welcome everybody and again we apologize for the technical difficulties that's what happens when this
is live so thanks for TSD for getting us back on track here and our mics working because I know we got
a lot to say so we want to make sure that it captures everything so welcome everybody to the
23rd of September, 2025, a regular session of the Monroe County Council, present in the NatU Hill Room.
We have counselors, Spidal, Deckert, Henry, Iverson, and Hawk, and not present today in person and via
Teams is Councilor Wilts. So we will go ahead and get into it. And so all those that are able to stand,
please stand for the reciting of the Pledge of Allegiance.
United States of America for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for
all. Okay. All right. So next up is the adoption of the agenda. And does anybody wish to amend tonight's agenda?
Yes, Council Iverson. Madam President, I would like to amend the agenda by tabling items 7B and 9G to
our next meeting, which is Tuesday, October the 14th. Second. Okay, we got a motion and a second to
table those items to October 14th. Yeah, I think you can.
I would also like to table item 11 a which is resolution 2025 37 to the October 14th council meeting
Second I also like to amend items 11 C overtime resolution and 11 D hiring freeze resolution to the
discussion items and possible approval of
to allow for further council input to these resolutions. And lastly, I would like to amend the agenda
to add item 11F, a discussion to amend resolution 2025-27, establishing 2026 minimum cash balances and
move the 2026 budget reviews to item 11G.
Okay. All right. Thank you for that. Um, yes, counselor hawk. Okay. Uh, the, um, resolutions. Uh, did
you table that child out from what? What was your motion? Uh, my, the first motion dealing with the
resolution was to table item 11 a
Okay. To the October 14th council meeting. Okay. And I wanted to amend items 11 C and 11 D to allow
not only for discussion, but also possible approval. Okay. Thank you. You're welcome. All right. So
we got a motion and a second. And so is everybody clear on those motions? Okay.
and no further discussion. Looking to my right. Does anybody else have any questions over here? Yes.
Information. So on item 9A through D, is there an opportunity to combine for simultaneous on here rather
than for separate items? Yes. Within the motion that I have provided in the script, I have combined
A and B into one motion and C and D into one motion.
Thank you for that. Okay. So Madam President, I have another motion. So we have under consent agenda
item B, the request for approval of creation of new account lines simultaneously approved category transfer
in the health fund. Councillor Iverson, you didn't table that one, is that correct? I did. Oh, that
is the tabled one? Yes. All right, thank you for the clarification. Okay. Yeah, that's, thank you.
Okay. So to run it back, just to make sure that we all know, item 7B and 9G is tabled to 1014. Resolution
11A is tabled to October 14th. The resolutions regarding overtime and a higher end freeze is a discussion
and possible approval for tonight. And we also are amending the agenda to add item 11F
for discussion to amend the resolution that establishes the minimum cash balances. So once again, I
wanna make sure everybody is heard here. Is everybody clear on the motions? And is there any further
discussion related to amending tonight's agenda? Seeing none.
All those in favor of approving tonight's agenda as amended signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed,
same sign. Okay, motion carries. Thank you all for that.
So next up is item number four, which is public comment. And so this is the opportunity for those that
are here present in the Nattie Hill Room to speak on items that are not on tonight's agenda. If you
are here in the Nattie Hill Room, you can make your public comment by coming forward to the lecture
here and the Nattie Hill Room, and you will have up to three minutes. And those that are present via
Teams also can make public comment, but you can also raise your hand via Teams and you too will have
up to three minutes. So I'm going to look here to the Nightingale room to see if there's anybody that
would like to make public comment again on items not on the agenda. Please come forward to the lecture.
And then I'm going to look via Teams to see if we have some hands raised to see if anybody would like
to make public comment via Teams.
Right. And seeing none seems like we are all ready to go here. So we will move forward with making.
or closing out public comment and move forward to department updates. So next up for department updates,
if there are any departments that are via Teams or present here in the NattU Hill Room, you have up
to 10 minutes to talk about items that are not on tonight's agenda. And again, you can raise your hand
via Teams or you can come here to the lectern here in the NattU Hill Room. Right. And seeing none on that.
Next up is item number six, which is the update and discussion regarding the American Rescue Plan Act,
also known as ARPA projects. So at this time, I would like to invite, I see one commissioner here present.
So you all can come on up here and you can have a seat here at the table and we will open up the conversation
on our ARPA projects and discussions of
those items and next steps. Do you want me to start? You can go ahead. Welcome. Yeah, and I think I'm
maybe the reason we're having this meeting. I've been working with our health department and the auditor's
office has been working with the health department on the septic agreements and septic contracts. Right
now we have roughly 600,000
out in approved contracts to replace septic systems. Excuse me. And I think we're going to struggle
to get enough contracts done that we are going to have the ability to say for certain that we're going
to be able to spend all the money by the end of next year. A lot of that has to do with the really wet
year we had this year because you can only put
septic systems in when it's dry. Right now, I think we're starting, you know, I saw quotes come in today
for a new agreement, which, you know, so I think there's still time left this year. But I think when
we were discussing it, we also want to be sensitive to the fact that we do have a hard deadline for
these funds to be used. And so our internal discussion had us
going to the council, going to the commissioners and expressing, hey, can we have till maybe December
1 or Thanksgiving summer on there, kind of as a hard cutoff to get these contracts in place. And then
after we have that, then we would have a number that's uncontracted that we would know what that overage
is. And then those contracts would primarily be for placements next summer, right? So we would, we wanna
be sensitive to, we think the septic is a big need.
Clearly we've we've done a lot of septic programs We also want to be sensitive that we want to make
sure that we spend every dollar that we get from the federal government for the ARPA programs and so
I think our plan was talk to the council talk to the commissioners see if we could get a see if you
guys are comfortable with us having that kind of December one hard deadline and
getting those contracts in and then that way in December you would know exactly what we wouldn't have
obligated under and under contract. For that our program and then we could have a discussion of what
that overages and then what we could what you guys wish to do with the whatever amount it is. Is that.
So we don't know the number yet we will know the number once we know the number we will also know whether
it's in restricted or unrestricted and.
we'll come up with an options list and we'll talk through it with y'all and There's really nothing to
decide today. This is really just a discussion item so that you're aware of of what's happening and
We're keeping track of the calendar and the budgets both Okay, and I know before I open it up to council
I wanted to look to see if the auditor had any
anything to add to that discussion there. Good evening council. We just want to remind the public and
everyone that these dollars have to be expended by December of 2026. So if we do make any adjustments
to a contract we would need to keep that in mind.
we did recommend that we have a backup plan if any contracts were to come in short of what is currently
obligated. Thank you. I'm curious to hear what council members have to think about the deadlines because
I guess personally I was thinking we would know a little bit more this evening because I think while
we all have budget brain right now it's definitely something to think about in terms of
some of the conversations that we've had where we have potentially listed out things where we could
possibly use the ARPA funding and remove it from budget and possibly put it into ARPA projects. So I
was hoping because in fact, and correct me if I'm wrong, y'all, we heard during the convention centers
or that budget
something about a broken elevator, and I had broke down in my notes here, something related to possibly
using ARPA to have, or to have funding for that. So yeah, I mean, I was hoping that we would have more
information tonight. So I'll look over here to my right and see if y'all have any questions or comments.
So it looks like,
everybody has a line here. So usually when everybody raises their hand, I'll just go down the soldiering
line here. So I'll start off with Councilor Iverson. Thank you, Madam President. Thanks for being here
on yet another night. And, you know, we certainly got the message that weather is playing a huge role
here in these septic systems. So thanks for keeping us in the loop.
And hopefully, we can get more of those out there. I certainly have had septic systems in the past.
And they're pretty nasty to deal with when they're old. And so I'm certainly appreciative of our work
on this. My first, I guess, septic is just one of 14 lines where there's unexpended dollars. And I certainly
am. Look, the septic is the one where the unexpended is the highest percentage.
So do we know in the five point eight million dollars of unexpended dollars. Do we have other account
lines that we need to be highlighting for concerned they may not be expended by December thirty first
twenty twenty six. I know that. The for me what I know for sure is that the septic is the one
I think. For these other projects we have. Prop contracts in place I think I think commissioners just
heard the last another can I was the last convention center related ARPA contract like two weeks ago
or ten days ago so. I mean this is the bills are not in yet because the contract was just approved so I think.
This is something we will obviously be looking at, but I just think right now it's actually premature
to say, oh, look, there's money left over because I don't think that there is necessarily. And I know
the numbers look big, but I don't think that reflects the reality. In some cases, we just haven't gotten
billed yet. And we know the projects out there are the contracts approved. Sure. Can I hear from the
auditor's office? I think you had something to say on this.
Yeah if you don't mind I can share my screen so the public can see what we're seeing please. So you
should be able to see the projects in green that have
So Mr. Prider just pointed out to me, for example, under the Convention Center, since that was raised,
that it shows here $101,864.56 on expended, but by his calculations, based on projects that had been
contracted or need to be completed, we're going to be down to about $10,000. So I do think there's going to be
little bits of money left in some of these funds. And we will be talking through what can be done with
that. But I think, again, I know you're in the middle of budget crisis mode. But I don't think that
today is going to be the day where we can say, oh, money's done. It's over with. Whatever's left over
goes to something else. I just think that there are things outstanding.
Sure. Did you have more to say from the auditor's office or you just wanted to show what I was reading?
So in front of you you can see the green cells that have unexpended balances. We have not received any
indicators that any other projects will come in under budget, but it's always good to have a backup
plan, especially because it does take time to get these two groups together and make those decisions.
We would hate to
And in a way that we don't have a clear path as to what both bodies would like if we do come into a
scenario where additional funds are utilized. And as we've discussed before, we do have distinctions
between how some of this money can be spent.
So you'll notice that some of the cells are colored in orange and some of them are in yellow. We have
limitations to our unrestricted expenditures. So as of right now, those yellow cells are all of our
lost revenue dollars, which are unrestricted. That limit that we can spend is $10 million.
As of right now, we have $152,243.76 of this money that could be obligated. I'm so sorry. It's obligated,
but if we wanted to move any of these around, we couldn't exceed the $10 million. Okay. And then, Madam
President, can I just say one last thing?
I am in favor of a backup plan, and Commissioner Thomas, I think one of the things that could be in
that backup plan is what you just mentioned, where some of these funds are gonna have a little bit of
money in them, and what do we do with that little bit of money? And restricted versus non-restricted
is going to give us a really powerful indicator about what we can actually spend that money on. We may
be very limited in what we can do with some of it, so we need to be careful about that. I agree, okay.
Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Commissioner Thomas, as well. And I think Peter really answered
quite a few of my questions in terms of residuals and what is able to be, I want to caution by saying
reprogrammed, but we are talking about whatever the residuals are here. And yeah, and there were two
that jumped off the page of me here.
I know we're working hard on the Karst field project, but I'm also looking at the general obligation
bond asking for almost $905,000 for the nature preserve and the proposed GO bond we're going to talk
about later this evening. So it's something like that, right? Where if we have unexpended here, it looks
like we have some ideas here. It sounds like there's another set of numbers that aren't before us. Maybe
we can talk about the park one first for a minute. That might be helpful.
Two million and change? Yeah, where's the status on that one? Yeah, hi. We swapped in, all right. Yeah,
and on the screen for folks, it is line item, thank you, 37, Carsefields. Yeah. Yeah. Do you want me
to talk to you about the unexpended? Yeah, what's unexpended? Because that's a huge item here right
now, yeah. It will all be probably gone in 90 days. OK, that's easy.
And we actually need more money if possible, because I think you all remember the airport's farm field
that has an ARPA caused us to have $114,000 drainage issue for this project. So we would take anything
additional to make up that $114,000. I mean, there is in line 38, almost $1.6 million in airport stormwater
and drainage.
again I guess but I guess the commissioner Thomas's point there's another set of numbers here we haven't
scraped yet so this is kind of the I think the stuff that we're looking for the only other one I thank
you for that by the way yeah thank you for that the only other one I guess I have a question about it
and I know counselor wilts if she were here she's asked about this before on line thirty three the jail
transition contract we were starting to see- continued travel on that line item even though it seems
like a lot of the-
planning with the LZ is kind of done, but there seems to be receipts still for travel being filed on
that contract. Does anyone have any Commissioner Thomas? No idea on it. Okay. Okay. That's fair. Just
want to highlight. Thanks. Okay. Thank you. Yes. Council. Yes. Seeing 233,000 approximately for that's
still left to be expanded for jail locks. So I think we should check to see if they need
That's one of the things we discussed not long ago was like, if you have a problem, let's get that taken
care of. Can't wait for five years for a new jail. I see the auditor staff has something. I did have
communication with the financial manager in that department and it does sound like they are on track
to spend those dollars. Those dollars are not available then.
And I also see under line six COVID vaccine that it looks as if that has all been expended out. Is that
correct? Yeah, the only ones that are active are the green. Right. I just want to call our attention
to that since there's been a lot of discussion.
Thank you very much Mike. My question is so lost revenue or Restricted line we can add to or we can
juggle around help me out with the auditor. I want to make sure I got it right. I Apologize for that
jumbled explanation. No, it's me not you So we cannot increase our obligations for the lost revenue
category beyond 10 million right now and
we are short of that 10 million by roughly 152,000. The reason I ask is when I look at the list of projects
that we did, and this has been a long process, that as I look at the list, it brings back a lot of memories
from some difficult times and other difficult times and a whole story there. But one thing that we have
talked about here is the potential to up
dollars that we would use for our not-for-profit community through Sophia Travis dollars. We looked
at an option to raise that considerably because we expect demand is high and other things like that.
I see lines here where we responded to Hoosier Hill Food Bank and Pantry 279 that serve the greater
portion of this community with a lot of food.
And so my thought is if we start getting into, and I'm not ready to offer anything yet, but if we start
getting into the how do you make this work, those entities could probably take you tonight and buy food.
And if those lines, it looks like Hoosier Hills did match when I was kind of glancing. I'm not sure
about pantry 279, but if that starts matching, you could juggle that around there. And if we are in
a need to,
do more for our local not-for-profit community, that could be a quick way to do that. Hoosier Hills
Line was 37487. Community Kitchen, we actually got the Express Kitchen, so that should be a done deal.
But for buying food, if I'm reading this right, we could buy food and if we need food, food we have.
And maybe I'll respond a little bit to that. I think one of the things we would work with our vendor
Baker Tilly with who has been helping us make sure we stay within our rules and guidelines, we would
ask to ask them that question. My understanding is that the projects have to be opened or the money
would have still had to have been obligated by the end of 2024.
So if we have these open projects, as long as we don't materially change them, I think we could we could
add a little bit to them. But again, we that's why we have Baker Tilly. So with that question, we would
run it by Baker Tilly to see if that is an acceptable route. So I don't want to it's not quite the hey,
look at anything on this list. And we could certainly fund that. But we can ask those questions and
get those answers. You have to be nimble.
all that will have to be figured out pretty quickly. Okay. Did anybody else have any? I guess the one
question that I have is since the last claim date that I see for rural transit since that's definitely
something that we have to think about on the horizon was what looks like three March of this year. If there is
So by the logic that we're saying right now, because let me see. Sorry. Is that considered closed? So
there were actually two awards to rural transit. The first one has been closed. The second one has not
been closed. And I believe that is line 44 towards the bottom. OK.
The item that's closed is the buses. We actually purchased buses. That's done. The item that's open
is this year's service to the, quote unquote, urbanized area. Okay. And that's the one that we've kind
of had open communication with our good friends down the street in Ellisville. Okay. So, I mean, I would
think that if there is funding, if we're, you know, trying to come up with a contingency plan for
you know, extra dollars, I would love to see how we could use some of those extra dollars for this particular
project as well, if possible. While I'm sure it might not be enough, and we still will have to have
conversations, every little dollar helps. So that's definitely something I would think of in the back
burner too, while hopefully continuing to have conversations with the town of Ellisville too. All right.
Yes, Councilor Everson. I wanted to take this in a different direction. Could you scroll up to line
20? Today, Commissioner Thomas and three of us from the County Council were able to see these dollars
in work. This is $500,000. And Commissioner Thomas was able to break ground on Beacon Inc.'s new center.
And that money was used to help do that.
I think if we're gonna look forward to a plan on how to use these funds, I would also like to think
about ways to celebrate some of the things that happened in this community that would not have happened
had it not been for these dollars. This new center is cool. It's gonna do a lot of really good work
for a lot of people. Agreed. All right. Yes, Councillor Hock. I just need a little clarification.
only the ones that are in green that has an opportunity to move some dollars around into those. Do I
understand that correctly? It's only these that have an opportunity to be able to use the money for
something else because they're still open. Based on our conversations with Baker Tilley that is accurate.
The federal government does not like us moving these obligations around and it raises
far less red flags to move the obligations within open projects. And just keep in mind, we
can't substantially change the scope of the projects. OK. Does anybody last call for any other questions
looking around? OK.
And since this was a discussion, there is no motion or anything that needs to be made. So now, of course,
we just wait for you all to come back in December, which isn't that far around the corner, ugly enough.
So we will look forward to having that conversation again. So thank you all very much. All right, have
a good night.
All right. Next up is number seven, which is our consent agenda items. Council, I move to approve the
following consent agenda item for September 23rd. A, the prosecutor's request and fund 1000-0009 general
fund prosecutor for a category transfer in the amount of $15,000 from the personnel category to the
services category. And B, which we tabled. Just A. Second.
All right, we got a motion and a second. Are there any further discussion from council related to the
consent agenda items? All right, seeing none. All those in favor of approving our consent agenda items
tonight signify by saying aye. All those opposed, same sign. All right, motion carries. Next up, we
are at item number A.
for ongoing business. 8A. Yeah. Council, as a reminder, this is the second reading of this request due
to the lack of a unanimous vote to the August 12th, 2025 meeting. I move to approve the Health Department's
request to amend the 2025 salary ordinance and fund 1161-0000 Local Public Health Services to remove
the positions outlined on the agenda.
We got a motion and a second, and I don't see anybody from the health department that is here to discuss
this. So I'll look to the liaisons to see if they feel comfortable. Yeah. So council, this is essentially
a housekeeping item.
As you recall, we moved positions from Health First Indiana to the Health Fund and in the 2025 budget.
And we needed to make this change because we moved those positions. This is completely separate from
the 2026 budget, where we've already made the decision to move them back. This is only for the 2025
budget. Okay. Yes, Council Huff.
And I don't think that they all landed in 1159. Some did, some did not, if I recall right. But it would
make sense to me to leave these open and to finish out the year in the 1161, thereby saving the money in the
now the 10th at you know, number so that they would have additional cash in that because that's where
we are trying to save the money to make sure that we've got enough because that's in that frozen levy
portion. So it makes sense to just finish out the year since we've already moved them over there for
next year to just go ahead and finish out the year. It would save quite a bit of money.
to land there in the 1059. Okay, so if I understand what you're saying, Councillor Hogg, is finish up
the year in 2025 where they are, since we've already made the changes for 2026. Is that what you're
saying? I'm saying they should be moved back over. In other words, right now, we've got some vacant
spots because we moved them over into the
the property tax fund. Because we moved him over from the 1161 over to there. So now these positions
are setting vacant and in the 1161 budget, and just growing the 1161 balance. And it seems to me, you've
moved the employees back over there and finish out the year and the 1161 and let the property tax balance
grow, which would help
frozen levy portion and it's not going to hurt them at all just moving around and i don't think that
they all moved to the 1059 i think only maybe two or i just want to remind council the appropriations
for this has already been de-appropriated
and appropriations have already been appropriated in 1159. So if you choose to have these remain so
that she can use them, she'll have to come back and appropriate. But these were the last positions to
be moved with regards to those core services that were being questioned. There are, I believe, three
positions that are still
in 1161, but I'm looking that up right now. Okay. Yeah, and while you're looking that up, I'll go to
Councilor Henry. Thank you, Madam President. There's even further complication here because as of July
1, HFI was no longer, or the public health coordinator and public health preparedness director were
no longer able to be funded in HFI. If you recall, it was tobacco cessation and the public
health preparedness programs that would have been
discontinued had we not moved into county dollars, right? So there's a distinction here about at least
two of these. And without the health office here, I don't know if a 10113 is one of those as well, but
I definitely know just being me that the public health coordinator and the preparedness ones were part
of that, that after July 1st were ineligible to be funded by HFI. That's why it moved them. And so we
brought them into county dollars for the purpose of preparing the county for,
you know, pandemic and other disasters, right? So the other piece of this that has my attention tonight
in context of the budget is that we are buying time with the auditor's office, county legal, and the
health department to figure out how we're going to manage to take care of people in our community who
may not be able to provide proof of citizenship that may have tuberculosis or other things our county
health department needs to treat.
As of right now, with how we moved things, those services continue, but the clock is ticking for January
of 25 when we did the movement in the budget as proposed. So I guess that's also on my mind too, that
moving these positions assures we're providing those services universally in the county. And then there
are some items that we can't really move anywhere because the consequence would be basically terminating
those account lines and persons in them
there's nowhere to fund them right now to move them back to HFI. But those are some thoughts I have
on that. Thank you. Thank you. I'm a musical chairs of this department. And Michelle, I'm gonna look
to you to see if you got that information. Okay. Four positions that are still in 1161. Everything else
has been moved.
appropriation wise as well to $11.59. This just cleans up the salary ordinance to match what you've
done with regards to appropriations. Got it. So whatever you decide. Okay. All right. I'm gonna look
over here to my left to see if anybody has any questions on this. No? Okay. I'm gonna
and see if you all want to pick up your mic and speak to the mic. Sorry, Madam President, I was contemplating
a motion, but I'm not saying a motion right now. Okay. Well, seeing no further discussion on this item.
If there are any public commenters that would like to take public comment on this item, you can come
forward to the lectern here in the Nattie Hill room, or you can raise your hand via Teams. And seeing
none, may we please have a roll call vote? Councilor Feidl? Yes. Councilor Will, or, by pardon, Councilor
Henry? Yes. Councilor Hawk? No. Councilor Crosley?
Councilor Iverson? Yes. Councilor Deckard? Yes. Vote passes 5-1. Thank you very much on that item.
Next up, we are going to go to new business, which we'll start off with the Sheriff's Office. Item number
nine. Council, I will be combining items A and B into one motion.
I move to approve the sheriff's request and fund 8103-0000 Operation Pullover for an additional appropriation
of $14,908.79 in the personnel category and to simultaneously and fund 1000-0005 County General Sheriff,
deappropriate $14,908.79 in the personnel category. Second.
We got a motion in a second. We have- Wait, wait. Did I hear 14 million? I'm sorry. Excuse me.
Let me check. 14,000. Yes. I'm glad the gallery thinks that's funny. All right. $14,908.79. Okay. Now
we balance. Okay. And we're still good. And scene. All right. And now we have Ms. Jamie Yonkey here.
Welcome. Hi. Thank you.
So this is just housekeeping. It's just the first and the second quarter of the chirp grant, just moving
the funds back where they need to be. All right. Doing a little housekeeping here. Seems to be the theme
right now. All right. And so if anybody over here to my left have any questions, stand on. Anybody over
here to my right have any questions? Go on.
All right, seeing none, if there are public comment on this particular item, you can come forward to
the lectern here in the net you room, or you can raise your hand via teams. And seeing none, may we
please have a roll call vote. Councillor Henry. Yes. Councillor Hawk. Yes. Councillor Crossley. Yes.
Councillor Iverson. Yes. Councillor Deckard. Yes. Councillor Fido. Yes.
Motion passes 6-0. All right, next up is item C. Council, I will be combining items C and D into one
motion. I move to approve the sheriff's request and fund 8143-0000 JAG Sheriff.
to create account line two one one two four safety supplies slash equipment and appropriate three thousand
eight hundred four dollars in the supplies category and to simultaneously and fund one thousand dash
zero zero zero five county general sheriff deappropriate three thousand eight hundred and four dollars
in the supplies category second all right what would you like to add to this i think it's just housekeeping
just to keep the grant funds where they need to be okay
All right, look into my right here to see if you have any questions. Council have any questions on this
item? No. And look to my left. Yes, Councilor Decker. I just want to quickly say I appreciate the efficiency
of these motions. I think this is awesome. Thank you. Efficiency at its best. All right.
Seeing no other further question or discussion from council, we'll move to public comment. If you have
public comment, you can raise your hand via Teams, or you could come forward to the lectern here in
the Knight-U-Hill room. And seeing none, may we please have a roll call vote? Councilor Hock? Yes. Councilor
Crossley? Yes. Councilor Iverson? Yes. Councilor Deckard? Yes. Councilor Feidl? Yes. Councilor Henry?
Yes. Motion passes 6-0.
Thank you. Thank you. Have a good night. All right. Next up is item E from the Youth Services Bureau.
Council, I move to approve the Youth Service Bureau's request and fund 4111-0000 donation BTCC for an
additional appropriation of $1,850 in the services category. Second. All right. We got a motion and
a second. It looks like we have Ms. Vanessa Schmidt that is via Teams.
and you can go ahead and present. Welcome. So yeah, just a little bit of housekeeping for us as well.
I am just requesting the approval of an additional appropriation. Both are donations. One is a $500
sponsorship from the city of Bloomington that will again support our 10th annual Monroe County Youth Summit.
And then we have another, this is actually not a donation, but this is from trainings that our Bloomington,
the building thriving and compassionate community BTCC subcommittee has provided. And that's in the
amount of $1,350. Thank you. And glad to hear about those donations for the youth summit.
I'm excited to hear about that. All right. Thank you. Looking to my right over here and seeing if anybody
has any questions. Yes, Councillor Henry. Thank you. Just a comment related to just the great receipts
that we have here. It's refreshing to still see words like equity and inclusion on government documents.
And so I'm a fan of the BTCC program and what they've done in the community. I'm just glad to see that
is in fact, as they say, thriving in its title.
That was nice to see. I'd like to see it too. All right. Anybody else have any questions on the side
related to this item or comments? Seeing none, looking to my left. All right. Seeing none. All right.
So we'll move to public comment. If you have public comment on this item, you can come forward to the
lectern here in the Nightingale room or you can raise your hand via Teams. And seeing none, maybe please
have a roll call.
Councillor Iverson? Yes. Councillor Deckard? Yes. Councillor Feidl? Yes. Councillor Wilt? Yes. Councillor
Henry? Yes. Councillor Hawke? Yes. I'm saying yes. Oh, thank you. Councillor Crosley? Yes. Motion passes
6-0. All right. Thank you for that. Next up, we're still sticking with Youth Services Bureau for item
number or item F.
Council, I move to approve the Youth Service Bureau's request and fund 8120-9626, Runaway Homeless Youth Grant.
for the creation of new account lines outlined on the agenda and to simultaneously approve additional
appropriations of $159,748 in the personnel category, $6,750 in the supplies category, and $15,594 in
the services category for a total appropriation of $182,092. Second. All right, and what would you like
to add to this item?
Again, this is our runaway and homeless youth grant. It is a three year grant that we are awarded, but
we apply for a continuation every year. And so this is our second year of the fiscal funding in that
three year grant period. And we're just requesting appropriation of that $182,092. Well, congratulations
on obtaining that grant. Thank you. Yes, you're very welcome. I will look to my right because I already
saw a hand counselor Hawk.
Yes, as many times if I've been speaking with you lately, I don't why I didn't ask you this question.
But what I see, they have some salaries in here. And since this is covered with a grant, do those salaries
stay as the grant as it's entered here? Whether or not there's a raise? The other thing I wanted to
check on, and I see,
that you have covered the self-insurance out of this grant. That is really a very good thing because
when we accept a grant and it actually ends up costing a lot of money out of that insurance fund, it's
good for the grant to be written such that it can include that self-insurance in the grant.
Yeah, so when we apply initially at the three-year mark, we don't always know what those COLA raises
are going to look like. Sorry, I feel like there's a lot of feedback. Sorry. I don't always know what
those COLA raises are going to look like. And so we make adjustments each year through our continuation
apps. So if there is a COLA increase that we weren't anticipating, then we will make adjustments in
our supplies category, outreach category, to make up for that amount. Thank you.
All right. I'm going to look to my left here to see if anybody else has any questions. All right. Last
call over here. All right. Seeing none. If there is any public comment on this item, you can come forward
to the lectern here in the night. You know, room where you can raise your hand via teams. And seeing
none, may we please have a roll call vote. Councillor Decker. Yes. Councillor Fiddle. Yes. Councillor
Henry. Yes. Councillor Hawke.
Yes. Councillor Crossley. Yes. Councillor Iverson. Yes. Motion passes six zero. Thank you very much.
Have a good night. Thank you. Thanks. All right. Next up, since we, as a reminder, we disabled the item
G, we are moving to item H, which is the board of commissioners for the 2025 general obligation bond.
Get ready. This is a long one.
Council, I move to open for discussion and establish this as the first reading of ordinance 2025-30,
an ordinance authorizing the issuance of general obligation bonds in ordinance 2025-31, an appropriation
ordinance for the general obligation bond of $6.1 million for projects which include but are not limited
to, one, design plans for improvements at the Monroe County Airport, two,
Remodeling of the showers building, primarily for renovations for voter and election services. Three,
vehicles. Four, improvements at the Youth Services Bureau, Monroe County Nature Preserve, courthouse,
courthouse grounds, emergency management building. Number five, body cameras. Number six, non-lethal
force equipment for the sheriff's department. Number seven, airport furniture, tools and equipment.
Item number eight, which is the last one, emergency management sirens and equipment and all related
improvements and the incidental expenses in connection with these projects. All right, we got a motion
and a second and back again is Mr. Draft Cockroach, Ms. Angie Purdy and Commissioner Julie Thomas. Welcome.
And I think I'll start off because this this document I've prepared and I've
reviewed and brought a document similar to this every year for the last 15 years. And this is probably
the first time it's had really a substantial difference to what we had done in the previous year. And
there really are two differences in this ordinance. And they both are kind of a result of Senate Bill
1. The first is our typical term has historically been a one-year bond.
With the recent legislation, there is a cooling off period where in order to be able to issue this bond,
we have to make this bond longer than five years. So I believe what you have in front of you is a six-year
bond. And so that's one of the major differences. The other is the amount on it is $6 million.
Typically, we do $3.1 million, $3 million for the project costs, and then $100,000. And that was done
solely so you guys would have the discretion whether you wanted to stick with the kind of standard,
the old amount of 3.1 or whether you wanted to expand it to 6 million due to what you see as needs,
fiscal needs for the county.
And so those are kind of the two major changes from what this group has looked at in the past. So if
you have any questions about those changes, I'm more than happy to answer them. Otherwise, I'll turn
it over to the people who actually know the projects and they can explain to you what they wish to do.
I already saw a hand, Councilor Hawk. Yes. Since there's a one year cooling off time, if we don't use
six year plan, but we could use
that our regular plan if at the beginning of next year and not do one this year. Could we not? I think
that's something we talked with. I think what the code says is that in the
Basically, the final year you pay it off, which we would have paid off last year's bond this year, then
you have a one year cooling off after that payment occurs. So I think we would have to wait till 2027
to issue the bond. Thank you. That made it more clear to me.
Yes, Councilor Henry. Thank you, and thank you, Jeff, and everyone for putting this together. I do have
a few questions. So it's page 71 in the packet, but it's the exhibit A-1, which is description of projects
and the actual language of the bond itself, not the spreadsheet. And that's, I think, what Councilor
Iverson basically read in this evening as well in terms of the types of projects.
There's a line in here that says projects include but are not limited to. Is that a standard phrase
that you've used in the previous 15 years of bonds? Absolutely. Okay. So that's what gives us the wiggle
room for potentially re-obligating a project one way or another. Is that right? I think at the end,
as well as all related improvements and incidental expenses, a connection with these projects is also
another area where you get a little bit of wiggle.
Okay, so I guess my question is then about, you know, there's an additional sheet that was provided
to council about some of the other projects that are listed here. For example, TSD 500,000 for laptops,
stormwater 450,000 for street sweeper. These were items that, of course, we removed from the 26 budget
that are now in the bond. And I'll only speak for myself here and not other council members.
My intention was that we actually go back to the 11 years of previous bonds, the 5.9 million that is
already sitting there, and look to those line items to include but are not limited to repurposing those
to find some resources. What this seems to have done is to take the items we've removed from the budget
and added it onto the large bond, but correct my, disabuse me of my thought process here. I want to
make sure I understand what we're adding on here.
I guess I, so. Some are from the budget. That would be the stormwater $450,000. That is also the 102,000
for airport, for furniture, tools and equipment and things of that nature. The YSB is from the budget
at 55,000.
Those were the only things that we actually took from the proposed 2026 budget and put into this proposed
2025 grant. The TSD sheriff, those are body cameras and tasers. That's actually a five-year program
at $440,000 a year. And the laptops are for the squad vehicles, and that's at $500,000. I see that.
I guess I'll just restate.
the way I put it. And again, I'll leave it to other counselors to maybe explain what they thought we
were doing when we were cutting items out of the budget in terms of seeking previous bonds and use that
we have that has been languishing, frankly. And I know that you've said it's accounted for, there are
projects that are in mind, but we don't have the granularity beyond that initial sheet. And so I guess
when I had proposed this, my goal was to use what we had and not add onto the pile. I see you,
you know, gesticulating maybe a disagreement with that idea. I mean, that's what I'm after here. The
second thing I guess I would ask is, in the laundry list of projects, do you have a final number on
the cost of the mold in the justice building for the work that was done? I don't have that off the top
of my head. I think the most recent, I don't know, do you guys remember, did you see it come in?
It's like 24. I think 24,000 comes off to the top of my head. So I'm not sure where that's coming from
Okay, and how was that paid for? special projects we paid for it out of special projects in cumulative
capital development Is there a reason why justice building isn't listed as a possibility for projects
in this particular bond over five years? It wasn't
What we did is we put together all of the projects that had been presented to us and things that we
knew that needed to be done. I did recognize that the justice building is not on here. And it generally
is a huge cost to Monroe County government. The mold.
remediation has been remediated and we have it'll be coming to the commissioners in a couple of in a
week. I think it is a proposed long-term plan to how to address the issues within that particular building.
Going back to the issue about the prior bonds those I don't know how else to say it those projects are
already in play and
If there was some money left in a bond from prior years that was for vehicles, we've already pooled
that and are using that for the vehicles now. Like I was here at your last meeting, I believe, requesting
additional funds for sheriff vehicles at Accumulative Capital. I was able to reduce that request because
of unused prior lines,
that were specific for sheriff vehicles that we were able to take and just go ahead and apply that to
the cost of vehicles coming out at this time. So we don't have money in old bonds that can be used for
any of these particular new projects. Whenever we have a capital project come up and we don't have the
funding, we go to the bonds first to make sure if there's been a project that has been expended and
there's some money left if we can use it.
but the money goes to the projects in that bond first. So like when Parks has a project, if there's
money, if they need more money for their project, we will transfer from another line. I understand the
interpretation. I'm reading it differently because it's not that granular in the exhibit. And it seems
that when we have found resource, and that's a word we've used in this room,
it strikes me as interesting because there would be more detail or granularity in that project. It shouldn't
be found, I guess is my point. And I'm gonna keep coming back to this because there seems to be some,
maybe, it's hard to talk in this room sometimes. There may be some talking past each other about what
that money really is and how it gets obligated and de-obligated as projects devolve or evolve over time.
That's all I have on it. Thank you. Okay, thank you. Councilor Everson. I have, I'm sorry, did you use?
I was just wondering if I could respond briefly. I know that this party has provided a regularly updated
spreadsheet to council, which lists out the quote unquote leftover money. And it's not, you know, I
don't want the public to think we're sitting on millions of dollars in this big slush fund that we're
going to spend on gold taps or something. This is, this is, it's a regular,
effort. And I mean, regular effort that is put into a project need comes up. That's the first place
she looks is previous bonds, special projects, our current budget, what can we do? Then if it's something
that really has to happen, we go geo bond. And the whole reason geo bonds are so important to this county
is because years ago,
back when I was on council even before I was on council. The decision was made and obviously forced
to be made on the council. The fact that cable franchise fees were going down and we no longer have
money for technical services, so therefore we're going to use cumulative capital development fund. So
that decision was made years ago. Now, cable franchise fee would never have supported this
that we need every year for our technical services department. It certainly couldn't pay for the vastly
increased. Budget that we need every year for software- and so. What should be the capital fund. Is
pretty minimal. For the commissioners to utilize for
the list that looks very general to you for geo bonds it always bothered me too always when I first
started this job but it is general for a reason and it's and it's always that been that way it's not
something that we invented but at the same time if if changes are made here the commissioners will go
back and amend our resolution to match what
You all want in there, OK? And I would just point out that the exhibit that we're talking about does
not have laptops in it or computer equipment and a couple in the. We have to go back anyway, this the
street sweeper. So if those were things we wanted to fund with this bond, I know that there is some
wiggle room, but it's it is wiggle room. It's not a it's not a hole that we I would I would I would
ask that we would amend that
description of projects to include those things. And then we would go back to the commissioners and
amend this project description of projects to include those things so that it's there. I mean, part
of what this description of projects to me is telling the public, here is what our intent to use the
money for and what we're taxing for. So we want it to be as complete and accurate as possible.
I'm going to acknowledge that I see Councilor Hogg's hand, but I know Councilor Iverson had his hand
up first before Commissioner Thomas made a comment. So I'm going to go to Councilor Iverson and then
I'll come back to you, Councilor Hogg. I've got three questions on three separate lines. I'm taking
this in a new direction. Could we look at line number 12? On the sheet that I have in front of me, there's
an acronym and I don't know what that acronym is. Historic Courthouse.
The second question is the airport projects. Are any of these FAA? I mean, I know that we are waiting
on some FAA dollars to come in. Do we know? I don't know if Carlos is online, but I know that we needed
to put in some funds, but I thought that there was.
And I earlier this year, we brought a resolution actually to the county council that we were that we're
going to expend money for. And I know this 184, 439 line five tower project. So so we went ahead and
did that. And there was a resolution that said, hey, if we get a general obligation bond, we'll reimburse
the airport, whatever funding source they used to pay for that.
And that was to get a leg up, because I believe this is like the final year for a certain grant that
pays for these kind of things. And I spoke with Carlos last week. We don't know if we've gotten it yet,
but he's fairly optimistic that we're in good shape with that. So I know for a fact that that one is
tied directly to
what I always consider pulling a highway and getting all the preliminary design work done before you
apply for a grant because it really increases your chances of getting that grant. So I know that is
what that for. I would assume that probably the furniture tools and equipment are probably not part
of a FAA grant, but the ARF equipment and ATCT equipment probably are or could be, and those are the
kind of things we see more federal grants for than the other.
All right, and my third and final question is about the nature preserve I am outright giddy about this,
I am really excited and I just want to be clear that we are talking about the mineral county nature
preserve here right. This is so exciting, this is on the east side I run past here all the time.
And so I think the last time that Kelly was in front of us, we talked a lot about the invasives, and
we were going to have to plant a whole bunch of trees to make sure that those invasives. Is that what
this money is for? Or is this money for trails? I mean, I understand the dog park is different. I'm
talking about the other line. She's going to talk about that. Thank you, Commissioner. I do not have
a spreadsheet from me, so it's what I remember. I'm sure it's going to be sufficient.
The 775 includes a brand new entrance because we do not have one. It includes all of the dirt work,
the stormwater, the planning and building requirements. Our park staff will be the general contractor.
So we will not be hiring all of that work out. We'll have to have ADA parking for planning.
We have ADA trail. We have trees.
wildflowers. And yes, this includes some trees in there also. So it looks like a large number, but we
can't open unless we do all the things that stormwater planning and building require of us. And it also
includes the equipment for our park staff to do this. If we don't have the equipment, our park staff
cannot build this. Does that answer? It does. And can I ask a follow up question?
Yes. Because we had to change the term of this bond to six years, is that going to change the timelines
for getting all these things set up at all? No, our goal is if we can get our engineer on board, our
park staff will start, if we have money, start constructing next year, which is 2026, and we can be
open by 2027. That's a tight
tight building, but our park staff is up for it only if they have the equipment. If they don't have
the equipment, I always say our park superintendent with one shovel isn't going to do it. No. And I
just clarify that the six years is the repayment schedule. We would get the proceeds up front. Another
question? No, I think I've talked enough. I'll look to Councilor Honk and go ahead.
Okay, I have more than one thing to discuss. First of all, I just have to I'm trying not to chuckle.
But those of us who remember when someone an employee who came at who decided that we did not need that
sprinkler was a waste of water.
and he tore our sprinklers out of the ground. You do not remember? And then to water all those plants,
he was carrying buckets of water out there, like I was gonna say, and he tore them out of the ground.
I think he was, well, I know who it was, but I guess I won't say who.
It wasn't anybody sitting here right now. There's something in the ground now. We do have a system.
But the system is so hinky that we get calls on a weekend because somebody is trying to walk down the
sidewalk and the water is just pouring out of our sprinkler system. So we need to update it. And I'm
just saying, I remember he was so happy he had it. He took his picture. He tore it up. So I hope if
we do put it in there, we won't rip it out.
the next two because we're trying to save water. Then a question about the courthouse steps. I'm thinking,
what about that 147,000 approximately that we are asking for from the community foundation? So that's
part of my question there because we were going to talk about that tonight. I guess we're going to talk
about it next week.
and it's it's for work for historic buildings so that there is there is a fund for historic building
preservation the the steps are the limestone steps and they're in disrepair we want to make sure that
there we we have obviously in mind that we we do know that canopy alights is every november
but we all but we do know that the sesquicentennial is next july and so we want to make sure that the
steps are in decent shape by then but um do you want to talk about that something sure um so the the
to complete the steps um it's going to be a little over two hundred thousand dollars uh that's for
Basically, we're going to make some nice new caps for the treads and then follow it up with ADA compliant
handrails. And then there's going to be approximately $50,000 to repair the sidewalks where they're
cracked and busted in different locations and $5,000 to replace the dove on the monument.
I'm not objecting to steps being repaired. I've fallen up those steps before around the courthouse.
I just wanted to say there's an opportunity maybe to use that other 147 and not use all of that.
Then I moving on to another question and having to do with the money for the nature preserve. So my
question is what that's not our only park, of course. What about that query part that we put so much
money, you know, got the query part and that's so, you know, and we're we're
I'm wondering if we could assist in any way covering some of that, or we've wonder if could we cover
some of that with the food and beverage tax revenue? So I'm wondering if we could assist in any way.
I'm just throwing out some ideas. Some suggestions are you looking at me? And that the quarry the quarry
Park project is not a Parks
dollars for development, we got stalled because we didn't know about the location of the new justice
center because that's on the south side of that new park land. And now we know with our budget constraints
that the roadway we thought was going to be there to feed people to that park will not be there. So
we're going to have to
re-imagine all of that in terms of using Arlington. That is a food and beverage based project and no
money has been spent yet, but we are actively working in committee and we have, once we have our first
frost, I'm not
we're not going to be able to do that. We're certainly not suggesting we speed the clock up in the world
anymore than we already have it. But but once there's our first frost, we're going to go back out with.
Um an expert in limestone equipment, and we're going to take a look at what's there and, um. Continue
in our committee meetings to move to the next step.
I'm trying to get through this question. The other thing I heard comments made about how the Q cap doesn't
cover very much. There's very little left. And as a reminder, the commissioners used about a half million
dollars. I believe that's the number every year that's going out there.
for the parking garage. And now however many years ago that was, but we know that parking garages are
supposed to have a lifetime expectancy of 30 years. So perhaps it's not gonna be paid off until 30 years
is up. That's kind of thing goes on. But we need to remind ourselves that that's why they don't have
much left in that QM cap to spend every year
because they opted to use it for a parking garage. So, I mean, I just, that's some history I think we
need to remember. That's an interesting point. I appreciate that comment. I kind of, as we are on the
cum cap, I kind of want to bring it back because as we're talking about this, it kind of, conversation
from Councilor Henry kind of conjured up something else. So,
As we look at QCAP, and Ms. Purdy was talking about, we look at trying to transfer a line of items for
certain things related to the Justice Center, and then anything from there, then we kind of look at
QCAP to see how we can go from there. And then potentially, I guess last resort would be the bonds.
My question is, because in listening to the conversations related to
the justice center and listening to employees and whatnot talk about the building and some of the some
of the items that were discussed in terms of remediation which was Oh, why am I blinking? Ah, it was
the HVAC system that was supposed to be brought up and then the obvious problem was the water issue
that was a thing
And obviously the water source, what was mentioned in that meeting was the water source was a thing
that we needed to figure out where that was coming from to potentially remediate all of these issues.
I guess my question is, is there any idea on the horizon to either use QCAP if there is something left
in QCAP or could we possibly look at
working out the HVAC system where we can put that in the geo bond. Since those were conversations that
were brought up during those meetings. I'm not sure I'm going to answer your question, but I can talk
about the condensation. Right now, that building
is what they refer to as out of balance. And it means your supplier and your return air aren't even.
And because of that happens, it pulls more air from the outside of the building to try to even itself
out. This summer, you're out of balance. You're pulling in air that's already 80% humidity, and you're
unable to reduce that.
Therefore, anything that's not insulated condensates and drips. And as far as funding, I can let somebody
else talk about that. Well, there is the sleep system that was used, right? That's already been installed.
Yeah. Yeah, and I believe the controls have been, there was an issue with the controls with it. Yeah,
we just took last commissioner's meeting
Some projects to to improve the controls further We've we've done a lot of insulating lately So it's
it's in progress Okay CCD Okay, I guess what I maybe I didn't hear maybe I'm I
not too savvy on that, is the conversation related to the HVAC system, because that was something that
people were discussing in terms of, hey, can we have this looked at? And I walked away from that conversation
at least thinking that that was something that was going to be looked at, at least that was mentioned.
So are we saying that QCAP is going to cover that? I'm not sure what the question, I mean, so I did
hear people
I think, okay, so I believe the question is that there is a perception that we were going to have the
HVAC system tested.
Well, it wasn't so much that it was tested. I thought I remember, and I'm forgetting his name right
now, but I swear I remember and listening to the conversation that people were saying that there was
an HVAC problem and they wanted to look at the the ducts and whatnot. And that was at least
to my understanding. Now, that was also at the time I just came back from surgery and I could have been
delusional, but I don't think I am.
I was thinking that we were going to have that be looked or that the HVAC system was something that
was going to be looked at since the people were complaining about the ducks and all of the items blowing
through the air. I guess that's what I'm getting at. Okay. I think I'm on the same page. The issue was
people are concerned about the duct work. The issue though is
we have the airspace tested. And if it tests within acceptable levels and there's no guidance on mold,
then we're at acceptable levels. So we're not going to keep diving down to find more problems if we
don't have a problem. So if we're at an acceptable level, good. If we're at a...
can't remember what it's called, slightly elevated maybe level, then we need to find the source of the
problem. So then we need to look into is there, and that's what they did. So that goes in and they try
to find where the problem is. They try to find where it's wet, things of that nature, remediate that
situation, resolve that situation. We got rid of the condensation that solved.
that particular problem. And then plus they use the kill spray on the mold. So I do believe that there
were some people who don't catch the fact that what we are looking at is the air that we breathe in
the room. And it doesn't necessarily matter what's in that duct.
if what you're smelling, what you're breathing in here is of acceptable levels. Does that make sense?
It does. I guess not. I'm seeing it a little differently. And I don't want to continue to keep going
back and forth here. And I'm not trying to be rude at all or anything. But I remember that it was almost
a surprise to Sarah from VET
that we hadn't looked at the HVAC system because there were literally comments that were made where
people were saying that there is, you know, they were surprised that Mr. Garner hadn't looked at that
yet. And so I was just, I guess the reason why I keep coming back to this conversation is because if
we use QCAP for that and we are all done with that, then,
the airspace above the tiles, but outside the duck work. And that came up as well. So I think that may
be what you're what you're remembering. Um and we also had a discussion. I know that there was an initial
discussion and I had to leave, but there was an
between David Gardner and Sarah Hamidovich at VET about the systems that we already have in place from
COVID using UV light, which actually helps reduce mold.
and that those things were still there. And so they were having that discussion as well. And that was
after the meeting was over. So I think I know what you're referring to, but here's the thing. So we're
going to have a long-term plan that's going to require some investment for all of our buildings for
testing on a regular basis and remediation as needed. We don't have that proposal yet, but Sarah Midovich
is working on it. And that is something that we would pay for out of cube.
Probably. Or out of professional services. So it just depends. But going back to the HVAC, I can't speak
to that. I'm looking at Richard because I don't know that there's a problem other than the fact that
it's out of balance. Right. That's it. That's the problem. I think what I'm hearing is,
Is there concern that there's mold in the HVAC system? Or are we talking about how the HVAC system functions?
No, I know there is not that. And I have a little bit of background with property management and knowing
the idea of when there is mold in the system and you haven't looked at the ducts,
And you can clean and you can spray and you can fumigate all you want. But if you don't take care of
the HVAC system where all of that stuff is continuously to blow around and it's in there, you can clean
it all you want. But if you don't look at that particular system there, it's going to keep blowing around
and around. And that was the conversation that I recall hearing where there were literal audible gasps
where it was like, oh my god, I don't
I can't believe that we never thought of something like this before. So I guess, you know, we don't,
this is just a discussion of conversation of what we can use for geo bonds and whatnot. And I know this
is coming back up here in October, but I guess I just wanted, since we were on that mention and since
we're talking about funding and all those different things, that's kind of what I was talking about,
if that makes sense. All right. So why is there no money in this geo bond to invest in that?
justice building HVAC system. Is that the issue? Cleaning the ducks? Well, I guess the truth of the
matter is the only thing I'm worried about right now is since we keep talking about CUMECAP and versus
GeoGond and whatnot, is that something that we can take care of with CUMECAP or
if we don't have it from professional services or other different line items, is that something that
we can put in the DO bond is what I'm asking? The short answer is yes. The long answer is why would
we invest funds to clean out the duct work if the air that you're breathing has acceptable levels?
My question, why would we do that if we're at acceptable levels? I'm wondering if the best way to manage
this at this moment, I think we can cover costs with CCD that we're experiencing now and that we think
are coming. I think the best way, because we don't have that proposal yet from Sarah Hamidovich, I think
what we could do
is bring that information to you all once we have it. We have it. She sent it to me on Monday. Oh, well,
I haven't had. Yeah, of course. Yes, that's OK. Yeah. But once we have that, that we can bring that
here and have a discussion and share the information with you so that you know what we're doing, what
the plan is. I mean, there are some minor things that I know we need to repair.
I know that things she had said verbally at our meeting, but we can present that information so that
you have a sense of what we're doing. But I think replacing the HVAC would not
be a viable expense to take on if we're building a new justice bill and I guess the only thing that
I'll say to that before we go on because I know council members over here I have a hand up and again
I don't want to belabor this conversation but again what I also remember hearing is we got to figure out
a contingency plan to get people out of that building. And while they are there in that building, we
have to make sure that with the continuation of remediation and testing and whatnot to ensure the health
and safety of everybody in that building. So again, that's a conversation that I look forward to having.
And again, more can come in October, but that's all I'll have to say about that. So I'll move on. Yes,
Councilor Decker. Thank you. Thank you very much.
I'm sorry. What was occasionally we all know that counselors get information whether in the meeting
just as commissioners do, but someone had referenced to me plenum air versus ducted air and that difference.
And I am not even close to qualified to spell half that alone talk about what that truly means. But
what I would say is, and this might be a discussion that you all
it out. But if if as I look at the bond description, at least in the narrative portion, we talk about
courthouse courthouse ground. If the cum cap is makes you waiver in some way, having a background option
there. Maybe the maybe what you want to do before we get to adoption. But that that's something that
you'll have to have to figure out best based on the information. So actually,
Richard and I had spoken a little bit during all of this and the 200,000 that we've kind of identified
for the historic courthouse. If we use the community foundation funding in addition to this, that could
be reduced to 150. We could then put 50,000 as an earmark for
the justice building, if you like. And again, yeah, we could do that. And I'm sure I've got just a few
more. I'm sure there's things to figure out on that. And the one thing I'll say is I think everyone
is always very fond of and emotionally attached to the courthouse. I mean, my heavens, it's on every
image of this community and logo. And I love the courthouse.
That said, sometimes the courthouse where we sit gets a lot of attention and other buildings may not,
right? Just for just visual, our eyeball attention. And so that helps you all to kind of figure that
out. Maybe that is something to think about. One other thing, when I look at this list here, and it's
a pretty solid list of things,
I do want to make sure, does the word vehicles, again, I'm looking at narrative, maybe I should be looking
at something else, but does vehicles, does that give you narrative, does that narrative give you enough
wiggle room to do that street sweeper that we kind of looked at and shipped it out? So there are things
that we need to amend on our exhibit.
and if you all so they need to amend it too right now no okay well you have it in red on here to be
amended has to amend the written component and that will include highway and the tsd sheriff um items
the street sweeper should have been i think is already in there but i'm not sure he'll need to have
a look at that and see um the
What was the question? What was the issue? I just want to make sure, when I see the word vehicles, I
want to make sure that gives you wiggle enough room that street sweeper wouldn't get lost or street
sweepers covered. Because I know that we kind of shifted that out of there. It was with a wink and a
hope that something like this is out there somewhere. So we're talking two things, because in my mind,
yes, if you could put it under, it can be considered a vehicle. I don't care. However,
When it comes to appropriating lines in the bond, it is much easier to have them specifically associated
with a project. Because otherwise, I've got highway with vehicles that are trying to purchase. I've
got airport with vehicles they're trying to purchase. And it just makes it much cleaner if we can address
each need individually.
And the auditor's been great at helping us come up with good plans. Go ahead. I'm sorry. I was just
going to I would consider the street super a vehicle, but I did not have that in mind when I prepared
that list. And so it's something like that comes up. I run that by bond council and I get their guidance
on those kind of things. I guess what I what I'm intending to do is take the this discussion because
it sounds to me like there is some additions that need to be
be added to that list. I'm going to amend that list, again, run it by the bond council to make sure
we're not doing anything crazy. And then when we publish the appropriation before your next meeting
where it gets voted on, we'll make sure that that language is appropriate. The only other thing I'll
say and then I'll be quiet is that
So often in our roles, everyone says, you all just need to cut, cut, cut, cut, cut, never look back
again. You all just sit up there and make things up. But when you look at this list, I don't know that
I've yet to find something where I say, well, right there, that's them being malfeasant and a joke.
I mean, I want to talk about some of these things for a second. Emergency management, sirens, and equipment.
That one right there alone. Body cameras, which is now expected by everyone.
right, left, indifferent, smart, dumb, you name it. Emergency management building, right, which we every
year test how much those folks will go through, and then some. Youth Services Bureau, they were just
in here. So voter election services, we're doing a massive transition there, and my gosh, don't get
that wrong, because everybody's gonna wanna weigh in next year. So I just,
The bond Avenue, which is a means to keep government doing the things it's got to do because again no
one else is going to do animal control and other things so might as well be us. But the ability to do
this is a is a powerhouse to get those things done and a few counselors have heard me say this over
the years, but.
You expect in our county roads and things to have a street sweeper, right? You expect paving, you expect
services and living rural doesn't necessarily mean you just signed up to, I just shut, get out there
with a broom and hit the gravel. It means you expect those amenities in a place like this. This is the
only way we get it done. So I appreciate very much the list and the continuing work, particularly around
what Councilor Crosley asked so well, and we'll figure it out.
look over to my right here, Councilor Henry. Thank you. I know we're really into this, but there's some
newness. I mean, it's a new structure, right? So actually, my two questions are on the legal piece,
Jeff. So I wanted to maybe just get some stuff in the air. So the first question really is understanding
the five-year and the cooling off and what we're doing here. So I'm going to just put this in layman's
terms and maybe some ignorance of my own, right?
With this bond presented for six years, or sorry, five years, six million, are we gonna see another
five years, six million next year and the following year and the following year, right? This is it for
five years in terms of bond, with the general obligation bond. Is that a way to think about it? Well,
I guess, I think you said a few different things. Yeah, I did. And other counties have had this type
of program where they do a six billion, six year bond each year of the six year cycle, right?
And so that is an option. I think that you and the commissioners probably need to have a conversation
about how that's gonna look moving forward, because historically we've had 3 million per year. So if
you guys choose to do 6 million this year, does that mean we're going to do the 6 million each year
for the next six years or does that mean
We're gonna do six million every other year or however that's going to work out. That is kind
of a conversation that the council and the commissioners.
have to have that discussion. Ultimately, it's the council's decision whether the issue, the bond or
not. Okay. So the second piece of that then is in the new structure, is there a current threshold for
controlled projects in the county? Like if we had like, and how do we figure that out? Like,
is there like, why 6 million? Why not 16 million of stuff today? Like, what is there a cap on this under
new legislation or not? There are different levels, right? So and I
I don't know the exact number, although I can say six millions below the level where there's a level
where you have, you have to go, I think it's over 18 million or 19 million where it got the full, you're
gonna go through a referendum and all that. And medium level where it's like, well,
it may I think it's subject to a reference not a bond council I just know that once you get that and
I think it's about seven million is where that cutoff is. It's it used to be it used to be three or
actually used to be two million then it went to five million but it has a kind of growth factor associated
with it so that numbers these numbers change every year so they go up a little bit but there's a kind
of a threshold
that starts, I think, around seven and ends around 19, where there's just a different structure and
process. And I don't exactly know what that structure and process is. But I think, in my mind, I think
it's kind of like the, if you get so many remonstrations in, then that goes through the DLGF or through
some kind of process that has an ultimate decision maker that is not the
that is not you, right?
Now, I appreciate you taking the shot at it. I know that was a technical question, but it does raise
some interesting ideas about how much we can bond for and for what. I mean, when you say 18, we're awfully
close to what's been asked for to begin the Justice Center project at that point in terms of, I'm sure
what you're coming back for later on that. So I just wanted to raise, you know, what are our, like,
I think that's a good question to ask as we're considering this year, next year, and following years
as our revenue continues to decline in the county as well, what we're asking for.
Yeah, that's it. Go ahead. I'm sorry. And I just want to be clear that the structure that we've looked
at with the Justice Center is a revenue bond, which is a different beast than a general obligation property
tax bond. And my understanding is we could bond 100% of the county's revenue if we wanted to. And it's
the way the law works, as it's been described to me. But we shouldn't do that.
No, we're not on 100% of the county revenue. Because if you're utilizing property tax, that's where
these rules kick in. And if you're using LIT, then there's a structure where you can only go up to 25%
right now of what your revenue is. And then to you,
I mean, you can't make your budget if you bond all your revenue. Thanks for going in the weeds with
me. I appreciate it. All right. Thank you. Leslie, I just have a procedural question. Do you need to
make any changes to the amendment or to the motion that I read today? Or, you know, you need to go to
bond counsel for some additionals, but for tonight, it's OK the way they're at it. I think it was introduced
at this meeting. I think we've had a very frustrating discussion that included changes. I actually think
what you read is different than what was in the exhibit A. I think
And I'm trying to go back. But I think it's pretty clear from this meeting what the expectation is.
This will be advertised for your next meeting. So the appropriation will be advertised. And so the detail
will be in that advertisement. So the public will be aware and know exactly what you guys are going
to be looking at at the next meeting. Great. Thanks. OK. Well, that was it. A good conversation.
All right. Are there any other questions from council related to this item?
Seeing none, we will place this on the October 14th agenda for our next meeting. Thank you. We appreciate
it. And I just want to clarify, I just pulled up exhibit A from the ordinance with regards to the motion
and they match. I was going to say, I thought I took it straight from exhibit A.
So whatever's in exhibit A is- I appreciate that. Okay. We'll make the changes as discussed. Thank you.
Okay. I actually, I need to excuse myself for the moment, but before I excuse myself, I wanted to see
if we could recess for five minutes.
and be back for around 7.06 to finish out the agenda. Is that okay with council? Okay. All right. So
we will come back at 7.06. Okay. And welcome back. We're still here. And we are going to dive into the
county council business.
and we're going to start with item 11B since A was tabled. Council, I move to approve ordinance 2025-26
approval of the Recorder's Perpetuation Fund request for office expenses for the 2026 budget year. Second.
All right, we got a motion and a second. I'm going to look to a person that's been really quiet this
evening, which is Ms. Turner King. Hello. Hello.
Hello. So I hear an echo, hold on. So the first resolution is 2025-26, which is the recorder sworn affidavit.
This is a yearly thing that happens. The recorder presented a sworn affidavit during her budget session
that states that there's enough funding in there to cover
office expenses, and so this is the resolution that would accept that sworn statement and authorize
that budgetary expense. Okay. Oh, okay. And we're back. That's all she has to say about that. All right.
Looking to my left here to see if anybody has any questions.
So I presume, well, this was in the packet, but I wonder if there's a way to put it up so people can
see it now. We have a way to do that. And it looks like Ms. Turner King is intently getting ready with us.
Okay, and so this is up for the public to see if you are via Teams or present here in the Na'i Hill
room or to watch later. All right. Councilor Decker, did I see that you had your hand up? Okay. Okay,
all right. Thank you. Looking over here to my right to see if anybody has any questions on this item.
Yes, Councilor Hawke. I think this is just routine. Before she's allowed to spend money out of there,
she has to put a resolution.
saying that this is appropriate use of the money and so forth. So it's just something she has to do
every year. She's going to use the money out of them. No problem. That's correct. And I try to find
a problem if there's one there, but there's none there. Oh, we know. All right. Anybody else have anything
on this item?
Seeing none. If there's any public comment on this item, you can come forward to the lectern here in
the night, you know, room, or you can raise your hand via teams. And seeing none. This is a resolution.
Can we do a voice vote on this? Nope. It has to be a roll call. Ah, darn. Okay, I tried. All right.
May we please have a roll call vote. Councillor Crossley? Yes. Councillor Iverson? Yes. Councillor Decker?
Yes. Councillor Feidl? Yes.
Councilor Henry? Yes. Councilor Hawk? Yes. Motion passes six zero. All right, next item. Council I move
to open for discussion resolution 2025-41 a resolution relating to the use of overtime. All right, we
got a motion and a second and to kind of queue up the conversation here because before we go to Ms.
Turner King, this is
Something that came out of budget discussion and conversation as we saw many account lines through various
departments have overtime. And as the public continues to hear us say that we are trying to work really
hard and getting our deficit down. And this was something that the council as a whole talked about last
week during our marathon meeting.
of other items that we could look at. And this is one of the discussions that came from that. So Ms.
Turner-King, you can take it away. And I went ahead and displayed this resolution. This is the draft
that I shared last week.
So I'm skipping the whereas clauses and going to the now therefore clauses. Upon passage of this resolution,
it would remove departmental budget lines in all departments except for departments with 24 hour operations.
So that would include the sheriff, the jail, YSB, and then, and or that are responsible for responding
to weather conditions and or natural disasters that covers highway. And then those are actually listed
out in the next sentence.
The second paragraph of the resolution indicates for the exempted departments, the council encourages
over time to be used judicially and then it implements the following procedure. So if a department were
to need additional appropriations or funding beyond what is already in their budget and was going to
do an in-house transfer, it would require them to come to council before
um that in-house transfer can happen which is not the current procedure um so it kind of makes uh it's
it creates more transparency on what over how much overtime is being used and then there's um when they
come to council a requirement that they provide a report and the report list out the number of hour
time hours used by the department as of the date of the request the um dollar amount related to those hours
The reasons for the overtime the amount of anticipated need that they're asking for why that
is an anticipated need and then it also Asked for the number of comp and comp time hours occurred by
the department's employees to kind of give you a comparison of comp timers overtime and i'm happy to
make any amendments to this as Council sees fit Thank you for that and I see a hand raised over here
to my left counselor vital
Thank you. I don't know that I have any amendments, but I have a question. I'm just curious, maybe if
there might have been another resolution before about overtime and if it was similar to this one, are
we missing anything from one before that we might want to consider? That was just a thought.
I didn't find any prior overtime resolution. I did find like a prior hiring freeze resolution. I did
look to see if I could find other local government agencies that did overtime resolutions. There wasn't
any that I could find. And so this is just kind of a new document that I thought documented the council's
expressed intent.
Yes, Councillor Henry. Thank you, Ms. Turner-King. I want to propose an amendment here, but I just wanted
to maybe get some procedural steps in line here with the auditor's office as well. So under the now
therefore item one, I'd like to add to the exempt department's airport operations. Now, my understanding
is airport operations doesn't have an overtime line right now in the budget, so we'd have to add it
later this evening at
a line item, I think. So there's a two-step here. Does it matter for the resolution if we add airport
operations now and then add the budget line item later, or do we need the line item first before I add
it, in your view? I just want to make sure we're doing this right. I think if council wants to make
that amendment and then pass this resolution with the intent that that amendment be incorporated, you
can pass the resolution contingent on the creation of the overtime line.
So if you do this first, you can create the line. I mean, would it be sufficient to add just add air
for air? Sorry, keep saying Air Force. I guess we have an Air Force in the county now, right? Airport
operation to the line. But do I need to add that other verbiage contingent upon or can I just say airport
operations? I think that when we do the roll call on the motion and the resolution, we would add the
contingency. Thank you. Madam President, I have a motion to amend the resolution.
Okay, go ahead. And item one in the now therefore clauses to add the exempt departments would include
the Air Force, I'm sorry, did it again, airport operations before sheriff's office. All right, we got
a motion in a second on the airport, not Air Force, to be added in there. I think they just had a birthday,
that's why you're
Yep, thinking about it. All right. Any other questions on that? Yes, Councillor Paito. So I was just
curious why it was before the sheriff's office. Is there a reason for that? Alphabetical, but it's not
alphabetical. I don't think the rest of them are alphabetical. They're not. It just caught me. Okay.
All right. Yes, Councillor Hawke. Right. At what point would, this is for
Miss King, at what point is appropriate for us to add that line in the budget so that if it's necessary
to use this, because it's not tonight. Kim. I was gonna say later tonight, we can make a motion to add
it to the budget. Let's forget it. Okay. Are there any other further discussions on Councilor Henry's
amendment?
Seeing none, all those in favor of the amendment to add airport operations to this line signify by saying
aye. Aye. All those opposed, same sign. All right, amendment carries. Now, coming back to the overall.
Yes. Yeah, Councilor Everson. So my question is for staff. I know that a fiscal impact has not been
calculated.
and particularly makes it hard because we just added a whole other department. But do we have any idea
of the fiscal impacts that this resolution, if passed, would have? And again, I mean, I'm asking you
to ballpark it. I have not done one since I wasn't sure where you guys were going with what you were
intending to do. But I could have one prepared for the next meeting in October 14.
Thank you. Is there any other further discussion on this motion here or on the resolution? All righty.
Seeing none. Yeah. Just a point of procedure, I guess. I read my motion as a discussion only.
And so I don't think, I think given the fact that we just had that conversation about fiscal impact,
then we'll read another motion at our next meeting. Sorry, we can just move forward with the changes
as is. And then we can add it to the October 14th so that it will be on the corrected and in the packet
for the public along with the fiscal impact.
Or you can make a motion and approve it tonight. I personally want to see the fiscal impact before adopting.
So I'm going to be quiet. Okay. Council would say yes. I think whatever we can do to make sure that
we're reducing our expenditures is important to do and the sooner we do it, the better.
And so I would like to see a vote on this tonight, and then we can make an adjustment amendment to it
the next meeting. Okay, yes, Councilor Decker. I appreciate what Councilor Iverson said about fiscal
impact. I generally on everything we're talking about in the budget, I'm very curious about this impact.
And we're figuring out things, trying things, trying to get this all right.
I am more in favor of holding this as Councilor Iverson I think said to the next meeting in case there
are any other unintended consequences or to really see what we're talking about. Sometimes we can have
really amped up conversations in here about $2.35. And sometimes we can have amped up conversations
about very important things. And I'd like to have a better handle on what this truly means.
sorry I miss I misspoke we can make changes at the after or during the public hearing so that will be
our next time to be able to make adjustments so that is September 30th so next Tuesday we can I can
bring this information back to you on September 30th. So we have a couple of council members who want
to think about
impact and then we just heard miss uh shell say that this resolution could come back to us on at our
next meeting which is september 30th for the public hearing is there any other questions or comments
from council related to this discussion well i'd like to call a question on doing it this evening and
see where we go see if anybody would
wants to do that. And if not, then the majority wishes to wait. Well, I guess I call the question on
whether or not we would move forward with it tonight. And then any corrections to it can be made at
our next meeting. Correct. The motion. At the motion, do I have a second? I'll second it. It doesn't
look like we have a second, so you vote.
Okay so we got a motion and a second are there any other further discussion on this item I guess I understand
us wanting to know the fiscal impact of this and I think that is something that we could potentially get
or we can get next week. So if we decided to pass this resolution tonight, we could still look to you
to give us that impact. And if there is something that might impact what we hear, then we can always
change that or make, you know, and we can bring this back up during next week's meeting. That is correct.
Okay. Okay. Ooh, council hawk, look at us.
I think I would be in favor of your motion. Can I ask a clarifying question on the motion? Yes. Is the
motion to pass this night contingent on the creation of that overtime line that we talked about for
the airport? Yes. I would be in agreement of that as well. Oh, bipartisan heart is so happy. Okay.
Yes. So I was just wondering if somebody could be a little more elaborate on the pros and cons of doing
it one way or the other. In terms of voting the motion Councilor Hawk made or not doing it, right? I
think the pro is if we hear something that happens, and I don't want to speak, I guess she could also
speak to this, but I think for me, this would be if we say,
It all goes in our favor and we put this resolution into place. Um, and Michelle comes back and she
brings us, you know, information related to fiscal impact. If everybody is all good with what she has
brought to us, then there is no further discussion. That's one less item on a long night that we would
have to hear. At least that's what I look at in terms of that. Yes, I get it. Okay. Yes. And the reasons
you should vote no on this.
is because number one, we don't know the fiscal impact. So if the fiscal impact is low, should we even
be doing this? Does it have an impact? Number two, our staff who we work really hard to make sure have
jobs just saw this resolution tonight. So department heads and people who are gonna be impacted by this
have only heard this conversation tonight. I think we owe it to them to give them one week to mull it over.
Oh, I'm sorry. Would there be no way then to change it if we approve to accept it now? Charge, we can
get rid of totally next meeting if we'd like to. Yeah. So even if we didn't vote no, it seems like we
can change it, right? Yes, that's what Michelle was saying as well too. Gotcha. And I saw Ms. Turner-King
have her hand up.
I think one detail on that is not in this resolution and I'm now going to reshare that might factor
into whether you adopt it now or not is when do you and when do you want this to become effective because
so for example, for the hiring freeze that.
the discussion that is coming up next and the draft resolution has that resolution going into effect
immediately. This does not have a timeline built into it. So is the idea that this is implemented for
2026 budgets, is it implemented now? I think if we really want to try to stop the flow of money leaving,
We need to make it effective now. If between now and the next meeting, we have department heads that
say, this really isn't working because it was an emergency, we did X, Y, and Z, we can change it then.
But the longer we delay trying to get our work done, the more is going to be on our plate and we'll
have another six hour meeting. Well, five hour, whatever it was. So I'm just trying to get things to move.
that doesn't hurt anyone. Yes, Mr. Arne King. If it is council's intent that this become effective
immediately, I would suggest that a motion should be made to amend this to add some language. And I
would also like to, since we are currently in a payroll, we may already have people that have done over
time. So I would recommend that the effective date
be October 5th. That's the beginning of it. Excuse me. That's the beginning of the new payroll. Okay.
And so again, this is we are on the discussion of Councillor Hawks amendment. So I saw Councillor Decker
have his hand up. Yes. So I mean, that that kind of further illustrates a point and again,
I don't know that we know specifically who right now was thinking why while they're running a department.
But if somebody said on September 24th and 25th, I will need you to do a little bit of overtime for
the annual ringing of the sheaves or whatever it is that the department knows that we don't know, then
that could suddenly be not the plan in those next two days. Am I wrong on this? Right?
I do get the sense to like hurry, hurry, hurry, do all these things, hurry. But again, we're talking
about a thing that goes from one week to the next meeting to the cycle. So I just, I get a,
I don't know, we can do what we want here, but again, sometimes there's midstream unintended consequences
that come out.
for something and hopefully we've exempted everything. I don't know, we found another one tonight that
we had to add in here that was necessary. Yes, Councilor Iverson. So I want to make a motion to add
the effective date. However, Council Member Hawke, would it be all right with you if I made this motion
before we voted on your motion? Please do, yeah.
that the effective date would be October 5th. October 8th. The fifth. The fifth. I said October 8th.
It should be October 5th. October 5th. Second. This is crazy. Okay.
So we made the motion to amend. So if we are wanting to do this effective immediately, because we are
in the middle of payroll, that it would have an effective date of October 5th, 2025. OK. All right.
Any other further discussion? All right. Seeing none.
If there's any public comment that folks would like to make, you are here in the NattU Hill Room. If
you'd like to make a public comment, you could come forward to the lectern here in the NattU Hill Room,
or you can raise your hand via Teams. Seeing none, may we please have a roll call vote? This is on the
amendment to add the effective date. Okay, correct.
So yeah, so this will be the second amendment. Yes. So technically, because this is an amendment to
add, we can do a voice vote. OK, that's right. All right. All those in favor of the amendment to add
October 5th to this signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed, same sign. All right, motion carries.
Now for the overall.
resolution here can we have a roll call vote? Councillor Iverson? No. Councillor Deckard? No. Councillor
Feidl? Yes. Councillor Henry? Yes. Councillor Hock? Yes. Councillor Crossley? Yes. Motion passes 4-2.
Okay and the only thing for us having that vote tonight is
If we hear anything else between now and next week, we can always bring this conversation back up. Michelle
still can continue to look at the fiscal impact for that. And depending on what that could be, you know,
conversations, other conversations could be had next week. So next item. Council, I move to open for
discussion resolution twenty twenty five dash forty one.
A resolution to temporarily freeze the hiring of full and part-time staff. All right, we got a motion
and a second, and I'm going to go back to Ms. Turner-King for this one. And this is resolution 2025-42.
Yes, I meant to, yeah, that was the Scribner's error, excuse me. This is 2025-42. I apologize.
So I'm getting ready to share my screen. This is the hiring freeze resolution that council was considering
but did not pass at the last meeting. And so what I have done is, in essence, looked at the last time
a motion to this effect went into place.
And it will go from there with amendments. So I think there I know there are a lot of departments have
provided feedback based on the last council meeting and some of the feedback was situational.
How does this hiring freeze apply to grant positions? How does this hiring freeze apply to departments
that are already in the process of hiring process? So they've interviewed applicants. Some have already
had applicants make commitments, but they won't start until later in October. So I think there's a lot
of questions as to how council sees this hiring freeze applying to those situations.
question. And so the last time that we had a higher end freeze was back during COVID. Is that correct?
Yes. And I guess my question to how did we do it before? Because this was before my time. So the prior
resolution doesn't have any language in it that is applicable to grant positions. And so
I wasn't here either, but I'm assuming since there isn't anything in the resolution that exempts those
positions, the resolution was applicable to those positions. And that is something that we should definitely
consider. All right, I think I heard somebody say question over here. Councilor Haug, did you have a
question? Yes, when it comes to grants, sometimes a grant is split between
you know some money in the grant some money in general whatever and so I can I can see why we would
want to make sure it was it just covered all of it because otherwise you'd have somebody hired to pay
a part of the salary and then we're going to end up with the same mess we got now where all the grant
money goes away and then we get stuck with everything in county general and that's not something we
can continue to afford
I want to address the third clause of this draft resolution which handles public safety It is clear
that There it is in the fourth line that council will identify what positions fit within this category and
And I think we need to think pretty, well, first of all, my question is, have we gotten feedback from,
well, okay, hold on, let me back up. I think we need to think pretty broadly about this. And the reason
is, I think when we think public safety, we think immediately of sheriff and jail. I think that's pretty
rational. But we're about to hit winter.
And this sun sets on December 31st and we get a big snowstorm who's going to be clearing the streets
and the roads. To me, that's a public safety issue. When someone goes for a hearing, we got our public
defender in the back of the room here. Are we is that an issue of public safety that people
have representation in the courts? And so I think we need to think pretty long and hard about what exactly
clause number three means. And I think that there's additional nuance within the departments, right?
Not everyone in the department has that public safety feature, but not every position, excuse me. And
so I think that needs to be teased out. And so my question to you, Ms. Molly Turner King, is when we'd
done this before, did we elucidate those positions? Did we enumerate those positions?
I used the exact language from the prior resolution, so they weren't identified or enumerated in the
resolution itself. And I did not go back to the 2020 recordings to see if when the resolution was adopted,
the conversation itself identified them. I mean, I think that's before we even start to really even
seriously consider this resolution, I think we have to get that list.
down pat when you talk to every single one of those department heads. Okay. Yes, counselor hop. I did
send you an email about this, Molly. I mean, Miss King, because I wanted to make sure that this was
it sort of reflected part of what the overtime situation was as well to making sure that a 24 hour
that required staff such as in the jail, such as in the youth shelter that, you know, that they would
always have, they have to have a certain amount of staff to have the door open. Can't very well close
that jail and you can't very well close our youth shelter. So those things need to make sure we're protected
that. And the only reason this would even come up is because we have a serious budget situation.
that we have to address. Now you could pick it together for a long time and we could decide three or
four months from now we should die three or four months ago, or we can do it sooner rather than later.
So that we can do what we need to do. But I'm not going to argue the point I just know what I think
we should do. Okay. Yes, counselor vital.
So I have a couple of questions about the whereas language in the second one where it says whereas due
to state and federal, it seems like there's something missing there. I add it, legislation. That one,
what about in the fourth whereas where in the third line it says positions are naturally vacated and
then would be to adopt. Is there something missing in front of would be to adopt?
You see what I'm talking about? Okay. It seems like there's a word or two missing there. If you read
it, it says can be obtained through attrition as positions are naturally vacated. Then it goes on would
be to adopt. What do you mean would be to adopt? What would be to adopt?
I think it's just a poorly worded sentence, and I can rewrite that one, but that is exactly how it was
read in the first one. Well, I'm sorry I wasn't listening. No, it's okay. No, but you care. So, I think
it just needs to be reworded. Okay. So, what is the intent there that that, I mean, you don't have to
give me the exact verbage, what is the intent that that would say?
It should say the council recognizes that one method that can be implemented to maintain personal cost
at current levels or reduced levels would be to adopt a temporary hiring freeze. The problem is that
to the extent reductions can be attained through attrition as positions are naturally vacated is modifying
the reduced levels. And so I just need to make that more clear. Okay. So you'll work on that. Thank you.
Councilor Decker. So I want to make sure I understand it correctly. Let's say that this is passed.
In effect, a department says, I have a position that I believe is either a public safety or necessary
position under this. That department would then come to us just like anything else that we would have here.
and then we all would have a giant public discussion about that to move forward or not move forward.
Is that right? C. Julie, yes. And it would have to hit one of those two, public safety or necessary.
And we'd all talk about that very publicly in that sort of way. Well, if I can speak on it just for a second.
I'm not a fan of these times by any stretch. I'm not a fan of these times at all. As I said a second
ago, sometimes these things have unintended consequences. And in 2020, we had some strange circumstances
occur that were never the goal. But again, you've got to do what you got to do. The one thing that I
like about this all is that, which I'm sure department head may not necessarily always like,
but that we will be in a discussion together talking about the position. And that's probably pretty
annoying for the hiring, but I sometimes think that as council understands these things, we get these
things and these things go from abstract into this is necessary. And so that's a portion that gives
me relief. I will say this for councilors, we've got to be able to move like, you know what,
through a goose, we cannot,
Not because, I mean, you're talking about public safety and necessary positions. And a body that has
to have 48 hours notice for things isn't really built for a hot rod speed. So that will be a thing that
we do with those department heads. But if it's something that gets us to the other side, we just got
to know that it's going to be that. And the last time we did it, there was a lot of detail walking and
a lot of kind of figuring that out. And we have to be nimble.
because we don't have a counter and they do. And that's, we cannot ever forget that. This all right
here is not a counter. This is a meeting, a voting body of elected officials who are here some of the
time and not always. This can put us here a lot and that may be part of it or it may not, who knows?
Maybe it all gets better real quick, but I just throw that out there.
Yes, Councilor Henry. Thank you, Madam President. I appreciate the comments of my peers here. And we,
of course, were wrestling with hard times. I think what's important to relay, I think we have over the past
month here as we've been wrestling with a budget with finite resources, at least from my seat, it's
to preserve and take care of the staff we have. And so to the extent we have our people, we are trying
to protect our folks and find a way to give them even COLA and tough financial times that this is part
of it. I mean, as much as we would like to have additional resource helping our departments, the resource
is finite. We are losing
Revenue with each cycle. This is the easy year the next two years get increasingly difficult. And so
it is weighing on all of us to look at this. My question is just a clarifying one in terms of
the hiring process, right? Because there have been, I think Ms. Turner-King, you mentioned some department
heads had raised the concern about where they are in their pipeline. So, I mean, as I'm counting it,
I think we have nine vacant positions on the county website right now. Some, I presume, are very close
to offer. Some may be in interviews. Did some of this come up in that meeting in terms of the current
pipeline of where, who was in the department head meeting? Were you there? You were not. So, I'm kind
of curious if anyone was in the meeting with department heads that could speak to
the questions that were coming out about the pipeline process. There's some offers out there on the
street, I take it. I've only know of one. Okay. And that was in the surveyor's office of someone he
is currently interviewing someone for a position. I was not there for that department head meeting because
that was the next morning after our marathon meeting.
And so I didn't make it because that meeting was at nine o'clock. But I do know that it was discussed
and that we've had several phone calls with regards to a hiring freeze. But he's the only one that has
said I'm in the process of hiring. And I'll just finish my thought here to say again, you know, we do
get into a space. If we're the ones up here at the counter, if you will, adjudicating what is
is a word that's in the document what's necessary. First not of course we do that through pack anyway
it when we have a more deliberate process but looking at the list right now we have. A truck driver
which we've talked about snow removal at some point right we have an airport operations specialist which
is FAA put out fires shovel snow at the airport. We have the fourth disposition for health that we've
been fighting for back and forth all year- you mentioned the surveyor. We have some fleet maintenance
prosecuting attorney's office and a public defender and of course now we're into the criminal justice
conversation and three Youth Service Bureau personnel and so just that survey of what's currently being
marketed runs into some challenges in the resolution
I guess what I would offer is if it's marketed, it's in the pipeline right now, and then there's sort
of the faucet that turns off behind. I think Councilor Wilts had mentioned something to that effect,
not to put words in her mouth, regarding the ability that we always have had to put holds on positions
that come out from departments anyway. Thinking about at what point we turn off the faucet has my attention
this evening, I think. That's a good point.
Ms. Turner-King had her hand up. I was just gonna add that I also know of one department that has actually
extended an offer. The offer has been accepted. The applicant has given two weeks notice and is scheduled
to start on October 22nd. Okay, got it. Councilor Decker said something during his comment and I had
it and I lost it. And I'm trying to figure it out.
how to bring it back. Oh, okay. So I guess my question to council members that were here when we did
have this implemented before was, and anybody for that matter, the staff as well. When we did have this
higher end freeze, what was the process for council to go through and to have the public, I guess, conversations
with department heads to make the case for to implement the new person or to. Yeah. I was just going
to say if you wanted me to I can easily go back within the week and find the 20 20 recordings and watch
it and provide a summary of those conversations to counsel. I want to say.
was if a department had a vacancy, they submitted a request stating what the vacancy was, you know,
within the narrative and why they needed it. And then council would bring them in at the next opportunity,
you know, the closest meeting that they could. So. Yes, Councillor Hawke. Just wanted to mention that I noticed
I know you folks don't care what the state's doing, but I noticed one of the things that they were doing
was saying if the position, I didn't have memorized it and I just was reviewing it, something about
if the position was vacant where they came forward, they still had to leave it vacant for 30 days before
they filled it. They had to have permission to fill it, but thereby,
relieving that budget so that 30 days worth of salary was not used because they were trying to get enough
money to get through the year or having some reversions. I mean, you would want to go back and take
a look at that. But I thought, well, that is one way to really try to get some reversions is to say,
if it's already been vacant for a while and you hadn't bothered to fill it now, all of a sudden you
want to fill it.
and you come and say, yes, you want to fill it, you still have to leave it for another 30 days.
I don't know, I just thought that was an interesting part to put in there. We might wanna look at, would
that help? I'm not saying I'm for it, we're against it. Yes, Councilor. Yeah, I wanna pick up on that
because there are positions we've had vacant in the county for several months.
I think if you're gonna take a measure of what's necessary or not, you can make an argument that says
if you haven't even marketed it, if it's been vacant for a while, those might be line items to start
looking at. We would just need, I think, a clock on some of those to figure out in the 2026 budget,
if there's a line item for it and there's an appropriation, but we know it's been sitting open for six
months or more, that might be something to look at. So it's similar to what I think you're describing,
but to go a little farther and say,
Is this necessary if it's been sitting vacant? What is the rationale for keeping it open? And there
may be some positions in there we can scrape. But I know we're off the rails on the resolution itself,
but yeah. I mean, it's still all a part of it. Yes, Councilor, I'll go Decker and then Feidl. One thing
we could do, so if we have folks that are in progress, one thing we could do is add to the resolution
that we recognize there's a
ramping up of this, meaning that obviously much like the overtime discussion, faucet on, faucet off
can be more complicated during a service period. So I'm wondering since we ticked off a few people and
I wouldn't want to do this, us doing this, but if we said that between now and the next week, department
heads could identify things in progress that could then be tracked
towards that onset of whatever the disposition of that is. And then after that, this occupies that process.
So it literally gives sort of an on-ramp to anyone who registers within the week. Public defender says,
hey, I've got this interview. Prosecutor says this coming up. They give us an idea of those.
We have those. We've got that sort of docketed. Here's number one, two, three, four, five, six.
and I hate to put extra work on them, but this could fix this, then post that list after the week is
closed, then we're under this system. And that gives everybody a chance to say, I don't wanna take a
ride on that cruise, or I do wanna ride on that cruise, or I'll just wait until this all settles and
sees. Does that make sense? So if I were wizarding this on here, I would put that,
whereas is right. So I would put it in. I wouldn't make it the last whereas. Yeah. Your intent is to
ask departments to provide some type of list that of
that are already started. I think you can identify what you mean by started. Does that mean I posted
the job? Does that mean I've interviewed? Where are we at? And then what I think might be easier is
to say that to attach the list as an exhibit and say, as identified by the departments, these are the ongoing
Hiring process in place prior to the passage of this resolution and this resolution would allow the
hiring of those positions Yeah, I would say if there's a human involved in a discussion. That's not
Someone on the county side or a human prospect in that now that that would be enough and we give that
grace for this one week additional period and then from beyond that Go to the traditional system
I'm an interested applicant hot prospect, interview and progress negotiation underway. I think that
I think beyond that it's fishing and it's not there. And then it just falls under this which is somebody
comes in and says, I gotta have this, you all should agree. And we say yay. Does that make sense, Molly.
Councillor Fido.
Speaking of Molly, she gave a really good example of a timeline of a situation, a current situation.
And so I don't know what we would need to write to accommodate that, to make it fair to the person accepting
the job. In my mind, we certainly don't want somebody to say, I'm leaving another job, and thought I
had one here, and then they don't, right?
I think that would be a situation that would go in that exhibit list that Trent or Councilor Deckert
was just referring to to say that this process has already been started and actually finished. We're
just waiting for a start date so that that position can be hired as an exception to this resolution.
I just don't want the timing to get messed up.
anyhow in giving people options that they thought they had and then they make poor, not really poor
decisions, but they're stuck with the consequences, right? Although I understand that there's some urgency
to take action, I think that the best course would be for me to incorporate all of these ideas in a
draft, send it out to you, and then you can review it at the next week's meeting.
and that also gives departments time to tell us what what they have in progress or if they have additional
feedback because right now this is just a discussion item I don't know if you're opening it to public
comment but I imagine there is public comment I'm sure of that yeah okay so
that it's definitely a thought that is on our minds right now. And it is clear that a lot of us still
have some things that we want to work out with this. And since this is just a discussion rather than
Councilor Iverson making a motion, this is something that I think we need to think about a little bit
more, get more data here from our department heads as well. And
come back to the drawn board next week on the 30th. Yes, Councillor Fido. Just one more thing I see
at the bottom. It talks about in number six will automatically expire December 31st. And I guess I don't
know where that date came from. It's a placeholder right now. That is a discussion point that I was
going to bring up.
In essence, I drafted it just like our PAC pause, which was it would expire at the end of this year
unless revisited or extended by council. I think it makes sense. And the intent is to limit budgetary
expenses for next year that it would extend into December 31st of 2026. Yeah, because I think we're
at a different point now making this resolution than we were when we did the PAC pause, right? In my opinion.
And this resolution actually number six says at the bottom. I know it's not something that we're going
to at least for me, I'm not ready right now. Number six, it says this resolution will automatically
expire December 31st, 2025. So that's just maybe something to think of to change as well too, since
we just had the conversation of having it set to expire during the last day of the budget of 26.
which is December 31st. Okay. So that was a, so if there are any department heads that are listening
and watching or here, please send your information to us as council. We, again, we do care about what
is happening with the state house because
They're the reasons why we're having all these conversations and trying to figure out and stress to
the max and all the ulcers that all of us feel as we are going through this budget season. So I dare
to say that we actually do. If I could, I'd like to have departments forward everything to the council
office. That way you guys don't get a bunch of different
Emails and then that way I'll consolidate them and work with Molly and then we can get them all out
And I know this is going to be asking a lot of department heads but I I think the best approach because
I don't think they're all watching is for either Kim or myself to send an email out to department heads
and I would like to see what council feels about as putting a deadline for like end of day Wednesday
and I say end of day Wednesday because potentially
I'm going to take all of this information and try to get a draft for a packet that's going to come out
on Friday. Because we'll have to have the agenda in the packet out Friday for next Tuesday. Okay.
I mean, I can work on.
We could say Thursday. I was gonna say, could we say, since today's Tuesday, that gives people a lot
of chance to ponder and think about that. So I'd like the idea, and I'm wondering if everybody is okay
with this, of allowing department heads to weigh in by noon on Thursday, this Thursday, so that we can
get the information out and put it in packets, so that we can all receive it, ponder on it, until our
next meeting on the 30th.
Does that sound good for everybody? Yes, counselor. And maybe giving leeway for for staff that if the
the incoming data is is quite a bit and we're working on 26 budget and we're working on everything else
that if there is not turnaround time to include it for the next advertised budget that that maybe grace
can be given for a future agenda as well.
I'm very conscious of the amount of work that we're putting on our staff at this point. Of course,
of course. To piggyback on Council Member Iverson's comment, I think I can send an email and I will
also ask department heads just to send comments directly to me because Kim and Lehua are knee deep in
budgets and this is one thing, and Sophia Travis, so this is one thing I can just handle myself. Okay,
thank you. Thank you for stepping up to the...
volunteer for the Tribune. All right. Okay. So be prepared for conversations for next week as we go
through this. All right. Next up on our agenda here is item B.
Council, I move to open for discussion and to clarify that the council precedent set for assigning an
employee as an outlier in the salary ordinance is based on the employee's hourly rate and not
the classification. Second. All right. And this is where I look to Ms. Turner-King again, because this
is your part where you come in. It's your show. We all live in it.
This is the situation that occurred back in February. It's a little bit further back than February.
In November, the Council Office and the Public Defender worked to create a job description for system
navigators. Prior to then, a system navigator job description didn't exist, so we created one, we sent
it to WIS, it came back, it was classified as a Comet D, and previously it was a Civ Poll D.
Council approved the amended job description in February and what was supposed to happen at that meeting
was that the system navigators would be grandfathered in or classified as outliers at their current
rate and then when that rate matched the rate of the comment declassification then they would
in essence, absorb the rate and continue on with the common declassification. The signature page for
what occurred at the February 11th meeting documents the process that I just said, and the agenda states
that process. Unfortunately, the motion was different and so thus led to confusion. So currently, what
we need to clarify is that
What we need to clarify is, was it the council's intent to grandfather them and then at the rate, which
is in line with what council has done in this situation in the past, or was the intent to grandfather
them in at the classification, which would mean that the rates would never align and thus they would
remain at the civil D rate until the people who are currently in that position vacated it and new positions
would be hired in at the common D rate, which is not what council usually does, I've been told.
Thank you, yes, Councilor Feidl. So I don't know that I remember everything, but I think that I feel
strongly that there should be an element of past practice here. What we have done in the past would
make me very happy to do again. All right, does anybody else have any questions or comments related
to this item? Yes, Councilor. Council Member Feidl said it the best, I agree. Okay, anybody else for
that matter?
Seeing none, for the record, Councilor Hawkins left the building. Okay, so if there is public comment
on this particular item, here is your time to shine, you can come forward to the lectern here in the
night, you know, room, or you can raise your hand via teams. And seeing none, maybe please have. Oh,
well, before we do.
This is just open for discussion, so there's not a motion on the table to make a salary amendment. Okay.
Just kidding. Do we need to approve our clarification? Do we need to make a motion? Do we need to approve
council's intent? I think the motion would incorporate the intent. Got it. I think it did too. So do
you want to make a motion tonight
Amend the salary ordinance or would you like us to add it to the next meeting? No. Add the clarity you
just decided. We're going to let him finish his bite. And then. Iverson clarified it is. It
is my understanding that the clarity that Council just identified matches what I read in what I just said.
motion was to open for discussion so I think you have to move to amend the salary ordinance that so
that the salary ordinance aligns with your discussion. I mean I'm gonna do my best on this motion you
ready. Council I moved to open the salary
The outlier in the salary ordinance is based on the employee's hourly rate. Second. All right. Oh, man,
there's not a lot of confidence over there. We got a motion and a second. Yes. So is this the past practice,
what we did before? I just want to clarify. I don't know what to miss turning for that. We need to.
If I may help with the motion. I am in need of it. Perhaps the language should be that you are moving
to amend the salary ordinance so that the system navigators are identified as outliers by their hourly
rate and not by their classification. At this point, you could say so moved. A little too helpful there.
Nice prompting. Love the prompting. OK. So just so we all are clear, is that sufficient for the intent?
And the best practice. Correct. And the best practice. Best practice. OK. So now that we did that, now I can
go back to my Oopsy-Daisy moment and saying, if there's any public comment related to this item, please
come forward to the lectern here in the Nattie Hill room or raise your hand via James. Pardon me, who
seconded that? I consented. All right. Seeing none, I ask for consent that we go to a roll call. Councilor
Feidl? Yes. Councilor Henry? Yes. Councilor Crossley?
Yes. Councillor Iverson. Yes. Councillor Deckard. Motion passes five zero. Okay. Thank you very much.
Next up is item F. Council I move to open for discussion and possible adoption resolution 2025-27
establishing the 2026 minimum cash balances.
Ms. Turner-King, it says you are up on this conversation. Well, I can start this conversation, but I
don't think this is a me conversation. I think there is some interest in potentially amending the minimum
cash balance resolutions that was passed. And I don't have it readily available to display it, so I
don't know if Kim, you could find that resolution.
Before the conversation starts off, I think the one caveat and concern that I will voice is that if
we're going to in any way amend those minimum balance levels, I do think that it's worthy of having
a conversation with FSG. And so I have a scheduled meeting time with FSG tomorrow. And so if there are
any questions that council has or concerns that they
immediately would want answered before amending this resolution. I am happy to address that with F S
G tomorrow. Okay. Um, okay. And I see the auditors hit was an agreement as well as making sure that
we have that conversation with F S G. Um, so since it was brought forward for discussion, um, and this
is information for us to give back to
the powers that be to have the conversation with FSD. Would anybody like to make their conversations?
I'm gonna go to Councilor Decker and then I'm gonna rotate over here to my right with Councilor Iverson.
Thank you very much for entertaining this and I appreciate very much some analysis from FSD and I'll
just be candid. I've talked on the mic numerous times about this
that I have a concern that some of the pressure we're hitting in our budget is our desire that we enacted
in this resolution.
to hit all these minimum cash balances so that when we're budgeting, we're looking at priorities of
departments. We're looking at revenues coming in, but we're also thinking about minimum cash balances
so much that it is start. It's starting to perhaps eat into things that we have. We went from a minimum
and I'll take just the general fund for line 1000.
We went in the general fund from a cash balance last year of 10 million up to 15 million. I am concerned
that that additional 5 million is starting to creep into the pressure that we're feeling and that we
are literally getting into while this is a time to be.
to have austerity and to trim it and to own it and to think hard about every single line. And I'm not
saying we have not done that in the past, but we are literally looking in every space in every department.
While it is a time to do that, we also have to think about the priorities that we set and what we sacrifice.
And while I do believe it is desirable that the county maintains strong
minimum cash balances over existing rainy day funds as part of good practice. I'm a little bit concerned
that that effort to please both rainy day fund, which you need to have, and we have had, and we've built
up over the years, and minimum cash balance starts to set a tierage of systems by which the service
for which the taxpayers have paid starts to come in equally with those things. And I'll put it another
way, if I could.
Uh, years ago, there was a good, uh, state rep up from the northern part of the state named Jeff aspect.
He was ways and means chair. I think, uh, he's still around. He would always say this when Franco Bannon
was governor and there was some surplus in the state. He'd say government is not a bank. Now I don't
believe that that statement is 110% of the time, but we have to be very careful that in our effort to.
hit these high standards of money we want to kind of have on hand that we're not forcing ourselves to
cut services or cut things without being smart about it and so tonight I mean we're literally we're
talking about overtime.
We're talking about hiring freezes. We're talking about moving money into bonds. We're talking about
what goes in that bond. We have to think about all those things, and that is our job. We signed up for
it. But I just worry that that $15 million could be a price too high. And so I would love to hear FSG
comment on $12 million as a minimum.
And I would say that that would be to me a starting point that we think of that as a minimum, but we
may in future years find that our ability to continue to say those sort of high standards we have versus
what's happening in our tax base that we may not be able to kind of keep
those numbers the way they are. I don't want to affect our bond rating. I'm looking for that answer
from them. I don't want to put us into trouble. But I know that when I looked, I believe it was yesterday
I was in here for a good portion of the day, it looked like we had a 22 million cash balance. We had
7 million of that, which was not designated dollars.
And so I have to think about if I go sit right now in the middle of Elksville or somewhere in this county,
can I make an argument to a taxpayer? I'm cutting services and I need to add another 5 million to that
minimum cash fund. I hope I'm wrong on that, but I just not to belabor the point. I think we've got
a. I think we have to sacrifice a little bit too in that and that doesn't mean not being fiscally prudent.
It just means pruning some of our expectations, so I'll stop talking.
Thank you very much. Councilor Iverson. Thank you, Madam President. The way I'm looking at this is that
we, as I think Council Member Henry said it earlier, need to have every tool in our toolbox at our disposal.
I'm very glad that we're talking with FSG tomorrow. I'm very glad that we're discussing this. And I
think this is certainly one of the things that we can look at.
as this year I do think is gonna be one of the easier years. I think the next two years are gonna be
even harder. So I remain curious and I think that's a good place to be here. And I wanna reiterate that
I am deeply in favor of the work of the Long-Term Finance Committee. I think that's a very wise thing
that we did to create that committee.
these minimum cash balances, minimum fund balances came out of that committee as a best practice. And
you can go out and look at local government finance and look at the different best practices. This is
one of them. I don't think anybody here is looking to get rid of these cash balances. And I think that
as we are having these conversations, this is something that Councilmember Deckard raised as well,
that if we zero-based budgeted this from 2024, or I think that was the last year that we had it, that
would that impact the bond rating? Would that impact our ability to have ability to bond? And I think
these are all really interesting questions that we need to talk with FSG about. And one of, I think,
The other thing that I wanted to point out is as you're looking at this long list on the screen of minimum
fund balances. I don't I am not in favor of reducing.
you know, all of them by a certain percentage. What I am in favor of is I think what something that
Councilor Deckard alluded to was looking at the general fund and the general fund alone, because that's
been the emphasis that we are looking at our 2026 budget at is trying to keep that general fund healthy.
So I'll leave it at those comments. Thank you. Councilor Henry. Thank you, Madam President. I have two
questions and then a comment. So first question is,
The FSD's recent assessment about leaving the minimum fund balance as recommended, has that letter been
made public in a public space? We received a document from them. Is that something that's public record
that could be found at this point? As far as I know, it hasn't been shared publicly. I think it would be.
good to do so. So between now and the next time we talk about this, that makes sense. Secondly, I have
a question about the numbers and then I'll get to my comments. So Brianne and Carly, in order to really
understand this question, we need to understand what happened between settlements because what the fund
balance is doing is protecting our ability to pay our bills each month, right? And as we sawtooth down to
the moment where we're running low on funds before settlement is when things get worrisome. So can you
share if you have the balances between the last settlements of December and June of 25 of this year
and what that looks like? Because I think we do need some numbers in order to really understand what's
being asked here. Do you have it? I mean, that fast. OK. Yes, I have.
information in front of me. So we ended the year general fund balance at $30,181,939. So in the span
between settlements, so 12-18-24 through 6-19-25, the total receipts were $17,241,973.
And then just the salary portion of expenses from the general fund were $22,456,600. So pretty close.
All right. So just one other figure. The day before settlement, the general fund cash balance
was $17,404,000. So real close. And so one can imagine if we had health care reimbursements hit
at that moment, like we just dealt with last week, 5.6 million, give or take, that would have been a
challenge for us because we would have had a difference in the minimum fund balance. Okay. I think that's
one of the points we need to evaluate with FSG right there. So I want to just maybe say my piece about
this as we get in front of FSG and what this really means. I've heard this opinion making about reducing
the minimum fund balance for the past few weeks. I just don't agree.
I just don't agree with it. But aside from the fact that we just voted in June to raise our caps at
the advice of FSG based on their expertise as financial advisors, right? So I think the first idea that
I want to talk about is this idea of government as a bank, which I think Councilor Deckard's raised
a few times. I think it's probably best to think of the minimum fund balance as a shield or our insurance
policy against those shocks, kind of like that, which we just heard about.
It's not just the health insurance payments, it's the fact that the state and federal funding is wonky
at best right now in terms of how we get things from the state and federal government. That's part of
the discussion here. It's our shield, our insurance policy that we can show that we can pay our bills.
So I'm not comfortable, you know, in doing that. I don't think the answer to a leaky budget is to lower
the basement floor. I think it's to go find the holes in our budget and go make the cuts where they
need to be. We get two sack settlements a year. We've been hit with millions in unanticipated insurance
bills in the past two months.
And I really do think the days that we went through an ARPA discussion this evening about being kind
of flush with ARPA money, as well as COVID money are over. I think it's also fair to say that as income
tax changes in the state, our ability to receive the four or $2 million surprise income that we tend
to get sometimes year after year, usually in the summer, those disbursements are probably coming to
an end as well. And so there's a lot to think about here. I would like to maintain the cushion that's
been recommended by FSG because of the
two things that are on my mind. First is, it's good accounting practice. When we get audited under generally
accepted accounting principles, I hope John Michael's looking down on me right now as talking about
gap, but GFOA, the Government Finance Officers Association, they recommend about 16 to 18% of the minimum
fund balance. Now, we are at 23% in one of those funds with the general fund, so you could say that
seems high-ish, but we have to balance it, I believe, on what FSG was telling us.
Which is we just sat through a presentation about bonds, right? Six million over five years.
And as Mr. Cockrell said, could be six million every year for five years. That's an increase in our
bonding there. We also know that the commissioners would like to bond somewhere between 10 and 17 million
every year for the next 20 years to build a criminal justice facility. That's a lot more bonding.
which means you have to show the market that you're good for money with the AA bond rating that we have
in the county. So more money, more borrowing capacity, a little more in reserve to show we can pay our
bills, especially when we saw tooth down to those deductions when we get very close to our settlement.
So those things are on my mind as we're looking at this. They clearly need the expertise of FSG to weigh
in on this, so we're aiming right.
I'm gonna stick with my vote in June at this point, where we raised it, especially given how much is
being asked of us to fund while revenues continue to decrease. This counselor, Iverson, I think quoted
me, I'm quoting him back now, this is the easy year, right? It gets harder. We're not at final boss
level, if you will. So with that, Madam President, those are some of my thoughts on this resolution
this evening, thank you. Duly noted, okay, thank you.
anybody else would like to weigh in on this conversation? I will. And then we'll proceed forward. Again,
I think the biggest thing that we continue to keep talking about is how are we going to lower this deficit
that is in our budget right now? And while on one side of the
deus if you will maybe is you know the thought of looking at the minimum cash balance and on one side
of the coin here I should say is you know maybe not looking at that I think I would like as I've said
before with this is we
I want to be able to look at, after this budget season has come and gone, that we have left no stones
unturned, that we've looked at every possible thing. I know that there are some people, because in our
conversations in 2026 budget hearings have been, you know, maybe we used to edit for certain things
and some people have been like, well, no, don't do that. And then we hear people going, don't touch
my minimum balance right now. And then we have,
the argument of, hey, let's look at what this looks like. So I think for me, I want to be able to weigh
in on every single thing and look at every little speck of lint when it comes to what we need to do
for this particular budget season. So I am curious to know what FSG definitely says, because I don't
want to hurt
our bond and capacity and I don't want us to be in a really sticky type situation where we've kind of
put ourselves in a FAFO status with balances if you will. So that's on my mind and that is my concern
and I don't fault any council member up here for trying to figure out what we can do because again,
hashtag thanks Indiana for putting us in this predicament to begin with.
So I look forward to the conversation that will be had tomorrow and then you will report back to us
because I would assume again this is something that will come up on September 30th. Yes and if council
members have specific questions
If you could forward them to me before tomorrow, which I know is asking a lot so that when the FSG meeting
happens, I can ask those questions. And I will also send Councilmember Hock and Wilt an email asking
if they have any questions so that they aren't left out of the opportunity to
Here fsg's thoughts what time so that we all know exactly They haven't confirmed a time. I only proposed
afternoon times so by noon, okay Okay, so by noon tomorrow
everybody that has pressing issues or things that we might think about later after we've had a good
night's sleep and some coffee tomorrow morning, we'll think about things and we'll pass that information
along. And also one more hand raised, Councilor Decker. Yeah, one thing I want to say, I appreciate
very much you looking at this. I would be would like to know very specifically what FSG says about this
is what you have to do not it would
your most ideal thing is never to spend money. Because sometimes I've been in some of those meetings
and the implication is just don't ever spend money and you'll be okay. We have got to have very specific
information. If I'm literally saying or we are saying in lieu of spend those dollars or don't mean this
is really a line item. It's a $5 million line item that sits in the budget alongside everything else,
including all the items that we have debated other items that have been cut.
and may have been cut. And we need to know very specifically if that would go from 15 to 14, 15 to 13,
15 to 12 in general fund, what that would mean. And I'll put this in email to you, but not that it's
the most ideal as a preference to have the most as possible. That is consultant talk, and we need actual
talk. And we cannot be the only county that's contemplating this.
we're having this issue. I'll go back to Council Henry, and then if we all have any other further discussions
after this, I'd like for us to move on for other items here. As a consultant American, I'm not offended
by that statement. But Ms. Gregory, what happens, maybe the question for the auditor, when we're lowering
the minimum fund balance, what does that do to the deficit? Nothing.
Nothing. I think I was just cautioned about comparing this against other line items. It's kind of the
equivalent of saying that I have an auto pay set up on a bank account, and I know the money's sitting
there, and it's supposed to pay my auto payments. And then sometimes I touch it because maybe I can
get a deposit in there in time to cover my bills. It's just a different line item. It's not a line item
relative to others. It's just, I think,
And it's not really a philosophical statement. At some point, we are going to get into GAP and generally
accepted accounting practices. So I do look forward to what FSG has to say on that. Thank you, Matt.
So there's a great rapper that wants to hit the marathon continues. So that being said, this
is a conversation that will continue to come about.
We'll stay tuned like a telenovela next Tuesday, September 30th. All right. Thank you very much. And
now we are moving back to item G, which is also a marathon, which is the twenty twenty six budget.
All right. Here we go. This is item G one. And for those of you counting at home, we're going to go
to G 11. So there's 11 motions coming.
Buckle up. Council, I move to open budget 1107-0000 aviation fund and make the following amendments.
Reduce line. I'll wait for the screen here. Reduce line 13590 airport operations specialist to $50,711.
Reduce account line 17601 Longevity to $5,300. Reduce account line 18101 FICA to $50,577. And finally
reduce account line 18201 PERF to $88,868. Second. All right, we got a motion and a second.
Are there any questions from Council? Michelle, would you like to speak on this? Yes, if you'll recall
during aviation's budget session, they mentioned that a long term employee had resigned and that this
line needed to be set back down to the minimum for 2026. So those are the numbers reflective of what
is needed for 2026.
Okay, all right. Okay. Maybe everyone will call the vote. Councillor Crossley. Yes. Councillor Iverson.
Yes. Councillor Deckard. Yes. Councillor Feidl. Yes. Councillor Henry. Yes. Motion passes 5-0. Okay,
next up, G2.
Council I move to open budget 1000-0271 General Fund Public Defender and make the following amendments.
Reduce account line 13038 system navigator to $38,077. Reduce account line 13039 system navigator to
$37,728. Reduce account line 18101 FICA
to $138,452 and reduce the count line 18201 perf to $249,612. Did I misread something? OK. OK. We got
a motion and a second? Yes, Mr. McCain. This item is to, in essence, reflect the change that you just
made in the 2026 budget. An artfully stated motion, might I add. All right.
Any other further questions from council on this item? I hope not, because we had a whole conversation
before. Okay. And seeing none, maybe please have a roll call vote. Councilor Iverson? Yes. Councilor
Deckard? Yes. Councilor Feidl? Yes. Councilor Henry? Yes. Councilor Crosley? Yes. Motion passes 5-0.
All right. Next up, item G3. Council, I move to open budget 1000-0626, general fund animal control.
and make the following amendment. Increase account line 35040 animal shelter interlocal to $480,808.
Okay. And again, this is animal control in the general fund. Okay.
Yes, I reached out to the sheriff's department and I spoke with Jamie, the financial manager for the
sheriff's office, and asked her if they had received anything with regards to the animal local shelter
in her local. And she reached back out to them and it had passed. So this number that I'm asking to
increase this to is reflective of what has been passed by the city. So this is our portion for the 2026 year.
Any other further discussion from Council on this item? Yes, Councilor Vito. Can you highlight the difference
there, what it was and what it's going to? It's right there on the screen. Well, I can't see it from
here. You can't? OK, it's 433-123 to 480-808. Thank you. OK. Any other questions or comments on this
item? Seeing none, may we please have a roll call vote? Councilor Deckard?
Yes. Councillor Final. Yes. Councillor Crossley. Yes. Councillor Henry. Yes. Councillor Iverson. Yes.
Motion passes 5-0. All right. Next up is G4. Council I move to open budget 1173-0000. Motor vehicle
highway restricted and make the following amendments. Create the following account lines.
Truck driver 15830 set the amount to 13,505. Truck driver 15831 set the amount to 13,505. Truck driver
15832 set the amount to 13,505. Truck driver
15833 set the amount to 13505. Truck driver 15835 set the amount to 14045. Truck driver 15836 set the
amount to 12829. Truck driver 15837 set the amount to 13505. Truck driver 15838 set the amount to 12829.
Truck driver 15839 set the amount to 13505. Truck driver
Truck driver 15840, set the amount to 12829. Truck driver 15841, set the amount to 13505. Truck driver
15842, set the amount to 12829. Truck driver 15844, set the amount to 12829. Truck driver 15845, set
the amount to 12829. Light equipment operator, right? LT is light, all right, thank you.
15847 set the amount to 14248. Light Equipment Operator 15848 set the amount to 14248. Equipment Operator
15849 set the amount to 14649. Equipment Operator 15850 set the amount to 16053. Equipment Operator
15852 set the amount to 14082. Equipment Operator 15853 set the amount to 16053. Equipment Operator
15854, set the amount to 14082. Equipment operator 15855, set the amount to 14082. Equipment operator
15856, set the amount to 14649. Sign man 15857, set the amount to 14248. Sign man 15858, set the amount to 13697.
Traffic Control Tech 15861 set the amount to $11,872. Traffic Control Tech 15862 set the amount to $11,872.
Full time self insurance, 18001 set the amount to $100,847. FICA 18101 set the amount to $32,461. PERF
18201 set the amount to $56,368. Furthermore, reduce account line 23400
to $93,000 or to account line three zero zero zero six contractual to nine hundred fifty one thousand
one hundred twenty one dollars and reduce account line three zero one two nine sidewalk repair
and maintenance to one hundred and fifty thousand dollars second no idea that is a terrible thing to
say to someone
Bingo. All right. Can you repeat those? Michelle, what would you like to add to this? Lisa Ridge is
here if you'd like to speak with her. But what happened was this is a way to reduce the amount in 1176
and just kind of give some relief to that fund in 1176. So this is just a portion of
the truck drivers that can be put in here. We did speak with employee services. This can be done through
AOD where a portion can be paid out of two different funds. So do you wish to say anything? Okay. So
the public isn't hearing you Lisa, I'm sorry.
Hello. So we're just taking 25% of the crews and putting them into 1173. In the past, we used to do
transfers all year. It gets a little bit messy doing that. Last year, we tried to do this. It still
left our 1176 way over budget. I don't like to be over budget, so moving 25% over to the restricted
activities will help balance those two budgets and keep them within our estimated revenue.
Thank you very much for that. All right, anybody have any questions on this long motion here that Council
Iverson made? It was a long and it was a lot of numbers. So we're confident the numbers are correct,
right? No doubt about that, right? Yes. The highway department sent me these numbers. I typed them in
to this script, sent it back to them. They double checked it. So everything is correct. Love it. Thank you.
And I just want to remind everyone the next one's even longer. So thanks. You were built for this. Okay.
All right. Without any other further discussion, you like using your TV. May we please have a roll call
roll. Councilor Feidl? Yes. Councilor Henry? Yes. Councilor Deckard? Yes. Councilor Crosley? Yes. Councilor
Iverson? Yes. Motion passes five zero.
all right next up on the twenty twenty six bingo card is item g five make me laugh council i moved to
open budget eleven seventy six dash zero zero zero zero motor vehicle highway and make the following
amendments reduce the these account lines super into can i just say the name and not the account whatever
you want to do whatever i want to do yeah all right
Reduce superintendent to eighty three two five seven director at seven nine eight one eight operations
manager at forty four six nine nine highway engineer eighty two seven sixty truck driver oh here we
go one five eight three zero to forty five one four truck driver one five eight three one to forty five
forty thousand five one four truck driver one five eight three two to forty thousand five one four truck
driver one five eight three three to forty thousand five one four truck driver one five eight three
five to forty two thousand one thirty
Truck driver 15836 to 38,486. Truck driver 15837 to 40,514. Truck driver 15838 to 38,486. Truck driver
15839 to 40,514. Truck driver 15840 to 38,486. Truck driver 15841 to 40,514. Truck driver 15842 to 38,486.
Truck driver 15844 to 38,486. Truck driver 15845 to 38,486.
Light Equipment Operator 15847 to 42,744. Light Equipment Operator 15848 to 42,744. Equipment Operator
15849 to 43,946. Equipment Operator 15850 to 48,158. Equipment Operator 15852 to 42,245. Equipment Operator
15853 to 48,158. Equipment Operator 15854 to 42,245.
Equipment Operator 15855 to 42,245. Equipment Operator 15856 to 43,946. Sign in 15857 to 42,744. Sign
in 15858 to 41,091. Traffic Control Tech 15861 to 35,615. Traffic Control Tech 15862 to 35,615.
self insurance to five seven five six five three FICA to one eight five two nine three perf to one eight
two zero one two three two one seven five eight and increase account line three zero zero zero
six contractual to one hundred forty three thousand five hundred fifty two dollars all right anything
else to add to this michelle this is the seventy five percent
from the lines that is in 1173. Got it. Okay, any questions from council on this item? Seeing none.
All right, may we please have a roll call vote. Councilor Crosley? Yes. Councilor Iverson? Yes. Councilor
Decker? Yes. Councilor Feidl? Yes. Councilor Henry? Yes. Motion passes 5-0. Next up is G6.
Council, I move to open budget 1197-0000 Stormwater Management and make the following amendments. Create
the following account lines. Superintendent at 27,753, Director at 34,208, Operations Manager at 19,157,
Highway Engineer at 14,605.
and increase account line eighteen zero zero one self-insurance to eighteen six two five increase account
line FICA to sixty eight thousand five oh five and increase account line perf to one twenty three four
one seven okay um is there anything else to add to this um these are the administrative positions that
can't be put into eleven seventy three so um
Pardon? Going into 1197, right? So they put a portion of these positions into the stormwater. So to
kind of relieve that fund 1176 again. All right. And is there any other questions or comments from council
related to this item? Seeing none, may we please have a roll call vote?
Councillor Henry? Yes. Councillor Crosley? Yes. Councillor Feidl? Yes. Councillor Iverson? Yes. Councillor
Decker? Yes. Motion passes 5-0. Next up is G7. Council, I move to open budget 1000-0002 County General
Auditor and make the following amendments. Increase the count line 10020 General Ledger and Grants Manager
to $69,493.
Reduce account line 10044 internal auditor to 60,653. Increase account line 18101 FICA to 70,782. Increase
account line 18201 PERF to 129113. Second. Okay. Anything that adds to this item? So it was discovered that the
The general ledger person, when it was first budgeted, should have been budgeted at the eight year.
It was not, because there's been a personnel change. There's also been a personnel change with regards
to the internal auditor. And so that has been lowered to the one year, because it is now at the minimum.
So with those two amendments, that brings her budget to the current personnel. Okay.
All right. And just looking at the auditor, did you have anything to add to that? Nope. Okay. Good.
You got to get it. Okay. All right. Council. Does anybody have any questions or comments on this item?
Seeing none. Maybe please have a roll call vote. Councilor Iverson? Yes. Councilor Decker? Yes. Councilor
Feidl? Yes. Councilor Crosley? Yes. Councilor Henry? Yes. Motion passes five zero.
next up is item g8 council i move to open budget 1000-005 county general sheriff and make the following
amendments reduce account line 30025 maintenance to one thousand dollars second okay anything to add
to this yes um molly and i had miss turner king sorry had a meeting with uh chief deputy parker yesterday
along with a couple of his uh
people, we were talking over time. And during that conversation, this account line was mentioned. This
particular account line is not utilized that much. This one is the one, so they don't mind to reduce
it down to the $1,000. It's the maintenance line that's within the jail that they don't want touched.
And you guys did not do anything with that. So they are happy.
with reducing this down to $1,000. Okay, so thank you for that clarification, because last week, when
we were going through our motions, it was determined then that the proposed motion was to zero out a
line item. So this is not it? No, this is not it. And to confirm that particular item, they just want
to leave it alone? Yes, and I will show it to you here in just a moment.
It's this line right here, which is set at $50,000. It's a maintenance slash repair supplies. And it
was set at $50,000 last year. And so that's what they're doing for this year as well. Okay. Thank you
for that clarification. Council, do you have any questions or comments on this line item? I appreciate
the reduction of that line item.
All right, and seeing none, maybe please have a roll call vote. Councilor Henry? Yes. Councilor Feidl?
Yes. Councilor Crosley? Yes. Councilor Decker? Yes. Councilor Iverson? Yes. Motion passes 5-0. All right,
next up is G9. Council, I move to open Budget 1202-0000, Surveyor's Corner Perpetuation, and make the
following amendments.
Reduce account line 18-001 self-insurance to zero. Reduce account line 18-101 FICA to zero. Reduce account
line 18-201 PERF to zero. Second. Okay. Ms. Schell, would you like to add anything to this item? The
surveyor has recently attended a conference and per updated SBOA
regulations and this kind of thing. It was discovered that benefits along with FICA and PERF cannot
be taken out of the Corner Perpetuation Fund. So these items need to be reduced and then they're going
to be moved to the General Fund, which are the next two motions. All right, Council, do you have any
further discussion or questions on this item?
I would just say I did have a chance to sit down with the surveyor on Friday on this issue, and it's
one of the good catches. So I appreciate that, caught, reported, shared. I mean, it does bump things
back up a little, but good accounting on his part. So just thanking the surveyor for the catch. Yes,
thank you. All right. Without any other further discussion, may we please have a roll call vote? Councilor
Feidl? Yes. Councilor Crosley? Yes.
Councillor Henry? Yes. Councillor Iverson? Yes. Councillor Deckard? Yes. Motion passes 5-0. Okay, next
up is item G10. Council, I move to open budget 1000-0006, County General Surveyor, and make the following
amendments. Increase the count line 18-101 FICA to 24,142. Increase the count line 18-201 PERF to 39,446.
Okay. Michelle, what would you like to add to this item? This is just the FICA portion that's going
to pay for the personnel that's in the surveyors corner. So we increased those two amounts to accommodate
for that. Okay. Council, do you have any other questions or comments on this item?
and I feel like Councillor Hawke is online too. Okay, all right, seeing none, may we please have a roll
call vote? Okay, Councillor Henry?
Councilor Hawk? Yes. Councilor Crosley? Yes. Councilor Iverson? Yes. Councilor Decker? Yes. Councilor
Feidl? Yes. Motion passes 6-0. I see Ms. Turner and King has her hand up. As a reminder, if you're appearing
virtually, you have to be visibly present. So Councilor Hawk would have to turn her camera on to vote.
It's on. Yeah, it's on. I see her.
Yeah. Visible on the screen. Oh, yeah. OK. There's a painting behind her that I see. OK. All right.
Next up on the train is item G11. Council, I move to open budget one thousand dash zero three zero nine
county general employee services and make the following amendment increase account line eighteen zero
zero one self-insurance to seven million one hundred eighty five thousand
seven hundred and fifty dollars all right michelle this is adding that portion of the coroner's perpetuation
um personnel which is 0.75 personnel into that fund um in general fund okay council is there any other
discussion on this item
So can we please have a roll call vote? Councillor Crosley? Yes. Councillor Iverson? Yes. Councillor
Decker? Yes. Councillor Feidl? Yes. Councillor Henry? Yes. Councillor Hock? Yes. Yes. Thank you. Motion
passes six zero. Okay. Thank you. And that concludes the amendment.
We got one more item before we end our time here with each other is council liaison updates and comments.
And so I'm sure we got some, let's keep it brief. But I am going to look to councilor Hawk to see if
she has anything since she's on virtually. And then I'm going to kind of go down the day as starting
with councilor vital after councilor Hawk.
No comments. Oh, okay. That was easy. All right, Councillor Fiddle. I think I've just been remiss in
saying that we're inundated with the Sophia Travis Grant Committee work, and I've completed 34 of the
45 applications I saw come through, have 11 more to go, and we'll be having a meeting on Friday. That's
been the big work.
budget hearings, you know, just lots of budgets and committee meetings and liaison assignments. I've
been trying to be there where I can, and I saw lots and lots of things. I hope to go to the ribbon cutting
this week. So for Fullerton Pike, that's a big deal. I got late to the sunrise ribbon cutting. I was
about 20 minutes late, and they were all gone, but it was great. I drove on it.
I've been enjoying seeing what's happening in the county as relative county government and other things
happening. All right. Thank you very much. Councilor Decker. I just other than budgets and budgets and
more budgets also Sophia Travis grant work which thanks to Councilor Fido for reminding me I got to
get Johnny on the spot on my stuff because it's a long week but
It doesn't wait for anything. I do just wanna say there was a beautiful, since I can't remember the
last time we met, but there's a wonderful Monroe County Fall Festival. Thanks to all the community over
there that did it. And then looking forward to this weekend. 40 days, so nice to have good things to
go to. On the line, Councilor Iverson. The first of my 40 items.
No, I'm going to share one thing. The Substance Use Disorder Advisory Commission finally met last Wednesday,
and we got a lot of things accomplished. The two things that stand out that I want to make the public
aware of is that we are making headway on the 2026 Recovery Summit. So that's really exciting. Keep
your eyes peeled out for
The second thing is that the Substance Use Disorder Advisory Commission is going to be publishing the
first ever Comprehensive Monroe County Treatment Report in June of 2026. This is going to be written
by members from Centerstone, the Probation Department, the Indiana Recovery Alliance,
And a whole bunch of others were really excited about this because a lot of treatment has been siloed.
And so this is going to be a really great report that we can look at. And the last thing I'll mention
is this Friday.
Since this is recovery month is paint the town purple so come on out to the south side of the lawn and
celebrate recovery. I'm going to be dressed in purple there's going to be a DJ there's going to be lots
of games and it's always a packed house.
But stick around, because this weekend is also Lotus Festival. So come for Paint the Town Purple. Stay
for the Lotus Stage, which would be on the north side of the courthouse. So it's going to be a great
weekend here in downtown Monroe County. Thank you, Madam President. Just a few notes. I forgot about
Lotus Festival. Yeah, Lotus Festival is interesting for me, because it's always the anniversary of when
My wife and I decided to move back from Washington here in Bloomerang to Bloomington. So it's something
about this time of year and the music that always makes me get a warm fuzzy about coming back to my
forever home. It is also National Preparedness Month. We have a lot of months with titles. National
Preparedness Month has been recognized since September 11, 2001, where FEMA encourages folks to get
prepared and think about their preparedness.
It's not a bad time to check your fire alarms at home and just make sure you're in good shape. I want
to thank the Perry Township trustee and his staff, Dan Combs, who have written, with the assistance
of a local journalist, I think it was Stephen Higgs, on a kind of a report on their experience during
the tornado in the spring.
you know, hard copy, but it's being distributed around the county to different organizations. But it's
a fascinating oral history of what happened and what we really need to do to continue to prepare for
things. And I hope that there's a digital copy out there at some point to share with folks. But it's,
I think, a great companion to the work that our Emergency Management Agency is doing to really compile
the lessons learned we have from just how close
Things could have been worse in our community, but they were worse for so many people that are on the
end of our lifelines for transitional housing. Some of those stories are still enduring in terms of
people trying to get back on their feet and some of the challenges there. It's six months on, but Dan
and his team did a really great job with that report. It's worth a look at and getting up into digital spaces.
I think lastly, I would just reflect on also just how wonderful it was to see Beacon break ground on
their new facility today with Councillor Feidl.
Councilor Iverson that were there and Commissioner Thomas. And with all, I think there was a comment
made about positivity earlier about events in our community. That was a good positive event.
It is so easy to, I think, look down our nose at people that are less fortunate in our community and
to make noise online and be full of judgment without solutions. And to be at a place where so many people
were working on solutions today and the energy that has gone into making that facility a reality
It was heartwarming before this event today and I think really kind of steeled me a little bit for dealing
with some incredible cynicism in our community about the state of affairs with the person's experience
in homelessness and making it a political issue when it really is a human issue. And so thanks again
for Beacon and the hard work and all the people who have put in hard work to get that place shovels
in the ground and getting us on our way to solving some serious problems in our community. But thank
you Madam President.
Thank you, and I appreciate that, and thanks to all the hard work that's there. It's easy to make a
comment on things that you're seeing, but it's also even better when you kind of come off, instead of
being keyboard justice warriors and actually work with the folks at Beacon and other people that are
trying to have solvable solutions instead of putting people out in their deepest, darkest moments. That's
what I'll say to that. The other thing that I wanted to say is,
I've been a lot into our community with a lot of different things. And yesterday, it brought me great
pride to go talk to some students at Indiana University, while we still can, and have a really good
civic conversation related to all the different things that are happening, and to get people open and
engaged. And so as a result of that, there were a couple of students that were online via Teams, and
one in particular that showed up in person. And it's interesting because in the conversation, they are
very much eager and excited and want to be involved. They just don't know how. And I hope that any student
that will watch this back, or the student, Kennedy, that was here earlier today, I just thank you all
so much for really actually taking the task, what I had said yesterday in our conversation, and continuing
to actually
show up in community. And I would be remiss to say I wish when I was a student and I graduated from
this institution 20 plus years ago, that I would have got involved so much more in our community. But
I was so busy and so focused on trying to graduate and not go back home to the great city of Gary, Indiana.
So Bloomington and Monroe County, y'all got me for a while. So yes, so I appreciate that. And then the
New Marshall Black Cultural Center had a pin-in ceremony. And that was really interesting to see the
first-year students be involved. And so it was nice to actually, again, be involved and engaged in the
community that we serve. And I'll just say thank you to Dr. Gloria Howell for inviting me to be a part of that.
The last thing that I will say is, speaking of positivity and a lot of work and solutions that will
be done, I look to all seven of us, one that isn't here and the one that is virtual, Councilor Haug,
to say thank you for the continued work. It is not easy. Again, as I mentioned before, this is the fourth
budget, I believe, that I've gone through, and this by far is one of the hardest ones to date, and it
sounds like we got some
More harder days that will come ahead. But for the work that we have done so far, I just wanted to say
to my colleagues, thank you. I also wanted to say thank you so much to the auditor's office, Ms. Turner-King
and our council staff for working tirelessly, definitely tirelessly to show up
smile when you don't really want to, and continue to keep coming to work and listening to all the things
that we request of y'all. I know it's a lot, and this too shall pass, and I look forward to getting
on the other side of this budget. So we still got some work to do, but the marathon continues.
And with that being said, as I am so kindly reminded, thanks, hashtag Iverson. We are adjourned, thank you.