alleviate that 00:40:41.386 --> 00:40:47.797 - $3 million deficit this year that we mentioned. And keep in mind that $3 million deficit, like I mentioned 00:40:47.797 --> 00:40:54.029 - earlier, that's actually already taking about $7 million in capital out of it. So if we keep $7 million 00:40:54.029 --> 00:41:00.140 - in capital within the general fund, that 3 million actually turns into 10 million. And I think it was 00:41:00.140 --> 00:41:01.758 - a few years down the road. 00:41:02.114 --> 00:41:09.363 - and had $9 million deficit sold out in terms of $16 million. So I want to talk about it with the city's 00:41:09.363 --> 00:41:16.334 - debt, which is on the screen now that actually this is all on the city. I believe you guys have all 00:41:16.334 --> 00:41:23.304 - done the debt process, right? But you guys are all familiar with the process. Essentially what this 00:41:23.304 --> 00:41:29.438 - page is showing is, I'm sorry, I'll try to be fast so we can have public comments time. 00:41:29.538 --> 00:41:37.603 - What this is showing is what the city debt limits are. We were limited in how much debt we could issue. 00:41:37.603 --> 00:41:45.512 - For each district, it's a third of 2% of net assessed values. Now the city technically has the city's 00:41:45.512 --> 00:41:53.577 - geo limit. The city has a park and redevelopment district, so they each have their own separate limits. 00:41:53.577 --> 00:41:58.462 - So you see, we have the geo calculation, the park, and the RD. 00:41:58.626 --> 00:42:05.444 - follow the same, a third of 2%. So that gets us to the $36.5 million. The city currently has three city 00:42:05.444 --> 00:42:12.131 - general obligation bonds and three park district general obligation bonds. And there's nothing in the 00:42:12.131 --> 00:42:18.753 - leader moment district. So if we look again, if we go by column, if we take out the three bonds that 00:42:18.753 --> 00:42:25.374 - are currently outstanding with the city general obligation, we have $28 million left to spend there. 00:42:25.730 --> 00:42:32.625 - The park has twenty three million dollars left and because the district has does not have one issue 00:42:32.625 --> 00:42:39.795 - towards it. There are thirty six point five million dollars. So that is to say, if we issue a bond near 00:42:39.795 --> 00:42:46.897 - the end of this year, we have total roughly about ninety seven million dollars of limits that we could 00:42:46.897 --> 00:42:49.310 - use now. Yes, it's reflected here. 00:42:49.762 --> 00:42:55.954 - TIP bond is paid by solely TIP revenues, not property tax backed, then no, they're not. But if it's 00:42:55.954 --> 00:43:02.146 - backed by property tax, then they would be included. But most TIP bonds, the TIP bonds are all paid 00:43:02.146 --> 00:43:08.586 - for by TIP revenues only. And just to also clarify, the Convention Center, which is the least purchased 00:43:08.586 --> 00:43:14.841 - paid for by food and beverage tax, doesn't count towards any of our debt. Correct. It wouldn't count 00:43:14.841 --> 00:43:18.494 - towards this. And another note to make is, yes, we have 97 00:43:18.594 --> 00:43:25.808 - million dollars in limit, that doesn't mean we necessarily can issue a $97 million worth of bonds this 00:43:25.808 --> 00:43:32.951 - year, because there are other constraints, right? If we look under that, we have some rate thresholds 00:43:32.951 --> 00:43:40.305 - that we have to meet. The first column right under the $28, $23, and $36 million, you'll see the current 00:43:40.305 --> 00:43:42.686 - rate that each of those districts 00:43:43.074 --> 00:43:50.437 - Yeah, I was about to say, I think I have to scroll down right now. You can see the first one. So you 00:43:50.437 --> 00:43:58.238 - see that 0.053 and 0.0338. So those are the rates that are currently levy on the city's general obligation 00:43:58.238 --> 00:44:06.112 - limit and the parts obligation limit. As you know, when I made a change to the thresholds, so the potential 00:44:06.112 --> 00:44:12.382 - remonstrance thresholds means that we issue a bond while our rates is above 25 cents. 00:44:12.642 --> 00:44:20.208 - there's a petition remonstrance. If it's over 40 cents, then it goes automatically to referendum. The 00:44:20.208 --> 00:44:27.773 - news is for the city, we're currently under both those rates for all three of our limits, so we don't 00:44:27.773 --> 00:44:35.264 - have to worry about that right now. But let's say we issue a park bond this year, and that rate goes 00:44:35.264 --> 00:44:42.014 - up to six cents in 2027. If we were to issue another park general obligation debt in 2027, 00:44:42.466 --> 00:44:49.581 - we would have to go through petition remonstrance steps. And the bond council will help the city with 00:44:49.581 --> 00:44:56.836 - that. But those are things to keep in mind. Yes, we have $97 million in debt limit. We can't just issue 00:44:56.836 --> 00:45:04.161 - $97 million. And on top of this, we also have project control, project thresholds. So a project is over, 00:45:04.161 --> 00:45:11.486 - I want to say, $28.6 million. That automatically goes to referendum, even if we're under the debt limit. 00:45:11.714 --> 00:45:18.132 - Some other things, some other items to think about when we look at this. Is there any questions on this 00:45:18.132 --> 00:45:24.427 - page? I know I went through them really fast. And you can hit those three dots there. And I hate this 00:45:24.427 --> 00:45:30.599 - new AI feature. Sorry, I'm taking notes on this on my other page. I actually can't see that. It's a 00:45:30.599 --> 00:45:36.956 - really acrobat AI feature. I've been in it. I've gone into studies and pulled it to never do that. And 00:45:36.956 --> 00:45:39.486 - it's still sometimes. It drives me nuts. 00:45:40.130 --> 00:45:48.418 - So this is a question for probably for Jeff. So the redevelopment, what does CDL say? Institutional 00:45:48.418 --> 00:45:56.789 - Debt Limit. So that's the third of two percent I was talking about. We don't have any of those kinds 00:45:56.789 --> 00:46:05.160 - of debts. Are we set up that we could? What is that? Why don't we use that? So I'm going to ask Jeff 00:46:05.160 --> 00:46:07.646 - to answer that. You go first. 00:46:08.482 --> 00:46:16.260 - We can. The city does have a new redevelopment district. Yes, but we haven't used it yet. That's property 00:46:16.260 --> 00:46:24.111 - tax backed as opposed to TIF revenue backed. Yes, it will still be property tax backed. The one additional 00:46:24.111 --> 00:46:31.008 - step is during the bond process, it has to go through the REC as well. But I was going to say 00:46:31.008 --> 00:46:35.998 - the redevelopment commission already has, I mean, they have several 00:46:36.258 --> 00:46:43.645 - and they're outstanding. And they have several major projects that they are working on, including Hopewell, 00:46:43.645 --> 00:46:50.895 - not just South, but you know, all of Hopewell and Summit District, as well as the police station project. 00:46:50.895 --> 00:46:58.009 - Yes. So, you know, I want to specify, if we do an RD bond, it doesn't have to do really deal with their 00:46:58.009 --> 00:47:05.054 - revenues. It's just under the reader bond. And in terms of public debt, we have utility funds as well. 00:47:05.794 --> 00:47:18.989 - Yeah. I know, but I'm just thinking about that. And we both on those bonds, we both on utilities bonds. 00:47:18.989 --> 00:47:31.422 - Well, I mean, regarding expansion of that. I guess I'm not supposed to say any. Yeah. In terms of 00:47:32.098 --> 00:47:38.440 - bonds at all, though, as they want to change some of the bond rules. Yes. But are we like kind of good 00:47:38.440 --> 00:47:44.720 - with that right now? Like we could issue like a new general obligation bond last year for a bond, but 00:47:44.720 --> 00:47:50.877 - we could then share the gap. So one of the changes is actually the rates that I'm showing there and 00:47:50.877 --> 00:47:57.527 - I discussed previously. So on that, on that side, we're good. Regarding there's, I believe you're referring 00:47:57.527 --> 00:48:01.406 - to like the cooling off period in the next amount of years. So 00:48:02.082 --> 00:48:09.921 - a non-legal council, a bond council would be who would, who can answer these questions and give an opinion. 00:48:09.921 --> 00:48:17.397 - But what we've seen is if we, if the city issues a debt under one year of maturity, then the next bond 00:48:17.397 --> 00:48:24.874 - issue has to be over five years. If that next bond is not over five years, let's say it's three years, 00:48:24.874 --> 00:48:29.374 - then that three year bond needs to have a cooling off period. 00:48:30.178 --> 00:48:36.619 - But if we issue bonds that are over, so two, three, four, five, six years, right now we do a lot of 00:48:36.619 --> 00:48:43.382 - six-year bonds, and then every three years we do another rotating bond, so sort of two six-year rotating 00:48:43.382 --> 00:48:50.273 - bonds every three years. So in other words, we could do, say, a six-year parts bond to repair and maintain 00:48:50.273 --> 00:48:56.907 - current capital assets. Correct. We could do a six-year, and we could even do a three-year parts bond. 00:48:56.907 --> 00:48:59.870 - We could have that discussion as we look into 00:48:59.970 --> 00:49:06.844 - Um, any bond issuances, but yes, we'll give you a six year, six year parts loan. Yes. Um, yeah. Yes. 00:49:06.844 --> 00:49:13.786 - Uh, Jeff, you were expressing, um, the, the, the number of things that RDC is managing. Was that more 00:49:13.786 --> 00:49:21.137 - about the capacity to oversee and administer projects versus the financial component of it? I was extending 00:49:21.137 --> 00:49:26.718 - a reservation about it. Oh, yeah, that's, that's different. Well, right. But, um, 00:49:28.578 --> 00:49:34.135 - I was I was inferring that you were making the argument that we wouldn't want to do a redevelopment 00:49:34.135 --> 00:49:39.858 - property tax backed bonds because of the sheer volume of stuff they're doing. I could have been wrong. 00:49:39.858 --> 00:49:45.859 - Another reason you were sharing that. No, I guess I'm maybe not as as I don't have as good an understanding 00:49:45.859 --> 00:49:47.582 - of the redevelopment district. 00:49:47.746 --> 00:49:52.931 - General property tax bonds. That's not something we've done here as far as I know. So you're just letting 00:49:52.931 --> 00:49:57.970 - us know. Here's all the things they're doing. Yeah. Yeah, I'm saying that the tiff revenue was reading 00:49:57.970 --> 00:50:02.960 - into it. Okay. The tip revenue is pretty tapped out. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Um, yes. And again, like 00:50:02.960 --> 00:50:07.950 - I mentioned, the real district, it sounds like has already seen different means, but we could, it can 00:50:07.950 --> 00:50:09.662 - be set up in a way where it's only 00:50:10.466 --> 00:50:16.909 - property tax. So there'll be a new rate, be a rate of non-industry bond rate. So we wouldn't tap into 00:50:16.909 --> 00:50:23.351 - any of that. So it doesn't go against the civil city's constitutional debt limit, but it still raises 00:50:23.351 --> 00:50:29.667 - taxes for, it still raises taxes. Correct. So yeah, we'll see, right now there isn't any, but if we 00:50:29.667 --> 00:50:36.110 - look at that current rate, if we were to issue an RD property tax bond, there will be a rate in their 00:50:36.110 --> 00:50:37.310 - tax on the cities. 00:50:37.634 --> 00:50:44.053 - You're basically telling us we're nowhere near our constitutional deadline. We're very far off. 00:50:44.053 --> 00:50:50.872 - On that note, there's maybe a couple of members of the public online. Let's just take a pause. I feel 00:50:50.872 --> 00:50:57.826 - like we've arrived at the stopping point because we really have to stop. But if there is anybody online 00:50:57.826 --> 00:51:02.974 - that would like to make a comment, I see somebody already raised their hand. 00:51:03.234 --> 00:51:07.721 - Go ahead and start when you're unmuted and you'll have three minutes, but I'm timing on my watch and 00:51:07.721 --> 00:51:12.297 - you can't see it, so I'll try to give you a warning. Please state your name for the record. That would 00:51:12.297 --> 00:51:13.630 - be helpful. Thanks. Go ahead. 00:51:14.338 --> 00:51:20.771 - Kevin Keough, I'm here today to comment on the estimates regarding the debt limits and the tax rate 00:51:20.771 --> 00:51:27.268 - using data that's fundamentally stale and to comment on the bond continuing disclosure agreement. As 00:51:27.268 --> 00:51:33.958 - we sit here today, March 13th, the city has still not published the 2024 annual comprehensive financial 00:51:33.958 --> 00:51:38.590 - report. We are now closing on 15 months since the 2024 fiscal year-end. 00:51:39.074 --> 00:51:46.046 - and our most recent ACFR, specifically the Federal Single Audit Report from 2023, 00:51:46.114 --> 00:51:52.553 - came with a qualified opinion from the auditors and reported a material internal control weakness. This 00:51:52.553 --> 00:51:59.116 - report, for some reason, has gone dark for over a year without public deliberation, seems to have created 00:51:59.116 --> 00:52:05.555 - a vacuum of accountability. The city's 2016 GO bond official statement contains a continuing disclosure 00:52:05.555 --> 00:52:12.303 - agreement. While there is a technical loophole that allows the city 60 days to post an audit after receiving 00:52:12.303 --> 00:52:16.080 - it from the State Board of Accounts, the contract explicitly 00:52:16.080 --> 00:52:22.999 - sets a 180-day benchmark for annual reporting, June 30th. State Board of Accounts has stated they require 00:52:22.999 --> 00:52:29.657 - a 90-day window to complete the audit by the June 30th deadline, meaning the City must have its books 00:52:29.657 --> 00:52:36.250 - compiled and ready to be audited by April 1st. By failing to meet that April 1st readiness date, the 00:52:36.250 --> 00:52:43.038 - City is effectively bypassing the primary 180-day transparency requirement promised to our bondholders. 00:52:43.234 --> 00:52:49.141 - I believe this is more than an accounting delay. It presents three specific risks to the Bloomington 00:52:49.141 --> 00:52:55.165 - taxpayers. I'd like to confirm these potential risks. One, investors may view chronic reporting delays 00:52:55.165 --> 00:53:01.130 - and material weakness as high risk. Could this risk premium lead to higher interest rates on the very 00:53:01.130 --> 00:53:04.990 - bonds you are discussing today? Is the city acting in good faith? 00:53:05.314 --> 00:53:11.738 - Does SEC 15C2-12 rule require us to file a notice of failure to file when we miss these continuing 00:53:11.738 --> 00:53:18.682 - disclosures? Basically, asserting the city may not be acting in good faith. Could this lead to enforcement 00:53:18.682 --> 00:53:25.301 - actions that damage our reputation for years? The committee cannot track fund balances or improve the 00:53:25.301 --> 00:53:31.790 - budgeting process if the foundation for your data, the audited financials, the ACFR, is missing for 00:53:31.790 --> 00:53:35.294 - over a year. The data is stale. You are flying blind. 00:53:35.394 --> 00:53:41.483 - I'd like to close with a couple of questions. First, what date were the final compiled 2024 financial 00:53:41.483 --> 00:53:47.752 - statements delivered to the auditors? Did we meet or even come close to the April 1st good faith window? 00:53:47.752 --> 00:53:49.662 - Second, Faridi, how much is our 00:53:49.826 --> 00:53:56.918 - market reputation, and these disclosure delays currently costing, and more importantly, what could they 00:53:56.918 --> 00:54:03.806 - cost taxpayers in the form of higher projected debt surface interest rates? Process is how we ensure 00:54:03.806 --> 00:54:10.762 - outcome benefits the taxpayers. We cannot get our debt limits right if we don't get a reporting right 00:54:10.762 --> 00:54:17.854 - first. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Hio. Is there anybody else online who would like to comment? 00:54:21.122 --> 00:54:28.411 - I can't tell if there's any actual other people on prevention. No, they're just like AI. Okay, 00:54:28.411 --> 00:54:36.390 - coming back, we have about four more minutes left. Could I just ask for a question? Yeah. For response, 00:54:36.390 --> 00:54:44.292 - do you have any opinion of the controller or our consultants on the ACFR delay in terms of reputation, 00:54:44.292 --> 00:54:50.430 - competencies, potential penalties, and the potential for higher interest rates? 00:54:51.522 --> 00:54:58.307 - Yeah, I couldn't answer that one. So if we're talking about these property tax bonds, there shouldn't 00:54:58.307 --> 00:55:05.158 - be too much of an impact because property tax bonds are one of the most secure bonds. There's a reason 00:55:05.158 --> 00:55:12.143 - if even if we do a revenue bond, let's say a dip revenue bond, like we said, we were mentioning earlier, 00:55:12.143 --> 00:55:18.462 - we even do a property tax backup to that revenue bond because property tax is the most secure. 00:55:18.786 --> 00:55:26.840 - especially when we're nowhere near our constitutional government, our overall property tax rate environment 00:55:26.840 --> 00:55:34.447 - is so low, and we're issuing these shorter term bonds, it wouldn't affect it too much. Maybe, and I'm 00:55:34.447 --> 00:55:42.053 - not saying this will happen, but maybe we're looking at a larger, larger project with a 20-year life, 00:55:42.053 --> 00:55:48.094 - then maybe there could be an effect there. But with these bonds, we don't really 00:55:48.642 --> 00:55:56.165 - see it happening in movement and discuss how financially we're pretty, still pretty healthy. Great, 00:55:56.165 --> 00:56:03.990 - okay. Jeff, you really addressed the ACFR in the past and you're still on track to essentially complete 00:56:03.990 --> 00:56:12.266 - it. Yeah, I'm just saying that, well, we are waiting for the auditors now. We're not, there are no deliveries 00:56:12.266 --> 00:56:14.974 - that are pending from, and we have, 00:56:15.330 --> 00:56:23.693 - constant communication with the auditors and individually asked questions and were to arrive and follow 00:56:23.693 --> 00:56:32.136 - them for information. And I think I did in, what date was it? I gave, I think, a fairly extensive report 00:56:32.136 --> 00:56:40.338 - on the timeline and timing on, was it the fourth? Yeah. Just to counter the statement that there's no 00:56:40.338 --> 00:56:42.590 - data permission about that. 00:56:43.298 --> 00:56:49.745 - with the actual thing. So I just wanted to ask you a question you came up with. Great. Around two minutes. 00:56:49.745 --> 00:56:56.192 - So really quickly, we're having these meetings every two weeks. And the next one then will be more focused 00:56:56.192 --> 00:57:02.278 - on the council and things that we need to do. And I haven't really thought quite about that and what 00:57:02.278 --> 00:57:08.364 - the specifics will be. But I'm going to gather after our meeting on Wednesday that I'm going to have 00:57:08.364 --> 00:57:12.702 - some kind of a draft of some sort of a letter. And that will be part of 00:57:13.026 --> 00:57:20.455 - That was special. Last two minutes. Who has something in closing that they want to say real fast? Reedy, 00:57:20.455 --> 00:57:27.742 - House Members, Jeff. Are we going to cover more of what we didn't get to in a future meeting? Or would 00:57:27.742 --> 00:57:35.170 - we want to just cover at a high level? You can just tell us what's there, how to interpret it, if that's 00:57:35.170 --> 00:57:40.830 - possible, in a couple of minutes. Yeah, sure. Without going into as much depth. 00:57:41.282 --> 00:57:48.785 - I could do that, yes. So two pages left and what we brought is really two colorful pages, one with a 00:57:48.785 --> 00:57:56.214 - chart and one with a lot of rows. The first one is essentially showing the city's current debt rate 00:57:56.214 --> 00:58:03.717 - with all the debts listed and their rates. So when we look at 2026, our debt rate's at 84 cents. Our 00:58:03.717 --> 00:58:09.214 - total rate is at 84 cents. I'll probably have the legging on the control, 00:58:09.314 --> 00:58:15.616 - We're focusing on that in this conversation. So that's why we have all the individual that they listed 00:58:15.616 --> 00:58:21.978 - out. At the, in sort of purple pinkish color, what we're showing there is where the city of Bloomington 00:58:21.978 --> 00:58:28.524 - has really low property tax rates. We're looking at other low property tax rate communities like Lafayette 00:58:28.524 --> 00:58:35.071 - and Noblesville. They're even slightly higher. So that shows we have some room to grow, you know, property 00:58:35.071 --> 00:58:38.558 - tax rate without putting butter on our taxpayers, right? 00:58:39.074 --> 00:58:46.796 - In that blue, that is what we're saying is, okay, right now in 2026 and that green, those cities tax 00:58:46.796 --> 00:58:54.824 - rates at 84 cents. Let's just say we bring it up to $1, which is close to what Noblesville and Lafayette 00:58:54.824 --> 00:59:02.929 - is at. If we bring it to $1 using property tax, what does that mean in terms of rates and dollar amounts? 00:59:02.929 --> 00:59:08.510 - So you'll see in 2027, if we were to bring it up to $1 by increasing it, 00:59:09.794 --> 00:59:16.100 - by issuing a 14 cent increase, we would have an extra $8.2 million in levy. And we remember the numbers 00:59:16.100 --> 00:59:22.163 - that Tim gave earlier about the deficits, that can more than cover the deficits in the general fund 00:59:22.163 --> 00:59:28.287 - by pulling capital out of the general fund, paying that with property taxes. And my last point is we 00:59:28.287 --> 00:59:34.533 - don't have to do this in one year. Let's say on average, we're looking at $8 million increase in levy. 00:59:34.533 --> 00:59:38.110 - We don't have to do that one year. We could increase it by 00:59:38.210 --> 00:59:45.896 - $2 million every single year I ramp it up over four years. Just so, again, to make sure there's no burden 00:59:45.896 --> 00:59:53.292 - on our taxpayers and by ramping everything up instead of doing it all at once. You guys all feel free 00:59:53.292 --> 01:00:00.615 - to ask me questions afterwards as well. I know I went through this really fast. I usually give Tim a 01:00:00.615 --> 01:00:01.630 - lot one time. 01:00:01.762 --> 01:00:08.855 - Yeah. Well, it's one of the last year, like one meeting and we talked about council stuff and city stuff. 01:00:08.855 --> 01:00:15.681 - There was never enough time to cover all the things. So, um, yeah, it's, it's complicated. What about 01:00:15.681 --> 01:00:22.909 - this last page? So I have up there now, is this just kind of a different way to represent this spreadsheet? 01:00:22.909 --> 01:00:29.734 - Yes, this, yes. It really is just the first, the first page of what we show it in a chart form to see 01:00:29.734 --> 01:00:31.742 - what the makeup operates are. 01:00:32.066 --> 01:00:40.048 - Great. All right. Last questions, last comments. What is CCD then? CCD is cumulative capital development. 01:00:40.048 --> 01:00:47.880 - So that would be, we have, that's a rate driven fund. So the Bloomington city's CCD rate is five cents. 01:00:47.880 --> 01:00:55.787 - We don't, that doesn't fluctuate. If NABs go up, we'll collect more CCD revenues. If it goes down, we'll 01:00:55.787 --> 01:01:00.606 - collect less. There isn't a lot of growth associated with that. 01:01:00.898 --> 01:01:09.554 - And just so you know, what you see there listed as max levy weights gets divided up among the general 01:01:09.554 --> 01:01:18.126 - fund, the parks and recreation fund. And for the first year this year, you put some of that into the 01:01:18.126 --> 01:01:26.867 - motor vehicle highway for behaving so well. Any other last things? A lot of interesting. I mean, there 01:01:26.867 --> 01:01:28.734 - are a lot of options. 01:01:29.058 --> 01:01:35.849 - I just kind of wanted to make sure everybody knew the big picture and knew some of the big decisions 01:01:35.849 --> 01:01:42.707 - that are going to be facing us. And so I appreciate the detail. Actually, one question on that front, 01:01:42.707 --> 01:01:49.902 - which is the task force must, must, must, must. Who makes the decision about whether the city participates 01:01:49.902 --> 01:01:55.550 - in that process at all? Is that the mayoral decision or is that a council decision? 01:01:58.914 --> 01:02:07.705 - I'm not sure that particular bill states what does. I'm not an attorney, but I would imagine your attorney 01:02:07.705 --> 01:02:16.086 - would say it would just default whatever the statute overrides it that makes sense. I don't know what 01:02:16.086 --> 01:02:23.070 - that is. I don't know if the mayor makes that decision, council makes that decision. 01:02:23.650 --> 01:02:29.884 - I mean, I would be the representative as the fiscal officer and I would point to the mayor. So I guess 01:02:29.884 --> 01:02:36.057 - that would be my. Well, I guess that would make sense if you look at it from that perspective. So the 01:02:36.057 --> 01:02:42.231 - city is the fiscal body. The council is the fiscal body. I think that maybe the longer answer is that 01:02:42.231 --> 01:02:48.465 - we need to figure out how to do that together. We need to have our own must process first. It is a bit 01:02:48.465 --> 01:02:53.246 - odd that the city fiscal body is involved in that. It is very odd. Yeah. Yeah. 01:02:53.698 --> 01:03:00.318 - You gave yourself the vote topped in, right? So the city council would still, or I would, I don't know 01:03:00.318 --> 01:03:07.066 - if that particular bill requires it, but if that's your policy, that's your policy, so. I mean, it would 01:03:07.066 --> 01:03:13.493 - not make sense. Yeah. Without, without the. Yeah, to the mayoral control to go independently out of 01:03:13.493 --> 01:03:20.049 - the city without just the body voting on it. We're, what the policy is going to look like. That's why 01:03:20.049 --> 01:03:23.134 - it seems like if the must automatically creates 01:03:23.362 --> 01:03:29.007 - an opt-in that it feels like that decision can participate and authorize it would have to be a council 01:03:29.007 --> 01:03:34.488 - decision. Yeah, I kind of wonder. I mean, this definitely feels like a conversation that we need to 01:03:34.488 --> 01:03:40.407 - continue and it does kind of have to do with both ends of what we're trying to do with the fiscal committee 01:03:40.407 --> 01:03:45.998 - this year in terms of the council and administrative end. So this might be something to continue. And 01:03:45.998 --> 01:03:51.698 - I was also thinking that this might be another good forum for trying to get some of our county partners 01:03:51.698 --> 01:03:53.342 - in to figure out some sort of 01:03:53.474 --> 01:04:00.927 - cooperative methods in moving forward and starting smaller on some of those conversations before trying 01:04:00.927 --> 01:04:08.165 - to, you know, get 20 people into the same room. So yeah, I think that that's the preview of what I'm 01:04:08.165 --> 01:04:15.619 - thinking for the next few fiscal committee meetings in terms of really trying to start that, especially 01:04:15.619 --> 01:04:20.062 - considering we have a further deadline. Any other last words? 01:04:21.410 --> 01:04:28.742 - I'm going to echo thank you to Justin and get you this overview. It definitely, there's a lot of detail 01:04:28.742 --> 01:04:35.793 - and it's challenging, I think, for everybody to really understand and get that. I really appreciate 01:04:35.793 --> 01:04:40.446 - you taking the time this morning. So with that, we are adjourned.