Good evening, everybody. And welcome to the 2026 budget work session, night one. Today is Tuesday, August 26, 2025. And in the NETU Hill Room, we have all seven counselors present for our first 2026 budget work sessions.
 Next up, we will have the adoption of tonight's agenda. Everybody has had this for a while and you also have it in front of you. Would anybody like to make any changes to tonight's agenda? All right, seeing none.
 And because we are all present, we just need a motion to adopt tonight's agenda. I move to adopt this evening's agenda. Second. All right. Got a motion and a second. All those in favor of adopting today's agenda as presented signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed, same sign. All right. Motion carries. All right. As we start off tonight's well, or
 budget session. I just want to go over some procedures for this evening.
 All the departments of Monroe County government will be coming forth over several days over the next few weeks to present your agenda, your 2026 budget session. As we are having that be presented to the council, I would like to remind every department that you should have already received directions of your time limits. So we ask all because we have
 Again, three weeks of budget session. We want to be very mindful of the time that everyone has.
 your each department will have up to a certain time frame. Your time will be shown on the screens here in the night you heal room or be a teams if you have to join virtually. And I'm going to have our council pro tem and counselor Iverson help us with the time. So if your time is up, we will politely tell you that your time is up. So that gives us a chance to proceed with questions from the council.
 And I want to, as I'm saying that to department heads, as council members, I want us to make sure that we are sticking to the topic of budget. So if there is any questions, comments, or concerns that does not necessarily have anything to do with the budget that is being presented to us, then I will kindly interject and say that that is something that could be answered during another work session
 of the council. So again, I want to be respectful of everyone's time, and I want us to make sure that we are sticking to task and staying on task, because we have a lot of stuff to go over with the upcoming budget season. All right. Also wanted to say during the department's review that you may be asked to explain any increases, decreases, or additions to their 2025 budget.
 and council members also will be asking questions of the department as well. Any council member may can make recommendations to increase or decrease account lines based on the discussion and or the need of the department and then council will vote to approve moving forward with the department's review budget as requested or as
 budget request. Again, this is not the final approval of the budget, but it is a recognition of the request presented or amended by Council.
 With that being said, let us go ahead and get started on this night. So I'm going to look over to the auditor Brie Gregory for her overview of revenues, expenditures for the 2026 season.
 Excellent, thank you. Good evening, everyone. You received via email and also have a nice binder in front of you full of all kinds of revenue information, everything we provided related to the cash balance revolution, geo bond review, self insurance information, the maximum levy worksheet.
 So any questions about that, please do let us know. This is available for the public on the calendar. It's under auditor documents. The only items not included are like internal working documents like that Max Levy cheat sheet and a couple other things just like that. So just some general notes. We do have
 deficit budget the total anticipated revenue for 2026 is 127 million 655 dollars while we have total requested budget of about 137 million so a deficit of about 9.4 million that we need to address so we know that due to legislative changes this was going to be revenue was going to be an issue so we just
 need to be as conservative as possible. Consider cuts, consider prioritization of projects, et cetera. You know, you've had that pack pause in place, just things like that to really continue to benefit the county financially. And anywhere we can cut, utilize still funds, for example, that would be ideal.
 so as we go through budget by budget Carly and I intend to provide some recommendations if you wish for us to do so and I'm happy to help any way we can. Okay thank you very much and I'm going to look to council to see if anybody has any questions for Ms. Gregory. Thank you very much for putting together this this is really awesome and I definitely love myself some some binders because I did my own for
 budget season. So anybody have any questions for the auditor before we proceed? Please note, we did not purchase these binders. We already had them in supplies. All the way of saving. Look at that. All right. So if no one has any other further questions for the auditor, then we will go ahead with the first department that will be present in their budget, which is the legal department.
 Council, I move to open for discussion and review fund 1-000-0277 County General Legal with a category request of personnel $701,618, supplies $1,145, services $102,926, capital $0 for a total budget of $805,689.
 second all right we got a motion and a second um and uh for t s d to just as a reminder to put the timer up for us to see and we have mr dave schillen welcome thank you very much go ahead and proceed thank you dave schilling from the legal department uh the 26th budget that we're presenting uh in the uh office supply and services category is the same same amounts as last year's budget
 The only changes are in the personal salaries lines. Those were increased in the amount authorized by council. And we had longevity increase due to three bump ups in service. And we have one salary increase due to a bump up in the salary scale. And otherwise, it's the same as last year.
 Okay, thank you very much. And looking over here to my left to see if anybody has questions on the legal budget. Councillor waltz. Given the, and I'm looking in litigation, because that's where we have a hard time predicting, and we frequently see a need for an additional appropriation.
 that prudent. I'm not suggesting that we raise any lines. I'll just say that. But is $30,000 realistic in? Well, based on the five year average, yes. The last couple of years have been pretty brutal. And in fact, I'm going to be in front of you soon with another request for an appropriation. But a couple of these expensive
 lawsuits that we've been involved in, I think are gonna wind down this year. And so I'm hopeful that we'll be okay with the 30,000, but I'm always happy to come in front of you and ask for more money and keep you informed about what's going on. And that was a burning question that I had too. So thanks, Councillor Wiltshire. All right, Councillor Irving.
 So this is the first budget that we've had and so one of the things that folks may notice is that in the ones which is the personnel lines The 2026 requested budget is a little bit higher than 2020 25 adopted budget because we baked in the the cola Am I reading that correctly Kim shell that is correct. So when when we're saying we're gonna keep all lines flat across a
 all that we are we're already working to invest in our employees in this way so I just wanted to point that out just as you're the first all right thank you all right looking down here to see if anybody else has any questions counselor hawk I heard you mention and I did see a brief
 briefly saw an email about an additional appropriation yet this year that you plan to bring forward. Could you share with us again what that dollar amount is? Yes, there would be 85,000. 85,000. I asked that because that means that we'll have to adjust that for be on that. Brianna.
 you'd already changed it or not, but that's something I wanted to ask. Thank you. All right. Anybody? Oh, yes. Counselor Decker. I should ask this as your liaison. I should ask this a long time ago. Remind me of one thing. You probably covered it. When you all do training, you all have as attorneys, you have to do training with your CLEs. Am I saying that right?
 That is correct. We're required to do 12 hours a year on average over a three year period for 36 total hours of CLE. And usually every year we go to the EMLA, the Indian and Municipal Lawyers Association seminars. It's a day and a half. And that eats up most of our seminar budget and gets us nine hours of CLE this year due to scheduling
 None of the attorneys were able to attend, and that's why there's more in the seminar education line than usual. We will need to use that before the end of the year. Thanks. I just wanted to piggyback off of Councillor Iverson's comment. I'm not looking at exactly the same sheet that you are.
 But what I have for the requested 2026 personnel is 701-618. And then the adopted budget from last year is 753-476. So in reality, it's actually less than. And that's because we've taken out some of the self-insurance
 And so I just wanted to, yes, we put in, this is not a question for you, I'm so sorry. This is me clarifying the comment so that I make sure that we're on the same page. So we've baked in a 3% COLA, but we removed from everybody's budget, except for employee services, the self-insurance costs. So that's why yes,
 It's more, but it's showing up as quite a bit less. Thank you for that opportunity. Thank you for pointing that out. All right. Anybody else have any questions or comments for Mr. Schilling? OK. May we please have a roll call vote moving forward with the legal department's budget?
 Councillor Hawke. Just to be clear, this vote is only that we agreed to move forward. Yes, that's what I said. It doesn't mean that I agree with this particular one. I have a problem with the others. I will. That's everything that's happening tonight. That's exactly what we are going to do. All right. Motion on the floor. Please proceed with the vote. Councillor Hawke. Yes. Councillor Deckard. Yes. Councillor Wilts. Yes.
 Councilor Feidl? Yes. Councilor Crosley? Yes. Councilor Henry? Yes. Councilor Iverson? Yes. Motion carries. All right, thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. All right, next up we have employee services. Council, I move to open for discussion and review. Fund 1000-0309 County General Employee Services with the category requests of personnel,
 $8,322,244. Supplies, $1,500. Services, $63,000. And capital, $0. For a total budget of $8,386,744. Second. All right, we got a motion and a second. And we are joined by HR, E. Sinclair and Commissioner Julie Thomas. Welcome. Hello. You may proceed.
 Good evening council similar to the legal department. We have some increases in our personnel lines because of the cola increase and then also we have one employee that's getting a step level increase. And then also a step level for another employee in longevity and then the only other increase we have is a contractual increase with Fred prior in our 2020.
 is increasing incrementally and then we'll see another increase
 And then the big thing that Kate has already alluded to in our budget is much larger than last year because we have accounted for about seven almost $8 million in self insurance for all of the county general departments that we will be sweeping into the self insurance fund. All right.
 And starting off and looking over here to my right to see if anybody wants to start off and ask any questions. Council, I understand. So I think the biggest burning question that we all have is probably twofold. Number one is we came up with an amount per employee to get to this number. And can you kind of talk us through that? And like, I think we decided it was going to be around the $18,000 level, right?
 Yes that's what we have budgeted for up to this point. I think based on some conversations we had at the long-term finance committee meeting that we might be on the same page with an additional appropriation in 2025 and perhaps reducing that number for the 20 the self-insurance number for 2026 and if so I believe that we could reduce it to 16,000. I think that
 the auditor and Kim Shell agree with that number and what we've discussed. I mean, that is what we are. I can throw that out there. You guys think about it and figure out what you want to do with it. And again, thank you for the binder. We have this in our email as well, which is the analysis of self-insurance. And that additional appropriation is going to be around 1.3. Am I getting that right or am I wrong?
 I just submitted a request yesterday and I will tell you that based on invoices we received from Anthem in August that the additional appropriation request is much higher because our costs in one month alone have increased significantly. So our projections for the rest of the year are higher based on what we're seeing, an upward trend in our claim costs.
 Yeah, if I may, I do. I did not see what the auditor's office provided you because I think they have also done an assessment of the self insurance fund. It's significantly less than than what we anticipate and what we are looking at and what we will be proposing. So, in order to reduce the $18,000 per FTE.
 This year, we are going to need an additional appropriation. I think it's roughly $3 million so that we will end the year ideally with 1.5 million. That's the plan so that that's how we would normally go forward as far as our budgeting is concerned into 2026. Yeah, if I could, that's my apologies. I believe that if I could
 we under budgeted this year, right? So we're looking at increasing that per employee number in 2025 for the remainder, for the rest of the year to account for that shortfall. And that's what, so there's a few additional appropriation, additional requests that are coming your way. All right, I think I kicked this off sufficiently and I'll open up to others. Okay, Council Henry. And we are gonna talk about 4,700 if you need us to,
 separate the conversations, too, because that is on the agenda. Thank you, Madam President. I do want to pick up on this because these are some big numbers. As I understand it, as I just heard it, and I guess about 4,700 maybe we can bring it in. Is it 1.5 million or 3 million? The actuals are closer to 3 million?
 It is. Or is it a cushion? It's a couple different requests that are going to come your way. So it is we're going to fund the cash per employee in county general to sweep into the self-insurance. So we're going to fund, I'm asking, it's a three million dollar appropriation request in employee services self-insurance.
 which accounts for about four, I can't remember the number exactly, but that'll sweep into the self-insurance fund. And then we are going to need an additional appropriation of two and a half million dollars to pay our bills, pay our invoices, our things that we expect to come through the rest of the year. Okay, so that's a pretty significant shortfalls late August, right? So I'm just trying to wrap my head around it. What is the cash balance there right now? I don't know.
 And if they have that but what I can tell you is that ideally if we end each year with $1.5 million and this was a conversation we had, I think that Greg Garrett has had with the long term finance group.
 We should end the year with 1.5. We use that along with the monies that's generated from the upcoming budget to meet our needs along with the premium equivalents that are paid by the employees to pay all of the expenses associated with the health benefits. So I guess maybe my third follow up and then I'll pass the torch is.
 What's the burn rate then? You have an invoice coming in for the month of how much?
 like right now, do we know? We get an invoice bi-weekly, so twice a month. The last one was around, the one we're paying for next week is over $500,000. And the one we paid prior to that was about a million dollars. Our average invoice prior to that was about $250,000. Are these estimates shared with the auditor so we can get like a, I think where I'm going with this is, and what I want to see in the budget,
 period is the ability to forecast a little bit. I know that there's variables and some employees are going to be using more resource than others, but are we sharing the estimates? Is that APEX? Are we sharing the estimates to the auditor or trying to get a forecast of what a year looks like? Because these are huge jumps at the end of the year. We have shared with the auditor. The auditor's office has not been providing us with their
 position on this, because I do know that it's significantly less than what we were proposing. So that's all I can say at this point in time. Madam President, I'm happy to hand it back, but I'd like the auditor, if they could respond to that. I saw the hand waving. So, yes. Historically, we've not been provided any of the documents from APAC side. We have had good communication this year. And you chose to create the, your office chose to create your own spreadsheet. We have been using ours and forecasting based on
 just trending. That's all we have to go on. So it seems to be pretty accurate based on what we're seeing now. That is certainly fine. And I apologize if you did not have the information from apex. I thought that you weren't part of that meeting and conversation regardless. You know, I think that if if you guys want to manage the self insurance fund,
 You know, this has always been a commissioner and HR fund. So it's odd having other people forecasting a fund that has always been under this purview, if you will. And there's a lot of moving parts to that, too. Like we get reports from APEX that we see high claim people on members on the plan that are high claim.
 that are running high, but we might not see that invoice for months and months and months. And so it is like trying to, we are trying to manage that by making some predictions and we use Apex to be able to do that. But it's not, it can't be that precise, right? Yeah, we do the best we can with our crystal ball. And up until this year, I think we have done really well.
 last year we were not prepared for this year correctly. All right I want to make sure because I'm looking at our time here of other council members I'll move to council hawk and then I know this side needs to have questions so I want us to kind of keep to the actual general we're in the general part of this particular budget so council hawk proceed. Yes in your conversation I heard you saying
 that it was for the county general employees. However, I was seeing when I was going through the budgets where, just case in point, Stormwater had said it was gonna be covered. It appeared to me from what I was looking at that it was gonna be covered under this budget. Now, of course, that's not a county general employee. I mean, they have their own separate fund
 It comes in separately, totally. And so I believe there are other employees that are covered that are not County General Fund, Fund 1000, that you have covered in there. And that, I believe, might really be a problem when you're coming to County General for a three
 Perhaps a three million dollar additional appropriation. Now what I would want to make it clear is if the point of doing a three million dollar appropriation is so that you don't have to ask for us high end appropriation for next year. That's counter intuitive because
 If you ask for three million this year, when you look at the four B, it has to be entered in as an additional appropriation, which simply leaves us for less money at the bottom line to operate anyway. So, you know, you may as well have the budget height for next year.
 rather than think you're solving anything to put it to three million this year unless you think you need it to pay bills before the end of the year and that is scary. So then that brings me to the point that what I was seeing and maybe I'm looking at it wrong but it looked to me like there was a lot of other employees put in this fund that is coming to county general for payment
 and it needs to go back into their funds.
 the council office and auditor field that question. I'm just merely doing an administrative task where I've been told to put these numbers in my budget to sweep them into self insurance. The numbers that I got were directly from the 144 is that the department submitted and they were the information that they directed us to where to put their self insurance. But now I'm not. I was not the decision maker and where the self insurance just is going or or. But I think that is one of our big things that we have to work
 out is the insurance is coming from the fund that the general fund is for the employees that are covered under general fund the others have their own funds I'm gonna look over here because we still got again things on employees or this is that we need to go through so anybody have any questions counselor Decker I would just say that once we sort out
 any amount of this that could be reduced for this budget versus whatever would be appropriated this year. I would just recommend that we get whatever that is very clearly for us and not try to do that by the seat of our pants up here because that's how mistakes get made and it keeps our focus off. I also want to say this really quickly. One thing I appreciate that President Crossley did this year and kind of broke the tradition that past counselors had
 was putting cola in here, because I sometimes worry that the old cola games of yesteryear may have led to some of these surprises with additional appropriations in the middle of the year when everybody's trying to rank it together to get to goal. And so I think maybe some of this is seeing getting to goal in the bumps and all that. But I hope that makes sense on the first part, because doing that by the fly here, I don't want us to get it wrong.
 Thank you. Anybody else over here have any questions? Councillor Wilts. So far we've talked very generally and I guess what I'd like, are we, we're on item A.
 So we should be sticking to County General. I've been trying to. Thank you. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. But the 20 minute allotment is just is for A through E. That's what I've been trying to say. I'm sorry. No, you're fine. I would like to take a moment. Yes. With regards to general fund and the number that is in the employee services. Okay. I sent you an email.
 with a document of a breakdown of numbers over the weekend. So, Councillor Hawke asked to see numbers that were broken down by fund that's going to be in general fund. So as you can see, here is the general fund line of and the number of employees that
 we are accounting for in the employee services line, that it totals 443.75 positions, okay? The assessor is inserting one position from sales disclosure. Probation is inserting 30
 positions into general fund. This is due to the lack of sustainability within their user fee funds. And they have dramatically cut their user fee funds as well. And then and that's it. So there's a total of an additional 31 positions within general fund.
 Councilor Hawk was saying something with regards to stormwater. Stormwater has 12.25 positions that they are budgeting within their stormwater fund with regards to self-insurance. There are additional nine positions when we finally get to it in the highway where the highway has double budgeted nine positions within that general fund budget.
 That's the breakdown for general funds. So with the general fund, we have 443.75 positions, which is going to cost that amount of money. Yes. And I was just going to say that we did catch an error in our number earlier today. And so that number is slightly different if you need me to address that some way. What did we budget for? I'm going to pull the screen here.
 Thank you. I have the numbers if you need them. Yeah. In the budget itself, they have requested $7,947,000 in self-insurance when it actually should be $7,987,000. And that was due to an error found within the Surveyor's Department. There was an error there. Sorry. It should be actually $7,947,000.
 million nine eighty seven five hundred five hundred sorry so there we do need to make that correction if we choose to move forward with those additional positions within the general fund so okay and so the number again was seven million nine hundred eighty seven five hundred okay yeah right there all right
 So council, let me amend my motion in the personnel lines. That new number is $8,362,744 in the supplies is still 1,500 and services still 6,300 for a total budget now of $8,427,244. Like when that happens.
 Let me let me ask you a question on the Fred prior training here. Is there a level lower if we'd have to go like tearage for 55,000? You get this amount for 25,000. You get a different amount. Is there is there any option there if we would have to to go lower at that level? I have some know our contract. It's laid out what our our annual amount is, and it just so happens to be that.
 like it's increasing year over year, three year contract. They're all or none? It's based on the way that we're utilizing it. We certainly could have a higher plan where we're getting some additional services from them, but this is for the software and the content that's housed within that software per employee. Okay, and I just realized,
 Councilor Iverson amended that and we didn't get a second. So, okay. So we got a motion and a second on the amended item as presented. All right. So no further discussion on this. We got to move on because we are now way past time. Can we please have a roll call vote on this item? We need a vote on the amendment first. That's right. Okay.
 just kidding all right with the amendment since all are here you can do a voice vote okay so all those that are in favor of the amended motion signify by saying aye aye all those opposed same sign all right thank you very much now can we have a roll call vote on this item okay so there is a um this is uh to amend
 the employee services. Budget as stated by counselor Iverson with the total category amount being eight million four twenty seven two forty four. So then counselor wilts. Yes counselor Henry.
 Yes. Councillor Wilts. Councillor Fiddle said yes. So the motion passes six to one. Okay. Before we move on from this, does someone would like to make a motion
 to be able to reduce the self-insurance amount from 18 to the recommended 16? Is that what you're going with or? I would wait until maybe the final hearing because there looks like there's confusion. I think that's particularly given the flurry of emails that came in this afternoon. I think there needs to be time to digest.
 I just wanted to make sure before we moved on from this fund. Thanks. All right. Moving on to item B.
 Council I move to open for discussion and review fund one one one four dash zero three zero nine lit special purpose employee services with the category requests of personnel six hundred seventy six thousand nine hundred eighty dollars supply is zero dollars services zero dollars and capital zero dollars for a total budget of six hundred seventy six thousand nine hundred eighty dollars. All right we got a motion and a second. Go ahead. I think I'm
 to talk about the self-insurance amount so we're budgeting this is in 1215 is that what you said oh sorry I which this is one for one one one one four eleven fourteen so this is there's thirty seven point six one employees out of courts probation and ysb with their self-insurance amount in this fund all right any questions or comments to my left
 on this item. Anybody on my right have any questions? Council Hawk, is that a hand raise? Yes. Okay, go ahead. I did speak with YSB and I remember the number was 673 or something like that. Is that right? 670 under YSB. And I think that was, are you looking at it or do you want me to try to find it?
 I only, I have, in this fund, I don't have it broken out. I mean, I could get you the number broken out, but this is a total number for the employees and courts probation in YSB. Okay, so that was my question, the, was being sent to that special purpose fund. Is that for more employees than, covering more employees than,
 what is normally covered in that probation portion, or is there also a separate one that is in YSB that is not a part of the PSLIT? I mean, for the employees of the YSB, there should be, there's separate charge for their self-insurance. And then, it's up to me like you were,
 having something separate for the probation officers. So again, referring back to that chart that I sent out for the special purpose fund, courts has 2.25 people within that special purpose fund. Probation has 10 personnel, which are
 paid out of special purpose and then YSB has twenty five point three six personnel for a total of thirty seven point sixty one for six hundred seventy six nine eighty okay that's that's the answer to my question okay because that dollar amount uh that six seventy whatever it is covers the employees of YSB not just that that was my question it
 Anybody that's being paid out of Special Purpose Lit are included within that self-insurance account line. All right. So that answered Councilor Hawks' question. Anybody else on this side have any other questions? All right. And can we please have a roll call vote on this item?
 Councillor Cronin. Councillor Iverson. Yes. Councillor Deckard. Yes. Councillor Feidl. Yes. Councillor Wilkes. Yes. Councillor Henry. Yes. Councillor Hawke. Yes. Motion passes unanimous. And then me. Okay. The question about the insurance. Insurance, we can get to that when we get to the insurance part. We're going to move on to the public safety. So item C.
 Council I move to open for discussion and review fund one one one four dash zero three zero nine public safety lit employee services with a category request of personnel four hundred fifty four thousand five hundred dollars supply zero services zero capital zero for a total budget of four hundred fifty four thousand five hundred dollars second
 All right, go ahead. Yeah, and this is the same situation for 25.25 employees out of fleet, jail, probation, prosecutor, and sheriff. All right, anybody have any questions on this item? All right, seeing none, may we please have a roll call vote on this?
 Councilor Iverson? Yes. Councilor Deckard? Yes. Councilor Feidl? Yes. Councilor Wilts? Yes. Councilor Henry? Yes. Councilor Hawk? Yes. Councilor Crossley? Yes. Motion passes unanimous. All right. Item D, election fine.
 Council I move to open for discussion and review fund one two one five dash zero three zero nine election fund employee services with the category requests of personnel fifty four thousand dollars supplies zero dollars services zero dollars capital zero dollars for a total budget of fifty four thousand dollars second
 This is three employees out of the election fund for the clerk's office for their self-insurance. But looking around here and to my left, seeing if anybody has any questions? No. To my right? No. All right. Can we please have a roll call vote on this item? Councilor Decker? Yes. Councilor Feidl? Yes. Councilor Wilts? Yes. Councilor Henry?
 Yes. Councillor Hawk. Yes. Councillor Crossley. Yes. Councillor Iverson. Yes. Motion passes unanimous. All right. Next up is item E which is self insurance.
 Council I move to open for discussion and review fund forty seven hundred zero zero zero zero self insurance with the category requests of personnel zero dollars supply zero dollars services eleven million three hundred five thousand five hundred dollars capital zero dollars for a total budget of eleven million three hundred five thousand five hundred dollars second all right we got a motion and a second go ahead
 like we've kind of already talked about this a little bit so if you have additional questions related to self-insurance and look to my right because I know counselor Hawk had one so go ahead my assumption is this dollar amount includes all those extra people that's been put in there that have previously been in other funds including grants and
 fee funds or just any fund where they're running short of money. And I think we, well, everybody just vote however they wish.
 So this would just be the anticipated more going to spend out of this that number for that you'll see total for grants and all of the self insurance I think will come together as you're going through the rest of the budget sessions, because I've only talked about the things that are
 being budgeted in my fund that I'll be responsible for sweeping into the self insurance fund, but there we've had to break things out a little bit differently for some of those other funds in the grant funds. If I may just maybe to help with counselor Hawk.
 county employee who enrolls in the county's insurance regardless of whether or not they are in the county general or a different fund grant fund the fees associated with their health benefits are in the 4700 fund and that's my understanding the one we're talking about right now and so the way we do this is
 Generally, the county pays 80% of the costs, and employees pay 20% of the costs. And so just to go back to the original county general conversation, when it was decided to put what normally was budgeted in everybody's budget individually,
 And it was always based on a full-time employee per an amount. And this year it's 18,000 in an attempt to get a better control over the self-insurance and making sure that we are actually budgeting for and able to sweep the correct amount of funds. It was decided, I believe, to put it into the county general and
 but not up from all funds. I know like CCD, it's still in, it's in the cumulative capital fund there. But that money is our, and I say our meeting, Monroe County government's 80% and then the other part is the 20% coming from the employees. Does that help? Yes, thank you.
 So uncertainty here is really tricky. We just don't know what claims are going to be next year. Claims are up this year. We just don't know. We also know that the state is taking actions, which gives us even less money this year to budget with. And so one of the difficult things that we're going to have to deal with here is these lines in this budget where there's a cushion. And we know that that cushion is needed
 potentially to provide healthcare for our employees, which we value greatly, but at the same time, we've got to be really careful here. Do you have any thoughts about the conundrum that we're finding ourselves in right now? The thought that I would have is if you are interested in not, this fund has to be budgeted,
 for what our anticipated costs are. But if you're concerned about the 80% or the 18,000 per FTE, you could appropriate in rainy day X amount of dollars to cover the loss, to cover what we don't have, that we are concerned we won't have in the 4,700 fund. That is a choice?
 I personally don't like that. Well, I asked for your opinion on that and got it. Thank you. Councilor Henry. Thank you. And I'll just pick up right on that. So now that is a option. But I think I need to go back to the analysis piece because this isn't rocket science in that respect. There should be an ability to project a little better into the fund how much we can anticipate. And so it's either at a department level, if your department's managing that estimate,
 How are you determining your anticipated amount anyway? Because you said this is what we think we anticipate. So what are you putting into that to bring a number to us right now? What's your analysis now? Because clearly that analysis is short, and we may need to calibrate a little better on what we're really expecting to spend here. So can you walk me through how you got to your anticipated number that you're asking for?
 Yes what we did is we've looked at the past I think we went five years back on our actual expenses and then we are looking at so we've done our actual expenses from 24 backwards and then up to date in 2025 and then we've also in allowed for it I can't remember the percentage increase overall but
 based on the increases that we're seeing overall from year to year. We were trying to account for that. As I've said before, it's a crystal ball that's not particularly clear. And it does change based on the age of our employees. It changes based on health factors that are affecting our employees. There's a lot of issues that go into hand, into this whole thing, but we feel
 The worst situation is that we would, I mean, the worst situation is we don't have enough money in the fund to pay our bills. That's a problem. The best situation is we end the year with more than $1.5 million this year and next year so that we have a larger pool to start with on our budget, which would then allow you to provide a less FTE cost.
 18,000, it can go with 16 or whatever. By having that, if we're able to have a better, a healthy cash balance at the end of the year, we're in a better position for the following year to help keep our costs down to the council and to our employees. I guess maybe just a comment I'll pass back with time, a concerning time. So my concern is a tighter projection because
 We're not talking small dollars. I mean, we are talking $3 million in the third quarter of the fiscal, and we see the bill hit the desk here. The assumption that the general fund will always be robust enough to absorb it over the next two to three years, I think, probably stretches credulity. We probably get one more chance at that, maybe two more years before we're really... We do run out at some point, so that's my concern here. How we get to a better analysis, I think, is something we need to see.
 I think the analysis has worked really well up until today. We wouldn't be there at this point, right? We would be saying it's a $3 million. The crystal ball isn't exactly clear, as I stated, and I believe that we've done a very good job. Thank you. I appreciate it, Madam President. If you think that we need to budget less, advise us, but we'll be back, because we're not going to have the money. And I just want to remind everybody, we're not finalizing anything today. So we can think about this, meditate,
 do whatever you will with it. And then we can still come back and open this up for discussion after we've had a time to stop, collaborate, and listen about what we need to do for this. So I just wanted to put that out there and give a wrap reference. All right, anybody else have any questions? I see another hand waving at me. And Auditor Gregory, yes. And I don't know much about this. I do know our insurance policy is very generous when it comes to spouse.
 significant others where we don't have that requirement that if there is insurance offered by the spouse's employer that they must that they are not eligible for ours would that be a big savings you could have a spouse that costs us money and a spouse that doesn't cost us money they just depends but there are a
 I think a variety of cost containment strategies that we could implement if a spousal carve out is a policy you want to consider. That's something that you, I think that's something that commissioners could consider. But I think that some perspective that I would like to provide is that benefits are why people work here. And you would put yourself in a situation where
 we would have retention and attraction issues. The other issue with this fossil carve out is it actually costs your married couples more money because they have two deductibles they have to reach. Okay. All right. Consider one more and then we are moving on in the explanation of the colors in this budget.
 If it is purple, then it is new or double-budgeted. Are the two lines that are purple in this budget? Right here? FTS clinic payments and FTS ER paid life slash CI. I have them as purple in mine. Do I have an old, am I not looking? There they are. There they are, okay. Simple question, very quick. Are those new or are they double-budgeted or both? These are new. Thank you.
 Thank you for that clarification. And now can we please have a roll call vote? What? Excuse me. Yes. I didn't know. I just want us to be mindful of the time. And so I understand, but I will recognize you now. Councillor Hock has a question. Talking about this. So have we seen a reduction or an increase in costs because we no longer have.
 Could you not hear me? I'd be happy to repeat myself. Okay. We know that in the past we had a doctor in the clinic and it was thought that if we did not do that, it might be some cost savings of sorts. That's sort of the way it was presented.
 I see that it does not appear that there's cost savings or the dollars have gone down. And so I'm just wondering at some point in time, will that be reconsidered? Because at the time, it was said, well, we'll wait and see how this works. And if it doesn't work, maybe we will do something else. And so I just wanted to run that by you because I think that's all a part of the big picture. Yeah, when we did the RFP for the clinic, our costs were going to increase no matter what.
 It was more expensive for us to go with a model that had a physician as opposed to a nurse practitioner, which is the way that we, the direction that we chose to go. I will say that we are about to approach one year in the new clinic. We have more utilization than we ever have had before. We're seeing more patients with less staff. We're expecting to be able
 to see what that cost savings is because we have more accurate reporting. We do, the clinic provider does a little bit different model where they run zero dollar claims through the plan so we can see actually how that's saving us in claims costs versus what we've seen in the past. So we're hopeful here in the next few months that we can have some actual data that we can provide you as what cost savings that is giving to us
 As far as what were claims that we're not incurring how we're being preventative and things like that But as far as the actual costs that you're seeing and in the budget that number was going to increase no matter what provider we went with because of the increase and Just the clinic costs in general Anybody else have any other questions about this? What are the
 the non-essentials that could be taken out? I have answers to that question, but I'm curious if you have answers to that question. Non-essentials. That don't have to be paying for. We don't have to be paying for. That we are. We provide for
 Yeah, I would say any of the EAP services are not essential, but they are important for employers to provide, especially because we, I mean, we provide in the past couple of years, you've specifically provided EAP for our first responders and for new parents, which are very highly utilized services, but they're also not very
 costly in terms of the grand scheme of this fund. That's not a per use charge, or is it? It is, yes. Okay. Councillor Henry. Thank you, I just wanna go a little farther. Do you actually have data on how much the two programs are being used, parental service and wellness? Like, is 9% used? Yeah, we get monthly invoices about, I mean. Could you ballpark it a little cleaner? Like how much, I mean, is it mostly used,
 I'm just trying to understand it. Is it 20% use? Yeah, I mean, I can't recall how many new parents we've had, but this is really tricky because I'm sharing information about employees, right? So it is being utilized every month as opposed to not being utilized, which
 you have only a certain number of first responders in the sheriff in jail. So I would say probably 10 to 20% is, that's a lot for, I don't know how to quantify that number, but same with the new parents. It's in the last invoice we got for the last month, we had three or four employees using it. And so that's a lot of new parents. I think we on average have 20 new parents a year.
 So, but I think the sheriff, that one, I would defer to the jail and the sheriff to speak to that because that was implemented by them at their request. We're just supporting them by having it in this fund. They value that a lot. Okay. Anybody else have any questions on this particular item?
 Seeing none. Can we please have a roll call vote? Councillor Iverson? Yes. Councillor Deckard? Yes. Councillor Feidl? Yes. Councillor Wills? Yes. Councillor Henry? Yes. Councillor Hawke? No. Councillor Crosley? Yes. Motion carries six to one. All right. Thank you. Appreciate it. All right. Next up we have item seven which is weights and measures.
 Council, I move to open for discussion and review Fund 1000-0308 County General Weights and Measures with the category requests of personnel $71,458, supplies $6,900, services $4,200, capital $0 for a total budget of $82,558. Second. All right, welcome. We have Mr. Daniel Vest.
 Before we get too far into it, I would like to ask for an adjustment. Just due to. Information recently received that I was asking an extra $1000 on the maintenance line. I found that that is not my department's responsibility for what I was looking for that money for. So if we can reduce that line by $1000 to make it a total of 500.
 and I'll wait for Councilor Iverson to get everything ready. All right, Council, I amend my amounts by the following. Personnel, $71,458. Supplies, $6,900. And services, $3,200 for a total of $81,558. Lessened it by 500, right? That is correct.
 Let me take 0.200 minus 500. It's 5,000. 1,000. Down to $500, right? Right, I get that. But what about the 4,200 number? There's not a 4,200. At the bottom. That's the total for that category. But wouldn't that add up differently? Yeah. OK, I'm sorry. I must have misunderstood. It's all right. Did we get a second?
 Okay, so we need a second. Second. All right. And all those in favor of this adjust wait now. Yes, the all those in favor of this as amended signify by saying aye. All those opposed same sign. All right. Any other thing. Go ahead. Okay.
 Anybody else have any questions or comments for Mr. Vest on this item? Councilor Iverson. Up in your threes, at the top two, you've got two lines for office supplies. That's lines 2001, 20001 and 200011. It looks like historically that second line that 200011 has been a little lower.
 and I just was wondering if what what is the rationale for the increase? I believe maybe that that number has been changed. One is not in use any longer. So it should just be one and we set one of those lines to zero then. Kim Shell, which line would you like to set to zero? I think the idea is if it says other supplies were
 But if it's, I need to know, it's two different supplies. It's two different supplies, yeah. So what I need to know is, what are you spending out of that other supplies if it's not office supplies? Because if you, you don't want to combine them if. I don't know if there's a reason not to combine them.
 I wouldn't necessarily call office supplies, but maybe some equipment supplies that's used in office. And I was going to ask if the auditor wanted to maybe weigh in on this. As of June 30th, only $68 was expended, it looks like, from any of the supply lines. Fantastic. I do know that you've had to get the stickers for the- Yes. That has your name on it.
 I don't know how you are utilizing the difference between the two supply lines. So if you need When you say equipment supplies for the office, what does that mean? One thing recently was a laminating machine That I got out of one I believe other than the office supplies come out the other supplies for the office and
 And this is my first full year, so I basically just went off of. What has been done in the past? Sure, yeah, yeah, so I've just kind of tried to mirror everything and I know what I have used in this past year and what I haven't. So I've just tried to basically keep everything about the same. It looks good. It looks like historically 24242023 you you've expended around $600 a year.
 Does that sound about right with those two funds combined? Within this past year, my past full year, yes. All right. I think that that would be, and it also doesn't make sense that they're both in the twos. So an office supply line I think would be sufficient because it would meet his office is kind of traveling. So I think we can cover his needs that meet the criteria of a twos expense in
 just choosing one of those fun those lines. And I would it's six hundred I know that Dan hardly spends anything I think that's probably an appropriate number. Council I moved to set line where we at one thousand dash zero three zero eight nine two zero zero one one two zero.
 We got a motion and a second to set that line item to zero. Any discussion on this amendment? Or this motion rather? No. Auditor Gregory. I see that there are a couple other supply lines. Were you saying you only need one total?
 I don't know if I understood. Yes, as long as you know there's a fair amount in there. You have office supplies. Fuel obviously should be separated. Postage supplies. Wait supplies. Maybe yeah, what's tear weight? Or wait. Are things that if I'm going to go into a store?
 the tier of the product is the packaging. We cannot weigh the packaging and consider that part of the weight of the item that's been checked. It may have to be purchased so we can remove that packaging. Okay. So we're good on that. All right. Yes. The postage supply line hasn't been used in two years. I see that too.
 Thank you. Madam president. It may not. May I continue to go through some of these supplies with the reductions or would you prefer that we go to other people or deal with the current amendment on the floor. Let's deal with their current amendment on the floor- and then we can. Go down the line- anybody else have any questions or comments on this. Seeing none.
 Aye. All those opposed? Same sign. All right. Proceed. Thank you, Madam President. So what I would recommend, and I just want to hear your thoughts here, is the postage supplies have not been used in the past. I don't want to rob you of any postage needs you have, but I'd like to reduce that line.
 And I also like in the tear and weight supplies, I'd like to reduce that line. It looks like in 2024, we expended $88 in that line. And I'm curious as to why we need 300. Again, this is my first full year. I went off of past request.
 So I don't know that I'll ever spend anything in that tariff supply line, but if it comes down to it and I need it, I guess it's easier to have it than have to come back and ask for it. And also the postage, the reason it's not being used, most of that is equipment being sent to the metrology lab to be tested. The metrology lab has been closed for the last couple of years, so nothing has been sent to them.
 And if it was open, it sounds like you would use it. Absolutely. Okay. Any questions or comments? Okay. Councillor Wilts. In the combination of lines that the auditor has been doing, have you been leaving postage?
 The auditor's office, we mail all claims for departments. So generally, unless there's a need for a department to have separate mailings, they don't need much of any of a postage line. But I guess I'm just trying to find out, is it preferable to take the budgeted amount from postage supplies, eliminate that line, and just call it office supplies, and understand that he's paying for his mailing that way? Everybody's not.
 I move to eliminate line 20085 postage supplies and move the budgeted amount to line 20001 office supplies. Keeping the amount the same. Yes. Second. All right. We got a motion and a second.
 Anybody have any questions or comments related to this item? So we're basically from councillor wilts's motion is just eliminating one and just combining it all Auditor, do you have any? comment on that In the grand scheme of things it is nice to have that consolidated but certain things should be separated out for example fuel just
 So we can keep an idea of what the actual expenditures are for some specifics like that. Okay. So we're all in agreement. There's agreement of what we okay, got it. Any other questions or comments related to Councilor Wiltz's motion? Okay.
 And I'm looking at council staff to see if you all are getting the changes because they're doing this in real time as well. We have an amendment to reduce the postage line to zero and then move that $100 into office line 2001. Okay. But we need a vote on that amendment.
 So that's why I was just making sure that y'all were all in the good of what it is that we're doing. Got it? All right. So all those in favor of Councilor Wilson's motion signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed, same sign. All right. So motion carries. All right. Coming back to any other final questions or comments or observations on this particular budget.
 looks like we also might need to amend the amount too. Okay. Since we did those changes. All right. Council I move to amend my original motion to the new these new numbers personnel line seventy one thousand four hundred fifty eight in the supplies line six thousand one hundred dollars in the services category three thousand two hundred dollars for a total
 budget of $80,758. Yeah, I guess maybe instead of making an amendment to that motion, I can just restate my motion. Yeah. Okay. So that way you don't have to keep voting on. Correct. All right. Thank you. Okay.
 So if we don't have anything else, then can we please have a roll call vote? And you're doing a good job on your first time. Thank you very much. It's stressful, trust me. But you got through it. So all right. Councilor Decker? Yes. Councilor Feidl? Yes. Councilor Wilts? Yes. Councilor Henry? Yes. Councilor Hawk? Yes. Councilor Crosley? Yes. Councilor Iverson? Yes. Motion carries, unanimous.
 thank you very much thank you y'all have a good evening all right next up is item eight which is veteran services office council i move to open for discussion and review fund 1000-0012 county general veteran services with a category request of personnel 172 296 supplies 500 services 2900 capital zero
 for a total budget of $175,696. Second. We got a motion and second. We have Mr. Stephen Miller.
 Welcome. Thank you for having me tonight. I'm Steve Miller and this is Andrew Blake, the Deputy Director and Veterans Affairs Office. I wanted to bring to your attention our budget. At first glance, you'll notice that our overall budget seems to have some larger savings. Part of that is due to the full-time self-insurance going away.
 But additionally, we did make strides at reducing every one of our lines except for salary FICA and perf. So in our office supplies line, we reduced that from $800 to $500. Printing and subscriptions, we lowered that from $1,500 to $1,000. For dues, we lowered that from $400 to $200.
 travel and training from 2,500 down to 1,500 and postage we lowered that from 400 to 200. These are based on a concerted effort and research into our last number of years of budget and what we've actually spent and we tried to right size our budget and give as much savings as possible.
 Well, we appreciate that. So now I'll look around to my colleagues to see if anybody has any questions or comments. And I'm going to start over here to my left. Oh, I keep saying my left again. I'm looking over here to my right. It's my glasses. Council Iverson. I have no changes, but I wanted to thank you for going back through the previous years and adjusting your budget. Given the constraints that we're under, this is a huge help. So I just wanted to thank both of you for really putting in the work here.
 welcome. Anyone else on the right? Nope. Moving over here to my left. Thank you. All right in that case may we please have a roll call vote. Councilor Feidl? Yes. Councilor Wilts? Yes. Councilor Henry? Yes. Councilor Hawk? Yes. Councilor Crosley? Yes. Councilor Iverson? Yes. Councilor Decker? Yes.
 Motion carries, unanimous. All right. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. That was easy. All right.
 Next up, item number nine, which is the building department. Council, I move to open for discussion and review fund 1000-0312 County General Buildings with the category requests of personnel $689,959, supplies $7,000, services $37,900, capital $0 for a total budget of $734,859.
 Second. All right. And we have Mr. Bobby LaRue here. Welcome. Thank you. Good evening, Councillors. Good evening. Start with office supplies, code books, operational supplies. We kind of did the same. I went back to and tried to adjust down where we felt we could.
 into the budget as there's four vehicles we've learned that we don't need to include that in our budget so we'd like to remove that hundred dollar Bobby sorry move that mic so that it's more closer and directly better yeah it sounds worse for me
 So we'd like to remove that $100 from that budget line. We've learned that we don't need to be responsible for that. Printing, as you all are aware, several things have changed at the state level. We have some additional mailing responsibilities that will be starting in January.
 That we will need to print some letters and some notifications for complete for complete applications We don't quite yet know how that's gonna to totally work out We've been working having several meetings and about it with the city county planning and the legal department about how this
 is going to fully affect what we do, but we are likely going to have to start printing and mailing notifications about application status. And that is also why you'll see the increase in postage that we're requesting. It is something that is not related to claims and we will need to do.
 Any other questions about the budget? I'm happy to. And just to clarify, you said that you wanted to remove the line 30004 repairs of the $100. Is that right? That's correct. I understand that we're not responsible for that any longer.
 I have a question. Yes, go ahead. So on the training and travel, when I look at what you've expended the last few years, what I see, it just comes nowhere near the $10,000. Are you expecting a big expense next year? The building
 I've been for about 18 months working at the state level for the next version of Indiana's commercial building code, what we utilize for class one structures. There is a very significant change happening, a couple of them with regards, and I say this, I'm always trying to look forward here.
 I never know what's gonna happen there and I apologize. I don't have a better answer than that, but a very significant change in the way that building permits and the code applies to existing buildings. Essentially, it's an entirely new book that's been added into Indiana's building code called the existing building code. It will be really good for everybody
 If it gets if it gets adopted, but it is something that Indiana has not ever had in place before we are going to have to search out search and find appropriate training for for that. I don't know where that's going to be found right now. I'm hopeful.
 that the Indiana Association of Building Officials will, and I think they should, my suggestion to them will be to have appropriate training. But we may have to go farther because nobody in the state has utilized that, no building department anyway. I'm sure architects that work out of state have used it before. So there's that coming up. Again, I just don't really
 I don't quite know what that's going to look like yet. There's a significant change there along the line. Let's take effect this next year, take effect next year? I would, I certainly hope so. But the code review process hasn't been completed yet. I have a meeting next week and hopefully it's done and then it moves on to every other agency in the state that looks at it.
 So, if it's not next year, it will likely be the beginning of 27, but my plan is to be prepared for when that occurs. All right. Anybody else? I'm going to look over here to my right. Councillor Henry. I appreciate the insight on the training travel. I had a similar question, but I want to ask it differently.
 past your average over four years is 2200 in use. It's 10,000 this year. Are you expecting out of state travel or airfare? Because otherwise that's per diem and mileage somewhere in the state, right? I don't know the answer to that yet. I'm going to apologize. I don't know where we're going to be able to find it. My goal would always be to find it in the state.
 and not travel far to get it. I do understand. Every year we've also carried money in books and that is something that we carry because I don't exactly know when the state is gonna adopt new codes. Just an example,
 a suite of commercial code books that is around $850. Councilor Eberson. Thank you. My question is in your ones and your part-time line. It seems like you haven't had a lot of part-time people in the past couple of years. We have not. That's correct.
 would you be amenable to reducing that line? Yeah, I think we can, we'll work with you all however we need to. Do you foresee having? I don't foresee anything coming up that would necessitate that.
 All right, Council, I move to reduce line 17801 part-time to $1,000. Second. All right, we got a motion and a second. Anybody have any questions? Councilor Wilks. Is it appropriate to combine motions that the $100 that he's suggesting to remove
 that and maybe something else like could we kind of tab keep tabs and then just have one because I feel like that might get us moving faster would definitely like to think that would so yes okay in that case yeah there was a second you weren't quick enough with your suggestion sorry but you also could withdraw the motion yeah I uh
 Thank you, Council Member Wilt, I withdraw my motion. I'll just speak really quickly. I appreciate the building commissioner talking about this state change in training. And it seems like most of the things we're dealing with across the board and it's well beyond building is different philosophies of thought from the state.
 You know there's a was an old philosophy counties need to have enough rainy day funds to fund six counties next to them six counties north and beyond. Then there was the philosophy of the state will hold money back now there's the philosophy or there was a philosophy take care of people, then there was a philosophy don't only take care of law enforcement during certain times and then.
 And now we're at the philosophy of cut, cut, cut, cut, cut, cut, cut, cut government. And I just think for council, one of the things that's coming up in my mind over and over and over, we will have to decide what that prevailing philosophy is here. And we may be able to please all masters, including that notion of you're going to have enough for any day funds that you could run an old national down the street. And I hate to say that.
 But we're seeing the reality. I mean, we've all been to a self-insurance seminar this evening that basically would probably turn most people into a socialist. I mean, it was kind of alarming. So I just throw that out there because the building commissioner has highlighted something yet again that we'll have to figure out, send people to train, all that to follow state philosophies that are unfunded mandates. And yeah, anyway, I'll be.
 Councillor Wilks. To follow up on the previous discussion about the training travel, you have the same amount budgeted for this year. And if I recall, it was because of this exact situation, you're just holding $10,000 in anticipation. This is gonna happen. And you need to have it when it does. But my guess is you haven't spent your $10,000. We have not. Okay, that's what I thought.
 That makes perfect sense to me. And if they're rewriting the book, you gotta get trained on that. So have that at the ready. I think that makes sense. Postage is going up, so that increase makes sense. What, pray tell, is the refunds situation? Because it looks like that hasn't been spent very much either. Refunds situation is
 there in case a permit has issued an error. It is the fund that it's a fun line that's been there for a very long time. And I am grateful that we don't spend it because it means we're not making many errors. But if that line is not there every time there is an error, I would need to come back and talk to you all about funding the
 the refund of an erroneously issued permit. Given your stellar track record, would you be amenable to reducing that line, say, by half? Sure. Council, I move that, no, I'm not moving. I'm just saying, Councilor, over there, please write it on the list.
 It's not a real movement yet. I just want to make sure we don't have any other questions for Mr. Leroux. I didn't miss anything. Okay. Councilor. Now I'm going to make a motion. Council, I move to reduce line 17801 part-time to $1,000 and also to reduce line 33010 refunds to $2,500. Okay.
 And which one what I miss the repairs and and repairs equipment vehicle line three zero zero zero four to zero And we got a consent so all right, so We're moving on we're good. So y'all got all the changes there Okay Okay
 Yes. So just so I'm clear on the vote, so what would be the difference of just reducing to a dollar in the refunds line and then to hold it and then come back and fill it later if needed? Can you state that again? So the point of information is why not just put it as a dollar in the refund line and then come back later if we'd actually need to appropriate? It's just point of information on this motion before. Yes. Yeah.
 That is absolutely fine to be able to do that because that holds that line open. And as you can see by the history, he doesn't use the travel training and some other lines that he's always able to do in-house transfers if a refund is needed immediately. So. So technically, what I'm hearing is we can reduce that item to zero, do in-house transfers,
 Should he have to use this particular line item for a refund? One dollar. To a dollar. Hold it. Did I say, OK, that's what I meant, a dollar. Yep. I had it on my heart. It just came out different. OK. OK. I candidly said I didn't want to jinx it. I mean, yeah, we put it out to the ether. All right. Folks down here, do y'all have any
 Yes. All right. May I restate the totals? Sure. All right. The new totals before we vote is in the personnel line is six hundred seventy thousand dollars. Nine hundred fifty nine. Sorry. Six hundred seventy thousand nine hundred fifty nine dollars in the supplies category. It stays at seven thousand dollars in the services category. It is reduced to thirty five thousand three hundred dollars for a new total budget of
 $713,259. What do you have, Ms. Kischel? Where did I go wrong? So according to my screen, we're moving $3004 to zero, refunds to $1. Is there somebody? Michelle, you have $3004 at $100. Oh. Oh, I see what you're doing. Never mind. Yeah. All right. We're going to go with Michelle's math.
 in the services category that's $32,801 for a new total budget of $710,760. Because he restated it, we don't have to have a second. There was a question.
 Mr. Turner King is your intent to reduce that line to a dollar because I don't think you've moved to make that amendment I think you made an amendment. Mr. Henry made a point of order and then you didn't amend your amendment Are you talking about line three zero zero zero four? So your advice is to I need to make a new emotion I
 to withdraw your first amendment and then make a new amendment if your intent is to reduce that line. All right council I reduce my amendments at the advice of our council and I make a new amendment for this to read to for the following lines in personnel it we are at six seventy nine five nine six hundred seventy thousand dollars nine hundred fifty nine
 $670,959. In the supplies category, it is $7,000. And in the services category, it is $32,801 for a new total budget of $710,760. Does that sound all good? OK. Second. All right. We got a motion and a second.
 as amended. Any other further discussion? Are we all clear of everything that we just did here? Yes. Okay, I hope so. Um, all right. So, Molly, so was that a statement of the amendment to a statement of the total budget total budget? Okay, that's what I wanted. I didn't know if we were going voice vote or if we're going roll call vote. I think
 Mr. or Councilmember Iverson's statement of the total budget incorporates the motions that were intended. That was indeed my motion. Okay. So we will now move on to a roll call vote, please. Councilor Wilts? Yes. Councilor Henry? Yes. Councilor Hawk? Councilor Crosley? Yes. Councilor Iverson? Yes. Councilor Deckard?
 Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
 questions and then we can, you know, move accordingly. All right, item 10, emergency management.
 Council I move to open for discussion and review fund 1000-0361 County General Emergency Management with the category requests of personnel $170,267 in the supplies category $5,600 in the services category $148,666 and the capital category is zero for a total budget of $324,533.
 second. All right, we got a motion and a second. We have Miss Jamie Noble. Hi, welcome. Hi, go ahead. So just starting off, the only increase to our budget from last year would be in the personnel according to the salary ordinance. Everything else remains the same with the exception of office supplies, fuel program supplies, training, travel, and EM structure engineering services. They have all been reduced.
 that structural engineering services is no longer necessary since we have the emergency response and recovery line. All right. Do y'all so now we will open this up to questions or comments and to my right.
 about not just in your budget, but in many of the budgets, the pretty high dollar amount for training and travel. I know in talking with my other council members throughout the state, that they are cutting way back on that. And so I just think that you're talking training and travel for two people.
 That's a lot of traveling. Where do you plan to travel that that would be that kind of money? So that has historically been high because of our attendance to the IAEM, the International Association of Emergency Managers Conference. It's held all over the United States. Last year, it was held in California. Now, I may be telling on myself a little bit, but I am not a fan of flying.
 And if I can not, I choose to not to. So I did not attend the conference last year because I don't want to fly to California, but. Well, I just, I think that there's reasons why, not just your fear of flying, but that a lot of the training can happen online.
 and feel very much like you are a part of it because they're all coming together online. And I would like to see a major reduction in that. I'm just suggesting that. I know you're saying. Well, I understand.
 Council Henry. Thank you, Madam President. You're very welcome. Thank you, Jamie, for being here. I do also have a question about training and travel, but maybe it'll help my fellow counselors understand what you do at that conference or those conferences. So remind me, you're a certified emergency manager at CEM? It is in progress. In progress. Yes. And that credential, can you explain what that means? Because you go to that conference to work on those classes, right? Absolutely.
 80% of emergency management is networking with other emergency managers, our local elected officials like yourself, as well as our fire police, et cetera. But there's a lot of classes that we take there during that conference, which is typical for conferences.
 You know, those CEUs also build into that certification. If we present, if we do the poster contest, all of that wraps into those pieces for getting that certification. It is quite a process. I appreciate that. And you do take advantage of the online trainings and free things that FEMA can travel people to when they do that as well, right? Absolutely. Such as like Emmitsburg with the, there's a training facility in Maryland
 that there's a lot of work to be done and many emergency managers gone to so I just appreciate that there- my only other question is just it to maybe at maybe have you explained for council just the kind of urgency of making sure radio and sirens are- being renovated I mean we did have a little issue back in the spring that- we relied on those services or the sirens for. So I know that line items a little up but maybe you can explain the state of the sirens are you're you're replacing in the county. Absolutely so the sirens are
 That's kind of a go no go they absolutely have to work and so that line item 100% goes to sirens along with radios but most of that budget goes to sirens.
 I think it's difficult budget wise whenever you are new coming in to get a good feel for what you're going to spend in the first year, the second year you kind of get a little bit of a better handle on it and by that third year you're like, all right, I got this and so I feel like I'm in a place right now where I really, I feel
 confident i don't want to be overconfident but i feel just the right amount of confidence that you know i have a feel for where we are i know that uh by the time this year ends where i sit right now i will have spent all but about 900 up the budget this year either due to repairs uh let's face it mostly due to repairs um the geo bond
 Plays heavily into this because as we utilize that to replace sirens that makes this budget line item less needed so All right, thank you and look over here to my left to see if anybody has any questions Councilor waltz
 The maintenance line, it's small, but it looks like it hasn't been used in the past. It's not a very highly used item. I think I used it most recently to modify when we got the plum case. We got to simplify it. It's an antenna that's very bulky and hard to use. So I used it to buy a
 part of sorts and send it to a welding shop to have it specially fitted so that it made it more portable. And another time I used it to fix a leaking roof on a trailer. So it's very incidental and yeah, it's hardly ever used, admittingly.
 my question is the the sirens they're in 39 I'm sorry they're in services is that right is that correct okay um so there's nothing I guess I got a little confused when you said geo bonds because that's usually capital yes that's separate so we use the geo bond to do the replacement
 which we have broke down into phases. I see. So nothing for that is showing up in this budget. Correct. Correct. So when we use the GEO bond, we get to replace them, which takes away from the maintenance piece so much. We still have to do the maintenance contract, which comes out of the budget. Thank you. Okay. Are there questions or comments? Councillor Hawke.
 What portion of this is covered with your grants? Is it like I'm glad you brought that up because I almost forgot to mention it. So our EMPG our emergency management performance grant covers almost half of our salary. It's kind of it's tier based based on population, but they actually increased it this year, so it will be covering 60,500 of our salary.
 Okay. And then I assume that's going to show up in our miscellaneous revenue. Auditor. Yes. So each department provides an estimate of miscellaneous revenue. So whatever they provided within reason we review has been added. Put that in there. Okay. And the reason why I asked that question is do they
 do they just say a flat amount or what it can be used for? They say a flat amount but it's for salary reimbursement but the confines of where it goes the money goes into a federal grant fund and then we correct the expenses out of the general fund into that grant fund which would then increase the general fund cash balance once we're done with all of that.
 The reason why I ask is because I thought cover a certain amount of your salary and then will they also cover what is the monkey in the room lately is the insurance and so I just wondered if we were going to be able to maybe get more to help cover for the insurance but it's just a flat amount you're saying. The rules say salary and
 things associated with it in layman's terms without getting specific because I can't speak to it specifically without looking it up but it does say that it will cover benefits so I mean we can look through the fine print if that's something that. We want to do whatever would be helpful and please meet with the auditor and short and see what we do whatever dollar we can save we need to do it thank you.
 All right. Since we have another item for the emergency management department, I want to move on. Yep. Yep. So anybody else got any questions or comments? All right. I was waiting on the motion because I because I wanted to reduce that training and travel. So then do you want to make the motion?
 I've seen in the past that that training and travel in 2025, you have spent only 1,043. In 2024, you spent 5,480. So it seems to me we might be able to reduce that by maybe two or $3,000 and still you will be able to do what you needed to do.
 So I'm saying we reduce line. Level 30028, $2,000. You might want to restate your motion. Can your microphone cut in and out? Oh, I'm sorry. The training and travel line reduced from 8,000 down to 5,000.
 Sorry. Just speaking with Carly with regards to we're trying to consolidate some lines. And so the maintenance line, she's we're requesting to change that to a dollar. The maintenance line now down to a dollar and leave that way it's still open. And then
 Did you want to?
 So back in June, we sent an email to departments that were consolidating lines, account lines. We have a lot of redundancies in the ledger. For example, we have probably five lines that address employee clothing, multiple lines that address maintenance. So we sent departments an email saying, hey, if you're going to use these lines, you need to look at potentially using the new lines that are combined. And that's actually in your binder.
 be the orange tab towards the top. So departments received this and we noticed that some departments I think overlooked some of these combinations. Right now this account line is scheduled for inactivation in 2026. So we need to figure out what account line they would use based on what we are told it sounds like an appropriate count line would be for
 service maintenance repair of equipment, which is 38010. Okay. Would we fund that fund a new line 38010?
 It's $900. You could do $900 or given the fact that it's infrequently used, it could be funded at a dollar and then in-house transfers could occur if the department needed to spend out of that line. Okay, I just want to get back here because Council Hawk did have a motion and I believe there was a second from Councilor Decker. So there's a motion and a second on the floor.
 So I just want to have that conversation as well, because that came after that was motioned and seconded. Yes, I see your hand waving at me, and I'm calling at you, Councilor Henry. Thank you, Madam President. Jamie, do you intend to go to IM 26, the conference? Do you intend to go this year? Yes, because it's in Louisville, Kentucky. Yes. That's good to know. Two years from now, it's in Long Beach again? Yes. OK. Seems like Louisville's closer than Long Beach.
 a little bit thank you madam president okay so counselor decker yeah i want to explain my second i agree with counselor hawk on the opportunity i saw your head nodding and i agree with that as well i also want to offer this provision even though we are in budget hawk season right here um and cutting i always want to say this if there's something you need for which our
 eyebrows raised on budget is preventing you from doing, please always know coming to us asking for additional so you get to go where you need to go so we don't have the things we read in headlines. I want you to know that as director, that is a discretion thing you always should feel free to do, because I'd rather us revisit and get into something that we need so you get what you need so they're okay. Does that make sense? It does. I appreciate that.
 All right, so we got a motion and a second. Is there any other discussion related to this motion? No. All right. So all those in favor of the motion to reduce the line item 30028 of training and travel to 5,000 signify by saying aye. Aye.
 All those opposed, same sign. All right, motion carries. Now, are there any other motions related to this particular budget item? Go ahead. I'm sorry. It does seem like I could make a motion on line 30025.
 to make that motion. Would you like me to make that motion to hold off? Let's hold off because the auditor's office brought up the whole item of the maintenance issue and reducing that one item to one. So I'd rather us have the conversation again of anything else. Any other discussion that we need to do in terms of any other items that we would like to reduce? And then let's restate again
 For everything. Yes councillor Henry. Thank you. So the program supplies line 20 or two zero two one zero So the past five years the average has been about a thousand sixty six dollars. You've got twenty five hundred in there this year What's the program supply line? What do you what's it for? Program supply line is any supplies or equipment that's not covered under office supplies or within the radio budget
 So like this year, we purchased a wire rack for all of the emergency radios that we bought. Or if we were going to purchase more weather radios, they would come out of that line. We take it down to $1,500, given the average? Because you must be anticipating an expense there, because I just saw that face. So what's going on? Well, there is BAM Weather app.
 We were looking to start that. Explain more about that. So the BAM Weather app gives us better access to be able to watch the radar, have a real-time text conversation with the weather experts on what weather is coming and what time in real time.
 Anybody else have any questions over here? Yes, Councillor Hawke. Well, I'm looking at the fuel line, and it looks like you've not used a great deal of that budget this year. It shows you've used $932 so far this year, and you're asking for 2,600.
 24, you spent 1,700. So I would think we might be able to reduce that 2,600 down to 2,000. Then if you needed to, you could, you know, you're not gonna be running around without cash. You can move the expenses up and down, but then always come to us if you need something. So I would like to reduce line 2100 fuel
 from 2,600 down to 2,000. Again, before we do that, is there anybody else that has any other things that they want to? Okay. Sure, I just wanna make sure. All right. Now, if there's, Councilor Haug, if you wanna state your motion. I would, I thought I mentioned,
 Okay, fuel. The amount that has been budgeted is 2600 light like to reduce the 2000. Have a second.
 We are getting a second vehicle. So I don't know if that plays into this discussion as well So with the second vehicle, you'll obviously have more okay, so and because there was a a motion there was no second That I heard I didn't yes, she made a motion. So there was a motion. Is there a second?
 motion dies for no motion dies okay all right all right so now we need to make the comprehensive all right we need to combine everything that we heard and have councillor Iverson if
 a motion of any other proposed changes that we also heard from this evening all right I'm gonna do I'm gonna take a stab at this but I will accept any friendly amendment here okay so this is not me I misheard things I'm getting old council I moved to set line 30025 maintenance to one dollar and to set line 201 00 fuel to two thousand dollars
 Help me out because I didn't catch it. Oh and create a new line which is line. I didn't catch the number. What was the number? 38010. To create line 38010 and set that line to $900.
 I was gonna say as a point of order, you said the fuel for 2000. I did. There is incorrect because Councilor Hawk made that motion, there was no second and so it failed. So I can't include that in my motion? I mean. What about the new vehicle she mentioned? It wasn't exactly like mine, it was larger than mine.
 Mr. Turner King, would you be able to weigh in on all the things? Because there's a lot of changes and a lot of things that folks want to put in right now. And I just want to get your advice on what we are doing right now. So for clarity, are you asking general procedural advice? Yeah, I guess. Madam President, maybe I should make a shot at one piece of it. Do you mind if I take it?
 right now. So first question is, we had an amendment that did not get a second that failed and then the same amendment was attempted inside of Mr. Iverson's total amendment. So that item had already not been seconded but was reintroduced with other things. So the question would be, is that part of it? Mr. Iverson can include that in his motion if he would like and then it would be up to the entire council. What if they second and proceed vote on it?
 I think it's really confusing that you're trying to combine them all in one motion. And inevitably, what's going to happen is someone's going to ask to separate the motion. So my procedural advice is to just handle each amendment one at a time. Yes. With that, with the clarification, you changed 30025 to $1. That account line is going away. It needs to go to zero. All right. I will accept that.
 friendly amendment that will set that to zero instead of one. So now we are back to the motion that I spoke onto the floor, which creates new account lines at 900. And we also are reducing fuel and that's it. Yes. I'll second that.
 That's what I was just about to say. Thank you. I didn't want to miss it. So I heard her say that there was a new vehicle. So I'm concerned about allowing for that with reducing that to 2000. She can do internal transfers. Okay. And there's enough money to work with to do that. Councillor Decker.
 I was just going to kind of go back to the statement I made earlier to you. If that gives you heartburn because we're starting to enter a territory of unsafe, you could just go like that to us right now and I will make a friendly amendment motion to remove the fuel from Council Iverson's motion. So the point of heartburn comes into play because the point of the second vehicle is so that Justin and I can operate in tandem whenever there's a disaster.
 that does tend to entail a lot of driving. Now if we don't have a disaster, no problem. No tornado, no problem. But historically speaking, there will be problems. I'd offer a friendly amendment to remove the fuel line reference in Councilor Iverson's motion. Okay. Sorry.
 Councilor Deckard is removing the 2000 who seconded it. Thank you. All right. Any other further discussion related to this item as amended? Are you about to say something? Okay. All right. All right. So all those in favor of this motion as amended signify please by saying aye.
 All those opposed, same sign. All right, motion carries. Now. We are at. The part where we do we need to restate all the numbers. There OK. You good OK.
 In the personnel lines, could you please scroll up? The new number is 170,267. In the supplies line, the number is $5,600. In the services category is $145,666 for a new total budget of $321,533. One second, I'm doing two computers here.
 Councilor Henry? Yes. Councilor Hawk? Yes. Councilor Crossley? Yes. Councilor Iverson? Yes. Councilor Deckard? Yes. Councilor Feidl? Yes. Councilor Wilts? Yes. Motion passes unanimous. Okay. Next up is item B.
 Council I move to open for discussion or review fund one one five two dash zero zero zero zero Emergency planning right to know with the category requests of personnel zero supply is $100 services fifteen thousand three hundred fifty dollars capital ten thousand five hundred dollars for a total budget of twenty five thousand nine hundred and fifty dollars Second I got a motion and a second. Please go ahead and
 All right, this is just a reminder that this is not county dollars. This is not taxpayer funds. This is all from the SARA Title II, Tier II reporting fees that all of the industries in Monroe County that have extremely hazardous materials report to and pay fees. And we get those funds back for planning purposes with first responders
 and other community members. This is a cumulative fund. So just stating that in the beginning, this is the exact same budget as last year. The only exception is an additional $10,000 to the 33210 planning and admin costs because we would really like to do a commodity study. One has not been accomplished since the construction of I-69 finished.
 We would like to use a vendor to complete that. And we also plan on using some grant funds to accomplish that as well. As soon as the hazardous materials emergency planning grant opens. Good to know. All right, Councilor Hawk. It's probably on here someplace, but can you tell me what your balance is in that fund now?
 It is not on here and I cannot off the top of my head. I know that the last drop that we got was $8,000 and some change and we get that every June. We actually got an increase from previous years. Previous years it had been around $6,000. So we're growing, which is both concerning and a good thing.
 because we're bringing more hazardous materials into our county, but we're getting revenue for that to plan and be prepared. All right. Anybody else have any questions on this side? No. All right. Anybody else have any questions on my left over here? All right. Seeing none, may we please have a roll call vote? Okay.
 Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
 Before we resume and come back to our highway department, I'm gonna ask for council to be back up here on the dais in 10 minutes, which is 725. So if we can recess for about 10 minutes, and again, come back at 725 on time, then we can go ahead and proceed. All right.
 We are back from recess and we are moving along on our first night of our budget work session. And we're gonna go to item number 11, which is our highway department. Council, I move to open for discussion or review fund 1197-000 stormwater management with the category requests of personnel of $1,191,267.
 The supply is at $314,000. The service is at $770,252. The capital category at $450,001 for a total budget of $2,725,520. Second. All right, we got a motion and a second. And we have Ms. Lisa Ridge and Mr. Toby Turner here. Hello and welcome. Good evening. Good evening.
 So if you want me to go over some of the differences, we stayed within the recommended of the cola for any of the personal services. Our insurance, of course, looks like it increased. We moved fleet maintenance supplies. We moved that to the 33050 to a new line.
 We did increase pipe just due to inflation and the number of pipes we put in for drainage. We didn't buy a lot of new signs. We didn't utilize all of those funds, so we took that line down a little bit. We moved gas, moved from 30700 to the 2000s.
 supply category. We did the software that's due to an increase in our software that we utilize within the department. Any other significant changes? We did increase the professional fees.
 150,000 because it's in interest of the stormwater board and the department to redo our update our long-term stormwater plan and we increased the public education participation portion. We did add in a street sweeper in our capital category that's probably our biggest change
 $450,000. We've been using the same original sweeper since 2013. So we feel like it's time to look at a replacement for that before that increases. Some of the other lines we changed just due to trying to be consistent with what the auditor's office is recommending for departments. But if there's something that sticks out to you and you have questions on
 Now I will look to my left over here and see if anybody has any questions on this particular portion of the highway department's budget Nobody over here Okay, and then I'll come back and then I'll look over here to my right and I think I saw council hawks hand raised go ahead It looks like as if
 What I'm seeing here doesn't quite look like what I saw on another report. And this has to do with that famous self-insurance. But it shows like on the white section as well as on the yellow section. So I think that means that you're including it in your budget.
 I'm trying to figure out why it also says that it's in the employee services budget. Well, if you look at the one eight zero zero one, it's actually zero. But then it's moved to the back. Well, I'm sorry. When we tried to roll our stuff into gateway, a department that has four zeros, and then we tried to add a department
 location to that it wiped out the fund with the four zeros and we were only left with the employee services budget so we have to revert back so we put it back into there and we just didn't correct the the note saying this in employee services so it's in your fund and then excuse me right it's added in the back yeah but it's not added in the back anymore
 it's a it's it's still it's going to be in your fund like this and we'll have to move forward with you know just sweeping and like they have in the past so they have that we're not able to create a an account line or a location on its own like we thought we could so yeah i didn't yeah okay so when i was talking a while ago or whoever i was i think i said in the meeting but i was talking to somebody saying that
 You know, the stormwater insurance needed to be paid out of stormwater. And you're saying, yes, it is, even though it looks confusing on the report. Nevermind. And thanks for letting me know that wasn't just totally crazy. It was just because you had to win the zeros there. Yeah, it all has to do with a single user budget versus a multi-user budget when we uploaded it into Gateway.
 right i'm going to look to my right over here see if anybody has any additional questions council hawk the other one is i see that you you're planning for uh two summer interns this year uh rather than one um i'm just trying to find if there's some place here that we're going to be able to make some kind of reduction though we all know that stormwater
 it comes in, it's not on a property tax, even though it shows up on your property tax as a fee, because that's the only way that the county had to bill for stormwater. And this particular, just for the public's information, if you live in the city, you don't pay this to the county. If you live in Elstville, you don't pay this to the county.
 for the residents who live outside of the city that pays the stormwater fee, and it shows up on your property tax. Even if we tried to cut this, it's not going to reduce where we need to reduce it from the tax. I'm going to come back over here to my left and see if anybody has
 thought of any questions. Yes, Councillor Wilks. To that point, in my gigantic pile of papers, could I find our anticipated revenue into this? The last white tab is going to be anticipated revenue.
 That's amazing. Thank you. Any other questions? The last page.
 You can see a total, which is 2510. Is it estimated to be so much higher? Oh, because that's just one half. Got it, never mind. Does anybody else have any questions for Miss Bird? Yes, Councilor Decker. I don't have a specific answer for this,
 We were always very creative about maximizing funds in different ways. They get us somewhere. Is there anything that if the revenue here looks to be higher coming in for the year, is there anything that could come out of anything else to supplement, to go into this that might lower some of our other issues in the general fund or elsewhere? And I'm not asking you on the spot to have that,
 I don't know if you have thoughts or. I know the stormwater or I mean we have the way the stormwater fee was structured and what you can use those funds for and it is made mainly for stormwater infrastructure and the employees and the. The supplies to do that to help with another budget. We do that a little bit with our Cune Bridge as you can see in the backfill line.
 I think we budget $130,000, $75,000 that helps with the pipe installations for our paving projects. We started utilizing that last year. If other things come up later on or whatever, you might come back to us with that. Councillor Henry.
 I'm gonna go to Councilor Henry, and then if Councilor Haug hasn't, then I'll... Yeah, thank you, Madam President. All right, so just taking a look, because we've seemed to have gotten into a pattern this evening of looking at training and travel. So the account line, 30028, training, travel. You've got a 12,000. The note is you added an FTE. The kind of three-year average on your travel has been about 4,500. That would be about some.
 What's the training travel plan that would be? I know we didn't probably spend as much this year, but just because we've had some employee changes, we had some open positions that didn't attend some of the training. And then if I recall, one of our board members on our stormwater board really stressed on keeping training and travel the way it is for our employees staff to be able to attend what they need to. For
 for them to complete their duties. So your max year was 2022 where that was the highest in the past five years. Was that a typical year then of travel? Well, and it's not just travel too. We also try and get training. This year we had one of our guys go up for a special harness training for confined spaces. We try and use it for chainsaw training because we have a stormwater crew. So we also, it's not just travel, it's also some training opportunities for them.
 If you feel like you want to lower it some. It seems like training and travel is getting haircuts in each department of some. I'm just trying to identify the actual use versus the anticipated. My only other question, I guess, is maybe picking up a little bit on where Councillor Deckard was going on the street sweeper.
 Have we looked at exhausting all the options, including because it's a capital purchase of whether or not there's a bond or something that could cover this out of a different department? Is it possible to cover this through residual general obligation bonds out of the commissioner's office as a capital purchaser is it really here? Well, we usually use that opportunity for our capital out of our NVH because it's a lot more strapped than the stormwater.
 We've already replaced our and purchased the gradles. I feel like this is our last big purchase within stormwater for a while. And we've replaced our dump trucks. But we kind of use utilize the geo bond for more of the highway portion, just because that frees us up more for by two minutes for paving. Thank you, Madam President. And I'll circle back to Council Hawk. Do you have any other additional questions?
 I'm looking at the vegetation killer for fieldstone. Are you still needing that in there? Or is this just have that as a placeholder? Doesn't look like you spent that this year. We just we leave that in there as a placeholder. I mean, we could lower that if need be. We do some of the maintenance around the fieldstone dam, but other than
 that most of it is relied upon with the HOA out there. While I know that doesn't help the general fund or the tax dollar funds to reduce this, what it does do is if we reduce it in some of these other lines, it frees up money for them to do the actual work of getting out there
 for stormwater. And boy, do we know we've had problems. We've got people south of town that are really suffering under some of the stormwater loss. And we do in most every neighborhood, we need to have more ditching done and so forth. So where do I see the expenses for ditching?
 Well, that's mainly out of our crews. I mean, we already own the great all. So you're looking at labor and equipment and manpower. You're not looking at really any materials to do ditching. Or only materials are not required to ditch. But we'll see some erosion control things to go back and see and I was just looking at.
 like for instance the overtime line or whatever like that too. All right. I'm gonna again kind of look back over here to my left and see if anybody has any other questions. Councilor Wilts. Okay so now that I've had a minute to look at this and
 here. The total budget request is 2.5 and some. And at least this, the anticipated revenue is 690. A bit of an over budget. Tell me about that. How does that work?
 have a cash balance if we need to and typically we don't spend all of our appropriations so we use the transfer mechanism when we can. Thanks. Okay any other questions? I would just like to remind ourselves that when they can save on this and then it reverts and stays on that fund
 Next time they need a big piece of equipment, instead of putting it on property tax on the GEO bond, they can maybe cover some of it of this. Like the street sweeper. Okay. Seeing no further questions, may we please have a roll call vote? Councillor Crossley? Yes. Councillor Iverson? Yes.
 Councilor Feidl? Yes. Councilor Wilz? Yes. Councilor Henry? Yes. Councilor Hawk? Yes. Motion carries, unanimous. All right, next up is item B, which is the county general portion of the highway department.
 Council, I move to open for discussion. Review Fund 1000-0530 County General Highway with the category requests of the personnel category $907,830, supplies $400,000, services $25,000, capital $0 for a total budget of $1,332,830. Second. All right, Ms. Ridge.
 Okay, so in the past, the council has appropriated 1.5 million for our community crossing program. That grant has changed tremendously. Actually, it'll go down to one call a year. That call will be in October for 2026. The funding for that program across the state has decreased tremendously. It will be a lot more competitive, less awards.
 So it is not a guarantee for any county or any LPA, any local public agency. So with that said, we were proposing to move nine of our admin positions along with the FICA, perf and insurance to replace that 1.5 to help our MVH budget. Anything that we have left over in our budget
 is goes strictly to paving. It goes to our by two minutes line. We were over budgeted, over budget for 2025. I don't typically, I don't like working that way, never have. I'm not comfortable with that. So there needs to be changes moving forward with that budget. So that is why you see this proposal in front of you.
 As far as the gas and oil lubricants and the repair building and structure, we took that out of MVH.
 a year ago, we put it into the Local Road and Street Fund. The Local Road and Street Fund typically pays for our major infrastructure road projects. Coming up would be the old 37 North, South and Dillman Road that'll be over the next three or four years. We also use it for our salt for the roads. We have a bituminous line in there that we use it also for. But this gasoline line basically is for the whole county.
 We purchased the gasoline out of our MV or out of our local road and street, and then we get reimbursed from all the departments. We were wanting to move that into the county general location because it's basically, it's a county fund, it's, it's, it's for all departments that get billed. And then it gets reimbursed back into that line.
 The repair building and structure is for different things like the insurance, the tank fees, the inspections that we also pay for used to be out of NVH. Now we moved it to local road and street to help the NVH. So again, I feel like that's an overall county cost, not a highway cost. That's why we were proposing to move that also with those employees staying under the 1.5 million that you've allocated to our department the last two years.
 but then also helping us to be able to use our other funding from MBH to apply still for the CCMG grant out of those budgets versus the county general. Thank you for that explanation. That helps. Alright, I'm going to look over to my right and see if anybody has any questions. I'm so hot.
 Councilor Hinn. So yeah, I'm just trying to wrap my head around this like the new person I am. So is this double budgeted right now then? Okay, so where is the better place for the single budget of this to live? Because if it's doubled, I mean, we're trying to hack down the number here of the overall 9 million, right? So I'm trying to understand if we have multiple items here, if it is double budgeted, where should this live?
 MVH here in general fund. Where? At the top of the screen here. MVH 1176 and it's also in 1169. Okay, thanks. Maybe I'll ask the auditor. Just the gas and oil is in 1169. So maybe I'll ask the auditor. So what's the real effect here on the budget? Just means we're eating into the levy.
 You know, over 1.3 into that levy, into that 9 million. So it's up to you to determine where you want it. That's already been there for the last two years. It's already been budgeted just in a different category. Sure. Was that supposed to be temporary? No. Never listed as temporary. We put it in the last. Because I thought community crossing was going away, so it was going to be there until it went away. But that's my recollection. It could be incorrect. No. It's never been stated that community crossings was going away.
 and anything that I've dealt with since 2016. Okay, so you're saying it's been there? It's been there. They still put it still back into House Bill 1461 and still being funded. It's just being funded a different mechanism. And then I'm going to go down the line because I saw Councilor Decker and then I'll go Councilor Wilts. I think you were talking to liaisons and sending this out to Council
 in this process so that we can figure this out. Your argument essentially on this is that your department and you particularly have had the hot hand in attracting those outside dollars. As motor vehicle funding goes down, this takes obligation out of there so we can continue to attract those dollars for as long as we can and bring that in and do more with our taxpayers for the maximum. Am I saying this right?
 Yeah it's just a lot of change and a lot of increase with the MVH and you're correct the MVH funding if you've watched any of the presentations from LTAP and the MVH it's going down it's not going up your your parts your supplies everything that we maintain and work on everything has gone up so you can't sustain that if and we have a cash balance but you can't be over budget every year
 and sustain that to moving forward and again I'm not. We were over budget over budgeted in twenty twenty five. And I'm I'm not comfortable with that sustainable. And our pace for paving obviously things. Things do go down over time when costs go up you can do you can't can only do so much but our pace of paving which is
 picked up in the last few years, kind of because you've been managing that, this would at least kind of maintain that for at least a couple minutes more, right? We have only been able to maintain that with that 1.5 that you have provided. And that is paving roughly 50 miles of roadway of 710 miles of roadway. If we don't have the assistance or we don't make changes however we make these changes, your paving is going to
 drop in half the way it used to be and then we are back in the in the condition that we were eight years ago and people want the road paved how long's your list would you say the request list that you have on people saying when you come in here and all that well you never do enough we've just paved union valley road and i bet we've received
 ten calls from ten subdivisions that connect to Union Valley, and you had a paver out here, so why didn't you just bring it into the subdivision? It's just not doable if we lose more funding. We do as much as we can. And do we have a long list of requests? Absolutely, we have. We just pulled it because we're already trying to look at October for the CCMG call.
 on what we can afford. It went down to a million dollar call. It's not a 1.5 at this point. So we're trying to make that list and prioritize what we can put into that list come October 4, 2026. We're already working on 2026 list. All right. Councilor Woods.
 I never heard that community crossings was going away, but there was an understanding in my mind that we've added more to paving and community crossings intentionally to pick up the pace on trying to keep up on the hundreds and hundreds of miles. If community crossings, though, is going down by 500,000,
 then that to me seems like a place to, I mean, when we're looking to get $9 million out of this budget, not your budget in particular, that might be a place to do it. And I do wonder if, what I need to see, I think too, is, sorry, this is not a question, apparently, because I'm talking myself in circles,
 I also feel like we need to look at the other funds, the MVH, local road, and write side by side, see what the... I'm very visual, so I need to take the spreadsheets and print them and put them like this. And I have not done that, that's on me. So I think that this budget,
 is it it's causing a little bit more scrutiny I think from council because of weeks and we expected that I mean and the only thing I can say about the community crossing is and over the years we were pretty comfortable that we were very competitive in that and we did good applications and we were prepared and we knew when we applied for that community crossing grant we had the funds to back it up
 there is not a given that you're gonna get that community I would hate to see you hate to see a million be reserved for it and then it's lost because we did not get that that award so we were trying to make changes that we know that those were taken care of and then what's left we will apply for it with our other budget if we get it or we don't get it whether it's doubled or not that million still gets to go to the roads
 and paving, whether if we didn't get the CCMG, that million did not, because we did not receive it. I see another hand waving at me. So over here, Councilor Henry. Thank you, Madam President. So I know we're spending a lot of time trying to figure out
 Identifying or triaging challenges that we're here, but maybe some solutioning may help too. So it strikes me that the edit is sitting there and it's untapped. And it sounds like economic development activity that we could use to offset some of this. Auditor, what's the current balance in the edit?
 Yeah, that balance is $19,570,977. I wonder what the temperature of council is to start to tap some of that resource for actual economic development, given the situation we're looking at here. Councilor Iverson. I'm going to keep this really brief. Those dollars are earmarked for the justice complex. We need those dollars for bonding capabilities. So I think... I don't think we actually know the answer to that until we speak with FSG. I don't think we should touch those dollars.
 so we got that anybody else counselor hawk yes well it's um it's interesting uh to hear you say you know we shouldn't touch the economic development dollars and of course i've been a big one to say the minute we start doing that and we open up that door those dollars will be gone
 Although I'm also hearing from several folks that we're not real interested in this gigantic price tag on the jail proposal. So in the meantime, while we're dithering around about how big a jail should be or how gorgeous that big, beautiful jail is supposed to be. Is this related to the budget? It is, absolutely. Please let me finish. I was just asking, sure.
 is being considered perhaps we could get into that economic development tax money to provide some economic development for the paving leave the salaries where they are in the highway budget and not in the general fund budget
 but take what they want to do, which is the paving, and move those dollars over into economic development. That doesn't mean it's there permanently. It means it's going to give them a place to go to until we get to 2028. Now that's what I'm hearing. Am I hearing? What am I getting? That's sort of what I'm hearing. So we asked, Council Henry asked the question,
 One council member said his statement, you said yours, that's fine. It's a democracy and we can all do that. And so now I'm trying to go down the line of, Councilor Henry asked the question, what say you to the rest of the council members of the appetite of ED lit for this particular item? Does anybody have anything? Councilor Decker. I think that's a larger question that is outside the scope of what we have before us.
 The question is, how do you make sure that these two department leaders can continue to maximize dollars so people get paved roads? And how creative can you be under the constraints of the state will change the rules in 22 minutes? How can you do that? So that project, the correction project, which I don't think I'm dithering on, maybe people have some guilt on that, but I don't.
 That's a separate question that's been well discussed and will be discussed more. Going down the line, does anybody else have anything related to this? Yes, Councilor Williams. And this does have to do with the lift as we're in a tough spot.
 so to speak. And if not, if not this for help, if not the tapping into the lit, where else? I mean, we have to take it, we have to take money out of somewhere. And we're collecting dollars for longer than we had anticipated before bonding.
 I'm not entirely opposed to that, although I, you know, I recognize that there are severe implications with respect to a bigger project. But you could, I mean, we could move some things out of general and maybe,
 look at the lit to fund the bituminous. And then you've got, that would make a big dent. Again, we are not solving all the problems this evening. No. But this is the conversation to get us to the bigger picture and the bigger goal here.
 That is a very interesting point that we could further look to explore. All right. Considering we have other things on the highway department, does anybody else have anything other questions related to this general county general part of their budget?
 So what what's our county attorney advise us to do when we have not come at arrived at a bit the bigger solution because we don't have all the bigger numbers as yet. Should we just table this and bring it back to when we have arrived at at a number that is workable because this we can't spend more money than what we have. So.
 You could table the budget, but you're just voting to move it forward. And at any night, you can make changes to it. So it's not final adoption. I mean, this can be changed at any time. But if we voted to approve it, it appears. If everybody said yes, we're going to leave it in general, then that means we've got to figure out some way to get something out of general to make up the difference. We have literally
 And I know I've been many hairstyles and about four years on council, but what I again want to reiterate and the same my first rodeo is the fact that as counselor or.
 Ms. Turner King has said, and I've said repeatedly this evening, that this is something that we are having a discussion on. We can still move this forward, however, by moving this forward does not necessarily mean this is the end all be all, and this is as adopted as presented, we move forward, and it's good to go in 26. Because we can think of several departments where we have
 said yes, and then after going home and thinking about it and long weekends and whatnot, we have come back to the discussions and we have opened those up and we've made changes. I can think of maybe about a year or so ago for the commissioner's budget. I recall there was a conversation that we did there. So again, hearing the conversations, hearing the appetite of ED lit to not ED lit, bituminous, not bituminous, all of those things,
 We can all take that into consideration. But again, moving this forward is not saying yes to all of this related to this particular item in their budget. We don't have a motion on the floor. Yeah, we have the underline. Yes, but nobody's made anything else. All right. So any other questions? Yes. A question for you.
 When we get to where these things are double budgeted, I can come back and still refer back to this budget. Absolutely, absolutely. Cool. All right. All right. So here not maybe please have a roll call vote. The motion read was to open for discussion and review the fund.
 same motion we've done with all the funds. You turn on your microphone so this can be on record, please. I move to table this budget to later time, which will be decided no later than next what next Monday or Tuesday.
 If you're going to table it to a specific date, we have to know the date, or you can table it indefinitely and bring it back up during a budget session. Indefinitely sounds good to me. Does that have any practical difference than what we're doing right now? We're deciding to decide later on all the budgets. Nothing concrete. I know.
 So there was a motion. I don't know if I heard a second. So, and as we've had other things today, if there's no motion, or if there's a motion, there's no second, then it fails. Got it. All right. So, Michelle, as I asked, can you please call a roll call vote? Councilor Iverson? Yes. Councilor Decker? Yes. Okay. Yes.
 Yes. Councillor Henry. Councillor Hawk. Repeat this emotion, please. It's a motion for us to to consider this another time. We are in a roll call so we can't do anything. I'll just say no. Okay. Anybody can ask for a repeat of the motion, please.
 Councillor Crosley. All right, so. Yes, can we please have the finish. Councillor Crosley. Yes. Motion carries unanimous or big pardon six to one. Thank you. And again, these are opening up discussions, there is no.
 conversation of anybody making any line item changes. Everything that we've done since about five o'clock this evening has been opening up discussions to talk about the items as presented. So moving on to item C. Council I move to open for discussion and review fund one one three five dash zero zero zero zero cumulative bridge.
 with a category request of personnel at $491,062, supplies at $471,000, services at $1,977,603, and capital, $1, for a total budget of $2,939,666. Second. All right. Please proceed.
 I guess in personnel. The only thing we did was stick with the recommendation of the board. Supplies, we were only moving things around to coincide with the correct name of a fund over an account line. Services was the same. The only additional two services is if you'll see, I have two construction matches put into the
 bridge which would be our $600,000 estimated match for bridge 308 and 980,000 for the Eagles and bridge both of those are supposed to go to letting in January and February and that would be as of right now that would be our match that would be recommended at the time it's awarded.
 I do realize if you look at the estimated revenue that we are approximately 600,000 over. We have 2.6 in our cash right now because we anticipated these two construction matches in 2026. So we would be able to pull from our cash balance for those construction matches. Okay, anybody over here to my love have any questions on this particular item?
 To my right, Councillor Hawke. Yes, we know that this is a rate-controlled fund, .0213, I believe it is, and so whatever that rate times our net assessed value is the dollar amount that it will bring in, and they certainly cannot spend any more than what comes in and whatever is still sitting there in their balance, and they'll be watching this very carefully to make sure that there's
 spending only what they have and so there's no reason to not move forward with this. Okay anybody else over here to my right got any questions? Looking over here to my left. All right maybe please have a roll call vote. Councilor Decker? Yes. Councilor Feidl? Yes.
 Councillor Henry. Councillor Hawk. Yes, Councillor cross Lee. Yes, Councillor Iverson. Yes, motion passes unanimous.
 Council, I move to open for discussion and review fund 1169-0000 Local Road and Street with the category requests of personnel at $0, supplies at $1,060,002, services at $495,003, and capital at $1 for a total budget of $1,555,006. All right, Ms. Ridge.
 As you can see, this includes some of that double budget of the $425,000 for the gas and the $25,000 for inspection fees and things. So depending on what happens with the other budget, this one will also need to be adjusted. Anything extra we had gone ahead and proposed to put into the bituminous line if those changes happen. If you have any
 questions on anything else. That was probably the biggest change in here. Counselor Decker. I had a quick one and you can always get back to me on this one too. I saw on a salt liquid. What's liquid? See what's the CA calcium and deicing sand. I saw the price increase went up from 320. Well, what you're asking for went up from 320 to 420.
 and in the notes it says price increase how about how far out do you know roughly what pricing will be on things like that. We just did bids for salt for over the next year and a lot of that also depends and Toby can speak on this too is which salt we use the untreated or treated we've kind of actually started using more salt trying to use less sand and then using the
 better salt, treated salt on our major roads, like a Curry Pike that has four lanes and the traffic that it carries, or Business 37 North, old 37 North. So we are treating the roads a little bit differently than we have in the past, and we feel like it's helped us a lot. Of course, we have the brine system also to assist with that, but it has to do with the amount of salt that we're using and the treated salt that we're also using. Seth.
 That is correct, yeah. We're using a better material. It's not a huge cost more, but it's much better. It works much quicker. It works at colder temperatures. Our employees appreciate it because they get off the road faster and we get them opened up faster. Okay, Councilor Wilts.
 regarding that same line, then is this year's budget, 320, is that also using kind of the newer things? I guess what I'm asking is it's gone up from last year, that makes sense, price increase, but it's gone way up from years prior to that. So it was like this and then,
 like this and I'm just wondering when. Another thing we will do is that is a bid price. So we will normally max that line out at the end of the year because we know it's going to go up the next year. So we will fill our barn up or we will spend everything in that line to get as much as we can before it goes up. So we might be buying salt in March and April and May.
 just to go ahead and spend that line out and try to get it why it's cheaper than when it comes again the next year when it's more expensive. All right. Looking over here to my right. Do y'all have any questions? Nope. All right. All right. Michelle, can we please have a roll call vote? Councillor Faital. Yes. Councillor Wills.
 Yes. Councillor Henry. Yes. Councillor Hawk. Yes. Councillor Crossley. Yes. Councillor Iverson. Yes. Councillor Deckard. Yes. Motion passes unanimous. All right, we move to item E. Council, I move to open for discussion and review fund 1171-0000 County Major Bridge.
 with a category request of personnel zero, supply zero, services are at $3,660,059, capital is at zero for a total budget of $3,660,059. Ms. Ridge? Yeah, if you have any questions for this budget, we pretty well
 budget what our estimated revenue will be. I know I was contacted today about the heavy balance that I have in that account. I think it's a little over 10 million. It's I'm not saving that we have Mount Tabor Road bridge that's under design getting ready to go into right away. That estimate for construction of that is $7 million. We also have the Dillman Road bridge in there that's going to end up being a 200 foot length bridge when it's constructed. So that
 This fund is also covering the matches in the grant fund. So we transfer from the cash to that. And also the old business 37 North Bridge that is under design will also be over a 200 foot bridge. And the funds from this fund will be used to cover those grant funds for our matches and everything. So that's why that has that hefty amount in it, but it is allocated. All right.
 any questions over here to my right miss hawk yes do you see any movement there at all or i'd have to look at the legislation on this one if it will be possible to move some of the administrative cost over to this fund
 That's what I was reached out to today. It's a very restricted fund at this point. There's only, I believe, seven counties in the state that have a major bridge fund. And you can only, you can only use those funds for a bridge that's over 200 foot in length. I believe right now we have, we had six when we created the fund back in 2018. Since then we have the Fullerton Pike Bridge. And then we have, again,
 the other bridges, the Mount Tabor, Dillman and Business 37 North that will add to that list. It's in my hopes there's another county out there that has had the restriction lifted off of their major bridge fund to where they can use their major bridge fund for any of their
 bridges in their inventory. We have 157 bridges in our inventory. It would be my hopes that sometime we could get legislative to maybe lift that restriction. I have reached out. I've put the word out. I've talked to our association that that would be our goal to try and be able to utilize the bridge fund for normal county maintenance on our other bridges. But again, it would be only between the Kuhn Bridge and the bridge fund that you could use that in.
 I know some counties use say a CUNE bridge fund, or if they have the major bridge fund taken away, they can use it for a percentage of those administrative costs, say a county engineer, 25% or something like that. But at this point, it's very strict restricted on the use of this fund.
 You're seeing that in other counties, you're seeing them using their cum bridge for some administrative cause, but not their major bridge. Right. We use our cum bridge for our bridge crew and that administrative that actually work on bridges and do bridge work. You can do that. And you know, in the past, I would never have suggested any of this movement around like this. I fully support
 you folks getting the money from some fun to get your job done. So anybody else over here have any questions? All right. Can we please have a roll call vote? Councilor Wills? Yes. Councilor Henry? Yes. Hock? Yes. Councilor Crosley? Yes. Councilor Iverson? Yes. Councilor Decker? Yes. Councilor Feidl?
 motion carries unanimous all right and next up is item f uh council i move to open for discussion review fund one one seven three dash zero zero zero zero motor vehicle highway restricted with the category requests of the personnel is zero supplies is 860 000 services is one million six hundred thirty thousand dollars capital is zero dollars for a total budget of two million four hundred ninety thousand dollars okay
 All right.
 Ms. Ridge. This is the restricted portion that comes from the motor vehicle highway distribution. You can only use it for certain activities that you do in the department, which is paving. That's what we utilize this fund more for stoning our gravel roads or traffic signal maintenance. Contractual is hiring out, bidding out, paving projects, sidewalk maintenance. We are committed in our ADA plan to use so much of our funds
 our ADA compliance and our sidewalk repairs and maintenance. Pavement striping and our thermo and our infrastructure line is also used for paving. All right. Looking over here to my left to see if anybody has any questions. No. Oh, OK. Anybody over here to my right have any questions? No. All right.
 Can we please have a roll call vote? Council Henry? Yes. Councilor Hawk? Yes. Councilor Crosley? Yes. Councilor Iverson? Yes. Councilor Decker? Yes. Councilor Feidl? Yes. Councilor Wilz? Yes. Motion carries unanimous. All right, next up item G. Council I move for open for discussion and review fund 1176-0000 motor vehicle highway with category requests of
 personnel $4,152,975, supplies category $172,302, services category $515,507, capital category $5,502, for a total budget of $4,846,286. Second. All right, Ms. Ridge.
 can go over any we did we stuck with the the cola record recommendation again it's double budgeted with the nine positions and as you can tell if you look at the estimated revenue it is and you keep those positions in there and we put by two minutes the way we have it we are over budget just as we were in 2025
 So that way you can see how it affects that full MVH budget by leaving those in there. The other insurance increase that was due to the invoice that we received this year for our insurance. And we had to, I believe we had to do a transfer into that account. Really have any capital except maybe some chairs replacement.
 other questions. That's pretty much the gist of that budget. Okay. All right. Anybody have any questions over here to my right? Does anybody else have any questions? Yeah. Um, looking at this,
 Can someone quickly tell me the revenue for this particular fund? I have it right at 4.326. And that is derived from our MVH distribution of 2,493,177, and then our wheel tax distribution, our national forestry distribution, our engineer allowance, and then miscellaneous revenue.
 same thing but that's what I have. I would like to make a motion to float this in public because I feel like yes we're not making binding decisions right now however I feel like it's important to have these discussions in public and
 while it's in front of us. So I would move to take the personnel, the personnel salaries and put them in this fund, leave them in this fund, take them out of general fund where they're double budgeted. Second.
 Okay, we got a motion and a second. Any discussion any further discussion rather on this motion. No. Council Henry. It's a great idea. Okay, a double second. Anybody else have any questions on this motion or comments. Council Iverson. I really like this motion in particular Councilmember Wilts because I do think we need to have these conversations in public.
 I do think we need to talk about these things in public. I also want to remind everyone about Councillor Crossley's initial statements. None of this is final. We are simply having these conversations to address our options here, and we're doing so with as much transparency as possible. I know my motion did not have math or numbers.
 You're just saying leave it as is. I'm saying leave this one as is, which means we gotta go back. We'll have to go back later. Okay, so you're just making no? Yep. Okay. Anybody else have any discussion? Councillor Hock. Yes, and as a reminder, part of what was being discussed earlier,
 was we know that if we do this, it really hurts the bituminous line, but there's nothing to say that as time goes on, we can't find another slot for the bituminous line. Oh, I won't mention where, but you know, somewhere. Agreed. Yeah. All right. Sorry. Is it OK to say something? Of course. Yes. So just keeping that in mind, I understand.
 but we only budgeted 150,000 in bituminous. We're over 500,000. So I'd appreciate the assistance on where we're gonna cut another 400,000 out of this budget and not cut employees. Right. So Ms. Ridge has made that a note to us and I hope that we can proceed with caution with that. Okay. Maybe please have a roll call vote.
 Councillor Hawk? Yes. Councillor Crosley? Yes. Councillor Iverson? Yes. Councillor Deckard? Yes. Councillor Feidl? Yes. Councillor Wilz? Yes. Councillor Henry? Motion carries, unanimous. So that was the amendment. That was the amendment. So now we need to have a roll call vote on the overall discussion.
 because we didn't change anything. We left everything as is. So what you can do is later, even at a different session, you can go back into the general fund highway part and make corrections. You can do it later tonight or you can do it... Got it. That's not the budget that we're... Okay, okay.
 So we can move on. Okay. Okay. Item D. Oh, well, H, sorry. It's been a long night. Council, I move to open for discussion. Review Fund 4920-0000.
 westside economic development tiff with the category requests of personnel zero supply zero services at one million seven hundred thirty six thousand two hundred ninety six dollars capital at four hundred ninety eight thousand nine hundred ninety one dollars for a total budget of two million two hundred thirty five thousand two hundred eighty seven dollars all right miss rich you want to miss uh mentioned we found a mistake in the mvh for the self-insurance
 So I want to make sure that gets out there. I didn't get a chance to catch that. And our original budget, it was $756,000. And then we removed $162,000 to take it to county general. It did not get added back into our NVH as a double budget. Sorry about that. Well, that goes up another $162,000. So that goes up another $162,000. So in this budget,
 We're staying within our estimated revenue. And basically, this is just projects. We have our vernal pipe connector, should be done later in the month. But we will be closing out that account. So we budgeted funds to work to close that project out. We have our multi-use trail for any improvements to our trail system, the annual review, engineering and constructions, what we use for any Westside TIF.
 We have the stem payment in there also for next year the disbursement to bank for the bond, and then the fire truck payment. The only thing that's added is a curry pike reconstruction for $650,000.
 That's a new project that we're going to do over the next three years. But the RDC has approved us moving forward for drainage improvements, sidewalk improvements, and road reconstruction for Curry Pike from Bloomington City Limits out to State Road 46. But we will be doing it in phases over the next three years so we can stay within our budget.
 Anybody over here to my left have any questions? Anybody over here to my right have any questions? All right, seeing none, maybe please have a roll call vote. Councilor Crosley? Yes. Councilor Iverson? Yes. Councilor Deckard? Yes. Councilor Feidl? Yes. Councilor Wilts? Yes. Councilor Henry? Yes. Councilor Hauk? Yes. Motion carries, unanimous.
 you know. Next up item I. Council I move to open for discussion review fund four nine two one dash zero zero zero zero forty six corridor economic development tip with the category requests of personnel zero supply zero services five hundred three thousand two hundred one dollars capital zero for a total budget of five hundred three thousand two hundred one dollars. Second. And this isn't just budgeted for the tip annual review.
 and our disbursement to the bank according to the FSG report and their guidance. Okay, looking over here to my right, anybody got any questions? To my left. Please have a roll call vote. Councilor Hyverson? Yes. Councilor Decker? Yes. Councilor Feidl? Yes. Councilor Wilts? Yes.
 Councillor Henry stepped away. Councillor Hawke. Councillor Crosley. Yes. Motion carries 6-0. All right. And next up, item J. Council, I move to open for discussion and review Fund 4922-0000 Fullerton Pike Economic Development TIF with the category requests of Personnel Zero, Supply Zero, Services at $133,000, Capital Zero,
 for a total budget of $133,000. Second. All right. And this is just for the annual review. And if any engineering or construction come within that TIF limit and stays within the estimated revenue. Anybody over here to my left? To my right. Anybody have any questions? All right. Maybe please have a roll call vote. Councilor Decker? Yes.
 Councilor Feidl? Yes. Councilor Wilts? Yes. Councilor Hawk? Yes. Councilor Crosley? Yes. Councilor Iverson? Yes. Motion passes 6-0. Okay, and last item is item K. Council, I move to open for discussion and review fund 4934-0000, Curry Profile TIF. With the category request of personnel zero, supply zero, services at $25,689,
 capital zero for a total budget of $25,689. Second. All right. We got a motion and a second. This is just also for the annual review and disbursement to the bank. Right. Over here to my right. Anybody have any questions? Looking to my left. Anybody have any questions? All right. May please have a roll call vote. Councillor Fiddle. Yes.
 Councillor Wilkes. Yes. Councillor Hawke. Councillor Crosley. Yes. Councillor Iverson. Yes. Councillor Deckard. Yes. Motion passes 6-0. Thank you. We appreciate y'all. Thank y'all so much. Next up is item 12, which is TSD.
 Council, I move to open for discussion and review fund 1000-0106 County General TSD with a category requests of $252,617, supplies at $13,702, services at $270,000, capital at zero for a total budget of $536,319.
 Thank you. All right. And we have Mr. Greg home here from TSD. Welcome. Hello. Thank you, everyone. Good evening. For those of you who don't know her, this is Wendy Gauss. She's our office manager and telephone guru. So many of you has dealt with her many times on the phone, getting her problems straightened out. So one thing I'd like to point out, our 25 budget was static from our 24. We did not ask for any increases.
 What we've done is try to find ways to reduce costs internally without sacrificing service or products that we're providing to the county and to the departments so that they can do their functions. This year for the 26 requested budget, we have reduced it just a small amount. You'll notice there were some changes in our supply line for computer and supplies and repair and maintenance.
 We know those costs are going to increase. Over the last couple of years during COVID, there wasn't a PC refresh going because they weren't able to buy computers. So that's why we're seeing less money come out of those supply lines this year because the equipment, we're replacing it with new equipment. So we haven't had to do some of the repair pieces. But some of those machines are now hitting three years old, some of those devices. So we know those repair lines are going to come up and have the increased cost.
 One thing we did do I did do put in a $30,000 reduction under our telephone maintenance. We are still working with AT&T to get us off the Centrix copper lines.
 So that will have some cost reduction. However, there's going to be onboarding costs, device costs and things associated with new contract with AT&T to get us over on the complete HBS or hosted voice service. So while we were able to make some cuts out of that, we know there's going to be upcoming costs that's going to get us close to that line. So we didn't want to do a deep dive into that with that new agreement coming up.
 for an increase to our part-time budget. Right now, we currently pay $17 an hour to our part-time employees. I'm trying to get that up at least to $18 an hour. Additionally, I'm trying to add one more part-time staff to try to take some of the burden off my senior full-time staff from covering meetings and things like that so that they can move forward with their supervisory roles and getting that higher-end work done.
 In 24, we did see a less number on that for our part-time, but that should be noted that we had one employee, part-time employee who was on deployment with the United States Air Force. So he was gone a good portion of the year. It took us a little bit to get some more warm bodies in the seats to fill that. So that's why the 24 numbers, you see our part-time line didn't quite meet it. But like I said, with this increase that I'm hoping to do for our staff, as well as add one more part-time person, that when we ran the numbers, we could do the
 $90,000. Okay. All righty. And looking over here to my left to see if anybody has any questions. Councilor Wilts. Yeah. How many part-time staff do you have? Right now currently we have three. Three and you're looking to have four is what you're thinking. Well actually I've got one vacancy to fill we just had an employee to leave so I'm actually looking for five part-time staff so I need to
 need to fill the one seat we already have and add one more okay and the the primary duties for the are they all the same type of position they are mainly this is the entry level the the low level tech work that needs to be done they get stuck doing a lot of the hod carrying for lack of a better term when we're having to move equipment they're also working these meetings that we have day and night
 And that's part of it. A lot of times my full-time staff, especially senior staffs having to cover these meetings, makes it a little bit challenging during the day when we're short some staff. So I'm trying to fill those with some more part-time bodies to make that easier on them. So council, make your meeting shorter. All right. Oh, I'm just kidding. All right. Anybody over here to my right that has any questions? No.
 Can we please have a roll call vote? Councilor Wills? Yes. Councilor Henry? Yes. Councilor Hawke? Yes. Councilor Crosley? Yes. Councilor Iverson? Yes. Councilor Dunn? Yes. Councilor Feinle? Yes. Motion passes 7-0. All right, and we are at item B, public safety let.
 Council I move to open for discussion review fund one one seven zero dash zero one zero six public safety lit TSD With the category requests of personnel zero supplies zero services zero, but capital is at two hundred eighty seven thousand five hundred thirty eight dollars for a total budget of two hundred eighty seven thousand five hundred and thirty eight second Okay, so
 So this 47-100 line is actually for the Axon body cam system that the Sheriff's Department uses. So that includes body cams for all the officers. It also includes the interrogation room where they do their interviews. And that also covers evidence storage in the cloud for evidence.com. And that space is also shared with Public Defender's Office.
 we know so right now you can see we haven't expended out of this line but that bill's not due till October so that's why you're still seeing money sitting there that's all getting ready to go away additionally
 This Axon agreement, this will be the last payment we make on our five year contract. So that means we're going to have to make a new contract for 26. And we've already been advised by Axon that there will be considerable cost increases. Also been made aware that the Sheriff's Department has some needs for additional equipment that would come out of that line. So that's why I'm not looking for a reduction right now. All right.
 Anybody have any questions, Councilor Decker? Just a quick question, and this may rely on a lot different people to shake their heads in the room. We've had body cams roughly how long now? Honestly, I couldn't answer that question for Council. 2020-ish? Before 2020. You should probably come to the mic. Yeah. Sorry. Sorry. Yeah. I swear I have a point with all this.
 we did we did start using them during Brad Swain's administration and that also we also extended it into the jail as well during that administration and then also weren't service and other other items that was you know that that was an agreement that that we reach so it's pretty what usage is widespread. Yeah thank you very much for giving the context on it the reason I bring up this point is you know all the time we hear
 We're coming up with new things to fund and blow dollars and you know smoke cigarettes and hang out but the reality is most of the public. Though that wasn't maybe what they're born conceiving or thinking they want that body cam and they want to see it and shoot judging by YouTube views alone people really they they like to know what happens right wrong or indifferent and.
 287,000 was something that our predecessors 20 years ago were not sitting in here talking about. So I just bring that to light because there's all these things that get added in and it's not just hanging out and shooting the breeze. So thanks for letting me make that point. Anybody else have any questions about this? All right, seeing no, may we please have a roll call vote? Councillor Henry. Yes, Councillor Hawk.
 Councillor Crosley? Yes. Councillor Iverson? Yes. Councillor Decker? Yes. Councillor Feidl? Yes. Councillor Woods? Yes. Motion passes 7-0. Alright and last item is the election fund.
 Council I move to open for discussion and review fund one two one five dash zero one zero six election fund TSD with the category requests of personnel zero supply zero But services are at ten thousand dollars capital is at zero for a total budget of ten thousand dollars Thank you. All right So this fund was created last year this account was and it's
 The intent is to support election services with any unplanned expenses as far as computer equipment, things like that. So it gives us a little bit of an IT operating budget should we have to help at voter edge, help at voter central, wherever they may need the extra equipment at. OK. And looking over here to my right to see if anybody has any questions.
 Councilor Henry. Thank you. Thank you, Greg. I just made for my own clarification, especially as we get to the clerk's budget in a few days. What what's the what's the granular use case? Like what would be a condition where we would be using you all to do something verse what they've contracted over at elections are? Let me be clear on that. This wasn't saying that we would be taking doing any part of the election rule. This is saying if they needed
 some more scanners, if they needed some printers to be purchased, if there was all of a sudden they had a justified reason for laptops that we needed to come up with, that's for that kind of thing. This is not for TSD to be operating an election. Okay, thank you. No problem. All right, Councilor Wilts. So to that point, it's under contractual because you have a contract for those types of purchases?
 I'm sorry under contractual. I meant I meant the clerks have the contracts not. That's why I said he was speaking at the clerk's office, not myself. I say OK, so your purchase it like this line that we're talking about in the election fund. It's contractual. This would be for one time expenditures for peripheral devices that they may need. Like I said, for electronics so. Right, so.
 Are those I mean I'm just asking why it's not contractual why it's contractual and not supplies. Or oh okay that's that's a good question I didn't that's all I'm sorry that'd be a question know that I would have to because I wasn't I didn't create the phone I don't know how why it was listed as contractual okay because yeah. No you're. Good point I think that we did this.
 It was just to kind of be as a buffer backup, because we're actually working on providing the new voter registration space. And so there really shouldn't be any particular needs that's not accounted for in that creation of that space. So I think this was just thrown in there as a just in case. And in my mind, I think, which I may not have shared with Jeff or with Greg,
 is that we may need to have some additional wiring or something done in the area. That was what that was for, for a contractual kind of situation. All right. Anybody else have any questions related to this item? 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. Councilor Henry? Motion passes seven zero. Thank you. Thank you very much. All right. Next up is the last item of the evening, which is the Board of Commissioners.
 Council, I move to open for discussion. That's right. Fund 1000-0307. County General Fleet with a category request of personnel at $79,595. Supplies, $0.
 Service is $35,350. Capital at $0 for a total budget of $114,945. Becca. OK, thank you. And we got a motion in a second and we just got some items here. Some whole lot and.
 We, yes, please go ahead. Yes. So when we met with our liaisons earlier, Jill had printed off our ledgers for them to be able to see what kind of purchases were coming out of the respective lines. And I believe they found those to be helpful. And so she went ahead and prepared these for you guys this evening.
 that you can actually see. What kind of expenditures are coming out of the respective lines so that's current to. Last Thursday I believe it was- so. Just just a just kind of to get bring you up to speed as to where we're at this year clearly I understand that we're- now talking about a budget for next year and we'll have a corollary increase
 Yeah. So, um, if I understand correctly opened up the county general fleet maintenance budget. That's right. 1000 dash zero three zero seven. Okay. Um, in this budget, uh, that's where we generally pay for expenses associated associated with non law enforcement vehicles. Um, it also is, um, pays for part of, um, our, um,
 Sorry, building and fleet manager's salary at 75%. I went blank on that one. I don't. Yeah, I'm so sorry. And if you have any questions about this particular budget, we're here to. Happy to answer. OK. Looking over here to my right to see if anybody has any questions on this item from the Board of Commissioners.
 So first of all, let me just say I appreciate the reductions that we made in here. I think it's always helpful to meet with such intelligent and handsome liaisons. So really appreciate that. But in all seriousness, I think it was really helpful to go through this and really understand where some of these lines were coming from and the reductions. I think that's really helpful. Thank you.
 Looking over here to my left. Anybody got any questions? Maybe. Okay. On that case, can we please have a roll call vote? Councilor Crosley? Yes. Councilor Iverson? Yes. Councilor Decker? Yes. Councilor Feidl? Yes. Councilor Wilts? Yes. Councilor Henry? Yes. Councilor Hogg? Motion passes seven zero. All right, item B.
 Let special purpose fleet Council I move to open for discussion and review fund one one one four dash zero three zero seven lit special purpose fleets with the category requests of personnel zero supply zero services six thousand capital zero for a total budget of six thousand dollars Thank you so in this particular budget
 25% of our building and fleet manager's position is included. And the other components of this is actually for the maintenance of the sheriff's vehicles, so the law enforcement vehicles. We had, and this was brought kind of to our attention during our liaison meeting,
 there's actually an animal control maintenance line, there's jail maintenance line, but we found that we're not using those consistently because they're all considered part of the sheriff's department. So we just moved those all into one line. That went over that with you. I know. All right, looking over here to my right to see if anybody has any questions.
 Looking over here to my left to see if anybody has any questions. Councilor Wilts. Just about the need to update note. I have a question. What was the motion that was read? I read that I wanted to open for discussion review fund 1114-0307 lit special purpose fleets. So that was special purpose.
 Talking about public safety. With regards to to so that's why I was concerned about the personnel line. Yes, thank you. Right. I went to lit and oh yeah this is me. Okay. So yes, special purpose. That is the juvenile YSB. So my apologies. Thank you for catching them.
 Is this a consolidation of lines? Yes. One of them that the auditor was seeking to move. Michelle, could you move your mic closer to your face? Yes. This was one of the account lines that the auditors, Tusha.
 had moved, would like to see it moved to a more appropriate line, so. Yeah, and I've had an opportunity to look at that, and so that is perfectly fine. I can't remember the number that was proposed, but this is specific to their vehicle. I'm not sure what the correct number is. Yeah, I've got it. Oh, you got it? Yes.
 So I move to update the budget to reflect the deletion of line three, zero, zero, zero, three, zero, three, zero, I can't read it, zero, zero, four, and the addition of line three, three, zero, five, zero in its service maintenance slash rep fleet repair.
 Second. Okay. Is there any discussion on that motion to delete line and add a line? Nope. Okay. All those in favor of the motion, please signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed, same sign. Okay. Go ahead. All right.
 Well, is there any other questions related to this? Okay. So maybe please have a overall roll call or vote a roll call vote overall on this. Councillor Iverson? Yes. Councillor Decker? Yes. Councillor Feidl? Yes. Councillor Wilts? Yes. Councillor Henry? Yes. Councillor Hawke? Yes. Councillor Crosley?
 Motion passes 7-0. Okay. Now we are at item C public safety lit fleet. Council I move to open for discussion and review fund 1170-0307 public safety lit fleet with a category requests of personnel at $26,482, supplies at zero, services at $204,000, capital at zero for a total budget of $230,482. Second.
 Okay, well I've actually kind of already spoke about this one when I was on the wrong one beforehand. So this is the one that holds 25% of our building and fleets managers position. It also covers the maintenance of all sheriff vehicles. Anybody over here to my right have any questions. Looking over here to my left anybody have any questions.
 May please have a roll call vote. Councilor Decker? Yes. Councilor Feidl? Yes. Councilor Wilz? Yes. Councilor Henry? Yes. Councilor Hawk? Yes. Councilor Crosley? Yes. Councilor Iverson? Yes. Motion passes 7-0. All right, next up is item D. Council, I move to open for discussion and review fund 1000-0068 County General Commissioners.
 with the category requests of personnel 673,389, supplies 35,600, services $3,863,133, and capital at zero for a total budget of $4,572,122. Second. Okay. All right, thank you. So this particular budget,
 comprises most of the commissioner's salaries, the office staff salaries, and this is also the fund that pays for the granting funds for rural transit. It also has the disabilities fund lines that are outside the levy, actually, same as with the mental health
 component that's also outside of the general levy those are all included in this particular budget. We will may be coming back. For an additional for next year what's not in this budget that was covered by arpa.
 Are two components related to rural transit as counselor Deckard knows we had a discussion with Chris Myers that rural transit about providing continuing to provide transit for people who live in more densely populated areas that in dot says regular rural transit is not supposed to go.
 And yeah, in their infinite wisdom. So she has estimated a budget for next year of $155,000, which is the same as this year's budget, which is great. But given the recent news about SEPTIC and ARPA and where that's going, there may be an opportunity to use ARPA money dedicated for SEPTIC to continue that program for one more year before putting it in county general.
 we're going to have to find out. Let's find out. Let's see what happens. Similarly, we also contributed to using ARPA funds. We contributed to the Route 13 with Bloomington Transit, which goes partially down West 3rd Street to Ivy Tech, et cetera. And that's another one where if we want to continue funding
 I know. Who would have thought we'd be talking about ARPA 2025? Or it may have to come out of county general. So I just want to put a marker on the table for those two items from county general for the commissioner's budget. Thank you for that. All right. Looking over here to my left to see. Oh, OK. I didn't want a good job. All right.
 Anybody over here to my left have any questions related to this item? Councillor Wilks. I would just like to have someone read the comment column for America 250 because that's hilarious. I could not begin.
 Yeah it is uh 2026 is the sesquicentennial of the united states we are we have asked for some funds to put aside so that we can be part of that celebration on july 4th um and we will hopefully be working with the city to organize something we're thinking big picnic uh honoring veterans
 etcetera, kind of making a day out of it where usually people come for the July 4th parade and go home. So we'll need some money, but we're also thinking about decorations and things like that to really make it memorable. Okay. I had to look that up. That's why that's in there. Like when centennial bisect
 It's the set square. Yeah, which is 50 bicentennial Mr. 50. It's got numerous names. Say we just say 250. I like that one. Okay. All right. Does anybody over here to my right have questions? All right. I'm going to go since it's on both your hands. I'm just gonna go down the line. Iverson and then counselor Henry. I'm in the threes and support for boards. Yes. Let's see.
 a couple years. I mean, it jumped up a couple years ago because we started including the human rights. And I think that hasn't come out yet. I'm using the packet you gave me. Yes. It looks like the only thing that's come out yet is Boys and Girls Club, but that's probably still pending for the other boards and commissions. We haven't been billed yet. We haven't gotten a city invoice yet, but we'll- I may have. We may have gotten that from Jessica.
 I need to make sure that I pass that on to Jill. So yeah. But yeah, it is in there. And then in this budget, we've accounted for it in the 2026 budget. And it leaves us with about $6,000 for other issues. And we did. We're doing the coding camp this year. With the Women's Commission? Yes. And that's $3,500. Yeah. OK, great. Pardon.
 Councillor Henry. Thank you. Some maybe a follow-up to Councillor Wilson's question. So for the 250, I know it's a little ways out, but if we explored opportunities for public-private partnership, what else is going on in the community that we're aware of that helped offset a cost like that? If you looked at that area, we're just presuming that this is the county's share of celebration
 this is just something I don't as far as I know there's not been any real planning or any kind of reach out I know that Commissioner Thomas spoke of working with the city I just put this in as a I didn't even know it was the sesquicentennial sesquibicentennial yeah we we are we wanted to put something in the budget and
 You know, public-private partnerships sound really great until you work with a company that really shames themselves, and then you're stuck with their name on something. But no, I would say that the stages are early for planning. I did attend one or two of the planning meetings at the History Center, but the city wasn't there. So then I went and had a conversation with Itzhak Ansari,
 on the city council and so he and I in about two minutes came up with 10 ideas so we'll do something we're going to do something I hope it doesn't cost us but a thousand dollars or two thousand dollars I'm hoping to keep it really under budget way under budget but just because we did the bicentennial of the county a few years back it's good to have the money sitting in the budget because
 We don't know what eventualities will come up. So the city and the county may decide to put something together that's going to cost a little bit of money and we cost share it. But we do want to make sure we're honoring our veterans and that we are being very welcoming to the community. We know for sure we're going to have to
 probably have the courthouse open that day, which is a holiday, and there's costs there, et cetera. So we're thinking low key here. I appreciate that. But yet spectacular in other ways. But you now trigger a different idea about what this line item should be called, because there are other events that we hold at the courthouse that aren't the 250. Do we account for opening the courthouse for, say, the lighting of the square on an account line, or how is that usually budgeted?
 I know that happens every year. That becomes, say, the decorations in the courthouse, that is, I think we pay for those out of the morale, employee morale fund. The building's open after hours and people are shuffling in and out of it. Right, yeah, we do have. So staff, I believe, comes in and they
 They either flex or can. So following that line of thought and forgive me. President because I think this is important. So we have other events that are civic minded that the costs have been worn by other organizations. For example, the swearing out of officers at January 1st every.
 two years, both Republican and Democrat in this room. And that has been a cost borne by political parties to use for a public event, too. So I guess where I'm going with this is we're going to have an account line. We probably should be looking at an events account line and maybe think about what that is. I appreciate there's a very large budget for the very special day. But I think tightening this up may make a little sense on paper to me.
 And it's not just that event, but it's other events that we open the building and have costs that we incur that should be accounted for somewhere aside from morale or charging people to use it if we think those are not civic events. But that's my view. Thank you, Madam President. All right. Anybody have any other questions over here? I think Council Hawke, I keep seeing a finger and I'm not certain. Use your mind.
 I know that last year and perhaps the year before there was conversation about when we were trying to make a budget work, we thought we had a problem then. Now we have a real problem. We looked at that health net for 250,000. If you were to choose between whether or not employees had a shot at getting some kind of a raise or such as that,
 that we've had for Health Net, would you be willing to forego that expenditure? That's something we can think about, but boy, that is really hard for this community because we have a lot of public health needs in this community, as you know.
 The reason why I say that because when this was first presented maybe I misunderstood this but they were supposed to have like a separate set of funding and they weren't going to be needing the county funding anymore but maybe that's no longer the case. So I just want to throw it out there. I know that we're all trying to find some money in there to cover
 They did move into one of the federal programs, but that federal program now doesn't have money because it's been defunded. So I don't know that that's going to work as an answer. And I think it's something we should all talk through and figure out what our priorities are and where they're at and see what we can do. I will put a little plug in for them. They're great.
 many time we have to reach out to them versus the unhoused. So I just want to say they've been always fabulous to work with. OK. And they just gave a presentation at our meeting. They do good work. All right. Did I see another hand over here? Yeah, but maybe we should go over there because we've been talking. OK. I'm going to go over yonder and see if anybody has any questions.
 I had a question. 33043 CBDC, what is that? SBDC. SBDC. Development Center. Got it. Yep. Yes. That's Ivy Tech? No. Well, no. There's that region, whatever workforce,
 I don't see anything yes it involves Ivy Tech but it's really the what is it region eight or whatever it's called workforce development. It's the small business development center if if I don't I don't see us. Having any kind of a. Imprint I I this is just been in our budget forever so we've
 that we're taking it out because I I'm not sure that that we've been participating in in any kind of programming directly. With them so okay because I see they're like. And there are it looks like it's been used and then this year there's nothing really.
 Councilor Everson and I met and I think this is like the third time I've talked about this in return in regards to support for boards because that number was high because we had the contract with the city of Bloomington since we've merged the Monroe County Human Rights Commission Bloomington Human Rights Commission. Can you explain where we are with that contract and if we if this is like the final year of us being in that again?
 I keep forgetting. Right. I anticipate that my understanding is that they were keeping it the same as last as 2025 for 2026 and then there is supposed to be probably a reevaluation of the agreement with the city. So and the reason that there is a cost with this particular board or commission even with a merged version is because of
 the fact that the city of Bloomington has attorneys on staff who address this. And as we did, we used our legal staff to staff ours, but it just, in the scheme of things, it just makes a lot of sense to be combined here and to work together.
 I'll add a little bit to that if you don't mind about the staffing. It's more than just covering meetings. The attorney does the investigation into any human rights complaint. So it's interviewing witnesses, writing up reports. It's a little bit more in-depth. It's legal work. Yeah. It is legal work. Yeah. A lot with that particular one. OK. All right. Thank you. I appreciate that. All right. Anybody else have any questions or comments?
 I don't know exactly what the development of disability DSI entity is. They spoke, I think they also presented the same night as Health Net. What is Health Net? They're not Health Net. It used to be Life Designs. Oh, Life Designs. Yes. I'm with you. Okay. You're welcome. Thanks. Yeah. Okay.
 I was just thinking, because I know that Health Net's been here, and TSI came, and Stone Belt hasn't come this year, have they? Life Designs? TSI Life Designs are the same. TSI is the new corporate. They came to our meeting. Did Stone Belt come to your meeting?
 here that's what i was saying no we haven't heard from stone belt i have not reached out to them actually um these are these are um so stone belt dsi and center stone those are all part of um indiana coat where i'm not trying to do anything with him i was literally trying to recall who had come and told us what was up lately you got to uh yeah sorry it's after nine
 I am not responsible. It's bedtime. All right. If we don't have any other questions related to this, as I put my readers on, I actually will make a motion here. Council, I move to zero outline 33-0-043 SBDC. So I want to
 take that from 10,000 to zero. Okay, I don't feel so. All right, there's a motion and a second discussion. Councilor Everson. Do you mean to zero it out or do you want to leave it at $1 to preserve the line? I mean, zero it.
 I am respectfully a no on this one only because I've had a visit out there at Ivy Tech and some of their affiliate organizational kind of capacity and I see that kind of partnership something that was strong once for the county and will be in the future out realizing that this is only a temporary
 vote until we figure other things out in the budget, but I certainly know that we're figuring all that out. The theme of tonight is even, you know, this isn't set in stone, so we can always come back and revisit. Council Wills. Hey, you can see it in the budget history here, the health net
 you know, when we hadn't heard from them in a long, long while, and we had reached out and asked, you know, I mean, it wasn't just, oh, they didn't call last week. We reduced their budget 100,000. And, you know, because we had no idea what was going on, and I realize this is a different situation in many ways. I would like to know what's going on.
 Okay. And so as a reminder, we have a motion on the floor. So any other further discussion? Okay. Maybe please have a roll call vote on the amendment. Yes. All those in favor of amending the
 what I said in terms of making the or zeroing out the line 33043 signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed same sign. Okay. Councilor Feidl. Yes. Councilor Wills. No. Councilor Henry.
 Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
 here. Since there was no further question or discussion, may we please have a roll call vote on the overall. Councillor Deckard. On the overall? Yes. Sorry. Yes. Councillor Wilks. Yes. Councillor Iverson. Yes. Councillor Crosley. Yes.
 Councilor Feidl? Yes. Councilor Henry? Yes. I'm so sorry. Motion passes 6-0. Okay. All right. Next up is item F, with special purpose. No, it's item E, county buildings.
 I move to open for discussion and review fund 1000 dash zero one six one county general county buildings with the category requests of personnel two hundred seventy eight thousand seven hundred and twenty eight dollars supplies ninety eight thousand services two million three hundred four thousand seven hundred fifteen dollars capital is at zero for a total budget of two million six hundred eighty one thousand four hundred forty three dollars second
 All right. Thank you. This particular budget takes care of generally all of our maintenance expenses in personnel, as well as a lot of expenses associated with the buildings. There's a larger one that we have in CUME that takes care of the bigger issues, but cleaning, supplies, grounds. I have asked, and I don't know,
 for line 23004, uniforms and mats. I asked if that could just be changed to uniforms. There's an employee clothing and uniforms line 22218. So if we could make a motion to add account line 22018. 22218. I got it. Okay, 218. Mm-hmm.
 appropriate it at $2,000 and at the same time you could zero out line 23004 in the sum of $2,000. Council I move to create line 22218 uniforms for $2,000 and at the same time reduce line 23004 to $0. Second.
 All right, we got a motion and a second on that amendment. Any further discussion on that? Yes. Yes, Councilor Feidl. So when you look at the expenditures over the last three years, it doesn't seem like it's that close to 2000. So is 2000 too much? Well, this is for our maintenance staff. They're pretty good about making boots and overalls and things of that nature work for them.
 If you're wanting to reduce it, it's just nice to be able to when they need and we surplus their there's their stuff. So when their boots are worn out, they they get surplus doubt. So I think that I guess maybe I'm asking, you know, if there are any upcoming. I am personally not aware. Are you? Upcoming needs? Yeah, annually we replace the the safety toe shoes and
 We don't supply coats every year, but if you look at these last three years, it doesn't look like that's been a big expense. They don't cost very much our guys, but things aren't getting cheaper. So again, I'll defer to you. If you don't like the 2000, then we will try to work within what you want to change to. I mean, if you made it 1000, it's quite a bit more than any other year you've spent from what I see.
 Anybody else have any other questions? Comments? Councilor Decker? I don't want to interrupt. Was there a motion or? Could I make a motion? Is that what I do? There's a motion on the floor to create the new account line and to set the old one to zero. Right. And so, Madam President, should we vote on this or should I accept this as a friendly amendment?
 It's up to you and whether or not you want to take that to a friendly amendment. My question is, will you take a friendly amendment? I will take a friendly amendment. And I got a friendly nod from the desk. So yes, I will take a friendly amendment to reduce that line to $1,000. OK. Second. All right, we got a motion and a second. All those in favor of this amendment signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed, same sign.
 All right. So coming back to overall county general, does anybody else have any other further discussion? Councilor Decker. I do have a question. I'm going to ask a tougher one. Is this with what we, and this may not be appropriate, but with what we're experiencing in the justice building, is this going to get us through needs there, things there, time there, anything else, or am I asking about something in the wrong section?
 So we can use some of this with the justice building but right now with the issues we're using special projects to address this so. Expenses in here are are anticipated to be the expenses that we will actually see so it doesn't have a buffer if you will. This is the.
 known ongoing costs of utilities and things, but it doesn't pay for the duct tape bubble gum and bailing wire that we've been having to purchase recently. So essentially what you're saying, this is the basic bettys of like the general upkeep and anything else related to bigger projects and unexpected circumstances comes out of Q. Got it. All right.
 Councilor Henry. Thank you, Madam President. I know the hours late, but I don't even know if this fits here, but I think holistically, I want to address something with the entirety of the commissioners presentation. I'm looking at the general obligation bonds that you have. Some of these go back 11 years. There's a count lines in here that have not been tapped to deal with capital expenses and things that
 I think a closer read of the budget as presented would alleviate some of the challenges we have of drawing off the general fund. And so my general question, whether it is in this section or sections we've already covered, but definitely will need to be addressed before we finalize the budget, is what efforts have you made to draw down on
 stale bonds that could be used to address some of the requests that have been coming forward here, because ultimately, we're at five hours, and I don't think we've even had a million dollars in cuts, maybe half a million dollars in cuts. So, entertain the question as germane or not. I don't care, but I'm putting it in the room. I just would like a general understanding of where we need to go with this, to how you're going to pull those resources into your budget thinking.
 Oh, if I may, first of all the general obligation bonds, each bond has specific projects that are part of that bond and the money that's been received is to be used for those particular projects.
 sometimes if we have some money left in a bond, if a project or one of the projects that's in that bond meets a current need that we have in the county, we can then use those funds for that particular need. It has to be a capital expense, so I'm not sure what it is, because I don't know what it is you're trying to find. I'm trying to find a way to use the resource that's been sitting there.
 Right? I mean, you've had in 20, as I'm looking at this 2014, you've got $1,600 sitting there from 11 years ago, and there's IT lines in there. So I, again- Those are all spoken for, so I understand- Well, have you presented those plans to council lately on how to use those or what your plans are for those funds? Because it's quite a bit of funding, and we're trying to find quite a bit of funding. I'll yield back to Madam President at this point, but I think it's worth raising. Thank you. Yes, Councillor Woods.
 So this isn't the first time that we've done this. And we did go through and you provided a pretty thorough report on what we could pull from. And we kind of did that. That was over a year ago at this point, I think. 2023. I don't know. We've done it for a while. I've got it here. I can email it.
 I think, well, that would be great. Because I think what is needed is a regular review on this for our peace of mind as we go through. Because of course, we can't pull something from a project that isn't complete. And I know sometimes they drag on forever. They do drag on. But at the same time, this is the time for us to find any pennies in the couch cushions kind of situation. Believe me, we have been doing that.
 With vehicles. We've been doing that, but I'll be happy. I'll send it to you. Thank you. It's all updated at this point in time. But if you when you see some of these larger lines, those projects are. They're still there. They just haven't actually had an opportunity to really get going. Solar project is one parking lot. We've got a lot of those.
 projects evolved a little bit from when we first asked for the bond money and they're just not finished yet. A conversation either with a small maybe your liaisons. I'm not trying to take over anything, but you know, it might be something to walk through. I I welcome looking at the document.
 I love looking at the older bonds and seeing where we can pull money from. And unfortunately, you can't just grab money from this bond and move and pay for something that you really want to pay for. You have to be a little careful there. But yeah, we're constantly looking at the older bonds to see how we can fund current projects. I just emailed it to you. All right. We don't have any other further questions.
 On this, I'm going to ask for roll call votes since we still got several items to go. And it's almost 10 o'clock. I'm tired. We are still on that one. Yeah, you're on that one. Councilor Wilts? Yes. Councilor Henry? Yes. Councilor Crosley? Yes. Councilor Iverson? Yes. Councilor Decker? Yes. Councilor Feidl? Yes.
 Motion passes 6-0. All right and we are now at item S. Council I move to open for discussion review fund 1114-0068 lit special purpose commissioners with the category request of personnel zero, supply zero, services 95,000, capital 12,000 for a total budget of $107,000. Second.
 Okay, so this is the special lit which is the youth services funding one of their funding sources. And my Vicki reached out to me that this afternoon I haven't had a chance to hear what she thought of this. Because what we did was we included in this particular budget $50,000 of proposed bond projects which was sterile
 dish machine kind of thing, light fixtures, updates, badge entry. So those were all kind of contractual things that could be done. So in the first line of the contractual, which shows $70,000, if you want these projects or these programs to go into the bond, which has not been presented to you,
 for 2025, you can take it out. I know that in the past, Commissioner or Councilman Hawk has always said these projects should be funded by the lit. So that's why I went ahead and put it in there. Okay. And the proposed bond for 2025 is a million dollars plus over on possible projects.
 over budget right now. So when are we going to hear about that? I have talked to I think Mr. Cockrell is getting a bond timeline from usually it's going to be in the next couple of months because that's that's the timeline to get it done before the end of the year. I think that would be helpful for us absolutely right now considering
 all the things that, and I think that's where you might be going with that is considering that we're trying to trim everything and we've not really made even a dent or even a scratch in kind of reductions this evening. That would be really, really helpful. What would be your preferred deadline for us to bring this to you and how do we do it? I mean, in terms of your meeting schedule, do you want us to tag onto the end of a budget hearing
 Do you want us to I mean, I don't know how you want to do that? Um So think about it. Yeah. Yeah, we don't have to decide that right now because we still got a lot to go through But I think that's something that you know, we can discuss During this type of season so that you can get that information to you so y'all can get it to us so that can factor into
 all of this, because that would be extremely helpful if it doesn't have to, if we can use a bond, it doesn't have to come out of this. I can send you the kind of project list for the 2025 bond, so. Okay. You can have that too. Appreciate that. All right. Does anybody else have any other questions related to this item? No. All right. Maybe please have a roll call vote.
 Councillor Henry? Yes. Councillor Crosley? Yes. Councillor Iverson? Yes. Councillor Deckard? Yes. Councillor Feidl? Yes. Councillor Wilks? Yes. Motion passes 6-0. Okay and we are at item G. Council I move to open for discussion and review fund 1138-0000 cumulative capital development with the category requests of personnel $883,863, supplies zero.
 services $2,030, capital $1,676,420 for a total budget of $4,590,283. Second. All right. So this particular budget carries the bulk of technical services and carries the bulk of the big repairs and sheriff.
 vehicles. And so this one, this is also because so much is in this particular budget is why we bond, because we don't have the capability with the amount of funds that remain in CUME after we pay for TSD. And nothing against TSD. But software is killing us.
 So if you have any questions, it's all pretty self-explanatory. I know that Councilman Hawk doesn't like the special projects list. However, that one is a special project. That's the one where we're working with the Justice Building remediation. That's also generally where we will deal with the unhoused and public land.
 That's where we will deal with building repairs that were not anticipated. Building repairs that we did not anticipate. Like a roof or a leak in a roof or things like that. And cumulative capital is restricted on its use. Any questions looking over here to my right? Council Henry?
 So let's go into the software line, three, three, zero, zero, four, one, um, 500,000. What are we buying with this this year? Hey, 300,000. Uh, outline. Sorry. Uh, three, zero, zero, four, one. And the amount should be like $1.5 million. Yeah. So adopted last year is a million.
 we're up to 500,000. So what's going on here? I'm going to defer to Mr. Crone because we've already spent more than our appropriation for this year. And it's not going away quickly. So I will defer to him. So software increases across the board.
 Most vendors have gotten away from what we were accustomed to with on-permiss licensing, which means you bought a license once you owned it in perpetuity. They no longer do that. It's all subscription based models. Adobe, Microsoft, all those have raised their pricing and went to those subscription models.
 We tried to make gains. I worked with Microsoft to try to go through do a complete inventory of our licensing. Make sure that we're utilizing getting everything out of that licensing. We can, because there's still some things that we need to do with our Microsoft environment. All the gains we've made the increases of taking them back up. We've added staff across the county. Everyone of those people cost me right out of the gate $3000 on a base employee.
 and then you got your ongoing costs after that and that stuff we haven't. It just keeps adding up on us so we keep trying to make the cuts. We keep working with other vendors. Prime examples are county website going to the state CMS that saved us several $1000 a year overpaying ego. There's some back end software that supports that that we no longer have to pay for because that factors in with that states contract.
 So everywhere we can we're getting on state systems or adopting programs that they're putting out that the feds pushing that we can get on and we're working with our vendors to cut costs best we can but unfortunately, it's just one of those
 OK, so I appreciate all that, but what is the 1551.5 million buying as a Microsoft Teams instance like an enterprise instance for the county like what's what's the what are we buying for the software line? So Microsoft your Microsoft 365 365 environments. One of your largest cost quarter of a million. Then whenever you get into your other softwares for.
 The jail things like that. Those all factor in your Adobe licensing for everybody. It has to have Adobe Pro. That's a couple 100 per person.
 So I can give you. Exactly allow softwares another $200,000 investment so when you keep getting these big six figure softwares it doesn't take long to hit that mark. I can provide an itemized list of it. It's it's it's useful yeah it's useful but but I guess really the follow up question is what yeah what we're buying here because I appreciate that the county commissioners have released at least the legal documentation around the cyber security incident last year. It doesn't address issues
 regarding why our workforce is no longer able to telework in the manner they were prior to the incident. If we're buying software that would allow for people to work from home remotely and restore that benefit in the county that they had prior to the cyber incident, I'm interested in what that technology is buying us, because clearly people can use those resources at home. And I hate to drill into this line item here, but it's
 It's what we're buying with this technology and since it is buried in the in the cube cap here. I think that what I'm looking for. Maybe is and Greg. This isn't you. This is more Above the pay grade about what software we're buying to restore that capability for our workforce. It's been over a year. I haven't heard much on it other than we don't let people in the VPN anymore and they can't do their work from home.
 And the real cost of that is the fact that when we have to close a government building and we're taking emergency leave instead of people working from home, we're losing productivity. And I'm pretty sure if we ran those numbers side by side, we'd see that the cost of not investing in the technology against the cost of what we're losing in productivity is significant here. I would argue that you don't get hour for hour on anybody working from home.
 So you can say it's an eight hour workday, and I bet you'd be hard pressed to find somebody who's actually putting in a hard setting. I've worked at home for 13 years. So I have to take some umbrage of that comment. I appreciate what you're saying, Greg. But this is the information. This is the policy behind the numbers here, which is important to pull out today. Thank you, Madam President. All right. I'm going to look over here to my left to see if we have any more questions on this item.
 This is a real quick one. You can get back to me if you need to. When are we done paying on that parking garage? Oh, that's a long story. And we talked about it. It comes up. Do you mind?
 I think, if I recall, and I can get back with you, but I believe in 2030, we need to reassess and try to avoid a balloon payment. Yeah, we've actually got two accounts out there. We talked about this not too long ago, because Bree and myself and Jeff Cockrell met with the bank people to kind of get my head around it, because it's
 It changes, so the rate changes. And I didn't have that information. So I know that we have it on our calendars to before, like a year before, if not six. The minimum was six months, so I think I took it out even further to remind us to reach out to the bank. Current schedule has us going through, I believe, 2041, though. Currently, yeah. Well, but it balloons before then. So it shows it going out.
 We're not really we there's a balloon pavement On floor worlds Please don't take this question the wrong way it is late and I have no this is what's in my head would it be Appropriate or helpful to have a member of council involved in that Just knowing that that's that's a thing that's financed very differently
 than anything we've we typically do oh yeah and it might be just worth having someone who can go like okay yeah yeah let me you know make sure it might it maybe it's council office or legal i have a problem like kind of keep us in the loop on that one sure i have no problem with that because truly it was it was one of those things where i was like the um expenses were more than what i had been what i had been a
 requested to be appropriated, and that's because my old sheet hadn't accounted for the change in the rate. I can send the council and I'll copy the commissioner's office on all the current documents we have. Thanks. Of course. All right. So without any other further question on this, may we please have a roll call vote?
 Councilor Iverson. Yes. Councilor Decker. Yes. Councilor Fiedel. Yes. Councilor Wilts. Yes. Councilor Henry. Yes. Motion passes six zero. All right. H item H. I move to open for discussion and review fund two five zero two dash zero zero zero zero cable franchise user fees with the category requests of personnel zero supply zero services at five
 $535,226 capital at zero for a total budget of $535,226. Second. I got kicked out of my Microsoft, so it's asking me to sign back in. Licensing problem. Secure than ever.
 Just kidding. I would not make that joke. That's awesome. So this particular fund is an interesting fund in that its revenues are decreasing.
 So we kind of throw in here some things that I think council has thrown in the past things that were in County General to kind of help County General on some items but the biggest thing we have in here is probably our payment to community access to television we also give WFI you
 and WFHB, the weather alert. There's funding for both of those entities. I think TSD's training and travel is in here. It's kind of a, you see what you get fund. Okay, well, I'm gonna mean that, I mean this year,
 What's the repro graphics or whatever that's called. So there's two costs associated with our copiers. You've got a contractual that pays for the copier itself and then you have a reprographics line. We pay for a maintenance and copy agreement for each one of those copiers.
 That's the number of copies, and then they charge you for black and white and color. Kind of like a lease, right? Precisely. So the lease itself comes out of contract. That comes to pay for the rest of it. I think I never remember what it is. I pronounced it right. Yeah. Luckily, Councilor Henry. So yeah, this is an odd historic
 I mean, it dates back a really long way back to coaxial cable and whatever. And way back then, the prime account that was getting funding was the cable access or CATS, right? And over years, that's declined. The revenues declined because people are cutting their cable, right? So I guess my question is just on the 30071 is, have we revisited lately what
 And I think that's what we get and what they're getting from us in terms of this contract and two things come to mind. I know the city's wrestled with this issue as well. We have folks from Cats TV recording us late night here and they're earning a wage that's pretty well below what others do in the county.
 the county at all about revisiting their overall contribution that they get from us to help maybe raise their wages? What they do is we have a contract the commissioners sign and so this this amount was their request so I'm wondering if they go to ask at this point but this is you know this is was their their request of the funding so
 I mean, maybe a nudge they could ask for more, I guess, in a sense, which is a strange way to go at it. The second question here is that just generally what we're contracting, given how technology has evolved. I mean, CATS is mostly available. I mean, you can still, I guess, tune into a TV, but it's digital, right?
 that have we revisited some of the opportunities to maybe work with their growing programs? They obviously closed caption everything, and we'd be capturing those words as potential use for minutes. I mean, I'm just kind of curious if we've thought about the contract. Because again, it's like 40-year-old technology that we're, or the fund is quite old. Yeah, the funding mechanism's quite old. I wonder what we've done on this contract lately, what we're getting out of, what we're mutually getting out of it. Thank you. And yes?
 I mean, I guess, Mr. President, would you? Sure. We will, yeah, please. Yeah, sorry. Martin O'Neill, the General Manager for Community Access Television. I'll just answer your question about the salaries there. CATS is an apartment of Monroe County Public Library, so the salaries are dictated by the library depending on the position.
 So that's where we get those salary guidelines from. That'd be a question for the board. So that would be a question to the library board on that. Yeah, just a word of thanks and everything else for Angie and everything else for the support that we are getting. It's great. We all know it's declining a little bit over the years, and we have those headwinds to come up against eventually. But yeah, we're really happy with the support we're getting from the county.
 to be honest, to be fair, it's good and fair. Thank you. This was a case where I was trying to shake the tree to find more money instead of cutting, so. And you're right, too, if I may. So, you know, the technology, originally when it was invented, the cable is very old and everything else, but over the past few years, we have revamped our whole system, so we're now live 24-7 streaming. We're on YouTube and Facebook and, you know, everything else, and we archive everything. Everything that we have since 1974-75 is being
 our times as we speak. Thank you. I really like that you're on YouTube. I appreciate that. That's really great. It took us a while, but we got there. Thank you so much. All right. Anybody else have any other questions? Sorry, I'm standing because I need to stand. Anybody else? Bueller. Okay. Can we please have a roll call vote? Councilor Crosley.
 Yes. Councilor Iverson. Yes. Councilor Decker. Yes. Councilor Feidle. Yes. Councilor Wills. Yes. Councilor Henry. Yes. Motion passes six zero. Well y'all look we are on the back page of this. All right. Item I.
 Council I move to open for discussion and review fund one two two two dash zero zero zero mineral county e nine one one with the category requests of personnel at zero supplies at zero services at six hundred twenty two thousand two hundred ninety four dollars and capital at zero for a total budget of six hundred twenty two thousand two hundred and ninety four Second, okay
 Okay, well this budget is solely for dispatch. That's all the money can be used for and I don't know what's gonna happen with it in the future, not heard.
 about how it may or may not be affected. But at this point in time, this is what the city of Bloomington when they met with myself and even Molly and Jeff, we kind of hit at different times, but this was their request be funded in this particular line. And the contractual, I want to say it's part of their
 but I might be wrong on that. All right. Council votes. It's actually less than was budgeted for the current year. Why? I can't really answer that question because that was what the city provided to us. I don't think that they needed as much.
 reduction in the contract, or in what they were getting. They also know that this fund can only be for dispatch issues, and I anticipate they're going to, if their police department's moving, they're going to be moving their dispatch. So this is a nice fund for them to kind of keep in mind for that project. I see Ms. Turner-King wants to weigh in.
 I do believe Chief DeKoffin, the dispatch manager is going to be here tomorrow to present that budget, so they might be able to provide further insight. Perfect. Thank you. Thank you. Anybody else have any questions related to this? Nope. Maybe please have a roll call vote. Councillor Iverson? Yes. Councillor Deckard? Yes. Councillor Feidl? Yes. Councillor Wilts? Yes. Councillor Henry? Yes.
 Yes. Motion passes 6-0. OK. Thank you. Next up is item J, PCEP lit.
 Council, I move to open for discussion and review fund 4933-0000 PSAP lit with the category requests of personnel zero, supply zero, services $2,781,462, capital zero for a total budget of $2,781,462.
 Yes, correct. So this is. Hold on a second. Second, sorry. All right. And now you can go and sing. Yes, and I believe Chief Dieckhoff will be here tomorrow to speak more about this. But this since the county receives all of the public safety answering point funds and they actually deal with all of the budget side of it. This is the total amount that they're requesting as per the rate.
 they are my understanding is they are presenting a higher budget to city then what this is going to bring in however as we have looked at in the past and based upon their actual expenditures this is a number that will meet their needs and they will probably still have we we both have monies that are
 kind of staying hanging over. So I don't remember off the top of my head, I think they have 2 million, we have like 2 million. Don't quote those numbers, but that's just off the top of my head from reversions, when things, they don't expend at all. So just to let you know, this is based on a lit rate, the PSAP lit rate, and they agreed with this. Their overall budget will be higher
 They budget for, they have a lot of dispatchers that are not in play. I think they're like 13 down. So it all comes into a problem. I think it would be fabulous if they had all their dispatchers, because I think that the dispatchers they have now would then actually be able to have some time off and not be so burnt out. But that's where we are at this point.
 looking to my left. So over here, anybody? Bless you. Bless you. All right. Looking over here to my right and seeing no, because you'll sneeze. All right. So maybe please have a roll call vote. I forgot what I was about to do. Yes. Councilor Feidl. Yes. Councilor Wilts. Yes. Councilor Henry. Yes. Councilor Crosley.
 Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
 All right, and then I have a hand raised at the table and I see some head nods. So I'm gonna go to Michelle. Michelle, hey. Hi, I don't want to extend our time, but I would really like for you guys to go back and open the Highway General Fund and reduce all of those lines to zero.
 Otherwise, we will not know where we're at tomorrow with regards to general fund and that kind of thing for starting tomorrow's budgets. And then the other one would be to also open 1176 and amend the self-insurance to add in that 162,000 into that budget. And then that way you will know exactly where you're at with the highway
 as well as general fund when we start tomorrow. I moved to do whatever Kim Shell says. Do we need to vote on this? Yes, because we just have to. Yes we do. So OK, I moved that we reopen the highway general fund budget. I don't know any numbers. So somebody second that. Thank you.
 seconded okay okay is this an all in favor of opening kind of vote yes yes all those in favor of opening this discussion back up again signify by saying aye I move that we take all of the personnel lines that are double by two minutes supply services and set them all to zero
 is my right in the general fund in the gym by two minutes the rest of my two minutes but the the all of the personnel lines that were double booked please put those to zero um in the general fund that's the one that's open wait a minute well they also had 425 doll 20 425 000 double budgeted as well do you want to keep that amount in the general fund me
 We should make sure that it's what I said in the room earlier. I agree. What I remember saying is just personnel. I knew I wasn't covering everything. I concur that you only did personnel into MVH. Okay, that's all. Okay, that's good. We'll talk about this more. We will come back to it. We have to. But this at least gets you a little bit closer. Status quo is not sustainable.
 All right, so we got motion and a second, and we got a motion on the floor. So is that right? Did somebody second that? Second. All right. I was going to second it. So any discussion on this? Please no. All right. This is we can do a voice vote, right? We've been voting.
 On the other, I would follow the same pattern, because you are changing what is on there being reviewed. Okay, so can we please have a roll call vote? Councillor Crosley? Yes. Councillor Iverson? Yes. Councillor Decker? Yes. Councillor Feidl? Yes. Councillor Wilts? Yes. Councillor Henry? Yes. Motion passes 6-0.
 And then there was something else that we needed to open it in the same in the in the same highway. It's not in this 1176. 1176. We're here. H.
 move that we open fund 1176 which is motor vehicle highway uh and take a look at it second okay so we got a motion and a second that we opened up 1176 is there any additional comment we need to change that number we do um that number needs to be amended
 to $756,000 in the self insurance line. Yes, so we need it. We motion in a second. All those in favor of opening this 1176 signify by saying aye aye. Alright, and so now we have to adjust this cost to
 So I move in line one eight zero zero one self insurance and set that to seven hundred fifty six thousand dollars in the Motor Vehicle Highway Fund. All right. Motion and a second. Any other discussion?
 This is, again, for anybody watching this very quick play by play of a very long and late meeting. This is something that we are doing so that we can look at our numbers and have a better picture of what we have in general. All right. Please have a roll call vote. Councilor Crossley? Yes. Councilor Iverson? Yes. Councilor Deckard? Yes. Councilor Feidl? Yes. Councilor Woods? Yes. And Councilor Henry?
 Motion passes six zero. OK. And so that's all I need. Thank you very much. We are so appreciative. I will say we have another budget session work session tomorrow. Council, I will say this. I don't know how many more times, but I'll say it again. Please make sure that we are sticking to the questions related to the actual budget items.
 And as a final reminder, but I'll probably will say it again throughout the season is the season that we are not making any like big decisions. We are just pushing these discussions through. And as we progress and process through these items can be open, which is what we just did. And those items can be changed. We so.
 I figure all of us, especially those of us that have been here longer than I've had great here would know that and understand that. But moving forward, that's the name of the game. It's late. Thank you all so much. And that's it. One last thing with there. I sent out an email to everyone just a little bit ago. I just totally forgot to do it. We updated.
 the agenda and the packets for budget session two and budget session three, because there was a request to move the sheriff and the jail to a different night. So you have a totally different agenda and packet that you should get in an email tonight. So. Got it. Yep. Okay. Well, stay tuned because we are back for day two.
 So until then we are recessed until tomorrow at five o'clock. Thank you