- Good evening, everybody. Welcome to Tuesday, September 30th, 2025 meeting of the Monroe County Council.
- We are calling this meeting to order. And here in the NetU Hill room, we have to my right here, we have
- counselors, Henry Iverson, Decker, Wilt, and Fidel. And I don't see counselor Hawk online or in the
- room just yet. But again, we'll announce when she's here.
- So we have a quorum, so we will go ahead and get started. And for all those that are able to stand,
- please do so for the reciting of the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United
- States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and
- justice for all.
- Okay, thank you very much for that. Next up is item three, which is the adoption of tonight's agenda.
- Council, does anybody wish to amend tonight's agenda? Yes, Councilor Everson. Council, I wish to amend
- the agenda to move all of item 12 to immediately follow item seven. To amend item 12 and add item G
- quote, the reduction of certain capital lines, end quote. And am I going too fast? And rename the current
- 12G to 12H. And to table indefinitely, item eight, the discussion regarding the minimum cash balance
- resolution. Second.
- Okay, we got a motion and a second. Are there any other discussions on amending tonight's agenda? I
- need to reread that slower. If you want us to keep on. Anybody else have any questions or comments on
- this? We all got tonight's information in front of okay.
- All right, and thanks, council staff, for getting that ready for us. Okay, so there's no further discussion.
- All those in favor of adopting tonight's agenda as amended, signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed,
- saying sign. All right, motion carries. Next up, this is before we begin tonight's public hearing tonight,
- I want to make sure that we are setting the ground for tonight's public hearings.
- we will open a budget and anyone who wishes to make a comment will be given the opportunity at that
- time. Those present here in the NetU Hill room can come to the lectern here or if you are participating
- virtually you can raise your hand via Teams as well to make a comment. We ask that you are going to
- limit your items to three minutes and after your three minutes are up we will politely say that your
- time is up and then
- We will move on to the next speaker if there is a next speaker. Here in the NETU Hill rooms, TSD will
- have a monitor of the timer and you will see how much time that you have left as you are chatting. Also
- via Teams, you will see that countdown clock as well. Following the public comments of each item that
- we have tonight, the council will have an opportunity to also make a comment on the budget.
- Once council is finished with comments, the public hearing for that budget will be closed. I want to
- make this sure that we get that again, so I'm gonna read that one more time for the people in the back.
- Following the public comments, council will have an opportunity to make the comment on a budget. And
- after council is done making their comments, that item is closed and we will move further.
- Does anybody have any questions or comments about those things? Looking to the right and looking to
- my left and seeing none. Next up on our list here, we will have item number four and we will go ahead
- and get started with the first reading of public hearings. Our hearing of ordinance 2520 or 25
- twenty twenty five dash thirty four waste reduction district twenty twenty six budget. So I open the
- twenty twenty six race waste reduction district budget say that three times fast and I call on counselor
- wilts to read the ordinance into the record.
- All right. Okay, ordinance 2025-34, be it ordained by the Monroe County Council that for the expenses
- of the Monroe County Solid Waste Management District,
- For the year ending December 31st, 2026, the sums herein specified are hereby appropriated and ordered
- set apart out of the several funds herein named and for the purposes herein specified, subject to the
- laws governing the same. Such sums herein appropriated shall be held to include all expenditures authorized
- to be made during the year unless otherwise expressly stipulated and provided for by law. In addition,
- For the purposes of raising revenue to meet the necessary expenses of the Monroe County Solid Waste
- Management District, the property tax levies and the property tax rates are herein specified and are
- included herein. Budget Form 4B for all funds must be completed and submitted in the manner prescribed
- by the Department of Local Government Finance. Disordinance shall be in full force and effect from and
- after its passage and approval by the Monroe County Council.
- Funds, fund code 1215, non-reverting capital projects. Adopted budget zero, adopted tax levy zero, adopted
- tax rate zero. Fund 8210, special solid waste management. Adopted budget $3,254,620. Adopted tax levy
- $2,355,620.
- $1,848 adopted tax rate 0.0248. Fund 8283 solid waste district debt service. Adopted budget $308,445
- adopted tax levy $217,259 adopted tax rate 0.0023.
- For a total adopted budget of $3,563,065, adopted tax levy, $2,573,107, adopted tax rate 0.0271. Okay,
- thank you, Councillor Wilts for reading that.
- If we have any members of the public that would like to make comments on this particular item as presented,
- again, you can come forward to the lectern here and then at your home and you'll have up to three minutes
- to speak, or you can raise your hand via teams. Seeing none. And for the record, we do have counselor
- Hawk that has joined us all seven council members are present. All right.
- Next up, I will look to any council members to see if anybody has council comment on this budget Yes
- councilor wilks I just wanted to note for everyone that the Monroe county solid waste management district
- is actually now the Monroe county waste reduction district and
- I was just informed that the ordinance reflects the former name because that's what the Department of
- Local Government Finance still has on file. So it aligns there. But I thought just to be clear so everyone
- knows they did change their name. Thank you. Does anybody else have any other comments? Checking my
- list. Okay. All right.
- without any further comments from council the public hearing for the twenty twenty six waste reduction
- district budget is closed thank you all right next up I'd like to open the twenty twenty six Monroe
- fire protection district and I'd like to call on councillor Decker to read ordinance twenty twenty five
- dash thirty five into the record
- order and by the Monroe County Council that for the expenses of Monroe Fire Protection District for
- the year ending December thirty first twenty twenty six the sums herein specified are hereby appropriated
- and ordered set apart out of the several funds here in name and for the purposes herein specified subject
- to the laws governing the same.
- such sums herein appropriated shall be held to include all expenditures authorized to be made during
- the year unless otherwise expressly stipulated and provided for by law in addition for the purposes
- of raising revenue to meet the necessary expenses of Monroe fire protection district the property tax
- levies and property tax rates as inherent specified are included herein
- budget form four B for all funds must be completed and submitted in the manner prescribed by the department
- of local government finance this ordinance shall be in full force in effect from and after its passage
- in approval by the Monroe County Council all right. In fun code. Zero zero six one rainy day adopted
- budget one million seven hundred thousand.
- zero dollars adopted tax rate zero dollars or pardon me 0.00 in fun eight six zero three special fire
- general adopted budget seventeen million six hundred ninety eight thousand one hundred fifty five dollars
- with an adopted tax levy of nine million seven hundred ninety
- thousand three hundred sixty nine dollars adopted tax rate zero point two five seven seven in eight
- six nine one special cube fire adopted budget one million four hundred one thousand nine hundred thirty
- two dollars adopts adopted tax levy one million three hundred four thousand seventy seven dollars for
- an adopted tax rate
- of 0.0333 for an adopted budget of $20,800,087 with an adopted tax levy of $11,094,446 and an adopted
- tax rate of 0.2910.
- Thank you very much for that. Is there any public comment on this item? Again, if you have public comment
- on this item, you can come forward to the lectern here in the night, you heal room or you can raise
- your hand via teams and then we'll come back to council. Wait, this is just just one second, Marty.
- I just want to make sure that you are here. But before we go back to council comment, we're going to
- go to public first and then we'll come back to
- Oh, no, no, no. It's OK. It's all right. So not seeing any. Counselor Hawke. OK. My statement is not
- just particularly about this budget, but just in general. I thought the new legislation said that when
- we read this, and of course, this is just the first reading so we can fix it next time, is that we had
- to also read in what was presently and what it is
- proposed. I believe when you look at the legislation, unless for some reason they took that out and
- that's something that we're going to be required to do. But if you can check into that before our next
- reading, please. Ms. Harnequin. I'm looking right now. Okay.
- I'll just yell at it. It'll start. Thank you. Do you mean we're supposed to read in the previous budget
- or the fund balance? Well, I don't have it all memorized, but we're supposed to read into what it is
- for this year and what it's proposed to be for next year and showing the difference in the tax levy.
- Okay. I don't have it all memorized.
- But I know it was supposed to be so that we had to acknowledge as we were passing a budget exactly how
- much the changes were. And hopefully somebody will check into that. Maybe they took it out of the letters.
- They're looking. I just wanted to get an idea of what you meant. But you mean 20, 25 numbers compared
- to 26 numbers.
- right? And just whatever that legislation says, and by the way, just for you folks, I'm not saying that
- about your your proposed budget. I'm just saying in general, I think that says that's what we have to
- do. But we can fix it before. Because this is just the this is just the first reading, right? Yes. While
- we're waiting,
- I'm going to circle back to public comment. If there's anybody here in the room that wants to make a
- comment, or you can raise your hand via teams. Hold, please. All right. If you want to keep going, I
- can keep looking. It might take a minute. Okay. Because we can always come back and reopen.
- if we need to. Okay. All right. So we'll keep going on that regard. So if there isn't anything of council,
- now we can come back to council to see if council has any other comment on this. And seeing none. The
- public hearing for the 2026 Monroe Fire Protection District budget is closed. Okay.
- Next up, I would like to open the 2026 Monroe County government budget, and I would like Councilor Henry
- to re-ordinates 2025-36 and to the record. Thank you, Madam President. Just as a point of clarification,
- Michelle, does that include the reading end of the home-ruled funds as well in this document? Yes,
- it does. All right. Buckle up, everybody. I know. There we go. And same. Be it ordained by the Monroe
- County Council.
- Let me start over. Ordinance resolution number 2025-36.
- Be it ordained by the Monroe County Council that for the expenses of Monroe County for the year ending
- December 31st, 2026, the sums Heron specified are hereby appropriated and ordered set apart out of the
- several funds Heron named and for the purposes Heron specified, subject to the laws governing the same.
- Such sums Heron appropriated shall be held to include all expenditures authorized to be made during
- the year unless otherwise expressly stipulated and provided for by law.
- In addition, for the purposes of raising revenue to meet the necessary expenses of Monroe County, the
- property tax levies and property tax rates, as Heron specified, are included herein. Budget Form 4-B
- for all funds must be completed and submitted in the manner prescribed by the Department of Local Government
- Finance. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and approval by
- the Monroe County Council.
- The adopted tax levy is zero dollars the adopted tax rate is zero point zero zero. For zero one zero
- one general. The adopted budget is fifty seven million. Eighty seven thousand and twenty dollars the adopted
- thousand one hundred thirty nine dollars and the adopted tax rate is point zero two one five five. For
- funds code zero. Zero point two one thank you let me go back and where did I do that point is it two
- one five five. Great it's gonna be a long
- The adopted budget is $1,451,190. The adopted tax levy is $335,000. The adopted tax rate is 0.0030.
- For fund code 0124, 2015 reassessment,
- The adopted budget is $968,615. The adopted tax levy is $810,000. The adopted tax rate is .0073. For
- debt service, 0180 fund code. The adopted budget is $8,502,000. The adopted tax levy is $8,774,000.
- and $57, and the adopted tax rate is .0791. For self-insurance, fund code 0203, the adopted budget is
- $11,305,500. The adopted tax levy is $0.00. The adopted tax rate is 0.00. Did you say it was
- for self-insurance? I did say self-insurance. Thank you.
- For fund code 0254, local income tax, the adopted budget is $4,513,360. The adopted tax levy is $0.
- The adopted tax rate is 0.00. For fund code 0256, public safety local income tax, the adopted budget
- is $4,734,976.
- adopted tax levy is $0. The adopted tax rate is 0.00. For Fund 0256. Did I do that already? Awesome.
- For 0616 Convention and Visitors Bureau, the adopted budget is $3,216,600. The adopted tax levy is $0.
- The adopted tax rate is 0.00.
- For fund code zero seven zero two highway the adopted budget is six million eight hundred nineteen thousand
- eight hundred thirty seven dollars the adopted tax levy is zero dollars the adopted tax rate is zero
- point zero zero. For fund code zero seven zero three highway special the adopted budget is zero dollars
- the adopted tax levy is zero dollars the adopted tax
- for zero seven zero six fund code local road and street the adopted budget is one million five hundred
- fifty five thousand and six dollars the adopted tax levy is zero dollars the adopted tax rate is zero
- point zero zero for fund code zero seven nine zero cumulative bridge the adopted budget is two million
- $932,166. The adopted tax levy is $2,362,187. The adopted tax rate is 0.0213. For county major bridge
- fund code 0792, the adopted budget is $3,660,059. The adopted tax levy is $3,692,996.
- The adopted tax rate is 0.0333. For fund code 0810 health, the adopted budget is $647,913. The adopted
- tax levy is $350,000. The adopted tax rate is 0.0032. Council Henry, sorry to stop you. I think you
- said 8010 for health.
- and it's a year was it what zero eight one zero yes they're sorry did it again zero eight zero one yeah
- great got it. For fund code. One three one zero park non reverting capital the adopted budget is one
- hundred thousand dollars the adopted tax levy is zero dollars the adopted tax
- The adopted budget is $1,681,574. The adopted tax levy is $850,000. The adopted tax rate is 0.0077.
- For Fund Code 2391, Cumulative Capital Development, the adopted budget is $3,878,283. The adopted tax
- levy is $3,850,000.
- $692,996. The adopted tax rate is 0.0333. For funds code 2402 economic development, the adopted budget
- is $0, the adopted levy is $0, the adopted tax rate is 0.00. For these funds, the adopted budget total
- is $116 million.
- $54,099. The adopted tax levy is $44,770,000. Sorry, I'll repeat. $44,770,375 with a cumulative tax
- rate of 0.4037. For the Home Rule funds not reviewed by the Department of Local Government Finance,
- fund code 9500 extradition and sheriff's assistance. This is cut off, Kim. Is that assistance? The adopted
- budget is $538. 9501 surveyor corner perpetuation is $100,049. Fund code 9502 local public health services
- is $2,072,287.
- For fund code 9503, Monroe County 911 fund is $622,294. For fund code 9504, Monroe County Convention
- Center debt is $0. For fund code 9505, auditors and eligible deductions, the amount is $347,103.
- For Fund Code 9507 Community Corrections Fees, the amount is $275,846. For Fund Code 9508 User Fee Jury
- Pay, the amount is $36,500. For Fund Code 9509 User Fees Juvenile Probation, the amount is $7,079.
- For fund code 9510, user fees adult probation, the amount is $110,288. For fund code 9511, user fees
- project income slash job, the amount is $0. For fund code 9512, supplemental PD services, the amount
- is $925,636.
- For fund code 9513, clerk's record perpetuation, the amount is $151,021. I'm sorry, $151,027. For fund
- code 9514, user fees, diversion, prosecution, the amount is $102,411. For fund code 9515, user fees,
- court alcohol, drug, the amount is $266,630.
- For fund code 9516, local health maintenance, the amount is $65,713. For fund code 9517, emergency planning,
- right to know, the amount is $25,950. For fund code 9519, misdemeanor community corrections, the amount
- is $128,500. For fund code one, sorry,
- $9,521 alternative dispute resolution, the amount is $17,700. For fund code 9522, sales disclosure county
- share is $66,114. For fund code 9523, convention visitor capital improvement and maintenance, the amount
- is $100,000. For fund code 9524, county offender transportation, the amount is $2,500.
- For the Fund Code 9525, Local Health Department Trust, the amount is $61,121. For Fund Code 9526, User
- Fees Problem Solving Courts, the amount is $22,544. For Fund Code 9527, Westside Economic Development,
- the Richland Township TIF, the amount is $2,235,287.
- For funds code 9528, 46 corridor economic development Bloomington Township TIF, the amount is $503,201.
- For funds code 9529, Fullerton Pike economic development TIF, the amount is $133,000.
- For fund code 9530 plat book the amount is $500 for funds code 9531 Convention Center operating is $531,300
- for nine for fun code 9532 user fees cable franchise the amount is $535,226.
- For Fund Code 9535 PSAP Interlocal, the amount is $2,781,462. For Fund Code 9543 Public Health Emergency
- Fund, the amount is $20,000. For Fund Code 9544 Identification Security Protection, the amount is $18,000.
- For Fund Code 9548 Park Non-Reverting Operating, the amount is $300,000. For Fund Code 9551 Recorders,
- records perpetuation. The amount is $357,714. For Fund Code 9552, Stormwater Management, the amount
- is $2,390,284. For
- Fund code 9559 County Elected Officials Training. The amount is $18,000. For fund code 9580 Lit Correctional
- Rehab Facilities, the amount is $594,429. For fund code 9588 Federal Award Title IBD, the amount is $58,132.
- And finally, for fund code 9589curryprofileTIFF, the amount is $25,689 for a total of $16,010,050. And
- you can breathe.
- All right, thank you so much for reading that into the record here. If we have anybody from the public
- that would like to make public comment on the Monroe County government's 2026 budget, again, you can
- come forward to the lectern here and then at you Hill room you have up to three minutes and then you
- can also raise your hand via Teams.
- And so I see that we have both. So I'm going to alternate back and forth. So I'll go to our public commenter
- here. So again, you can come in, state your name for the record. Again, you'll have up to three minutes.
- And then I'll go from here in the Nightingale room to teams as well. So welcome. Thank you. Thank you.
- I am Dr. Lisa Hannah Robinson here to give comment as a private citizen.
- In the name of transparency and doing what is right for the health and safety of Monroe County citizens,
- I am here to remind council that the $3 million shortfall in the county budget should not be remedied
- by cutting any part of the $1.1 million health department operating budget that is tied to the levy.
- This is wrong. Also wrong is the clawing back of $750,000 of COVID-19 funds.
- These funds have to be used for capital improvements and it is not allowed for these funds to revert
- back to the general fund. Slashing the budget of the Monroe County Health Department is dangerous and
- puts lives at risk. Public health encompasses disease prevention, vaccine administration, and emergency
- preparedness. You are jeopardizing the health and safety of Monroe County citizens.
- The tax levy of $350,000 for Monroe County is frankly pathetic and sends the message that health is
- not a priority of the council. The second message I have tonight is that the cancellation of the IU
- Health contract with the Monroe County Health Department has nothing to do with Lori Kelly's leadership.
- Understand that Lori Kelly inherited a department in disarray post-COVID from the prior administration
- who left abruptly.
- during covid there was complete perceived cooperation between council and health department. In twenty
- twenty four point six million dollars in covid funds were dispersed. In total dispersed now when large
- sums of money are not flowing through the health department and we we are under intense pressure to
- clean up our books. IU health in their own words desires to now provide public health services to the
- region not just Monroe county. And their nonprofit status depends on it.
- Monroe County was an experiment. Could taxpayer dollars fund contracts to provide public health services?
- And the answer is yes. So now IU will step away for a period of time and people will blame this on Lori.
- As you propose slashing our budget by $1.8 million, this will ensure we will have a very low balance
- by the year 2027. Then more political games will be played and someone will step in and say, we need
- to save the health of Monroe County and make it a priority.
- There is no reason why the citizens of Monroe County need to suffer while political games are being
- played. Your constituents are counting on you to make the right decision. Their lives depend on.
- Thank you. Thank you. All right, next up, I see the hand raised via teams. Again, you can unmute yourself.
- unmute yourself. State your name for the record and you'll have up to three minutes. So looks like we
- have Jeff McKim. Good evening council members. My name is Jeff McKim and I want to begin by sincerely
- thanking you for the incredible amount of work you've put into this year's budget.
- I know it's been a long and difficult road, and I truly appreciate the seriousness with which you've
- approached the task of reducing spending. Your ongoing efforts to trim supply budgets and identify smaller
- savings are worthwhile and appreciated. But unfortunately, those kinds of reductions alone will never
- be enough to bring this budget into balance.
- The reality is that Monroe County budget is overwhelmingly driven by personnel costs, not supplies,
- not services, not capital projects, and not by fund balance policies. The deficit you're facing is almost
- entirely the result of rising personnel expenses compounded by declining revenues in part due to the
- impacts of SEA-1.
- I do want to acknowledge and commend the progress you've already made in reducing overtime costs. That's
- a meaningful step in addressing personnel related spending, and it shows a real willingness to make
- hard choices. But to truly get a handle on the deficit that's eroding our financial stability,
- We have to look beyond overtime and squarely at the broader drivers of personnel spending. These include
- several factors, the growing number of positions funded by the general fund, the generous rate that
- is already approved and those currently planned, and significant increases in health insurance costs.
- I understand that eliminating positions is a difficult and painful step, one no one wants to take, but
- there are a couple of other responsible options before you. First, you can fill positions more slowly
- through a hiring freeze. I very much hope you approve that measure tonight.
- Second, you can moderate the cost of living increases planned for next year. While I understand the
- desire to reward hardworking county employees, Monroe County simply cannot afford to lead the market
- in raises right now. The most fiscally prudent step would be to pause raises entirely for the moment,
- but even scaling back to a 1.5 to 2% adjustment would keep us competitive with other public employers
- while making progress towards closing that gap. And then hopefully you'll work aggressively with the
- county commissioners to raise in the escalating costs of the self
- insurance plan, which continues to be a major driver of the deficit. In the end, there's no path to
- fiscal balance that doesn't involve addressing personnel costs, whether in the number of positions,
- salary levels, or insurance expenses, or some combination of all three. And I know that means there's
- no path without pain. But I urge you to make the difficult choices now the ones necessary to stabilize
- our finances and protect Monroe County's long-term health. Thank you again for your service and for
- the hard work you've already done.
- Thank you. Looks like we have another public commenter here and then at U-Hill room again. You can come
- forward to the lectern. You'll have up to three minutes, state your name for the record and you can
- proceed. Okay, my name is Janae Trimple and I'm a former employee of the Monroe County Assessor and
- Auditor and a resident of Monroe County. I first reported fraud and multiple state code violations that
- the Monroe County Assessor is committing back in March. Nine which are provable with documentation.
- Tonight's budget is being based upon fraudulent assessed values, fraudulent tax rates, and fraudulent
- tax levies. I made the auditor aware of this back in March as well, who was required by Indiana State
- Code to report any reported fraud to the State Board of Accounts and she did not.
- I also made some of the members of this council aware, along with the commissioners and the legal department.
- And according to Monroe County Ordinance 295-3, all board members, committee members, officials and
- employees are required to report any and all suspected fraud to the commissioners who are then required
- to report that to the State Board of Accounts. And no one has done that. So again, tonight's budget
- is being based on fraudulent values and the Monroe County taxpayers are being lied to and taken advantage
- of. Thank you.
- Thank you. All right. Is there anybody via teams that would like to make public comment on Monroe County
- 2026 budget? Again, you can raise your hand or if there's anybody else that's here that would like to
- make public comment. Again, you can come forward to the lectern here in the NatU Hill room. Last call
- in the NatU Hill room and then last call for teams.
- and seeing none. Was there a person that, do you have public comment? I thought I saw somebody's hand
- raised in the back. Okay, nevermind. I don't wanna make sure I missed anybody. I wanna make sure everybody
- has an opportunity to speak. So I just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing anybody. So again, I'm gonna
- go back to council since there is no more public comment. Yes, councilor Huck.
- First of all, I want to say a huge thank you to former council member Jeff McKim, who has continued
- to make sure that he's done everything possible to review our budgets just as though he was still sitting
- here. And his advice is much appreciated. And of course, I miss his presence here.
- But I'm just going to say it's rare that you see someone who has served as long as he has and just continues
- to serve. And he's doing that for the benefit of not just everybody here on the council or the people
- over there, the staff, but for the people of Monroe County. And that's what his goal has always been
- to just be a good representative of the entire county. And I just want to make sure we
- that we recognize that not not all would proceed to spend their personal time. Continuing to do county
- business much appreciated. Thank you counsel for your comments- anybody else on this side that has any
- questions or any comments. It's you know head shakes I'm a look over here to see if council has any comments.
- this agenda item we will move into the amended agenda will there be public comment on the follow the
- items the rest of the items on our agenda um i mean if council will or would like to do so sure i just
- want to make sure that that that people know yes or no i mean i
- you know, because I kind of feel like maybe people would be holding their comment for a specific topic.
- But if I didn't, you know, I didn't understand, so I just wanted to ask. Yeah. Yeah. OK. Yeah. I think,
- again, that is up to me. And I think, depending on the conversation here, just so we can get through
- this part here, I'm sure there are lots of comments related to lots of things on this, our agenda.
- would like to listen. So, but again, do we have any other comments related to 2026 Monroe County budget?
- All right. Then I will go ahead and the public comment or the public hearing rather for the 2026 Monroe
- County government budget is closed. Okay. Next up is the
- ordinance for 2025-37 Monroe County's 2026 salary ordinance and I will read that information here and
- like to hear it here it goes okay an ordinance adopted Monroe County Indiana salary schedule and compensation
- policies for county elected officials ordinance 2025-37a whereas
- Indiana Legislator adopted Indiana Code 36-2-3, which established the Monroe County Council as the governing
- fiscal body of Monroe County, and whereas Indiana Code 36-2-5-3 grants the Monroe County Council the
- power to, one, fix the number of officers, deputies and other employees,
- to describe and classify positions and services adopt schedules of compensation and hire or contract
- with the persons to assist and the development of the schedules of compensation whereas Monroe County
- Council wishes to establish a salary schedule and compensation policies now it be ordained by the Monroe
- County Council of Indiana that this ordinance affixes the salary for elected officials of the county
- from the period of
- January 1st, 2026 to December 31st, 2026, whose salary is comprised of funds payable from any county
- fund or budget as provided by Indiana Code 36-2-5. These salaries are hereby solidly fixed and
- follows the maximum level of salary as shown on the elected official salary compensation grid. All payments
- made pursuant to this ordinance are contingent upon the strict compliance with and the adherence to
- the benefit compensation fiscally related and state
- and federally mandated requirements of Monroe County personnel policy handbook. It is the intent of
- county council that this language will encourage compliance with personnel policies which may have a
- fiscal impact on Monroe County government. For elected officials, Tom worked on or after January 1st,
- 2026 and prior to midnight
- December 31st, 2026, shall be calculated and paid within the parameters of the salary ordinance and
- personnel policy handbook, regardless of when the payment is issued. Elected officials shall not receive
- compensation above the salary range authorized for their position in the elected official compensation grid.
- The county auditors shall not issue pay warrants for pay that exceeds the authorized amount specified
- in the salary ordinance. The salary amounts listed are an annual appropriation amount. Calculation of
- the biweekly salary rate may result in a slight variation and will not be adjusted at year end. Elected
- official base rate schedule. To establish a more equitable system of setting salaries from rural county
- elected officials not set by state,
- The county council has established within the annual salary ordinance a base rate for elected officials
- with the schedule of amounts to be applied. The base rate schedule is outlined in section one of the
- elected officials salary grid for elected officials whose salary is set by state. The state mandated
- salaries are amended annually on July 1st.
- The sheriff is excluded from this base rate schedule as his first salary is paid pursuant to Indiana
- Code 36-2-13-2.5 or Indiana Code 36-2-13-2.8. It is the intent and the direction of the Monroe County
- Council that all salaries paid by county council, which are tied or related to the Monroe County Sheriff
- as it is mandated by the state of Indiana, shall be automatically amended
- at the same time as the state mandated salaries on July 1st. The county council recognizes that this
- is an exception to the general rule for county set salaries, which are generally modified on January
- 1st. Additional information regarding payments of certifications, supplementals, and or per DMs is outlined
- in section two of the elected officials salary grid.
- presented to the Monroe County Council Red and Fool for the first time on the 30th day of September
- 2025. Yes. And that's it. Thank you. Okay.
- If now we'll go to the member of the public. If you have public comment on this item, again, you can
- come forward to the lectern here in the Night U Hill Room. You'll have up to three minutes or you can
- raise your hand via Teams. Okay, and seeing none in the Night U Hill Room or hand raised via Teams.
- We will go back to the county council for discussion. So I'll look over here to my left to see if anybody
- has any comments. Seeing none, I'm gonna look to my right. Yes, Councilor Iverson. In keeping with some
- of the earlier comments, I think a lot of credit for this elected official base rate schedule goes to
- council member Wilts. We worked, she worked really hard on this and it's proved enduring.
- to you for creating this grid and ensuring that we're not having big debates about what we should be
- paying different elected officials every single year. This has really been a good solution and an enduring
- one. So thank you. Council Monson and I work together on that. All right. Anybody else on the right
- here have any questions or comments on this item?
- Yes, Councilor Hawk. Well, this is, we're still working on this. So this still seems to me that for
- anybody listening or watching the paperwork, this is still a work in progress. It appears to me. Yes,
- because it's a first reading. Yep. Absolutely correct. Okay. Yes, Councilor Decker. I would just add,
- just to clarify and add to what Councilor Hawk said, if I could,
- everything that we are doing from now until probably everyone here's term is done is going to be a continual
- work in progress with the way the budgets have shifted that has always been the rule anyway that the
- minute you're done you're automatically fixing things that got a minute or left off but with the changes
- to the state that means that every county council that i guess is paying attention
- will continuously be in a constant process of trying to figure it out. And we signed up for that. And
- so nothing is ever final till, I guess, your term's done. You can't do anything else about it. All right.
- And seeing no other, yes, Councilor. Just to be clear, however, the elected officials' salaries that we set
- We have to have that finalized. We can't be changing it next year because you cannot do that with the
- elected official salaries. If we should follow some of the advice that's been given not just tonight
- but in the past to put a pause on the pay raise or something in order to make these budgets work and
- was wait to see what our revenues situation might change. We can always change that.
- for the county employees. We cannot change it for the elected officials. Next year during the year,
- but we certainly can for our county employees. That is correct, which is why we will
- So without that being with that being further I'm going to go to item. I'm thirty or ordinance twenty
- twenty five dash thirty seven B and I'm going to look to counselor fight old to read into the record.
- Clarify this is multiple multiple pages right yes okay. Three pages well that's multiple well. The whole
- thing okay well I'll start and somebody tell me when to stop if I go too far.
- So the 2026 Monroe County Government Employee Salary Ordinance and Ordinance Adopting Monroe County
- Indiana Salary Schedule Policies for County Employees Ordinance 2025-37B. Whereas the Indiana Legislature
- adopted Indiana Code 36-2-3, which established the Monroe County Council as the governing fiscal body
- of Monroe County, and whereas Indiana Code 36-2-5-3
- Grants the Monroe County Council the power to one fix the number of officers deputies and other employees
- to describe and classify positions and services. Three adopt schedules of compensation and for hire
- a contract with persons to assist in the development of schedules of compensation. Whereas the Monroe
- County Council wishes to establish salary schedule and compensation policies.
- be it ordained by the Monroe County Council of Indiana that this ordinance fixes the number and salary
- of employees of the county from the period of January 1, 2026 to December 31, 2026, including all officers,
- deputies, assistants, and other employees whose salary is comprised of funds payable from any county
- fund or budget as provided by Indiana Code 36-5.
- This compensation is limited by the following lines and maximum levels of salary shown on the salary
- compensation grids. All payments made pursuant to this ordinance are contingent upon the strict compliance
- with and adherence to the benefit salary fiscally related and state and federally mandated requirements
- of the Monroe County personnel policy handbook.
- It is the intent of the County Council that this language will encourage compliance with personnel policies
- which may have a fiscal impact on Monroe County government. Any Monroe County employee, including those
- employees under a contractual agreement or whose salaries are determined by a state prescribed rule,
- order, guideline, or mandate shall not receive compensation above the salary grids outlined within this
- ordinance.
- The county auditor shall not issue pay warrants for any payment that exceeds the authorized amount specified
- in the salary ordinance. The annual salary amounts are listed as approximate annual appropriation amount.
- The calculation of the annual appropriation amount may result in a slight variation and will not be
- adjusted at year end. Salaries paid on or after January 1, 2026 and prior to midnight December 31, 2026
- shall be calculated and paid within the parameters of this salary ordinance and the personnel policy
- handbook, regardless of when the work is performed. Specifically, this salary ordinance is applicable
- to dates encompassed within claim one as outlined in the 2026 pay schedule. Hello, Monroe County personnel
- policy handbook, any item not covered with the salary ordinance shall be governed
- by the Monroe County personnel policy handbook. Job description classification definitions. Beginning
- calendar year 2022, council approved using the updated classifications and levels for Monroe County
- government job descriptions. Compensation levels have been updated using alphanumeric letters A through
- E. The listing of all classifications is outlined in section A of the ordinance notes. Now do I read
- the grid itself?
- I read the grid itself, okay. So this is the elected, 2026 Monroe County Government elected official
- salary grid, account line. No, I don't need that. Oh, I don't need that. Page two, sorry. Sorry. So
- the next verbiage. Yes. Okay, all right. That's what I wanted. Well, it was there. And Councilor Feidl,
- can you pull your microphone a little closer? Oh, sorry. Sorry, sorry, sorry. Thank you. Is that better?
- Yes. Just because I printed it doesn't mean you read it. Apparently. Okay.
- That was shuffled in there. I apologize. Full time hire date compensation step increase schedule. Employees
- will attain a new salary step increase level on the first day of the pay period, which includes the
- anniversary of their most recent full time hire date. The salary step increase schedule is outlined
- in section B of the ordinance notes.
- The salary step increase level given to other county employees will not be given to jail slash correctional
- center employees covered by the collective bargaining agreement. Knowledge skills and abilities KSA
- compensation procedures. Employees who have gone through the review process and approved to receive
- knowledge skills and abilities KSA status may receive compensation at either the three or eight year
- level based on
- the salary grid applicable to the assigned job description classification and level. An approved KSA
- status will remain with the original requesting department for the determined period of time. Departments
- may request an employee's KSA status be transferred when an applicable position becomes vacant within
- their department. An employee's KSA status does not automatically transfer with the employee and is
- subject to review.
- an employee's approved KSA status only adjusts the salary base rate for that employee. An employee's
- approved KSA status is not included in the years of service pertaining to longevity and or vacation
- calculations. A listing of approved KSA hires with term dates is outlined in section C of the ordinance
- notes. Longevity scale.
- Employees who have an official hire date and have begun work with Monroe County government prior to
- November 1st, 2023 shall receive a longevity payment for complete and uninterrupted years of service.
- These payments will continue until either there is a break in the employee's service or the employee
- ends employment with the county.
- An employee who has an official hire date and begun work on or after November 1st, 2023 is eligible,
- excuse me, ineligible to receive longevity payments. To determine longevity, the effective date for
- longevity is the employee's most recent full-time hire date of the employment with the county. All records
- must be verified by the Employee Services Department that involve any type of interrupted service.
- Longevity pay for eligible employees is based on a schedule outlined in section D of the ordinance notes
- of complete and uninterrupted years of service. A break in service will result in the loss of longevity
- pay if the rehire date is on or after November 1st, 2023. To be eligible for a longevity payout, an
- employee must still be employed on the day after his or her anniversary date.
- Elected officials do not receive county longevity pay employees whose salaries are determined by a state
- prescribed rule order guidelines are mandated do not receive county longevity pay. For excuse me probation
- officers would be an exception to this rule and would receive longevity.
- The annual longevity payment given to other county employees will not be given to jail slash correctional
- center employees covered by the collective bargaining agreement as longevity is provided for by the
- consideration of the collective bargaining agreement. Prior years of service credit beginning January
- 1 2017 county council approved allowing complete years
- only a prior years of service for each term, a full term, excuse me, a full time Monroe County government
- employment be applied when calculating the rehire of an employee's salary. Step increase level. Months
- of service, which are less than one full year, shall not be counted nor combined to achieve a complete
- year of service. For example, an employee who worked for one year and three months shall be credited
- with one year of service.
- For probation officers who have transferred from other county positions, the start date for probational
- salary increases will be governed by the start date certified by the state for that employee's position
- as a probation officer. For a probation officer who has prior years of service, either in other counties
- or states, he, she will receive credit for said time as determined by the state for that employee's
- position as a probation officer.
- Said start dates and prior years of service will be verified by the probation department, documented
- in the probation officer's personnel records, and will be tracked by both probation and the council
- office. The council administrator and personnel administrator must verify all prior Monroe County government
- service with employee personnel records and or with a PERF report before being applied to the returning
- employee salary.
- The Council Administrator will notify the elected official slash department head if the prior service
- credit total has been verified and granted the Council Administrator will maintain a spreadsheet of
- employees with confirmed prior service credit for future use.
- any additional information and or explanation of the Monroe County government salary schedule
- and compensation policies is included in this salary ordinance for the purpose of clarification and
- transparency. C-section ordinance notes. Monroe County policy, or excuse me, Monroe County Council policy
- regarding salaries tied to state mandated salaries. Annual salaries for the Monroe County Chief Public
- Defender, Chief Public
- Chief Deputy Public Defender and Monroe Circuit Court Commissioner are all tied and or related to the
- salaries mandated by the state of Indiana for the Monroe Circuit Court judges, Monroe County Prosecutor
- and or Monroe County Chief Deputy Prosecutor.
- the state mandated salaries are amended annually on July 1st. It is the intent and direction of the
- Monroe County Council that all salaries paid by the Monroe County Council which are tied and or related
- to the above mentioned salaries mandated by the state of Indiana shall be automatically amended at the
- same time as the state mandated salaries.
- The Monroe County Council recognizes that this is an exception to the general rule for county set salaries,
- which are generally modified on January 1st. Additional detail, including Defense Services Standards,
- Standard G, Supreme Court Compensation Information, Indiana Code 33-39-6-5 and Indiana Code 36-2-3-17
- are incorporated by reference.
- Monroe County Youth Services Bureau. Due to the requirements established by Indiana Administrative Code
- for personnel employed at a child-caring institution, the Binkley House Manager, the Prevention Coordinator,
- and counselors employed at the Monroe County Youth Services Bureau will be compensated at a minimum
- of the one-year salary for the PATC classifications.
- This compensation level meets the current minimum requirements for exempt employees pursuant to the
- Fair Labor Standards Act. The starting annual salary level for these positions shall be reviewed annually
- to ensure ongoing compliance with state and federal law and adjusted when necessary. Gotta turn the page.
- presented to the Monroe County Council red and full for the first time on 30th day of September 2025.
- Okay, and I'm gonna go to Ms. Turner King. Looks like she was waving me down there. Sorry. It dawned
- on me while Council Fiddle was reading that, that we probably should add some sentence to the section
- about KSAs that indicates that that process is suspended by council resolution and that council code
- rescind such accordingly. So I can add that to the next reading if you're okay with it.
- it should match with what we're doing. Yes. Yes. The KSA pause is already in place. I just think we
- should acknowledge it in the salary ordinance for transparency. Okay. Yes. Okay. Thank you, Councilor
- Feidl, for reading that. So if we have anybody on the or members of the public that would like to speak
- to this item again, you can raise your hand via Teams or you can come forward to the lectern here and
- then at you Hill room and you'll have up to three minutes.
- Seeing none Are there any questions or comments from council? I'm gonna look to my right and see if
- anybody has anything Okay, and look into my left to see if anybody has anything Okay seeing none
- Then I'd like to remind everybody that the budget ordinances and salary ordinance will now be placed
- on the October 14th, 2025 agenda for a second reading and vote. So nothing is set in stone, but we'll
- see everybody back in a couple of weeks. All right. Next up, since we changed the agenda, we are going
- to move to our amended items and counselor
- I'm going to look to Councilor Iverson for that. Sure. Council, as a reminder, we amended the agenda
- today, so I'm going to start reading item 12 here. Particular 12A, which is fund 1000-00068 County Council
- Commissioners.
- Council, I move to amend to open budget 1000-0068 County General Commissioners and make the following
- amendments. Increase account line 13,000 Commissioner to $69,129. Increase account line 10400 Commissioner
- to $69,129.
- Increase Account Line 11-0-12 Commissioner to $69,129. Increase Account Line 18-1-0-1 FICA to $42,804.
- And finally, increase Account Line 18-2-0-1 PERF to $78,417.
- All right, we got a motion and a second. I'm going to look to Ms. Kim Schell for this item. During our
- budget session process, this went through. Councilor Feidl then pointed out that all three
- of the commissioners' salaries were not increased for the 2026 grid amounts. So this is correcting those
- three salaries
- which then includes the FICA and the PERF amounts for the twenty twenty six budget year. Okay. All right.
- Thank you. And thank you to Councillor Fido for catching that. Does council have any questions or comments
- on this item? Yes. Councillor Hawk. Yes, I understand. We there's a need for making the correction.
- It does not mean that I will support the salary ordinance with this included in here.
- but we have a lot of work to do tonight, so I don't want to weigh in on that now. Okay, thank you. Anybody
- else over here to my right that has any questions or comments on this item? Seeing none, I'm going to
- look to my left, seeing if anybody has anything. And seeing none, if public comment, if anybody has
- public comment on this item, again, you can come forward to the lectern here in the Night View Hill
- Room, or you can raise your hand via Teams.
- and seeing none, maybe please have a roll call vote. Councilor Wilts? Yes. Councilor Henry? Yes. Councilor
- Hawk? Yes. Councilor Crossley? Yes. Councilor Iverson? Yes. Councilor Deckard? Yes. Councilor Feidl?
- Yes. Motion passes unanimous. All right, thank you. Next up is item B.
- Council, I move to open fund 1000-003 County General Treasurer and make the following amendments. Reduce
- account line 30004 repairs, equipment slash vehicle to $0 and simultaneously create account line 38010
- repair equipment and set it to $600. Second. All right, Michelle.
- Yes, this is one of those cleanup items that we were doing with consolidating account lines. This one
- was missed. So this is just following the precedent that we've set in other budgets. Okay, thank you.
- And look into my left to see if anybody has any questions on this item.
- Yes, Councillor Decker. I only just have a technical suggestion on the technical. Is there any way that
- we just combine the next two technicals and have Councillor Iverson do that in one heap? So we've been
- getting rid of all this house cleaning. Just might, maybe we might do. Okay. So you're saying combine
- C with D and I think that's the last one, but. Yes. Yeah. So C and D. Okay.
- Yes, Councilor Hawk. Right. I would like to, before we do the item C, I want to make sure that the sheriff
- understands that because there were some of us that thought we ought not to do that. I thought we agreed
- we weren't. I see Kim Schell's hand. Yes. But we are not on that item. I know what you were saying.
- When we get there, I'll explain it.
- right yes we're sent we can combine those when we get there we can definitely do that because that is
- also a valid point um that we talked about before so yes i hear you all right but because we are still
- on item b does anybody else over here has any questions related to councillor iverson's motion seeing
- none all right if you have public comment on this item again you can come forward to the lectern here
- in the night you hill room or you can raise your hand via teams
- Seeing none, may we please have a roll call vote. Councilor Henry? Yes. Councilor Crossley? Yes. Councilor
- Hawke? Yes. Councilor Iverson? Yes. Councilor Decker? Yes. Councilor Wilkes? Yes. Councilor Feidl? Yes.
- Motion passes unanimous. Now Councilor Iverson will combine item C and D. Council, I move to open fund
- 1000-0005 County General Sheriff and make the following amendments.
- Reduce account line 30025 maintenance to $0 and simultaneously create account line 33050 service maintenance
- slash repair fleets and set it to $1,000. At the same time, I moved to open fund 1000-0009 County General
- Prosecutor and make the following amendment. Reduce account line 30004 repairs equipment slash vehicle
- to zero dollars. All right, we got a motion in a second, Michelle. OK, so with regards to the sheriff's
- request, I spoke with Chief Deputy Parker. This is an account line that they're using strictly for the
- deputies. The account line that I believe Counselor Hawk was referring to was the maintenance line that's
- in the jail. That line has not been touched or anything.
- Deputy Parker said, this is fine. We actually reduced it at the last meeting from $5,000 to $1,000.
- And he was fine with that. And so this is, again, this is writing those combination or several count
- lines into one accurate number. So that's where we're at on that. Okay. Okay. All right.
- And then with regards to the prosecutor one, I'll pull that one up here just for a moment. With that,
- that account line along with another account line was combined into 38010. So that one was just missed.
- So it just needed to go to zero, so. Okay. And, Councilor Hogg, since you were
- question. Does that answer your question, but I just was concerned about the sheriff. Okay All right.
- Um that was a similar question I had earlier. Um so anybody else over here to my right that has any
- questions. Or comments. Seeing none. I'm gonna look to my left. See if anybody has anything. Sorry Um.
- All right. Seeing none. If anybody has public comment on these two combined items again, you can come
- None, maybe please have a roll call vote. Councilor Hawk. Yes. Councilor Crossley. Yes. Councilor Iverson.
- Yes. Councilor Decker. Yes. Councilor Feidl. Yes. Councilor Wilts. Yes. Councilor Henry. Yes. Motion
- passes unanimous. All right, next up is item E.
- Council, I move to open fund 1161-0000 Local Public Health Services and reduce account line 10104 Assistant
- Registrar to zero, reduce account line 18001 Self Insurance to $264,000, reduce account line 18101 FICA
- to $75,110, reduce account line 18201 PERF to $139,420, then
- Open Fund 1159-000 Health Fund and increase Account Line 10104 Assistant Registrar to $45,318. Reduce
- Account Line 18001 Self Insurance to $85,000. Reduce Account Line 18101 FICA to $16,039 and reduce Account
- Line 18201 PERF to $27,301.
- Okay, Michelle. Instead of saying reduced in $1,159, it should say increase. Yeah, that's what I thought.
- Council, I move to amend my motion for fund $1,159 to increase those account lines to those amounts.
- And Madam President, if you want me to reread it, I can, or if that's sufficient, we can do that.
- I think that that should be enough. That's OK. OK, all right. So any other further discussion on this
- item? To my right, yes, counselor Henry. Madam President, thank you. And as one of the council liaisons
- to the Health Department, I have to admit I'm at this point lost in the sauce when we get between the
- movement of positions back and forth as we've been doing here for well, the whole year, frankly.
- I just maybe have a point of information so remind me which fund we're moving to. Is this out of HFI
- into county? That's exactly right. So 1161 is the titles local public health services, but we commonly
- refer to that as health first Indiana and then 1159 is that general fund the health fund. Thank you.
- Here's my comment and I'll be brief. So I had the good fortune today of going to some of the Association
- of Indiana counties annual
- conference. It was a French lick and asked in our county council meeting with peers if other counties
- are experiencing this challenge of how to provide. Public health services under H. F. I. verse. Their
- own local funds are not alone as one would imagine. Though it but also intriguingly it
- there are other counties that don't seem to either acknowledge that this is a problem or they're having
- issues as people present at their health department. And that may speak to their rural character.
- Of course, counties that are larger seem to be experiencing the diversity of concerns here. But what
- I walked out of that meeting with was there's still no consensus on how to approach this. And it really
- is on the state to start providing guidance to our counties about how to provide these services under
- HFI. I mean, we have this bolus of funding that comes to us
- public health services and it's sequestered in a way that we can't really tap it.
- I think at some point we're going to have to stop at the ping-ponging, though. We're going to need to
- come up with a solution locally that if we wait for Indianapolis to say you can use HFI for this and
- not for that based on the way the code is passed, we might be in for a long wait is what I was getting
- out of our council at AIC today. And so I wanted to say that. I also wanted to say I know it's not customary
- to comment on public comment, but we all wear many hats in the community. And when a board of health
- members speaks in a personal capacity or in a
- I guess sometimes I want to drop the Victorian behavior of etiquette in this room and actually get to
- what's going on. And what's going on is we have a serious challenge in how we deliver public health
- services in our community with the money we have. But the answer can't be to keep coming back to county
- health funds to try to do that. We need to figure out a way to use what the state provides us. If this
- is the temporary solution for now, fine. But I don't think we're done with this. And so I guess I appreciate
- yet again us looking at this.
- it's not finger pointing. We are in this together, one government, health department, county departments,
- county council, to try to figure out how to deliver the solutions. But it is not a heart issue, it's
- a head issue, this is math, and there's laws that are preventing us from doing this correctly. So I
- think we just need to honor that every time. It's nothing personal, this is not our fault that we have
- to do this. But that's my rant on this, thank you. Yeah, I appreciate that. Yes, Councilor Hark. I just
- wanted to add, I'm on the,
- of the Indiana County Council Association legislative group and we did make it clear that we support
- increasing the money for HFI to the extent that the state can but then you look at what's going on with
- the state and they're cutting their budgets five percent and ten percent. So I think we should not just
- count on that being our salvation.
- need to just look at what we have now and go from there. Yep because if I held my breath waiting on
- that I might be six feet under. Okay looking over here to my left I'll go to Councilor Decker and then
- I'll go to Councilor Wilts.
- Yeah I appreciate very much this discussion and I appreciate very much what counselor Henry said and
- that he went down there today to talk amongst our colleagues and try to get a sense of where folks are
- at. If anyone from the state were watching and I'm starting to think no one watches maybe I was wrong
- but if they were watching one thing I would say is there used to be a belief it was not on my side of
- the aisle but back in the day it was a belief that
- local government had a pretty close to accurate and if you kind of kept your ear to it step back just
- a little bit local government a lot of times would get it right one of the things the state could consider
- is to continuously stop having unfunded mandates where we have to have legal look at something for 9
- 000 days and then health administrators who should be putting shots in places
- And people should get their shots and vaccines right that they would be able to do that versus figure
- out if they're if this is that or this is that but that whole thing is like inverted and so if I had
- my druthers and since the state's not listening I can say this among friends I'd send them a bill.
- for all the things that we had to figure out for all the attorneys in that bench we had to pay and all
- the time that I kept people or we kept people up there in that booth watching us because we can't afford
- to do it and we actually accounting with resources or some resources to figure those things out this is not.
- we're not going to be able to do that. We're not going to be able to do that. It's untenable. We also
- need legislators to tell us what they think and to be honest about it with us. You're either fixing
- these things or you're perpetuating these things. There's not Democrat or Republican anymore to me.
- It's you're either fixing these things or you're perpetuating what makes it worse. So that that's my
- observations on all this as I start to get fired up again and
- Thanks. I want to come back from the forest and actually look at the trees for a second. Please. Because
- I just want to make sure that I understand what we are doing with this particular move from one line
- to the other, one fund to the other. We're taking one assistant registrar position and we're placing
- them back into
- the county general funded lines so that. That person. Is being paid by what I'm going to recall going
- to call unrestricted health funds as opposed to other positions and other assistant registrar positions
- which are in the restricted funds known as HFI.
- Am I correct? That is correct. So that is telling me that whatever percentage, I don't know how many
- assistant registrars we have, but we have three. So one third of our assistant registrar duties are
- being paid for by unrestricted funds. And as I'm going to interpret that, and you know, I don't run
- anything, but I'm going to interpret that that
- Approximately or up to one third of the folks coming in and needing services don't need to necessarily
- meet a certain residency mandate. I mean, if we're, I know I'm going, I took it that extra step, I did,
- I admit that. But I don't know how else or why else we're doing this. Councilor Henry.
- Okay, I'm gonna do my level best to try to channel the Board of Health and the Health Administrator
- as it was explained to Peter and myself or Councilor Iverson and myself. So you're on the right track
- with why we're doing this. The why we're doing this is I think where Councilor Decker and I were going
- toward the state. But here's the issue, right? So HFI being funding core services of public health in
- our community has done so for a few years now. We were able to put the registrars under that account
- to do that work because it was core public health work in the community.
- The way that the new legislation is working is saying that, and this is why the language that Councillor
- Iverson read is important, to be able to extend vital record work that may extend beyond the geographic
- boundaries of Monroe County in the state of Indiana. What does that really mean for citizens? Well,
- if you were born here and you moved away,
- And you don't live here anymore. If we're funding that registrar through HFI now, after July 1st, they
- can't work with you. And when they go online to use our online systems, like I think VitalCheck is one
- of those systems, if our registrar is funded by HFI, that's their paycheck, and they get a out-of-county
- human that even was born here, we can't
- Use that dollar amount to fund that labor. So now the result is what Council Becker said. That's the
- unfunded mandate on Monroe County that once upon a time was considered a core public health service
- in the state of Indiana funded by ID OH. That's the mess.
- I think for me, what I'd like to get to is a place where we get that data that you're asking for. We
- don't really know yet from the health department just how much of their work is out of county humans
- right now. And to get that data is going to take some work. I mean, because we're making a guess here
- to provide services. We're saying one out of three can handle the out of county people.
- But we're gonna need to get granular. I'm not sure if that's a 40-hour week yet. I don't think we know
- that. And hopefully the legislature fixes this before we have to start tabulating by like piecework
- how many birth and death certificates we're processing here. So it has to come home into the county
- budget for now as an unfunded mandate. I think that's about as clear as I can make it. I mean, yeah.
- Thank you for taking us down that trip there. All right, Councilor Iverson, that's all your hand up.
- Thank you. My question is for Kim Shell. I think one of the the negative four B's that we've seen was
- this 11th. I'm sorry. I'm thinking of the wrong fund. I retract my statement. Yep. Nope. Got my numbers
- mixed up. Thank you. Okay. So does anybody else have any? Yes. Councilor Hawk.
- If we had had the list, here's what needs to be under 1159, period, because we can't put it over in
- 1161. I think that they thought they were giving us that message, but it was not coming through loud
- and clear. We just knew they were unhappy. That doesn't fix the situation. So anyway, at least this
- is a step in the right direction. We certainly are not going to say we're not going
- we're not allowed to give out birth certificates or death certificates. Of course we are. We just have
- to figure out what, where to put it and get it done. I think this is the only way we can. I mean, legally,
- until the state decides to change something, it was made clear in that email to us that that is exactly
- the situation.
- we had all of that information like a long time ago. It saved us a lot of time. Right, exactly. Yep.
- And I'll continue on my quiz with Santa's hashtag. Thanks, Indiana. All right. That being said, because
- they're making us do with what we have to make do with, and that is the common theme of the night and
- the overall theme for me, unfortunately, during this entire budget.
- So that being said, if there's any public comment on this item, again, you can come forward to the lectern
- here in the night, you know, room or you can raise your hand via teams. And seeing none, maybe please
- have a roll call vote. Councillor Iverson, yes, Councillor Deckard, yes, Councillor Fiddle, yes, Councillor
- Wells, yes, Councillor Henry, yes, Councillor Hawk, yes, Councillor Crossley, yes,
- Motion passes unanimous. All right, thank you for that. Next up is item F. Council, I move to make the
- following amendments with regards to the passage of our overtime resolution, which is resolution 2025-41.
- There are six of these. Number one, open fund 1107-0000 aviation and create a count line overtime and
- set that line to $1. Number two,
- Open Fund 1000-0001 County General Clerk Reduce Account Line 17101 to $0 Number 3 Open Fund 1000-0009
- County General Prosecutor Reduce Account Line 17101 to $0 Number 4 Open Fund 1119-0000 Clerk Perpetuation
- Reduce the count line 17101 to zero dollars. Number five, Open Fund 1155 Extradition Prosecutor. Reduce
- the count line 17101 to zero dollars. And finally, number six, Open Fund 1215-0062 Election Fund Election
- Board and reduce the account line 17101 to zero dollars. Second.
- Ms. Schill, what do you have to add to this? So with regards to the aviation department, there was a
- discussion on the overtime resolution to add them, but there was not a discussion on what to
- put in as an amount. So I just put the dollar because you can create a line. But if you don't put anything
- in there, it will not show up into the budget for the next year. So if you're going to move forward
- with more than a dollar, then I need to also know that so that I can take into consideration FICA and
- perf. But that will need to be added to that line. At this point, by adding just a dollar, there's no
- change to FICA or perf.
- And then the only other one that I want to say that is with regards to the extradition, if you set that
- one to zero, that wipes that entire budget out. So if she does need to come back because that's the
- only thing in there is overtime, FICA and perf. So if you take care of removing all of that, then
- she would have to come back and ask to have that line created again for 2026. I would recommend just
- leaving that one as a dollar or something, but that's totally up to you guys. Otherwise, that budget
- will no longer exist for 2026. OK. Thank you. And Ms. Turner-King. And to piggyback on what Ms. Schell
- was just saying,
- It's fine if you leave the prosecutor's line at a dollar. We'll just have to amend the resolution that
- you passed because the overtime resolution says all account lines will be zeroed out. Yeah, I looked
- to my left here. Yes, counselor. Well, sorry. Yeah. I wasn't here last week. I did watch the meeting, but
- I'm a little confused about extradition being overtime. Can someone explain to me why that's that? What's
- that mean? Is it because people are paid overtime when they have to go get people elsewhere? Is that
- one of those? Okay. I would. Interesting. There's no other overtime line in
- the prosecutor's budget? Yes, but we have zeroed them out with the ordinance that we passed. Okay. Okay.
- I'm trying to keep up. Sorry. So all of those were automatically zeroed out.
- from the resolution that you all passed last week? Correct, yes. Got it. But these are bonus? Well,
- what happened was the ordinance passed, then in order to give you an accurate accounting of what account
- lines are being zeroed, these are the account lines that need to be zeroed out per your ordinance.
- So that's why I'm bringing this to you saying this is. What is getting zeroed out as well as hey, I
- need to have an account line for aviation with $1 and then explain with extradition. If we wipe that
- out totally, then it's gone. What is extradition budgeted at now? $538 so $500 for overtime, $38 for FICA. And
- Is it specifically called out as an account line in the resolution? Yes, it's it's called overtime.
- The resolution refers to the overtime line. So any overtime line in in on all the funds that is correct
- and because it says the word overtime, that is correct. I get it so. Have we checked with the prosecutor
- to make sure that they can
- do what they need to do without overtime? I mean, is there a way to do extradition without overtime?
- I would think there might be, but I don't know. Our security is here, so if you'd like to be put on
- the spot and answer Councilor Wilts's question.
- Absolutely. Eric Oliphant, Monroe County prosecuting attorney. I appreciate your concern, Ms. Wilt.
- I think that we can live without this extradition. We haven't used it in a long time. It's essentially
- to pay a sheriff's deputies over time. So actually not even somebody in our department to go fetch somebody.
- But we typically contract this out. So we don't, we're willing to live with this change. So thank you.
- Yes, Councilor Decker.
- One thing I want to make sure of, and this is a theme that I'll come back to a few times tonight, I
- would like to make sure that as we do these things, we're quantifying roughly some number on this because
- I don't want us potentially to take action that doesn't turn into actual savings that actually helps
- the bottom line. I mean, all this can't be just
- an exercise in pain, just have an exercise. I do want to get a rough ballpark what that is. I don't
- know if the auditor's team has thoughts on what these things will do, but I don't want to chop down
- every tree on the lawn if two will get it for me or one. And I know that I'm not going to get it all
- here, but I just think knowing that running forward will help us a lot. So are you wanting to know what
- moving these to all zero is going to cost?
- essentially what it benefits this process. I mean, if this is $20.35, I think I used that joke last
- week, $2.35. That's one thing. If this is another amount, it's another. I just want to make sure that
- we're not losing that in the process. If you want to give me a recess of about five, six minutes, I
- can do it quickly. I don't know that we need to recess. But I think us keeping track at some point here.
- Let me do one thing real quick and I was thinking that the prosecutors itself. So just to clarify on
- number five, the 1155 fund, is that now zero? Did we get back to zero or are we doing the dollar? It is zero.
- Just to show one of the reductions is the prosecutor's office. It has $3,000 plus then there's going
- to be a negative, I'll need to take out $230 in FICA and $426 in PERV. So that's $3,656.
- That's just the one department. I would have to check everybody else's with regards to that. I'm going
- to look over here to my right to see if anybody had any questions on this particular line. I know we're
- all anxious to get moving, but I want to make sure we are good to go on these.
- If there's no further questions or comment from council, I'll go to public comment. Again, if you have
- public comment on this item, you can come forward to the lectern here in the Nattie Hill room, or you
- can raise your hand via Teams. All right, and seeing none, maybe please have a roll call vote. I switched screens.
- Councilor Decker. Yes. Councilor Fiddle. Yes. Councilor Wilkes. Yes. Councilor Henry. Yes. Councilor
- Hawke. Yes. Councilor Crossley. Yes. Councilor Iverson. Yes. Motion passes unanimous. Thank you. And
- that is all under that particular item. I am going to look at the auditor because before we
- started our meeting. Ms. Woodruff went and passed around the theme of budget season, which is the 4B
- conversation here and what's or what lets us know rather where we are in terms of deficit and whatnot.
- So I'm gonna pass it back over to the auditor before we go into the next item for any updates that she
- would like to give us on this.
- Financial director Carly Woodruff is preparing to share her screen and going to go through this with
- you She is updated and is ready to speak on it Trying far as I can Okay, are we able to see the screen?
- Yes. Thank you for zooming in
- So right now we are roughly at 4.4 million in a deficit. That is looking at a simple calculation. So
- this takes the entire amount that is anticipated to be received in 2026. And we subtract out the amount
- that is anticipated to be expended, otherwise known as the budget. This does include that 3 million
- that is appropriated in rainy day.
- It also does not include the tax cap impact. Also on this same document, we do a deep dive calculation
- into all of the levy funds where you can see the
- amounts on a fund by fund basis for the levy funds. These also have headers that show what lines are
- pulling these from on the 4Bs. So if you want to go into the 4Bs, you can double check their numbers
- are correct. We're pretty sure they are, but we always like a good review. And then in addition to that,
- any funds that aren't displayed in this list can be reviewed in the same method.
- And if you notice the levy funds, do you have a larger deficit than the overall budget? Okay. All right,
- Council, does anybody have any questions for the auditor's office on this item? I'm going to look to
- my left here. Yes, Councilor Decker.
- And correct me if I'm wrong. The one that we're watching hard is that simple calculation up top that
- you put, that 4.406346 that doesn't include anything done tonight, right, so far? It does not reflect
- any of tonight's changes. But theoretically, anything we're doing here starts to move that down, hopefully
- not up. Okay. Yes, Councilor Wilts. I just want to make sure I understood or at least heard you correctly.
- does include the rainy day appropriation, which we hope not to have to spend, but it's budgeted, and
- I appreciate that. But it does not include the tax cap impacts, which forgive me, how muchish are we
- looking at? That's going to be reflected in column D, so it's roughly 1.757 million.
- Oh yeah, thank you. All right, I'm gonna look to my right here to see if anybody has any questions.
- Yes, Councilor Everson. So one of the things that we've been talking a lot about are our minimum fund
- balances. And if you scroll over just a little bit to the 4B line 18, which is the estimated end of
- year cash for 2026, none of those are negative, which is a good thing.
- And all of them are within the minimum fund balance. Am I reading that correctly? That is correct.
- All right. So in one sense, that big $4.4 million deficit is what we're going after. But in another
- sense, our 4Bs are looking pretty good right now. And we're within the fund balances that we set for
- ourselves back in June.
- Just to remind you, those are the minimum fund balances. The county should never go below. It doesn't
- mean it would be healthy to stay at that level. Good clarification. Yes. Anybody else? Councilor Hawke.
- Yes. I'm always concerned when we're talking about just the minimum fund balance because what we really
- need to be looking at is our revenue for this coming year minus
- or whatever you have to. We've got a revenue coming in and we've got projected budget. And we're five
- million in the deficit for general. See, I mean, those are the two lines that you look at. The total
- revenues and the total expenses. I rounded off the total revenues at about 52 and took that from 57.
- That comes up about the five million I was talking about.
- from seven foot. Try to make it easy. Those is what we ought to be looking at is what is our revenue
- for this coming year and what is our expenses that we're approving for the coming year and everything
- we go over that like for general it's five million we're taking it out of the cash
- because we're spending down what the reserves would be. So there's been a lot of talk about what the
- minimum fund balance is, but those are things we have to look at to see if we're in deficit. Did you
- all have a response to that? I thought I saw. She's right. Carly or Ms. Anybody from the auditor's office?
- Yes, if you look at the screen in column I, we went ahead and did the deficit calculation on a fund
- by fund level. And you can see that the general fund does have a $5.146 million deficit as of right
- now. If I may just add. So through this entire process, we've been showing you the two different methods.
- The 4B goes on a fund by fund basis, which we really want you to dig in and review those.
- However, this gives you the overall view of the county and the deficit so Then we dialed it back and
- just showed you the levy funds as well. So Maybe more isn't best, but we've trying to give you everything
- so you can review and Just make it make sense, I guess the way that is best for you Yes council Iverson
- I want to piggyback on something that Councilor Decker just raised. We're going to be doing a lot of
- work tonight, and that top number for the simplified deficit will change as we work this evening. Is
- it possible to check back in periodically throughout the night? I'd prefer not to do that. That's how
- mistakes are made, and we give inaccurate information publicly, so we can have that for you tomorrow,
- though. Okay.
- Anybody else have any questions on this item as presented to us by the auditor's office? Yes, Councilor
- Wilts. So I've kind of calculated three different ways of looking at it, and I'm not going to share
- that math because it might be embarrassing. But what I'm seeing is anywhere from 3.1 million to
- almost $6 million as kind of, depending on how you look at it with all these different comments, the
- deficit that we have to attack. Yeah, and that's totally right. I mean, you can look at it as like all
- of the funds, which is the simple calculation. You can look at it at a fund by fund basis or just the
- levy funds. I mean, there's not a wrong way. Yeah. Well, not that we presented. We're done.
- Yes, Councillor Hawke. Move your mic. It's not picking up. The green light's on. Yeah, for some reason
- it wasn't picked up when you were talking. Okay. I'm going to call your attention to the fact that CUME
- CAP is on there. Well, now, if it's running in the deficit, remember, that's a rate control fund. There's
- a big difference between the rate control funds and the levy control funds. So whatever that rate,
- the .0333, brings in for CUME CAP,
- then that's where it's going to go. And so it's rather confusing to include that as a total of the deficits,
- because then it makes it feel like as if we're more shaped than we are. Is that in the 4.6 up top? Because
- this is what we're looking at, the 4Bs.
- to follow that. Okay. All right, so we don't have any further questions on this again. We will probably
- come back to this as we go through this evening, but I wanted to give an opportunity to the auditor
- to. Present that I don't. Yes, one final comment as we go through. If you'd like to pull up a 4B and
- present that as we're looking at different budgets, we're happy to do that and answer any questions
- along the way.
- Okay. Thank you. All right. Next up on our agenda is item G, which is the reduction of capital account
- lines. Council, I move to reduce the following account lines because they've been moved to the 2025
- general obligation bond. In county general fund,
- one thousand dash zero zero zero one clerk account line four zero zero zero two to zero dollars one
- thousand dash zero eight zero three parks account line four zero zero zero one to zero dollars one thousand
- dash zero three eight zero jail account line four zero zero zero one
- to zero dollars in aviation fund eleven oh seven dash zero zero zero zero account line four zero zero
- zero two to zero dollars account line four zero one two zero to zero dollars account line four zero
- one three zero to zero dollars account line four one five zero to zero dollars account line four one
- one zero four to zero dollars in the reassessment fund one two two four dash zero zero zero
- Account line four zero zero zero three to zero dollars. It's OK. Account line four four three zero zero
- to zero dollars.
- And lastly, in Motor Vehicle Highway 1176-0000, account line 400001 to $0, account line 400002 to $0,
- 400003 to $0, account line 41104 to $0, and finally, account line 45310 to $0. Second. OK. Michelle,
- what would you like to add to this?
- There was a discussion with the commissioner's administrator and the auditor with regards to certain
- capital lines. Then I received that list. And so as far as I know, and I confirmed with Angie Purdy,
- these lines have now been placed into the bond with whatever requests that they were asking. OK.
- because it was our understanding that capital, anybody that had capital in their budget lines should
- have, or could have been swept into the geo bonds. Right. I think that the idea, my understanding was
- a long time ago that budgets didn't have capital lines, but they've slowly been coming back. There are
- a few things that she, that did not creep in.
- I want to say to the bond because the bond is very specific on what it can take in. So not all capital
- lines have been removed, just those that are that can be captured in the bond. Okay. And so the other
- question I have for this before I move on to everybody else is,
- since that has, then this can play into the deficit. Oh, heck yeah. Okay, okay. So that could come out
- of our general because it's already in there. And so what I'm saying when it comes out is trying to
- make that lower, that amount lower, get it, got it good. Okay, sounds interesting. And then council.
- I was just gonna say, I do know that because I looked it up that for the general fund itself,
- It was like $75,000 and a dollar. Out of those three things there. A dollar means that somebody had
- an account loan and it wasn't zeroed out? Got it. Correct. Okay. I'm going to look over here first because
- I thought I saw Councilor Wilts. Again, so that I'm catching up maybe from last week.
- So you said $75,000 is all from the general and then like I'm assuming there were other. It's not. Was
- it all in the general fund? Or that we were just those three departments. Were picked up and put placed
- into the geobond. OK, so if somebody else has a capital, this is literally just $75,000 that were
- doing yes for the general fund but then you had the aviation which is a levy fund you have reassessment
- which is a levy fund right okay yeah but what's the total then i don't know okay that's what i'm saying
- i only was able to pull because i didn't get this till late in the day yeah right so yes
- or during our conversation we were presented the 2025 do bond so I'm more than happy to pass that over
- to you since you weren't here so you can make what you can with it I would like to look at but I can
- ask another question my understanding was that there was already about six million in the bond request
- is that right
- It wasn't exactly that amount, but it looks like, according to this sheet, it was $5,873,960, but not
- quite at $6 million, but real close. Okay. And that conversation is coming back around on the 14th.
- Okay. I just am concerned about
- to save money now by spending more money overall by bonding for so much stuff. And I see. No, no, no,
- I get it. Yeah, I know. I see Miss Purdy is here. So, yes. Yeah. Um, Councilor Iverson asked me to come
- forward. Um, so the bonds that was presented to you, the 2025 proposed bond included already.
- These items that you are taking out today, it also included a street sweeper for stormwater.
- So the bond, the project list that you saw includes these issues. And what happened, it sounds like
- is we failed to tell you guys that
- they were put into that bond. So there was a kind of a breakdown in. Bri and I thought we had a good
- thing going on. Yes, no, I was just going to add I we presented those in a list of possibilities and
- I should have just forwarded the email. It was about as clear as mud, though, so thank you.
- Councilor Iverson. I have some totals, if you'd like to hear them. For the general fund, it's $75,001,
- like we said. The aviation fund is $102,000. The reassessment fund is $10,000. And the motor vehicle
- highway is $5,502. And I'm, so take those with a grain of salt, as Ms. Schell pointed out,
- some of those do impacts our deficit and some don't. All right. Anybody else over here have any questions
- related to this item? All right. Last call. All right. All right. So if there is any public comment
- on this item, again, you can come forward to the lectern here in the night, you know, room or you can
- raise your hand via teams.
- seeing none, may we please have a roll call vote. Councillor Deckard? Yes. Councillor Feidl? Yes. Councillor
- Wilkes? Yes. Councillor Henry? Yes. Councillor Hogg? No. Councillor Crossley? Yes. Councillor Iverson?
- Yes. Motion passes six to one. Okay.
- Thank you. And before we get into the meat and potatoes of the other parts of our agenda here, I'm going
- to ask for us to take a quick recess, a five minute recess, literally a five minute recess.
- So maybe six, since it's seven oh four. All right. So if everybody can come back to the dais,
- at seven and be ready by 710 so that we can move through a packed agenda here that would be greatly
- preferred. So again, come back 710 and let's get ready to roll. Thank you. We are going to go ahead
- and get started because I said we should start back at 710 and it's 712. So by my calculations for two
- minutes over. All right.
- So let's get back into this agenda here, which is item H, which is the other 2026 budget reviews. Council,
- I open for discussion a possible 5% reduction in the supplies category across all funds. Second. We
- got the motion and the second.
- Yes, counselor hawk. Okay. Well, it looks like as if. Like there'd be a big saving of five million something.
- But we have to break it down by the funds. Because you can't think you say $5,000 and fix your deficit,
- because that's not correct. So I don't even know which funds are included when it says across all funds.
- are they including? Kim Cap of the including tip. Who was included in this? I mean, if I may, I want
- to make sure I understood the question. Are you looking at the simple calculation that? If we're if
- we're looking at the total and it makes it look like it said, oh, well, there's a reduction five million
- something. Well. We need to know where.
- the two eighty ones. It's the five percent reduction in the amount of two eighty one seven thirty three,
- which that says reduction in the supplies category across all funds. OK, no, but regardless of the dollar
- amount, what I'm trying to figure out is which funds and how much it is for the separate funds. I just
- looked at number. And. Yes.
- And I think Michelle is gonna pull that up so we can see that on the screen and for the public to see
- it as well. I just did this like,
- little bit ago while everyone was taking a break. Let me see if I can get it any quicker. Okay, so what
- I did was I ran just a cumulative budget. So for general fund, this is the supplies.
- General Fund has $1,389,297 in supplies. A 5% reduction is $69,465. Okay, so Councilor Hogg, does that
- answer your question as to which areas it's coming out of? Right, I mean, I have other questions, but yes, so.
- it's probably going to be more important when we get to the next ones. The next one, she said. Yes,
- I'm going to go to Councilor Henry and then Iverson. Thank you. And yeah, my question does relate,
- I think, to all of them, but the line of thinking here. So is the reduction, the 5% reduction after
- all the cuts that we've made already, or is it before?
- this is all before I have not changed anything because you know everything was not approved until tonight
- so this is all before so all the edits we've done over the past three weeks like we're presuming no
- it includes everything up until tonight that's what I'm asking so that what that would infer then and
- again this first item might be smaller but when we get to items down wind here gets
- more difficult to say that some departments have already made the good effort to reduce are going to
- get hit again. And other departments that did not make the effort are seeing their first 5% cut as of
- this. Unless we say it goes back to what it was to begin with and then make the 5% cut. However,
- there were, I'm sorry not to over talk, but however, on that point, some departments made more significant
- cuts to begin with, you know, beyond 5%.
- And so they would be gaining back, in theory, 45% where others would be. So I'm just trying to get a
- sense of the point in time where the cut is happening. It sounds like, Michelle, you said it's from
- everything that we've done up to this point, and then 5% on top of that. Correct. OK, that's it. That's
- all I got right now. Yes, Councilor Iverson. And just we're getting some questions about where we are
- in the agenda. This is a 5% as a discussion about a 5% reduction in the supplies category.
- The next discussion is going to be services. The discussion after that is capital category. The discussion
- after that is training and travel. So I just want to kind of road mapping for people that we're talking
- about supplies now. Then there'll be another discussion on services and then there'll be another discussion
- elsewhere. And then I had a question for what's on the screen. Yes. Michelle, what you have on the screen.
- five percent reduction. Would that apply to grant funds or other sources of revenue that come in from
- outside the county? No, this is only the funds that council is like read in tonight's ordinances. So
- anything that was done presented to you, this does not include grant funds whatsoever.
- I'm gonna, before I go back to Councilor Haunt, I'm gonna look over here to my left. Yes, Councilor
- Williams. All right, so. I see that fund 1000 is, you said the general? Yes, this is general fund. Okay,
- so what's 1107? I don't. Eight-gation. Okay, so they don't really align with the numbers that are on
- the code. No, and that's the problem.
- SBOA and the county we use fun numbers that we recognize DLGF has a different set of numbers so that's
- why I'm not gonna say what I'm thinking. Thank you. We've complained I know that a lot of county officials
- have complained the auditors because they talk one number we talk a different one. Brain can only handle
- so much. Yeah. So okay so you've got
- general aviation would you mind telling me the others on there. I'm sorry I don't know all but I can
- help you so fine. 1114 is lit special purpose. 1119 is clerked perpetuation. First part of the situation
- clerk that's not clerk perpetuation. 1122 is
- the community corrections for probation. 1135 is cumulative bridge. 1152 is emergency planning right to know.
- 1159 is health. The levy fund, yeah, that's when we all know. OK, the next one to 1161 is the local
- public health. HFI. 1168 is local road and street. 1170 is. Public safety.
- Yes, public safety let. 1173 is. Highway motor vehicle highway restricted. An 1176 is motor vehicle
- highway. You don't remember 1178 it's a.
- It's a parks, but I'm not sure which parks. It's either parks operating or parks non-reverting capital.
- Capital, okay. What's 1186? 1186, that one is rainy day. Oh, okay. What's 1197? 1197 is storm water.
- appreciate that. It's helpful. Thank you. Okay, Councilor Hawke, you had your hand raised and then I'll
- go back to Councilor Iverson. Right. And this was just a lot to expect the Auditor's Office or Council
- Office to put this together. So if last minute I did speak with her earlier today, but she already had
- her hands full. But we need to zero in on
- the differences in the different funds, whether or not the reduction there is going to help us meet
- our deficit goal. But remember, if you change something in stormwater, that's covered with fees. It's
- not covered with property tax or income tax. That's a fee based, even though it gets billed on their
- property tax, but it's not a property tax.
- And then a lot of the ones, the supplies have you do with the highway. Of course, those funds are coming
- in, having to do with the gas tax and the wheel tax and whatever. But we've got to watch if we're talking
- about supplies. Does that mean where? So I mean, I think this is a great thing to look at. But so far,
- I think the supplies is not
- as big of an amount that would make a lot of difference. When we move down here in the capital items,
- then we'll have a lot more to talk about. But whether or not it's moving it from a rate control fund
- and saving the money at the levy control fund is something we would need to look at. Yes, Councillor Iverson.
- So I don't disagree with that. We want to make sure that our reduction amounts are zeroed in on that
- deficit, that negative $4.4 million deficit. Tonight's the first reading. We are up against it. We are
- adopting this budget in two weeks. So we really need to be able to make some hard decisions.
- and one of the the rationales behind doing this having these discussions is that if if we go line by
- line in every single budget it would not only take a long time but also the savings would not be up
- to where we needed to be to tackle that budget so attacking something that
- we're taking a five percent reduction across a number of funds helps us achieve not only the reduction
- that we need in the debt but also we hope that as we're discussing this that we're not taking a deep
- cut into all these services what we're doing is we're taking as small a slice across the top a haircut
- if you will at this point
- into the service or into the supplies excuse me such that we can be good fiscal stewards we completely
- understand that if departments need to come back and request from council an additional appropriation
- in the supplies category then and that's that's what needs to happen and and and we are certainly looking
- forward to that but
- the the really difficult thing that we are facing at this point is that looming deficit and it is not
- in this county's interest that we conclude our business tonight with such a looming deficit all right
- thank you councillor henry thank you um madam president um yeah i don't disagree with what i've heard
- so far but i think if we're going to continue the
- Barbara shop analogy we kind of need to think through this a little bit because I wanted to come back
- to I said earlier for the departments that. Voluntarily took the haircut and made the cuts in their
- line right. This is now accidentally setting the buzzer a little low and taking a second kind of the
- side of their head right I mean it's it's it's so I. I wonder if and I appreciate that going line by
- line is also onerous with the timeline but I'm wondering
- If there's two other cuts of the data, we can see you know what does 5% look like before we even touched
- it right and then what. What does 5% look like on the account lines that we haven't touched because
- those are those are kind of two different takes on it because, again, I mean there are departments that.
- did the haircut. I mean, they did the work. And so what we're going to hear next is, well, now I'm basically
- at 90% of, I have a 90% cut because we cut 85 and you took five more. They will be here to ask. And
- maybe we will have a lot more business on Tuesday nights of people asking to get 500 bucks here, 500
- bucks there. But I'm wondering, my heartburn is still with the idea of honoring the working department
- heads and finance officers that really tried. And now it's five more.
- And that's it. Yeah, that's it. So to make sure that I understand what you're saying, which I think
- I do, but I want to clarify. You're basically saying, let's look at a 5% reduction for people who have
- not made an effort to look at
- that's one data set that's one data set to look at you know and then the other data set would be well
- what what if we never touched anything it was five percent across the board off the initial okay requests
- and what does that look like because I'm not sure I'm not sure it's 280,000 you know how what what north
- and south of that look like right now but this could be the median there might be a better number that's
- it yeah okay okay yes councillor Wilts
- I get what you're saying that I think this might be too blunt of an instrument. I'm wondering though,
- because to Councilor Iverson's point, we need to get some stuff done tonight. Can we say 5% across all
- funds and list the ones that are meaningful?
- I mean, just from that list, there's lots that just aren't going to impact our budget. And yes, I appreciate
- that some departments already went through the wringer and gave us their blood. Some were forced to.
- We came back and took some too. So I get that, but we will deal with that kind of thing case by case.
- We'll go back.
- I think we need to do something. And I think in the interest of doing something, we just quickly go
- through that list of the funds and general aviation, health, what else? The levy funds? Yeah, the ones
- that we really have to get it just like, let's make these about that so that we're not impacting
- non-reverting funds or fee based funds or things that aren't going to impact us and will impact operations.
- that's my that's my suggestion. It's okay. All right, counselor honk that I see you had your hand raised.
- I just would like to see us move on to these larger amounts, because by the time you split up 281,000,
- it's gonna be, you know, it's gonna be split up with such little amount that not even in funds, it's
- going to help us with this reduction we're looking for. So I think it's more important we spend our time
- this larger amount going on down. It's like almost $3 million, but then we have to see where that's
- coming from. I think the same approach could be used, though, in the subsequent items. If we agree on
- kind of a philosophy forward, I think that's where I'm coming from. Okay, so if we put Councilor Wilts'
- thought process into moving forward with the other items here, we can kind of, for lack of better words,
- kill two birds with one stone.
- is that? Yes. And can I clarify the stone that we're using to kill two birds? That's so weird. Yeah,
- it is weird. Michelle, would it be a simplified way of doing this that we could see to just look at
- the eight levy funds that I'm getting those numbers? So as soon as she gives me those, I can't see like
- the number of fingers going like this on keyboards ever at that table is insane.
- All right. I have a good idea, but like I said, I don't know them all. We're in the process of looking
- at putting that theory to items one, two, and three. Okay. Now, I just want to say I did not get a chance
- during that break to run a to do the report for the capital. So if you wanted that the capital numbers,
- you'll just have to bear with me for a little bit. I would have to pull those up. So and knowing that,
- you know, some of some of those numbers haven't been removed because of tonight's stuff, you know, so
- those will change. Okay.
- So auditor and Michelle, while you are working on that and trying to get those numbers up, would it
- behoove you all to have a little bit of a break to do this type of work? Again, we figure this is going
- to be something, again, as we are doing this on the fly, and again, I'm going to say,
- as Councilor Hawke said earlier, staff was here really late last night and early this morning, and I
- want to make sure that we are giving people an ample amount of opportunity for doing this on the fly.
- So I'm going to say we take a quick recess as they are pulling in about two minutes. Okay. Actually,
- I think I'm ready for the supplies one.
- Okay so no reset we keeping it rolling yeah okay two two okay.
- Okay, not every levy fund has all categories. So for instance, HimCab does not have a supplies land.
- Yeah. HimCab is a rate control fund. Right. So, and that's, so I'm trying to, let's see.
- So what you see on the screen highlighted in yellow are the levy funds. Is Cunebridge a levy fund? Rate
- control, sorry. Okay.
- was aviation. What is the sum of column E?
- Sorry. No, it's not. That's because I'm, yeah. There you go. So that's the total. That's the total of
- those five funds. This is supplies. This is supplies. Okay. Okay.
- I think we should. Y'all got a comment over here? Would you like to make? Yeah. Well, I thought somebody
- had, yeah, 81919. Yes, for the supplies in terms of saving with the 5% reduction.
- Does anybody else have any questions or comments on this item? Okay. Council Iverson. Council, I move
- to implement a 5% reduction in the supplies category in the levy funds. Okay, motion in a second.
- Any additional comment on this item? Yes, I think what we're going to end up doing here in this particular
- instance is that they're going to be coming back and asking for additional. So, you know, maybe that's
- how we plan to spend this next year is trying to fix this. But I think that 80 some thousand
- saved over all of the frozen levy. It's more importantly, moved to other places that might be larger
- and not have to go. I mean, 80,000 is a lot of money to me, folks. I mean, a lot of money. But I'm just
- looking at all these departments who will probably come back and say, we need those. So I won't be saying
- that on everything, but just this particular thing. Understand. OK.
- Thank you for that. Anybody else have any other, excuse me, additional comments or question on the motion?
- Who seconded? Thank you. Okay, so we got a motion and a second, no additional comment from council.
- If you, I guess I'll go to public comment.
- If you've got public comment on this item, you can come forward to the lectern here, the NetU Hill room.
- You'll have three minutes. And you can also raise your hand via Teams as well if you are online. So
- seeing none. All right. Maybe please have a roll call vote. And I just want to clarify, because I was
- typing and doing things. So this is a motion.
- for a 5% reduction on the levy funds. That is correct. Just the levy funds. I just heard from someone
- else. This is just the five levy funds. Levy, levy fund, okay. That's correct. Thank you, Councillor
- Hock. Yes, that's correct. In the supplies. Thank you. All right. Councillor Deckard. Yes. Councillor
- Feidl. Yes. Councillor Wilts. Yes. Councillor Henry.
- Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
- Yes. Yes. Yes.
- So we have a motion and a second to open up this discussion on this item. Yes, Councillor Everson. And
- I think pursuant to the previous conversation, we should edit that to say, again, we should be looking
- at the five levy funds because that's going to have the most direct impact on the $4.4 million debt
- that we need to tackle tonight. Let me just make a quick note.
- Just a few items to consider. We have some service lines that were required to make payments, like if
- you think about debt service, for example, fixed expenses like utilities and so forth, contracts and
- contractual obligations. So just a thought. Ms. Ternike.
- And I will piggyback on the auditor's thoughts. I would also remind council that a lot of our contracts
- are negotiated for multi-years, so those rates are set. So I think a 5% reduction might put the already
- in-existent contracts potentially in jeopardy. Okay.
- so the five I hear you say five percent I'm just saying for anybody that's watching don't at me um but
- is there if if five is a lot is there another number that could possibly be comfortable for that I don't
- know that I could speak to a number tonight without trying to figure out what how many multi-year contracts
- we have what the contractual amount for 2026 for those are so I don't
- I don't know that I can give you a number tonight. Okay. All right. Council, if anybody has any questions.
- Yes, Councillor Henry, and then I'll go to Iverson. Thank you. And yeah, I think picking up
- on Ms. Turner-King's comment, I'm recalling the clerk's budget with how I think we saw a multi-year
- contract listed
- the entirety of it in one year, right? We did reduce that to the correct amount for this year versus
- next year, and that is a number that we really can't move anymore, because it is the contract. So this
- one's a little, this is even trickier than last time, because again, we are looking at now being boxed
- in with contracts, and again, with the services category, departments that have made good faith efforts to cut.
- during our first few weeks. And as the number goes up, as I'm thinking through, the departments again
- have tried really hard to meet us where we were taking the county with making the cuts to preserve the
- COLA, which was always the goal. Again, as this goes on, I think the spirit of this makes a lot of sense
- because it's just numbers, right? Take a number, cut 5% out, great.
- we're now bumping into some other challenges here. I just feel compelled to highlight that. Thank you.
- Yes, Councilor Iverson. So later in the agenda, we're going to be talking about exemptions. What services
- are exempted from certain reductions or what departments are exempted from certain budgets? And here,
- I think we're starting to get a little bit of a flavor of that.
- So far, we've heard that multi-year contracts would be impacted by this, and rates that are set by external
- agencies or companies that we have no control over, that we have to pay anyway, such as whether these
- lights come on or the air comes on, might also be exemptions. But that necks into the savings we can
- have too. So this is tricky.
- but those two areas of exemption start to form in my mind. Yes, Councilor Huck. Right, I'm just thinking
- services contract. Doesn't that cover what we have with the inter-local agreement with the city having
- to do with animal control? That is a very good point. That would be a big one and so forth.
- So I mean, I think that the theory of this is good. I think we needed to start it two months ago so
- we'd see what we were really doing and have a list of peer service contracts. And that's what's included.
- And then we know what we can reduce and what we can't. We don't have any control over those animals
- that just show up. No? True story. All right.
- anybody else over here? Yes, Councilor Decker. Well, I appreciate the spirit of it as well. And if any
- of this were pretty or good, they wouldn't have us doing it. Like this is this is awful work. It's awful
- to figure out. This is probably some of the hardest stuff I've seen since January 2019 when Councilor
- Wilts and I came on here. And I hate this. I hate every bit of this. This sucks. I didn't want to do
- this to sign up for it. That said,
- when I look at this, and I start thinking about this, and this is probably more magnificent of our problems
- than we've had, where we literally, the analogy I always use is you're walking towards the door in the
- dark, and you're trying to grab hands and find the doorknob. My question on this with that analogy is,
- are we literally here, would it be more attainable to say,
- that we alongside our departments in this area are looking instead of the five, but to do two or 1.5.
- And again, much like right now where you're filling your way through the dark, trying to find that doorknob
- to get out of here and on the other side, we would come back in, look at this, realize some of these
- things that Councilor Iverson's talking about, Councilor Henry's talking about around this, but two
- more attainable perhaps as we do this. When we move on tonight and we talk about hiring freeze, I'm
- going to talk hard about Council saying,
- in that here's a goal to do it because again why go through pain if you don't have a number and it may
- be that we get to the other side of some of this and we just say to indianapolis and our constituents
- i apologize there is no way to offer things for someone that lets that damn horse out again uh the third
- time this month and mineral county's got to go out there may be something that we can say there's no
- other way to do this other than to have dollars to do it
- And so you get your shots and so that you know you have the crossing guard. It may be that we say that,
- but 2% maybe that brings that in just a little bit and we roughly together as a county try to fill our
- way towards the door without just completely going out that window instead. You want to see what 2%
- looks like? Yes, please. Maybe in those areas. To see where it would have. As I'm saying it wrong, no.
- The percent would be 278,000. The levy funds. We're trying to cover $4.4 million in a deficit. Like,
- oh man, if we keep lowering these numbers, we're never gonna get there.
- And it just the complexities are real. This is hard. But at the same time, at some point, I think we
- need to do the difficult thing tonight and then work with our department heads to make it right in the
- coming years where we need to make it right. I just man, if we just keep reducing these percentages,
- we're never going to get to four point four.
- So yeah, right. It's five in general, so. So we're looking at a 278, 196 total if we did a 2% as opposed
- to a 2.9 million. For all for all for all, right? But the levy fund is that it was the number that was
- on the 695.
- is the 5%. The 695 is the 5% across. And that's just the levy. Oh, so if you I mean 5% for all funds
- is 3,000,000.6. But for the levy funds only it's 695,489.
- Yeah, Councilor Henry. Yeah, thank you. So trying to find a space between Councilor Deckard's good comment
- about what a 2% looks like versus Councilor Iverson's comment that we have a mountain in front of us.
- In this case, because I don't know how this would work, but I made this more of a point of information,
- presuming we move forward with it, and we have two weeks from now we revisit this,
- help us to have the departments report in how the impact of this because we one thing we need to understand
- is the contracts right because like that that's like look this cannot change like you we can't cut it
- right and to try to get something about those fixed expenses in front of us that will give us a real
- number right it won't be a kind of the five percent haircut for everybody but we'll get a real number of what
- the real reduction is once we take out the contracts that we can't change and other fixed expenses we
- can't change. Is that as a point of procedure clear because that would get we would vote on it and then
- we have two weeks to fix it with what comes back or do we hold on it so we hear back from the departments?
- Personally we probably I guess you vote now
- potentially what I'm saying is not again don't at me I'm just going through all the things here um is
- we vote now and then we potentially could possibly change our mind or if you vote in favor of the five
- percent you know it could fail that I think we have a lot of possibilities but I see the auditor has
- her hand up and I'm gonna go to you hey
- Just one more note I was just conferring with the commission's administrator and there. She brought
- to my attention, a few other big ticket items that would be included in this category, for example,
- like developmental disability. And that's added back in, we get that.
- it's going to take a lot of work to get through them. So when you say that it's going to take a lot of work
- what does that look like for you all? I think we'd have to partner with the departments and analyze
- contracts to see what our obligations are and eliminate those lines that simply can't be reduced at
- this point. And you would be confident that you potentially could do that in the next couple of weeks?
- We could ask departments to reach out and give us a list of what can and cannot be reduced. We'd have
- to assume that the information that is being provided is accurate. However, I don't think that we can
- get through and analyze and audit everything on our own here with your staff table. All right. Yes,
- Councilor Wilt.
- Hello. Hello. I think I mentioned this earlier. I just think services is a different animal than supplies
- and capital because services is what we do. Like I said before, there's just a lot of contracts that
- are already signed and we're committed. Honestly, I say I am not going to vote for cutting the services
- in this manner.
- I also think it's way too much to ask to have people analyzing stuff over the next couple of weeks.
- I think today's the end all I think we need to get through this. So I mean, I'm ready to move to capital
- and say cut that and then move on and get into the bigger ticket items that I know are waiting for us
- at the end of this agenda.
- that's my opinion okay all right so do we have a general consensus from council right now that services
- or yes services is something that we do not want to touch as of this moment right now and we can move
- forward with other items and reduction in the levy speak now forever hold your peace all right
- Yes, Councilor Iverson. I disagree. I think we're here to do hard things, and I think that we can come
- up with exemptions that fit some of the things that we've been talking about. And if we didn't, if we,
- for whatever reason, didn't come up with an exemption, then that is something that we can address fairly
- quickly. So the other thing that I will say to that is, let us maybe put a pin in this, this particular item,
- and let's move on to other items. Can we just table it? I'm sorry? I'm sorry, just table it, right,
- for now? Yeah, so I think what we can do is, because we have some other sausage to grind right now.
- Okay, so we got other things that we need to worry about right now. So maybe let's put a pin in this
- reduction conversation and services category, and let's look at some other things. And if need be, we
- can come back to this item.
- right. All right. Council I move to open a discussion regarding a five percent reduction in the capital
- categories across all funds or across all levy funds levy funds excuse me I misspoke levy funds the
- five levy. All right so we got a motion and a second as a open end of discussion on the five percent
- reduction and the capital category across all levy funds keyword levy funds all right
- Council would say you. I'm going to look to Councilor Wilson. She says she wants to look at capital.
- There are only three. The Health Department doesn't have a capital in the in that levy fund, so it's
- general aviation and reassessment. So that's and that's all there is and just know that some of this general
- is going to go away. Um, with regards to, um, because yeah, all of that is going to be gone to 75,000.
- So that's gone. Uh, the aviation is going to be gone and the reassessment is also gone. That's because
- it's capital and those were moved into that bond.
- So you already took care of that. So there's nothing left in the levy funds with regards to capital.
- Okay. So Michelle is saying there's nothing that's left in the levy funds in relation to capital. And
- we have general aviation and reassessment that we can look at or that would have capital lines. No, I mean,
- that's it that's it right that's it yeah that's what so yeah so so actually these should all be zero
- okay because they've already been done yeah all right um right so there's nothing else to discuss on
- that item okay moving on council i moved to open a discussion regarding a reduction of training and
- travel lines to one thousand dollars across all levy funds okay
- We got a motion in a second. Okay, I'm I'm gonna put myself out there since I, you know, yes, go ahead.
- I forgot to list the exemptions. Okay, go ahead. Yeah. Right now the exemptions that we have listed
- are fund 1217 elected official and fund 1222 Monroe County E911. Okay.
- Yes, Councilor Henry. So making this as painful as I can this evening, I think I'm just going to say
- the same thing a little differently. So here's a case where we've had departments make cuts on training
- and travel. Some were surgical because we understood they weren't traveling across the country or the
- continent, and it was more a regional conference. But of the ones that are required for training for
- the purposes of doing their jobs,
- the certification ones, plan department, probably thinking about the sheriff's deputies, where we know
- that as their employment, you know, having the trainings for the travel matters, this is another case
- where a lump cut will definitely put people at the table asking for that extra travel to get to their
- certification conference, right? I'm just raising it because that's the consequence of the bludgeon
- instead of the scalpel. So that's it.
- So, yes, and that's what I was just about to say before you stepped in here is understand that we have
- people that have to have for certification and all the other things. And I already know some people
- already did, you know, the reduction of training and travel to those people. I greatly appreciate that.
- We have had and I think maybe Councilor Hawke had mentioned this
- Maybe a couple of a few weeks ago early on, where she had mentioned that other counties had to come
- towards council to get approval. I'm not saying that we have to say that, you know, everybody is cut
- from going to go do those things.
- I'm going to say the hard part out loud. I do think that we do have some people that leisurely will
- go for training and travel. And that's not something that is required a part of their job, point blank
- period. So if you add me, I'm sorry. That's where we're at. And we got to do the hard stuff. And again,
- that's what we're saying right now. I think
- I get your point and that's what I don't want to affect is anybody that is required to have you know
- yearly annually those types of trainings. I think for us is looking at what we can say we can reduce
- and put that line item in and if you are still if you are you know because we have
- Those that are elected, we have the election fund and all the electeds can go into that particular fund
- and take out of that pool and their staff can go into what we have one item. But I do like the fact
- what Councillor Huck was saying is we just need to get a handle on these types of things.
- And this is a way for us to get a handle on the training and travel when it comes to what is a necessity.
- and what is leisurely travel? What is us getting out on a cold January day going out west versus what
- is something that is really a part of your job and will make and break your position when you do that?
- So I will say that hard part out loud. People can send me emails and text messages. That's great. But
- I am speaking to leisurely and not mandatory training. Thank you.
- Yes, Council. Well, I thought it was very interesting when other council members throughout the state
- were saying, oh, well, we have them bring all of those projection of what it's going to be per employee
- that's going and where it is they're going.
- and was it this much for a hotel this much for whatever and if they're just going to Las Vegas because
- that's the lovely place to go. Is there some place they can get that training closer to home? Because
- folks were not the only one looking at budgets hard and we've really got it better than most counties.
- So I just think sometimes if
- If the departments know that we're going to see where exactly they're going and what the cost is and
- how many is actually going, they might be thinking, making sure, oh, well, this is going to be open
- for the council to see every penny and we're going to turn it in. Because otherwise you hear from the
- people who've worked in the claims position over the years
- you would be surprised we're all there going and I don't think we should be surprised. I'm gonna look
- over here to my left to see if anybody has any discussion on that. None. Yes, Councilor Decker. I appreciate
- the tough questions because again this is what we've been sent to do and to have. I love
- I love the idea around training. We have done for years a lot around training for folks. But we are
- in awful times, in difficult times on some of these cuts. And the question I always have, and this is
- always a debate over me, going to county counselor training, which probably if people had to prioritize,
- they'd say it's the least important of all of those that people go to.
- but the question that I often look and evaluate that is that training for my role and what I do gonna
- be things I actually need to do my function or is it as I've often noticed a bunch of people sitting
- around talking about what's the legislature gonna do and then not really answering any questions. And
- I think that in the state a lot of those things are gonna have to be really really addressed because we
- nobody's gonna be able to, I don't know how people are at anything right now. And so I like a little
- bit more leaning in on this to kind of figure it out because again, it's, well, let me put it like this.
- It's these things change or we lose people or what people get and you need people to offer the services
- and do those things.
- And so somewhere, somehow, something has to lean in hard. We tried things to figure out things that
- were alternatives. Minimum fund balance discussions. I'm sure nobody wants to hear me talk about it
- anymore. But the reality is those things went in. Everybody said, nope, that's not going to do it. Back
- to the drawing board. And so it's this and a few other artful things where we're going to have to lean
- in harder, harder, harder.
- Yes, Councilor Wilts. I believe that you addressed the elected official exemption for that fund being
- that that's an option for folks to use. Is that what you're saying? It's like because anybody, not anybody,
- but any department elected official.
- I honestly don't see why that should be exempted. Why are we not just applying it to everything? And
- if an elected official has a required training, we can. They can come to us and ask to use it. I'll
- just cut it all. No, OK, I mean if it's if it's I don't know and then the other one. What is the other
- one about the 911? Yeah, mandatory training to be certified in 911 services.
- I think I'll add the possible exemption list there. The auditor, the treasurer, the recorder, and clerk
- are all statutorily required to complete. I think it's 15 training hours the first year and then 40
- within the remaining three of their term. They could use the elected officials. Every law enforcement
- officer has a training requirement. I think it's 24 hours with a breakdown within firearms, emergency
- vehicle operations, and defensive tactics, which would include
- both merit deputies and the jail. And then attorneys have to do six credit hours per year, but 36 within
- three, that's the one I really should know and I'm blanking, which is sad. Okay. Yeah. And I mean, I'll
- for the legal department there's four of us but you know we try to go to one training a year and that's
- like three hundred dollars individual person so if you reduce it to a thousand there goes the budget
- I know we kind of wanted to get through some of the other stuff and then I wanted to add public comment
- but sure go ahead yes
- attorney that we have to have in law enforcement. One of the things that we try to go beyond that is
- one of the things that we touched about when you was going to open public session. We had a point now
- that we raised it to a certain level so at one point it's not going to cost us down the road. What I
- mean by that if you look across the country and and you look at a police department or county or sheriff's
- office that
- something tremendously wrong went wrong and then later was sued and then we had to pay. It was a whole
- lot more. If you trace it back, it's going to be to training. And for us, that's critical for us to
- be training because if we don't stay on top of things beyond what the training just mentioned, the basics,
- yes, we have to have that. But looking forward, if you go do your homework and go back and look,
- It's very difficult not to fall into a situation where lack of training will cost you at the end a whole
- lot more. And the other thing is this, we do try our very best to work with the counselors. I know you're
- in a very difficult situation. We know this. So in the Sarasota, we try to meet you more than halfway,
- but training is something that we work very hard to get at a level now
- Because one of the attractions that we're trying to trying to change and get people to come to us, obviously
- will be a pay increase. I got it, I understand around that path. But if we reduce training at our level
- at this point, we're going to lose that as well. And I hate for us to digress where we came from.
- to where we are right now, because I assure you, a lot of the ages want to come to us because of the
- training level and the professionalism that we had at the present time. So I do urge you to think about
- that, because you might save a little here, but if, God forbid, something goes wrong, there's going
- to be a whole lot down the road. And the last thing I'll leave with this, I'd be very respectful of
- your time, and thank you, Madam Chair, for allowing me to say this.
- The other thing that I, and I mentioned this before, one of the things that I, when I go to bed at night,
- it worries me drastically, drastically. And I bring it full circle. As God forbid, one day we lose one
- of our deputies because of lack of training, because we also got to equip them really well so they can
- go home each evening. But at the same time, we got to give them the training that they deserve and need
- to make it home. So I wanted to,
- make sure that I come up here and share that with you. Because when I saw this, the training part,
- I get it. I truly understand it. But in this arena for us, it really truly, truly is a matter of life
- or death for us. Because what we do is a job that not everybody could do. And we have to have that constant
- high level training to make sure that our people that work so hard to represent and keep this community
- very safe,
- at the very edge of the training he received. So I apologize for walking up, but I felt that as you
- were talking about this topic, I wanted to make sure that, because you're gonna have to make a decision,
- and I know it's gonna be tough, but I want you to be well informed of why is it this is kind of passionate
- for us as far as training goes, because God forbid one day, I don't wanna stand in front of you and
- say, hey, here we are, and I wanted to avoid this tremendously. So I wanna be very respectful to you
- and your time, but I also wanna give you the actual knowledge
- Why is it that there are certain things? Yes, I get it. It might seem logical to you, but when it comes
- to our world, it makes a hellacious difference for us that sometimes, God forbid, we're not be able
- to go home. So with that, thank you so much for the patience. And I do apologize for allowing me to
- come up and talk to you. Sure. Thank you.
- Since we open that up, I guess if there's other electeds that are in the room that would like to speak
- to this, I know I've heard from it. So please briefly speak to this particular item. Thank you. Erica
- Oliphant, Monroe County prosecuting attorney. I know some of you heard from me tonight.
- As Ms. Turner-King mentioned, attorneys have to have a minimum of six hours of continuing legal education
- every year, but the average is 12 hours a year because we have to get 36 in three years. Makes sense,
- right? The training, the $1,000 would fund one attorney to go to one Indiana prosecuting attorney's
- council conference and get their CLEs for the year.
- I have 18 deputy prosecutors, so $1,000 gets me one trained person their minimum amount for one year.
- And going to Mr. Deckard's point, I know we're worried about people going for fun travel and not practical
- travel. But when we send people to the Indian Prosecuting Attorney's Council, we're talking about Indiana
- statute updates, Indiana legal updates, Indiana
- law and procedure, and we're sharpening trial skills and getting a lot of really practical, directly
- applicable skills with those trainings. So they are practical trainings. I understand that we're trying
- to save money in some dark, dark times, but we
- We'll be here all the time, and frankly, I think we'll probably miss some deadlines where we could get
- them a little cheaper. They tend to have escalating fees if you wait to sign up. I would also just like
- to note, though the vast majority of our training and travel budget does go to training and the associated
- travel, there is also a component that goes to case pertinent expenses.
- For example, if we have a witness who lives out of county or out of state, they are entitled by law
- to have their deposition taken in their county of residence. So we have at least a few times in the
- last year had to send a deputy prosecutor to another state to take a deposition of a witness. You might
- be thinking, wouldn't it be wonderful if we did these by Zoom? But unfortunately, we can only do them
- remotely if we have the consent of defense counsel, and that is unfortunately rarely given. And they
- would give you a lot of reasons for that. They want to lay eyes on the witness and see how they're going
- to testify at trial to assess the merits of their case. It makes sense.
- I know my office isn't gonna be the only one in a position to need this training and travel line. I
- know the public defenders are gonna be similarly situated. You'll probably hear from some others, but
- I just wanted to make it clear that this is an important line and having us come to council to ask for
- an appropriation every time is going to be, I think it's gonna cost us money and cause us to blow some
- deadlines potentially, but it's also just gonna be burdensome
- for you and me if I'm here all the time. So I do appreciate the time to speak to you kind of off schedule.
- Thank you. Thank you. And I see you walking towards us. Welcome. Hello. Mary Ellen Decoff. I'm the presenting
- judge in the New York Circuit Court. I just want to add to what Molly said, what Erica said, what the
- sheriff said.
- to be able to stay certified for us to stay certified, and that enables us to get granting, get grant
- funding, et cetera. Also, judges are required to get 15 hours a year CLE, and if we don't get it, then
- we will be suspended from doing our jobs. So it is vital that we have adequate money to be able to do
- that. Thank you very much.
- Yes, Councilor. I'll go Henry, and then I'll go Iverson. Thank you. So at this point, I wonder if we're
- considering exemptions and funds. What an exemption for non-emergency and non- or the exemption. So
- keeping it for non-emergency, non-required, the $1,000 cut, but for emergency or those that are engaged
- in emergency services or first response and
- as a requirement of their work, leaving those alone, what that would look like. But again, this is surgical,
- not bludgeoning. I'll come back to you. I'll go Iverson, and then I'll go Wilt. So in the previous three
- items that we discussed, we discussed a percentage decrease, which is equity, right?
- but here we're saying, well, no, we're gonna reduce everyone to $1,000, which is equality. So I'm wondering
- why we went from a percent decrease to a dollar amount here, and would we not be better going back to
- a percent decrease? Councillor Woods. Isn't training and travel part of services anyway? I mean, didn't
- we already just cut it?
- Essentially services. We didn't cut we didn't cut services because it was to you, right? Yeah Training
- and travel is within the service category. So let's cut so then We cut training and travel by a percentage
- I Don't quite get the equity thing, but but it does make more sense to say hey
- if we've already looked at your budget, because we have, we've looked at all of these budgets, and Councilor
- Henry in particular was very good about hammering on the training and travel lines. So we've made those
- surgical cuts. If we say, let's cut 5% or whatever someone deems reasonable on this side of the day,
- I know nothing is reasonable out there, and I get that. I think that makes
- more sense and less of a less drastic an impact perhaps and is more maybe palatable. So like a 5% in
- training and travel. So we heard Councilor Wilts' conversation there.
- Yes, Councilor Iverson. And I like what Councilor Wilts was saying, and I tend to agree. And the reason
- is, is when we set the dollar amount, it means we're robbing 17 of 18 attorneys from training. If we
- decrease it by a percentage amount, we're just, I don't know, we're robbing 5% of each one of them training.
- Can I make a couple of other statements? I mean, I know this isn't popular,
- There are situations in which your employer doesn't pay for your training, even if it's required for
- your profession. My husband's a psychologist, and when he worked for other places, he had to get his
- own training to get his continuing education credits. It's just a different paradigm than what some
- folks might be used to.
- I don't think it's unprecedented to suggest that we don't pay for everything that everybody needs. If
- it's a requirement to work in this position in county government, yeah.
- I do training for a living. I'm a trainer. That's what I do. So this hurts my heart. I get it. I also
- know that our federal government has cut training and travel because that's who I train. And we do everything
- online now. And it's because of this exact situation. It's a lot cheaper to do training online. Is it
- as effective? Depends on the-
- depends on the teacher, depends on the subject matter, but. So Councilor Hong, just to kind of recap
- the conversation, we've talked about instead of doing a flat line item of the thousand, Councilor Wiltsch
- just mentioned doing a percentage like we've done with other things. So what, the five percent is what
- you're saying, Councilor Wiltsch? I was, yeah. Okay.
- So 5% instead of having the flat line of 1000. Some might be more, some might be less than 1000. And
- I appreciate the last comment you were making. I don't know how long you.
- about but the training that you can get online and folks there's so much available for us at the county
- council level and you can go back and get that training and a lot of it is just free coming from the
- DLJF and shame on us if we don't take advantage of that and our staff. Right now we had staff went to
- AIC and that's lovely but AIC is not really meant for staff.
- It's meant for the elected officials. So if we're going to find fault with the other departments or
- see what we need to start at home.
- Yes, counselor file so I wondered, speaking about the online training, I wondered about what happened
- during coven was there an online training mandate then whenever that was all shut down and you couldn't
- really go anywhere right I mean has there been a past practice of doing online trainings for see us
- or whatever.
- it would be just like getting a real estate training that we're required to take and you have to do
- so many, you have to answer all the questions, you can only have so much time to pass it and you have
- to, they keep track of it and whether or not you passed it with what credit. I've done a lot of training
- where you have to verify that you actually did it and
- and they can send you the certificate or they keep track of it. I'm just trying to figure out if there
- was a practice before during COVID or some other time. That's why I was referring to real estate. We
- did before and after, but we had to do that during COVID. Yeah. Thank you. What I'm hearing from those
- that just spoke to us is maybe
- Our particular type of training is much different than their particular type of training. And they have
- to go, they might be required to go to a sunny place in December. That sounds so warm right now. But
- even though that sounds like a, what some might think as a leisurely, and I say that with air quotes
- again, don't at me. What some might think is a leisurely training travel is something that is required
- for your job. And I see some, some knots in the back. Okay. All right. I'm gonna counselor Henry.
- I mean, it's a perception reality problem. You know, vendors find venues to take people to. You know,
- I, yeah, but it's what's going on in the box, right? And I want to, again, because of the time crunch
- and things here, it's, I don't want to speculate on
- I mean, I'm guessing we can't do small firearms training virtually. That'd be a guess for the sheriff's
- deputy. I presume you have to fire on a range if we're doing training somewhere. That's not virtual.
- It's hard to really pick at these bit by bit. But I guess what I would say is, you know,
- What I wanted to say here at this point is, can we get a percentage of what this looks like by percentage
- instead of the dollar amount so we can actually see a number on screen to say, what does 5% look like?
- Is that something we can do quickly here? Thank you, Michelle. The 5% may help us clear this up a little
- bit if that's where folks are leaning.
- you want this just for the levy funds or do you want yes just levy funds otherwise you're going to be
- here for 20 minutes
- So I'm going to say this while we're waiting.
- because it was put on my heart. And I felt like I was thinking this earlier. And I said it to some.
- And I'll say it out loud for the record so people can actually hear it. Councilor Decker said it best
- earlier this evening. This sucks. For a lack of better words, this actually sucks. It sucks that we're
- sitting here having stress pimples from rubbing our faces and trying to figure out all of these different
- things and having everybody
- you know, say all the things to us. This sucks that we are in this position, and it seems like,
- you know, due to some other things, we got a couple more years of this lovely budget stuff that we have.
- This is just the first movie. The sequel and the other part of the trilogy is coming in the next couple
- of years. So I say all that to say, I feel as though, at least for me, being on county council for the
- past four years,
- I truly believe that council has really tried to go and do a lot of good things for Monroe County government.
- And the cheerleader right now, which is all seven of us, is in a really bad situation. And we are trying
- our best and our hardest, and I was saying another word, but I don't wanna have language yelled at me,
- to the point where this is where we are.
- While I hear everybody and I hear all the comments and the phone calls and the emails and the texts
- and all of the above right now, we cannot make everybody happy.
- But I'm willing to figure out how we can make this work because as counselor Henry said earlier today,
- and it's definitely has been a thought of mine. We are trying to make sure that we retain people, not
- lose people or doge people. And that is what other government entities are doing right now. We can look
- up the street to Hamilton County and some other places and they are literally cutting people out of
- this. So are we trying to
- I understand that people are like, oh, this amount here, this amount here. These larger amounts hopefully
- will help eat away at some of this deficit and all the hard long hours and the sore cheeks in the seat
- that we've been sitting here for a really long time will, I hope, to pull out.
- That's what I will say to that. Again, we can't make everybody happy, but this is the sucky situation
- that we're in. And I see Michelle has the Excel sheet. The total amount
- of reduction for the levy funds only doing the training and travel would be $10,088 if you did a 5%
- reduction. Yes, Councilor Iverson. Hello. Council, I move to implement a 5% reduction in training and
- travel lines
- in the five levy funds as presented on the screen. All right we got a motion and a second with the five
- percent reduction and that amount is ten thousand eighty eight dollars as opposed to what would have
- been possible which was three ninety eight six three hundred ninety eight thousand six ninety. All right any other
- questions or comments related to. This item. Okay I'm seeing nine if you have a public comment on this
- item you can come forward to the lectern here the night you know room or you can raise your hand via
- teams. And seeing
- Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
- by to $500 across in the levy funds. We might as well edit this to be 5% as well. Second. All right,
- we got a motion and a second and I see Mr. I know you have identified some exemptions there. I think
- you should maybe consider adding the courts to that exemption considering they have mailings they have
- to mail out and the clerk as well. Yeah, clerks and court are at it. I can speak it out into the record.
- I was looking at a prior copy. OK. So we got a motion in a second. Hello.
- Okay, so we got a motion and a second. Is there any other further discussion on this item? I guess if
- we do much like we've done before, is there a way that we can see what the 5% looks like as opposed
- to what was in our agenda? Thank you. And this is just levy, not all, right?
- Both ways. I was five years old.
- On the screen, there are only three levy funds, general fund, election, and reassessment. So the total
- reduction at 5% would be $8,640. Does that have the exemptions in there? One moment, please. Well,
- I mean. Literally, it's, I mean.
- that's not worth your time. I at least in my opinion, this is looking underneath the couch cushion for
- something and a big old budget. This is it. All right, so. Okay, we tried. Um, all right. So yes,
- additional 2026 budget reductions, I would like to discuss longevity and what the impact might be of
- removing longevity completely. We've already taken the steps to only grandfather and we no longer offer
- this benefit to new employees as of sometime in 2023.
- I know we just read the salary ordinance that described it. My understanding from my notes, which vary
- in their reliability is about a 300,000 plus impact. 300,000, yeah. It's a bigger chunk than things
- we've been. And can I ask, because I'll pull up a report.
- just wanting the levy funds? Or do you want all funds? Well, I think this becomes more of an equity
- issue. Correct. Okay. Okay. So I would suggest that it's all funds. Yes. All right. There you go. Yes,
- Councilor. I understand it should be across all funds so that we're treating all employees equally.
- I bet we really need a number to see what we're doing with our deficit. And I keep hearing 4,000 whatever
- and I just don't understand what I keep looking at the four B's and that's what we're going to be voting
- on is four B's. It's five million deficit in general alone. And we will give Michelle a moment while
- she pulls that up. And Ms. Gregory has her hand up in the meantime.
- I think I have the total amount here for longevity, but I don't have it by levy funds. But it looks
- like the total amount would be $341,102. Say it again for me, please. $341,102. Thank you. This is across
- the general? All funds. Oh, all funds. It'll be less.
- So that's across all levy funds or across all funds? That's from the budget projection, communal budget
- report for all funds budgeted. Okay, and I'm going to do levy funds. Okay. 347,000 is what can be saved
- in levy funds, but across all funds. Okay. That's like user fees and
- And this would end up being a change to our salary ordinance which I have to read
- It has been brought to my attention that in certain negotiated contracts Longevity is calculated into
- those negotiated contracts. So for example Jail and married deputies as well. Nope. Just just
- just correctional officers Yes, just correctional yeah, and it's paid out differently so it's
- built in as an increase in their hourly rate. So at what point if we say we want to treat everybody
- equally and fairly, which is the reason why it would have gotten in that contract to begin with, it
- wouldn't have even gotten there.
- then it has to come out from everywhere and any contract and sign is surely subject to the county council
- approval of paying for whatever the expenses are. I mean, this conversation nobody wants to have.
- And to me, it's a lot harder than how much you're gonna save on postage. Yep. This is really hitting
- the people that work for us
- But what we're trying to do, or at least I think that's what we're trying to do, is make sure that the
- people who work for us have stable employment. Is that what we're trying for? Yeah. The reason I bring
- this up specifically, this particular benefit, and have brought it up every year
- for the past five years is because it was pointed out to us that we are one of the only counties that
- double dips into the concept of longevity. And it's lovely that we've been able to do that. But we offer
- step increases built into the salary grids. And that is a form of rewarding longevity.
- right? So we were told that by with many years ago that we should not be doing. Doubles and we've been
- doing that. Back I guess when we could do that, but this is how new ball game folks. Yeah, and I mean
- that is that was the motivation behind. OK, let's stop doing it for new hires and it'll phase out over
- time. It was sort of a compromise and I like that. But
- here we are. I just am trying to revisit. Yes, Michelle. Across the levy funds, reassessment does not
- pay out. There's no employees in reassessment, so that's why they're not included. So there's only the
- four levy funds, so there is a total longevity of $277,450. And that's the levy funds, whereas auditor
- Gregory gave you the total funds. Yes, okay. Councilor Everson. I think this is one of those things
- where if we're going to do it, we need to rip the bandaid off and do it for everyone. Because if we
- just take it out of the levy positions, then those who aren't the levy would have the benefit.
- I think that's a given. I think we wanted to see this number so we know what we're impacting in terms
- of the apples to apples. But yeah, and I mean, but it doesn't solve to Councillor Hawks point, you know,
- the contracted folks. And when, you know, I mean, I guess we could revisit their,
- Their stuff when it comes back up. I don't necessarily advocate ripping open a contract. Yeah, that's
- Turner King As I look at the contract and think about this further Although the jail gets 48 cents per
- hour correctional officers get 48 cents per hour as a longevity Unlike other county employees. They
- don't have a step schedule. Okay, so
- Council. I move to, uh, implement. I moved to set, uh, longevity to zero in all county funds. Okay.
- When you do that also, uh, that's going to affect, uh, FICA with, uh, yeah. So you're going to have
- to calculate that and I, and we need to exempt the negotiated contracts.
- It's it's not included. And should it say all employees? I'm not sure you should say county funds because
- one of us grant or if it's some kind of fee fund, whatever. I just think it's removing it from the salary
- ordinance. Yeah, and then defunding all associated accounts. I can send all that. OK, alright, let me
- let me type that all up so yeah.
- Let's bring it back. Can we, Councilor Iverson, can you please restate? Because I also didn't hear a
- second. So please restate what you were saying. I move to amend the salary ordinance to set longevity
- lines to zero. No, no, no. All right.
- Okay. Help me out. Yes. Okay. So what you want to do is you want to remove longevity from the salary
- ordinance so that it can't be paid out and then set all funds across the budgets as well as grants to
- zero. So moved. Yeah. Can I get a second? We need a second. Second. All right. We got a motion and a second.
- everybody um let's just look over here to the right and see if anybody has any questions or comments
- counselor hawk yes this is uh extremely difficult because this means that the folks that have been around
- for years and been good servants to the county of monroe they're going because they get more in longevity
- than the others and so it behooves us to be
- very cautious when we are working on budgets next year that we remember them every time we let increases
- happen that's going to affect these same folks. And normally I wouldn't support it because we're talking
- about people who have been here 20 years. And as a reminder, it hasn't been that long that we added
- step increases. I can't remember what the
- was it like anything over 15 years started getting step increases that didn't get them before forget
- what it was but that there was a cap on step increases yes we're at 25 was it just for 25 yes but but
- doesn't mean that we couldn't say we could have a pause on step increases of everything over x if
- I don't know if anybody wanted to think of that. I mean, once we if we ever get to the point where we
- can't figure out how we're going to get because the state will cut us. That is already. Look like they
- already do it or they will. Any other comments over here on this item? Looking to my left. Does anybody
- else have any comments on this item?
- is there any public on public comment on this item you can come forward to the lectern here in the night
- hill room or raise your hand via teams and we already have somebody that has raised their hands via
- teams and looks like mr mckim so unmute yourself and you'll have up to three minutes thank you very
- much i'll be brief here i i can see the argument for getting rid of longevity we've certainly
- heard the recommendations from our classification consultants. But I really feel like you're doing this
- in the wrong order. Why are you talking about cutting people's salaries? And make no mistake that from
- the perspective of an employee, longevity is salary before you even discuss cutting the growth of salaries, i.e.
- the COLA. At this point, you could really cut the COLA, pass the hiring freeze, establish an ED-lit
- budget, and call it a day. Thank you very much. Thank you.
- it's easier said than done. So yes, we appreciate that. I just know for me personally, I'm trying to
- not touch Cola until it is the absolute last ditch effort. But that's my personal opinion. All right.
- Any other public comment on this item? Please raise your hand or come to the public or come to this
- podium here in the NatU Hill room.
- roll call vote. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
- budget. Yes counselor Henry thank you madam president I think the order of operations here where we
- have. The additionals were discussing and then we're going back to. Agenda items where we can talk about
- some instruments to fix the budget in terms of. The special purpose
- next item a little difficult unless unless we can figure out a way to amend the agenda here but- to
- the public comments point- the Social Security administration for twenty six set the cola for the anticipated
- call is somewhere between two point seven two point eight percent. We started off in a good faith effort
- to aim for three percent in the corner.
- We've had some great difficulty making the cuts to get there. When we look at peer organizations or
- governments in the county, I believe City of Bloomington is at 2.7 in their budget. Just trying to get
- a handle on what the dollar amounts would be unless we're willing to tap other instruments like the
- special purpose lit or the edit. What would matching our City of Bloomington partners look like for
- 2.7 percent COLA for this year?
- So it's not a motion, it's more where we would be in the salaries if we reduced to, you know, it would be a 2.7%
- increase for employees this year at the SSA understanding of 2.7% instead of three. I'm not making the
- motion, I just wanna see the numbers and what that looks like right now. So,
- Yeah, I would definitely like to see the numbers, but I definitely want to tap into that ED lit. Let's
- get lit. Um, so that I said it, sorry. It's like, um, so I think that would be a conversation. I'm curious
- about that, but then I really kind of want to have a conversation about lit and then maybe we can circle back to.
- would be fair to amend the agenda to move on to the other items and then return to this. I mean, because
- really, that's procedural. That's where we're going. That's where we're headed. And then we can come
- back to the aim, or we can come back to the 2026. Yes. So. I make a motion. I just had a question. Yes,
- so I'm going to move on to the next agenda item.
- eight was tabled. We then moved to number nine. And that is a discussion and possible approval of resolution
- 2025-42. Councilor Wiltz, did you have a question? I'm so confused. So basically the idea is Councilor
- Henry is wanting to possibly look at potentially doing a
- 2.7 increase to match the folks at the city of Bloomington. However, because we have the ED lit conversation
- that is coming up, because we amended the agenda earlier to kind of bounce around, and now we're coming
- back to this particular item, he wanted to look at the numbers. We might have, dependent on the conversation
- about what we want to do with ED lit, we might not necessarily have to do
- the proposed three to a potential lower amount. So I think that's where. Yes. My question is then if
- we still want to have a further discussion under item eight H. Six, which is where we are.
- table that so that we can come back to the cola discussion because the cola isn't on the agenda anywhere
- right or or is it and I missed it I mean that's other 2026 budget reductions right so we need to keep
- that open we can't just move on am I wrong like isn't there something we have to do to keep that item
- that open so we can come back to it
- I just want to make sure we can. Yeah, so the idea is. We want to come back to the conversation. Technically,
- Councilor Henry's point of reduction is a continuation of where we've been for a really long time, but
- we are now done with that potentially, and we are now moving back towards item nine.
- which is the discussion of the potential hiring freeze, the special purpose lit and the economic development.
- There could be a possibility that depending on the conversation with 80 lit, we might not have to tap
- into a decrease of COLA. So do we table 2026 reductions or can we move on and then come back?
- could table it to later this meeting you could table it to later in the meeting but if the idea is you
- want to revisit counselor Henry's cola discussion I always go back he can withdraw the discussion the
- opening that discussion now you could have the edit and then if counselor Henry wants to repurpose having
- that discussion he could do so I believe my comment was in eloquently
- made as a point of information. It was not a discussion. So it wasn't there wasn't a motion. There wasn't
- a second. And so it was just him stating, you know, his his point of, you know, the reduction of cola.
- I think the safest bet is to probably move to table further discussion on the 2026 budget until after
- whatever other items you want to discuss. So moved.
- you're going to be able to do that. Well, you probably should identify what other items you want to
- discuss. Council Yes, Councilor Decker, Madam President, I move that we table additional budget discussions
- until after we've had a discussion on and I would if I might recommend the hiring freeze resolution
- item nine discussion regarding economic
- Okay. Somebody seconds. Second. Okay, we got a motion in a second to move around. Is there any discussion
- on this item? Yes, Councilor Feidle. We're leaving off number 10, the lit special purpose tax. My inclination
- of the motion was it comes after the additional budget discussion. Thank you. Because it's not directly
- compressing that. Thank you. Correct. Thank you. Okay. So we're still having the discussion. Yeah.
- that's been moved. All those in favor of adopting what Councilor Deckert said signify by saying aye.
- Aye. All those opposed same sign. All right motion carries so let's get into the conversation of item
- number nine. Council I move to open for discussion possible approval of resolution 2025-42 a resolution
- to temporarily freeze the hiring of full and part-time staff. Second.
- All right, we got a motion in a second. Mr. King. So I in your packet, and I could try to get it up
- on the screen, but I would have to join the meeting is the amended version of the hiring ordinance from
- last week.
- yesterday I sent you a packet that included all of the departmental responses that I got in response
- to an email that I sent asking for information and then I included in the email to you seven potential
- talking points that you probably would want to consider and I don't know if you want me to tick through
- them individually or or how you would like to have this discussion open it up so
- Is there a way that we can have, well, you're trying to join the meeting so you can post or share your
- screen. In the meantime, as Ms. Turner-King is working on that, since the motion is open to have the
- discussion here, what is the council's discussion on this item?
- I'll just go down the line, Councilor Iverson, and then I'll go down the line here. So from my comments
- on this topic last week, or yeah, it was last week, the issue of exemptions still is a tricky one here.
- And in the six points that were included, I think that's
- probably what we need to tackle. Should this pass that procedure of what should be implemented to assist
- us in determining what positions may qualify for an exemption? And then should we repurpose PAC to be
- a body that hears those or does that come directly to council?
- Should we use a process that's similar to how we fill vacancies? So I think a lot of that work needs
- to be done. And I think that's pretty paramount because I did hear from a former council member who
- shall remain nameless who said that when this happened during the Great Recession that there were quite
- a few folks, departments who came forward wanting to have their vacancies filled.
- and council approved every single one of them. So I think we need to learn from that history and acknowledge
- that history and get to the point where we are fairly evaluating department needs to fill vacancies.
- I'm gonna come back over here. So I'm gonna go Councilor Hawk and then I'm gonna come back to Decker
- and Wilts. Yes. I'd like to make it really quite simple.
- it's a hiring freeze except for the jail and the youth services shelter because they have to have so
- many people on staff because that's a 24-hour operation and then anything beyond that then you know
- everybody's gonna yell and scream they're gonna cry a lot harder when they don't get the raise and no
- I don't think you can afford a three percent raise.
- Thank you very much. This one has been particularly on my mind, by the way, doing anything affecting
- employees coming in going out what they get paid is always hard. The hardest thing for me. And this
- was this year, absolutely sucks to repeat counselor crossly speaking, repeating me. But when I look
- at this, I believe what I said I think earlier in the meeting
- is that if you're looking at this, the council does have to make determinations on that and go through
- that with the department head, which really is a time suck for everybody. And I get it. That said, when
- we did do this before, council generally said, yep, yep, yep, over and over because the revenues were
- there. This time, the revenues are not there and it's problematic. And so when I look at this,
- I see this as an opportunity for all of us to kind of go through that together. I also think that if
- you're going to go through the pain of this process, that the council should be realistic about why
- you're going through the pain and it's about money and having some control over the growth of the county
- because the state's revenues are not growing with us. That is dramatically changed. So when I look at
- this resolution,
- it is exceedingly hard for me to vote yes on this but if I do vote yes and I will tonight I'm saying
- in my mind is one counselor
- would like to see this turn into a cost saving for the county that we manage with departments as best
- as we can and that it has a quantifiable amount to it and that is not easy but for me i think the council
- has to set a target amount that makes this worth the while of preserving
- a cola, preserving employment for those who are here and remaining here and preserving services for
- taxpayers. To me, it would be worthwhile for the county to approach this with the mind that we would
- want this to come at a significant benefit to the county about a million dollars. I'm just going to
- be real honest on that because what we're facing now is battling back
- from a deficit that is in millions, not minutes. It's millions, literally. We've heard tonight a lot
- of things about everything that is important. And I agree. And back in the day, when I was more good
- time Charlie in this role and we had the revenues, we could support a lot. But now we're literally trying
- to save the ship from taking on
- water that the state says well now that's the only amount of water you can so to me that's the criteria
- i have to have a demonstrated significant significant need for this county to fill it otherwise we have
- to fudge it along and that sucks but this all is going to suck if we don't do it right
- I agree that this is necessary and this is difficult. And I think also to Councillor Hawke's point,
- I think we can simplify this a great deal. It occurs to me that it gets very mired and mucky when council
- as a body has to make
- thumbs up, thumbs down decisions on departmental business that of this nature. I mean, do you get it?
- Is your position worth this or that? My suggestion would be that there's a hiring freeze. And if a department
- head feels that that particular position is integral to functioning,
- as a department or an office, then that department head can find the equivalent FTE to remove from their
- office or department if they want to fill the position that has been vacant so that you've got some
- parity there. And it might be FTE, it might be salary equivalent. We could work that out exactly, but let
- the department had determined, make that hard decision, frankly, rather than coming to us with, I mean,
- we would have to be involved, but rather than making us suss out the value of X position in this department
- versus Y position in that department and all of that, I agree with setting a goal for saving money.
- I think thinking about this in real terms is important,
- Um, the practicality of it is, you know, we have to have a certain number of people at YSB. I do, I
- do remember that. And I think obviously there's some, some public safety issues that, that, um, maybe
- warrant either exemption or discussion. Um, but ultimately I would like to put as much decision making
- in the hands of the department heads while still freezing the overall addition, you know, of or replacement
- of FTE. Yes, counselor. So could you with that in mind, could you freeze the total FTE in each department
- and let the department do the work of deciding what that's going to be?
- that not all FTEs are equal. Because of differing salaries. So I kind of have backed off of FTE as the
- unit and maybe in dollars ultimately have to be the unit. If it's about saving money. And I guess my
- other question is with this because we have people that will come. I just want to get a clarification,
- Ms Turner King.
- Does this include grant positions? That would be the first talking point that I suggested you guys talk
- through. So the first talking point would
- Should grant positions be handled differently? If so, how? Should departments be allowed to move personnel
- into grant positions? I think in the packet that I sent you for departmental responses, this was one
- of probation's real concerns. And I could pull up the responses if you want, but I mean. What was the
- general consensus? Like, yeah.
- related to specifically grants or overall? The grant. I think the general consensus was there is a fear
- if they do not provide the grant services or have the employees to provide the grant services, then
- they could be in jeopardy of losing the grant funding. Understandable. Okay. So the first talking point
- of the day for this resolution is would we make this grant positions exempt from this freeze?
- And I would think that we would say yes to that. But the floor is open. So, you know, anybody that would
- like to make a comment on this, please do. And Council Hawk. Yes, I'm just reminding you the trouble
- we're in right now is because grant dollars went away and employees were moved to grant dollars. And
- now they're being moved back to general. And it isn't like as if we I mean, now that
- that exploded the number of employees in County General, as well as the number that was being covered
- under the self-fund insurance. So I mean, just be careful what we're doing with grants. Yes, Councilor
- Iverson. In reading what the probation department wrote, it's actually the other way where
- if a position is vacant inside of a grant, then we may not be able to fulfill the obligations of the
- grant, and then we will lose that grant. And examples of grants that we currently have that we could
- lose include problem-solving court, pretrial services program, juvenile detention alternatives, and
- community corrections programs. We're talking about drug testing, JDAI, mental health court, reentry court.
- So, I would personally be a fan of excluding those. Yes, Councillor Henry. I think it is worth maybe
- mud stomping Councillor Hawke's comment, right? I mean, of course, if we have grant funding coming into
- the county and that is a contained bucket of money that is tapped for that FTE, that's funded.
- But we have had some challenges with the way, we've talked about HFI especially, about moving people
- out of a funded program into county general, or the county, the health fund, right? And it is maybe
- reasserting or being very clear that if the grant goes away, the person goes away, which I think we've
- had some movement around. That was definitely not the case when I was an employee of the county like
- 18 years ago, right? I mean, I understood if the grant went away, so did I.
- Now that position's funded differently. We're funding it out of COAG, I think, right now. But I don't
- think we need to put it in the language of the resolution, but it should be abundantly clear that if
- you're funded on grants, it's as good as the grant. We can't keep bringing people in at this point.
- Yeah, I think maybe I'll say it this way. I think the hardest thing lately, or at least from my seat, has been
- When we do have department heads come to us and they plead their case about the value of the program,
- the necessity of what they do in the community, we know that. This is dollars. I mean, we literally
- don't have the money tree behind the desk here. I mean, this is not, there's a lot of pain here. So
- it's not coming from a place of malice to cut these programs. We literally don't have the resource at
- this point. Totally agree. All right, looking over here to my left, does anybody have any questions
- or comments on this particular?
- resolution here. Go ahead. The language that grant positions are exempted from the hiring freeze. Is
- that what I'm hearing? And what's the argument against that, I guess?
- like to hear that again sorry but it's it's it's the fight gun purse
- to the grant position if we actually can fund it or not, right? I mean, is the grant funding the whole
- FTE with the wraparound, or is it just salary? And I think that's what we've bumped into, right? So
- there's a condition on that, I think. That's one way to think about it. Is it totally funded or half
- funded? And if it's half funded, then we are cutting into other things. I think that, now, of course,
- I don't have those off the top of my head right now, but that would be one condition, right? We can't
- do half a thing.
- that's a fully contained funded thing. So I think, yeah. But you're clear. So for that reason, are you
- saying that's why we don't add that into the language? I think we have to add the language that says
- that what grant funded means fully funded. It doesn't mean partially funded. I would agree. Or else
- we're partially eating into the general. I think we just need to make it explicitly clear for people
- how we are looking at that. Yes, Councilor Hall. Well, if we would ever really adopt
- What had for years been the plan was when the grant went away the position was dropped and they were
- supposed to be notified this is a grant position and you know it's for two years or one year or whatever it is.
- But what has happened is the grants gone away, but the person is still there and county generals picking
- up the rest of it. So while I love grants, because they've let us operate a lot better than a lot of
- counties, we can no longer afford to take the grants
- that run out of money and put it over in general. Now, if we would vote on that, and I knew that's what
- we were gonna do, I could support that part, but so far that's not what we've done. So my understanding
- is that every employee's job description that they sign. I agree with what you're saying. Okay, every
- employee signs something that says, you know, if the funding goes away, this job is no longer here for
- me. I know, but we don't honor that.
- We have not been honoring that. We found. We found good reason not to. There was revenue. We debated
- it. You raise those points every time I remember, even when we added that language to every job. I remember
- I took hell from people's pack chairs probably four or five years ago that we put that mean language
- in there, but we did and we debated it. Now we're in a different time where revenue has shifted. We
- have looked up and we see our
- up in the air above us and we're trying to write that so that we're not on the ground anymore. So it's
- this is you know we do it just like everyone says when they run you debate the values of your community
- most those grants people went after because we value it we were able to fund that value now- those things
- shift and change. We'll debate this all again.
- and five years, 10 years, maybe 20, it'll go the other way, maybe, hopefully, please God. But people
- come in here and say, I don't know why you'd ever cut that. And they'll laugh about us. Okay. Yes, Councilor
- Iverson. So I think some of this blends into the next talking point, which is, should the hiring freeze
- be applicable to all departments? Which is something that
- I think is an interesting point that if we don't exempt any department, then if we don't accept any
- department, then we simply have them follow the same procedure. And maybe the or maybe the exemption
- is that they just don't have to wait to hire. So
- like I'm walking. I'm reading. Sorry. I'm kind of going back to the email that we got sent. I guess
- the biggest thing is, can we just simplify this entire thing? And how we can, I see the six different
- talking points here,
- Are we getting into the really nitty gritty willy nilly of this? Or are we just truly saying this is
- a real hiring freeze and we are saying that we have grant positions that are exempt from this? And
- if you know that grant goes away then unfortunately we cannot absorb that into the county general and
- then that position goes away that's what i'm trying to look at and simplify i don't want us to too complicate
- this but that's what i'm thinking okay hey hands over here yes i think one way you can simplify it is
- kind of within 6b of the talking point that i pointed out and if the process is
- It's a hiring freeze. It applies to everyone. And then the procedure becomes departments who are wanting
- to submit an exemption. They follow the same process like we do for our vacancies now. So hiring freeze
- applies to everybody. If the department wants an exemption, they email council office. Council has 48
- hours to respond to determine if they want to talk about it as a whole council to consider the exemption.
- And if no one responds in 48 hours, a hiring freeze is a hiring freeze. The answer is no.
- No, you don't get to hire. Correct. The default is the default is no. OK, you don't get to hire unless
- council wants to consider it at a meeting and then council can decide, OK, this is a grant position.
- We want to talk about it. This is, you know, a position at YSP. We want to talk about it. And so then
- you're not talking about every. You're not talking about every position that's being requested because
- the default is no default is no until
- we get the email and somebody objects. Somebody objects, right? And then that brings it just like we've
- done earlier this year with some other stuff. Got it. Um, OK. Does anybody else over here have any question?
- More questions to it? Yeah, OK, yes. Counselor Iverson. I wanted to clarify in paragraph one if you
- could scroll down or whoever's got it shared. That's me OK in the sentence right before the red.
- It says that that that must occur during a notice public meeting. Now, the procedure that I just described
- is not the procedure reflected in this ordinance. This was the draft from last week. Those were just
- suggested considering points, maybe. So if you want to do that, then I have to amend the resolution.
- Also, did you have your hand?
- everybody is staring at their hundred emails that we get every day. And so it's really easy to miss
- one. And I know when we first started this, when FSG said put a pause on everything. So I started saying,
- no, well, what did we get? We got everybody who let me, Marty Hogg, she won't give me that job. And
- let me tell you, somebody else had better be the main whoever it is. But the default is the freezing.
- It's opposite for this. The default would be if we don't say anything, it's frozen. They don't. Oh,
- opposite. Everybody's a quiet Marty. So basically what we're saying is basically we default. We adopt
- it or we adopt this. The default is no, you do not get
- to do that. Okay, so if you see it and you want to make an exception for them, then you better say then.
- Yes. So it's exactly opposite of what you're saying. Okay, well, I'm glad everybody else caught that.
- So again, that's the simplified method and keeping it the kids method is making sure like we just say no,
- And then if somebody wants to continue to, or to push for it and advocate for it, then much like we
- have right now, they can send an email, somebody can object, and then wham bam, it's on our agenda.
- And then they have to state their facts.
- I do think that we need to make absolutely certain that we don't slow down the hiring to making sure
- we're full staff at the jail and full staff at the youth shelter because we have no choice. We can't
- shut down the jail and you can't shut down the youth shelter or at least I don't think we should. They
- should be exempt.
- I don't think anybody up here wants to shut down those two things. So OK. So we heard that. Does anybody
- else have any questions or comments for this? I feel like we still got a lot to tackle and we've been
- on this for awhile and we've had this on the forefront here for awhile now. So yes, count.
- Somebody I mean, I mean, I'd like to.
- I'll talk about another talking point that was OK. Part time employees. Are we freezing? Are we free
- specifically? Are we saying there's no summer camp employees for next year, right? This is a park.
- I mean, because the parks do seasonal hires for that. So they hire maybe the same people, but they're
- let go every fall. It's a seasonal thing. So.
- would we be saying our seasonal staff be exempt from this? Is that? Asking, yeah. Yeah, okay. Yes, Councilor
- Decker. To me, and that's in the budget now, right? All right, to me, that's in the budget now. That
- is something that comes on in a season. And to me, that would be exempt because it would be ramping
- up and on and is expected that way.
- I think we would have to be explicit, but yes, I kind of, you know. Unless we're in such dire straits
- that we are cutting that programming. Which is a whole different discussion. I think it's a whole different
- discussion. Yeah. Oh, sorry. Yes, I'm sorry. Councilor Henry. Kate took the wheel. I think what maybe
- a lot of these points can be summed up with is the idea that.
- You know, things are hard. This is different. Departments are going to have to come make their case
- in this room. And there are going to be exceptions like this. I mean, one of the part-time mentions
- is this idea of the election workers. It's like, well, of course, we're going to have an election.
- Of course, there's going to be people hired. The issue is that that department head is going to have
- to come in here and make that case. And we're going to have to do a lot more of this.
- adjudicating the case against the fiscal constraints of the county, not the mission, not the value,
- not the individuals, not the longevity, the dollars. So I guess on all of these, I'm at a point where
- you gotta come here. That's really what this is about for the next year. It is a new world. You have
- to come here to make your case. And that's the simple method. So that's it. So again, I think
- I'm going back to the earlier point is just keeping this simple. That is a freeze. Obviously, I think
- we all know that there are things that would be exempt from that, and so they would just come in and
- state the case and go from there. Yes, Councilor Iverson. For the untold number of county employees
- and department heads watching right now, what would be the next steps in terms of drafting
- or making edits to this document? Well, I can edit this on live if you have suggestions on language
- you want to put it in there. If you are wanting me to go back and incorporate all of these ideas, then
- I am not going to do that on live. So this isn't either, I guess,
- Provide me edits that you want me to make and then consider passing it tonight or give me time to edit
- it My gut says that there was enough here that we do the latter Then you have any objections of doing
- this on the fly right now And we can always go back and and
- always open this back up for discussion if we go through this and we have a moment we can always come
- back and open this up and amend it later yes counselor so what's the critical path preventing voting
- now because if we don't we have two more weeks right we go we just continue with hiring so i'm just
- trying to get to the critical path of what is the blocker that gets us to vote and if we have to amend
- we is it really
- And I don't mean to be that shrill about it. I'm just trying to wrap my head around what is really in
- the way here that can't be amended in a future resolution. I just think that it's just to keep a simple
- method. We put in, look at what we have on the screen here. If there's anything that we need to put
- in, let's go ahead and do so. If we hear from people or we come back in a couple of weeks and we realize
- that after sleeping X amount of hours,
- we can come back and look at this. But I think that we have had this on the brain for a while now. And
- I think we need to move because I don't want this to come back. And then we have another discussion
- and another discussion. There's too much of that and other avenues of government. So we just have to
- do the hard part now. Yes, I'll slip right on. So I would definitely advocate for keeping it simple.
- and open to change as needed, rather than getting yourself into a box with 20,000 different exemptions
- or exceptions. Because I'd like to remind us, when we passed earlier this year, the KSA and the PACPAS,
- that was conversations that we continued to keep coming back over and over again. And then we finally
- did it. And here we are. So that is the point that I wanted to make with that. And again, we can always
- come back to it.
- Yes, Councilor Wells. The resolution references in Exhibit A and I'm able to open the packet. Is Exhibit
- A attached? Exhibit A has not been formed because that would be Council identifying what departments
- are exempt, right? So that is something that
- Okay, it says that council exempts the ongoing hiring processes. Oh, sorry. Exhibit A is we had asked
- all the departments, what are your vacancies? Where are you at in the hiring process? All of that is
- included in the response packet from the department heads and elected officials. I did not form Exhibit
- A because I don't know out of the information council received which
- positions are far enough along in the hiring process, the council would want to exempt them from the
- freeze. So is posting a vacancy enough? Obviously, I would hope that offer extended and accepted gets
- you out against exempt, but there's a range of steps that the departments are in between posting vacancy
- and sending an offer.
- Would it be okay? Yes. Looking at the agenda, if you do not think that I am going to be instrumental
- in the next two discussions, I can pull this off my screen and start editing it and see if I get something
- by the end of the night. But the next discussion is about special purpose lit. And I think that I'm
- going to have to explain the lit process and what special purpose could be.
- we're not going to be able to use it. We're not going to be able to use it for so. What is the point
- of the order? The information there? I think Councilor Deckard amended the agenda to continue to item
- 11, so we're not doing 10 at this point. Um right. So technically. While we're talking about 11, you
- could be working on this. I will start editing. We will go. All
- Council, I move to open for discussion regarding the possibility of creating a 2026 economic development
- lit budget. Second. All right, we got a motion and a second. Yeah, I think it's time for us to look at this.
- and so the floor is open for people and I'll go to Councilor Henry first. Thank you, Madam President.
- Ms. Woodruff, are you able to display your three-year grid of the accumulations on the edit? This may
- help guide the conversation in terms of what we've been collecting as a county since the tax was imposed
- and since the council last revisited how we're going to use this
- So if we'll zoom in a little bit here, just to get a data set to work with. Mr. Deckard. Has this been
- emailed out to council? I don't think so. This was not emailed. This was a last minute request that
- was thrown together. The edit.
- Okay, so I just and I appreciate this was the five o'clock thing so I appreciate back when I can work
- here. So what we have here of course the receipts on the edit month by month since 2023. There are some
- expenditure lines which I guess I have some questions about because it predates my time on council about
- when we have actually tapped the edit and used it. There is an expenditure of 272,000 and June 23. You
- have the running balance on the side which has been accumulating in the pot.
- Let's scroll down a little to 24. We have two disbursements there. The accumulations continue. And then
- in 2025, and then we're seeing our September disbursement. Right now it's September. We're looking at
- north of $20 million sitting in the edit right now. Now, I think my reason for wanting to get into this
- tonight is pretty simple. I think when the previous council talked about and talked about using edit
- for the purposes of developing the Justice Center,
- And we're well north of that now- there's also of course the changes of SCA one. And- and this is something
- to consider because the E. I. I. I. want to actually.
- borrow gently and honor Councilor Deckard's comments about the government bank at this point. This is
- the government bank of revenue coming in at $974,000 a month and nothing coming out of it to do economic
- development in the county. Look at the anticipated for 2026. By December of 2026, we will be sitting
- at $35.8 million in this account and that almost buys you a convention center.
- Now here's the thing, we know that we have revenue coming in every month. If we do tap this to start
- balancing,
- our budget, it will accumulate and we'll catch back up. And it's clear that there have been disbursements
- out of this fund over the past three years anyway. And maybe I can get some clarity about what those
- are from the auditor. But I think the numbers here tell a story that we have a resource here that, as
- we are sweating bullets about cuts, there may be a way to put some of this money to use to do economic
- development at aviation, at parks, at some of the end. And I will add one more thing, too, not for tonight
- but later, that we've had discussions about the bonds.
- And why are we borrowing money plus percentage to buy a street sweeper when I have the resource right
- here that will accumulate month after month? But, Auditor Gregory, do we have data on the expenditures
- from this fund and what they were? It was debt service. Okay. So that's all it was in that large lump
- sum of $10 million in change, sorry.
- So I would propose that where we are with our deficit would regenerate within five months and and would
- be nowhere near the principle that was discussed. By the Council of its previous iteration again I've
- yet to see an actual resolution or vote that said a vote that committed the edit to.
- I can't find it. It may exist, but it was predating my time. But that's some thoughts about where we
- could go with this resource. Thank you, Madam President. You're welcome. Councilor Henry. I just did
- the same thing to Councilman Henry. It's okay. It's late. Yeah, the other Henry. Councilor. The motion
- I read was to think about creating a budget for this fund. So is the
- the consideration here to build in twos and threes and fours, and potentially ones, personnel services,
- supplies, and capital. What was the thought behind the motion that I read? Is it to, are we going to
- be, I mean, are we creating the possibility of doing that? We did something similar in rainy day. So,
- what is what is being proposed here? Especially considering that the spreadsheet before us has not been
- shared with Council, and it was only produced at five o'clock today, which was the start of this meeting.
- What is being proposed here? Well, Madam President May. Yes, well, first of all, I would say that the
- the agenda item that I proposed did not
- I mean, it was not a discussion of how the verbatim get put into the agenda. The it was not a discussion
- of the budget that I wanted to do. It was the discussion of using the lit period. I mean, and so the
- so the open ended question is how. So it was not. So I understand that that's what has been published,
- but that was not what I submitted to leadership to be put it here. But I that's fine. We can work through
- it. So the discussion is if we if we want to amend
- but that's where I'll leave it open at this point. Yeah. Councillor Hawke. Yes. Auditor's table. What
- was advertised for? I'll pull it up. I believe it's 2 million in each category. So let me pull that
- right now. No, that's 2 million in each category. So eight total.
- that was a total of eight million that was advertised. Yes. Yes, counselor Decker. I appreciate counselor
- Henry's comments in the chart that he's brought. And anybody that watches these meetings first, I'm
- very sorry that you do that. But no, they're very informational. But they'll recall I got pretty passionate
- on this one given our previous plans.
- that said any any person in government who doesn't look at paths forward and again to draw that analogy
- tries to find your way towards the door in the dark to get there safely and not trip on the extension
- cords as I said to Councilor Henry earlier today that person is a wise person in government as wise
- as one can be when I look at the revenue and I think about a shortfall right now which is seems to be
- hovering in the
- I don't know, 293 kind of range 2527. I'm not sure. I'm thinking that this could be a path forward until
- the SEA-1 ship is righted for its temporary permanent destination, if that means anything. So I think
- that there are paths forward here for a small portion of these dollars.
- to find a place. And I want to voice that because I've been so. V about all that, but we have options
- for reasons. So I wasn't here and I can play dumb. So what are these monies designated for? What are the
- Look to Ms. Turner-King to give us that information. What can the monies be used for in this economic
- development lit? So economic development lit is governed by Indiana code 63610-2. There are 11 very
- specific uses and I can read them all, but I think the most important one is number 11 that says for
- any lawful purpose for which money and any of its other funds may be used.
- Thank you. Okay. Yes. Just one quick comment. I mean, I earlier today I said to somebody. This is the
- route that the state ultimately is that you'll end up in this place is property taxes.
- that we retire and somebody quickly corrected me and they said no they just want to cut they want to
- cut and then you just keep cutting. Alongside them but the reality is. Funds like these are where the
- state is pushing us in this measure towards these levels so counselors like us are gonna be staring
- more at this.
- for a couple of years in this direction, but this County actually had action before then as controversial
- as that was these dollars are here. Yes, counselor. What, what ban was, what is the debt service specifically for?
- It's okay. It was the 2022 bond anticipation note. I believe it was specific for a purchase of property.
- That's my recollection. I can find the bond documents for you. So that's when we said we could use this
- money to purchase land for the Justice Center. And so a bond anticipatory note was issued and now we've
- had to pay
- debt service on that, having not purchased the land. Don't we look great? Fan-freaking-tastic, is that
- what all of those in the expenditure column are? Yes, it's either interest or principal. Okay.
- Thank you. Okay. Does anybody? Yes, Councilor Iverson.
- It sounds like the plan for using these funds has gotten as far as advertising $2 million in each category.
- Have plans gone further? Has anybody identified personnel lines to move into this? Service lines? Supply
- lines? I kind of feeling left out.
- things been discussed, Councillor Iverson, this is the discussion here. Yeah, if I may. Yeah, I would
- just echo that. So, you know, this is very much a public sausage making activity at this point. The
- fact that the edit has been encumbered as a custom, because again, I don't find a resolution anywhere
- that was voted on as sort of customary since it was given to the county by the
- City of Bloomington under the previous mayor. You've all made a verbalized its use for the justice center,
- right? I mean, I wanted to do this in public. I think to get to this is the discussion piece to see
- what the temperature is. If there is positive temperature, then I think we have a good week or so to
- use what has been advertised two million per category to go figure out how to use this to close a deficit.
- Or we keep cutting, or we have a deficit budget. Or we cut coal. I mean, this is where we are.
- And it is hard, I think, to justify to the community this level of takings without letting it flow back
- into the economy, which is the design of the tax to begin with. So yeah, Peter, with all respect, there's
- no secret meaning here. We're doing it right now. This is the discussion in public. I just wanted it
- on the agenda to get it out.
- Anybody else? Yes, Councilor. Just just be clear. We wouldn't have expenditures if we hadn't had a vote
- to approve the bond anticipatory note being issued. So there has been a vote that that expressed intent
- to use this money for the Justice Center land at the very least.
- I don't think that you or I even are beholden to that at this point, but I just want to make it clear.
- It's not as though we've been spending on things without a public discussion and, you know, ill-advised
- as it might have been, I don't know. But I think you're making a very good point. And I appreciate you
- kind of getting the numbers in front of us because that's a lot of money.
- And it's looking as though even with hoarding this money away, we can't afford the justice center as
- designed and presented to us. We could scrape together every penny from this and the corrections lit.
- And still, I don't know what we're planning to do unless something big changes.
- It does not give me that much heartburn to then turn and spends out of this fund, knowing as you point
- out that it is being replaced over time and we've been let it build up as we've been waiting.
- Yeah. That is a very good point. And I do feel as though times have changed. And I don't want to keep
- going back into those conversations. We know times have changed, which is why we're still sitting here
- talking about this budget. And so I think that no, I don't think that we are ready to be in the business
- of building a justice center. And I think we were a little bit away.
- Therefore, while we are still having this regenerate, why not tap into this? I will be honest, originally
- at the first conversation of this being used, it gave me a little hiccup at the moment. Because I really
- thought we could do some other stuff. But because we are still sitting here and we got two weeks before
- we have the final adoption, as we had talked about earlier before we get to the other conversation,
- do we want to use this, or do we want to cut cola? That's kind of the bottom line for me. And I appreciate
- this being brought to the forefront. And again, this also makes me realize that we see Council Hawk
- just a second. We're in a different day, and this is looking mighty appetizing right now. So that's
- what I'll say to that. I'll go to Council Hawk, and then I'll circle back to Iverson.
- Okay. Perhaps I've forgotten what the dollar amount was. How much is it for Cola? We don't have that
- at the top of our minds if that's what we think we're saving. We have to know. Well, we had it built
- in. I want to be fair to the staff like we had it built in because we couldn't have it built in and
- then we'd be sitting here talking another long time for that. So what's
- Yeah. I don't want to put too much pressure on at staff who is already working late nights and I've
- seen the phone calls in the in the messages, so let's not.
- Well, one thing I'll just say, I mean, I'm going to look at the clock. It's nine forty eight p.m. in
- two hours and twelve minutes. Your federal government will shut down because a bunch of people wearing
- suits worth more than our budget cannot problem solve to save their you know what? We on the other hand
- have a lot of different thoughts here and we are literally problem solving this one step at a time.
- We've talked about postage stamps. We've talked about everything. We have literally made people
- get close to tears this evening. And one example that we're seeing here is that no philosophy, no plan,
- no thing is greater than trying to figure out how we make sure that deputy back there, those folks up
- there, and everybody else that needs a service tomorrow morning that cannot be up to watch gets what
- they need. Meanwhile, when they look at their headlines, our federal friends will be giving speeches
- on MSNBC and Fox.
- So problem-solving looks like that. Have I solved enough for you, Kim? I'm going to go. Iverson has
- been bouncing in his seat and waving his hand at me. I'm going to go to Iverson, and then I'm going
- to go to Michelle. All right. So it appears to me we have some next steps.
- with this fund, and I want to try and enumerate some of those. Number one, because of FICA and PERF
- concerns, we do not have a running total for how much we have cut tonight. We have to wait until tomorrow
- for those calculations to be done. That's unfortunate, but that's where we're at. So in terms of coming
- up with a plan to use the advertised dollars in this fund,
- we do have to wait until we know what those numbers are tomorrow because we did move quite a bit out
- of the fours tonight into the bond. We did do a lot with some of the personnel lines and that's gonna
- be impactful. So I think starting tomorrow, it's gonna be, we're gonna need to have some pretty serious
- conversations about those categories that we've advertised because I think it's premature to have
- much more of a conversation on this fund because we're at the risk of not knowing the running total
- of what we did tonight. Michelle.
- around and this is a cola comparison that I prepared back in June and this is the top part here is the
- levy funds then there was the rate controlled and everything so I mean do you do you want a bottom dollar
- kind of cola so which would be you know all the funds kind of thing it's it would be that right there
- So let me. This column I am. Yeah, so the difference from. 2025 to 2026 salaries with the FICA in the
- perf is 2,000,477,169. That's FICA and perf.
- salaries only is two million point zero three two okay yeah this is the total this is the grand total
- difference what if you just did um the levy controlled funds
- the levy funds to be a million six about and then the others they could just take it from their existing
- budgets but that's at a three percent that's at the three percent so we did like a one and a half percent which is
- another number that had been discussed very clearly when we first started with three, we just said three
- because nobody gave us any numbers and we just need to move on. But I know, I believe it was council
- member Wilts was suggesting one and a half. And so what would it be if we had listened to her wise counsel
- back then? I'm not kidding. It would be half that amount. Where's my don't count that? We're just counting half.
- have to do just be half. Yeah, it's up here. The awesome number. OK, so the grand total salary increase
- difference for the levy funds. 1,000,349,760. The grant the that was just the salary. Sorry, the grand
- total that also includes FICA and perf is 1,000,644.
- six eighty three. But what doesn't make any sense if we that was for three if we said one and a half
- it would be one half of the one six so be about eight hundred thousand. Yes about. Eight hundred twenty
- two three forty two.
- And remind me again, what percentage is this? This is at 3%. 3%. I don't have, and I don't know why,
- but this is flat, what I would call hard numbers. They're typed in. I probably copied and pasted it
- from somewhere. So I can't change the percentage to see where it's at. I'd have to go back and reformulate stuff.
- of the grand total. So that's 2,000,006. So that's the half of the three. We wouldn't do all of that.
- We wouldn't. Yeah, I mean, that's what I'm saying. That's the grand total of all funds, because some
- of them are diversion. Some of them are the user fees, that kind of thing.
- But if you give COLA to, you know, I mean, across the board, I mean, we give everybody the same salary
- grid, so. So they could take it out of their existing funds. If they've got a separate fund, it's not
- in the general fund.
- then they could just take their raise, which right now it's already been projected as 3% in their budgets.
- If we reduced it one and a half, all of those budgets will then be reduced. And so, because then you
- have less expenses, we're going to have less deficit. Councilor Wills, did you have something that you
- wanted to add to that? I thought I heard you. I had a question. Yes. Councilor Hawk, are you,
- suggesting that. Are we still talking about using Edie lit or have we moved on completely to only talking
- about Cola? Nope, because we the motion on the floor is we were talking about Edie lit so that we can
- get to Cola and some so we went down this part here. So the reason why you might wonder why I'm saying
- this because
- If we're saying, oh yes, we need to know what we plan to do with the 2%. And that's the reason why I
- was looking at what is the COLA and what will we be willing to put in there because we're spending down
- a revenue that is going to be a part of the 1.2 come 2028. I know what I think.
- So that's the reason why it's important for us to know what we're voting on. Yeah, that's what I thought
- you were talking about. Yes, counseling and I think I want to honor what counselor hawk just said there
- too because this is this year's version of this.
- As you just articulated with the incoming 1.2 and of course we've also had conversations with FSG about
- how much of the 1.2 would be obligated to the Justice Center, right, because we've had that conversation
- too. This is this year. I don't think we would be visiting this path this way next year with the instruments
- and the funding and the revenue that we're going to be seeing and how it comes in.
- This isn't sustainable because we just flat out can't do it this way again, and we can't do it this
- way again in two years either. So this is a moment in time about how we're using, I think, this fund.
- It's not going to be here. It's not going to be here. But if you put it over there, you've increased
- the spending over there. The money's not going to suddenly increase.
- enough so that we don't have to think about it. I was not saying not to think about it, but it is buying
- time with the resources we have. And then we're going to have a new battlefield and a new battlefield.
- I think that's kind of my bad analogy at this hour, but yeah. Yes, Councilor Wilks. Is it then appropriate
- to not look at the personnel costs for ED lit?
- just look at capital expenditures because it's one time. Or I guess you could say services if it's one
- time contract kind of thing. I mean, you could get into that, but it seems to me that this is best used
- for something then that isn't ongoing. I agree with that. I mean, because ideally, I mean, we're talking
- about if we're doing capital investment. I agree with that.
- I mean, this is not a sustainable use for salary. But what it is, is if we can move things around and
- there's going to be a lot of work in the next week to move those items into the edits so that we use
- the general fund for salaries, right? Because right now we're kind of pulling from, I mean, I think
- this is the way I'm seeing it right now, is pulling things out of general fund into this to free up
- the space for personnel to be left alone. I have some heartburn about the personnel piece.
- that make sense? Yes. Okay. Not to belabor this, but I know other governments in proximity to this building
- have taken a different approach. Yeah. And I'm not suggesting that with us. Yeah. Yes, Councilor Decker.
- Well, based on the previous well vetted amendment earlier that I don't think we adopt. No, we did not
- adopt. We had a determination that there was in this budget total 3.863
- in capital and I guess the question would be. Rather than do what we were saying the 5% reduction in
- capital we could take. 2 million in from that capital and put it. My think something horrible. Please
- be yes auditor's office help us.
- You could do that, but it would not reduce the overall deficit. It would only reduce the deficit in
- the funds you're taking it from. What if we just took it from the levy funds? You would reduce the deficit
- in the levy funds, but you would not reduce the overall deficit across all funds. That's that simple
- calculation we were looking at.
- simple calculation accounts for all funds. So if we're using the simple calculation to identify what
- the overall deficit is, then moving it from one fund to another would not reduce that number. Yeah,
- I thought I saw somebody here waving at me over here. Okay. Um, yeah, I just so
- I guess overall, the general consensus is that we think that we should touch this. And then the next
- steps would be, I guess that's what I'm trying to look at in terms of next steps. Yeah. I just had a
- thought and it just lost my brain, or left.
- it's something that I feel like is this not we should probably have a general idea of what we are needing
- to do tonight with this particular thing instead of coming back on the 14th on the final adoption or
- even want to put this out here but until we know what we've done today from the auditors to
- or from the calculations that we should get tomorrow is that something that we potentially possibly
- look at having one more meeting in between the final adoption. I'm trying to avoid it but we got a lot
- of stuff that was thrown at us this evening and for
- folks at the table over here to get us the number so we can figure out what we need to do here. Maybe
- that is the better way of doing this. Yes, Michelle. I would prefer that because trying to come back,
- give you good numbers. And then, I mean, at the adoption meeting, we would have to be trying to amend
- things on the fly, having to pause,
- so that we could make changes and you would have to then redo the ordinances and that kind of thing.
- So in anticipation of that, I looked October the 8th, the NatU Hill Room is available in the evening.
- If you wanna set a meeting for October the 8th, that's Wednesday, October the 8th.
- basically the Sophia Travis committee people will be living in the county building for that week because
- we got the meeting the grant presentation on the seventh and then we have another meeting on the 10th
- on the 10th and so the eighth okay the only other time it's available is on the 13th and I'd rather
- not wait till the day before and is that a holiday that's honored by the county
- Because the 13th is indigenous people's day. Okay, nope. Okay, I will not be available, because I will
- be out of town. So, then.
- would be an ideal. And let's keep it simple. Let's keep the kiss method going here. So we come in, we
- do our sausage making, we figure out so that on the 14th, this will be a time for us to literally just
- kind of go through and do final adoption because we do not want to come here on the 14th and willy-dilly
- numbers on that particular time. I would request that if you have ideas of what you want in edit,
- I mean, I can't do anything until you guys direct me. What do you want in there? You know? Okay. Yeah.
- Okay. What are you looking at? Do you want, you know, are we moving things from the general fund? I
- so I need some direction with regards to what do you guys want to move? So
- So in that term, and so in that timeframe, in order to give you all the opportunity to get all information
- from all seven of us, if all seven of us should send that information, what would be a good timeframe
- before the eighth? Well, Friday the third, before the end of the day, Friday the third,
- So counsel, we hear that Friday the third, which is this upcoming Friday, gives us an opportunity to
- get information to Michelle and the auditor's office in terms of what we would like to see in edit.
- So I am putting us to task at the end of the day, Friday, October 3rd. That is your time to shine and
- we need to come into this space on the eighth, ready to go, locked and loaded.
- Let's put it all out. Okay. So do you want, I'm just trying to think of the agenda ahead of time. What
- is it we wanting? Do you want to be able to go back and review the hiring policy that she's been working
- on? You know, that kind of thing. Then also, is that yet? The hiring policy and then just revisiting numbers.
- So let's revisit numbers, because we know we'll have a clear picture for tomorrow. We'll have the higher
- freeze, because in all this conversation, I completely spaced Mr. King was working on that. So we can
- potentially have that. And because we have all the know and that we should be ready to go making that
- decision. And then the discussion of what we would like to see in ED lit so that we can be prepared.
- on the 14th. Does that sound okay for everybody? Does anybody have any objections? Yes, Councillor Hogg.
- These folks need to know whether or not to include the raise or not to include the raise, whether they
- include 3%, 1.5%, whatever. I was getting there. Give us a number. They can't make these decisions.
- We have to make them. I'm sorry. That would be the other thing. With regards to the COLA,
- I need to, if you want to change that, I need to know an amount because then I have to go in and create
- a grid so that I know what numbers so that I can get, at least to give you an idea of how much is going,
- that difference is gonna be, but I need a number if that's what you want me to do. So then that is a
- time for, like we said on Friday,
- whatever we want to think about in terms of ED lit, that is also something that we can send to you as
- well with that. Does anybody else have any objections or any questions or comments on that? Yes. So
- we're just individually sending her our thoughts on Friday. We have to,
- The phase has to be decided tonight before we leave here. I don't know how they're going to have time
- to work on the COLA. They're thinking that maybe the COLA should be less, which I don't know if that's
- the case. We might have to do that sooner than next week.
- It's not hard to give you a number saying, this is how, you know, I can show you, this is how much it's
- gonna cost you to 3%, this is how much it's gonna cost you to two, this is how much it'll one. But in
- order to get that done and changed in all of the LOW stuff, I'm gonna have to open it up to the departments
- to edit some numbers or something somehow, because I will not be able to make all of those changes on my own.
- I have to make a decision now. I say we stay at 3%. There's more than an ample in edits. We've got a
- hiring freeze resolution that's edits have been made right now. We are at the deadline. We do not have
- the time for our staff to keep going back to the drawing board, going to every single department. Staying
- up until 1 o'clock in the morning working on stuff.
- we stay at my vote is to stay at 3% and find it elsewhere. One and a half. Okay, not three. All right,
- so I'm gonna put it out here. Council I make a motion for us to say that we are going to go with a 3%
- cola and that is going to be the determined number that we are going to do so that we can try to get
- other numbers moving forward ahead of the next couple of weeks.
- We got a motion and a second. 3% is what we've been talking about since the very beginning. We see that
- we have it in edit. I really, again, would like to keep us at the three, but I know, because I can hear
- the whispers, that people don't think that. So this is our time to shine and say yay or nay. Let's go.
- What else do people think? I see head nods. I've heard a no.
- this is our time now that we can be silent. This is our time to speak. Yes, Councilor Iverson. This
- is about integrity. We told people that 3% is baked in. This was the thing that we were going to provide
- this year. This was the thing that we said we were going to do. This is about integrity for me. I'm a yes.
- I would be always in favor of more money for employees. However, I would like to know if it was baked
- in. I know there was a letter that went out, and I don't have the language memorized, that said there
- was 3%. Now, did the language say that is our hope, or what did that language say? That's real important
- of how we advertised we were thinking about that 3%. There was no guarantee. Right.
- I'm trying to pull that up now. That's okay. I tried to find it and I couldn't find it. I'm sorry.
- Let me. Because I know you sent out a letter and it is important of what it said and I think that's
- what, you know, people baked in something that wasn't really in the letter, that's a different story.
- But if we did promise that, that's a little different story for me. But we didn't.
- Okay, so in the president's letter, it says additionally, departments whose salaries are not set by
- the state will see a 3% COLA increase in all proposed 2026 salary grids, which will be distributed by
- the council office. When completing the salary quest for your proposed budget, please refer to those
- grids. The council prioritizes our valuable
- employees and recognizes that a cost of living adjustment cola is a vital consideration for both you
- and the loyal members of your department. Thank you. Yes, that's not the whole letter. So can we put
- it on screen? I mean, because the and I don't this is important. If we're going to
- I'm not going to put it all on the table of this. This is what employees were told. So this isn't the
- whole part of the letter. We need to look at the supply services and capital category request part of
- the paragraph. If you can display the whole letter, it might be useful. And I'll read it while you're
- preparing it. By reducing your budget, you are also safeguarding the proposed COLA of 3% for all employees.
- It's in the letter.
- the caveat has always been we need to make the cuts in supplies and everywhere else to attain the goal.
- And we're not there. And so as much as I, look, as much as I appreciate the target, what we're wrestling
- with is getting the everything else in line here to preserve the culettes, but we're not there with
- the deficit. Now, if we are going to make proposed attempts to use the edits to fill, to cover other
- costs in the budget,
- sure, but I mean, the letter does also indicate to department heads we have to safeguard this by making
- the cuts. Some really did the work. I want to honor that. Others, this has been a bit of a challenge.
- That's all now, I'm president. But you have the letter up? Yeah, I mean, yeah. Okay. I wasn't sure where
- you were at. I could not hear you sometimes. Yeah, I was just firing away. Yeah, it's all right.
- It's late. Yeah, it's that bullet. Yeah, that's where we indicate that.
- Councilor Decker. I appreciate those comments. We tried a different approach to COLA this year in budgeting
- that in. Some did make cuts early, some made lots of cuts here. Many of us, we've continued to cut,
- cut, cut. I mean, we have cut the bucket so much that there are times where
- the marginal errors and say, nope, it's another million more. You got to cut. Nope, it's actually this.
- We've kept going. To me, the 3% in there, we have been going after those cuts. Department heads have
- been going after those cuts. I mean, some of us, when we were sitting with liaison, some of us sitting
- with liaison ships that weren't even our own. And they were asking us for advice. We were helping them
- cut pre. So I think that, you know, did everyone do that to the same balance? No.
- to the same balance. I think they've been chasing it. I think we're chasing it tonight. The thing I
- keep coming back to is a little bit of what Peter's counselor Iverson said. The 80 lit those dollars
- that the way that they are sitting there, the ample amount that there's enough to pull just slightly
- from to me that.
- gets you through this moment as we continue to adjust. It helps us maintain the employees that we have.
- It helps us to provide the services for the things those folks do. And it gets us close to the end.
- I think we are actually closer than we think, thought, once these numbers start getting computed. But
- we have pulled longevity out.
- this evening. We've done a lot. We're talking about a hiring freeze. This has been the most menacing
- this council has been since the 2010 to 2012 era. And friends, I'll tell you one thing is their era,
- we're still paying the prices from some of the rhetoric of that era. I mean, it was one of the- in 2019,
- some of the first liaison ship discussions I heard were from that era. So while I get
- Yes, it'd be lovely to continue to cut, cut, cut. I do think that there's a point where you gotta be
- cautious about that employee line, because many years ago, our rhetoric on our people was awful.
- And I know, because I heard it as a child of a county employee, and it was awful. And we need that workforce,
- because we're not at that counter. So to me, we would hold the line at this,
- and continue and continue down the path. And those edit funds are part of it. Some other solution will
- be too. We will continue to do it. It'll be a new thing every 20 minutes around here till we get it
- all figured out. So we got a motion. There was a second to keep it at three. We can move forward here
- again as protocol. If you've got public comment on this item,
- you're still here watching us in person- or you can raise your hand via teams. All right. And seeing
- not maybe please have a roll call vote. Counselor
- Councilor Crossley? Yes. Councilor Feidl? Yes. Councilor Henry? No. Councilor Decker? Yes. Motion passes
- by majority four to three. So council staff will proceed with the three percent. Thank you.
- we got on this thing. Yes. All right. Due to Councillor Deckard's motion, I'm going to go back to item
- number 10. After that, we still need to go back to the additional 2026 budget reductions. So we still
- have two more agenda items. Yep. Number 10. Council, I move to open for discussion regarding the possibility
- of increasing lit special purpose tax for 2026.
- second all right we got a motion in a second I'm just gonna go on the record as I said it before I'm
- not interested nor am I okay with doing the special purpose tax I definitely think it's something for
- us to look into this for the following year but increasing the lit by doing this right now after going
- through all that we've gone through this evening I am
- Yeah, so that's just my take, but I'm willing to have other people give their taking counselor Henry
- you're up next. Thank you. This is an item I had requested to be discussed this evening I some of this
- may be man president I agree, maybe overcome by events because we've had a lot of discussion about other
- instruments at our disposal here.
- I am only raising this back up because trying to evaluate all the things we have at our fingertips to
- get to a balanced budget. I don't need to remind the counselors that were sitting here before I was
- sitting here that the lowering of the special purpose lit for juvenile services from the .085 to the
- .03 was an action you all took in the development of the jail corrections lit.
- with the idea that it was a temporary reduction to eventually be increased. And so I think, if anything,
- it's really just revisiting that that was a concept that was
- And to keep it you know at the tips of our tongue this is something that if it needs to be revisited
- you think we just heard indication that maybe it's another year on this but I think it's worth raising given.
- the budget cycle we're facing, the budget cycles we are facing in the future about preserving juvenile
- services, particularly because we know it's a dedicated lit, but it's not, again, one way or another,
- advocating the raise of that or lowering of that that happened before my time here, but it is one of
- the tools in the toolkit that need to be at least surfaced in terms of the temperature of the body to
- consider raising again. Yes, Councilor Hock. Right.
- In anticipation of this evening, I'd asked to have this, so I just had to look it up myself. I thought,
- okay, quit waiting on somebody else to do your work, just do it. When you look at Indiana Code 6-3.6-7-16,
- which is from a new county special purpose, additional rate to fund the operation and maintenance of
- a juvenile detention center
- or facilities providing juvenile services. The very last paragraph there says revenues raised from a
- tax imposed under this section may be used only to fund the operation and maintenance of a juvenile
- detention center and other facilities to provide juvenile services. So that means we can do a detention
- center, which we had pledged, we don't, that's not our
- priority and the other facility is our shelter. So for any reason, if somebody thinks that they can
- start moving expenses over into this fund that is strictly for juvenile services, I'm going to yell
- bloody murder all the way to the state because this is for the kids. This is not for somebody else's
- fund to move operations or extra insurance or whatever into
- But I will happily support taking them back to the rate that they need to so that our youth shelter
- can operate and they don't have to worry about they're going to be able to make payroll. But I want
- to remind you that to begin with,
- Our juvenile probation officers were not supposed to be included in this and because they were included
- in the welfare budget. We had four juvenile probation officers in the welfare budget. But when the welfare
- was taken over by the state and they said, no, no, we're not going to cover those because we shouldn't
- have to begin with. We were pulling something to get them covered.
- And so I met with Steve Galvin out in the hallway, and I said, well, let's look at this legislation.
- Well, it says if we do services for this facility, and so in some of the other counties we had visited,
- the probation officers worked right there in their facility. And I said, I think we could cover these
- if they're working there in the facility. Well, now from four, it's gone to 10,
- And it's very expensive, and they're not operating in our facility. But I don't object to them going,
- you know, whatever. But I don't want them to think that they're in charge of this money, because this
- money is for the kids. And I feel strongly about that. And I hope that you do as well. I'm going to
- look to the auditor's office
- for help on this because my understanding is maybe right now for 26, that we have a pretty decent balance
- in there. However, for next year for 27, this is something that we need to keep in the forefront and
- maybe not necessarily something that we need to do as of right now. Am I correct on that?
- we provided the analysis that was the consensus like we need to revisit it it's trending down however
- carly's pulling information now to share more detail got it thank you madam president yes you might
- also want to look at it instead of
- raising it back up where it was because that was allowing them to not them. I mean, it was growing funds
- for millions more than what was needed. So rather than replace it back up to where it was, maybe just
- another smaller percent and do it gradually as it might be needed. But that's always been a very healthy
- budget because income taxes have been
- And I see it's displayed on the screen. We have the four be pulled up for this fund, and we do show
- a projection of this fund ending twenty twenty six with one point one five two million. Obviously that's
- not comfort level, but it's definitely not zero.
- We heard from folks over here. Does anybody else over here have any questions or comments? Yes, Councillor
- Wilts. So I've spoken about this before. I think that we should increase the lit special purpose this
- year in anticipation of changes
- across all kinds of lit in the future. And I think this is a good time to do this in addition to the
- idea that the trend is downward on the balance in that fund. I know that's not a super strong argument.
- I mean, it is not unhealthy.
- Like you said, the auditor said, it's not where you might want it, but we certainly can implement the
- levy at some future point. Doing it now though, prevents us from getting backed into, oh my gosh, Youth
- Services Bureau needs a new whatever, and we don't have the money to pay for it.
- you know, we have to go to a bond or something like that. I mean, traditionally, that's kind of how
- this has worked. I also I have mentioned using this for expanded services for specifically for youth.
- I wasn't ever, I don't know, because you keep mentioning Councilor Hawke about spending it, moving it
- to other things. That's never been my intent at all. But I have thought that, you know, with the health of this
- revenue source that providing other youth services might be appropriate. But that requires looking at
- the legislation much more closely than I have as of yet. But I digress. I think we should increase it,
- if not the whole way, a little bit because I think that
- the timing is appropriate given what's going on with property taxes and then ultimately income taxes
- in the future, likely. What was it we cut it by, the percent? I don't remember. I think it was like
- .2. That sounds right, but that doesn't, it's a point. What was the cut
- Okay. Anybody else have as we're pulling that information? What is your thoughts on this information?
- I have it right here. Jeff McKinn 0.08 5% we cut it to 0.03 0%. So let's say if you took it back up,
- but not back up to the .085. Because if you remember when we took it to the .085 to begin with, which
- was a major jump, and they said then, well, if that's bringing in more money than what you need, then
- you could just go in there and reduce it. We never did. We just let it grow, and it was sitting there
- was several million. So I'm not objecting to
- making them whole. They just don't need to be sitting there with millions. So remind me who is paying
- for this? Who pays this lit? Oh, everybody who lives. Right. So anybody who makes income gets charged
- whatever this percentage is. Is that true? Okay. Thank you.
- And live and work well work in Monroe, right? Or did if they live live in Monroe, OK, but if they live
- in Monroe and work in India, they still get paid. They have to do the lit hit. It's here you live. OK,
- so it's based on where you live, not where you work, OK? So because this is a discussion and there is
- no motion for anything.
- to figure out what if there is an appetite to do. We can add it to the 8th discussion since we're already.
- I mean, if. Yeah, only thing I would caution is there's an entire process to change the local income
- tax, which requires a public hearing 10 days notice before the hearing.
- And if you want it to go into effect for January, that entire process has to be completed by October
- 31st. So I don't know that a discussion on the 8th gives you time to complete that process. Let me ask
- her a question. If we were to do it, say, in January or February, when would it be collected? So if
- you pass it between September 1st to October 31st, January 1st is the effective collection date.
- and I think if you pass it November 1st to December 31st, the collection date becomes October 1st of
- the preceding year. Following you following following, yeah, so sorry, technically collected October
- 26. Is that yes, correct? Yes, what if we waited till January? Would it still happen in 26? Or are you
- saying that?
- I think it would be in 2727. Okay, thanks. So again, it's 1034. And I'm not saying anything about time.
- I'm just saying it's 1034. And this is just a discussion. And we again, if this is something that somebody
- wants to go forward on, I personally think
- what's even more than to talk about this now and to act on this now. Otherwise, we are cutting everything
- close at the end of October. Any direction? I'm going to say if people aren't making a motion, then
- I think that's a conversation that is ceased.
- and that is something that we need to think about in the forefront going for next year. So, all right.
- Pursuant to Councilman Deckard's motion, we are now going back to the additional 2026 budget reductions.
- Is there anybody that would like to make any other type of reductions
- Please make a comment. Yes, Councilor Iverson. I don't have another reduction, but I also, if there
- are no other comments on this line item, I'm wondering if we need to revisit the draft of the temporary
- hiring freeze this evening.
- table this item till next week? The reduction item? The total reduction item? Is that sure necessary
- or reasonable? I don't have anything else. This was I put that on there in case you guys had more reductions
- that you wanted to do that didn't come to me. So this was like a totally just in case.
- I don't care. I personally don't like. If we're going to have another reduction then we probably should
- talk about it now otherwise we're gonna look into building a long agenda for the eighth. And possibly
- kicking other stuff down the road- until the fourteenth. And I don't want to do that and I don't think
- we want to do that either.
- we have in order to give if people go home now and we'll think about what we've done today plus we can
- figure out you know the numbers of the the movement of things now some people might want to have a a
- discussion of it but again whatever we I would hope that whatever we do now we get ourselves ready for
- the eighth so by the 14th it's all good so I
- I mean, we can add it to the eighth, but again, we're making that longer, and we're also making staff
- do more things longer as well, too. So again, anybody got any reductions for 2026? All right. So seeing none.
- We'll come back to the draft of the higher and freeze. Yes, counselor file. So the hiring freeze is
- what you want to talk about now. Is that what you're saying? Well, because I know we were saying that
- we wanted to go through and look at
- the draft that Miss Turner King was looking at. I mean, we can look at it, but again, that's something
- that we can also push to the eighth as well too. If that is the will of all seven of us still sitting
- here and having that conversation, let's talk about it. Yes, Councilor Williams. I think it needs work,
- but I'm in favor of implementing it right away. The main thing that needs to
- that we need to do. Um maybe be tweaked tonight is that exhibit a part. Um because we need to give people
- actively hiring some guidance. Like where in the process are they to stop? Um Miss Turner King.
- display the original resolution or the draft resolution that I just made? I would think the one that
- you just made that you were working on, the most up to date. Yeah, we'll go from there. Maybe I drafted
- it. Maybe I made it better. I don't know. I didn't touch any of the whereas clauses. Excellent. Good work.
- So it says upon passage of this resolution, the council immediately implements a higher fees on all
- full and part time staff positions within Monroe County government. No elected official and or department
- head shall hire full time or part time staff without receiving advanced written approval and or it'll
- say without receiving
- approval and permission from the council, which must occur during a notice public meeting. The hiring
- freeze applies to all departments and all positions, including transfers within positions, within departments
- and between departments. Just to be clear, no department is exempt from said hiring freeze. Two, I added,
- was the process for elected officials and or department head to request to hire a position, hire and
- or transfer
- into a position as an exemption to this resolution. So in the event that an elected official and or
- department head wishes to request to hire a position or make a transfer as an exemption to this resolution,
- the elected official and or department head shall be responsible for informing the council administrator
- In writing that they wish to fill a position and or make the transfer said request can be submitted
- via email to the council office kind of like we do vacancies right now. The council administrator will
- immediately forward to the elected official and or department heads request to the entire council and
- employee services administrator.
- If the Council wishes or requests to discuss at a public meeting of the Council the possibility of allowing
- the elected official and or department head to continue with the hiring and or transfer their requested
- position, providing an exemption to this resolution, then the Council members shall notify the Council
- Administrator within 48 hours exempting weekends and holidays after the notice is sent.
- If no council member requests to discuss at a public meeting the possibility of allowing the elected
- official or department head to continue with the hiring of the requested position, underlined in bold,
- then the elected official and or department head shall not move forward with the hiring and or transfer
- of the requested position as the hiring freeze would be applicable. So default no unless someone wants
- to talk about it. And then it talks about that if
- If a person if a department receives an exemption, they have to provide the council signature page to
- employee services to document that they were exempt. And then I didn't change this, but it's if employee
- services or council office becomes aware that someone didn't follow this policy. That's the consequence.
- Resolution effective December 30, 31st or 2026. And then the resolution will be effective as the date
- of passage.
- However, council exempts the ongoing hiring processes as delineated below. And what I did was I went
- back and I looked through all of the department responses and I listed them here. And so you can decide
- which ones you want to keep, which ones you don't. So airport operations, they posted and received resumes.
- Internal auditor, the position is posted and it's set to close on October 10th.
- commercial building inspector. They received permission to fill, posted it, but took it down because
- they didn't have qualified applicants. These two, in all honesty, don't matter because they're already
- hired, so I'm going to strike through those. Health identified that there's a disease intervention
- specialist. Their job was posted on the 17th of this month. They're collecting applications and currently
- screening.
- Health Services Director posted on April 24th, and they extended an offer on the 15th, completing pre-hire
- steps, but I don't really know what that means. Same for the administrative assistant, posted in July,
- extended offer. Highways said they anticipated having a truck driver in a part-time hourly line, but
- they didn't say when. The public defender has
- extended an offer with the applicant set to start on the 20th of October. The sheriff's office identified
- two vacant mayor-deputy positions, which they are actively recruiting for and accepting applications
- in effort to begin a new selection process. There's a GIS technician where they're conducting interviews.
- The mortgage deputy in the treasurer's office offer extended and accepted. Support technician offer
- extended and accepted.
- Although TSD did not identify in their response that they have a full-time support technician, I think
- after they respond, they did submit a request to fill a vacancy. So I put support technician question
- mark. That was like within the last 48 hours, something like that. And then YSB has a clinical coordinator.
- They're currently interviewing, but have an extended office offers.
- There's a counselor at YSB and a part-time direct care staff, which are all in the advertising process.
- So some of those, like beginning at H, I, and J, I don't see departments correlated with the, like for
- instance in J, it says part-time hourly. What department is that? It's highway. So the truck driver
- and the part-time hourly line are both in highway. Okay, and then also H.
- H is health. And how would we know that from this? You wouldn't, but I can make that clarification.
- I would like clarification on which departments they're in, if that's possible. But then the question
- is, do you want to keep the list as is? My suggestion would be like for support technician part time,
- if an offer has been extended and accepted and same thing for the public defenders, it seems like they're
- through the process.
- I would take them off, but that's just me. What's what's the lead in? Right, what's the lead into the
- list? ABC? Is that what you're talking about? No, I mean, what does it say? The list is that the Council
- exempts the ongoing hiring process processes as delineated below, so they're exempt and they can continue
- moving forward with the hiring of these positions and I can clarify that.
- Yes, Councilor Decker. Just for historical record, do you think it would be possible on seven to add
- a slightly exempt the ongoing hiring processes as dealing delineated? It's not my word delineated below.
- Something comma which were underway during adoption, just so that folks don't think that. Which is yeah
- Christmas listed a few things that were cool. Yeah.
- Okay. Is there any other further talking points? When you finish that, could you go down to the bottom
- of the list of the positions again? I just want to see the bottom again when you finish. So to Councilor
- Deckard's request, now seven says,
- To be clear, this would allow for the elected official and or department head to continue hiring the
- following positions. The positions were exempted as the hiring process had been initiated prior to the
- adoption of this resolution. Unfortunately, because of the page break, I don't know that there's a good
- way to get all of them on. I think that's fine. I just want to see the bottom of the exemptions now.
- I missed some of that. I mean, K is an offer and accept it.
- N is an offer and accept it, and O is an offer and accept it. And so it seems like those would, I would
- suggest considering making those exempt. You mean taking them off the list? Correct. Well no, by exempt
- I mean they would stay, because the list would be these are the positions for which you're allowed to
- continue the process. And so like when I marked out
- Well, those are already there. But if you take them off the list, it's saying the hiring freeze applies
- and you have to stop this process immediately. Yes. Yeah. Immediately is pretty strong. That's what's
- in the resolution of the part time hourly line. And Jay, what is that? The highway also. It's highway.
- OK. And I just want to get their response. There wasn't any information that I saw beyond that.
- Just the department, I think, is enough. And then go on down past L. Thank you. Okay. So seeing what
- we see here,
- Is there other discussion that needs to be added to this? Or are y'all wanting to punt this to the eighth?
- Yes, Councillor Iverson. I like what's on the screen, and I would, council, move to approve resolution
- 2025-42. Second. All right. So for clarity, by approving this, you're not editing that list at all,
- we're just leaving
- A through S. Yep. Okay. Okay. So there's a motion and a second on that item. Is there any other further
- discussion? Yes, Councillor Iverson. I think it bears to say and I know we still have quite a few people
- watching in this late hour. This is the in the same category as longevity with me. This is not done
- with any type of joy. This is done with a heavy heart.
- These are really difficult times. This is one of those difficult decisions that we have to make.
- And I just, you know, I think I want to make it really clear that we are doing everything we can right
- now to make sure that this community stays strong. And I just, we are doing our very best here. So thank
- you for understanding. Yes, Ms. Turner-King.
- I would suggest taking D and E out for clarity because those positions have already started, so they're
- not in the hiring process. They're through the hiring process. I agree. There you go. Okay. And if council's
- okay with it, I would like to clean up A through Q now just to identify the department and the position
- and probably add the
- or some other identifying mechanism and take out where we are in the hiring process, because I don't
- think it needs to be included. Yeah, I think that I consent with that into my motion. So the motion
- is to adopt this with the contingency that I'm cleaning up A through Q and putting it in some form.
- That's right. Okay. Thanks, everybody.
- So if there is any other further question or comment on this item, anybody? Bueller? Passage. All right.
- I guess we've got to go to public comment on this item. If there's public comment on this item and you're
- still watching, you can raise your hand via Teams. And seeing none, can we please have a roll call vote?
- I'm sorry. OK, OK. Alright, we got a hand raise. You please unmute yourself. State your name and you'll
- have up to three minutes. Hi, this is Kelly Whitmer. I'm the director Monroe County Parks and Recreation.
- I just want a clarification. We have after school recreation staff that is in the process of being hired
- and they're going for criminal background checks. I don't know where.
- they land on that list of yours? That's all I guess that's all I have to say. I mean, if we need to
- cancel after school programs or day camp programs, we're gonna need to know soon. Those positions are not
- in the list that I had displayed in the resolution as I don't think they were mentioned in the parks
- response. Sorry, so I didn't know that the hiring process was ongoing. Well, I thought we were already
- hired but weren't and we're picking up some more after school instructors and unfortunately they're
- like 17 years old so they have to put their parents to go.
- or either get a notary for a criminal background check or actually take off work and go to the Sheriff's
- Department. So this has been quite a disaster week for us trying to get these after school kids hired.
- And when I emailed you, Molly, I didn't realize that and I didn't realize it would go to someone who
- worked four hours a week or maybe four weeks teaching basketball
- For clarity, if council wants to include these in that list, how many employees are you talking about
- hiring for those after school programs? Is it? I mean, we're in the process. I mean, we're trying to
- get the paperwork is arduous. We're trying to get the paperwork in the last two weeks. I mean, we're
- talking about maybe, I think we have maybe two more to hire. I don't know where they're edited.
- get to the Sheriff's Department for the criminal background check or not. I don't I don't know if they
- made it there today. I mean, this is how close we are of getting these kids hired. You know, if not,
- we need to tell the parents at Unionville that we need, you know, because without the staff we can't
- have the program. So I need to note basically tonight if we're having this program or not,
- Okay, how many people do you normally hire to administer the program? She was, I think we might have
- six counselors or six instructors, but most of them are all hired. We just have one or two. I'd have
- to call my athletic, I mean, my recreation director to double check where she's at in the hiring process.
- I mean, we're so close. We're almost at the finish line.
- I mean, I can follow your foot. Can you tell the people or conditions? First case scenario, you have
- two options. You can include parks, counselors in this resolution now. And I don't know how many like
- to put, or worst case scenario, once you have more information that
- the process is in place. Ms Whitmer would email that request to Kim and then it would go to full council
- if council wishes to hear it. Okay. Um. My only concern is if we have this, are there other departments
- that potentially could be doing the same thing and missed a time where we're doing this? However,
- We are putting in something that says if they would like to not be exempt from, you know, the hiring
- freeze, then they can come to council email and go from there. So this is literally a test. I mean,
- I did. We're about to put it forward in the email that I sent to councils or to department heads and
- elected officials. It was pretty specific. And the first question was, do you have vacancies? And then
- where are you at in the hiring process? I received
- I think 21 responses. And so, I mean, if they didn't respond, I don't know about them. And so I don't.
- Yes, Councillor Wells. I consider this a response. I mean, it's a clarification of the response that
- was given. Can we indicate that the on the underway hiring
- of these seasonal parks employees and you can edit as you see fit just like you are with the other positions
- that don't have details are on that list. I mean, I'm happy to already getting background checks. That's
- pretty far along. So then
- it sounds like maybe somebody can amend the motion to include those two or however many positions there
- are with this. Again, we're doing this and I understand this is a response, but I also understand if
- we're sending out emails and whatnot and we don't get feedback back, then it's really hard for staff
- to do what they can. So I think at this time, maybe that's a motion or that's something that we can
- entertain where we can amend it. Yes.
- I'd like to move that the underlying resolution be amended under Exhibit A to include two additional,
- whatever that's called, camp afterschool coordinators from parks. Need a second? Hey, Kate. Oh, I didn't hear you.
- Okay, so we got a motion and a second to amend. Is there any questions on the amendment? Yes, Councilor
- Pytel. So I like the amendment, but I'm concerned. I don't know the county, all the county employees
- that well yet. And I'm concerned about other seasonal employees, if there are any. So I don't know if
- there are any in the whole workforce. So I would like to include all seasonal employees, if that's the
- case. If not, then I'm fine with what they suggested. But then I think to that point is,
- again if people are if we don't know and it comes up again that is on that particular elected slash
- department head to send the email and then it's up to us to look at the email respond to it so that
- it can get bumped back into council for approval I just don't want to miss it you know in all fairness
- yeah so I hope we can not miss those yeah I I
- I think it'll all be coming back over and over under this. Yes, counselor. This amendment doesn't apply
- to even the parks seasonals. I mean, this is we just added the ones that are currently in process and
- they'll have a whole slew of folks that they'll have to come before us with. Yeah. Can I say one thing? Yes.
- I just, I'm on the phone with my recreation director. She says we only have one employee who has all
- her paperwork and she's supposed to start to work tomorrow. Her parents are supposed to go to the sheriff's
- department for the criminal background check. That's how close we are with that one employee. Yes. I'm
- going to go to Ms. Turner King. Can I ask Ms. Whitmer a point of clarification?
- Are you saying you only need an exemption to continue with the hiring process for one employee?
- Because what? Well, I'm on the phone and she said. Everyone else has completed everything except one
- employee starts tomorrow, but her parents have to take off work to get to the Sheriff's Department in
- order to have a criminal back. She's like, hold this, she's 17. She's 17 years old. One one one position
- one person. She's
- She teaches that after school, what sport? What sport? What sport? She's teaching flight football. And
- she's supposed to start tomorrow. Is she starting before the battle?
- complete? No no her parents are her parents are get her parents hopefully get there in the morning and
- she's hopefully to work in the afternoon. She's supposed to be there after school tomorrow but parents
- are supposed to be at the apartment in the morning. So couldn't we just in the interest of time just
- add this position that she's talking about and the other positions and kind of keep it moving?
- I feel like, again, we got the amendment that's on the floor here. I want to remind us of that. So I
- would assume Councilor Deckard's amendment includes that position. And anything that's after that, once
- this goes into effect, should this pass, then this goes on to the department head to bring this back
- to council so that council, we get the email and we make do and that's on us to bring it back.
- the question. So I started. I just want to show you what I was doing while I was working through that.
- Um, I started this the chart to populate, so it'll say department head title, the position. I'll work
- with Miss Kim to do the account line. And then I added this other column given this interesting park
- situation to identify if it's a full time part time or seasonal position. And so I'm going to populate
- that chart.
- The other quick question that came to mind, sorry, but some of these are pretty open. So I don't know
- when the highway is going to have a vacancy for truck driver. I don't know when they're going to start
- the process. Is this a blanket go forth and hire? Or does this exemption expire and then they have to
- follow the process after a certain time? Because I don't know how quickly the Sheriff's Office will
- get a hiring process going.
- one truck driver, right? It's not. Yeah. And that's why I'm wondering, do we limit it? That's why I
- added the account line so that we could. But they said they anticipated being vacant. I don't know.
- So again, we can maybe go back to the overall there, but the amendment is the two positions to add in
- right now. So. I'm going to go to that. All those in favor of counselor Deckard's
- amendment as presented. Please signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed, same sign. All right,
- motion carries. Now we come back to the overall resolution and now we can discuss whether or not there
- is a expiration for some of these positions that are listed. However, there is nothing in the pipeline
- for these.
- So then do we, would November 1st be for those that are open? That's what I was gonna suggest.
- December 1st, November 1st. You know, it's tomorrow is October 1st, they got one month to figure it
- out. And then just like Cinderella, it all turns into pumpkins and then they can come back to council
- for that. Absolutely. All right. Add a line up here.
- So in number seven, I added this exemption grants departments until November 1st to hire and or transfer
- into the positions below. If the vacancy remains after November 1st, the elected official and or department
- head must engage in the process identified above. So if it's vacant after November 1st. Send us an email.
- Awesome. OK, so.
- I think we've exhausted this, but just in case anybody else has any other questions, does anybody have
- any questions or comments? Please, God, no. All right. Public comment. All right. If you got a public
- comment on this item, if you're still here, please come forward to the lectern here in the night. You
- can raise your hand via Teams. You'll have up to three minutes. Yes, Miss Turner King.
- I received a clarifying question, and I don't have the answer to. When we say the exemption
- grants departments until November 1 to hire, does that mean a person has to have started by November
- 1, an offer has to be extended by November 1? What is the will of the council? Personally, I think the
- will for me is you have to be in the pipeline. I'm thinking if November 1 comes
- We come to November 1st, and that position is still open, and there is no resumes. There is no action.
- Then it's closed. But that's me. I don't know about anybody else feeling that same way. So there has
- to be an accepted offer by November 1st, or they just have to have resumes and be interviewing? I think
- you have to have something in the pipeline.
- I mean, all of these positions are already posted. So we are going to have to be beyond interviews or,
- I don't know. Say it. Offer extended? Sure. Just to get some sort of, I don't know. OK. My thought is
- offer extended because somewhat
- start date is beyond the department heads control because now we're getting into whoever the applicant
- is accepting the position has to give notice to their current employer if they have one and So offer
- extended by November 1st offer extended Okay to I'm gonna put the exception grants departments until
- November. Oh, well, I'm just gonna read what I'm gonna type This exemption grants departments until
- November 1st to extend an offer
- to hire and or transfer into the positions below. If the vacancy remains after November 1st, the process
- as identified above governs. Sounds like a plan. Does anybody have any other discussion on this?
- All right, may we please have a roll call vote? Crossley, yes.
- Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
- Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.