WEBVTT 00:00:00.258 --> 00:00:07.656 - All right, since Dave is online now, and it's 8.32, I'll go ahead and call the order of the special 00:00:07.656 --> 00:00:15.572 - fiscal committee meeting on October 2nd, May 1st, 6, will be Stossburg, District 3. Isabel Piedmont-Smith, 00:00:15.572 --> 00:00:23.413 - District 1. Go ahead, Dave. Go ahead, Dave. Dave Rallo, City Council District 4. Sophia McDowell, Clerk's 00:00:23.413 --> 00:00:28.222 - Office. Jeff Machim, City Controller. Gretchen F., Deputy Mayor. 00:00:28.738 --> 00:00:36.760 - Thank you. So our agenda and packet today, our agenda is pretty short. I did put a must be an update 00:00:36.760 --> 00:00:44.783 - on that and elected official salary discussion, which is kind of like the main thing that we need to 00:00:44.783 --> 00:00:53.123 - do today. And then the controller just wanted to give us a couple of updates, any notes about scheduling 00:00:53.123 --> 00:00:58.206 - and then adjournment. So any thoughts or updates on the agenda? 00:01:00.098 --> 00:01:07.964 - Are we going to revisit the budget process and how things went and stuff like that at some point? Yeah. 00:01:07.964 --> 00:01:15.527 - I think that that definitely should happen. Our next meeting, I think we're going to talk about the 00:01:15.527 --> 00:01:23.166 - quarterly reports, third quarter reports because we were going to do that today, but then we need to 00:01:23.166 --> 00:01:28.158 - do the elected official salary thing today and so I don't want to 00:01:28.866 --> 00:01:38.348 - you know, push the quarterly report off for too long. And so probably the meeting after that. Okay. 00:01:38.348 --> 00:01:48.210 - Cause I don't think that as long as we get the elected official salary stuff sorted, I don't think that 00:01:48.210 --> 00:01:57.502 - we have another like time sensitive thing. Any other questions or comments or thoughts? Okay. Um, 00:01:59.394 --> 00:02:08.948 - I am going to do the MUST committee update, except I'm looking for the actual meeting time in my calendar 00:02:08.948 --> 00:02:18.322 - for the next meeting. Jeff, maybe you have it off the top of your head. I don't off the top of my head. 00:02:18.322 --> 00:02:27.516 - I know, right? I went to the MUST meeting, and Isabel did as well, a couple of weeks ago. That was on 00:02:27.516 --> 00:02:28.958 - September 18th. 00:02:29.410 --> 00:02:36.600 - The folks on the committee were I think there was it felt like there was general alignment about doing 00:02:36.600 --> 00:02:43.651 - a county municipal rate, which is the thing that's good for us. But of course they didn't, you know, 00:02:43.651 --> 00:02:50.911 - vote on anything they didn't make any decisions and they scheduled another meeting which I thought that 00:02:50.911 --> 00:02:57.054 - I put in my calendar for another Friday at 1pm, which I think was in mid October. Yeah. 00:02:57.186 --> 00:03:06.596 - I thought that I had put it in my calendar and now I'm like, hmm. But I don't feel like there's generally 00:03:06.596 --> 00:03:15.562 - like a huge update about the must stuff. The must process is going. Everybody seems to be bought in. 00:03:15.562 --> 00:03:25.150 - And I think that, you know. Did they send some feedback to the state? Wasn't there an October 1st deadline? 00:03:26.146 --> 00:03:33.667 - And that's November 1st. There was an October 1st deadline to have the first meeting. Right. And which 00:03:33.667 --> 00:03:41.554 - we accomplished. And so, yeah, the idea is that this next meeting to agree on the statements that hopefully 00:03:41.554 --> 00:03:49.295 - I'll have all four of us vote unanimously on the statement to send to the state. Yeah. And that is either 00:03:49.295 --> 00:03:53.822 - the 23rd or the 16th is what they maybe tentatively said. And 00:03:55.938 --> 00:04:06.027 - clearly thought I'd put it on my calendar. So that's the last update. Dave. Oh, just thanks for that 00:04:06.027 --> 00:04:16.315 - update. I just want to hear from Jeff McKim about Jeff, what is your sense of things right now? Is the 00:04:16.315 --> 00:04:24.606 - city and the county in general agreement about how to proceed in terms of rate and 00:04:26.018 --> 00:04:33.720 - chair and that sort of thing? I would say we did not get so far as to actually have any kind of agreement 00:04:33.720 --> 00:04:41.060 - on rates. In fact, we all agreed, or in the statement that I think we'll be passing next time, we'll 00:04:41.060 --> 00:04:48.689 - say we don't have enough information to agree on rates. But like Toby said, I would agree that the group 00:04:48.689 --> 00:04:54.430 - seemed to be in general alignment that keeping the units whole was a priority. 00:04:54.562 --> 00:05:01.709 - And they were interested in keeping it in its hole. So that was definitely the vibe in the room. That 00:05:01.709 --> 00:05:09.207 - was something that I think all four participants seemed to assume. So you don't see any at least immediate 00:05:09.207 --> 00:05:16.285 - hurdles going forward? No immediate hurdles. But the other thing is the general assembly is going to 00:05:16.285 --> 00:05:21.470 - make more changes. So it's just as soon as we come up with a path forward 00:05:22.018 --> 00:05:28.349 - I guarantee you this session, there will be changes. Some may be helpful changes and some may be, 00:05:28.349 --> 00:05:34.938 - you know, you've probably heard news about an interest in eliminating property taxes. So it could get 00:05:34.938 --> 00:05:41.656 - a lot crazier before it gets better. But I would say the meeting was, it was run very well. The meeting 00:05:41.656 --> 00:05:49.150 - was primarily run by Greg Garitas from FSG Group, which is the county's equivalent debris, their financial advisor. 00:05:49.282 --> 00:05:56.203 - And the scenarios that he modeled and that we discussed were definitely involved setting the rates at 00:05:56.203 --> 00:06:03.327 - a level that would keep the other units whole. There was also, of course, there was also mention several 00:06:03.327 --> 00:06:10.180 - times of wanting to make sure that the library and the schools are pulled. The school did not choose 00:06:10.180 --> 00:06:16.286 - to speak at the meeting. Units were allowed to speak at the meeting. The schools did not. 00:06:16.962 --> 00:06:23.973 - Speak but it sounds like from what we hear that they're kind of working on their own legislative path 00:06:23.973 --> 00:06:30.915 - not not You know necessarily asking for lit shares, but rather lobbying the legislators to make sure 00:06:30.915 --> 00:06:37.788 - that it in some way that schools are kept whole I'm just curious where our state reps there No, no, 00:06:37.788 --> 00:06:42.462 - no, okay. Thank you now there are a couple county councilors and um 00:06:42.850 --> 00:06:49.124 - Yeah, I finally found my notes. Because I actually said something to speak, but then I didn't manage 00:06:49.124 --> 00:06:55.336 - to get up in time because I wanted to make sure. Because Jeff was on the committee and spoke, and I 00:06:55.336 --> 00:07:01.859 - felt represented the city's interests pretty well. And that includes council in terms of his statements. 00:07:01.859 --> 00:07:08.568 - And so I just hesitated too long. So there were a couple of township folks that spoke. Monroe Fire District 00:07:08.568 --> 00:07:12.606 - spoke. And then Waste Reduction District spoke. And that was it. 00:07:12.770 --> 00:07:20.852 - And I was surprised that there were not more that spoke. And I just didn't like hop out of my seat fast 00:07:20.852 --> 00:07:28.624 - enough. Yeah. Can I make one other update about that? Yeah. But one topic that didn't get discussed 00:07:28.624 --> 00:07:37.406 - that I think should be at the next one is Bloomington Transit. It's the scenario that FSG modeled basically just 00:07:37.826 --> 00:07:44.850 - a model replacing the lost, the amount of lit that Bloomington Transit would lose. But the ceiling that 00:07:44.850 --> 00:07:51.806 - could be adopted for Bloomington Transit actually could be quite a bit higher than that. And could be, 00:07:51.806 --> 00:07:58.898 - for example, an opportunity to replace the city's contribution that we've been making and were scheduled 00:07:58.898 --> 00:08:05.854 - to make until 2027. As you heard at the public hearing from Bloomington Transit, they do rely on that. 00:08:06.050 --> 00:08:12.105 - at least some of that funding for several important services. But there is an opportunity through the 00:08:12.105 --> 00:08:18.101 - way that the lit rates are structured now to actually get Bloomington Transit more revenue to offset 00:08:18.101 --> 00:08:24.038 - that loss. And I don't think FSG would have even been aware of that one issue. So there's no reason 00:08:24.038 --> 00:08:30.390 - why they wouldn't have modeled a higher number. And unfortunately Bloomington Transit wasn't there either, 00:08:30.390 --> 00:08:36.030 - but somebody at some point needs to advocate for Bloomington Transit and rate setting process. 00:08:37.090 --> 00:08:43.950 - And while we're talking about Bloomington Transit, the other thing that Isabel probably knows I'm working 00:08:43.950 --> 00:08:50.681 - on, but Dave probably doesn't because I'm working on it through the council processes. And my interview 00:08:50.681 --> 00:08:57.283 - committee is looking at Bloomington Transit's board, which right now has five people on it, but state 00:08:57.283 --> 00:09:03.819 - law says they could be a board of seven. And so looking at the possibilities for creating a board of 00:09:03.819 --> 00:09:05.502 - seven and rows and ponds, 00:09:05.826 --> 00:09:12.713 - to that and what makes sense. And that's one thing when I met with, so Lamington Transit also has a 00:09:12.713 --> 00:09:19.875 - couple of people working on that. And when I met with them, one of the things they mentioned was trying 00:09:19.875 --> 00:09:27.037 - to be more inclusive of county stuff in terms of Lamington Transit boundaries. And so one of the things 00:09:27.037 --> 00:09:32.478 - that I have staff working on is taxing and how SEA1 affects Lamington Transit. 00:09:32.610 --> 00:09:44.198 - and where the tax base is and how we could potentially leverage anything in terms of that change and 00:09:44.198 --> 00:09:56.131 - also thinking about who is on the board. So that's, yeah, I haven't, they just got back to me with more 00:09:56.131 --> 00:10:01.982 - research on that yesterday. But yeah. Yeah. Other, 00:10:02.242 --> 00:10:11.603 - Questions, comments? Thank you, Jeff. I clearly did not care for that very well, wasn't I? Yeah, you 00:10:11.603 --> 00:10:21.150 - did great. But I still not having my notes when the next meeting is. I know. I have it on paper notes. 00:10:21.150 --> 00:10:30.974 - Well, you can get my paper notes right here. And there's nothing there. Maybe I haven't announced it yet. 00:10:31.298 --> 00:10:39.146 - Well, we did say that it hasn't been formally announced. It's true that we haven't set out a public 00:10:39.146 --> 00:10:47.544 - announcement or a notice yet, but we did set it up. Yeah. Anyway, moving on then to the elected officials' 00:10:47.544 --> 00:10:55.392 - gallery discussion. So in the packet, I included essentially the same document that I included last 00:10:55.392 --> 00:10:57.982 - time. But at the end, I added in 00:10:58.402 --> 00:11:05.523 - Claire Bolden did intend to join this morning. She messaged me this morning saying that she was last 00:11:05.523 --> 00:11:12.574 - minute unavailable. And so Sophia is supposed to have an update from her, but she also, in her text 00:11:12.574 --> 00:11:19.836 - to me, simply said that she doesn't have any changes from previous statements, whole increases for all 00:11:19.836 --> 00:11:25.406 - the gathered data for 2020. Yeah, that's basically what they. Okay, thank you. 00:11:25.762 --> 00:11:33.544 - And then I put in the statement for Mayor Thompson, who was unable to be here today, but also recommended 00:11:33.544 --> 00:11:40.885 - for 2027, elected official increases not exceed the budgeted civil city COLA. And then, so based on 00:11:40.885 --> 00:11:48.886 - the 2026 salary wage-informed benefit study, city of Wellington's elected official salaries are competitive, 00:11:48.886 --> 00:11:52.190 - especially considering benefits eligibility. 00:11:53.090 --> 00:11:59.382 - For 2028, I think additional research is needed to develop a consistent process for evaluating elected 00:11:59.382 --> 00:12:05.980 - official compensation. Not quite sure what she means in terms of the 2026 salary survey or elected official 00:12:05.980 --> 00:12:12.150 - salaries specifically. I think she probably, can you read the sentence again, sir? Based on the 2026 00:12:12.150 --> 00:12:18.564 - salary wage and fringe benefits survey, city of Bloomington's elected official salaries are competitive, 00:12:18.564 --> 00:12:22.718 - especially considering benefits. I believe she's speaking of the A. 00:12:22.914 --> 00:12:29.151 - survey and information. OK. Yeah, I have that, too. And AIM, for the public's knowledge, said to not 00:12:29.151 --> 00:12:35.573 - release any of what they did publicly. Yeah, I'm not sure that I would agree with that, actually, based 00:12:35.573 --> 00:12:41.809 - on the AIM thing, but that's maybe a conversation for another. I mean, I think that's a longstanding 00:12:41.809 --> 00:12:48.231 - philosophical disagreement between our two groups that we believe the other state salaries are the most 00:12:48.231 --> 00:12:51.998 - relevant factor, and we believe they're not relevant at all. 00:12:52.258 --> 00:12:59.407 - So I think that's a pretty big philosophical chasm to try to solve. Maybe. I guess I was looking at 00:12:59.407 --> 00:13:06.556 - it. I was doing some comparisons between elected salaries and some of the other department head and 00:13:06.556 --> 00:13:13.777 - official salaries of that A study. We don't think those are comfortable at all. No. I understand you 00:13:13.777 --> 00:13:20.926 - feel differently. I'm just saying we don't agree that that's a relevant consideration. I think one. 00:13:21.154 --> 00:13:27.365 - the rest of our city staff are paid at higher levels than other similar professionals in the state. 00:13:27.365 --> 00:13:33.763 - And then elective officials aren't necessarily, that does matter. Anyway. You are ranked in the higher 00:13:33.763 --> 00:13:40.036 - end of the state and you also receive health insurance benefits, which for the benefit of the public 00:13:40.036 --> 00:13:46.434 - is a $14,000 benefit added on top of the salary. I don't know that everyone is aware of that, but that 00:13:46.434 --> 00:13:47.614 - is the salary that 00:13:48.546 --> 00:13:56.480 - elected officials receive, all elected officials is also in addition to the benefits of health insurance. 00:13:56.480 --> 00:14:03.965 - Do we know if other elected officials have health insurance options at the council members? That is 00:14:03.965 --> 00:14:11.599 - not reported to AIM, but I can ask Dr. Paycheck to investigate. Dave, what did you want to say? Well, 00:14:11.599 --> 00:14:17.662 - just kind of unpacking it a little bit. I mean, I see there's a couple of things 00:14:18.082 --> 00:14:25.864 - going on here. One is what you mentioned Hopi that, you know, salaries generally speaking in the city 00:14:25.864 --> 00:14:33.645 - should be in some relative sense, you know, on the same level, it seems to me. There is such a thing, 00:14:33.645 --> 00:14:41.427 - you know, Bloomington does have a high cost of living relative to other communities in the state. And 00:14:41.427 --> 00:14:46.462 - I think that the workload of the Bloomington City Council is also 00:14:47.138 --> 00:14:55.968 - probably at the very, I would say in the top 5% of all electeds in the state, I think, in terms of council 00:14:55.968 --> 00:15:04.302 - responsibilities, duties, and work. So just those to consider. I mean, I would be, I think this is a 00:15:04.302 --> 00:15:12.719 - good study for a SPIA intern or something. Just do a deep dive into this and report back on variables 00:15:12.719 --> 00:15:16.350 - like that. Think of all the variables that, 00:15:17.218 --> 00:15:25.733 - You know, we would want to consider in this. Anyway, I think we're probably compensated in some range 00:15:25.733 --> 00:15:34.415 - that could be called fair, but I think that we're probably at the low end actually of that. But anyway, 00:15:34.415 --> 00:15:43.014 - that's it. So I think that we just went down a rabbit hole specifically talking about council members, 00:15:43.014 --> 00:15:46.270 - and I'm not sure that I was there yet. 00:15:46.754 --> 00:15:55.651 - But the other thing that I included in the packet was just a draft ordinance for next year that under 00:15:55.651 --> 00:16:04.722 - section one where we actually are supposed to put the compensation totals, I put the 2026 and then just 00:16:04.722 --> 00:16:14.142 - some proposals that are mostly meaningless, you could say. So with a 2% OLA for everybody and then I put in 00:16:14.402 --> 00:16:22.680 - what that means in terms of actual dollar amount increases for each of the three elected positions. 00:16:22.680 --> 00:16:31.123 - And then I put in a proposal with the average total amount. So instead of, it goes back to that whole 00:16:31.123 --> 00:16:39.483 - general inequity of cost of living percentage increases across the board between higher salaries and 00:16:39.483 --> 00:16:43.870 - lower salaries and how that perpetuates inequity and 00:16:45.378 --> 00:16:56.093 - the difference in terms of who makes the most and who makes the least. And so the average full amount 00:16:56.093 --> 00:17:06.809 - for those three positions is $2,300. And so then I gave everybody a $2,377 raise or increase from the 00:17:06.809 --> 00:17:11.326 - 2026 salaries. And then I went back to the 00:17:12.770 --> 00:17:21.053 - ad hoc committee of a couple of years ago, that the proposal was essentially to set the clerk and the 00:17:21.053 --> 00:17:29.336 - mayor and then do council members as a percentage of the mayor and did the 2.7% poll of the mayor and 00:17:29.336 --> 00:17:37.457 - the clerk and then made the council 20% of the mayor and then 25% of the mayor. And I think the 25% 00:17:37.457 --> 00:17:41.598 - was what was initially, that that was kind of the, 00:17:43.042 --> 00:17:50.103 - basis of salary setting from the committee a couple of years ago that council was a whole kind of shot 00:17:50.103 --> 00:17:57.232 - down and changed that. But I figured that that was, when I was brainstorming possibilities, that I felt 00:17:57.232 --> 00:18:04.293 - like that was one of them that I shouldn't have. And so then, of course, what we really need to figure 00:18:04.293 --> 00:18:10.942 - out on this committee is what our basis of salary setting is going to be this year, specifically 00:18:12.546 --> 00:18:23.545 - with hopefully the larger eye and mind of somebody that could be consistent. Isabel, do you have thoughts? 00:18:23.545 --> 00:18:33.824 - Oh, I just don't feel like we're getting anywhere in the last two years. We've gotten nowhere. Now, 00:18:33.824 --> 00:18:40.094 - two years ago, some people said we shouldn't change salaries 00:18:41.282 --> 00:18:53.818 - that would benefit ourselves. We should wait and change them for 2028. We're getting closer to 2028. 00:18:53.818 --> 00:19:06.229 - I feel like in the next 12 months is our last shot to actually have a coherent rationale for how we 00:19:06.229 --> 00:19:11.070 - set salaries independent of any public 00:19:11.202 --> 00:19:20.885 - judgment that we're doing it to benefit ourselves. Um, since, you know, some of us aren't running again 00:19:20.885 --> 00:19:30.289 - and et cetera. So, however, people are deciding now whether to run next year. And one of our reasons 00:19:30.289 --> 00:19:40.158 - was one of our, uh, things that we want to consider was making it a job that, um, more people could take. 00:19:44.002 --> 00:19:51.334 - because it pays decently, right? So that would be, then we would have to make that this year so that 00:19:51.334 --> 00:19:58.738 - people would know what they could earn as a council member when they make the decision whether to run 00:19:58.738 --> 00:20:06.214 - the council. Now I know some people think that's totally irrelevant and it's a public service position 00:20:06.214 --> 00:20:12.094 - and fiduciary and whatever, but I disagree with that. I think that we need some, 00:20:13.026 --> 00:20:21.323 - representation across the socioeconomic spectrum to serve on council. And so I'm torn. I feel like the 00:20:21.323 --> 00:20:29.620 - salary should be more. I think there's a good point to be made about the health insurance. But I don't 00:20:29.620 --> 00:20:37.675 - see that we're any closer to an actual calculation of what would be fair. And just to be clear, the 00:20:37.675 --> 00:20:40.414 - mayor's office doesn't, we don't, 00:20:40.898 --> 00:20:47.491 - oppose the increase because we think that, you know, you were describing reasons of, you know, it's 00:20:47.491 --> 00:20:54.413 - just fiduciary, it should be public service. It's that we don't believe that salary is the main obstacle 00:20:54.413 --> 00:21:01.071 - why people don't run. So if you increase it to an amount that is much more, but still not as much as 00:21:01.071 --> 00:21:07.730 - people are earning at their day job, you still haven't broadened the pool, but you have added all of 00:21:07.730 --> 00:21:09.246 - these other, you know, 00:21:09.346 --> 00:21:15.756 - It requires campaigning, which not everybody wants to do or can do if you have children or a day job. 00:21:15.756 --> 00:21:22.102 - It requires evening meetings, which if you have a day job is difficult. So, you know, in general, it 00:21:22.102 --> 00:21:28.512 - is a position that is difficult, I think, for it seems to me that it would be difficult for people to 00:21:28.512 --> 00:21:34.984 - do if they were working full time, had children or single parent and the adjustments in salary did not 00:21:34.984 --> 00:21:39.006 - solve those problems, which I think are deep and true problems. 00:21:39.266 --> 00:21:46.329 - with extending access, but. Well, I'll say to somebody who falls into that category of leaving my family 00:21:46.329 --> 00:21:53.258 - and my kids in the evenings for these meetings, salary does go somewhere and it is meaningful. And the 00:21:53.258 --> 00:22:00.120 - whole conversation that we had in 2024 that completely demeans the position of council at all was one 00:22:00.120 --> 00:22:06.982 - of the closest times that I felt like quitting. And it wasn't because of how much money I was making, 00:22:06.982 --> 00:22:08.798 - it was because of how much 00:22:08.930 --> 00:22:20.950 - the position was being demeaned, not only by administration, but by colleagues. And how much does it 00:22:20.950 --> 00:22:33.089 - really work? And the health insurance can mean something, but it doesn't necessarily mean anything if 00:22:33.089 --> 00:22:38.206 - you have to have another job on top of it. 00:22:38.306 --> 00:22:44.842 - in order to actually pay rent in this town. And so, yeah, then maybe the increase is completely not 00:22:44.842 --> 00:22:51.377 - meaningful because you would still have to have another job. Well, it depends on how many hours you 00:22:51.377 --> 00:22:58.305 - have to work another job, right? Do you have to work another job full-time or do you have to work another 00:22:58.305 --> 00:23:04.972 - part-time job? Yeah, you just have to work another job to pay the bills, but... Part-time jobs can be 00:23:04.972 --> 00:23:07.390 - hard to find, I think, and that's... 00:23:07.746 --> 00:23:27.221 - We know. That's not an experience, but. Yeah, sorry. So it's. I don't know where we can arrive. I don't 00:23:27.221 --> 00:23:36.958 - want to be there. You're muted. You're muted, Dave. 00:23:43.746 --> 00:23:56.230 - Still muted. Muted. Success. You said something brilliant from there. Expletives, no. I think everything 00:23:56.230 --> 00:24:08.834 - that was said here is fairly relevant. I mean, there are different facets to it. I don't treat all people 00:24:08.834 --> 00:24:11.806 - the same, so I don't say 00:24:11.906 --> 00:24:21.322 - you know, people do this or people do that. I think that there are groups of people that may be excluded 00:24:21.322 --> 00:24:30.647 - just because the salary is just not, you know, adequate to cover their needs. But, you know, I do think 00:24:30.647 --> 00:24:38.718 - that it's not a good thing to do. Getting back to the question hand, what to do for 2027? 00:24:39.234 --> 00:24:48.284 - I mean, I'm just in favor of the coal increase, um, for a couple of reasons. One is that we're in some 00:24:48.284 --> 00:24:57.070 - sort of fiscal, um, you know, uncertainty. And the other is because, um, the, what Isabel said that 00:24:57.070 --> 00:25:05.945 - I think it's better to raise for the, for the next crop of, of council members because we're in that 00:25:05.945 --> 00:25:07.614 - weird position of, 00:25:07.714 --> 00:25:14.733 - being able to raise our salaries, although I think we've been very judicious about it, maybe overly 00:25:14.733 --> 00:25:21.751 - so. So have we done nothing in two years? I don't know. I think this conversation's been helpful to 00:25:21.751 --> 00:25:28.980 - me to hear all sides. I think it's unfortunate if people demean the position. I mean, I don't know who 00:25:28.980 --> 00:25:36.350 - that was, maybe I would guess, but we don't need to name names, but I hope I was never in that category. 00:25:37.314 --> 00:25:46.337 - of someone who demeaned counsel or in any way. But I am overly cautious because I think that there is, 00:25:46.337 --> 00:25:55.185 - unfortunately, the way things are, there's a lot of cynicism and I don't want to lead toward more of 00:25:55.185 --> 00:26:04.734 - that for people who serve in office. I think it's a hard job. For everything Gretchen said, you have a very, 00:26:05.250 --> 00:26:11.548 - You have a schedule that's very demanding and fluid and things come up and it's just, sometimes it's 00:26:11.548 --> 00:26:17.970 - kind of overwhelming and then you've got constituents to deal with and it's one of the toughest things 00:26:17.970 --> 00:26:24.205 - I've ever done. So I think it does need to be compensated in a fair manner. And I think that having 00:26:24.205 --> 00:26:30.503 - somebody do some deep dive on it and then reporting back would be a good thing. It's a shame that we 00:26:30.503 --> 00:26:33.246 - don't have an office staff right now that's 00:26:33.378 --> 00:26:42.270 - you know, in a position to do it, but maybe soon we will. And that might be one of the top priorities 00:26:42.270 --> 00:26:51.161 - that we give our new council attorney and his office to do an analysis across the board and just list 00:26:51.161 --> 00:26:59.966 - all the facets that we want addressed. Anyway, to my two cents, thank you. Thank you for the record, 00:26:59.966 --> 00:27:02.494 - Gretchen, just had to leave. 00:27:02.658 --> 00:27:14.858 - but we now had a time to shoot them in the night. Oops, my hands back up. I'm trying to lower my hand. 00:27:14.858 --> 00:27:26.940 - Well, I feel like we've also said, so I understand Dave is saying, you know, we should do a deep dive 00:27:26.940 --> 00:27:31.678 - into some of the numbers. First of all, 00:27:32.258 --> 00:27:41.687 - this committee could write the charge for that deep dive. Maybe that's something we could accomplish. 00:27:41.687 --> 00:27:51.579 - I feel like we tried to do that by getting the numbers from other cities. I don't know if that spreadsheet 00:27:51.579 --> 00:28:01.470 - has been filled in for this year. I also don't know whether the inquiry included whether council positions 00:28:01.954 --> 00:28:09.993 - got benefits or not. I think that's relevant. So, I mean, there are some things we can do. Probably 00:28:09.993 --> 00:28:18.193 - not in time for 20 seconds hours. Well, I'll tell you totally openly, I stopped filling in that chart 00:28:18.193 --> 00:28:26.312 - when I realized, when I decided that it really wasn't relevant to me because salaries hadn't changed 00:28:26.312 --> 00:28:27.518 - significantly. 00:28:27.714 --> 00:28:36.873 - across the board since Lord Boland did that in 2024. When I talked to some people about it, and by some 00:28:36.873 --> 00:28:46.384 - people I mean in other places, that it's that political issue that Dave referenced in this idea of cynicism 00:28:46.384 --> 00:28:55.102 - and raising our own salaries and how that looks and that councils just mostly don't want to do it. 00:28:55.778 --> 00:29:03.179 - And so at that point, I kind of felt like a state comparison, especially for council salaries, was not 00:29:03.179 --> 00:29:10.580 - necessarily relevant. And that was kind of four years ago when I think I'm the only one here right now 00:29:10.580 --> 00:29:17.838 - who was on that ad hoc committee. I mean, that's basically what we found. If you want to think about 00:29:17.838 --> 00:29:25.598 - that deep dive, that's probably the deepest dive that we did. And with assistance from outside consultants, 00:29:26.114 --> 00:29:37.417 - they thought that that recommendation actually was good, even though it didn't reflect, even though 00:29:37.417 --> 00:29:48.721 - it was a lot higher than across the state. I'm not necessarily advocating for that. I think for the 00:29:48.721 --> 00:29:55.390 - benefit of the public, maybe all of us here remember this, 00:29:55.714 --> 00:30:01.888 - but state law says that once elected officials, or that you can't lower elected official salaries. So 00:30:01.888 --> 00:30:08.002 - once they're at a certain level, you can't go below that again. And so I think that we do need to be 00:30:08.002 --> 00:30:14.055 - cautious to some degree about it, but I'm still really, I would rather honestly have the exact same 00:30:14.055 --> 00:30:20.108 - salaries as 2026 than just give all three positions a pull up because I think that it's that amount 00:30:20.108 --> 00:30:25.374 - of unfair when the mayor gets a $4,000 increase and council members get less than 700. 00:30:25.922 --> 00:30:34.356 - I think that that is just ridiculous. And, you know, I would rather not have any full load than perpetuate 00:30:34.356 --> 00:30:42.397 - that inequality right now amongst these three positions, especially since we can't lower any of those 00:30:42.397 --> 00:30:50.437 - salaries. And if we do look at that AIM salary study and just look at the mayor's or the mayor salary 00:30:50.437 --> 00:30:54.142 - is and the court salary as well, they're both, 00:30:54.754 --> 00:31:05.111 - They will measure up really well across the state in terms of the name salary study. And I, yeah. What 00:31:05.111 --> 00:31:15.268 - about the proposal that you have? Oh, I'm sorry, Dave. Well, just to say that I, you know, since I'm 00:31:15.268 --> 00:31:22.206 - remote, maybe I'm not getting everything, but hope you reference the 00:31:22.626 --> 00:31:30.945 - Um, the deep dive that was done by council a couple of years ago, and that was, you know, that took 00:31:30.945 --> 00:31:39.430 - into account a lot of facets, including consultant recommendations and things like that. But the only 00:31:39.430 --> 00:31:47.832 - thing missing was the comparison. As I recall, with other cities. Yeah, had looked all that stuff up 00:31:47.832 --> 00:31:48.830 - and let me. 00:31:54.754 --> 00:32:05.632 - Do you want me to share it with this group? Yeah, you can. I thought that... Dave, I think that this 00:32:05.632 --> 00:32:16.619 - is... Yeah, this is already shared with you, Dave. It is... I will... Is it best for me to email this 00:32:16.619 --> 00:32:24.158 - link to you or... Yeah. Okay. That's good. Thank you. And me, please. 00:32:29.986 --> 00:32:47.570 - So was that were those figures considered by the committee in 2024? Yeah, and that was one of those. 00:32:47.570 --> 00:32:59.582 - So if the sheet that I just shared with you is kind of like the more 00:32:59.714 --> 00:33:10.946 - old sheet of what I shared a couple meetings ago with the 2026. And the second tab of that is the 2024 00:33:10.946 --> 00:33:22.177 - second class city comparison. And so that is straight from what Court Holden did. And none of that has 00:33:22.177 --> 00:33:29.374 - changed, including sources and all of that stuff. That's not bad. 00:33:29.602 --> 00:33:44.103 - clearly it'll take a minute. And then there's a pay for regular meeting number. The benefit of the public 00:33:44.103 --> 00:33:54.910 - will wait for that to come in and let me see if I can find it somewhere in the 00:33:55.170 --> 00:34:08.866 - Because it should all be somewhere in the packet for the special ad hoc committee a couple years ago. 00:34:08.866 --> 00:34:12.894 - I guess should all be online. 00:34:30.914 --> 00:34:45.084 - So these are the salaries for 20, 25. 24. Really? We were making the 5,600. That's this year, 00:34:45.084 --> 00:35:00.158 - isn't it? Are you working on the second tab? That's labeled 20, 24. The second tab. The second tab. 00:35:00.610 --> 00:35:12.009 - So I think, so this was done in fall of 2024. So they were probably, so they were 2024 salaries. Do 00:35:12.009 --> 00:35:23.636 - you get it today? Yep. Yeah. And, yeah. And so like, and that was the year, like we, the, the council 00:35:23.636 --> 00:35:30.590 - increase, it did go up to 25 that year. And so that's where, 00:35:32.770 --> 00:35:45.868 - When we were looking at the 2026, which I think one of my other spreadsheets, it was finding our data 00:35:45.868 --> 00:35:59.351 - on this one. Other places also increased at similar rates. So that jump that we did was maybe replicated 00:35:59.351 --> 00:36:01.534 - in other places. 00:36:18.722 --> 00:36:28.685 - There were some outliers, Hammond. I did a deep dive on Hammond recently and I looked up all of their 00:36:28.685 --> 00:36:38.550 - salary ordinances going back to as far as they had on their website. Let's see, I think it was 2013. 00:36:38.550 --> 00:36:46.462 - In 2013, they were getting paid as much as we get paid now. It was one of those. 00:36:46.754 --> 00:36:55.540 - Wow, something happened in Hammond farther back than was online where city council gave themselves a 00:36:55.540 --> 00:37:04.240 - significant increase. And then they kept that up in terms of pola increases since then. And I'm not 00:37:04.240 --> 00:37:13.722 - quite sure what happened. Gary, I know, increased all of their electives a few years ago to try to encourage 00:37:13.722 --> 00:37:16.158 - more people to participate. 00:37:16.706 --> 00:37:28.942 - in terms of governance, in terms of local governance. And I think that that's going well. And then all 00:37:28.942 --> 00:37:41.535 - the rest of them I think are pretty mid. Laura Greenwood. Yeah, Richmond, Indiana actually is the lowest. 00:37:41.535 --> 00:37:43.198 - Oh, you know, 00:37:43.490 --> 00:37:54.624 - This is even a partial one of four fold-ins, because all of the second class cities are not on here. 00:37:54.624 --> 00:38:06.750 - So Sophia, you must have a more complete one that has all of them. Yeah, I don't see the change. Yeah. Maybe. 00:38:21.506 --> 00:38:50.494 - We don't know if any of these council members get benefits. I'm not allowed to share this one for me. 00:38:52.834 --> 00:39:08.360 - Well, there is. And I cannot find the, I'm sharing the full one with you guys that work full-ended. 00:39:08.360 --> 00:39:22.334 - This is interesting. I'm on the tab, limiting elected officials over time. Yeah. In 2020, 00:39:23.394 --> 00:39:33.232 - The council salary as percentage of the mayor was almost 16%. And now we're down to 50.3% where we were 00:39:33.232 --> 00:39:42.692 - last year. So that as a percentage, it's decreasing. I think it went back up again, though, because 00:39:42.692 --> 00:39:49.598 - of the increase that we did. Oh, OK. Yeah, that was enough to pay. Yeah. 00:39:54.530 --> 00:40:04.388 - So I do end up feeling as though we haven't fully gotten anywhere. As Isabelle said, we're kind of looking 00:40:04.388 --> 00:40:13.877 - at these numbers, and we can play with numbers as much as we want. But ultimately, we either are going 00:40:13.877 --> 00:40:23.550 - to stay in roughly the same place as we are, or we're going to, as Dave said, increase council salaries. 00:40:23.970 --> 00:40:33.013 - and we're gonna get backlash for it from our community. And I think that doesn't even, I mean, I think 00:40:33.013 --> 00:40:41.880 - it will, no matter what kind of reasoning or justification or data or whatever that we show, I think 00:40:41.880 --> 00:40:51.099 - there will still be a backlash from the community if we increase our salaries. And I suspect that that's 00:40:51.099 --> 00:40:53.118 - one of the reasons why 00:40:54.082 --> 00:41:07.393 - it hasn't really been done across the state. Well, there's a chance for less backlash anyway if we do 00:41:07.393 --> 00:41:21.226 - it next year. Although, for the council members who are continuing, not so much, but still, it's a little 00:41:21.226 --> 00:41:23.966 - bit better to do it. 00:41:24.706 --> 00:41:38.902 - for a new term. Well, what about the, Hopi, you said you'd rather not do any increase than do a COLA 00:41:38.902 --> 00:41:52.254 - across the board. What about if we do the proposed, if we add the average COLA amount to each, 00:41:52.962 --> 00:42:04.598 - category of elected official salary like you have in your example draft. That's one of the options. 00:42:04.598 --> 00:42:16.699 - I think it's an interesting mathematical concept in terms of a way to deal with the built-in inequities 00:42:16.699 --> 00:42:21.470 - of total percentages. It's not something 00:42:22.242 --> 00:42:30.399 - It's not something that you could broadly roll out across the border. If I think about the larger issue 00:42:30.399 --> 00:42:38.556 - of coal increases and how to solve that inequity, it's not something that would work safe for the whole 00:42:38.556 --> 00:42:46.557 - city. But maybe it would work for these three positions. It definitely has more of a budgetary impact 00:42:46.557 --> 00:42:49.694 - because there are nine council members. 00:42:50.114 --> 00:43:00.850 - And so then overall, the amounts work out to be more. I don't know. I kind of just put that in and say, 00:43:00.850 --> 00:43:11.792 - how does this look in terms of what this number is? And it is a potential way to deal with the inequities 00:43:11.792 --> 00:43:17.470 - of pola, but maybe not the best way to deal with them. 00:43:18.754 --> 00:43:25.303 - And I was trying to look up some ways to do that. And I didn't necessarily find a good, solid resource. 00:43:25.303 --> 00:43:31.789 - I don't know if you have one that basically says, instead of the percentage of pull-up, what you could 00:43:31.789 --> 00:43:38.464 - do instead and how to figure that out. And I know at some point, county flat increases to certain people. 00:43:38.464 --> 00:43:44.888 - But I didn't find a resource that was like, this is a good flat increase, or this is how to calculate 00:43:44.888 --> 00:43:48.414 - the flat increase that you could give to even that out. 00:43:48.738 --> 00:43:54.758 - And so that's why I did the average. Yeah, I will just say that we did struggle. I mean, what you're 00:43:54.758 --> 00:44:01.016 - struggling with right now is what every elected fiscal body does. I mean, as you know, I served 16 years 00:44:01.016 --> 00:44:07.155 - on the county council, and we struggled with elected official salaries every year. It was probably the 00:44:07.155 --> 00:44:13.115 - least pleasant of any of our jobs to deal with. We did, but even just overall, in terms of employee 00:44:13.115 --> 00:44:18.718 - salaries, what we tried to do is alternate between a percentage increase and a flat increase. 00:44:18.850 --> 00:44:24.602 - and what we would do with the flat increase. And that kind of kept everything in check. If you just 00:44:24.602 --> 00:44:30.411 - do flat increases, you compress your salaries so much. So we alternated. And what we did on the flat 00:44:30.411 --> 00:44:36.220 - years in general was just calculate what the percentage increase would be overall, then divide it by 00:44:36.220 --> 00:44:42.144 - the number of FTEs. And in the county, we had an additional complication because we had some employees 00:44:42.144 --> 00:44:47.550 - who were $35 and some were $40. So we had to adjust for that. Now the city doesn't, you know, 00:44:47.874 --> 00:44:55.805 - We don't really have that issue here, but we did, like I said, I felt like alternating was generally 00:44:55.805 --> 00:45:03.736 - a good way of keeping both compression and expansion in check. And what did you base the side amount 00:45:03.736 --> 00:45:11.589 - on? Again, what we tried to do is use the, our benchmark was the December to December CPI increase, 00:45:11.589 --> 00:45:17.086 - which is how the 2.7% came this year also. So we've used that number, 00:45:17.506 --> 00:45:25.902 - And on the percentage years, we just gave the percentage. On the flat years, we took whatever that percentage 00:45:25.902 --> 00:45:33.610 - would be overall, like what that 2.7% of all the wages would be, and then divided that by the number 00:45:33.610 --> 00:45:41.472 - of FTEs. So in other words, it's neither more expensive or less expensive to the city, or in our case, 00:45:41.472 --> 00:45:43.838 - the county, as the percentage. 00:45:44.098 --> 00:45:54.175 - It was just a way of distributing. Can you see what I'm saying? Okay. So instead of taking the average, 00:45:54.175 --> 00:46:03.864 - take that. So there's the 693 council increase times nine of us. And then add that with the mayoral 00:46:03.864 --> 00:46:11.422 - increase and the clerk increase. And then divide that by 11 and get everybody 00:46:12.770 --> 00:46:21.487 - and the 1152 have produced. I will say if the county, we gave ourselves, meaning the county council, 00:46:21.487 --> 00:46:30.809 - half of the flat increase that we were able to use. Take that for what you will, but that was our practice. 00:46:30.809 --> 00:46:39.527 - So in the flat years, you take the same percentage as would be a COLA, apply it to all wages. Divide 00:46:39.527 --> 00:46:41.598 - it by the number of FTE 00:46:42.274 --> 00:46:50.572 - and then give that amount to each FTE, except for ourselves, we gave half. You apply it to all wages 00:46:50.572 --> 00:46:59.445 - first, and then you divide it by the natural positions, or FTEs. Yes. Yeah, it really isn't very meaningful 00:46:59.445 --> 00:47:07.825 - just to use it only for electives, in our case. I do like that idea, though. Is that something, Jeff, 00:47:07.825 --> 00:47:11.358 - that the administration would consider for 00:47:11.618 --> 00:47:19.090 - for employees? I mean, yeah, I would need to confer with Shar and Gretchen about the advisability. It 00:47:19.090 --> 00:47:26.416 - is certainly mathematically doable. But you haven't had discussions about it? Only briefly. I think 00:47:26.416 --> 00:47:34.108 - I've conveyed to them the same thing I have to you. That's something we did not whether or not we should 00:47:34.108 --> 00:47:41.214 - do it here. I feel like it worked out well on the county. I don't have a problem with it myself. 00:47:42.722 --> 00:47:51.445 - the waste reduction district does. Yeah, they try to follow the county model also. So that would, if 00:47:51.445 --> 00:48:00.860 - we did it that way for those three elective positions, if I did my math right, nine council member increases 00:48:00.860 --> 00:48:09.496 - of 693 and the clerk increase and the mayor increase with the 2.7 full of five by 11, it would be a 00:48:09.496 --> 00:48:11.742 - $1,152 increase for each. 00:48:15.714 --> 00:48:26.220 - as another alternative. Cool. It is 9.20 right now. Why don't we go ahead and go to vote comment. I 00:48:26.220 --> 00:48:37.462 - don't see any public in here. If there's any public online who would like to raise their hands and comment 00:48:37.462 --> 00:48:45.342 - just on elected official salary increases, now would be the time to do so. 00:48:45.506 --> 00:48:51.876 - I'm Kevin Kehoe. You hear me? Yep. All right. The allure to be a council member. I believe strongly 00:48:51.876 --> 00:48:58.564 - it is the independence and stature that should come with this elected position, along with the potential 00:48:58.564 --> 00:49:04.997 - to move the needle to make the city a better place for all. I don't think it's a job, but I agree it 00:49:04.997 --> 00:49:11.430 - is one where we need strong leadership and we should have a supply chain. I would say that causes me 00:49:11.430 --> 00:49:13.150 - pause and not want to run. 00:49:13.346 --> 00:49:20.348 - in my view, is the current state of the political system that just doesn't seem to include compromise 00:49:20.348 --> 00:49:27.282 - and trust and a long-term commitment to a shared strategic view of where we collectively want to go. 00:49:27.282 --> 00:49:34.216 - And really, all this discussion for more pay takes away valuable time to discuss much more important 00:49:34.216 --> 00:49:41.150 - fiscal issues facing the community. This is just so excruciating to listen to. Thank you. Thank you. 00:49:43.842 --> 00:50:01.166 - Are there other members online? I can't see the participant list. All right. I would really like to 00:50:01.166 --> 00:50:12.254 - get this off of our docket and forward an ordinance to council. 00:50:15.298 --> 00:50:26.846 - Well, Dave, you recommended more research. What additional information do you think we need in the long 00:50:26.846 --> 00:50:38.727 - term? Well, first of all, let me just say that I don't think our salary is way off in terms of the various 00:50:38.727 --> 00:50:45.278 - ranges. So I don't regard this as something that's urgent. 00:50:45.378 --> 00:50:53.905 - super urgent for compensation. I do think that, yeah, we've been belaboring it too long and it should 00:50:53.905 --> 00:51:02.516 - be put to bed. I think that if we had a researcher go into all of the facets, as Hopi has already done 00:51:02.516 --> 00:51:11.462 - a lot of work, and then come up with a, you know, I think in terms of time compensation, you know, council 00:51:11.462 --> 00:51:13.886 - members have been putting in 00:51:14.850 --> 00:51:23.791 - my observation more and more time over time. I'm also interested in the fact that, and Clerk Bolden 00:51:23.791 --> 00:51:32.821 - has brought this up before, that this is an expensive city to live in relative to as many others. So 00:51:32.821 --> 00:51:40.510 - your pay doesn't go as far. So just those sorts of considerations as well to see what 00:51:41.474 --> 00:51:48.722 - you know, if there, if there was an increase and then what we were just, what was just brought up with 00:51:48.722 --> 00:51:55.971 - Jeff McKim was I think another way of evaluating, um, increase over time that would be transparent and 00:51:55.971 --> 00:52:03.008 - would be understandable by people and so forth. So I, you know, my opinion is leave it as it is for 00:52:03.008 --> 00:52:08.990 - now, because I think it should, for the various reasons I already discussed and, um, 00:52:09.762 --> 00:52:19.128 - make a recommendation that we have, uh, you know, it'd be devoted to some council, uh, office employee, 00:52:19.128 --> 00:52:28.043 - maybe, maybe the assistant attorney or something to, to organize just a report on that. Um, maybe, 00:52:28.043 --> 00:52:37.049 - maybe in, you know, cooperation, which with controller McKim too, since he has experienced and as a 00:52:37.049 --> 00:52:39.390 - county council member and 00:52:40.258 --> 00:52:48.655 - that seems to inform us as well as being controller. I'm sorry to be vague about this, but I think I'm 00:52:48.655 --> 00:52:57.297 - content to just leave it as it is for 2027. I see it as something that's urgent that needs to be brought, 00:52:57.297 --> 00:53:05.449 - but I understand that committee needs to bring some recommendation to the council. What do you mean 00:53:05.449 --> 00:53:09.118 - by leave it as it is? No increases for 2027? 00:53:09.634 --> 00:53:17.512 - I mean, I don't see any, if I'm understanding correctly, no increases for 2027, but anticipating that 00:53:17.512 --> 00:53:25.468 - we would probably make an increase for 2028 because we would have degrees of freedom that we don't now 00:53:25.468 --> 00:53:33.578 - because of our concern about looking like we're increasing our salary while we're enjoying it as opposed 00:53:33.578 --> 00:53:39.294 - to anticipating that for all the reasons that I agree with my colleagues. 00:53:40.066 --> 00:53:47.528 - Isabel brought up very good reasons, and I hope you did too, that I wanna make sure that this 00:53:47.528 --> 00:53:55.705 - is a competitive, that people get compensated for their time because it does involve a lot of work and 00:53:55.705 --> 00:54:04.040 - sacrifice and so forth. And I don't see that, again, I kind of like recoil when people say, well, people 00:54:04.040 --> 00:54:09.438 - do this for people do that. Well, there are people that are working 00:54:09.666 --> 00:54:20.904 - couple jobs just to make do. I would hate this to be more of a burden such that you wouldn't even consider 00:54:20.904 --> 00:54:31.408 - it if you were low income. I don't know if you can glean a recommendation there, but leave it as it 00:54:31.408 --> 00:54:39.390 - is for 2027, have council staff do a deep dive in 2028 for the 2028 budget. 00:54:40.258 --> 00:54:49.173 - next year. So I will just confirm, though, that the current status quo with the budget is 2.7% for everybody. 00:54:49.173 --> 00:54:57.358 - Well, I think the date said to leave it. If that's what leave it means, then yeah. That's what I was 00:54:57.358 --> 00:55:05.544 - referring to just to call it. So your leave it as it is wasn't the same salaries in 2027 as 2026. It 00:55:05.544 --> 00:55:09.758 - was to give everybody the 2.7% pull up. Yeah, yeah. 00:55:10.402 --> 00:55:25.326 - Oh, yes, of course. Yeah, that's what I mean. I'm sorry. I was confusing. Yep. Thank you. Yeah, I guess 00:55:25.326 --> 00:55:39.102 - that's probably what we should do. I don't have a better idea. I mean, that that is keeping our 00:55:39.586 --> 00:55:50.041 - salaries the same, basically, because the cost of living, according to the official numbers, has gone 00:55:50.041 --> 00:56:00.394 - up by that amount. So I would not want to forego the COLA because that doesn't seem fair to me. Just 00:56:00.394 --> 00:56:07.262 - like any other employees, we are paying for gas and milk and bread 00:56:07.426 --> 00:56:17.380 - But that $600 increase that council gets because of the full up will not pay for gas and rent. Yeah, 00:56:17.380 --> 00:56:27.334 - but it puts us in the same boat as the employees that do the work that we want them to do. It's fair 00:56:27.334 --> 00:56:31.966 - vis-a-vis all the other employees of the city. 00:56:43.234 --> 00:56:53.457 - Well, I already said that I would rather nobody get an increase than continue to perpetuate the 2.7% 00:56:53.457 --> 00:57:04.894 - pullout that is really, really obviously perpetuating inequities with these three positions. So I will say given 00:57:12.706 --> 00:57:21.281 - think that even though it's just for these three salaries, I think that I would go with that alternative 00:57:21.281 --> 00:57:29.447 - county black increase idea, which is to take the total dollar amount of the 2.7 whole increases and 00:57:29.447 --> 00:57:38.430 - then divide it by the other positions. So then it doesn't increase the bottom line of how much is being spent 00:57:43.618 --> 00:57:53.171 - at least for these three positions, improves the equity situation once. So that would be, I guess, my 00:57:53.171 --> 00:58:03.006 - proposal and we need to come, but we'll need to make the motion to like what exactly we're gonna forward 00:58:03.006 --> 00:58:10.686 - to cancel and then we'll go. But we're not full-time and the magnets sort of are. 00:58:12.610 --> 00:58:19.181 - So even if we use the county's method, we would not be getting the same flat dollar amount. 00:58:19.181 --> 00:58:26.681 - Is that right, Jeff? Because we're not full-time employees. We gave ourself, meaning the county council, 00:58:26.681 --> 00:58:34.037 - 50% of that flat amount. I mean, whether that's super well justified by policy, I'm not going to argue 00:58:34.037 --> 00:58:40.894 - that. But that was just, that was the way we handled it. So you, which is, so you kind of said, 00:58:41.314 --> 00:58:50.362 - County Council, let's say that's 0.5 FT. For other jobs in the county that were 0.5 or 0.75, they also 00:58:50.362 --> 00:58:59.586 - got a proportionate flat. Correct. And like I said, we particularly had that with the difference between 00:58:59.586 --> 00:59:08.546 - 40-hour and 35-hour positions. So we did have to adjust based on that. But part-timers did get a flat 00:59:08.546 --> 00:59:11.006 - increase. It was just less. 00:59:13.474 --> 00:59:22.116 - I think that I would want to fight it just by the equal 11 and not worry about the FTE. I think that 00:59:22.116 --> 00:59:30.673 - council already gets shafted. I think that if anything, we're more of a third halftime position and 00:59:30.673 --> 00:59:39.658 - we're getting paid like we're a sixth of a position. And so I already think that there's enough inequity 00:59:39.658 --> 00:59:43.166 - baked in to council member salaries that 00:59:43.650 --> 00:59:51.888 - I mean, a couple of years ago, we kind of did the same thing, you know, and the resolution after 2024 00:59:51.888 --> 00:59:59.965 - was to, and council members got like $1,500 of increase or something like that. So it was more than 00:59:59.965 --> 01:00:08.365 - just a flagpole of, but anyway, that would be my position right now based on what it is that's in front 01:00:08.365 --> 01:00:13.534 - of us. My second choice would just be to go with 2026 salaries. 01:00:13.954 --> 01:00:23.022 - together as a committee, we need to, like somebody needs to actually make a motion, and then a second, 01:00:23.022 --> 01:00:32.001 - and then we need to vote on it. And then we can write it up, and then we can replicate to some degree 01:00:32.001 --> 01:00:41.069 - maybe some of these same conversations at the last level of a few weeks. It's fun. And then that's the 01:00:41.069 --> 01:00:43.358 - end of the story until we 01:00:44.290 --> 01:00:54.926 - Start this again in terms of, you know, hopefully on the day of have some staff that we can have to 01:00:54.926 --> 01:01:05.774 - go times in this next year. Yeah, and I would say. If we, when we have staff. And I think it would be 01:01:05.774 --> 01:01:11.198 - if this committee gave them a charge specifically. 01:01:11.586 --> 01:01:23.637 - And I would urge that they cast a net broader for the philosophy behind or philosophy for the calculation, 01:01:23.637 --> 01:01:35.913 - the equation behind the salaries. I would say we cast a net wider than Indiana. Surely some cities somewhere 01:01:35.913 --> 01:01:39.742 - in the US have come up with a way 01:01:41.058 --> 01:01:47.325 - a good method for compensating, you know, the legislative branch of government that we could. Madison, 01:01:47.325 --> 01:01:53.410 - Wisconsin is doing that now. I spoke with them earlier this year. They're having their staff do it. 01:01:53.410 --> 01:01:59.616 - I don't know the conclusion that they have reached on it. Last time I checked in with them, they were 01:01:59.616 --> 01:02:05.883 - still super busy. But yeah, like, and they, they contacted us. It's a peer city because of we're a big 01:02:05.883 --> 01:02:10.142 - company. And so I don't know who else they were contacting, but they, 01:02:10.466 --> 01:02:20.030 - They have staff doing a whole lot of work on that because they have similar sorts of disagreements amongst 01:02:20.030 --> 01:02:28.254 - their council members, backlash amongst their residents, like the whole thing. So it's 934. 01:02:28.254 --> 01:02:37.461 - We need a motion. Okay. Well, I'll make a motion that the council compensation reflect the recommended 01:02:37.461 --> 01:02:39.070 - COLA for 2027 and 01:02:39.170 --> 01:02:53.777 - that the council directs staff to continue to study an elected salary. This is for electeds, I'm sorry. 01:02:53.777 --> 01:03:09.086 - Motion that the electeds essentially have compensation that reflect the 2027 COLA and that our council staff 01:03:09.730 --> 01:03:26.120 - be directed to study the matter for council to make a recommendation for the 2028 fiscal year. Second. 01:03:26.120 --> 01:03:39.486 - All right. Basically on my sample draft, it's that first one, the 2.7 percent Pola, 01:03:39.874 --> 01:03:51.697 - For amounts in 2027 of the mayor, $149,953, clerk $94,926, and council members each receive $26,368, 01:03:51.697 --> 01:04:03.988 - and that was seconded by Isabel and that this be forwarded on to the full council, and the council staff 01:04:03.988 --> 01:04:09.022 - be directed to study this matter for 2020. 01:04:09.858 --> 01:04:26.785 - Yes. Yes. Well, yes. I know. But I will write that up and. Maybe we'll get that in at the working. Her 01:04:26.785 --> 01:04:38.782 - first dream. I'll have to check the schedule. Really, we just need it to 01:04:40.130 --> 01:04:47.349 - to pass before or like we need the salary recommendations to go before December 31st. So anytime in 01:04:47.349 --> 01:04:54.712 - the next couple months and I'll just have to speak with Larry and you talk about schedule. Dave. Yes. 01:04:54.712 --> 01:05:02.291 - Just wondered when is the final vote, Jeff, on the budget? Well, right now, final adoption is advertised 01:05:02.291 --> 01:05:09.438 - to October 7th. But at the October 7th meeting, you can then continue that basically to the end of 01:05:11.650 --> 01:05:17.950 - book to the end of the month. But we have you just want to make sure you don't run out of time with 01:05:17.950 --> 01:05:24.440 - quorum issues. And that's it. But yes, that's the October 14th. Yeah, that's what we talked about. Oh, 01:05:24.440 --> 01:05:30.866 - I think you missed the end of the work session on Wednesday. Jeff said that he needed a little bit of 01:05:30.866 --> 01:05:37.167 - time if there were amendments that passed. We needed a little time to make those changes and submit 01:05:37.167 --> 01:05:38.238 - it to the state. 01:05:38.626 --> 01:05:45.751 - so that it at least would need to be continued until the 14th, but that week should give them enough 01:05:45.751 --> 01:05:52.806 - time. So probably it will end up final approval on the 14th. Okay, good to know. I have to jump off 01:05:52.806 --> 01:06:00.214 - because I'm late for another Zoom, but I did want to just say I really want to give kudos to Jeff. Thank 01:06:00.214 --> 01:06:07.198 - you so much for staying to the end of the meeting on the special session of the 23rd of September. 01:06:07.810 --> 01:06:15.391 - When council made various comments on the budget as a whole, you were one of the few that stayed. And 01:06:15.391 --> 01:06:22.377 - I appreciate you listening to the council because not everyone did. And that's a shame. Well, 01:06:22.377 --> 01:06:29.883 - thank you. I will intend to continue the dialogue. If they have to go, then we have to adjourn, even 01:06:29.883 --> 01:06:33.822 - though we never got the updates from the controller. 01:06:34.178 --> 01:06:40.578 - So we'll just have to get those. I have them written up. I'll just email them to you. OK. That sounds 01:06:40.578 --> 01:06:46.852 - great. And then on the 16th is our next meeting. And Dave, are you going to be able to be in person 01:06:46.852 --> 01:06:53.378 - on the 16th? I think so, yeah. OK. And Isabel, you can be in person. All right. I may have to be remote 01:06:53.378 --> 01:06:59.778 - on the 16th. So yeah. OK. Mostly Jeff will be the star of the show on the 16th with quarterly reports 01:06:59.778 --> 01:07:03.166 - and these updates that he didn't get a chance to get. 01:07:04.514 --> 01:07:07.742 - Okay, thank you guys so much and we are adjourned.