All right, so I'll go ahead and call this meeting of the special fiscal committee. It's a order at 8
31 on September 4. District three chair. Big road, district four council. It's about Piedmont Smith,
district one. Matt Flaherty, council at large. Deputy mayor.
Jeff McKim, City Controller, participating remotely. Thank you. So today, probably because we're coming
off of budget month, and that was a pretty intense month in terms of financial stuff, and probably because
I knew that Controller McKim would be online this morning, I figured that it would be a good time to
just sort of talk about our thoughts, generally speaking, about
budget presentations, um, about anything related to the budget, if people remember that up specifically,
but also about the fiscal committee role, um, overall. And we talked to them during budget time about
outcome-based budgeting and the administration wanted some support with that. Um, and so, uh, just in
terms of this committee and then little notes about scheduling and then adjournment. Does anybody have
anything they want to add or comment on the agenda before we
Okay, great. Seeing none. So I included in this memo some questions to come prepared to discuss. And
the first thing on the agenda, that's just going to be with budget presentations and feedback. And I
kind of put them down as, you know, A through D before public comment in terms of the format of the
presentation, the slideshow, the question and answer format.
how the public was involved, how we might want to get them involved in the future, and considerations
for next year. But I don't care what order we talk about them in. I'm just going to take notes on them.
And then I also included in the memo some specific questions. Did the budget look at the information
you expected? If not, what was missing? Was the time available for presentations and verbal questions
sufficient? Did you find the format of follow-up
Written questions on that Google form, easy to use for both questions and answers. Was there anything
you felt particularly useful this year? Anything not provided this year that you found helpful in the
past and what could improve next year? And then how can public engagement be increased during the budget
process? And those first five questions in the memo really kind of include or relate to budgeting stuff.
So any feedback?
on any of those things at all? Well, comparing the budget book this year to last year, I felt like we
took a step backwards in our goal to try to get to the outcome-based question. So last year, at least we had
general categories and how much is spent on each, within each department. This year we have none of
that. So I guess I'll throw that out as my first reaction. All right, other thoughts on the budget book
as related to outcome-based budgeting? Matt, did I see your hand start to look? No, but I'm happy to.
provide some initial thoughts. Outcome-based budgeting, specifically, I said this in some comments,
and I've said it here, that my general view is that we need to establish outcomes in order to pursue
outcome-based budgeting, specifically shared outcomes that go through a process and are adopted. We
have some in the form of a few of our planning documents, but the outcomes are inconsistent in their
design, how we measure them, et cetera.
You know, I understand and appreciate what Isabelle is saying. At the same time, I'm not sure tracking
spending on priority areas gets us any closer or gives us anything really meaningful or actionable with
outcome-based budgeting. To make an intervention based on our ability to meet or not meet outcomes,
like the amount of money you spend really
theoretically has something to do with that, but not really. I think it's how effective are our strategies
and the personnel we have and the things to the extent we're operating programs or prioritizing spending
in kind of one way or another that goes beyond staff dollars, personnel dollars. The question is how
effective are those dollars at achieving our outcomes? And we're just very far from being able to really
do that in any kind of systematic way.
I think that's a lens I've always tried to bring to budgeting and governance, where we have those goals
that are well established. But it is just, I don't know, I still feel like we can't really make progress
until we have like a shared commitment to like what's actually needed at a high level. And like,
like I said, you know, they're budget weeks, like, I don't think software tools and like measuring spending
in by particular categories or subject areas or
gold codes or whatever is like the way the way to get there personally. So like that's like zooming
out even further like that's that's the bigger challenge here in my view. Well I'm trying to pull up
the budget proposal for 2025. Didn't we have objectives in there? Let me see. This is two years ago.
Where am I thinking that we did at some point have outcomes and objectives? I thought that was last
year. Or the last year. But I'm not sure that we ever really, from that point, I'm not sure that we
have ever really defined the outcomes. No. We've defined priorities. We've talked about priorities.
We've talked theoretically about desirable outcomes.
And by that, I mean, like, you know, we all want to make sure everybody has a home, like, you know,
and that would be an outcome per se, but we haven't drilled into anything specific about, say, like,
how much reduction or, you know, connecting all of those pieces of different priorities. Sometimes.
I mean, I think we had some
high level stuff in there. So just this year, when we were talking with staff about how to indicate
what are you doing and what are the measurements you're using? What are you tracking that would indicate
that you're doing meaningful work on the right things? And we included that in presentations rather
than the budget book this time. There's always a rush to get the numbers right for the budget book that takes
until the last minute to get all that lined up. And so I thought it would be better for staff to be
able to have a little bit more time to focus on that in the presentation and also to make sure that
everybody heard it. So one of the pieces of feedback we've gotten in the past is the budget book is
so long, I don't read it all. And so we're always worried if we're putting really important information
in this enormous document, how do we make sure that you and the public
can digest and see what's most important. So I think that's something I would love to get out of these
conversations is what's helpful to have in presentations versus the budget book, should they just repeat
each other, which I've always thought is kind of a waste of space, but maybe that is how we should do
it. You know, open to suggestion. And because you have departments that have really broad
you know, it's easy for street to talk about how many lane miles they're paving and how many potholes
they're filling. Their mission is pretty narrow. For other departments that have a broader scope, it's
harder to figure out in the 20 minutes you have, what do you pull out? So I think what would be helpful
for us would be, you know, understanding what are the most important things to track and getting those
outcomes narrowed down to
an annual budget-based metric, if that's what we want. So to use, for example, you know, the investments
you make in housing in one year might take a really long time to actually materialize. Like if we give
a, we'll talk about tax credit, it's years before it's actually built and you can see what's happening.
So there might be leading indicators, lagging indicators that you would be interested in seeing. And
I think it would be,
helpful to take things down from the top level of we want more housing to what is the metric that would
help us all feel like we can see that we're doing something that we hope will, by the time
it all materializes, have an impact. I would say the same thing with homelessness is also an issue.
So the priority you guys shared this year is actually the mission for heading home, but that's not
heading homes mission is not an outcome we can measure here in the city on an annual basis tied to what
we're doing. So that's what would be super helpful for us. And I take Matt's point about, you know,
what's more important? Is it the math on the budget, which is hard, or is it the outcomes? And I think
that's been an important lesson we've learned this year is that while there's interest in the numbers,
you guys are also equally interested in the outcomes, which isn't tied necessarily to
the numbers that could be tracked in different ways. So that's my team. Long answer, sorry. Go ahead,
Ray. So my question is related to large anticipated expenditures, big capital projects that looks like
we've got quite a few in the queue. And it's related to
Well, first of all, you know, we're drawing down reserves, we're anticipating various rate increases
or tax increases, et cetera, et cetera. And what really caught my attention was the utilities budget.
And during the utilities budget, yeah, put up a slide, and it had a anticipated cost of the new estimated
design of the utility service center, Winston Thomas,
$2.5 million and $2.3 million more for managerial services. Now, utilities has their own budget. They've
got extremes of revenue coming in. They're spending it without essentially my okay. However, they're
spending money anticipating a bond that the city council is going to be basically sending off. And a
rate increases that are going to be
anticipated that we approved. So my question then to Cal was, well, how much of the new rate increase
is going to be devoted to that service from the community utility center that's going to be 15 million
or whatever it's going to be? And she couldn't tell me. She said, well, it'd be costly endeavor to basically
come up with that estimate. And I was like, well, because we have to pay a consultant and stuff like
that. And it kind of struck me as like,
Shouldn't be that mysterious. I don't know. I'm not an accountant. I know there are times probably here.
But the point is that if you're going to have a rate increase, you're going to factor in your expenditures,
your maintenance, everything that you need to keep up inflation, everything that needs to be including
anticipated debt service for paying a bond that's got to be there.
especially for something as large as that. So I'm just kind of like, how do I get this information?
Because it seems to me it's relevant to my saying, okay, we're gonna go ahead and do that.
And just to finish, having those sum costs already for new service center almost obligates me then in
terms of like coming forward with a bond and saying we need a new utility service center. And by the
way, we spent five million already. So that would be a waste, wouldn't it? It's kind of a,
you know, cart before the horse kind of thing. I'm like, I ain't gonna get locked in to saying, well,
I don't know, at least $5 million we've already spent. You know, this sort of thing gives me a sense
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
a great question. You know, that service center had been in this especially long before this administration.
So this is a long-standing conversation and
I remember when we first came into office and they asked the same thing, like, do we need this? Are
there other options? Like, why are we doing this? So I think this is one of the central challenges we
face for staff when we get to the budget is the scope of what they have to talk about, including one
piece like the service center is so big. How do you provide enough information
in print in your 20 minute presentation to cover all those grants. So for the rate case, I know that
they go through a process where they assemble the list of every possible project they need that could
be used. And then they worked with bond counseling with their consultants to figure out what would the
rate be and that all went through the IURC. So there is a very rigorous process to justify
the rate case, get public feedback on the rate case, it goes through a very long process to get to that.
And then the rate case revenues are what is pledged against the bond. So the bond is not on top of the
rate case. The rate case exists so that you have the stream of revenue coming in that will back the
bond. So in some ways, if you object to the bond, object to the rate case sooner because they're late.
the purpose of the bond is to get the money that you will gradually get from Red Case Call at once to
be able to fix the project. So I don't have a great solution to that because what you're asking is,
how can we present an 18 month or a five year process in that context? And I struggle with that too.
So- Well, we don't have to be confined to the budget process. I mean, maybe we need more frequent updates
from particularly CDU on their long-term
Projects and how they're moving towards them. I mean you're not confined to the 20 minutes. Yeah, sorry
I don't even know what that service center looks like other than a rendering from the exterior. That's
just one facade I don't know what it consists of. What do you need it? Is there been an explanation
for me to me same? I mean there may be a very good reason public works does was that they said the same
problems public works does very expensive. Yeah, yeah sitting outside says
They call it the service center, but it's a bigger facility than that. Yeah, and I just, and my question
then will be, well, have you thought about other alternatives? I know you've got to put them outside.
I see, I drive by it, and I see like the MCCSE has school buses. Some of them, they're under, they're
under a carport, essentially. You know, the worst weather. I realize that. Anyway. Well, I mean, I guess
I would also point out, yeah, customer authority is actually on the USB and, you know,
I think often we assumed within the city that if there was a council member who was on the supervising
board, that there's information that's shared or that, you know, if you have questions, Matt would know
much more than I would about this process. He's been on the USB a long time and has seen all the ins
and outs of the great case and everything else going forward. So, yeah, I'm not trying to pawn off the
question. I'm just saying that, you know, that's there's another resource. That's also fair. And, and, um,
We've never, we've talked about this a little bit at the council before too. I mean, this is getting
a little beyond the purview of budget, but I appreciate the nexus that Councilman Rall is bringing,
but we've never really had a structured process. I mean, I can, certainly I can try to do better with
transportation and commissioning and USB both, which I both, you know, are the two that I sit on of
like bringing like major updates by way of like for awareness or something like that. But it's always
been a little hard to like, without structure or a consistent approach for how we want to pursue
updates like that as a council to kind of know what to bring. So, I mean, I can own that and I'm always
happy to answer questions too if folks have them, but could do a better job, you know, communicating
things that are in the works. I mean, Deputy Mayor Knapp's right, like this has been a conversation
for a long time and the administration did question it and really look at it with scrutiny, you know,
and they came in the door as well and it was on pause and, you know, designs were on the proceeding
so far and we were kind of examining alternatives.
So like this is a longer running conversation that council doesn't have visibility into. I also don't
think council member Aralo's question is like entirely unreasonable, if not answerable in budget hearings
itself of like a capital expenditure of this magnitude. What type of incremental cost are we talking
about for rate payers? So I appreciate the question also. That's not something I think was discussed
directly in these meetings I was in.
and I do think that this is applicable in terms of this kind of specific thing because I mean this may
be something very specific but it could be any department that has been working on some long-term project
that suddenly it's like oh we are only hearing about this really big expensive thing at like this moment
and that I mean that could happen anywhere and so figuring out some way maybe to communicate
more effectively I think is the thing about some of those big projects, which may include council members
who sit on different boards and commissions. Are you guys really not aware of the service center? This
is a good question because coming in, I just assume this idea has been around a long time that it would
have been enhanced even by prior. A few sentences were devoted to it here and there. I mean, you know,
it was mentioned
There was no, there was no case made for it. There's nothing to say, here's, you know, other than we
have equipment that needs to be sheltered. Okay. We'll build something to shelter it then. Oh, we need
a home and service center. Oh, well, then how much is that? What's the price tag? So this is a corollary
to this is that just in my head, I can add up about a hundred million dollars in capital expenditures
that we're looking at in the next couple of years. So we've got the service center. We got the,
public works, the street department needs to be in a different facility. There's the police station
that needs an E3 or E4 or whatever great wing for itself. For dispatch, we've got $6 or $7 million in
capital expenditures for parts and rack. And then there's something I think we've been needing for a
long time, and that's the fire station down on Taperow. You had it all together, it's over 100 million bucks.
we're entering a time with a lot of economic uncertainty with a massive amount of public and private
debt that's gonna unwind. And I wonder about taking on new debt as a city at this time and not so I
need to prioritize. I think it might be helpful and I know the controller has been working on some overview
documents of capital projects as we've been developing the capital plan because not all of the sources
when we talk about acquiring debt for all these various projects
not all of them are property pass debt that will impact residents. So a tip on does not affect property
taxes for the police station for example. And there are options for other ones too. Some of these are
maybe just best practices for, like if you're gonna buy a car or a house or a major purchase and you're
like, you would finance it, you wouldn't necessarily wanna pay cash up front. So sometimes it's just
a financing decision that makes more sense for the project.
I think an overview of all those things might be helpful. And to just kind of lay out, you know, what
are the things that will impact taxpayers and what are the things that don't impact taxpayers and compare
that to our debt limit. But certainly debt is a tool that we will, we're well below our debt limit.
Our property tax rate is well below our peers. We have lots of levers
available, we detect inside which ones we feel comfortable using and which projects we feel merit that.
So. Just in this kind of tangential, but tangential to what you just said, but it ties us back to the
agenda. So I was looking at the spreadsheet of questions and I didn't see any of these questions from
you in there. Did you not, why did you not submit the questions?
using the process that we have. Because I like to speak in a public setting and during actual budget
hearings. I've communicated my concern about that. We know. Much more access than utilities. So I'm
just saying that. Please make the case for this.
Right now, I'm asking her about like what, you know, the specifics about this, as well as some follow
ups about it spending a lot of money for me to know how much it would be for that. Are you doing that
by the spreadsheet? I'm just asking specific questions to utilities. But the spreadsheet is going to
be made public or is public? Yeah, you know, I
Okay, well, I need to, I guess what I need to communicate here is that, yeah, we're entering a new world.
Jennifer said he's had his hand up for a while. We can't see you, Jeff, sorry. Jeff, we can just send
you anytime. Okay, sorry, and I do just have, you guys hear me, right? Yeah. Yes. Okay, so I just had,
I had two comments. One is kind of on the broader subject of debt.
And that probably would be worth an agenda item on the fiscal committee just to talk about debt overall.
Because like Gretchen mentioned, there are different kinds of debt. So for example, if we're talking
about general obligation debt, yes, that does impact the property taxpayers, but it also comes with
a property tax rate to service that debt. So in other words, we're not kind of eating into our future.
by taking on general obligation debt. That is additional revenue used to finance capital projects. On
the other hand, we do have debt like the public safety bond, which is what's called a general revenue
bond. And that one really does eat into our future. That is debt that did not come with additional revenue
to service it. And so that debt, we have to make those payments
regardless of how much money we have coming in, we don't have additional money coming in to service
those debts. And in fact, when the income tax system is restructured in 29, we may not even have enough.
I mean, we're really gonna have to dig deeply into operations to be able to service that. So I think
it really does. And then there's also TIF debt, which is very different and other forms of revenue.
So I think it might be worth it to actually go through both what we have
what we're considering and talk about it. Jeff, what was that debt that does not come with more revenue
or does not come with general revenue bond? General revenue bonds, the public safety bond is the big
example of that. There's also the solar panel bond. But the public safety bond is the big example of
debt that we're just paying out of our existing revenues.
And of course, it has to be prioritized, number one, over all other priorities for that money. So when
ED lit disappears, for example, the paying of that debt is still going to have to take top priority.
But general obligation debt is not the same. General obligation debt actually comes with an additional
revenue stream to service it.
So that was my general comment on debt. And I think we could have that conversation where I can actually
show you in detail both what we already have and what we're considering. Then to go back to the utilities
issue, I think just to throw in one more piece to the Waterworks Bond, I think part of one of the issues
is also that the council has actually already heard and approved
the utilities bond back in 95, or at 25, sorry, in September of 25. So that is a particularly long time
between the council approval and the actual issuance of the debt. But you all in September of 25 approved
the issuance of $71 million in Waterworks revenue bonds. And so this first
bonds that though that the utilities the utilities is working on right now is really just the first
tranche of So really from the back to the council there are no more gate there are no more approval
gates The only connection is going to be for example councilmember Flaherty who serves on the utility
service board So the new service center is not going to come before us Is a bond
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
plan, indeed. I don't know the plan any more than you do. I just know the bond right now that you have
already brought me $1 million in Waterworks utilities revenue bonds. And this is just the first tranche
of that. That did not include the service center in its entirety. Why? OK. Well, Jeff.
Just a follow up. So we have an example of an economic downturn in 2008 that had various implications
for revenue. Do you work on scenarios related to anticipating things like that? Did we lose you? Yes.
Jeff, are you there?
I mean, we certainly look at, yeah, I'm here. Yeah, did you get my question? Did that discussion be
part of our fiscal committee talking about different scenarios? Anyway, I don't want to take a lot of
time. I can talk in this person on this. Sorry.
Gretchen has to have another meeting at nine, that's why I should have said that. Yes, sorry, I've got
bad connection, but yes. Okay, I'm sorry. Well, I was not paying attention to what was happening. Does
Matt have a, Matt, do you have anything to say about the water works bond that we approved, whether
that includes, how much of it includes the,
Service Center. I was looking for my memory as well. So this was passed on September 30th of last year.
I was actually on vacation that week and missed the meeting myself. Councilmembers Ruff and I were both
absent. And I'm just looking at it. There is mention of the Service Center in the context of it. I'm
sure controller Kim's, you know, I assume he's right, but. Yeah, look, if you look at exhibit A,
Which is just a list of descriptions of projects. Yep. And one of them is a new service center. Yeah.
Yeah. I have a vague memory of thinking like, well, $1 million isn't nearly enough for a service center.
So it was one of those like, well, it's a little bit here and a little bit there and thinking about
it as a study. But I'm not sure that we need to keep on
detouring about that specific thing. And what I have written down here as a summary is that we need
to maybe figure out ways that large capital expenditures could get more or different airtime besides
just bonds and besides just like the yearly budget, because they are big projects and they don't happen
overnight.
But sometimes I think it does maybe feel like from a council perspective, they do have it overnight
because we don't see all of those details that have gone in beforehand. And then they do come to present
to us because there's been so much work that's put into it. They may do have to summarize and skip things
and make judgment calls about what is the thing they're going to put the most emphasis on. And so figuring
out some way to do that
that would enhance communication in general with council members about those big projects. So that's
what I wrote down as the conclusion of that conversation. Is that good? Great. That's great. Okay. Dave,
I would love to revisit the written question issue though, because for me, another, another,
reason to have them written and have them on that public sheet is so that I can go through at the end
and read what questions other people have. And especially for me as a new council member, like relatively
new, so right, like this is my third year, I still feel like that's pretty new, especially compared
to some of y'all. You know, like thinking about it in terms of like, oh, what did some other people
ask? What did some other people see?
you know, and I know that one of your emphases tends to be on large projects as opposed to minutiae
in general. And so that's kind of this interesting piece to me. And there are some trends for sure with
what different council members like to ask. So are you gonna put any of those questions on that sheet
or have you just like, is it not a normalized thing? Like how can,
Like, is there anything that would be easier for you to engage in that way, just? You know, I'm saying
I'm actually writing a memo to all of you in this, with the controller, just saying, I don't think it's
taking on any more debt unless it's absolutely essential right now to the city. And it, and I don't,
I don't, I understand the perspective that relative to other cities that, you know, we're in a vulnerable
place, I think we're going into uncharted territory.
So I brought this up before, but I'm happy to do it on that forum and, you know, just communicate that
going forward. It might help to explain my words against dipping on new bonds, you know. I think that
would be good, but I'm also thinking about anything else that you might have had, like any other questions
or any other, like, pieces, or they're a mouthful of anything. I'm happy to just, you know, formally we had,
Actually, it's interesting because we used to have much more in-depth budget presentations for the public,
and we've gone to sort of the short form right now. People give a very brief introduction a little bit.
I like to just put the questions in the public meeting to whoever's presenting it. I think that's my
preference.
because the presentations are not as in depth. And so then you're asking questions, trying to get the
depth. Well, it's more likely to be, obviously, observed. And people are watching a budget hearing because
it's within the council record. And you find you have enough time during council budget hearings to
ask all the questions you want to ask?
I think mine are mostly related to a couple of subjects that I have someone to ask. I mean, I am doing
some follow up just to, you know, and I did CC everybody about my follow up questions. Well, that's
where like follow up questions should go on the Google form. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Like in terms of that
transparency and that like, you know, this like that's,
And I don't think I want to say anything like that. It's not that they should go on the Google forum.
It's that the system that we've developed this year is a system to put them on the Google forum. But
if there's a different system, and of course that's partly because, you know, open door and like not
really, like we shouldn't CC everybody. And that also honestly like blocks up emails when we do that.
And I would far rather sit down, like personally, I would far rather sit down and go to this one place
and get all the things when I'm like,
ready to spend a couple hours doing that, then do it piecemeal. Sure. In my inbox. So is there a system
that you prefer? No, that's fine. I didn't realize it was a problem for people. But if that is, then
happy to go along with that. I was just saying, it's not so much a problem.
we could benefit from seeing your follow ups and the answers to them. Right. Yeah. Okay. So I had a,
I had a phone question. Did you, you know, um, one thing that I found out with this large expenditure
coming was really into the police station. And I met with the mayor. She extended an invitation to,
I think you met with Jerry. You met with her.
Not recently. Okay. Did she extend an invitation? I have a schedule. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So she'll probably
tell you, um, I think it should have been part of the budget presentation, but it's a, it's a big expenditure
from the police station. And, um, I just, I just wanted to put that out there because I think that this
is something that it's related to this idea that we have all these large expenditures and
there's nowhere that I can find a list of them, let alone like a random priority, like where they're
just coming at us. And how am I supposed to evaluate, like if I am going to sign off on that, like obviously
public safety is very priority. You know, we need facilities is that, you know, I'm not gonna do it
at the, should I do a service center at the expense of et cetera.
You know, there needs to be some sort of prioritization. And I think that the, you know, facing a hundred
million dollars in the next couple of years of these kinds of expenses. I'll put that on Google. Yeah.
So just since we are in a public meeting, the thing that the mayor has been chatting with us about is
that the, if the,
property at the corner of Rogers and 1st Street becomes a police station. There's a proposal to put
the central dispatch there as well, but that would require or that would preferably come with
some solidifying a part of the building to make it withstand natural disasters so that our central dispatch
wouldn't survive a tornado or whatever. And that's another significant
I was responding to some other things. I think so control my Kim's hand actually just went up if he
wanted to spent respond directly to that item that you all just brought up. I would defer to him first. Okay.
Yeah, go ahead, Jeff. Specifically, maybe, I don't know if you can talk about that running list of large
projects and whether you could talk about that. I think, yeah, I mean, that's certainly part of our
intention is to create a more holistic capital plan, a capital improvement plan. And I think a budget
presentation as well, that's certainly going to be a priority.
for us even for the rest of this year. But in terms of what council sees and whether it's part of the
budget process, et cetera, that has to do with the funding, the actual funding mechanism. So for example,
the police station, if the redevelopment commission even approves it, the redevelopment commission has
not heard it yet or has not approved the request yet. That bond would go through
commission process. And then expenditures has never been part of the annual council budget process because
you don't appropriate it. You do have to approve the bonds, but you don't appropriate the funds. So
that's one reason why the police station would never have been part of the annual budget process.
That said, it certainly is in the mix of all the property. Jeff, you kind of went in and out there,
but I think
One of the things that I got out of that was that the budget process includes expenses we have to appropriate
for the next year, which seems appropriate, but maybe then there's still that idea out there that we
need to have something else that includes other types of expenses that aren't necessarily those specifically
appropriated expenses, long-term capital being maybe the primary thing that we're talking about right now.
But anything else that might also need a bond? I'm not sure. Whether any of our coffee things. Yes,
I agree. Nevermind. Can I follow up? Yeah, go for it. Are you changing the subject now? Only a little bit.
that it is 913, we need to have a public comment. We need to talk about fiscal committee goals. So can
you maybe wrap this up with a last comment about budget stuff? Yes. It's two comments. One is actually
about the topic we were just talking about, that I would agree that more conversation and effort applied
to capital planning, including with this committee and with the council, would be very, very welcome,
including all the different types of debt we have, how we service it, and what the options are. And
just thinking of a few examples, too, like the solar bonds were mentioned, but of course those are
Offset by energy savings. So, like, there's differences in what's being paid for and what's not. Similarly.
We were talking in a parking meeting this week or the transportation commission. That, you know, we
had about 50Million dollars of debt on 2 parking garages that are being exclusively surfaced serviced
by TIF. The consolidated TIF we do have. Apparently now excess parking system revenues that are going
to repaving for instance, which we appropriated this week or re appropriated this week. And so.
those are real conversations we could be having if you incrementally raise parking rates and apply excess
parking system revenues like parking meter funds as a portion of debt service that frees up additional,
you know, money that's going elsewhere and things like that. So like that's that's a part of the conversation
I like to have. I just wanted to draw attention to a few examples like that of like, it's not simply
how much was the debt, what's servicing it end of story. Like there are other questions about how we
can make adjustments there and you know, that kind of thing. The other thing I wanted to say briefly is just
We're drawing us back again to outcome-based budgeting. I've kind of lost optimism that this administration
or this council is going to make progress on this. We can keep trying, but I'm just looking at some
of the presentations to draw back to the packet for today, I guess, and looking at things like the highlights
that departments tried to draw us. Here in the police budget, it says overall vehicle accidents decreased
by 6.99%. Personal injury crashes decreased 16%.
That's, that's a metric, but like, what does that tell us? You know what I mean? Like, did any of that
have anything to do with policing? Probably not. Uh, like probably have to do with planning
and transportation and or just like noise in the data. And so it's just like, it's just an illustration.
And there are other things like that throughout all sorts of presentations that I appreciate the effort
to sort of say like, Hey, what's gone well? Like, what, what can we highlight that we did or saw,
you know, CFRD was like, we serve this much food, you know, like those are, that's great. But like,
if it's divorced from any like rational system of like goals and metrics tracked over time, it's meaningless
ultimately. And like that's kind of again, illustrating the problem. Like, and so that's not something
the council alone can fix. We can't just like simply have a few meetings and show up and be like, here's
the set of outcomes leading and lagging indicators for the next 10 years for the city of Bloomington.
Like this is a process to invest in. We probably would need expert support and help. And it would have
to have real buy-in from the mayor's administration and the council to work together on something like that.
Um, so again, I don't have a lot of hope or optimism for that, but I think, uh, I value it and appreciate
that the council had unanimous support for going this direction. And if we want to keep talking about
what it will actually take, I think, you know, I think we should. So there's my comments. Thanks. Okay.
Um, that's actually a pretty good segue into our, the next thing I want to talk about, which is this
role, but first we need to go to public comment on budget. Um, so we don't have any public comment in
the room, but I see a few people online.
So if you could raise your hand if you're interested in commenting. That would be great. I think that's
probably Mr. Keough there. KRKCP with a hand raised when you're... Sophia, if you could ask him to unmute.
And then go ahead. Can you hear me?
Yep, you have, uh, please state your name for the record and then you'll have three minutes and I'm
finding out how much. All right. Kevin Keogh, since public involvement in the future role of this committee
are both on today's agenda, I'd like to ask a broader question. What role does the council want informed
public participation to play in the city's financial oversight and budget process? I ask that sincerely.
As you know, I'm a retired CPA, a practicing internal auditor, 50 years of accounting, auditing, internal
controls, and information systems.
When I participate in these meetings, I'm not simply interested in offering an opinion about whether
I like or dislike a particular expenditure. I believe citizens can also add value by examining public
financial information, asking questions, identifying risk, and bringing relevant professional knowledge
into the discussion. The recent public safety and PSAP lit discussion provides an example. These discussions
raise questions for me concerning fund accounting, internal controls,
budget to actual results, intergovernmental funding, staffing, reserves, and financial forecasting.
Rather than reaching conclusions prematurely, I've decided to take approach at both questions the same
way I would approach a professional internal audit engagement. So I'm developing a formal risk assessment
and control evaluation. I intend to identify the applicable criteria, identify and rank the risk, obtain
supporting records, evaluate the internal controls,
test the available evidence and let the evidence determine my conclusions. If completed, I hope to produce
a report that can be shared publicly. That brings us back to the role of public participation.
Is that the kind of citizen involvement useful to this committee and to the council? And if it is, how
should citizens bring that work forward so it can actually contribute to the council's decision making?
Three minutes of public comments is valuable for expressing an opinion, but is not particularly well
suited to presenting financial analysis, explaining internal control concerns, or discussing supporting evidence.
As this committee considers its future role, I encourage you to consider whether it could also provide
a structured way for citizens with relevant knowledge to contribute substantive financial analysis.
That does not mean that council should accept the citizens' conclusions. Quite the opposite. Good analysis
should be questions, tested, and challenged, whether it comes from the administration, council member,
consultants, or the public.
Council has expressed an interest outcome-based budgeting. I believe the same principle applies to public
involvement. The question shouldn't be, did we provide opportunity for public comment? The better question
is, did public participation add value to the decision-making process? I would welcome guidance from
this committee about how citizens like me can best contribute to that value. Thank you. Thank you.
That was an interesting comment. I think I see one other hand up. Mr. M.G., if you want to go ahead
and unmute and state your name for the record. Good morning, Fiscal Committee. This is Christopher M.G.
from the Greater Bloomington Chamber of Commerce. I just want to say I appreciate Council Member Rollo
raising the debt and fiscal prudence in regards to SB 1 and creating that uncertainty in future revenues.
And I appreciate Controller McKim's insight on the city's debt. I'd encourage to have the committee
come back and have Jeff do his debt 101 and kind of get us all on the same page on what that means.
I mean, so what we owe and what comes back, what rolls off in our capacity, this way we're all speaking
the same language, I think, because it's complicated. And if we all have at least a general understanding
of some of these things, it makes the conversation, I think, at a higher level.
But I wanna broaden that conversation a little bit, that we still have to recall that like 80% of the
city's operating budget is personnel. So the necessary capital investments have cost and deserve scrutiny,
but they should be more on opportunity costs. We should be looking at, well, we only have this amount
of money, that's project A or B. But the bonds have like a finance of a beginning, middle, and personnel
costs do not. Salaries, benefits, COLA and all that become part of the recurring
based costs every year. So with SB1 looming, that reoccurring cost structure ultimately has a bigger
fiscal challenge and that fiscal prudence means understanding our debt, but also means being careful
about permanent obligation as we build during this constraining and sort of uncertainty that we all
are facing right now. So thank you for your time. I always appreciate starting my Friday mornings with
the fiscal committee. Thank you. There's also several chats at the moment.
I will read these chats if they are applicable. Property tax revenues depend on property tax assessments,
not merely the rate.
Accurate council can require by passage of legislation that formal review events before council. Yes.
Just going back to that rate thing, council only gets to decide the rate that we don't have any effect
on the assessment assessments.
Those reporting and review events can be required by legislation. That's kind of the same. Discussing
these matters in public rather than by email is appropriate. I think that's probably about the budget
stuff. In other words, council has authority to require council involvement in the form of actual approval
steps. So the grading level, yeah, all of that's the same. Confidence comes from process. Research and
exercise of council authority is separate from executive decisions.
Why does the council feel hamstrung by executives? All right. Those were all good questions too. Can
you make sure to send me those chats just so that you have, thank you. And those were all from Eric,
thank you. All right. Hang on. I need to move to agenda number three for this whole committee roll.
Okay, because I'm 923 and we kind of have a commitment to get out of here at 930 and this,
This part of the question, uh, questioning for me is kind of relevant because it is September at this
point. This is a special committee, not a, um, not a standing committee, which means that every year
it could like, go away. And it started out as being a special committee, partly because we were experimenting
with it for the first time. Um, I am personally of the opinion that we should keep it and it should
be elevated to a standing committee, but I, and I'm,
totally good with doing the legislation to make that happen sometimes before the end of the year, as
long as y'all are also on board with that and supportive of that. So before I go any further, is there
anybody not supportive here of making this a standing committee? I'm enthusiastically supportive. Great.
So the bigger question is, let's leave out from base budgeting. Well, we can't really leave it.
So we may not be able to finish this conversation here now, but we need to look at these roles that
are in the original charge of the committee that is in the packet to work closely with the controller
for various things, be responsible for supporting council staff with budget, continue the work started
by the ad hoc salary committee related to the elected salary framework and explore and recommend improvements
to the budgeting process. That was the original charge.
So we make this a standing committee. How does that need to change in terms of that original charge?
Are there things that are still applicable? Are there things that are not applicable? If we want to
each take maybe a minute to give me some feedback on that so that then maybe over the next month or
so I can start working on that legislation, that would be great. Who wants to go first? So I don't know what
track progress of the yearly budget and her means? I assume that that is like the quarterly reports.
Okay. Okay. I have not been reporting back to the whole council. No, you're right. We have not been.
So, the question is, should be, should we report, should we be reporting back
quarterly reports to the whole council. Any quick answer for that, yes, no? Probably yes. I support
verbal reports for some of that, like we talked about recently. Okay. And I think that one of the things
with verbal reports, and this is another Title II amendment, I'm pretty sure that reports from committees
in Title II say they have to be written reports. Right.
we could maybe amend that in some way. So maybe that's something that it's kind of like been on my mind
that maybe we should amend that so that to leave some space for verbal reports. All right, any other
feedback on that reporting? Yeah, I mean, it can be so involved that a verbal report might be difficult
in a time law. And so maybe in,
Reflecting on a suggestion about, you know, civic involvement, maybe deliberation sessions should be
allocated for council for a report and also input from citizens who have expertise or who have certain
perspectives. All right, so maybe
Maybe we could loosen up the phrasing so it's work to council on public and then we can leave open how.
And what about adding something about tracking that. Yes.
discussing upcoming projects that would be worth it. Similarly, we have verbally talked about
the administration bringing fee increases through this, which is something that's going to happen regarding
sanitation fees. But I will add something about that too.
I mean, speed increases. All right, anything else? Should I try to add something about outcome-based
budgeting or support for budget processes? Because should it be outcome-based budgeting specifically,
or should it be? I mean, we have number four, explore and recommend improvements. Would that be captioned
in? I don't know. So here's one reflection.
on what Matt said earlier about outcome-based budgeting, and he's right on target when it comes to public
safety reports that crashes are down 15%. What does it mean? What does that mean? It doesn't mean anything
unless you've got a trend line, unless we can see, and you've got an outcome maybe over here, and the
trend is going toward it or away or whatever. But if you have a yearly sort of progress,
We can just graph it. It's got to be the information there on the Excel spreadsheet. We can see what
happened in the last five years. Are we getting closer further away? And that really would help the
outcome-based process. And the logical theory of what caused that change, right? That's the other piece
of it too. I feel like that brings us back actually to the conversation that we were having before
about what it is that we might want for next year, which is trend lines over five years with any data
or any metrics like accident or crashes or road repairs, et cetera. And then ideally,
buying metrics to Google slash platforms. And we got some of that in street, right? With the whole thing
about like the sidewalks and the investment in the sidewalks and the investment in, yeah. So we got
a little of that in a couple of different places, but more of that would be helpful. Okay. Going back
to kind of like our mission statement. I think it's not hearing me now, so I need to go to public comment
about this.
If you are a member of public and wanting to comment hopefully relatively quickly on this committee's
charge and purpose and any thoughts that you may have about making it a standing committee versus a
special committee and what we should be doing as a committee. We already did hear one thing from Mr.
Keough about
receiving information from the public, essentially. And I see him with his hand raised again. Go ahead
and unmute, and you'll have three minutes. Go ahead. He's muted again. Hang on. You're muted again.
I'm sorry. Can you hear me now?
Yeah, I think you should really consider about elevating your stature, so to speak, and looking into
becoming an audit committee and look at other cities that have developed audit committees and would
have professional staff who are independent of the day to day operations who can add value to the,
you know, to your discussion by presenting independent.
based on a risk assessment, things you should be looking at in depth and giving you that type of information.
So I know other cities in Indiana do have audit committees and have internal auditors. And I think it
would be something that would be of great value to the community. And I think it would put a lot more
framework and structure into what you're doing. Because it comes with, an audit committee has certain,
it should have a charter and it should be looking at
doing specific things. So anyway, that's my position. That's my suggestion. I know it's difficult and
it takes funding and all that stuff, but I think it's something you should consider. Okay, thank you
very much. Anybody else online with comments about Smitty's charge of purpose? Okay, seeing no others.
Thank you guys. If you have any other thoughts on this,
Go ahead and let me know as I'm working on this piece of legislation on the goal of me to do it for
them. Yeah. Do you want to see the additional chats that will be submitted? How does fiscal committee
relate to budget committee? Verbal reports are federal. Written reports become farther written public
record. Economic conditions change when debt is durable. Highlight that distinction. OK. I'll send those along.
That would be great. We don't have a budget committee anymore. The budget committee was a budget task
force specifically related to outcome-based budgeting. It was also assigned by the president, Ad Hoc,
and the president this year decided not to do that this year. So it's just been the fiscal committee.
And so that is a point, like, you know, should I look back at the budget task forces purposes and see
if some of that should get molded into this committee? Which I think is one thing that I know I'm great
about, and I have that in mind.
So moving on to budget-related dates, just so that you all know, the county did indeed authorize having
a must task force related to SB1, the Municipal Unit Strategic Task Force. Jeff, if you've not already
received an invitation related to that, you should soon. And the other thing that I wanted to make sure
to mention is
you know I've been kind of keeping this like fiscal committee calendar like a yearly calendar and I
do want to try to have some sort of calendar in November or December that we kind of approve that informs
the 2027 committee. So please get back to me on anything you think might need to go on that as you review
this. Also in our future meeting dates our next meeting is September 18th. I put down there that we're
having the
I learned yesterday, the day before from Gretchen that sanitation is also going to have a memo
and information about their proposed fee increase. So that is going to be in that meeting. So the elected
official salary is revisited. Honestly, I'm going to de-prioritize that a little bit because I think
it's probably more important to do the sanitation fee conversation and make sure that we have
plenty of time for that discussion because we just need to get the elected official salary stuff in
before the end of the year. October, then I have quarter three financial summaries. So Jeff, that may
get pushed to the 16th of October, depending on how the elected official salary stuff goes. And then
there was some other suggestion on what we needed to do for a future meeting. Oh, I know.
I'm thinking maybe on the comment that we got related to Jeff basically giving a bond 101 kind of thing.
I'm not sure that that should be in this committee versus maybe we need to have that for the whole council.
The whole council needs to have a bond 101 workshop. And that one of the other things I think that was
an original charge of this committee was
are recommending CF work closely with the controller to recommend scheduling of specific budget related
discussions, presentations, and education for the full council. So I think that maybe I might try to,
and I'm meeting with Jeff next week about a bond, the no bond issue this year. So maybe we can schedule
some sort of education night for all council members, basically a working session slash educational
moment. And maybe it would be
Maybe it'd be more like public sessions or public counseling. Anyway, Jeff, let's talk about that next
week. That was all. Questions, comments, Isabel? I don't want to lose sight of ways that we could improve
the budget process, especially the public engagement piece and the follow-up council member question
piece because I think both
Well, we didn't, once again, we had very few members of the public engaged during the hearings. And
we have very few council members who have submitted questions through the form that was used this year,
which admittedly was a little more confusing in the past. So I wonder if those two, let's just put a
pin in those to discuss. Yes, I agree with that.
Yes. Yes. I feel like that was definitely half a conversation, because more than the full hour talking
about that kind of feedback. Yeah. Matt, did you have something else that you want to say? Just briefly,
I agree that a broader kind of 101 and discussion of different types of debt, how we service it,
et cetera, would be great for the Council as a whole. I'd also like this committee to dig deeper on
capital planning
That service and like, it's the level of depth that we would get to it in an all council session. Like,
I think it's limited and it will probably require some discussion over time. Okay. All right. So, so
maybe that needs to be. Part of this committee is so adding something about.
about long-term capital planning into the fiscal committees. I think that's terrific. It's a big part
of, yeah, city finances and fiscal oversight and it gets a little lost in the annual budgeting cycle
for sure. Or can. All right. Perfect. Perfect. Okay. Any other last words? I may be assuming on the
18th. Okay. Dave may be assuming Matt and Isabella if you could flip your calendars. I'll be in person.
Perfect. Perfect. Okay. Early heads up. I think I'll miss the meeting after that. The, the 1. In the
end of October or beginning of October, either. Okay. Okay. Great. All right. Thank you guys so much.
Have a great day. Have a great weekend and we are adjourned.