Good evening, everybody. Today is Wednesday, September 10th, 2025. And this is night five out of six
for our 2026 budget sessions. In the NatU Heal Room, we have a quorum, so we will get started, even
if we are just a little bit behind. But to my right here, we have counselors David Henry, Peter Iverson,
Kate Wilt, and Liz Vital. And we don't have counselors Deckard or Hawk, just
we haven't heard from them yet. But again, we will introduce them, and it seems like we have Councilor
Hawk walking in the building right now. All right, but we will still go ahead and get started. So, um,
the next step is the item, uh, two, which is adoption of agenda. Is there anybody that would like to
make changes or wishes to or same thing which is to amend tonight's agenda?
And since we are all here in person, we can do a voice vote to adopt agenda. So all those in favor of
adopting tonight's agenda as presented signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed, same sign.
All right. Motion carries. All right. So the same.
speech that I've given for the previous four nights of our budget sessions. This is not a final
We are here to make a decision tonight we are hearing. Departments of Monroe County to present to us
the county council their 2026 budgets and so just want to remind people of that each department when
they come up we'll be able to sit here and then at you Hill Rome and discuss their budget items and
council may will ask questions- and can make amendments as well as we feel the need to do so- but again
each department I like to remind
and keeping track of time. And I wanna continue the flow of that today. So each department will have,
has been given a certain amount of time to present. And once your time is up, we will politely say that
your time is up so that we can further move along through our agenda here. And also for council to stick
to the items that are related or items that are budget questions related to tonight's budget as presented. So again,
we do have the public hearing that is scheduled for Tuesday, September 30th at five o'clock and then
the final budget adoption, which is Tuesday, October 14th, also at five o'clock. So as we have gone
over before, we also before we get started with the department budget,
hearings, we are going to look to the auditor's office. And I see that we have Ms. Carly Woodruff in
and want to give her an opportunity to do what our auditor regradery would do, but she is not here.
So Ms. Woodruff. Good evening, council. Good evening. If I may share my screen, we've received some
requests to show our calculations for how we're coming up with the deficit. So we have that ready to
share here.
On the screen, you should see a simple calculation that we've been using thus far. This shows the maximum
property tax levy that were allowed in 2026. This is an estimate, but is calculated based on a state
calculation tool. We'll take the maximum tax levy plus the county major bridge levy, which is outside
the max levy.
and we'll add in the miscellaneous revenue that has been calculated by departments. The sum of those
compared to the requested budget that's in Gateway right now, if you reduce out the requested budget,
you're gonna come up with a total deficit for the entire budget of just over 8.1 million.
This is a simplified calculation that we've been using. We did do a little bit of a deeper dive and
we created a deep dive calculation for our levy funds. And this is an analysis that takes lines from
the 4B and shows you on one spreadsheet where we will probably end up if we adopt the budget as it is
right now. So you can see that in general fund,
based on what is anticipated for the end of year 2025 cash balance plus all of that revenue minus the
expenditures. If we adopt the levy at 23 million and change, we should end up with about 14 million
at the end of 2026. If you follow that down, you'll see that we have some fund balances that are anticipated
to end in the positive and others that are anticipated to end in the negative.
and this spreadsheet is only showing the levy funds. Okay, thank you for doing that. I want to look
to council to see if anybody has any questions for Ms. Woodruff. Councillor Hawke. Yes, do you have
that in hard copy for us to look at this evening? Or could you get it for us, have somebody get it for
us? We can definitely get it. It was emailed out earlier, but if you prefer in hard copy, we're happy
to do that. Would you like for that for the whole council?
When you say you emailed it out earlier, you mean today? Yes. It was an hour ago, it was emailed out,
yeah. An hour ago. Well, yes, an hour ago. Yes, I would like to see it in hard copy, thanks. We can
definitely do that. All right, anybody else have any questions related to this item? Okay.
Did you have more to add to that? Or is there anything else you needed to add? I'll stop sharing my
screen now. All right. All right. Well, if we don't have any other questions, we can go ahead and get
into our first department budget presentation tonight, which is the treasurer's office.
Council I move to open for discussion review fund 1000-0003 general fund with a category requests of
personnel $511,130, supplies $3,500, services $59,150, capital is at $0 for a total of $573,780. Second.
We got a motion in a second. We have our treasurer Miss Kathy Smith here to present tonight. Welcome.
Hi everyone. Thank you for having me. This is a pretty simple budget. I tend to go from the hard auditor's
office to the easy treasurer's office. So this is like a win just only having one budget and it being
pretty simple. So
I congratulate myself and you guys on that. So what you see here is the minimum pretty much that it
takes to collect taxes for the year. Next year is going to be an extremely painful year because there's
so many different changes and you know I think it's only fair to tell you that things are getting more
difficult in collecting taxes in that
used to most people either had a mortgage or they didn't have a mortgage they didn't have a mortgage
that came in and paid once a year with a check right or maybe twice a year now people have multiple
mortgages and so we have to deal with multiple mortgage companies and if they're if they pay by themselves
a lot of times they pay in partial payments with credit cards or e-checks to run those so instead of
making one payment they can make up to 26 payments based on their pay cycle or how they do it so in a
dish into all those extra payments, if you look around all the new construction, you can see there's
thousands of new pieces of property. So what we're looking at, say five years ago with the number of
tax payments that we took, it has grown astronomically. So what we're trying to do is keep it as minimum
minimally evasive to the budget as possible. And just adding what we absolutely had to add for all the
different, all the extra accounting that we have to do now and all that. It's really busy work. It's
not necessarily harder work. It's just a lot more work. And so the only other real change is, and Kim,
correct me if I'm wrong, you're trying to combine things to make it easier for
So you don't have a lot of account lines that sound very duplicated. So we really don't have equipment
vehicle repair. What we have is service maintenance and repair equipment. It's a very minimal budget
of $600, but I think it's a better choice. They picked it. I think it's a better choice of the language
for what it truly reflects. I don't know if you guys have any questions. Okay. Thank you very much.
Does anybody have any questions for our treasurer?
Okay, you're looking at me, I wasn't sure if you had any questions. I just wanted to make sure that
you know that I appreciate you working to make, to keep this budget very lean, again this year, and
look forward to working with you to see how we're doing with our revenue because of course, you'll be
the one letting us know if we start running short on what our,
revenue might be for interest. I'm working very hard to keep the interest up. Working with new people,
like we've had the credit union added to the list of public depositories because they can be a little
more generous with interest. But I'm trying to make sure that loss of interest, I got it up really good
last year. I don't want you guys to lose, I know you need that money.
So I'm working very, very hard to keep it as high as possible and working with a lot of different companies
and community people that work at the banks. Banks pay a finance tax, FIT. A lot of people don't know
that they pay taxes on the money, a different set of taxes, financial institution tax. And it costs
more for them to have public
fund money than it does to have regular money because there's more regulations on it. So it takes kind
of like a community partnership with the banks, and we have wonderful banking people here. People have
been banking, long-term bankers, German-American and, you know, First Financial and Chase, just really
wonderful people. I've known the 20-some years I've been doing finances here at the county of nothing
but wonderful things to say about them.
They all want to be on that team with us. They care about the county. All right. Does anybody else?
Counselor Woltz. Yes. So it looks like you're requesting an increase in the hours for one employee from 35 to 40.
Yes, one employee it is it's because of the all the different transact increase of transactions. It's
not an increase in pay as far as per hour. It's just there's more so many, many more transactions and
this is not these are not things that part time people can do this. This is the cash book. So we have
a very, very small staff. We don't even have a cash book backup person because there's only four people
in the department.
So just from 35 to 40 hours, because there's more just transactions. And what are the rest of the employees
at 35 or 40? So right now, three are at 35 and one is at 40. This would be making a second one at 40,
just the cash book manager. May I ask another question?
I had another question. Let's see. All right, Councilor Iverson. Thank you for being here. Thank you
for your service to Monroe County. You've been here for a
a long time, like you said, and we're really appreciative of everything you're doing and the institutional
knowledge that you bring. My question is your only line in the twos, which is office supplies, which
went up by a pretty significant amount. And I just wanted to hear what's going on. OK, so office supplies
is a loose term. It's actually the equipment and the pieces, I guess I should say, things that you buy
from Office Depot that you need to run the department, like envelopes.
We do lots of things throughout the year with all kinds of different taxes, but we're very instrumental
in snowmelling things back and forth. And when people are overseas or when people just don't use, older
people a lot of times just don't use email. And of course we try to talk them into using
people into using email, so we don't have to print stuff out and send it to them. We can just send it
to them. But a lot of people, because of their taxes, paying their income taxes, they want that piece
of paper with that hand stamp on there. And so can you, as it's related, also talk about in your threes,
your postage line, which is pretty high, and there was also an increase there. So your twos are for
mailings and then your postage line is high as well so because postage has went up and we mail out thousands
and thousands of things every year right like the tax bills that covers the tax bills and last year
we were short and what we the last and what we did was we scraped everything we had back into that postage
line so we didn't have to ask you for any more money right but postage just went up twice in the last
12 months so
questions. T s D. It looks like counselor Decker is trying to get promoted. Can he be promoted, please?
Oh, perfect. Thank you. Um, I just had a really quick question. You mentioned earlier that is becoming
a little difficult to collect payments in a previous life. I used to be familiar with how the county
was collect or
Is that something that is still? We still do. I drive to the banks and I pick them up, make it easier
for them. And that's very nice of them to do that, but they don't want somebody giving them 26 payments.
They only do that during tax season for the people that are basically their customers, but we do it
in several different banks. And then I physically drive and pick them up. It's harder on people to come
down to the square when we're busy and our office is full because there's no spaces left.
And, and Marty can testify this if someone can't get up the steps they just call us and we'll run down
there and pick them up because we're, we really try to be very very good to, to, to all of our people.
And if when it's really hot outside especially in May.
and there's only one place really to park, it's very difficult for someone if they're not just in a
wheelchair, if they say they're using a cane or they've hurt their foot or, you know, I mean, you know,
people from Elstow don't come downtown Bloomington a lot. And so we just wanna make sure, especially
the only pay once a year, you know, or twice a year people, we wanna make sure that we really hold their
hands and do a good job with them. The people who pay automatically,
many times over they do pay on computers and it's so what happens is we can't like if you go to Walmart
you spend you spend a thousand dollars Walmart doesn't get a whole thousand dollars they get something
less than a thousand dollars two or three percent less than a thousand dollars we can't do that so we
have to charge a thousand dollars and then have to have a third party run it through them and that's
how they get their um that's how they get their service fee right so if a person pays every two weeks
It could be a week or two weeks before that payment actually comes through. Well, we're showing it paid
in our system, but it's not paid in our bookkeeping. So then the next one can come through before the
other one's even been credited. So it becomes a cash book nightmare. And that's what we've run into.
That's really what we've run into this year. And it's getting worse because everyone's used to, younger
people are very much used to paying everything online or through their phone applications. Yeah,
that's true. And I wish we got a cut of that, but we don't.
but it makes more work for us. It's a lot easier to pay 26 small payments than one really big payment.
Yeah. Well, it looks like we are out of time on this one and we appreciate you doing that and all the
many different ways that you take the payments from our county residents. But if we don't have any other
questions, I see Councilor Decker is online and so since we have a member that is virtually, we will
do a roll call vote.
May I ask for a roll call, please? Councilor Hawk? Yes. Thank you. Councilor Decker? Yes, and I'm sorry.
Thank you. Councilor Wilts? Yes. Councilor Feidl? Yes. Councilor Crossley? Yes. Councilor Henry? Yes.
Councilor Iverson? Yes. Thank you. Motion carries 7-0. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Good luck with
the rest of your work. We appreciate it. Thank you.
All right, moving along on the budget train is item number six, which is the health department.
Council, I move to open for discussion and review Fund 1159-0000 Health Fund with the category requests
of personnel at $1,553,039, supplies at $795,202, services at $337,516, capital is at zero for a total
budget of $2,685,759.
Second. All right. And I see that we have Miss Lori Kelly here to present. Welcome. Good evening, counselors.
So just to walk you through what we have planned for 1159. So as we're aware, we've transitioned a lot
of our positions from the previously from the state fund into this local
health department funds. So that's, we've kept that pretty consistent in the requests for 2026. There
are a couple of positions that we have not refilled. So those are vacant positions and we are not gonna
be filling those in addition to our part-time lines. So looking at just being able to cut some costs
there. Move to
our supplies, so we've reduced amounts in many of our supply lines and have been able to transition
some of those costs over to the Health First Indiana Fund to try to help make up some of the difference
there for the additional costs and personnel. Same with service categories, so just gone through and
made a lot of reductions to that as well.
Looking at one of the service categories, the personnel healthcare line for $228,866. So that was previously
planned to go to IU Health for nursing contract services. So we will be looking at removing that or
transferring that to be able to provide nursing services in 2026.
Did you have anything else to add?
Okay, all right, and so I'm gonna look over here, because I already saw a hand that went right up. Counselor
Iverson. Well, first of all, thank you for being here. Thank you for meeting with your two liaisons
on this. I think we're really appreciative of a lot of the reductions that you made and in preparation
for tonight's hearing. So thank you for doing that. I will note that the 4B on this fund is not looking
very healthy at this moment. So we have some work to do.
in this fund to the tune of a little over a million dollars. So council is gonna have to do some pretty
big work here. And I just wanted to kind of set the table with thanks to the health department for doing
the work and making sure that there are reductions here, but also that we're gonna have to do a little
bit more work here. Okay, all right. And looking over here.
You just keep looking at me. So every time you look at me, I'm going to keep calling you. I like your
shades. I'm very curious to see what the outcomes are going to be here because it appears to me that
this needs to be adjusted and move this personnel back into the 1161 fund.
and I'll wait to see what the liaisons have come up with. Yeah, Councilor Henry. Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you, Lori. So maybe, yeah, maybe we can get into some of it. So I think when we moved things out
of HFI in here and trying to quickly put out a fire from the state, right? I mean, we had the change
in legislation. We didn't really understand what those implications were other than there were services that
We thought we would not be able to provide to persons that couldn't provide documentation of immigration
status and we had to split funds. We've been at this, how many months have we been in this model of
two funds at this point? I think it's around June is when, May, June is when it first started. So we
have like three or three-ish months of data. Are you seeing personnel spending most of their time,
I mean, I don't know how we figured this out, but like serving,
people correctly under the law? I mean, if people are coming in and getting services or you're out testing
for mosquitoes or whatever, are those people typically Indiana residents or US citizens? Do you have
any idea at this point? The whole point of moving this out was because HFI couldn't cover certain
circumstances, right? So what's the office look like? What's going on with the personnel? Sure. Well,
so with our nursing services, for example, I mean, they're not
obtaining or asking for that information because they were moved to this other funding. So positions
that have invested program supplies with some of those HFI dollars, we're seeing some mixed results.
So there are individuals, we do run into circumstances where either someone is not an Indiana resident
or they do, they have not had documentation. And so those individuals are not qualified for those services
or supplies under those
under these new guidelines. So I think that it would just be a matter of what positions can we most
easily have fall under the Health First Indiana compared to ones that it's really just going to be very
challenging to try to
and obtain the required documentation or run into scenarios where we're turning those individuals away.
And I appreciate that we really did build this on the fly. And this is at the recommendation of County
Legal and Mr. Schilling had the kind of ideas about how to do this. It seems like three months of it
already. We can sense that we have outliers, but what we've done is we've budgeted as if to protect
everybody and say, look, regardless of status,
this fund is taking care of our whole community. We're not, we can't even possibly figure it out when
we're at the door. I guess just, it's a very long way of saying what Councillor Hawke said is that
we probably do need to figure out what can move back in HFI. I don't know if there's more creative ways
to go at it, and I would be curious what the auditor's office thinks about an account line that we tag,
or an account line that we fund for those one-off scenarios where we have to provide a service that
we can't use HFI for. Not the position, but the service offering, right? Because that would, it's almost
like a cost center model. We'd bill, like that's the one we use for, does that make sense?
I'm thinking out loud here in the time we have, just because clearly we got to do something with it,
right? I guess the other question I have regarding these is the positions that we moved in that were
no longer covered by HFI, right? And that was tobacco and public health preparedness, is that right?
Public health preparedness positions, those have been moved to grant funding. Which grant funding was
that? The COAG. That was COAG, okay. 8111.
So we have two full-time preparedness positions that were moved to the 81 11. So the public
health coordinator, oh, that's right. It's here. I'm looking right at it. Okay. So I will hold back
on that comment, but yeah, thanks. Okay. Thank you. And looking over here into my left, if anybody has
any questions, counselor. Yes, thank you. Um, the, the coag grant has a,
cash balance. So are there things that it can pay for that it's not currently budgeted for? So the two
preparedness positions we're planning on keeping there at least for the next couple of years until we
can kind of see how things may or may not change with Health First Indiana that also will support our
school liaison services. So my best
thought beyond that would be to use that for nursing services. That could be an alternative.
It says PHC, the personal healthcare line, that it was something I think that was a contract with IU
Health, is that right? And that's gonna change. Correct. So does that mean, what does that mean for
that line and your requested budget? So in my mind, it means it would be zero. We could zero that out.
in my mind. Okay. Then I think that we would want to doing that, right? That's $228,866 that we could
zero out right now. I would look to the liaisons to.
I mean, if that's what the department is saying and that's what we're thinking about, I would also reflect
back on something that was said earlier that these funds might also be looked to be transferred into
another line for other services. So I think this change, this loss of a contract is so new that we are
really scrambling to try and figure out how to provide a statutorily required service.
I would be really nervous about zeroing this line out at this moment, simply because we just lost a
60-year contract, and we need to provide these services, and we are required to do so. So that's something
that you are thinking through still? That is something that conversations are ongoing right now. Now,
back to what President Crossley says every meeting.
We can make a change tonight, and it's not permanent. So we can keep that in our minds as well. And
I'm getting a stern look from the council. It's a stony look, not stern. It's either that or my readers
are a thing. No, you're not meant to be a stern look. I was thinking. I think for clarity, what I hear
Ms. Kelly saying is that,
The structure, we're still gonna have this budgetary need for providing these services. Just how it's
structured will change. It won't be a contract, but it could be personnel. So it's kind of similar to
what I said about the coroner's contract or coroner's budget. His budget has all the personnel lines
at 12,000, but it's potentially changing to a contract. So I think the need is still going to be there.
It's just, we're not sure yet on
what category or how it's going to be there. So I would also be cautious of zeroing it out. So along
those lines then with I mean with the coroner you have just the one budget one fund with this department
you have a lot and we're trying to ease the pressure on this particular one. So
Is it reasonable to think that you would be looking at other funds to pay for the required services
that are lost through this contract? That we would be looking at other funds? Yeah, I mean, that my,
the COAG grant would be the next best fund that could pick that up. We could, I do not think that, I
would not feel comfortable moving it to health first.
funding, just because of again, we have too many ongoing like TV cases, for example, there's there's
too many ongoing situations with those nursing services that we would be running into roadblocks to
where we could not provide the services. So I guess I'm really I mean, this is unusual in in the health
department is unusual. So I grant you that.
I mean, it's just a lot of different, you have so many grants and so many different sources and it's
a lot to manage. But we haven't yet sat here and heard from a department that if we look at the 4B,
we are a million dollars, if I'm correct, that we have to dig out of this budget. I'm just looking for ideas.
And time is of the essence. I realize that tonight is not the night we finalize anything. But again,
you're way more qualified than I am to know where and how to do that. I mean, coming up with that amount,
I think, is going to be really challenging. And if we move all these positions back
to 1161. Again, I think also just giving some consideration for the burden that it puts on our employees,
having to go through the process of asking, obtaining this verification, how do you navigate
those circumstances then when people are upset about why are you asking for that, doing all the internal
controls and tracking. So I would hope that we could find some way to
of less than that burden as well. Okay, I'm going to I'm going to ask a question that I see some hands
waving at me. So I'm going to go there. So yes, Councilor Hawking, Henry and Everson all are saying
right now and Wilts is we got to figure out what to do with this because I know that we were up against
trying to do something that was in a flurry. But now
that we are in this budget constraint right now, we have to make do with what we have to do. And so
whether that means we have to unwillingly put those positions back into HFI. And ideally, it would be
nice to see how we can work with our partners at Health Net and some other places that would be able
to help that won't turn people away for various reasons. It's a shame we're in this point, but unfortunately,
just like some other projects here in the county this is where we are. The other question I guess while
we are on this contract that I kind of just want to ask since it is in the contract and now hearing
that it's not a thing anymore is why is it canceled? Can you speak to that? Sure I certainly don't want
to speak for IU Health as an organization but I think that essentially
They are moving into a new model of care. So taking on a regional approach of care. And currently the
community health center, some of the other programs there have been covering multiple counties. The
nurses have not because they've been with Monroe County providing the services on behalf of the health
department. But the plan and the goal is that to move into a regional hub essentially and covering multiple counties.
which doesn't really align with the services that we provide at the health department in just Monroe
County. And then I'll go to Councilor Henry, and then I see Councilor Decker now has his hand up.
Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Lori. So I think, again, in the spirit of we're not going to
get there tonight, but maybe talking strategically about what has to happen here, given the news and
some of the other stuff, is,
I think the approach, and I think I heard Councilor Wilts say it, and maybe I'll say it my own way,
is to the extent that we can move costs into the grants is what we're after first to protect this fund
and the local county tax dollars using everything we can coming in here first. So if it means getting
creative about that and looking at funds that
You know, I think, and maybe I'll look over Carly here. The fund that it predates, HFI, is that, which
is that one again? The one that we used to use for stuff like this, the local public health. I believe
those are two funds that were kind of replaced with one. One of them is 1168, which is local health
maintenance. Right. And the other one is 1206, local health department trust account. So all of those
where we have boluses of funding are what
I think we're all looking to go to first to draw down on before we get, we're touching this fund, right?
And that's the general strategic, I think, goal as I hear it. So I just think as we work on this over
the next few weeks, like that's the target. Like how much of that can we move into those spaces? And
then what we see we're dealing with. I think we touched on the clinic a bit or that, and I do think,
you know, there's kind of,
You know, as organizations in the community are trying to figure out their strategic missions and how
they fit in this new health model, they may figure out a way to answer a request for proposals. I mean, it's not
nothing for an organization to pivot and go hire the staff you need to go win a contract. I mean, I
speak from a little experience because that's my life's work. I've been on government contracts for
15 years. You go find your team and you go win the work. And so I do wonder if there's a way to go at
a RFP approach again and find a vendor that'd be willing to answer a good
our request for proposals with a statement of work on what they can do to succeed IU Health. And that
would answer that question basically in 30 days. Once the contract's out and we get an award, hopefully
we get people back to work and not have to wait for alternatives there. But I'm on my stump at this
point. I do want to zero in on the other piece of what seems to be taking the fund out of balance, which
is that supply line, what 26, sorry, I got new glasses, this is horrible.
997 the COVID supply line so that's the one that that does I mean move us you know you know 750 ish
746 what's going on there in that fund again just so we can understand why that's sitting here instead
of maybe one of those other spaces. Sure so that was specific to COVID reimbursement dollars so back when
This was prior to my time when that was going on, but some of the money did come in during my time here.
So it was basically the state was helping to, they were working to help do the billing for that, reimbursing
these dollars to local health departments and using the funds, local health departments to use the funds
for one-time investments in public health. So that money was appropriated. We'd had discussions in the past.
even starting last year about using a large portion of that for a mobile unit. But the money had never
actually been appropriated. It was just kind of like hanging out. So we got the money appropriated this
year. So we would still like to move forward with using that to purchase a mobile unit. Can those funds
be used for other things?
They're not supposed to be used for ongoing costs like personnel they're not supposed to supplant local
appropriations so Dr box, who is the state health commissioner at that time, submitted a letter out
to local health departments with.
basically just talking about the funding that it needs to be held in 1159 and to use the money for one
time investments in public health, essentially to help increase vaccination efforts, address well visits
and basic health services. Thank you, Madam President. Okay. Councilor Decker has been waiting and then
I'll go to Councilor Hawk.
Thank you very much, Madam President. Again, I apologize for being remote. Are you all hearing me okay?
Yes. Okay, thank you. I just wanted to say quickly, and also, Councilor Henry, my eyes are also doing
wild things, so I appreciate you saying that. But I just want to say on this, obviously,
We're going to have to be artful in a number of ways to get to goal on every front, both financially
and from a service model. And I'm not sure what that looks like. And I don't think we really do know
yet what that looks like. So I will say that. And I do agree that, of course, we're not at the end yet.
But one thing I do think is, it seems like a lot of, and this is just an observation, when we're thinking
about whatever's going on with this contract happening, not happening,
It seems like a lot of health discussions are, pardon me, a little bit inside baseball. Things that
are kind of like in the net of how, I don't know, how boards function and how other things. And if IU
Health is going to a regional discussion or regional option, we're part of that region too. And I think
somewhere at some point, the public has to know what that means for them in a really clear term.
I have to be honest, I struggle as a county council member that is supposed to know all these things.
I struggle to figure out these things myself. And I just wonder if either the Monroe County Health Equity
Council, large discussions there, if it's a large discussion with groups like Health Net or others that we're
where people actually know what those things are more publicly. I just wonder if maybe we need to think
about that in some of this process, because I mean, I feel like I'm chasing mystery on these lines and
mystery on these things and all that. And I don't mean that as a criticism, because you all are in the
trenches, but if I can't figure this out roughly, I just think the public can't either. I think maybe
we've spent a little bit too much time
talking to ourselves. I don't know. I don't know. But we've got to figure that out because again, we
hear all the time from people talking about regional healthcare issues locally and all that. And I don't
know if we don't step in and talk about it. I don't know who will. So anyway, I just offer that thought.
Okay. Councilor Huck, you had your hand up. Yes. When I was reviewing this earlier,
And I saw that line that said reimbursement and I don't recall the dollar amount, but it was a hefty
amount. Was it 700 some thousand on the screen? I'm sorry. 746. Okay. Okay. I was going through what
I felt like. Well, at any rate, what we're talking about, when we get a reimbursement, that means we've
already spent the money.
And then this is coming back to us to reimburse us for the fact we spent the money. And so I just, I
think we need to investigate this further before we think that this money could not be used for whatever
we would want to because we've already spent the money that this reimbursement is for. We don't have
to prove that. We have already proven that. So this is dollars just sitting there. It appears to me
they can be used
for any purpose necessary for that fund. And why that would be questionable, I don't understand, but
I will work at trying to understand it. All right. Since we have other items that are on the health
department, we're about 35 minutes into, oh, 35 minutes left, rather.
I haven't said anything yet. Go for it. I just am concerned about the regional parts as well, which
means that we are a part of the region. And I just think we need to really keep that in mind and figure
out what that's going to look like. Definitely agree. All right. Seeing no more questions.
Just not right now, because it sounds like
I think that's a good point. I think that. Collectively there's definitely some things that folks want
to go back and look at in this I know I definitely do as well- and that's not just to you that's. Kind
of thinking about all the departments that have kind of gone through here to go back so seeing no questions
that we have now at this time maybe please have a roll call vote.
I know I can't say pass, so I'll just say no. We have no answers. Why would we say yes to this? Councilor
Crossley? Yes. Councilor Iverson? Yes. Councilor Decker? Yes. Councilor Wilz? You already voted me.
Take a dip. Councilor Feidl? Yes. Motion passes 6-1. Okay. And next up is item B.
Council, I move to open for discussion and review Fund 1161-0000 Local Public Health Service with a
category requests of personnel at $274,310, supplies at $148,321, services at $391,885, and capital
at $0 for a total of $814,516. Second.
Okay, what would you like to add to this. So, I don't think there's probably much to add about the personnel
line so basically what we had in this fund or some of those administrative positions that aren't providing
the direct patient care. So that's what we have budgeted they're keeping.
A large portion of our program supplies that are related to those core public health services within
this fund. That's where those programs originated. So it does make sense to to keep those costs there and have
We've really made some adjustments and some reductions in some of the other categories, but we still
have some money set aside for our partnerships. So community partnerships and grants to provide core
public health services. You'll see that in the contractual line and plan to use this fund for employee
training and travel as the
primary fund for those sources as well. Moved department insurance costs into this fund as well, so
that was a new change. Okay, and I'm gonna start over here to my left to see if anybody has any questions.
Councillor Wilts. What's the anticipated revenue for this fund? It should be right at that 814
So he's fully budgeted. Yes. Okay. Thank you. Looking over here to my right. Anybody got any questions?
Councilor Iverson. Again, I think a lot of the moves here are pursuant to conversations that we had
with together. And we're trying our best on this fund to kind of figure out the tea leaves.
I don't know if you want to talk more about those tea leaves. I don't want to put you on the spot. So
if you don't want to, that's fine. But we're really in this unique situation where the next two, three
to five years are really unknown, and we're trying to do the best that we can with the resources we
have now. Sure.
Originally, I think the plan was to be able to use some of our carryover funds, so funds that we haven't
used from Health First Indiana that we won't use this year and the year before to help us kind of keep
things moving along over the next couple of years. I'll be honest, I feel like we're in circles with
the whole legislative changes, that that's really what has caused the issues here. I'll be honest, I felt
really, really good going into a budget before we knew that those changes were coming. So that's really
the challenge that we're having to try to navigate here. And I'm happy to work with the council on whatever
changes that we can make and knowing that some tough decisions I guess will have to be made.
And we appreciate your willingness and I think you're putting it kindly that the legislative changes
and the things that we just don't know have really hurt public health. Public health really needs certainty.
We really need to have supplies in place to address health concerns. We really need to have nurses and
other trained professionals in place to address health concerns and uncertainty just puts a whole
a bunch of this stuff in limbo, and that's just not good for public health. And so I appreciate your
willingness to work with us and the understanding that we're in this tough situation where we have to
make hard decisions. Oh my gosh, I had a brain fart. Council Henry. To be the receiving end of that.
Anyway, so I guess, are you hearing from IDOH any
conversation about how a fund like this would pick up the slack for funding the governor's new initiative
of the Make Indiana Healthy Again. What's that? Are we hearing anything that might help with adjusting
some of that to help deliver these services or what do you know? Well, what I know is that the Indiana
Department of Health is
compiling information from local health departments about how these reductions and how the changes are
impacting communities at the local level so that they can provide that information on. There have been
surveys, they're gathering information. So I know that they're working actively to try to get these
funding levels back up in the future. Okay, thank you.
I'm gonna ask a quick question and then I'm gonna circle back around. I'm actually surprised Councilor
Iverson didn't ask this since that's been his theme as the training and travel. So it looks like the
budget for 25 was 200,000 and it looks like to date we've spent 11,532. You've come down on that travel
But I guess my question to you would be what types of training and travel do you foresee that y'all
will be doing here in the next year?
So we've already made some reductions to really limit it to the scope of what's necessary and required.
So that's the same thought that we'll be using for next year. So making sure that we're only going to
conferences or training events that actually align directly with someone's position or is required training
certifications for their position. So really just trying to kind of streamline that and be cognizant of,
making reductions where we can. Would you be opposed possibly to maybe reducing that a little bit more?
No, I think we're flexible. I'd be happy to kind of look at some numbers and look at some of those required
trainings that we have been supporting for employees in position and kind of see what
room we might have there to work with. Okay, I appreciate that. Thank you. All right, I'm going to go
to Councilor Wilts, and I think Michelle also had a clarifying question too. Okay. Looking at the same
services category, my first question is, other services, it says something about Fresh Connect, and
I don't know what that is. Could you just tell me what that is?
Yes, so this was a program we were actually really really excited and it was supposed to start in June,
but unfortunately.
Again, due to those legislative changes, the organization that we were going to be working with no longer
felt comfortable moving forward with that. So we are exploring partnerships with other organizations
because we would like to get this program out there. It's nutritional support. So essentially, we are
aligning it to chronic disease. So individuals who have high blood pressure, who are diabetic, and they
also have food insecurity, being able to provide credit
cards for those individuals that they can use for fresh fruits and vegetables. We would be loading the
card, also obtaining biometric screening data so that we have some program data. But that's essentially
in a nutshell kind of what that program is. So it's a nutrition support program. And then the one right
above that that you said was just for
working with the community, the 232,000? Yes, so a portion of that we'd like to continue with our Health
Net Homeless Initiative program. So we're providing some funding to help cover positions and they're
offering screenings and health services at the Wheeler Mission, for example. They do do some street
outreach, but that's
one of the programs in there. There's some money set aside for a hardship fund. So looking at, are we
gonna continue with environmental, for example, to have hardship funding available for programs? And
if there's any new community partnerships that we can work with to address chronic disease and trauma
and injury prevention. I mean, yeah, it's just really tough and unfortunately,
some of these really amazing things might have to wait. I don't know how else to do it. You do seem
to have a cash balance in this fund that, so you could appropriate more than, you could start to spend
down that cash balance from previous years. But the way to do that, that would then, you'd have to be
looking for stuff to come out of general
fund and go in here? Well, I think it's hard because we still have to also be meeting those core service
requirements. So it's, you know, really this balancing act of making sure that we're meeting all of
these health first Indiana core services at the same time. Thank you.
Okay. And then Michelle, did you want to ask your clarifying question? Yes. So you mentioned something
earlier about the insurance. Are you speaking with regards to the self insurance? No. Vehicle. Okay.
That's what I wanted to make sure that because I didn't have anything budgeted in here for self insurance.
So it's like that kind of threw me for a second. So. All right.
and I don't see Councilor Decker has his hand up. So if there's no other further questions on this item,
can we please have a roll call vote? Councilor Iverson? Yes. Councilor Decker? Yes. Councilor Feidl?
Yes. Councilor Wilts? Yes. Councilor Henry? Yes. Councilor Hawk? Yes. Councilor Crossley? Yes. Motion
passes 6-1.
Okay, and next up is item C. Council, I move to open for discussion and review Fund 1168-0000 Local
Health Maintenance with a category request of personnel at $26,913, supplies at $2,000, services at
$36,800, capital is at $0 for a total of $65,713.
So this is our old state funding so previous to health first Indiana it does fall under the same newly
updated code so that that was a big chain once I once I learned that again that just says that this is
We have those same restrictions in this fund as we do with Health First Indiana. So do have a small
amount set aside for part-time. That's really just in the event of some unexpected emergency or need
that might come up that we would need temporary or part-time position to be able to fill. Otherwise,
just a small amount in supplies and software.
printing and advertising the personal healthcare line in this. So some adjustments would be made with
that. Originally 30,000 was gonna be going to IU Health. So that money could be moved differently at
this point. Okay, anybody have any questions over here to my right? Councilor Hawk. Yes, the line that
I think is just called services.
What's that for? I'm sorry. What's it? What's the line? I think when you were reading it off, it was
just like services or contract or something. I was looking at earlier today. I thought, well,
what is this? Doesn't say the personnel health care.
If that's what you're referring to, the personal health care that was going to be going, 30,000 of that
was going to be going to IU Health. And so it's not now, so what's going to happen with it? Well, it
could be moved to another line. So you just said 30,000 was supposed in item
35 to 10. Yes. Was supposed to go to IU Health, but because that is no longer a thing, that's okay.
Okay. But because, so, and this is where I would look to Ms. Turner King, because we didn't do anything
previously. And the first one, since we,
Since that contract is no more, would somebody be wrong in making a motion to reduce this line item
by 30,000? I guess I have a clarifying question for Ms. Kelly. Is that part of the public health services
contract, the $232,000 one?
No, it's not because we lost, we did not receive immunization grant funding this year. At least we have
not as of this point. That was supposed to be around $30,000. So my plan was to put this $30,000 in
here to make up for that immunization grant, essentially to be able to supplement costs for vaccines.
I think so.
Anybody else have any other questions or suggestions? Okay. All right. Well, and not seeing a hand raised
via teams, maybe please have a roll call vote. Councilor Decker? Yes. Councilor Feidl? Yes. Councilor
Wilts? Yes. Councilor Henry? Yes.
Councillor Crossley? Yes. Councillor Iverson? Yes. Motion passes 6-1. Okay, and next up is item D. Council,
I move to open for discussion and review fund 1206-0000 Indiana Health Trust Fund with a category request
of $61,121 in the personnel lines. Supplies, services, and capital are all at zero.
for a total budget of $61,121. Second. Go ahead. So this request is to move the maternal and child health
coordinator position into this fund for 2026. That should pretty much spin down the entire balance of
this fund next year then. So that position is currently providing the tobacco cessation services for
for maternal patients. Okay. And Councillor Hawke. Okay. So we no longer receive dollars for the tobacco
cessation, right? And so that position, you're just moving over to this fund since we don't, we're not
going to be getting that grant money. Is that what you're saying?
So this is remaining. So my understanding of this is this is just remaining money that the department
has had for years that has just been slowly being used. So this, we do not receive money anymore into
this fund. We will just be spending down the remaining balance. And at that point then, since it was
a grant position, just that person,
understand that when the grant goes away, that normally means that the position goes away. All of our
employees are aware and they sign the documentation that's provided by the county that their position
may be eliminated if there is no funding. Council Henry. Thank you. So I think May is, if that's the
word in the document, not shall, right? That's important.
And I only say that to say, like, I know we're trying to deal with the fiscal year in front of us, but
what do you project out or have you all at the Board of Health kind of projected out the next few years
for some of these positions? Because, I mean, as you just indicated, this is a fund that will drain
out and it's not being added to. So whether it's this year or two years from now or three years from
now, like, this fund may
drain out to fund that position. Have you all thought about long-range financing within the Board of
Health at this point about some of these positions that the board has decided to absorb into the county's
funds? I know that's maybe an extension here, but it is where we're heading. Some fiscal year we're
going to be asking this question, so I'm kind of curious where we are right now. What's the thought?
So the thought has been to use some of the
carryover funds. So the remaining funds from Health First Indiana from 2024 and 2025 to be able to sustain
services over time. The stipulation with this program is we would not be able to move it into the Health
First just because it is providing those tobacco cessation services and those funds cannot be used for
tobacco cessation right now. Do you have the fund balance for this account or does the auditor
As of mid-August, it was roughly $96,000. So we're going to spend this down very quickly. So let's put
a pin in this one. We'll need to have a strategy for this within the next year or two. Year. Did you
have a question? Well, yeah. No, I don't disagree.
It looked like this was moved in here for one year to spend it down. I mean, this is exactly the kind
of thing I think they need to be doing. So to me, it's like perfect. I don't know how many times and
how many different ways we can say, I think that the next few years are going to see us not be able
to provide the services and the ways we want to provide them.
I mean, we have other funds that are flush with money that we cannot spend because our hands are tied
when we are allowed to spend that money on. And I'm 100% behind that. But at some point, if it's no
service at all to anyone, we're going to have to make a really bad decision or difficult choice, I guess.
I'm just upset about it. Yeah. Hashtag, thanks Cindy. Somebody should make a Facebook page for that.
All right. Anybody else got any questions? Councilor Iverson. And not to put too fine a point on what
Councilor Wilts was saying, but we are talking here about maternal and child health in a state where
maternal mortality is not looking great. In fact, it's getting worse. So there's a lot to do in this
state and it doesn't seem like we're getting a lot of help doing it.
I see another hand up over here, Councilor Hawk. Right. It appears to me that what the state was trying
to say is these other grants are going to be rolled into the House first, instead of having a little
bit of grant here, a little bit of grant there. They're going to have the one big one. That's what,
from what I could hear, the debate back and forth by the state when they were putting this together.
And this was not what the state wanted to do as a reminder. They didn't want to cut this. They had plans
of growing this funding. But then when they got their revenue projections, just like when we get ours,
and it wasn't what they wanted it to say, they had to make adjustments. So that's where we are, folks.
No one insisted that they put restrictions on who you can serve. The other thing I would like to make
it clear is that when we are offered a grant,
It is so imperative that we understand what the grant is going to require of us. And if we don't want
to do it, we should not accept the grant. And we've been told this even back when Steve Galvin was our
counsel attorney. It was clear. Look at that grant. See what it says we have to do. Is that what we
want to do? Is that what we can do? And if it's the what we can't do or don't want to do, we say thank
you, but no thanks.
Is this a situation like that? Because I don't think that's what happened here anyway. Oh, I'm just
saying that I thought that the first of all, I thought that when they took away the tobacco cessations,
whatever, they thought it could be made up with this out first. And so that's the reason why she's moving
around. And I get that. It's just I think we should try to understand why
The money isn't coming in like they had hoped. I'm going to go see Councilor Decker has his hand up
and then I'll come back to Councilor Henry. Well, I don't mean to belabor points that may not be helpful
to us, but kind of listening to the comments. I just, I just want to say that, you know, years ago when
we first began our correction discussion, there were also a lot of folks that were talking at that time about
Either go mental health or don't do the other. And I can remember in that discussion saying vividly
a number of times to former mayor Hamilton and others that once you start funding something or you start
down a lane on a program, you have to be in it and committed to it. And so, uh, counselor Hawk, um,
when the state started down their health reform and health funding option,
The intention was that they were going to maintain some level, do something, literally to get two years
in and then say, well, we got a bad revenue forecast because we didn't anticipate tariffs.
I'm not so sure. I think some of this could have been better planned, because the people that actually
have to do service and aren't over at Government South in Indianapolis, the people that actually have
to do service are now scrambling to figure it out. And the reality is, it's not easy to cut things at
the local level, because you actually see that people have needs, and you deal with, tend to those needs.
So I just, I mean, it's
These things are just not extension courts that plug, unplug. I think that's convenient when you go
work half a year in the legislature and then go home. But here, this is a reality that we'll have to
live with. And what will happen, if I may, what will happen is groups will have to come in to fill that
vacuum. And when they don't fill that vacuum, that service will go untreated. Then that becomes an extensive
cost to the taxpayer because that'll show up emergency room, you name it. So we're going to pay for
it one way or the other.
Let's bring that right down to what we have promised or at least planned to provide for government services
before we started looking at our numbers and we thought, whoa, now we have to cut. Does that mean we're
the bad guys? Or does that mean the numbers just are not going to let us do maybe what the big plan
would have been? And I'm going to go to Councilor Henry like I was intended to. Thanks. That's OK. I
appreciate the excited utterance.
I mean, I agree with my peers up here. This is not happening in a vacuum. I just want a point
of clarification. The reason why the tobacco cessation is now in county dollars is because it was something
HFI funded and we moved it in there. Is that correct? Yes. Okay. So just to be very clear that we were
committed to that at the state and then the state changed its mind for reasons. And we obviously are
trying to maintain that service here at a local level. It's something the board decided to try and we
were trying to fund it as best we could because as
Councilor Decker just mentioned, yeah, we just can't.
start and stop at the whims of people that are not using evidence-based solutions to do public health.
And I think for those that complain about mental health in the community, this is another fine example.
We've been battling 40 years of whataboutism from the state on this, and the end product is what we
see in communities all over the state of Indiana, not just downtown in Bloomington of people suffering
from mental health concerns that are no longer funded by the state government. And so that's just, it's
a remarkable place that you're in. You are in a frontline position
on this stuff and thank you for tolerating some of the speechifying here on this this evening but um
thank and i'm glad we were able to sustain this program a little longer while we try to figure out next
steps with the resources we have thank you madam president yep thank you and again hashtag thanks indiana
um all right so since we don't have any other uh questions on this um just come and may we please have
a roll call vote
yes counselor henry yes counselor hawke yes counselor crossman yes counselor iverson yes counselor decker
yes motion passes seven zero all right and it looks like we have the last item on the health department's
budget is item e council i move to open for discussion and review fund 4906-0000
public health emergency fund with a category requests of personnel $0 supplies $10,000 services $10,000
capital is at $0 for a total budget of $20,000. Second. All right. And Miss Kelly, what else would you
like to add to this? So this is
old local health maintenance funding so 1168. So this was created years ago to have money appropriated
and available to be used in the event of a public health emergency. And so that's essentially why my
understanding of this funding. I think
As has been discussed previously tonight, this now falls under those same restrictions. So I'm not sure
how beneficial it may or may not be in the event of a public health emergency, depending on what that
is. All right. I'm going to look to Councilor Henry first.
I feel as though this is a count line because this unfortunately dates back to my time in the department.
So a lot of what I recall using this for had to be if we had to pay for services to isolate an individual
that had, say, tuberculosis that was not cooperative with isolation and quarantine. Gosh, that's a really
old story Jeff Cockrell and I worked on 18 years ago around here. So I guess that's the question.
I mean, the uses of it
Have you identified uses for it? Would it be for things like tuberculosis for Indiana residents? I guess
that's kind of where we are with it, right? Yes, that's essentially kind of where we're at. Yeah. So
what would fall into that category? All right. Anybody else have any questions over here? Counselor
Hawk. Well, I'm just saying, let's say if someone came from Illinois because maybe they're not giving
them their
public health services, so they go, well, let's go to Bloomington. We can get it there. Is that what
we want to have happen? Whatever. Anyway, thanks, Bloomington. I think to protect local public health,
that's exactly what I would want to have happen. Madam President. Yes, Councilor Henry. I'll give the
use case for when we used it. I mean, we had an instance where an individual in the community
this was like 2006 or so, had drug-resistant TB or what was thought to be drug-resistant TB, that they
were unable to self-isolate and quarantine because of home situations. The county paid to put them in
the hospital until they cleared sputum to show that they weren't there. During that, it was discovered
that the person had a warrant for their arrest in Florida. So to answer the counselor's question, yeah,
they weren't a resident of Bloomington, but they were
they were a vector in the community that could spread a disease. And that was, to Councilor Wilts's
point, that it doesn't care what state your driver's license is from. And so that was the point of that
behavior years ago. It's just now we have a restriction to ask papers, please, on the disease. And that's
kind of intriguing. But we're off the rails here. Madam President, I just wanted to be clear on it.
Yep. OK. I'm going to look. No, no, no, no.
Nope, no sours. I'm going to look over here to my left to see if anybody has any other questions or
comments. All right. Again, hashtag thanks to Deanna. All right. With that being said, may we please
have a roll call vote? Councilor Wilts? Yes. Councilor Henry? Yes. Councilor Hawke? Thanks, Bella Bankton.
Yes. Councilor 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.
The discussion, the obvious is being like, this is not an easy job. And so disease knows no form or
boundary or status or whatever the case is, much like has been discussed. So we appreciate all the things
that you all are trying to accomplish. Again, we know that coming back to the larger budget topic at
hand, there's some things that we need to finesse. And I know that your liaisons are on that with y'all.
I appreciate you sitting here and going through this discussion with us. And now you get to go home.
Thank you. Have a great night. May you have the night you deserve, which is a good one. All right. That
being said, we are 19 seconds under. And so I do think that at this time, it is much more intent to
have a little bit of a recess right now.
I'm going to say we come back at 640. Because I know y'all never come back on time when I ask. So if
we could come back at 640 and then we can finish out the evening and maybe have a little bit of daytime
left to enjoy. So again, come back at 640 and we will be back. Thank you.
So we are going to go ahead and get started and jump back into some of the final items that we are going
to go through on budget. And next up on the agenda is the, I was wondering where that came from. It
sounded like a slow burn. All right.
So next up on the agenda is the auditor's office. That's going to be on the record. Council, I move
to open for discussion and review Fund 1000-0002 General Fund with a category request of $1,122,171
in the personnel line, $0 in the supply lines, $133,000 in the services line, and $0 in the capital
for a total of $1,225,171. Second. You said 225. I'm sorry, let me amend that for a total budget of
$1,255,171. I'll second. All right, we got a motion and a second. And I know our auditor is virtually,
but we have Carly Woodruff here.
I'm just gonna look to see who would be able to present. And it looks like Carly is smiling, so tag your it.
All right, so we have our general fund budget here. We tried to keep it pretty flat. We did implement
the salary changes that were suggested. We did increase postage just a little. We do pay for the postage
for the claims countywide, and we did have to transfer some appropriation to those lines this year.
So we'd like to increase that by about $2,000 to be able to support the expenses associated with mailing
those claims out.
Thank you. And see a hand raise, Councilor Iverson. Let's start in your ones. Am I addressing this to,
I guess, to you, or? Oh, yeah. OK. That was confusing. All right. The part timeline, that's been pretty
consistent for the past three budgets. How many part time employees do you have in your office? We have
one part time employee. OK, all right. Thanks.
anybody else have any questions for the auditor's office. So I have a quick question and then I'll go
to Councilor Fido. You said that you or y'all increased for a postage and you do claims. Could that
mean that other departments that also possibly do claims, could they run postage through you all as well?
They don't have access to our postage meter code. So any postage that is paid for by our office is run
by our office. Now, if we have another department that submits a claim and those checks do need to be
mailed out, we would mail a claim out on behalf of the department. Okay, that makes sense. Okay,
thank you. And then Councilor Vidal. So bear with me if I've not been here before and understand what
this is for, but what is the contractual in the
3,000 or 3,0006 line. What is that for? We have multiple contractual vendors. One of them is TMA and
they will investigate nationwide tax credits and deductions that
are basically duplicated or not eligible for the person who's applied for them. And if they find that
somebody has applied for a deduction that they should not have, then we pay them 30% of that amount
that we recoup and the county gets to keep their remainder. So the more that we spend in that contract,
the more the county gets. I see. Does anybody else have any questions?
Just as a reminder, the revenue that comes in for that is budgeted in another line, another fund. Let
me get there.
Yes. Auditors in eligible deduction fund. Yes, and I apologize. I can go further into other contracts
that we have. We have a Hartman and Williams contract that is for our gap compilation that is required
of us by the state. We also have Sidewell and they deal with the parcel fabric integration.
And then the last contract is going to be Baker Tilly. They're assisting us with ARPA regulation, making
sure that we're staying compliant there. Right now, the majority of that contract is budgeted in the
ARPA fund, but we wanted to make sure not to over-obligate that project so the auditor was able to move
some of that into their budget if we were to exceed what is appropriate in ARPA. So the FSG is not funded
in this line at all?
I don't hurt yourself. FSG is through the council's budget. And commissioners because I think they have
a contract for bond purposes. Okay. Okay. So it's budgeted into two departments, us and commissioners.
Got it. Councilor Iverson. You have a new account line in 17-7-9-3 for an alphabet soup.
It's for GASB and GAP. So first of all, what is that line? And second of all, why is that important
for the county to have this supplemental?
I don't quote me because this is more in Bree's wheelhouse, but I believe this is a supplemental paid
out to the auditor for getting the gap compilation together. Again, this is not my wheelhouse, so if
I have misspoke here, I'm sure Bree would be happy to follow up with a correct answer to that. That
sounds accurate to me, and this is important for us to have accurate books.
Yes and there are certain parameters that Monroe County needs as to why we need to file a gap report.
I believe it deals with size and what I was going to say is for 2025 there was a change in I believe
a statute or something like that where the auditor can only receive a supplemental with regards to being
the clerk for the
for the council and that maximum was $2,500. So in order to keep her in parity with the clerk, council
made a decision after budgets had been approved to create a line called Gatsby Gap Supplemental. So
the original amount was in the
the clerk's supplemental part of 5,000, but then once the year started, it was divided up. So you don't
see it as the adopted amount, but it was in-house transferred. And this was a decision in order to keep
that $5,000 in parity with the clerk who also receives a supplemental for her additional duties throughout
the year with the voter registration, as well as clerking different
excuse me, along with the election fund and voter registration. Thank you. Anybody else have any questions?
No. Councilor Hawk. So does that show when you're looking at the salaries, does that show that the auditor receives
whatever it shows on the salary line. And then this is a supplemental, does it show that way? So that
if the public wants to say, how much does the auditor make? What's her salary? Would that show up? So
it would... Yes, we have it set up in payroll so that she receives her salary amount and then
the supplementals come out of these two different lines.
So it is set up that way via through AOD payroll. Okay. Any other questions? All right. Seeing none,
may we please have a roll call vote? Councilor Hawk? Councilor Crosley? Yes. Councilor Iverson? Yes.
Councilor Decker? Yes. Councilor Feidl? Yes. Councilor Wilts? Yes.
Potion passes six zero. Okay, next up is item B. Council, I move to open for discussion and review fund
1181-0000 Platte Book Fund with category requests of personnel at $0, supplies at $500, services and
capital each at $0 for a total of $500. Second. Okay, and what do you, this is a pretty simple button,
but what would you like to add to this?
I just want to note that this is a record-keeping fund. We do bring in money by charging legal description,
even plat fees of $10 per item. All right. Any questions? Councilor Hawk. Yes. Can you share with us
what the balance is in there right now? Because we used to put, tried to put other things in that fund.
So is that, does it have a low balance?
right now the cash balance is just over 80,000. I believe that money is being reserved to digitize some
of our records. Over here to my left, see if anybody has questions. All right, anybody else? All right,
and seeing none virtually, may we please have a roll call vote? Councilor Huck? Yes. Councilor Crosley?
Yes. Councilor Iverson?
Councilor Decker? Yes. Councilor Feith? Yes. Councilor Wilts? Yes. Motion passes 6-0. All right, next
up is item C. Council, I move to open for discussion and review Fund 1216-0000, Auditor's Ineligible Fund.
with category requests of personnel at $82,353, supplies at $21,000, services at $138,500, capital at
$0 for a total budget of $241,853. Second. All right. And what would you like to add to this?
This is our auditors and eligible fund that is used to, um, we received that money in the TMA and our
property side through investigative work, um, fines whenever those deductions are applied that should
not be applied. And again, we have the contractual line in here that does share the expenses of TMA
and other contracts. All right.
Councilor Hawk. Okay, I'd like to know the balance and how much the last year's revenue was in there
because I thought we believed that this revenue was going to be coming down over time. At first, there
was a lot more because there were more people that were not aware of what the rules were.
That's a nice way of putting it. But so I'm just wondering how much of this has been spent down and
where we are now. The current cash balance is just over $504,000. When we started 2025, the cash balance
was almost $268,000. Oh, but right now, it's
over 504,000. Thank you. So I'll go. I'll come back to Councilor Wills, but I saw Councilor Decker had
his hand up. Yeah, I don't want to interrupt the train of thought, but I'm just looking at that contractual
line and it looks like we had a big spike
Was it 2 years ago? We had a yeah, big spike in the budget for 2 years ago, but it looks like. The spend
is lower and then it looks like we went down and I I'm not suggesting that I just trying to figure that
out a little bit more on contractual. We typically spend out of one fund for all our contractual expenses
and then switch over to another fund so.
whenever you can look at contractual expenses, you'd have to look at both funds together. All right,
thank you. Council votes. So I'm wondering if then more of the contractual could be moved to this fund
to alleviate that line in the general fund.
if it's only for one year and spend it down. It does make sense. I can consult with the auditor. I do
believe that this fund is under her. I can consult with the auditor. Should we just put a little pen?
Yeah, I'm writing it all down. Thanks. So the idea is to potentially move the contractual
which is 3-0-0-0-0-6. 3-0-0-0-6. No. We're moving from general, though. That would be from general into
this particular line I am. OK. OK. So I'll make a note of that, Giselle. That one is in contractual,
and the general is 125.
$125,000. And I did... No, go ahead. I did just receive a note from the auditor that we can move some
of our contractual expenses into this fund, but the funding is slowing down, so we do want to be aware
of that. Okay, but Council, I think, I think it was Council Hock that said that, but even if we did
it for a year,
and possibly move it back for 27. That's something that would help with that balance there. Okay.
I think, yes. I thought I saw Councilor Decker had his hand up. I did, and I don't know if this is germane
here, but it could be for further consideration. I know that we, the question about FSG a second ago,
where that was divvied up, it was commissioners and council, if I heard it right. I just think because
long-term finance has, I believe, treasurer is an ex-officio and auditor is an ex-officio, and everybody's
kind of using from that bucket. I think at some point, having that expense divided among the four entities,
I mean, if another's eligible, I don't know, but the reason being is I think that keeps everybody engaging that.
Service and then invested in it and then if they decide they don't want that service. It's not just
council Using it or commissioners using I don't know. That's a long-term thought but I just I to me
Dividing that up among people that actually use it might be a good apportionment of the cost Okay Does
anybody have any
Councilor Prado. So I wondered about the training and travel 30028. I see that looking in the previous
year's expenditures, it hasn't come close to this amount that's being requested. Upped in 2024, but
not 23 and 25.
noticed him. So, Miss Woodard, do you have anything to add to that? We typically try to utilize the
other funds that are available for training and travel. I can definitely talk with the auditor about
her willingness to reduce this. All right, does any Councilor Wolz?
I was not wanting to speak. I was getting ready to vote, I thought that's where we're. I'd like to make
a motion to go ahead and de-appropriate line 30006, general fund auditor. I know we're not there. Okay,
you're throwing me there, okay.
appropriate that whole line by down to zero and then. Increase. The one I guess it's not the appropriate
because it's not really appropriate, but you know what I mean and then increase the. Same line in the
auditors ineligible. By 125,000. Second.
and point of order or clarification. Do we need to open the previous budget to make this amendment?
Yes, we do. Okay. In that case, may I offer a friendly suggestion to your amendment? Yeah, take it over.
That we open for
for discussion and review fund 1000-0002 to accomplish your motion. With a cleaner way before Councilor
Wilts to withdraw her motion and then Councilor Iverson. I think we should do them separate because
as I'm going back and looking at your motion. I agree, yeah. You said
the same line in the auditors and eligible by 125,000. And you're talking about training and travel.
I was talking about training and travel. I'm talking about line 30006. Okay. That's where I kind of,
we were talking training and travel. But regardless, I'm going to withdraw my motion and let Councilor
Iverson take it. I'm also going to withdraw my motion. And I think Madam President, in order to keep
this train moving,
that we get through all of these budgets here for the auditor and if we have time then we can open up
the previous because we have to open up two budgets to do this. So we've got one open now. That's what
I was going to say you've got the auditors and eligible open now make the change now of what you want
it to say. Council I move to set line 3006 contractual
to be an additional $125,000 for a total of $250,000. Second. Okay, we got a motion and a second to
increase this lawn item in the ineligible fund to that amount. Is there any further discussion? All right.
And again, I think the idea of doing this is because of the balance that is in this account. And then
we'll go back. So, all right. I was going to ask, can we, I was about to say all in favor, but then
I realized we can't because I looked at Councilor Deckard's face. So in that case, can we please have
a roll call vote? The roll call vote on the amendment. Correct. So read this side first.
Councillor Deckard? Yes. Councillor Feidl? Yes. Councillor Ivers? Yes. Councillor Crossley? Yes. Councillor
Hawke? Yes. Councillor Wills? Yes. Motion passes six zero. So that motion carries. So that motion, okay.
So then rereading the totals for auditors and eligible.
personnel is 82,353, supplies is 21,000, the services is 263,500 for a total budget of 366,853.
Now the vote. Okay and can we please have a roll call vote for the overall? Councilor Crossley? Yes.
Councilor Iverson? Yes. Councilor Decker?
Yes. Councilor Feidl. Yes. Councilor Wilts. Yes. Councilor Hawk. Thank you. Motion passes 6-0. Okay.
And then do you- We're gonna go backwards. Yes. Council, I move to open for discussion and review Fund
1000-0002 General Fund for an amendment. Second. Second. Okay. All right.
Council, I move to set line 3006 contractual to zero. Council, I heard you, but it wasn't on camera
or on microphone. Second. Okay, thank you. All right, we got a motion and a second to reduce this line
item to zero. And again, for those that might watch this later,
We increased this in the ineligible font, and then just went back to open it up to decrease this to
zero. So a clean move here. All right. Any further discussion on this item? All right. Seeing none,
may we please have a roll call vote? Oh, before we do, our new total. We need to vote on the amendment.
Vote on the amendment first.
I'm just moving ahead. All right, so can we please have a roll call vote on the amendment? Councillor
Iverson. Yes. Councillor Decker. Yes. Councillor Wilts. Yes. Councillor Feidl. Yes. Councillor Hawke.
Yes. Councillor Crossley. Yes. Motion passes 6-0. Okay. And now can we have a new grand total? Yes.
in the auditor's general fund personnel, $1,122,171, no supplies, a new services total of $8,000,
no capital, with a new total for that budget of $1,130,171. Okay. Thank you.
and with us doing a few little housekeeping things here that is no we need to vote no hey yeah that's
right all right so can we please have a roll call vote councillor wilts yes councillor hawke yes councillor
crossley yes councillor iverson yes councillor deckard yes councillor fiddle
yes motion passes six zero okay thank you now we are done with this item so we thank the auditor's office
um and carly you did a wonderful job all right next up which is the final budget item of the night is
our council office council i move to open for discussion and review fund 1000-0061 general fund
with the category requests of personnel at $374,071, supplies at $1,350, services at $350,728, and capital
is at $0 for a total budget of $726,149. Second. All right, we got a motion and a second. I'm gonna
look to Ms. Kim Schill to tell us about the council budget.
Thank you, Council. So earlier this, well, August, I believe, we had a review of this budget. And so
based on what you guys suggested, I reduced and removed in the services category the amount in that.
So I changed that to zero.
And then what I'd like to do then as well, we had always in the past had to pay for the postage with
regards to anything Sophia Travis. So with the auditor's office now paying for all of those claims,
because everything's now going through claims, I'd like to reduce that line down to zero.
I would also like to. We have $100 in the legal notices that was being used prior to us being able to
use Facebook and also posting things.
better on our website. So we would use a legal notice in the papers to say, hey, Sophia Travis grants
are starting. Now we're utilizing the Facebook and we're doing a kickoff meeting, which we've done that
two years now and that seems to really, we've gotten the word out and people are doing that.
have not used that legal notices for a couple years now. So we could reduce that down to zero as well.
I know that there was talk about reducing the BEDC amount. If you do choose to move forward, the dues
for that for next year is $5925. So I would like to recommend to reduce that line to 5925. My one last
thing, which it's totally up to you guys. There was a request to have the Sophia Travis grant up
increased to $250,000. The growth that we would have done normally would have been at $181,000. So that's
the numbers there. If you wish to continue with that or not, I'll let the council talk about and figure
that out. But that's my only recommendations as of now.
I'll gladly go with whatever you guys decide. Okay. Well, I appreciate that. And thank you for giving
us the updates on the reduction. So we appreciate that. Council, do you have any questions? Councilor
Decker, we will go to you since I saw your hand go up first. Thank you very much. I appreciate
the explanation here for items. I'm not quite ready maybe to make a move
officially here on this, but a couple of thoughts I have around line 331, the Sophia Travis grant dollars
and 33032 BDC dollars. I think some, I understand rationale for action on both lines. Pardon me, I'm
losing my voice. But I think a middle of the road
kind of approach here may be a little bit more advisable as we figure out this budget. The move beyond
181 to 250, while always will be needed in the community, I'm not sure that that is a thing that we
can get to. And so I might be looking for a compromise number that doesn't quite go to that quarter
of a million.
there at the same time, I don't know on the BDC line that we necessarily, because of the financial
circumstances, need to take that just down to the membership level. And so there may be a medium approach
there as well. And I just kind of throw that out to council as kind of where my thoughts are at this
point. Okay, thank you. Councilors, I'll go down the line here. Councilor Feidl, and then I'll go to
Councilor Wilts.
So I too am concerned about the BEDC. I see that we have quite a long history of being at the 35, well,
at least a few years from what I'm seeing here. These are the number. I'm budgeting it, but it hasn't
been paid. Oh, I see, I see, I see. Well, it looks like it was paid in 2023. And then this shows,
was paid, right? Expended in 2023? Am I looking at that right? It wasn't expended back then, so I don't
know what that's about. I don't know what really happened. Anyway. Oh, anyway.
I think BEDC is very valuable. I have some history besides this council with BEDC. And I think that
they do a great job working with businesses to come into our community and provide jobs and that sort
of thing. So I would be remiss in not mentioning, I'd like to keep it. Councilor Woltz. So I wanna comment
on both Sophia Travis grant line and BEDC.
I do not think that given our situation and our needs, dire needs to make cuts, that we can have Sophia
Travis grants increase as much as we would like. I think we should return to the normal pace of increase,
which would be the 181.
and I think for BEDC, my intent when working on the tax abatement and including a payment to BEDC part
of those terms was to then take it out of our budget because it has been so controversial and knowing that we
are looking to cut things. So my intent was to cut it down to just our dues. The 59, 25, I didn't know
the total. And it's not because I don't support BEDC. I fought for this to put it in place. I 100% support
it. I just, you know,
that we need to make cuts, just like we're asking everyone else to. Well, and I was going to say real
quick, not so much controversial in terms of who BEDC is, because I think it's been controversial in
the way that council has had it budgeted and how it has been stifled to not been paid due to opinions
from other folks here.
None of us on this side of the dais, but maybe up there. But that being said, yeah, so not controversial
in our thought process. Because I do think that all of us definitely support the BDC. And I know your
idea when we were going through the abatement was to be able to kind of negotiate that part into it.
So yes, Councilor Vidal.
So I would like to know, I remember the abatement and that supported that very well, but I would like
to know when that becomes effective. Is that for next year's budget? Would the abatement be paid then
paying that amount in 2026 or do we still need to pay this until the abatement kicks in? When does the
abatement, the 30,000 or 40 or whatever it was kick in?
The abatement starts in 2026, but I do think I would look to council and if Ms. Turner King doesn't
have that information, we should ask Mr. Cockrell about the exact timing, but it looks like she's looking
stuff up frantically. Not frantic, fervent. She's fervent. I'll go with that.
I'm not seeing the date in the tax abatement or the resolution, and I keep looking. I do know Mr. Cockrell's
out of the office until Monday, and so I'll keep looking, and if not, I'll ask him on Monday and get
back to you. All right, does anybody else, Councilor Iverson? I'm gonna put in my quick two cents on
both of these topics.
we cannot talk about Sophia Travis service grant without talking about Cheryl Munson. If she was sitting
here, I'm sure she would have said we need to do everything we can, particularly given what's happening
in our economy. And so I, at the same time, am really worried about the numbers presented at the top
of this meeting. And so I think we retain the spirit of what
Councilmember Munson would want to do. At the same time, understanding the realities of where we're
at by keeping with the 4% maximum living growth quotient in this fund. Once we return to healthier economic
times, I'd love to push the gas pedal on this. In terms of BEDC, I certainly want to defer to Councilmember
Deckard on this as he is the liaison.
to that organization, and I certainly think that he's got his pulse on that pretty well. So if Councilmember
Deckard has a compromise number in mind, it would be a good time to utter that. However, if not, I can
come up with one as well. Thank you. Yeah, the only thing that I would add to the conversation,
I've been on council now for about four, almost four years in December. And so I have time supply when
you're having fun. Um, and I've been fortunate enough to be on Sophia Travis that entire time and I
chaired this
And so we haven't heard our presentations yet, but I can only imagine that the dire need from inflation
and all the other things that have increased. We will hear those in those budget presentations or in
those, those proposals that we'll hear here soon.
I will take Councilor Deckard up to task in trying to figure out a compromise, because I do recall us
trying to think how we can get to that level or try to, I know we do the quotient levying, we try to
follow that every year, but I would like to see how we could do that also at the same time, knowing that
We also are asking other departments to make sure like how they can cut and do certain things as well.
So this isn't fun for any of us, including, you know, in our backyard with our council budget. So I
think I'm willing to look at some things here and wanna go, I hear what people are saying. I really
would like for us to see how we could do that.
Heck, I would really like to see how, in the spirit of collaboration, not certain how this would happen,
how we could put grant funding together with other entities as well. So I think that's something that
we can talk about for future years. But for now, in 26, I'm willing to kind of go back to the drawing
board and think what would be if we can increase it or if we still go with the,
the growth quotient, which is the 4% this year, which is the 181. So willing to think about that. And
I see Councilor Deckard's hand is up again. Yeah, Madam President, if you would be willing, since we
do have to come back to several different budget lines, I specifically would like to do some further
homework on those two line areas, bring it back to a public meeting, and then I would be happy to offer
that motion if other
for both lines on some either compromise or if someone wants to divide the question, but I'd be happy
to do that so that we're moving it expeditiously. I appreciate that. And again, everything we do tonight
is not final. All right. Are there any other questions related to the council budget as presented?
on the first two zeros. Oh, yes, but we do have some amendment. Yes. Yeah. I'm looking at you, counselor.
Go ahead. All right, counsel, I move to set line three zero eight zero zero postage to zero dollars.
Okay. All right. We got a motion in a second. And again, this was something that Michelle has suggested
to us. So we are thankful for that suggestion there.
Every little bit helps. So any other further discussion on this item? Seeing none, can we please have
a roll call vote? Councilor Decker? Yes. Councilor Wilts? Yes. Councilor Iverson? Yes. Councilor Crossley?
Yes. Councilor Hawk?
saying yes or no for the record. Thank you. Councillor Feidl. Motion passes or yes 6-1. All right and
my final motion of the night is to set line or this budget is to set line 3-2-0-0-5 legal notices to
zero dollars. Second.
All right, we got a motion and a second. And again, that's what was discussed earlier. Are there any
other further discussion that is needed on this item? All right, seeing none, may we please have a roll
call vote? Councilor Iverson? Yes. Councilor Decker? Yes. Councilor Feidl? Yes. Councilor Wilks? Yes.
Councilor Hawk. Councilor Crosley. Yes. Motion passes five one. Okay. And I don't see any other. Oh,
hey, Councilor Wilts has her hand waving. Totally will respect Councilor Deckard's wish to do more homework
and come up with numbers. I would encourage us to remember
time is of the essence. I know we're not finalizing things tonight, but after this week, we really do.
We have to take action on these things that we've just talked about. And we're just setting ourselves
up for a really long night ahead at a different time.
because we have pushed so many things off and I'm just expressing that that makes me a little uncomfortable
and I hope that we can be really expedient with decision making and then motions and voting because
we'll have a lot of it to do since we put so much of it off. Sam. Yes, Councilor Hawk.
All along with that, I think we need to look at the big ticket items, big, big, because we're not going
to fix this with 20 bucks here or a thousand there. And nobody likes to make unpleasant decisions.
But that's what we get paid the big bucks for. We've got to do it. I don't know if it's big bucks.
But yes, absolutely. So again, as we hear Councilors Hawken and Wilts, definitely, I think we all share
that same sentiment. So I guess the task for all of us is after tomorrow, tomorrow's our last night
of budget, we've really got our work cut out. So any
extra time that we have or don't have, I would highly recommend us getting that extra time and really
kind of going back at each, looking at each and everything that we have discussed, talked about, and
really trying to look at some of the big items that could be come or could cut down. So, yes, I almost
called you Councilor Schell. Michelle. That's okay. So just as a reminder,
Yes, we do have a meeting tomorrow. That has typically been a longer meeting, and we've always had time
to be able to go back and open and talk about budgets and this kind of thing. With that being said,
we do have a meeting on September the 16th. It's a regular council meeting, and so we can also address
some of those concerns at that September 16th meeting,
Following tomorrow's meeting, we are going to, with the help of the auditor, give you an update of where
we stand after all of these budget sessions. So we'll do that. And then hopefully you guys can make
some of these hard decisions at the September 16th meeting. Because we then have to roll everything
into Gateway the 17th, which is the next day. So we have to have some decisions by the 16th.
All right, and I see Councilor Decker has his hand up. Thank you very much. I wanna add to the hard
decisions that we have to make is I think that the council has to determine if the resolution on minimum
balances that we passed with those numbers at 23 million or between 15 and 23 million,
If we can continue to afford that when that was passed under a different iteration of how things function.
A couple of counselors have heard me say this more than a few times. We've got
rainy day funds that we've set aside for things. I'm not sure what qualifies as raining, but we have
those, right? We've been through a pandemic, we had those. On top of that, we've got these high, high
minimum thresholds. And I know that according to good housekeeping rules, that means that we feel really
good about all this pad. But the issue is we're starting now to get into cuts that are now beginning
to eliminate
services. We're having debates over what this is and what that is. And I don't know that anyone in the
community subscribed to their dollars to make government a bank. And the state may have the leisure
to hold on to dollars, but I don't think a lot of counties do. And so you got to ask yourself after
a while, if you're making a rainy day and a pad for your rainy day and a pad for your general budget, what
What are you doing there? Are you running old national bank or are you running a government? And I think
that we have to have a serious talk about that because it would be nice. It'd be nice to do that.
but you can't say, I cut this service so that I feel better about my ledger or conversely down the road,
I went to people for more tax dollars so I feel good about my ledger. And I say that with all due respect,
you just can't have that conversation with a straight face from the Village Inn to the East side of
Bloomington. So that has to be part of this discussion because I think that's flying past us.
I just want also want to remind us we have one more item left for council and we need to vote overall
but before we do that we'll need to get a new total. For the county council's general fund budget personnel
three seven three hundred and seventy four thousand zero three hundred and seventy four thousand seventy
one dollars. Supplies
1,350 services, a new 350,000 for a total budget of $725,971. I can't talk tonight. Okay. And so that
we've all heard our new grand total. And so may we have a roll call vote? Councilor Crosley? Yes. Councilor
Iverson? Yes. Councilor Deckard?
Yes. Councilor Feidl? Yes. Councilor Wills? Yes. Motion passes 5-0. Okay. Just to note for the record
Councilor Hock left the meeting. All right and next up is the last item which is item B. Council I move
to open for discussion and review fund 1186-0000 rainy day fund.
with a category requests of $0 in the personnel line, supplies at $1 million, services at a million
dollars, capital at a million dollars for a total budget of $3 million. Second. All right, thank you.
We got a motion and a second. Michelle, what do you have to add to this? This is what we call rainy
day, which is our savings. We have,
budgeted per recommendation from our financial person FSG to set aside at least a million dollars in
each category in the hopeful not to be used you know state of emergency when we have used all of our
other funds
with regards to a disaster or an emergency that has occurred into the county. So this is just being
budgeted as a precaution for a, what if it happens kind of scenario. Okay. Am I mistaken? Cause I'm
looking at this now. I thought because of the tornado that we had earlier this year, that emergency
management dipped into. Nope. We, we had it ready, but they were able to utilize all of their funds. Okay.
Good job. Yep. Okay. All right. Anybody else have any questions on this item? Councilor Wilt. What's
the cash balance on this? Like, what do we have in here? I was thinking it was around 10 million, but
current cash balance is $10,177,000. 171? 77. Thank you. I'm sorry, that is 117. 117. My apologies.
117. Got it. OK. So we have $10 million in rainy day. And I think that's a good thing. Think about,
I know that in the past, we have used it
In fact, the line's still there for paving. And I think very healthy rainy day fund. So I still am very
much in favor of trimming the current budget. I like the idea of cash balances being in place for after we've
all the other measures. But thank you for the balance. Yes. So I wonder if there's a way to find out
what other counties in Indiana might be doing do the if they have a rainy day fund based on the size
population we have or that sort of thing or the size budget they have or maybe both. It's a way to figure
that out. We could definitely inquire
That would be a good metric to look at. What are other counties doing, right? I mean, we don't have
to reinvent the wheel. Are they keeping 10 million around or how are they doing thinking about that?
Thank you. Okay. Anybody else have any other questions? Councilor Iverson. I feel like I need to speak.
This is a very healthy balance and we've already heard voices saying that we're supposed to keep this
for an emergency rainy day.
some people feel like it's raining. And so we need to take all that into account as we move forward.
But I certainly think that Councilmember Wilts is spot on here. We need to go through the motions. We
need to make cuts where we need to make cuts because the importance is that the hands that have dealt
us this blow is going to be here for the next three years. In addition,
We are just now seeing the national economy start to downturn if it gets worse. That's an if. I'm not
saying that economy is going to get even worse. If it does get worse, we're going to need things in
place in the next two to five years. Understood. All right. So.
Seeing no further question or comments on this particular item, may we please have a roll call vote?
Councilor Feidl? Yes. Councilor Wilts? Yes. Councilor Crossley? Yes. Councilor Iverson? Yes. Councilor
Deckard? Yes. Motion passes 5-0.
thank you and so that is all the business that we have for night five of our budget work sessions again
we have our final budget session which is tomorrow september 11th at five o'clock and that one will
be a long one so i hope that we are all to task we all heard all the things and all the
Burdensomes. Heshek thanks Indiana that we have to do. And so I think we are up to task forward. Again,
it's just the idea of having us be in this position to begin with. And so I just ask for all of us to
come ready over tomorrow, the 16th and beyond to think about what else we need to do, because there's
definitely some go backs.
With that being said, I appreciate everybody's thoughts and intentions for tonight. And we are in recess
until tomorrow, September 11th. Thank you. Have a good night.