WEBVTT 00:00:00.610 --> 00:00:11.079 - All right, so I'll go ahead and call this meeting of the special fiscal committee. It's a order at 8 00:00:11.079 --> 00:00:21.547 - 31 on September 4. District three chair. Big road, district four council. It's about Piedmont Smith, 00:00:21.547 --> 00:00:27.870 - district one. Matt Flaherty, council at large. Deputy mayor. 00:00:28.738 --> 00:00:36.110 - Jeff McKim, City Controller, participating remotely. Thank you. So today, probably because we're coming 00:00:36.110 --> 00:00:43.694 - off of budget month, and that was a pretty intense month in terms of financial stuff, and probably because 00:00:43.694 --> 00:00:50.853 - I knew that Controller McKim would be online this morning, I figured that it would be a good time to 00:00:50.853 --> 00:00:55.390 - just sort of talk about our thoughts, generally speaking, about 00:00:55.490 --> 00:01:01.548 - budget presentations, um, about anything related to the budget, if people remember that up specifically, 00:01:01.548 --> 00:01:07.434 - but also about the fiscal committee role, um, overall. And we talked to them during budget time about 00:01:07.434 --> 00:01:13.319 - outcome-based budgeting and the administration wanted some support with that. Um, and so, uh, just in 00:01:13.319 --> 00:01:19.262 - terms of this committee and then little notes about scheduling and then adjournment. Does anybody have 00:01:19.262 --> 00:01:22.782 - anything they want to add or comment on the agenda before we 00:01:25.282 --> 00:01:32.395 - Okay, great. Seeing none. So I included in this memo some questions to come prepared to discuss. And 00:01:32.395 --> 00:01:39.508 - the first thing on the agenda, that's just going to be with budget presentations and feedback. And I 00:01:39.508 --> 00:01:46.550 - kind of put them down as, you know, A through D before public comment in terms of the format of the 00:01:46.550 --> 00:01:50.846 - presentation, the slideshow, the question and answer format. 00:01:51.394 --> 00:01:57.786 - how the public was involved, how we might want to get them involved in the future, and considerations 00:01:57.786 --> 00:02:04.303 - for next year. But I don't care what order we talk about them in. I'm just going to take notes on them. 00:02:04.303 --> 00:02:10.632 - And then I also included in the memo some specific questions. Did the budget look at the information 00:02:10.632 --> 00:02:17.023 - you expected? If not, what was missing? Was the time available for presentations and verbal questions 00:02:17.023 --> 00:02:20.094 - sufficient? Did you find the format of follow-up 00:02:20.194 --> 00:02:27.077 - Written questions on that Google form, easy to use for both questions and answers. Was there anything 00:02:27.077 --> 00:02:33.960 - you felt particularly useful this year? Anything not provided this year that you found helpful in the 00:02:33.960 --> 00:02:41.045 - past and what could improve next year? And then how can public engagement be increased during the budget 00:02:41.045 --> 00:02:48.131 - process? And those first five questions in the memo really kind of include or relate to budgeting stuff. 00:02:48.131 --> 00:02:49.278 - So any feedback? 00:02:52.194 --> 00:03:05.527 - on any of those things at all? Well, comparing the budget book this year to last year, I felt like we 00:03:05.527 --> 00:03:19.774 - took a step backwards in our goal to try to get to the outcome-based question. So last year, at least we had 00:03:20.706 --> 00:03:30.012 - general categories and how much is spent on each, within each department. This year we have none of 00:03:30.012 --> 00:03:39.690 - that. So I guess I'll throw that out as my first reaction. All right, other thoughts on the budget book 00:03:39.690 --> 00:03:49.182 - as related to outcome-based budgeting? Matt, did I see your hand start to look? No, but I'm happy to. 00:03:49.410 --> 00:03:55.889 - provide some initial thoughts. Outcome-based budgeting, specifically, I said this in some comments, 00:03:55.889 --> 00:04:02.432 - and I've said it here, that my general view is that we need to establish outcomes in order to pursue 00:04:02.432 --> 00:04:08.911 - outcome-based budgeting, specifically shared outcomes that go through a process and are adopted. We 00:04:08.911 --> 00:04:15.455 - have some in the form of a few of our planning documents, but the outcomes are inconsistent in their 00:04:15.455 --> 00:04:18.046 - design, how we measure them, et cetera. 00:04:18.786 --> 00:04:26.529 - You know, I understand and appreciate what Isabelle is saying. At the same time, I'm not sure tracking 00:04:26.529 --> 00:04:34.347 - spending on priority areas gets us any closer or gives us anything really meaningful or actionable with 00:04:34.347 --> 00:04:41.865 - outcome-based budgeting. To make an intervention based on our ability to meet or not meet outcomes, 00:04:41.865 --> 00:04:45.022 - like the amount of money you spend really 00:04:45.954 --> 00:04:52.606 - theoretically has something to do with that, but not really. I think it's how effective are our strategies 00:04:52.606 --> 00:04:59.134 - and the personnel we have and the things to the extent we're operating programs or prioritizing spending 00:04:59.134 --> 00:05:05.413 - in kind of one way or another that goes beyond staff dollars, personnel dollars. The question is how 00:05:05.413 --> 00:05:11.941 - effective are those dollars at achieving our outcomes? And we're just very far from being able to really 00:05:11.941 --> 00:05:14.366 - do that in any kind of systematic way. 00:05:14.786 --> 00:05:21.434 - I think that's a lens I've always tried to bring to budgeting and governance, where we have those goals 00:05:21.434 --> 00:05:28.146 - that are well established. But it is just, I don't know, I still feel like we can't really make progress 00:05:28.146 --> 00:05:34.346 - until we have like a shared commitment to like what's actually needed at a high level. And like, 00:05:34.346 --> 00:05:41.250 - like I said, you know, they're budget weeks, like, I don't think software tools and like measuring spending 00:05:41.250 --> 00:05:44.318 - in by particular categories or subject areas or 00:05:44.418 --> 00:05:53.296 - gold codes or whatever is like the way the way to get there personally. So like that's like zooming 00:05:53.296 --> 00:06:02.263 - out even further like that's that's the bigger challenge here in my view. Well I'm trying to pull up 00:06:02.263 --> 00:06:11.230 - the budget proposal for 2025. Didn't we have objectives in there? Let me see. This is two years ago. 00:06:20.034 --> 00:06:28.445 - Where am I thinking that we did at some point have outcomes and objectives? I thought that was last 00:06:28.445 --> 00:06:36.857 - year. Or the last year. But I'm not sure that we ever really, from that point, I'm not sure that we 00:06:36.857 --> 00:06:45.268 - have ever really defined the outcomes. No. We've defined priorities. We've talked about priorities. 00:06:45.268 --> 00:06:49.726 - We've talked theoretically about desirable outcomes. 00:06:52.994 --> 00:07:01.416 - And by that, I mean, like, you know, we all want to make sure everybody has a home, like, you know, 00:07:01.416 --> 00:07:09.922 - and that would be an outcome per se, but we haven't drilled into anything specific about, say, like, 00:07:09.922 --> 00:07:18.344 - how much reduction or, you know, connecting all of those pieces of different priorities. Sometimes. 00:07:18.344 --> 00:07:20.702 - I mean, I think we had some 00:07:21.890 --> 00:07:28.867 - high level stuff in there. So just this year, when we were talking with staff about how to indicate 00:07:28.867 --> 00:07:36.194 - what are you doing and what are the measurements you're using? What are you tracking that would indicate 00:07:36.194 --> 00:07:43.171 - that you're doing meaningful work on the right things? And we included that in presentations rather 00:07:43.171 --> 00:07:50.846 - than the budget book this time. There's always a rush to get the numbers right for the budget book that takes 00:07:51.170 --> 00:07:56.330 - until the last minute to get all that lined up. And so I thought it would be better for staff to be 00:07:56.330 --> 00:08:01.489 - able to have a little bit more time to focus on that in the presentation and also to make sure that 00:08:01.489 --> 00:08:06.649 - everybody heard it. So one of the pieces of feedback we've gotten in the past is the budget book is 00:08:06.649 --> 00:08:12.015 - so long, I don't read it all. And so we're always worried if we're putting really important information 00:08:12.015 --> 00:08:15.678 - in this enormous document, how do we make sure that you and the public 00:08:16.098 --> 00:08:22.755 - can digest and see what's most important. So I think that's something I would love to get out of these 00:08:22.755 --> 00:08:29.541 - conversations is what's helpful to have in presentations versus the budget book, should they just repeat 00:08:29.541 --> 00:08:36.133 - each other, which I've always thought is kind of a waste of space, but maybe that is how we should do 00:08:36.133 --> 00:08:41.950 - it. You know, open to suggestion. And because you have departments that have really broad 00:08:42.274 --> 00:08:48.920 - you know, it's easy for street to talk about how many lane miles they're paving and how many potholes 00:08:48.920 --> 00:08:55.632 - they're filling. Their mission is pretty narrow. For other departments that have a broader scope, it's 00:08:55.632 --> 00:09:02.408 - harder to figure out in the 20 minutes you have, what do you pull out? So I think what would be helpful 00:09:02.408 --> 00:09:09.120 - for us would be, you know, understanding what are the most important things to track and getting those 00:09:09.120 --> 00:09:10.814 - outcomes narrowed down to 00:09:10.978 --> 00:09:18.193 - an annual budget-based metric, if that's what we want. So to use, for example, you know, the investments 00:09:18.193 --> 00:09:25.270 - you make in housing in one year might take a really long time to actually materialize. Like if we give 00:09:25.270 --> 00:09:32.415 - a, we'll talk about tax credit, it's years before it's actually built and you can see what's happening. 00:09:32.415 --> 00:09:39.355 - So there might be leading indicators, lagging indicators that you would be interested in seeing. And 00:09:39.355 --> 00:09:40.798 - I think it would be, 00:09:40.994 --> 00:09:48.764 - helpful to take things down from the top level of we want more housing to what is the metric that would 00:09:48.764 --> 00:09:55.563 - help us all feel like we can see that we're doing something that we hope will, by the time 00:09:55.563 --> 00:10:03.034 - it all materializes, have an impact. I would say the same thing with homelessness is also an issue. 00:10:03.034 --> 00:10:10.430 - So the priority you guys shared this year is actually the mission for heading home, but that's not 00:10:10.850 --> 00:10:17.076 - heading homes mission is not an outcome we can measure here in the city on an annual basis tied to what 00:10:17.076 --> 00:10:23.062 - we're doing. So that's what would be super helpful for us. And I take Matt's point about, you know, 00:10:23.062 --> 00:10:29.228 - what's more important? Is it the math on the budget, which is hard, or is it the outcomes? And I think 00:10:29.228 --> 00:10:35.394 - that's been an important lesson we've learned this year is that while there's interest in the numbers, 00:10:35.394 --> 00:10:40.542 - you guys are also equally interested in the outcomes, which isn't tied necessarily to 00:10:41.058 --> 00:10:51.624 - the numbers that could be tracked in different ways. So that's my team. Long answer, sorry. Go ahead, 00:10:51.624 --> 00:11:02.293 - Ray. So my question is related to large anticipated expenditures, big capital projects that looks like 00:11:02.293 --> 00:11:08.094 - we've got quite a few in the queue. And it's related to 00:11:08.578 --> 00:11:16.492 - Well, first of all, you know, we're drawing down reserves, we're anticipating various rate increases 00:11:16.492 --> 00:11:24.485 - or tax increases, et cetera, et cetera. And what really caught my attention was the utilities budget. 00:11:24.485 --> 00:11:32.791 - And during the utilities budget, yeah, put up a slide, and it had a anticipated cost of the new estimated 00:11:32.791 --> 00:11:37.022 - design of the utility service center, Winston Thomas, 00:11:37.474 --> 00:11:46.279 - $2.5 million and $2.3 million more for managerial services. Now, utilities has their own budget. They've 00:11:46.279 --> 00:11:54.749 - got extremes of revenue coming in. They're spending it without essentially my okay. However, they're 00:11:54.749 --> 00:12:03.219 - spending money anticipating a bond that the city council is going to be basically sending off. And a 00:12:03.219 --> 00:12:06.238 - rate increases that are going to be 00:12:06.370 --> 00:12:12.718 - anticipated that we approved. So my question then to Cal was, well, how much of the new rate increase 00:12:12.718 --> 00:12:19.128 - is going to be devoted to that service from the community utility center that's going to be 15 million 00:12:19.128 --> 00:12:25.911 - or whatever it's going to be? And she couldn't tell me. She said, well, it'd be costly endeavor to basically 00:12:25.911 --> 00:12:32.197 - come up with that estimate. And I was like, well, because we have to pay a consultant and stuff like 00:12:32.197 --> 00:12:34.686 - that. And it kind of struck me as like, 00:12:34.978 --> 00:12:42.811 - Shouldn't be that mysterious. I don't know. I'm not an accountant. I know there are times probably here. 00:12:42.811 --> 00:12:50.868 - But the point is that if you're going to have a rate increase, you're going to factor in your expenditures, 00:12:50.868 --> 00:12:58.552 - your maintenance, everything that you need to keep up inflation, everything that needs to be including 00:12:58.552 --> 00:13:03.550 - anticipated debt service for paying a bond that's got to be there. 00:13:03.714 --> 00:13:09.691 - especially for something as large as that. So I'm just kind of like, how do I get this information? 00:13:09.691 --> 00:13:15.130 - Because it seems to me it's relevant to my saying, okay, we're gonna go ahead and do that. 00:13:15.130 --> 00:13:21.226 - And just to finish, having those sum costs already for new service center almost obligates me then in 00:13:21.226 --> 00:13:27.263 - terms of like coming forward with a bond and saying we need a new utility service center. And by the 00:13:27.263 --> 00:13:32.702 - way, we spent five million already. So that would be a waste, wouldn't it? It's kind of a, 00:13:32.866 --> 00:13:38.875 - you know, cart before the horse kind of thing. I'm like, I ain't gonna get locked in to saying, well, 00:13:38.875 --> 00:13:44.825 - I don't know, at least $5 million we've already spent. You know, this sort of thing gives me a sense 00:13:44.825 --> 00:13:50.952 - that I'm not in control of the decision as much as I would like to be. So. Well, I mean, I think that's 00:13:50.952 --> 00:13:57.374 - a great question. You know, that service center had been in this especially long before this administration. 00:13:57.374 --> 00:13:59.966 - So this is a long-standing conversation and 00:14:00.130 --> 00:14:07.584 - I remember when we first came into office and they asked the same thing, like, do we need this? Are 00:14:07.584 --> 00:14:15.188 - there other options? Like, why are we doing this? So I think this is one of the central challenges we 00:14:15.188 --> 00:14:22.717 - face for staff when we get to the budget is the scope of what they have to talk about, including one 00:14:22.717 --> 00:14:28.606 - piece like the service center is so big. How do you provide enough information 00:14:29.314 --> 00:14:36.233 - in print in your 20 minute presentation to cover all those grants. So for the rate case, I know that 00:14:36.233 --> 00:14:43.220 - they go through a process where they assemble the list of every possible project they need that could 00:14:43.220 --> 00:14:50.276 - be used. And then they worked with bond counseling with their consultants to figure out what would the 00:14:50.276 --> 00:14:56.510 - rate be and that all went through the IURC. So there is a very rigorous process to justify 00:14:56.642 --> 00:15:03.345 - the rate case, get public feedback on the rate case, it goes through a very long process to get to that. 00:15:03.345 --> 00:15:09.920 - And then the rate case revenues are what is pledged against the bond. So the bond is not on top of the 00:15:09.920 --> 00:15:16.303 - rate case. The rate case exists so that you have the stream of revenue coming in that will back the 00:15:16.303 --> 00:15:22.878 - bond. So in some ways, if you object to the bond, object to the rate case sooner because they're late. 00:15:23.170 --> 00:15:29.951 - the purpose of the bond is to get the money that you will gradually get from Red Case Call at once to 00:15:29.951 --> 00:15:36.599 - be able to fix the project. So I don't have a great solution to that because what you're asking is, 00:15:36.599 --> 00:15:43.313 - how can we present an 18 month or a five year process in that context? And I struggle with that too. 00:15:43.313 --> 00:15:50.360 - So- Well, we don't have to be confined to the budget process. I mean, maybe we need more frequent updates 00:15:50.360 --> 00:15:53.086 - from particularly CDU on their long-term 00:15:53.794 --> 00:15:59.915 - Projects and how they're moving towards them. I mean you're not confined to the 20 minutes. Yeah, sorry 00:15:59.915 --> 00:16:05.977 - I don't even know what that service center looks like other than a rendering from the exterior. That's 00:16:05.977 --> 00:16:11.863 - just one facade I don't know what it consists of. What do you need it? Is there been an explanation 00:16:11.863 --> 00:16:17.984 - for me to me same? I mean there may be a very good reason public works does was that they said the same 00:16:17.984 --> 00:16:22.398 - problems public works does very expensive. Yeah, yeah sitting outside says 00:16:22.658 --> 00:16:28.646 - They call it the service center, but it's a bigger facility than that. Yeah, and I just, and my question 00:16:28.646 --> 00:16:34.463 - then will be, well, have you thought about other alternatives? I know you've got to put them outside. 00:16:34.463 --> 00:16:40.280 - I see, I drive by it, and I see like the MCCSE has school buses. Some of them, they're under, they're 00:16:40.280 --> 00:16:46.268 - under a carport, essentially. You know, the worst weather. I realize that. Anyway. Well, I mean, I guess 00:16:46.268 --> 00:16:51.230 - I would also point out, yeah, customer authority is actually on the USB and, you know, 00:16:51.490 --> 00:16:57.235 - I think often we assumed within the city that if there was a council member who was on the supervising 00:16:57.235 --> 00:17:03.036 - board, that there's information that's shared or that, you know, if you have questions, Matt would know 00:17:03.036 --> 00:17:08.669 - much more than I would about this process. He's been on the USB a long time and has seen all the ins 00:17:08.669 --> 00:17:14.414 - and outs of the great case and everything else going forward. So, yeah, I'm not trying to pawn off the 00:17:14.414 --> 00:17:20.382 - question. I'm just saying that, you know, that's there's another resource. That's also fair. And, and, um, 00:17:20.962 --> 00:17:25.976 - We've never, we've talked about this a little bit at the council before too. I mean, this is getting 00:17:25.976 --> 00:17:30.940 - a little beyond the purview of budget, but I appreciate the nexus that Councilman Rall is bringing, 00:17:30.940 --> 00:17:36.003 - but we've never really had a structured process. I mean, I can, certainly I can try to do better with 00:17:36.003 --> 00:17:40.967 - transportation and commissioning and USB both, which I both, you know, are the two that I sit on of 00:17:40.967 --> 00:17:46.031 - like bringing like major updates by way of like for awareness or something like that. But it's always 00:17:46.031 --> 00:17:50.846 - been a little hard to like, without structure or a consistent approach for how we want to pursue 00:17:50.978 --> 00:17:56.023 - updates like that as a council to kind of know what to bring. So, I mean, I can own that and I'm always 00:17:56.023 --> 00:18:00.922 - happy to answer questions too if folks have them, but could do a better job, you know, communicating 00:18:00.922 --> 00:18:05.773 - things that are in the works. I mean, Deputy Mayor Knapp's right, like this has been a conversation 00:18:05.773 --> 00:18:10.721 - for a long time and the administration did question it and really look at it with scrutiny, you know, 00:18:10.721 --> 00:18:15.572 - and they came in the door as well and it was on pause and, you know, designs were on the proceeding 00:18:15.572 --> 00:18:18.046 - so far and we were kind of examining alternatives. 00:18:18.786 --> 00:18:25.087 - So like this is a longer running conversation that council doesn't have visibility into. I also don't 00:18:25.087 --> 00:18:31.635 - think council member Aralo's question is like entirely unreasonable, if not answerable in budget hearings 00:18:31.635 --> 00:18:37.873 - itself of like a capital expenditure of this magnitude. What type of incremental cost are we talking 00:18:37.873 --> 00:18:44.112 - about for rate payers? So I appreciate the question also. That's not something I think was discussed 00:18:44.112 --> 00:18:46.398 - directly in these meetings I was in. 00:18:47.522 --> 00:18:54.016 - and I do think that this is applicable in terms of this kind of specific thing because I mean this may 00:18:54.016 --> 00:19:00.699 - be something very specific but it could be any department that has been working on some long-term project 00:19:00.699 --> 00:19:07.319 - that suddenly it's like oh we are only hearing about this really big expensive thing at like this moment 00:19:07.319 --> 00:19:13.182 - and that I mean that could happen anywhere and so figuring out some way maybe to communicate 00:19:13.826 --> 00:19:20.531 - more effectively I think is the thing about some of those big projects, which may include council members 00:19:20.531 --> 00:19:27.046 - who sit on different boards and commissions. Are you guys really not aware of the service center? This 00:19:27.046 --> 00:19:33.624 - is a good question because coming in, I just assume this idea has been around a long time that it would 00:19:33.624 --> 00:19:40.139 - have been enhanced even by prior. A few sentences were devoted to it here and there. I mean, you know, 00:19:40.139 --> 00:19:41.214 - it was mentioned 00:19:41.890 --> 00:19:47.626 - There was no, there was no case made for it. There's nothing to say, here's, you know, other than we 00:19:47.626 --> 00:19:53.477 - have equipment that needs to be sheltered. Okay. We'll build something to shelter it then. Oh, we need 00:19:53.477 --> 00:19:59.440 - a home and service center. Oh, well, then how much is that? What's the price tag? So this is a corollary 00:19:59.440 --> 00:20:05.234 - to this is that just in my head, I can add up about a hundred million dollars in capital expenditures 00:20:05.234 --> 00:20:10.686 - that we're looking at in the next couple of years. So we've got the service center. We got the, 00:20:10.818 --> 00:20:17.744 - public works, the street department needs to be in a different facility. There's the police station 00:20:17.744 --> 00:20:24.808 - that needs an E3 or E4 or whatever great wing for itself. For dispatch, we've got $6 or $7 million in 00:20:24.808 --> 00:20:31.804 - capital expenditures for parts and rack. And then there's something I think we've been needing for a 00:20:31.804 --> 00:20:39.422 - long time, and that's the fire station down on Taperow. You had it all together, it's over 100 million bucks. 00:20:39.714 --> 00:20:45.893 - we're entering a time with a lot of economic uncertainty with a massive amount of public and private 00:20:45.893 --> 00:20:52.010 - debt that's gonna unwind. And I wonder about taking on new debt as a city at this time and not so I 00:20:52.010 --> 00:20:58.617 - need to prioritize. I think it might be helpful and I know the controller has been working on some overview 00:20:58.617 --> 00:21:04.918 - documents of capital projects as we've been developing the capital plan because not all of the sources 00:21:04.918 --> 00:21:08.894 - when we talk about acquiring debt for all these various projects 00:21:09.058 --> 00:21:15.657 - not all of them are property pass debt that will impact residents. So a tip on does not affect property 00:21:15.657 --> 00:21:22.128 - taxes for the police station for example. And there are options for other ones too. Some of these are 00:21:22.128 --> 00:21:28.727 - maybe just best practices for, like if you're gonna buy a car or a house or a major purchase and you're 00:21:28.727 --> 00:21:35.135 - like, you would finance it, you wouldn't necessarily wanna pay cash up front. So sometimes it's just 00:21:35.135 --> 00:21:38.942 - a financing decision that makes more sense for the project. 00:21:39.202 --> 00:21:46.472 - I think an overview of all those things might be helpful. And to just kind of lay out, you know, what 00:21:46.472 --> 00:21:54.026 - are the things that will impact taxpayers and what are the things that don't impact taxpayers and compare 00:21:54.026 --> 00:22:01.153 - that to our debt limit. But certainly debt is a tool that we will, we're well below our debt limit. 00:22:01.153 --> 00:22:06.142 - Our property tax rate is well below our peers. We have lots of levers 00:22:06.466 --> 00:22:14.584 - available, we detect inside which ones we feel comfortable using and which projects we feel merit that. 00:22:14.584 --> 00:22:22.546 - So. Just in this kind of tangential, but tangential to what you just said, but it ties us back to the 00:22:22.546 --> 00:22:30.508 - agenda. So I was looking at the spreadsheet of questions and I didn't see any of these questions from 00:22:30.508 --> 00:22:35.582 - you in there. Did you not, why did you not submit the questions? 00:22:35.842 --> 00:22:47.838 - using the process that we have. Because I like to speak in a public setting and during actual budget 00:22:47.838 --> 00:22:59.714 - hearings. I've communicated my concern about that. We know. Much more access than utilities. So I'm 00:22:59.714 --> 00:23:05.534 - just saying that. Please make the case for this. 00:23:05.666 --> 00:23:14.288 - Right now, I'm asking her about like what, you know, the specifics about this, as well as some follow 00:23:14.288 --> 00:23:22.911 - ups about it spending a lot of money for me to know how much it would be for that. Are you doing that 00:23:22.911 --> 00:23:31.449 - by the spreadsheet? I'm just asking specific questions to utilities. But the spreadsheet is going to 00:23:31.449 --> 00:23:35.422 - be made public or is public? Yeah, you know, I 00:23:35.778 --> 00:23:44.077 - Okay, well, I need to, I guess what I need to communicate here is that, yeah, we're entering a new world. 00:23:44.077 --> 00:23:52.064 - Jennifer said he's had his hand up for a while. We can't see you, Jeff, sorry. Jeff, we can just send 00:23:52.064 --> 00:24:00.128 - you anytime. Okay, sorry, and I do just have, you guys hear me, right? Yeah. Yes. Okay, so I just had, 00:24:00.128 --> 00:24:05.374 - I had two comments. One is kind of on the broader subject of debt. 00:24:05.474 --> 00:24:12.398 - And that probably would be worth an agenda item on the fiscal committee just to talk about debt overall. 00:24:12.398 --> 00:24:19.059 - Because like Gretchen mentioned, there are different kinds of debt. So for example, if we're talking 00:24:19.059 --> 00:24:25.654 - about general obligation debt, yes, that does impact the property taxpayers, but it also comes with 00:24:25.654 --> 00:24:32.446 - a property tax rate to service that debt. So in other words, we're not kind of eating into our future. 00:24:32.610 --> 00:24:40.025 - by taking on general obligation debt. That is additional revenue used to finance capital projects. On 00:24:40.025 --> 00:24:47.439 - the other hand, we do have debt like the public safety bond, which is what's called a general revenue 00:24:47.439 --> 00:24:55.218 - bond. And that one really does eat into our future. That is debt that did not come with additional revenue 00:24:55.218 --> 00:24:59.870 - to service it. And so that debt, we have to make those payments 00:25:00.098 --> 00:25:06.183 - regardless of how much money we have coming in, we don't have additional money coming in to service 00:25:06.183 --> 00:25:12.573 - those debts. And in fact, when the income tax system is restructured in 29, we may not even have enough. 00:25:12.573 --> 00:25:18.719 - I mean, we're really gonna have to dig deeply into operations to be able to service that. So I think 00:25:18.719 --> 00:25:24.804 - it really does. And then there's also TIF debt, which is very different and other forms of revenue. 00:25:24.804 --> 00:25:29.246 - So I think it might be worth it to actually go through both what we have 00:25:29.634 --> 00:25:38.081 - what we're considering and talk about it. Jeff, what was that debt that does not come with more revenue 00:25:38.081 --> 00:25:46.284 - or does not come with general revenue bond? General revenue bonds, the public safety bond is the big 00:25:46.284 --> 00:25:54.487 - example of that. There's also the solar panel bond. But the public safety bond is the big example of 00:25:54.487 --> 00:25:59.198 - debt that we're just paying out of our existing revenues. 00:25:59.618 --> 00:26:06.923 - And of course, it has to be prioritized, number one, over all other priorities for that money. So when 00:26:06.923 --> 00:26:14.086 - ED lit disappears, for example, the paying of that debt is still going to have to take top priority. 00:26:14.086 --> 00:26:21.390 - But general obligation debt is not the same. General obligation debt actually comes with an additional 00:26:21.390 --> 00:26:23.518 - revenue stream to service it. 00:26:23.842 --> 00:26:31.099 - So that was my general comment on debt. And I think we could have that conversation where I can actually 00:26:31.099 --> 00:26:38.425 - show you in detail both what we already have and what we're considering. Then to go back to the utilities 00:26:38.425 --> 00:26:45.682 - issue, I think just to throw in one more piece to the Waterworks Bond, I think part of one of the issues 00:26:45.682 --> 00:26:50.174 - is also that the council has actually already heard and approved 00:26:50.562 --> 00:27:00.019 - the utilities bond back in 95, or at 25, sorry, in September of 25. So that is a particularly long time 00:27:00.019 --> 00:27:09.658 - between the council approval and the actual issuance of the debt. But you all in September of 25 approved 00:27:09.658 --> 00:27:16.478 - the issuance of $71 million in Waterworks revenue bonds. And so this first 00:27:17.122 --> 00:27:24.799 - bonds that though that the utilities the utilities is working on right now is really just the first 00:27:24.799 --> 00:27:32.477 - tranche of So really from the back to the council there are no more gate there are no more approval 00:27:32.477 --> 00:27:40.307 - gates The only connection is going to be for example councilmember Flaherty who serves on the utility 00:27:40.307 --> 00:27:46.526 - service board So the new service center is not going to come before us Is a bond 00:27:48.898 --> 00:27:56.535 - I can't say that there won't be aspects of it that would not have to come before you. I don't know the 00:27:56.535 --> 00:28:04.172 - plan, indeed. I don't know the plan any more than you do. I just know the bond right now that you have 00:28:04.172 --> 00:28:11.883 - already brought me $1 million in Waterworks utilities revenue bonds. And this is just the first tranche 00:28:11.883 --> 00:28:18.334 - of that. That did not include the service center in its entirety. Why? OK. Well, Jeff. 00:28:18.466 --> 00:28:31.419 - Just a follow up. So we have an example of an economic downturn in 2008 that had various implications 00:28:31.419 --> 00:28:44.371 - for revenue. Do you work on scenarios related to anticipating things like that? Did we lose you? Yes. 00:28:44.371 --> 00:28:47.038 - Jeff, are you there? 00:28:47.746 --> 00:28:59.072 - I mean, we certainly look at, yeah, I'm here. Yeah, did you get my question? Did that discussion be 00:28:59.072 --> 00:29:10.625 - part of our fiscal committee talking about different scenarios? Anyway, I don't want to take a lot of 00:29:10.625 --> 00:29:16.062 - time. I can talk in this person on this. Sorry. 00:29:17.090 --> 00:29:25.734 - Gretchen has to have another meeting at nine, that's why I should have said that. Yes, sorry, I've got 00:29:25.734 --> 00:29:34.378 - bad connection, but yes. Okay, I'm sorry. Well, I was not paying attention to what was happening. Does 00:29:34.378 --> 00:29:42.770 - Matt have a, Matt, do you have anything to say about the water works bond that we approved, whether 00:29:42.770 --> 00:29:46.462 - that includes, how much of it includes the, 00:29:46.562 --> 00:29:54.004 - Service Center. I was looking for my memory as well. So this was passed on September 30th of last year. 00:29:54.004 --> 00:30:01.446 - I was actually on vacation that week and missed the meeting myself. Councilmembers Ruff and I were both 00:30:01.446 --> 00:30:08.673 - absent. And I'm just looking at it. There is mention of the Service Center in the context of it. I'm 00:30:08.673 --> 00:30:15.614 - sure controller Kim's, you know, I assume he's right, but. Yeah, look, if you look at exhibit A, 00:30:16.194 --> 00:30:23.278 - Which is just a list of descriptions of projects. Yep. And one of them is a new service center. Yeah. 00:30:23.278 --> 00:30:30.571 - Yeah. I have a vague memory of thinking like, well, $1 million isn't nearly enough for a service center. 00:30:30.571 --> 00:30:37.517 - So it was one of those like, well, it's a little bit here and a little bit there and thinking about 00:30:37.517 --> 00:30:41.406 - it as a study. But I'm not sure that we need to keep on 00:30:41.698 --> 00:30:49.940 - detouring about that specific thing. And what I have written down here as a summary is that we need 00:30:49.940 --> 00:30:58.264 - to maybe figure out ways that large capital expenditures could get more or different airtime besides 00:30:58.264 --> 00:31:06.835 - just bonds and besides just like the yearly budget, because they are big projects and they don't happen 00:31:06.835 --> 00:31:07.742 - overnight. 00:31:08.130 --> 00:31:14.609 - But sometimes I think it does maybe feel like from a council perspective, they do have it overnight 00:31:14.609 --> 00:31:21.411 - because we don't see all of those details that have gone in beforehand. And then they do come to present 00:31:21.411 --> 00:31:28.279 - to us because there's been so much work that's put into it. They may do have to summarize and skip things 00:31:28.279 --> 00:31:35.211 - and make judgment calls about what is the thing they're going to put the most emphasis on. And so figuring 00:31:35.211 --> 00:31:36.766 - out some way to do that 00:31:38.274 --> 00:31:47.126 - that would enhance communication in general with council members about those big projects. So that's 00:31:47.126 --> 00:31:56.328 - what I wrote down as the conclusion of that conversation. Is that good? Great. That's great. Okay. Dave, 00:31:56.328 --> 00:32:04.478 - I would love to revisit the written question issue though, because for me, another, another, 00:32:05.282 --> 00:32:11.897 - reason to have them written and have them on that public sheet is so that I can go through at the end 00:32:11.897 --> 00:32:18.772 - and read what questions other people have. And especially for me as a new council member, like relatively 00:32:18.772 --> 00:32:25.257 - new, so right, like this is my third year, I still feel like that's pretty new, especially compared 00:32:25.257 --> 00:32:31.742 - to some of y'all. You know, like thinking about it in terms of like, oh, what did some other people 00:32:31.742 --> 00:32:34.142 - ask? What did some other people see? 00:32:34.242 --> 00:32:41.662 - you know, and I know that one of your emphases tends to be on large projects as opposed to minutiae 00:32:41.662 --> 00:32:49.378 - in general. And so that's kind of this interesting piece to me. And there are some trends for sure with 00:32:49.378 --> 00:32:56.947 - what different council members like to ask. So are you gonna put any of those questions on that sheet 00:32:56.947 --> 00:33:01.918 - or have you just like, is it not a normalized thing? Like how can, 00:33:02.402 --> 00:33:08.189 - Like, is there anything that would be easier for you to engage in that way, just? You know, I'm saying 00:33:08.189 --> 00:33:14.031 - I'm actually writing a memo to all of you in this, with the controller, just saying, I don't think it's 00:33:14.031 --> 00:33:19.705 - taking on any more debt unless it's absolutely essential right now to the city. And it, and I don't, 00:33:19.705 --> 00:33:25.660 - I don't, I understand the perspective that relative to other cities that, you know, we're in a vulnerable 00:33:25.660 --> 00:33:28.638 - place, I think we're going into uncharted territory. 00:33:29.442 --> 00:33:36.777 - So I brought this up before, but I'm happy to do it on that forum and, you know, just communicate that 00:33:36.777 --> 00:33:44.040 - going forward. It might help to explain my words against dipping on new bonds, you know. I think that 00:33:44.040 --> 00:33:51.660 - would be good, but I'm also thinking about anything else that you might have had, like any other questions 00:33:51.660 --> 00:33:59.422 - or any other, like, pieces, or they're a mouthful of anything. I'm happy to just, you know, formally we had, 00:34:00.002 --> 00:34:08.212 - Actually, it's interesting because we used to have much more in-depth budget presentations for the public, 00:34:08.212 --> 00:34:16.192 - and we've gone to sort of the short form right now. People give a very brief introduction a little bit. 00:34:16.192 --> 00:34:23.941 - I like to just put the questions in the public meeting to whoever's presenting it. I think that's my 00:34:23.941 --> 00:34:24.862 - preference. 00:34:27.074 --> 00:34:34.670 - because the presentations are not as in depth. And so then you're asking questions, trying to get the 00:34:34.670 --> 00:34:42.638 - depth. Well, it's more likely to be, obviously, observed. And people are watching a budget hearing because 00:34:42.638 --> 00:34:50.086 - it's within the council record. And you find you have enough time during council budget hearings to 00:34:50.086 --> 00:34:52.990 - ask all the questions you want to ask? 00:34:54.178 --> 00:35:02.069 - I think mine are mostly related to a couple of subjects that I have someone to ask. I mean, I am doing 00:35:02.069 --> 00:35:09.730 - some follow up just to, you know, and I did CC everybody about my follow up questions. Well, that's 00:35:09.730 --> 00:35:17.468 - where like follow up questions should go on the Google form. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Like in terms of that 00:35:17.468 --> 00:35:21.758 - transparency and that like, you know, this like that's, 00:35:22.818 --> 00:35:28.206 - And I don't think I want to say anything like that. It's not that they should go on the Google forum. 00:35:28.206 --> 00:35:33.540 - It's that the system that we've developed this year is a system to put them on the Google forum. But 00:35:33.540 --> 00:35:38.875 - if there's a different system, and of course that's partly because, you know, open door and like not 00:35:38.875 --> 00:35:44.263 - really, like we shouldn't CC everybody. And that also honestly like blocks up emails when we do that. 00:35:44.263 --> 00:35:49.703 - And I would far rather sit down, like personally, I would far rather sit down and go to this one place 00:35:49.703 --> 00:35:51.710 - and get all the things when I'm like, 00:35:51.970 --> 00:36:02.580 - ready to spend a couple hours doing that, then do it piecemeal. Sure. In my inbox. So is there a system 00:36:02.580 --> 00:36:12.884 - that you prefer? No, that's fine. I didn't realize it was a problem for people. But if that is, then 00:36:12.884 --> 00:36:20.638 - happy to go along with that. I was just saying, it's not so much a problem. 00:36:21.282 --> 00:36:29.616 - we could benefit from seeing your follow ups and the answers to them. Right. Yeah. Okay. So I had a, 00:36:29.616 --> 00:36:38.032 - I had a phone question. Did you, you know, um, one thing that I found out with this large expenditure 00:36:38.032 --> 00:36:46.283 - coming was really into the police station. And I met with the mayor. She extended an invitation to, 00:36:46.283 --> 00:36:50.078 - I think you met with Jerry. You met with her. 00:36:50.594 --> 00:36:57.600 - Not recently. Okay. Did she extend an invitation? I have a schedule. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So she'll probably 00:36:57.600 --> 00:37:04.871 - tell you, um, I think it should have been part of the budget presentation, but it's a, it's a big expenditure 00:37:04.871 --> 00:37:11.745 - from the police station. And, um, I just, I just wanted to put that out there because I think that this 00:37:11.745 --> 00:37:17.694 - is something that it's related to this idea that we have all these large expenditures and 00:37:18.114 --> 00:37:25.557 - there's nowhere that I can find a list of them, let alone like a random priority, like where they're 00:37:25.557 --> 00:37:33.589 - just coming at us. And how am I supposed to evaluate, like if I am going to sign off on that, like obviously 00:37:33.589 --> 00:37:40.958 - public safety is very priority. You know, we need facilities is that, you know, I'm not gonna do it 00:37:40.958 --> 00:37:45.822 - at the, should I do a service center at the expense of et cetera. 00:37:45.922 --> 00:37:55.499 - You know, there needs to be some sort of prioritization. And I think that the, you know, facing a hundred 00:37:55.499 --> 00:38:04.804 - million dollars in the next couple of years of these kinds of expenses. I'll put that on Google. Yeah. 00:38:04.804 --> 00:38:14.020 - So just since we are in a public meeting, the thing that the mayor has been chatting with us about is 00:38:14.020 --> 00:38:15.646 - that the, if the, 00:38:16.450 --> 00:38:24.479 - property at the corner of Rogers and 1st Street becomes a police station. There's a proposal to put 00:38:24.479 --> 00:38:32.026 - the central dispatch there as well, but that would require or that would preferably come with 00:38:32.026 --> 00:38:40.697 - some solidifying a part of the building to make it withstand natural disasters so that our central dispatch 00:38:40.697 --> 00:38:46.398 - wouldn't survive a tornado or whatever. And that's another significant 00:38:46.626 --> 00:38:58.373 - I was responding to some other things. I think so control my Kim's hand actually just went up if he 00:38:58.373 --> 00:39:11.294 - wanted to spent respond directly to that item that you all just brought up. I would defer to him first. Okay. 00:39:12.770 --> 00:39:20.933 - Yeah, go ahead, Jeff. Specifically, maybe, I don't know if you can talk about that running list of large 00:39:20.933 --> 00:39:28.707 - projects and whether you could talk about that. I think, yeah, I mean, that's certainly part of our 00:39:28.707 --> 00:39:36.636 - intention is to create a more holistic capital plan, a capital improvement plan. And I think a budget 00:39:36.636 --> 00:39:41.534 - presentation as well, that's certainly going to be a priority. 00:39:42.018 --> 00:39:49.228 - for us even for the rest of this year. But in terms of what council sees and whether it's part of the 00:39:49.228 --> 00:39:56.720 - budget process, et cetera, that has to do with the funding, the actual funding mechanism. So for example, 00:39:56.720 --> 00:40:04.001 - the police station, if the redevelopment commission even approves it, the redevelopment commission has 00:40:04.001 --> 00:40:09.726 - not heard it yet or has not approved the request yet. That bond would go through 00:40:10.786 --> 00:40:18.470 - commission process. And then expenditures has never been part of the annual council budget process because 00:40:18.470 --> 00:40:25.652 - you don't appropriate it. You do have to approve the bonds, but you don't appropriate the funds. So 00:40:25.652 --> 00:40:32.690 - that's one reason why the police station would never have been part of the annual budget process. 00:40:32.690 --> 00:40:39.872 - That said, it certainly is in the mix of all the property. Jeff, you kind of went in and out there, 00:40:39.872 --> 00:40:40.734 - but I think 00:40:41.250 --> 00:40:48.545 - One of the things that I got out of that was that the budget process includes expenses we have to appropriate 00:40:48.545 --> 00:40:55.242 - for the next year, which seems appropriate, but maybe then there's still that idea out there that we 00:40:55.242 --> 00:41:02.470 - need to have something else that includes other types of expenses that aren't necessarily those specifically 00:41:02.470 --> 00:41:09.566 - appropriated expenses, long-term capital being maybe the primary thing that we're talking about right now. 00:41:09.730 --> 00:41:22.327 - But anything else that might also need a bond? I'm not sure. Whether any of our coffee things. Yes, 00:41:22.327 --> 00:41:35.806 - I agree. Nevermind. Can I follow up? Yeah, go for it. Are you changing the subject now? Only a little bit. 00:41:36.354 --> 00:41:41.157 - that it is 913, we need to have a public comment. We need to talk about fiscal committee goals. So can 00:41:41.157 --> 00:41:45.961 - you maybe wrap this up with a last comment about budget stuff? Yes. It's two comments. One is actually 00:41:45.961 --> 00:41:50.857 - about the topic we were just talking about, that I would agree that more conversation and effort applied 00:41:50.857 --> 00:41:55.614 - to capital planning, including with this committee and with the council, would be very, very welcome, 00:41:55.614 --> 00:42:00.277 - including all the different types of debt we have, how we service it, and what the options are. And 00:42:00.277 --> 00:42:04.894 - just thinking of a few examples, too, like the solar bonds were mentioned, but of course those are 00:42:05.058 --> 00:42:10.969 - Offset by energy savings. So, like, there's differences in what's being paid for and what's not. Similarly. 00:42:10.969 --> 00:42:16.442 - We were talking in a parking meeting this week or the transportation commission. That, you know, we 00:42:16.442 --> 00:42:22.025 - had about 50Million dollars of debt on 2 parking garages that are being exclusively surfaced serviced 00:42:22.025 --> 00:42:27.608 - by TIF. The consolidated TIF we do have. Apparently now excess parking system revenues that are going 00:42:27.608 --> 00:42:32.862 - to repaving for instance, which we appropriated this week or re appropriated this week. And so. 00:42:33.410 --> 00:42:38.204 - those are real conversations we could be having if you incrementally raise parking rates and apply excess 00:42:38.204 --> 00:42:42.908 - parking system revenues like parking meter funds as a portion of debt service that frees up additional, 00:42:42.908 --> 00:42:47.884 - you know, money that's going elsewhere and things like that. So like that's that's a part of the conversation 00:42:47.884 --> 00:42:52.452 - I like to have. I just wanted to draw attention to a few examples like that of like, it's not simply 00:42:52.452 --> 00:42:57.020 - how much was the debt, what's servicing it end of story. Like there are other questions about how we 00:42:57.020 --> 00:43:01.950 - can make adjustments there and you know, that kind of thing. The other thing I wanted to say briefly is just 00:43:02.242 --> 00:43:09.087 - We're drawing us back again to outcome-based budgeting. I've kind of lost optimism that this administration 00:43:09.087 --> 00:43:15.426 - or this council is going to make progress on this. We can keep trying, but I'm just looking at some 00:43:15.426 --> 00:43:22.398 - of the presentations to draw back to the packet for today, I guess, and looking at things like the highlights 00:43:22.398 --> 00:43:29.116 - that departments tried to draw us. Here in the police budget, it says overall vehicle accidents decreased 00:43:29.116 --> 00:43:32.222 - by 6.99%. Personal injury crashes decreased 16%. 00:43:32.482 --> 00:43:36.850 - That's, that's a metric, but like, what does that tell us? You know what I mean? Like, did any of that 00:43:36.850 --> 00:43:40.752 - have anything to do with policing? Probably not. Uh, like probably have to do with planning 00:43:40.752 --> 00:43:45.206 - and transportation and or just like noise in the data. And so it's just like, it's just an illustration. 00:43:45.206 --> 00:43:49.616 - And there are other things like that throughout all sorts of presentations that I appreciate the effort 00:43:49.616 --> 00:43:53.773 - to sort of say like, Hey, what's gone well? Like, what, what can we highlight that we did or saw, 00:43:53.773 --> 00:43:58.014 - you know, CFRD was like, we serve this much food, you know, like those are, that's great. But like, 00:43:59.010 --> 00:44:03.863 - if it's divorced from any like rational system of like goals and metrics tracked over time, it's meaningless 00:44:03.863 --> 00:44:08.448 - ultimately. And like that's kind of again, illustrating the problem. Like, and so that's not something 00:44:08.448 --> 00:44:13.123 - the council alone can fix. We can't just like simply have a few meetings and show up and be like, here's 00:44:13.123 --> 00:44:17.664 - the set of outcomes leading and lagging indicators for the next 10 years for the city of Bloomington. 00:44:17.664 --> 00:44:22.249 - Like this is a process to invest in. We probably would need expert support and help. And it would have 00:44:22.249 --> 00:44:27.102 - to have real buy-in from the mayor's administration and the council to work together on something like that. 00:44:27.234 --> 00:44:32.260 - Um, so again, I don't have a lot of hope or optimism for that, but I think, uh, I value it and appreciate 00:44:32.260 --> 00:44:37.097 - that the council had unanimous support for going this direction. And if we want to keep talking about 00:44:37.097 --> 00:44:42.028 - what it will actually take, I think, you know, I think we should. So there's my comments. Thanks. Okay. 00:44:42.028 --> 00:44:46.817 - Um, that's actually a pretty good segue into our, the next thing I want to talk about, which is this 00:44:46.817 --> 00:44:51.654 - role, but first we need to go to public comment on budget. Um, so we don't have any public comment in 00:44:51.654 --> 00:44:53.598 - the room, but I see a few people online. 00:44:53.922 --> 00:45:05.575 - So if you could raise your hand if you're interested in commenting. That would be great. I think that's 00:45:05.575 --> 00:45:17.564 - probably Mr. Keough there. KRKCP with a hand raised when you're... Sophia, if you could ask him to unmute. 00:45:17.564 --> 00:45:21.598 - And then go ahead. Can you hear me? 00:45:22.082 --> 00:45:27.296 - Yep, you have, uh, please state your name for the record and then you'll have three minutes and I'm 00:45:27.296 --> 00:45:32.928 - finding out how much. All right. Kevin Keogh, since public involvement in the future role of this committee 00:45:32.928 --> 00:45:38.403 - are both on today's agenda, I'd like to ask a broader question. What role does the council want informed 00:45:38.403 --> 00:45:43.878 - public participation to play in the city's financial oversight and budget process? I ask that sincerely. 00:45:43.878 --> 00:45:49.405 - As you know, I'm a retired CPA, a practicing internal auditor, 50 years of accounting, auditing, internal 00:45:49.405 --> 00:45:51.230 - controls, and information systems. 00:45:51.682 --> 00:45:57.912 - When I participate in these meetings, I'm not simply interested in offering an opinion about whether 00:45:57.912 --> 00:46:04.205 - I like or dislike a particular expenditure. I believe citizens can also add value by examining public 00:46:04.205 --> 00:46:10.620 - financial information, asking questions, identifying risk, and bringing relevant professional knowledge 00:46:10.620 --> 00:46:17.344 - into the discussion. The recent public safety and PSAP lit discussion provides an example. These discussions 00:46:17.344 --> 00:46:21.662 - raise questions for me concerning fund accounting, internal controls, 00:46:21.762 --> 00:46:28.065 - budget to actual results, intergovernmental funding, staffing, reserves, and financial forecasting. 00:46:28.065 --> 00:46:34.557 - Rather than reaching conclusions prematurely, I've decided to take approach at both questions the same 00:46:34.557 --> 00:46:41.238 - way I would approach a professional internal audit engagement. So I'm developing a formal risk assessment 00:46:41.238 --> 00:46:47.856 - and control evaluation. I intend to identify the applicable criteria, identify and rank the risk, obtain 00:46:47.856 --> 00:46:51.134 - supporting records, evaluate the internal controls, 00:46:51.490 --> 00:46:57.573 - test the available evidence and let the evidence determine my conclusions. If completed, I hope to produce 00:46:57.573 --> 00:47:02.974 - a report that can be shared publicly. That brings us back to the role of public participation. 00:47:03.266 --> 00:47:09.334 - Is that the kind of citizen involvement useful to this committee and to the council? And if it is, how 00:47:09.334 --> 00:47:15.460 - should citizens bring that work forward so it can actually contribute to the council's decision making? 00:47:15.460 --> 00:47:21.410 - Three minutes of public comments is valuable for expressing an opinion, but is not particularly well 00:47:21.410 --> 00:47:28.126 - suited to presenting financial analysis, explaining internal control concerns, or discussing supporting evidence. 00:47:28.226 --> 00:47:34.107 - As this committee considers its future role, I encourage you to consider whether it could also provide 00:47:34.107 --> 00:47:39.817 - a structured way for citizens with relevant knowledge to contribute substantive financial analysis. 00:47:39.817 --> 00:47:45.926 - That does not mean that council should accept the citizens' conclusions. Quite the opposite. Good analysis 00:47:45.926 --> 00:47:51.807 - should be questions, tested, and challenged, whether it comes from the administration, council member, 00:47:51.807 --> 00:47:53.406 - consultants, or the public. 00:47:53.794 --> 00:48:00.429 - Council has expressed an interest outcome-based budgeting. I believe the same principle applies to public 00:48:00.429 --> 00:48:07.127 - involvement. The question shouldn't be, did we provide opportunity for public comment? The better question 00:48:07.127 --> 00:48:13.449 - is, did public participation add value to the decision-making process? I would welcome guidance from 00:48:13.449 --> 00:48:19.646 - this committee about how citizens like me can best contribute to that value. Thank you. Thank you. 00:48:23.810 --> 00:48:30.844 - That was an interesting comment. I think I see one other hand up. Mr. M.G., if you want to go ahead 00:48:30.844 --> 00:48:38.160 - and unmute and state your name for the record. Good morning, Fiscal Committee. This is Christopher M.G. 00:48:38.160 --> 00:48:45.406 - from the Greater Bloomington Chamber of Commerce. I just want to say I appreciate Council Member Rollo 00:48:45.406 --> 00:48:52.862 - raising the debt and fiscal prudence in regards to SB 1 and creating that uncertainty in future revenues. 00:48:53.026 --> 00:48:59.073 - And I appreciate Controller McKim's insight on the city's debt. I'd encourage to have the committee 00:48:59.073 --> 00:49:05.119 - come back and have Jeff do his debt 101 and kind of get us all on the same page on what that means. 00:49:05.119 --> 00:49:11.407 - I mean, so what we owe and what comes back, what rolls off in our capacity, this way we're all speaking 00:49:11.407 --> 00:49:17.817 - the same language, I think, because it's complicated. And if we all have at least a general understanding 00:49:17.817 --> 00:49:22.654 - of some of these things, it makes the conversation, I think, at a higher level. 00:49:22.946 --> 00:49:29.086 - But I wanna broaden that conversation a little bit, that we still have to recall that like 80% of the 00:49:29.086 --> 00:49:35.526 - city's operating budget is personnel. So the necessary capital investments have cost and deserve scrutiny, 00:49:35.526 --> 00:49:41.666 - but they should be more on opportunity costs. We should be looking at, well, we only have this amount 00:49:41.666 --> 00:49:47.986 - of money, that's project A or B. But the bonds have like a finance of a beginning, middle, and personnel 00:49:47.986 --> 00:49:52.862 - costs do not. Salaries, benefits, COLA and all that become part of the recurring 00:49:53.282 --> 00:49:59.550 - based costs every year. So with SB1 looming, that reoccurring cost structure ultimately has a bigger 00:49:59.550 --> 00:50:05.818 - fiscal challenge and that fiscal prudence means understanding our debt, but also means being careful 00:50:05.818 --> 00:50:12.024 - about permanent obligation as we build during this constraining and sort of uncertainty that we all 00:50:12.024 --> 00:50:18.416 - are facing right now. So thank you for your time. I always appreciate starting my Friday mornings with 00:50:18.416 --> 00:50:23.070 - the fiscal committee. Thank you. There's also several chats at the moment. 00:50:23.906 --> 00:50:44.949 - I will read these chats if they are applicable. Property tax revenues depend on property tax assessments, 00:50:44.949 --> 00:50:49.118 - not merely the rate. 00:50:49.474 --> 00:50:59.569 - Accurate council can require by passage of legislation that formal review events before council. Yes. 00:50:59.569 --> 00:51:09.762 - Just going back to that rate thing, council only gets to decide the rate that we don't have any effect 00:51:09.762 --> 00:51:12.830 - on the assessment assessments. 00:51:13.410 --> 00:51:18.989 - Those reporting and review events can be required by legislation. That's kind of the same. Discussing 00:51:18.989 --> 00:51:24.568 - these matters in public rather than by email is appropriate. I think that's probably about the budget 00:51:24.568 --> 00:51:30.421 - stuff. In other words, council has authority to require council involvement in the form of actual approval 00:51:30.421 --> 00:51:36.055 - steps. So the grading level, yeah, all of that's the same. Confidence comes from process. Research and 00:51:36.055 --> 00:51:39.774 - exercise of council authority is separate from executive decisions. 00:51:40.994 --> 00:51:48.518 - Why does the council feel hamstrung by executives? All right. Those were all good questions too. Can 00:51:48.518 --> 00:51:56.042 - you make sure to send me those chats just so that you have, thank you. And those were all from Eric, 00:51:56.042 --> 00:52:03.491 - thank you. All right. Hang on. I need to move to agenda number three for this whole committee roll. 00:52:03.491 --> 00:52:10.270 - Okay, because I'm 923 and we kind of have a commitment to get out of here at 930 and this, 00:52:10.466 --> 00:52:16.363 - This part of the question, uh, questioning for me is kind of relevant because it is September at this 00:52:16.363 --> 00:52:22.202 - point. This is a special committee, not a, um, not a standing committee, which means that every year 00:52:22.202 --> 00:52:28.561 - it could like, go away. And it started out as being a special committee, partly because we were experimenting 00:52:28.561 --> 00:52:34.342 - with it for the first time. Um, I am personally of the opinion that we should keep it and it should 00:52:34.342 --> 00:52:37.406 - be elevated to a standing committee, but I, and I'm, 00:52:37.666 --> 00:52:44.839 - totally good with doing the legislation to make that happen sometimes before the end of the year, as 00:52:44.839 --> 00:52:52.155 - long as y'all are also on board with that and supportive of that. So before I go any further, is there 00:52:52.155 --> 00:52:59.612 - anybody not supportive here of making this a standing committee? I'm enthusiastically supportive. Great. 00:52:59.612 --> 00:53:06.430 - So the bigger question is, let's leave out from base budgeting. Well, we can't really leave it. 00:53:07.106 --> 00:53:13.186 - So we may not be able to finish this conversation here now, but we need to look at these roles that 00:53:13.186 --> 00:53:19.387 - are in the original charge of the committee that is in the packet to work closely with the controller 00:53:19.387 --> 00:53:25.649 - for various things, be responsible for supporting council staff with budget, continue the work started 00:53:25.649 --> 00:53:32.337 - by the ad hoc salary committee related to the elected salary framework and explore and recommend improvements 00:53:32.337 --> 00:53:35.742 - to the budgeting process. That was the original charge. 00:53:36.034 --> 00:53:42.702 - So we make this a standing committee. How does that need to change in terms of that original charge? 00:53:42.702 --> 00:53:49.304 - Are there things that are still applicable? Are there things that are not applicable? If we want to 00:53:49.304 --> 00:53:55.906 - each take maybe a minute to give me some feedback on that so that then maybe over the next month or 00:53:55.906 --> 00:54:03.102 - so I can start working on that legislation, that would be great. Who wants to go first? So I don't know what 00:54:03.778 --> 00:54:14.350 - track progress of the yearly budget and her means? I assume that that is like the quarterly reports. 00:54:14.350 --> 00:54:24.922 - Okay. Okay. I have not been reporting back to the whole council. No, you're right. We have not been. 00:54:24.922 --> 00:54:33.086 - So, the question is, should be, should we report, should we be reporting back 00:54:33.410 --> 00:54:40.463 - quarterly reports to the whole council. Any quick answer for that, yes, no? Probably yes. I support 00:54:40.463 --> 00:54:47.868 - verbal reports for some of that, like we talked about recently. Okay. And I think that one of the things 00:54:47.868 --> 00:54:55.344 - with verbal reports, and this is another Title II amendment, I'm pretty sure that reports from committees 00:54:55.344 --> 00:54:59.294 - in Title II say they have to be written reports. Right. 00:54:59.426 --> 00:55:08.530 - we could maybe amend that in some way. So maybe that's something that it's kind of like been on my mind 00:55:08.530 --> 00:55:17.372 - that maybe we should amend that so that to leave some space for verbal reports. All right, any other 00:55:17.372 --> 00:55:26.477 - feedback on that reporting? Yeah, I mean, it can be so involved that a verbal report might be difficult 00:55:26.477 --> 00:55:29.278 - in a time law. And so maybe in, 00:55:29.602 --> 00:55:41.157 - Reflecting on a suggestion about, you know, civic involvement, maybe deliberation sessions should be 00:55:41.157 --> 00:55:52.940 - allocated for council for a report and also input from citizens who have expertise or who have certain 00:55:52.940 --> 00:55:56.830 - perspectives. All right, so maybe 00:55:59.298 --> 00:56:17.641 - Maybe we could loosen up the phrasing so it's work to council on public and then we can leave open how. 00:56:17.641 --> 00:56:27.870 - And what about adding something about tracking that. Yes. 00:56:31.842 --> 00:56:42.172 - discussing upcoming projects that would be worth it. Similarly, we have verbally talked about 00:56:42.172 --> 00:56:54.040 - the administration bringing fee increases through this, which is something that's going to happen regarding 00:56:54.040 --> 00:57:00.414 - sanitation fees. But I will add something about that too. 00:57:01.538 --> 00:57:09.997 - I mean, speed increases. All right, anything else? Should I try to add something about outcome-based 00:57:09.997 --> 00:57:18.539 - budgeting or support for budget processes? Because should it be outcome-based budgeting specifically, 00:57:18.539 --> 00:57:27.417 - or should it be? I mean, we have number four, explore and recommend improvements. Would that be captioned 00:57:27.417 --> 00:57:31.102 - in? I don't know. So here's one reflection. 00:57:31.234 --> 00:57:38.638 - on what Matt said earlier about outcome-based budgeting, and he's right on target when it comes to public 00:57:38.638 --> 00:57:46.112 - safety reports that crashes are down 15%. What does it mean? What does that mean? It doesn't mean anything 00:57:46.112 --> 00:57:53.237 - unless you've got a trend line, unless we can see, and you've got an outcome maybe over here, and the 00:57:53.237 --> 00:57:59.454 - trend is going toward it or away or whatever. But if you have a yearly sort of progress, 00:58:00.194 --> 00:58:07.393 - We can just graph it. It's got to be the information there on the Excel spreadsheet. We can see what 00:58:07.393 --> 00:58:14.521 - happened in the last five years. Are we getting closer further away? And that really would help the 00:58:14.521 --> 00:58:21.934 - outcome-based process. And the logical theory of what caused that change, right? That's the other piece 00:58:21.934 --> 00:58:28.990 - of it too. I feel like that brings us back actually to the conversation that we were having before 00:58:29.602 --> 00:58:45.590 - about what it is that we might want for next year, which is trend lines over five years with any data 00:58:45.590 --> 00:58:59.070 - or any metrics like accident or crashes or road repairs, et cetera. And then ideally, 00:59:00.098 --> 00:59:07.465 - buying metrics to Google slash platforms. And we got some of that in street, right? With the whole thing 00:59:07.465 --> 00:59:14.482 - about like the sidewalks and the investment in the sidewalks and the investment in, yeah. So we got 00:59:14.482 --> 00:59:21.639 - a little of that in a couple of different places, but more of that would be helpful. Okay. Going back 00:59:21.639 --> 00:59:29.076 - to kind of like our mission statement. I think it's not hearing me now, so I need to go to public comment 00:59:29.076 --> 00:59:29.918 - about this. 00:59:30.274 --> 00:59:39.352 - If you are a member of public and wanting to comment hopefully relatively quickly on this committee's 00:59:39.352 --> 00:59:48.252 - charge and purpose and any thoughts that you may have about making it a standing committee versus a 00:59:48.252 --> 00:59:57.241 - special committee and what we should be doing as a committee. We already did hear one thing from Mr. 00:59:57.241 --> 00:59:58.398 - Keough about 01:00:00.994 --> 01:00:09.380 - receiving information from the public, essentially. And I see him with his hand raised again. Go ahead 01:00:09.380 --> 01:00:17.521 - and unmute, and you'll have three minutes. Go ahead. He's muted again. Hang on. You're muted again. 01:00:17.521 --> 01:00:20.126 - I'm sorry. Can you hear me now? 01:00:20.770 --> 01:00:26.988 - Yeah, I think you should really consider about elevating your stature, so to speak, and looking into 01:00:26.988 --> 01:00:33.144 - becoming an audit committee and look at other cities that have developed audit committees and would 01:00:33.144 --> 01:00:39.239 - have professional staff who are independent of the day to day operations who can add value to the, 01:00:39.239 --> 01:00:42.686 - you know, to your discussion by presenting independent. 01:00:42.850 --> 01:00:49.597 - based on a risk assessment, things you should be looking at in depth and giving you that type of information. 01:00:49.597 --> 01:00:55.853 - So I know other cities in Indiana do have audit committees and have internal auditors. And I think it 01:00:55.853 --> 01:01:02.110 - would be something that would be of great value to the community. And I think it would put a lot more 01:01:02.110 --> 01:01:08.427 - framework and structure into what you're doing. Because it comes with, an audit committee has certain, 01:01:08.427 --> 01:01:11.678 - it should have a charter and it should be looking at 01:01:11.778 --> 01:01:19.693 - doing specific things. So anyway, that's my position. That's my suggestion. I know it's difficult and 01:01:19.693 --> 01:01:27.531 - it takes funding and all that stuff, but I think it's something you should consider. Okay, thank you 01:01:27.531 --> 01:01:35.524 - very much. Anybody else online with comments about Smitty's charge of purpose? Okay, seeing no others. 01:01:35.524 --> 01:01:39.870 - Thank you guys. If you have any other thoughts on this, 01:01:40.194 --> 01:01:47.316 - Go ahead and let me know as I'm working on this piece of legislation on the goal of me to do it for 01:01:47.316 --> 01:01:54.581 - them. Yeah. Do you want to see the additional chats that will be submitted? How does fiscal committee 01:01:54.581 --> 01:02:01.845 - relate to budget committee? Verbal reports are federal. Written reports become farther written public 01:02:01.845 --> 01:02:09.822 - record. Economic conditions change when debt is durable. Highlight that distinction. OK. I'll send those along. 01:02:10.082 --> 01:02:15.661 - That would be great. We don't have a budget committee anymore. The budget committee was a budget task 01:02:15.661 --> 01:02:21.241 - force specifically related to outcome-based budgeting. It was also assigned by the president, Ad Hoc, 01:02:21.241 --> 01:02:26.820 - and the president this year decided not to do that this year. So it's just been the fiscal committee. 01:02:26.820 --> 01:02:32.399 - And so that is a point, like, you know, should I look back at the budget task forces purposes and see 01:02:32.399 --> 01:02:38.088 - if some of that should get molded into this committee? Which I think is one thing that I know I'm great 01:02:38.088 --> 01:02:39.838 - about, and I have that in mind. 01:02:40.194 --> 01:02:49.634 - So moving on to budget-related dates, just so that you all know, the county did indeed authorize having 01:02:49.634 --> 01:02:58.983 - a must task force related to SB1, the Municipal Unit Strategic Task Force. Jeff, if you've not already 01:02:58.983 --> 01:03:08.423 - received an invitation related to that, you should soon. And the other thing that I wanted to make sure 01:03:08.423 --> 01:03:09.694 - to mention is 01:03:10.562 --> 01:03:17.352 - you know I've been kind of keeping this like fiscal committee calendar like a yearly calendar and I 01:03:17.352 --> 01:03:24.549 - do want to try to have some sort of calendar in November or December that we kind of approve that informs 01:03:24.549 --> 01:03:31.746 - the 2027 committee. So please get back to me on anything you think might need to go on that as you review 01:03:31.746 --> 01:03:38.739 - this. Also in our future meeting dates our next meeting is September 18th. I put down there that we're 01:03:38.739 --> 01:03:39.486 - having the 01:03:39.650 --> 01:03:45.913 - I learned yesterday, the day before from Gretchen that sanitation is also going to have a memo 01:03:45.913 --> 01:03:52.902 - and information about their proposed fee increase. So that is going to be in that meeting. So the elected 01:03:52.902 --> 01:03:59.561 - official salary is revisited. Honestly, I'm going to de-prioritize that a little bit because I think 01:03:59.561 --> 01:04:05.758 - it's probably more important to do the sanitation fee conversation and make sure that we have 01:04:05.922 --> 01:04:12.264 - plenty of time for that discussion because we just need to get the elected official salary stuff in 01:04:12.264 --> 01:04:18.733 - before the end of the year. October, then I have quarter three financial summaries. So Jeff, that may 01:04:18.733 --> 01:04:25.138 - get pushed to the 16th of October, depending on how the elected official salary stuff goes. And then 01:04:25.138 --> 01:04:30.846 - there was some other suggestion on what we needed to do for a future meeting. Oh, I know. 01:04:31.810 --> 01:04:40.402 - I'm thinking maybe on the comment that we got related to Jeff basically giving a bond 101 kind of thing. 01:04:40.402 --> 01:04:49.239 - I'm not sure that that should be in this committee versus maybe we need to have that for the whole council. 01:04:49.239 --> 01:04:57.667 - The whole council needs to have a bond 101 workshop. And that one of the other things I think that was 01:04:57.667 --> 01:05:01.022 - an original charge of this committee was 01:05:02.882 --> 01:05:09.885 - are recommending CF work closely with the controller to recommend scheduling of specific budget related 01:05:09.885 --> 01:05:16.753 - discussions, presentations, and education for the full council. So I think that maybe I might try to, 01:05:16.753 --> 01:05:23.756 - and I'm meeting with Jeff next week about a bond, the no bond issue this year. So maybe we can schedule 01:05:23.756 --> 01:05:30.490 - some sort of education night for all council members, basically a working session slash educational 01:05:30.490 --> 01:05:32.510 - moment. And maybe it would be 01:05:32.898 --> 01:05:41.826 - Maybe it'd be more like public sessions or public counseling. Anyway, Jeff, let's talk about that next 01:05:41.826 --> 01:05:51.015 - week. That was all. Questions, comments, Isabel? I don't want to lose sight of ways that we could improve 01:05:51.015 --> 01:05:59.770 - the budget process, especially the public engagement piece and the follow-up council member question 01:05:59.770 --> 01:06:02.110 - piece because I think both 01:06:02.786 --> 01:06:10.975 - Well, we didn't, once again, we had very few members of the public engaged during the hearings. And 01:06:10.975 --> 01:06:19.491 - we have very few council members who have submitted questions through the form that was used this year, 01:06:19.491 --> 01:06:27.762 - which admittedly was a little more confusing in the past. So I wonder if those two, let's just put a 01:06:27.762 --> 01:06:31.774 - pin in those to discuss. Yes, I agree with that. 01:06:34.114 --> 01:06:41.041 - Yes. Yes. I feel like that was definitely half a conversation, because more than the full hour talking 01:06:41.041 --> 01:06:48.102 - about that kind of feedback. Yeah. Matt, did you have something else that you want to say? Just briefly, 01:06:48.102 --> 01:06:54.626 - I agree that a broader kind of 101 and discussion of different types of debt, how we service it, 01:06:54.626 --> 01:07:01.351 - et cetera, would be great for the Council as a whole. I'd also like this committee to dig deeper on 01:07:01.351 --> 01:07:02.494 - capital planning 01:07:03.042 --> 01:07:11.597 - That service and like, it's the level of depth that we would get to it in an all council session. Like, 01:07:11.597 --> 01:07:19.904 - I think it's limited and it will probably require some discussion over time. Okay. All right. So, so 01:07:19.904 --> 01:07:26.238 - maybe that needs to be. Part of this committee is so adding something about. 01:07:28.930 --> 01:07:36.443 - about long-term capital planning into the fiscal committees. I think that's terrific. It's a big part 01:07:36.443 --> 01:07:43.883 - of, yeah, city finances and fiscal oversight and it gets a little lost in the annual budgeting cycle 01:07:43.883 --> 01:07:51.249 - for sure. Or can. All right. Perfect. Perfect. Okay. Any other last words? I may be assuming on the 01:07:51.249 --> 01:07:58.910 - 18th. Okay. Dave may be assuming Matt and Isabella if you could flip your calendars. I'll be in person. 01:07:59.874 --> 01:08:07.842 - Perfect. Perfect. Okay. Early heads up. I think I'll miss the meeting after that. The, the 1. In the 01:08:07.842 --> 01:08:15.889 - end of October or beginning of October, either. Okay. Okay. Great. All right. Thank you guys so much. 01:08:15.889 --> 01:08:20.702 - Have a great day. Have a great weekend and we are adjourned.