- All right. So we will go ahead and get started. Good evening, everybody. Today is Tuesday, June 30th,
- twenty twenty six. The time is now five one and I am calling to order what was supposed to be the joint
- session of the Monroe County Council and board of commissioners. However, it
- does appear that we do not have a quorum of commissioners, although Commissioner Thomas is online with
- us. And here present in the NETU Hillbron, we have county council members Iverson, Wilts, Feidl, and
- then online we have council members Deckard and Henry. So we will go ahead and get started. Is there
- anything that you need to add to this, Commissioner Thomas?
- Uh, no, I, well, yes, let me be brief. Um, I have, um, I could not attend today in person for a variety
- of reasons, but, uh, commissioner Madeira got waylaid on, um, a trip. And so that's why she's not here.
- Uh, but I will take, um, our discussion back to my colleagues.
- for consideration. I don't see anything particularly significant in terms of debate. Okay. All right.
- Thank you. Yep. So we will proceed. So we will go ahead and adopt tonight's agenda. Is there anybody
- that has any
- concerns about the agenda as presented. Okay. All right. So I just need a motion to adopt tonight's
- agenda to move. All right. We got a motion and a second. And Michelle, will you please call roll? Yes.
- Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
- Yes. Yes. Thank you very much for that. Next up is the information related to the projects because as
- we all know, we have until
- December 31st of 2026, which is just a short while from here to spend all of the government dollars
- and we don't want to give not a single penny back. So I know we have the auditor's office that is here
- to present their recommendations to us. It looks like Miss Woodruff is going to be doing that. So please
- go ahead. Good evening. Good evening.
- We have some documents I would like to display. If I could be promoted, that would be fantastic. This
- is Carly. All righty. So this should look very familiar. This is our ARPA spreadsheet.
- We're going to get back to this here in a moment. I'm going to go over some details that are provided
- also in the packet in writing. I'm not going to read those word for word, but we're hopeful just to
- give you a brief overview of that document and how it plays into this spreadsheet. So reviewing the
- timeline for ARPA.
- It looks like we need to review the status of the ARPA projects as they are today. We need to determine
- next steps for currently overfunded projects. And then we also need to determine where that money is
- going to go. Ultimately, if we could, it would be really great to come to an agreement on what happens
- if other projects become overfunded after this meeting. That way we don't have to come back to the table
- and schedule a meeting. It's just kind of a natural process that happens.
- The cash summary, as of right now, we have spent roughly $27 million, and we have roughly $1.9 million
- unexpended. That is all currently obligated, but we do have some projects that are coming in under where
- they are currently budgeted. So that's why we are having this meeting today. When we look at the spreadsheet
- that should
- this spreadsheet right here, you should be looking at this column for obligated or appropriated. Yes,
- it's the appropriated or obligated column.
- Whenever you're looking at the color coding that's used in this column, the yellow is going to be lost
- revenue and the red orange is going to be that restricted. So anything that's restricted, it has to
- have a certain purpose outlined in the ARPA guidelines. And we have worked with our ARPA advisors to
- be able to determine
- whether a project is restricted or unrestricted. Now, if we have unrestricted projects, we can only
- have a total of $10 million obligated towards those unrestricted projects. So when we look at moving
- money around across projects, not only do we need to make sure that we have enough money in the fund,
- but also that we are not going past that $10 million obligation.
- If you look over in the gray box over here you can see the totals and that's simply a sum function of
- all the yellow and all the orange. And then down here right below the gray box you'll see how much of
- a difference there is between what we have currently obligated for those
- lost revenue projects versus what our max is. So as it stands right now, we have 152,000 and change
- that we have not obligated to the unrestricted, but we have obligated that in excess to what are required
- in the restricted. And we'll get back to that in here in a moment.
- Moving on to talk about open and closed projects, you'll see this red line. These are two projects that
- are currently under budget. So we expect for them not to use the full obligation. You'll notice that
- one of those projects is restricted and one of them is lost revenue or unrestricted. Moving down
- To the next layer, you have the light green. Those are projects that are open and have requested additional
- ARPA funds. So those are projects that can take on more of that money that the red projects cannot use.
- The next section, which is the dark green, those are simply projects that are open. It seems like they're
- running smoothly. We haven't received any indicators that they are going to go over or under budget.
- And then bouncing back up, you'll see all of these gray cells up here. These are all closed projects.
- So those are projects that we have started. We fulfilled the obligation. They've been fully expended,
- and they have been closed out in our ARPA portal. So when we look at the light green, I'm sorry, we
- look at the red. Bear with me here.
- Across the two projects, the amount that we are being told by the individuals that are running these
- projects, the amount that is available to be re-obligated to one of the light green projects is $315,225.41.
- And if you're trying to follow along, if you look at this page right here, it's the ARPA update.
- That number is noted in red on that page. Now the light green projects the amount that they each project
- is requesting in addition is listed in the chart on the ARPA update continued page which you can see
- displayed on the screen right now.
- As you can see, the requests are much higher than the cash that we currently have to be re obligated.
- Moving on.
- I just want to make a quick note that we do have some LATCF funding that we do need to make some decisions
- on soon, whether that be now, in six months, in 12 months. We're not on nearly as much of a timeline
- for LATCF funding, but that money is there and has not been obligated. Do we have any questions at this
- point about what's been discussed so far?
- Looking to my colleagues here in the room to see if anybody has any questions or how about virtually
- So for tonight's meeting the auditors recommendation would be to Suggest a deobligation of that three
- hundred and fifteen thousand and change of those red projects and then figure out a
- across those light green projects, how we want to kind of spread that money across those projects.
- And again, the very simple breakdown of what those projects are requesting is on that ARPA update. I
- do have a question. My hand's been up. If I might. Well, we couldn't see you. All right.
- So, hey, I do want to thank Ms. Woodruff and the auditor's office for putting this together. It's very
- clearly written and very precise and very concise. I did notice that there had been some sort of email
- exchange with the airport regarding the stormwater project where they may or may not need the $50,000.
- Do you know when we're going to know that?
- I do not have an answer for that. I can tell you they are working as fast as they can to close up that
- project. And it looks like there may be a hand. I'm so sorry, I was hoping that was the airport chiming
- in. I don't have a definitive answer, but I do know that they indicated their project should be complete
- by October of 2026 is what they said. Thank you.
- Councilor Decker. Thank you very much and sorry, I didn't mean to confuse that. Does this mean that,
- and maybe I'm getting ahead of things here, but does this mean that if the airport doesn't need that
- or, sorry, I'm getting an echo. If there's a combination of these that we might be able to spread this
- across all three since we can't max out.
- There's one of them that we could not max out to. Is this making any sense? Yes, that makes sense. Whenever
- I look at these, and again, I'm not going to make a recommendation for what you guys should or shouldn't do.
- But whenever I look at this table and I look at the fact that the max amount right now that we can give
- to parks is roughly $214,000, that is the easiest project for us to quickly funnel money into. So those
- monies have already been spent out of other non-ARPA funds. So what that comes down to is a simple ledger
- correction to move those expenses.
- from one fund to another fund. That would allow the Parks Department to then use the money that's freed
- up in the fund that the correction came from on the paving that they are trying to complete. That being
- said, since that is such a quick
- action item for us to complete I would suggest we figure out a hard dollar amount that we want to give
- airport that we want to give the ambulances for the fire district and then we leave some flexibility
- in the parks project so that if any other projects come in under budget we can make that quick pivot
- does that answer your question it does it sounds like
- Sorry, the feedback is wild. It sounds like the flexibility would allow you to say all but 50,000
- of it. And then in October, you'd know the remainder amount and could, you could throw that, if you
- were maxing out to cars, you just put it into more ambulance funding.
- it would actually be the opposite, because right now, if we give money to the ambulance, they're going
- to have to go out and purchase the items, get the invoice, pay the invoice, request reimbursement from
- us, and then they're going to have, we're gonna have to issue that claim. So that's a longer process.
- So if we want to give money to the fire district, we need to do that now to give them time to put those
- actions into motion.
- Does that mean that you would not max out Karst in that case? I would not max out Karst at this moment
- if I was making this decision. Oh, I see. I see. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Yes, Councillor Iverson. I want
- to switch topics just real quick and go back to this de-appropriation of the 315 and change.
- And I see it written here, but I think I do want it spoken into the record. We have reached out to both
- the sheriff's department and the health department. They are sufficiently far enough on these projects
- that they understand that this is happening. Yes, I've spoken to Dave Gardner, who has said that the
- project for the jail locks is complete and all invoices have been paid. And the health department has
- also confirmed that
- they reach their obligation deadline and they are aware that this is being de-obligated. Excellent.
- I think she's pretty sufficiently clear why I would want to have that read out. And Madam President,
- I'm ready to make a motion whenever you're ready. All right. Let me see if we have any other further
- discussions. I see Commissioner Thomas has her hand up, but I'll go to Councilor Wilts first, and I
- don't want to put her on the spot, but I know in looking at
- um, what we had and Councilor Wilts has done a really good job with, um, the Head at Home Initiative.
- And I know right now it's not a good idea for us to open up things because we have to look at things
- as lost revenue, but we also have that LA TCF, um, fund. So Councilor Wilts, I know you had, um, a concern or,
- an idea I should say an idea of use of funds and I don't know if you wanted to maybe talk about that
- or if not totally fine sure no I can talk about it and then I'm gonna put counselor Deckard on the spot
- so when I was when several of us have been involved with the heading home organization and their
- forthcoming efforts to look at a project around encampment removal and putting folks from encampments
- into housing. That initiative is in the very early stages of being figured out and it would benefit
- and indeed I think needs to be supported
- with some local government match. There are other funds that they can bring in, but long story short,
- I did speak with the auditor about this at one point, and I'm not sure it's the best use of ARPA so
- much because of some issues around when the spending would take place and that kind of thing.
- That one gets me every time. That's obviously an option. And I do know that since the last workshop
- on this issue that was a week or two, a couple of weeks ago, Councilor Deckard has been more intimately
- involved along with Commissioner Madeira. And so I think there might be some other ideas that they're
- floating either in addition to
- or instead of, so I wanted to just make sure that he had an opportunity to chime in. All right, I'm
- unmuted now. So that program is in a pilot discussion, and I don't want to get ahead of where they are
- publicly on that discussion, but a pilot
- pilot discussion on how that might be a collaboration here locally between different entities, city,
- county, and others. But the pilot program notion being that different entities would come together with
- dollars to fund helping individuals that are either finding themselves homeless or in encampments. And
- I guess my question on this would be, would this qualify,
- Would these dollars qualify as something that could be used quickly for this, for ARPA? And that I don't
- know. Yeah, I don't think that we know enough about the schedule for spending the funds to really have
- it be a serious consideration for ARPA.
- but the LATCF funds are not as time restricted. So I think that's what Councilor Crossley was referring
- to. So I just wanted to sort of answer that question. We can jump back to ARPA, certainly. I do believe
- there's a hand raised as well. Yes, okay. I wanted to make sure that discussion was over and then we'll
- go to Commissioner Thomas next.
- Yes, thank you. Yeah, I think what you've raised is interesting as a potential use for LATCF funds.
- But yeah, that's the end of December. And the only thing we can do with ARPA, I believe, is to utilize
- it for open projects. Projects still remain open, which is why there's such a short list in light green.
- And if I'm wrong, Carly, correct me.
- The other thing, I just wanna say a couple of things really quickly. First is that Mr. Copperle and
- I are in conversation with the Lake Monroe Water Fund about the potential for an additional septic program
- for our community, but also surrounding counties. So it's not that we don't care about septic, it's
- just that the timing is so critical
- there's only a certain window where you can actually install them, and that's where things ran astray.
- And I also want to state that I would, because the airport's looking for 50,000, it seems to me that
- for me, we can take whatever
- You all recommend I can take that back to the commissioners, but I would think about just splitting
- this between the ambulances and cars because the cars can be done quickly, but the ambulance side of
- it needs time. And that's really a great investment in our community. Thanks. Thank you.
- I guess one would also say as well that I know that it's been airport has been very vocal about trying
- to be on the up and up because this also too can be an investment in the community as well. And that's
- their economic vitality and growth. So you want to keep that in mind as well. And of course, we've heard
- about, you know, what we've been doing with the
- car spills project and we've been dealing with that for a really long time. And I really greatly appreciate
- all of that. I just am also trying to make sure that we are also taking care of because every budget
- season Mr. Laverty is always in here expressing some type of need. So if we could also shift with that
- in addition to taking care of the ambulances, that would be great too. Okay.
- Is there any other further questions or comments from council here or online? All right. Seeing none,
- I guess we will. Well, the idea is for us to make a motion to bring forth the recommendations proposed
- by the auditor's office to pass to go to the commissioners as well.
- So, okay. Ideally, it would have been nice to have this all at once and go forth, but fate happens and
- it allows us to be split at the moment. So that's okay. So. Deappropriation, you're going to start with
- the deappropriation. Then Madam President, maybe we can take a breath and kind of look at where that
- lands us. And then once everyone's good, then we can make a motion on the appropriations. Sure. All right.
- Council, I move to de-appropriate a total of $315,225.41 from two projects, the jail locks project,
- a lost revenue project of $62,512.50. And the second project is a septic project with the health department
- of $252,712.91. Second. All right. And then I wanna look to,
- Are council who looks like, is it good? All right, good, Nerman. All right, we got a motion and a second
- to de-appropriate. Is there any other final questions or comments from council virtually or in person
- on this item? All right, seeing none, maybe please have a roll call vote. Councilor Deckard? Yes. Councilor Iverson?
- Councilor Fine, Councilor Will, Councilor Henry? Yes. Councilor Crossley? Yes. Motion passes unanimous.
- All right, thank you for that. Great. So, yeah. Just so we're on the same page, now that we've made
- that deappropriation, we know that the three projects in total are asking for $1.3 million.
- What is the playing field right now that now that we made that day appropriate? Where do we stand? Can
- you bring us back to kind of where things are? I think at this point you need to determine across these
- three projects, where are you going to appropriate that $315,000? And like I mentioned, I would leave
- some wiggle room and cars so that we can make some last minute pivots. I would not personally max out
- to that $214,000 and change.
- That's complicated because we don't know the future.
- Go for it. I have a question perhaps for somebody who has an answer maybe about the septic project because
- it looks like there's more than, and maybe I'm not reading the numbers quite correctly, but there's
- still more that is being spent. There's an estimate for how much won't be spent. Is that correct?
- It's not the same number. Correct. So the amount that you're seeing for the D appropriation is the amount
- that they have not entered into contracts with homeowners and vendors to complete the projects. So there's
- no more, there are no more anticipated contracts to be signed. Correct. The issue with septic is that
- their work is heavily dependent on weather.
- So if they can't get septics in the ground, they can't bill us and therefore we can't spend that money.
- So that's where the ability to pivot and do a ledger correction very quickly would be really beneficial.
- So are you saying that that is a project that you feel not complete even what it says it's contractually
- obligated?
- Because there's a chance for all of these projects, but I would say of the projects that has the higher
- likelihood of coming in under budget. Got it. OK. And there won't be any issue with the contract.
- I mean, I assume that if they can't get the work done by the date, which is not the end of the year,
- I mean, how would you all have that figured out, right?
- Like we will be able to have time to get money back from a committed contract that isn't going to be
- fulfilled in time to. We gave a recommendation to the legal department to amend all of those contracts
- to have a date that they had to submit the invoice to us and have the work completed. I believe that
- date was in October, but I would have to double check.
- It's been a minute since I've had that conversation, but I believe all of those contracts have a deadline
- in them. That's important. I will move forward, trusting that. So if I'm understanding this correctly,
- for the auditor's office, like
- for the ambulances and stormwater, we could essentially, what you're saying is like, we could essentially
- max out those two lines and leave Karst open in case there is some projects that come under, which it
- sounds like it possibly will. So therefore they would be able to spend that dollars pretty quickly.
- and these folks here, but we need to do whatever we need to do for ambulance now. So in case that what
- you have mentioned earlier in terms of like getting invoices to purchase those things, because all of
- that would take time. OK, the only thing I would recommend is I don't know that I would give parks zero
- at this point, because if you have I mean, if none of them have another budget,
- to not give money to them at all from this. Because Kelly has been very good to work with. The fire
- protection districts has been very good to work with. Both of those entities have been very communicative
- in the need for their funding. OK. Yes, Commissioner Thomas. Thank you. Right. It sounds like both the septic
- contracts and also when the airport will know more about whether or not they need 50,000, because they
- don't even know that right now, is October. The quickest turnaround will probably be not to the ambulance
- service because they have to get the invoices and the claims on all of that, but to Karst. So I think
- that timing is going to be important to consider
- I'm not sure what can be done today in terms of votes, but we certainly can have a discussion about
- this among the commissioners and send you back our recommendation for this funding. I don't know what
- was advertised for today specifically in terms of allocations or if it has to be done at one of your
- regular meetings. Thank you.
- So to, yeah, can you answer that concern from Commissioner Thomas? Yes, so the advertisements allow
- for you guys to de-appropriate and appropriate within the open projects. I think we're good as far as
- advertisements go. I would not recommend leaving this amount of money de-appropriated. I would make
- sure to appropriate it somewhere since you guys have already de-appropriated. Right, and technically
- in a perfect world if we all were here,
- We wouldn't have to do one half here, one half there, because we could have done this all in one setting.
- So the purpose was for all of us to do this together. But again, fate happens and we're split right
- now, much like a lot. So, yes, Councilor Henry. Thank you. Carly, do we know from the fire district,
- that's a very specific number.
- Do they have equipment in mind? I mean, I'm presuming he's got a list of things he wants to buy. So
- it's in the packet. So the question about invoices and claims, I mean, it looks like there's a list
- here of things that they're ready to go with if they were funded. Is that fair to say? Yeah. Yes, that's
- fair to say. So that might be a little more expedited than what
- What was presented here? Okay, go on, I'm sorry, I know there's an echo, go on. The Fire Protection
- District is here and can speak on the next steps if they were to get funding today, would you like to
- hear from them? Madam President, I would, but I defer to you in the room. Yeah, I was kind of whispering
- to them if they needed to go ahead and come on up, so y'all come on up. Hello, Deputy Chief Matt Bright.
- Yeah, I think at this point we stand ready to expend any of those items. Excuse me, can you get closer
- to the mic or pull it closer so that we can all hear you? Is that better? Yes. Okay. Yeah, I think at
- this point we stand ready to expend funds on any of those items. I think predominantly the stretchers
- and power loads at the top are my highest priority.
- In the ambulance world, those represent a single point of failure for us. And if that happens, we're
- not transporting patients. So having that redundancy in those items is pretty important. I think our
- next highest priority is probably in some of the aging electronic stuff. You know, as we've merged,
- we've expanded quite a bit of district and kind of inherited
- a lot of electronic devices and stuff from the various departments. We've got a lot of items that are
- kind of approaching the end of their lifetime. So the tablets, we use those for our patient reports
- and stuff in the ambulance and things like that, as well as our mobile radios to communicate. So I think
- those would probably be some of my higher priority items. I thought I just saw Chief Diller has his
- hand raised via Teams. So you're able to unmute. You can join the conversation as well.
- I think just to add to what Deputy Chief Bright mentioned and Councilor Henry, with the exception of
- those station alerting systems, I mean, we could move as quickly as ordering things tomorrow. These
- items are items that could be ordered and placed into service relatively quickly. The station alerting
- systems take a little bit more time. Each station's got to be, you know,
- looked at by those vendors and, you know, they designed that system to go in there. So that takes a
- little bit of time, but the rest of the items, we can move very swiftly. Council Henry, does that satisfy
- your questions? Yeah, it does. Thank you. We appreciate it. You're welcome. Okay. Thank you. Does anybody
- else have any questions for? Yes. Councilor Decker.
- I don't have a question so much as I have a comment that I think. It's not lost on anyone here, but
- I always like to bring it up that we have to be increasingly mindful about ambulance use in the county
- and the demand on that. And some of us have experienced that personally and know that the fire district
- is responding in this service to a need that we've got, and we've had some shortfalls in the community
- in the past.
- I'm not casting aspersions on that or blame because I think that goes all the way around to all of us.
- But I think that the ambulance services is fulfilling a need that's robustly out there and something
- that everybody experiences at some point or another, unfortunately. So I was glad to see this on this
- list and would like to see us do as much as we reasonably can while we're doing this mix here.
- Thank you so much. Anybody else have any questions or comments for the fire department? Yes. Councillor
- Wilks. Okay. I'm sorry. You said for the fire department and my brain was already ahead. I'm sorry.
- It's for something else. No, you're totally fine. So it sounds like we're done with questions for you.
- Thank you very much. No, you're totally fine. Councillor Wilks.
- proceed regarding the other two, then I feel like, um, well, if we've got Ms. Whitmer here,
- maybe we could, um, I have a question about the parks specifically, and it's in, with respect to, um,
- what Ms. Woodruff said about the money being able to be used for paving in, in cars farm and,
- I'm the liaison, so I received an email from you, Ms. Whittner, not too long ago that indicated that
- it was about a million dollars in paving. Is that correct? Correct. But with anything, whatever money
- we have, that's all we will do. And this is related to? The trucks that came in and crushed our asphalt.
- Now our asphalt was only to begin with. Yeah.
- actually 30 years, we've never had a renovation of asphalt. So back in the day, asphalt just showed
- up, but now it doesn't, now it can't do that anymore. Just showed up. Okay, so that's, okay, that's
- the need that's being addressed there is a need for paving back to those new fields. Correct. Essentially,
- okay. Our parts that have been falling off and we've. Okay.
- Um, I just wanted to make sure that's what the connection was. Okay. Okay. Very heavy trucks. Yes.
- Thank you. And so there's, well, I'm thinking of was what with what was just saying in terms of, um,
- funding technically and thinking of other places.
- besides ARPA, we have other funding, like use of potentially edit, so to speak, if that is a thing.
- Right, right, of course. I definitely am not saying that we don't need to give anything, obviously I
- wanna go with that recommendation, but considering what we have versus the ask of like, you know, a
- million and other projects, I'm just, I wanna be able to give her what she needs and then,
- try to tap into other sources of revenue to give them what they need as well. Okay. Are there questions
- or comments? All right, seeing none, yes, Councilor Iverson. So I do think it was really helpful hearing
- you two talk about, this is the Monroe County Fire Protection District, talking about the projects and
- kind of prioritizing your list. That's always helpful.
- given the situation, and it's really helpful to hear kind of what's going on at the Karst farm. I think
- I've been kind of divvying things up in a mix on a spreadsheet here, and I don't know if we need to
- get to that point tonight to make a recommendation about how to divvy up that 315,000, but I think hearing
- your prioritization really helped with that.
- And it sounds like from the auditor's office, because we've already de-appropriated, you know, those
- types of things, the recommendation would be that we do something instead of just leaving it kind of
- flapping in the wind. And then again, we would do what we need to do here. And then pass those
- recommendations to the commissioners, the office to have a discussion for possible approval.
- Yes. Do you, do you recommend that we then, um, move to appropriate pending approval by the commissioners
- so that we get that done and they don't have to re-advertise appropriation? So yes, the motion would
- be contingent on, um, commissioner approval of the project. Okay. And then as Woodruff, I would also
- ask that then your D appropriation also be contingent.
- so that we don't have a de-appropriation without an appropriation. So we'll have to go back and have
- Councilor Iverson restate the motion. That just helps with everything remaining obligated. Okay. Okay.
- And I think I saw Commissioner Thomas is hanging back up again. Yes, I'm sorry. Thank you. Here's my
- suggestion.
- y'all can do what you want to do tonight. Obviously, we know we're shorthanded, but we can
- get a recommendation to you before your next meeting, okay? And so I don't know if there's any way to
- put this on for ratification at your next meet. I don't know how you wanna do that, but we could get
- you that information by then and,
- and that will also indicate where we stand as a board. Does that help? Well, and I'm seeing some heads
- shaking here in the room with the auditor's office, because again, they're saying we need to do something.
- So technically, what we can do is we could technically, all of this is contingent, right?
- we could say this is contingent upon approval and then pass the ball to the commissioners. And then
- at our next meeting, if there is something that needs to be retweeted and changed, it could be brought
- back to us then, correct, Ms. Turner-Keene?
- As an alternative approach, you could table the deappropriation and the appropriation to the 14th meeting,
- and that gives the commissioners the time to make their recommendation. And then at the council meeting
- on the 14th, you can handle the deappropriations and the appropriation. And that would also not require
- re-advertisement. I do want to say it has been advertised for both meetings. So what you could do is
- you could wait till next meeting, or you could do your contingencies now.
- and if they fall through, then you could amend those and do that at the next meeting. So you have many
- options. Okay. And I saw two hands go up virtually. So I saw Council Member Henry's hand up first and
- then I'll go back to Councilor Decker next. Yeah, thank you. So I just saw I understand the workflow
- here. So the open requests that came in,
- that we don't have requests from other open projects, right? That's correct. Okay, so having said that,
- and I'm looking at three items that are here, and I think, you know, in my mind, like I think Councilor
- Iverson mentioned, you know, trying to
- come up with proportions or whatever. I'm looking at three things here. But Commissioner Thomas, you
- had mentioned something about septic and regional counties as an idea. Are we to expect if the Board
- of Commissioners meets that we'll have additions to this list? Are you looking to add septic to this
- list or are these the three items that you'll be discussing? These will be the three items. I mentioned septic,
- because it's a different funding source, not related to ARPA. So we're gonna continue working on getting
- more septic service, better septic service in our community. Other ways. Yeah. So no, just what's here.
- Councilor Decker. Well, my question is, we can't table a de-appropriation because I think we already
- voted to de-appropriate, right?
- If we're following the best housekeeping items of how to handle this fiscally, we'd need a counselor
- with some sort of motion so that it kicks it to commissioners. Commissioners either accept it or send
- it back or what have you and triggers that process. I'm not offering to do that necessarily, but what
- I think we already voted to be appropriate. Yeah, I would agree.
- Okay counselor Iverson did you have your hand raised? I did not have my hand raised. Okay so essentially
- what it sounds like we should do is since we've already voted is maybe make would you agree counselor
- Decker that we should do you agree with the notion that we should go ahead and um
- Council Iverson's first motion on deappropriation, if he restates that and make that contingent upon
- Commissioner's approval, is that what you're saying? I thought we already roll called that original
- deappropriation, so now those dollars are deappropriated and have to be appropriated. But if I have
- that wrong, somebody correct me. Yeah, and he did. OK.
- So we have a couple options ahead of us, right? So we could re appropriate what I just D appropriated
- and get us back to square one. And that would meet that would give the commissioners time to do what
- they need to do. And then we can do all this at our next meeting. Option number two is I could amend
- my motion contingent upon the commissioners action. We can move forward to the motion on the appropriation
- of this 315,000.
- depending on commissioner action. I think those are the two options ahead of us. And either way, we
- are good for our next meeting because it's already been advertised. Right. Okay. Do you go and then
- I'll go to Ms. Turner King. I think that option two makes a lot of sense because there was no need to
- keep touching the same topic over and over again, unless
- And this is the second point I had. It's important that we acknowledge that we are making these
- appropriations in the spirit of a recommendation to the commissioners. It's not that we're telling them.
- I mean, I think just to be fair, it is important to mention that. And that's the contention upon is
- the fact that we would be making a recommendation if we had all the time in the world. That would be correct.
- Okay, you're welcome. No, you're totally fine. Ms. Turner King. And though procedurally to the option
- to which Mr. Iverson identified, you can't amend the motion because it's already been passed. So you'd
- be making a new motion to make the previous motion contingent. Yes, that is yes. Okay. So Councilor
- Iverson, would you? Okay, so let me throw two things out there and Council Member Wilts
- please let me know. The first way I thought about this was splitting up the 315 in terms of starting
- with the airport. We max out the airport at $50,000. Then we provide the ambulances with the replacement
- stretchers and the tablets for $167,500. And then the remainder is given to the parks. That's $97,725.41.
- An alternative
- would be to start with round numbers. The park's $100,000, the ambulance is $200,000, and the airport
- would get the remainder of $15,225.41. So I can go either way. It's a matter of where do you start?
- Councillor Henry. Yeah, thanks. So Councillor Iverson, so option B, are you just taking
- to get to what seems like two-thirds for the fire protection, a third for the parks. Is that how you
- got there? That's exactly right. Yeah, the sum of both of those options needs to be $315,225.41. Yeah,
- I had similar math at my end. I was more like $60.40, but I could support that option B. Hold on. Whenever
- I speak confidently, it seems like Carly has her hand raised.
- and missed the number, but can you just restate how much you would give to parks? In the option one.
- Option two. Option two, $100,000. Okay, thank you. Yeah. Does the auditor just have to see any issues
- with what Councilor Iveson mentioned?
- The only issue would be that if the airport project does overrun, they would have to pay for those expenses
- out of a different fund. And the same presumably with the ambulances. $200,000 doesn't get you anywhere
- close, but at least gets you those stretchers and maybe some of the electronics.
- Does anybody have any questions, comments, or concerns about either of those options? Why don't you
- just go through the option two numbers for me one more time? I don't think I have it right here. My
- math isn't working. I got option one down. So option two numbers again. Option two, let's go in order
- that it's on. Karst Fields Project would get $100,000. Monroe Fire Protection District ambulances would
- get $200,000. And the airport would get the remainder
- which is $15,225.41. That's what I couldn't figure out. It's the remainder. Thank you. All right. Okay.
- So option. I'm hearing a consensus on option two. Yeah, that's what I was gonna say. All right.
- All right. Council, I move to, let's get my language correct here. I move to appropriate. If I may Mr. Iverson.
- I think you should make the de-appropriation motion first. So council, I move to de-appropriate $315,225.41,
- which is the jail locks and the septic. Wait a minute. I think the motion would be I move to make the
- prior de-appropriation of $315,200. Conditional. Yeah. All right.
- So I move to make my prior motion on the appropriation conditional upon action by the Monroe County
- Commissioners. Second. Is that clear? I don't know how it couldn't be any more clear what we're doing
- here, friends. We spent a lot of time on these technicalities. Okay.
- So it sounds like we're all good here and no other further questions or comments. So maybe please have
- a roll call vote. You have to second. I second it. Me? Thank you. You're welcome. OK, so this is just
- for the motion. The prior motion is conditional upon the board of commissioners approval. Is that correct?
- Councilor Iverson? Yes. Councilor Feidl? Yes. Councilor Wilts? Yes. Councilor Henry? Yes. Councilor
- Crossley? Yes. Councilor Decker? Yes. Motion passes unanimous. Thank you. Next up. All right. Council
- contingent on County Commissioner action, I move to appropriate the following.
- $100,000 in Project 37 Karst Fields Project, $200,000 in Project 14 MFPD ambulances, and $15,225.41
- in Project 38 Airport Stormwater Drainage. Second. Okay, we got a motion and a second. Any other final
- questions or comments, even though I think we've exhausted those, but just in case.
- All right, and seeing none, may we please have a roll call vote. Councilor Feidl? Yes. Councilor Wilk?
- Yes. Councilor Henry? Yes. Councilor Krueger? Yes. Councilor DeX? Yes. Councilor Iverson? Yes. Councilor
- Feidl? Yes. Motion passes unanimous. All right, thank you for that.
- So we are good on the ARPA conversations. It looks like. There was a recommendation from the auditor's
- office that at some point, and maybe this can happen later, we make some declaration about what happens
- to any other projects that don't spend all their funds.
- and direct what they should be doing with that. Is that something you want us to do now? I would love
- if you could do that now. Okay. Okay. This is about any leftover. Any leftovers. Anywhere. Okay. Did
- I just move? Yeah. All right. I move that any
- outside of the emotions that we just did, any other ARPA projects that do not expend all of their obligated
- funds, have those funds directed to the Karst Farm Fields Projects Project? I think that's it. Second.
- We got a motion and a second.
- commissioners pending commissioners actions in approval okay so we got a motion and a second to move
- any unexpended items to karst contingent upon commissioner approval is there any other further questions
- comments or discussions on this item the
- Ms. Woodruff, is there anything to add to this? Are we good? No, I just want to clarify. Whenever, if
- a project does come up short, we will still send those through council for the appropriation actions.
- This is just to put on record what our plan is, correct? Right. Great. And if we surpass the lost revenue
- balance in CARS, we'll chat then, but let's fingers crossed that we don't get there. Okay. All right.
- Sounds good.
- Thank you very much. So seeing no other further questions or comments on this item, may we please have
- a roll call vote. Councillor Wilz? Yes. Councillor Henry? Yes. Councillor Cross? Yes. Councillor Decker?
- Yes. Councillor Iverson? Yes. Councillor Feidl? Yes.
- Motion passes unanimously. Thank you for that. And then it looks like item eight is to discuss the determined
- next steps for the LATCF funding, which again looks like has an expenditure deadline of 12 31 27. I
- don't know if there is much more to add to that except we got a little bit more time to talk about
- that so and we've already heard it's it's not something that we need to have expended right now but
- it sounds like there might be a potential plan that we can put into play and so that particular funding
- needs to be approved by both bodies is that accurate or in council
- understanding is that we don't need a plan like we did for ARPA, but it would require a contract, and
- the contract would go through the commissioners. Right, so that's where the two-star, okay, that's where
- the two-part process comes into play. Okay, okay, so that makes sense. Okay, but not necessarily needing
- to have a joint meeting like this again, we could literally do this separate in our own respective meetings.
- Okay, all right, well,
- Yes. Do we have some sort of a plan? Because I know 1231 of 27 is a long time out, but when do we expect
- to get our plan to do that? You know what I mean? When would we want to put that on an agenda, some
- timeline or something like that? Well, it sounds like from what Councilor Decker and Councilor Woltz
- was saying with respect to the Headed Home initiatives, that that's still pending right now. And so
- maybe when they have more of a concrete idea and plan, then that could change at any given moment, it
- sounds like. So it sounds like, although 27 is a little bit in distance, it sounds like maybe their
- plan could be coming soon. And so once they have that plan in mind, then of course, we can add that
- to our agenda and discuss. Exactly. And then do the two part process where
- We do that part and then pass on to commissioners for approval for the contract. Perfect. Thank you.
- You're welcome. Is there, Oh, counselor Decker. I was just going to say we can definitely get something.
- We can officially report back on that and get it out. I'm not trying to be mysterious on anything.
- It's just, I don't want to get ahead of the experts on this and start saying things until
- I know what we should say or who should say it or how we should say it. But we can get get really quick
- on that. Okay. Appreciate that. So more details will be coming. All right. Is there any other final
- questions, comments or concerns from council on this item? All right. With that being said, have a safe
- holiday weekend and Oh, counselor Decker, did you have something else?
- No, I can't control my hand. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. OK. Just me. It's not you. Keep your hands to yourself.
- All right. With that being said, everybody have a safe and happy holiday. And we are adjourned. Thank you.