committee. Um, so let's, uh, roll. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yes, I'm here. Sorry. Yeah. All our
present with two in the room and commissioner material virtual. All right.
And of course, we have Tom Glass, an executive director, and we have John Arnold, controller in the
room. And do we have any staff online? Looks like. Jacob is a CAC member. Welcome. All righty. Approval
of executive committee meeting minutes June 2nd. Any comments or corrections?
that we approve them. We've got a motion for approval. Do we have a second? I second. I just have one
question on these. Under all other items deemed appropriate, we talked about, we spent a lot of time
talking about the compactors. And I think the conclusion that we reached was that staff would get quotes
on service agreements
that would go with the purchase of new compactors so it can better weigh the costs between leasing and
buying. Should that be in the minutes? Is it important? It's just kind of, that's where we stood, so
it might be good to add that. I don't know. If that's the committee's call, we can certainly amend those
in if that's the wish of the committee. What do y'all think? I'm reading, it's right here.
And you're saying that to add more detail? Well, to add what our conclusion was. I see. I think, I mean,
that would be fine. Yeah. I mean, I think if it's something that we said and that I do remember. I listened
to it. I listened to it again. OK. I'm like, if you remember, he's better than I do. Yeah, I have no
problem adding that. So I can send you that text? Sure.
Sure, that's fine. So I propose to add at the end of that second paragraph under all other items, there
was general consensus that staff would get quotes on service agreements that would go with the purchase
of new contactors so that we can better weigh the cost between leasing and buying. So, Tom, does that
meet your recollection?
I mean, I did listen to it again, because I was like, OK, what was our conclusion? You would want to
add that as the last sentence of that term. Yeah. OK, yes. So I'd like to amend my motion. Do we have
a second? I second. All right.
Mr. Mclasen, could you please call the roll? Wilkes? Yes. Piedmont-Smith? Yes. Madera? Yes. Motion passes
unanimously. Does Commissioner Madera need to be on camera to vote? Oh, yes. That is in the statute.
Commissioner Madera, can you? OK. If you could repeat your vote. Yes.
Thank you. Thank you. OK, any comments or questions about the board of director meeting minutes that
will be handed on to the full board? So I have to say that I was not there. It says I was there virtually,
but I was not. Were you at the previous one virtually? Probably.
Leftover text. You might want to double check whether Lee was there. As well. Do you remember if Lee
was there virtually? I do not, I will double check. I remember that she was. But I will confirm the
attendance before we put the meeting packet together. Awesome. Any other comments on those minutes?
Okay. Next item on the agenda is Resolution 20-26-07 to amend the district fee resolution. We keep hearing
about this. It's a long process. We first discussed this a couple of meetings ago here. The June board
meeting was subsequently canceled. So it was introduced at the July board meeting.
You can see behind the memo on page 10 of the packet is the affidavit that it was published in the H.T.
on July 29th that meets the unnoticed requirements for public hearing and but assuming no objections
from the committee would have the public hearing on the agenda for the board meeting prior to the discussion
and vote on the resolution.
which I believe is exactly we did it the last time we amended the fee resolution. Yep. And the board
already talked about what the fee changes were last time. Yes. And then for the record, the public hearing
notice has been on the district's website. I think it's been announced since July 9th.
really adequately noticed and are well in compliance with the statute for public hearing notice. I think
there's one typo in the resolution itself. On the fourth whereas clause, it lists all these resolutions
that have been passed to revise the fee resolution. And one of them says resolution 200-15. I think
that should be 2000.
I think so. That title's been in there a lot. Yeah. Maybe five, six years. Eventually we'll catch these
things. We will get that. I will confirm the resolution number and get that corrected. Okay.
I think we need to vote on this. Are there any other questions? Comments? So we can move on to Resolution
20-26-08 for a public utility easement. Another one that's been around for a little while. So did have
last week did have some email correspondence with parties involved and was advised that the utility
service provider has completed
necessary easement documents and forward them to the National Guard for review. The hope and anticipation
is that we will have those finalized documents in our possession prior to the end of the week when the
meeting packet would go out. So I think the caveat is in the memo that requests that this be placed
on the agenda pending receipt of those documents and if not we'll pull it and shoot for next month.
Sounds great. Let's get this wrapped up. So hopefully we'll have that documentation. Any comments or
questions on that item? Not for me. All right. Moving right along to resolution 202609, revise internal
control policies.
Uh, yeah, as indicated in the memo, this is, uh, came up with, um, I get a couple of board meetings
ago. Maybe it wasn't July meeting. Yeah. Cause the June meeting was canceled, but we had the, uh, the
HHW vendor claim, uh, for 88, $1,000. That was an ACH claim and our internal controls did not address
electronic payments in excess of $50,000, but do put a cap on
staff's ability to sign checks. At $50,000, staff interpreted that the same limitation would apply to
an HCH transaction. So we were asked to revise the internal controls to address that. So we did that.
And you can see the bullet points in the memo in addition to that. So in reference to, we do accept
money orders for payment, specifically from a lot of the orange bag vendors.
I did try to do some clarification on how AP claims on the approved vendor list are processed and approved
with respect to Resolution 2022-02. And then also since we were providing a mechanism for staff to
execute an ACH payment in excess of $50,000. I thought it might be appropriate to provide a mechanism
to provide staff approval to sign a check in excess of $50,000. So that is in there, and we can go through
that. Indeed, it does require written approval from the board chair or their designee, but in the event,
I know that our bond payment is coming to an end, but in the event that we do have
something that needs to get paid in excess of $50,000 and people are out of town or, you know, there's
just conflicts and getting it together and we need to get something signed and that we could do written
approval via email or something so that the control of the genre owner could sign that check and get
payment made if we need to. Did you say this was reviewed by our legal counsel? Yes. Okay. Didn't know that.
legal status of an e-mail if that was sufficient. Well I guess we didn't we did not I guess specifically
discuss that it just says written approval and what qualifies as written approval was not discussed.
I can certainly pose that direct question before we put this to the board. I think we want to make sure
that e-mail is acceptable else. Is it writing a letter. Yeah I assume that it is but.
assuming is probably not the best approach. If you bear with me a minute, I'm going to... Are you going
to email it? No, I'm going to refer to how the claims, the weekly claims not covered under resolution
2022-02 get approved.
So it must be approved in writing by the board to pursue. And we have historically done that via email
and that's never been called into question. Yeah. Just if you could just make sure we can do that. Any
other comments or questions on the revised internal control document?
I do not, thank you. Neither. So I have a couple. Yay. Thank you for that. Some people may say boo.
No, I like it. So I was just wondering, so in that section under account accounts payable claims where
you cite resolution 20202.
Can we append that resolution to this document so that somebody wouldn't have to like go to a totally
different place to look that up? I don't see why not. I think that would be convenient. I mean,
we could just... The first reference to 2020-02 is we could just print the seed index A and attach it.
That's great. I think that that would be helpful.
And then, let's see, my other question, so if I go down, and this wasn't revised at all, this is just
an overall question I have, with the accounts payable claims process, and there are all these, you know,
12 steps or whatever, it talks about the invoices being,
in hard copy, right? Because it says, shall be stamped with the date received and forwarded to the office
manager or controller for claim preparation. But I imagine you get invoices electronically. So do you
print those out, or how does that work? Yeah, we will print those out. And then depending on exactly
how they are received, I mean, if they're received in the text of an email, they'll be dated in timestamp
when you print that email out. If they're attached as a PDF,
we would print the PDF and then put and stamp received on it. Okay. That's a lot of paper. Yeah. Well,
is that required for auditing purposes? We have to have all of that copy. There are, I will, I will
say that the LGF is starting to make some changes that
with things being regularly uploaded into Gateway. It appears they are setting themselves up to move
away from having to have those hard copies available for an audit, which might alleviate some of the
need to print everything. Yeah, that would be great. Yeah, I'm old enough to remember the promise of
a paperless office.
I used to do tech support for a hospital chain in Oklahoma City and we had a tech guy that was adamant
that the hospitals could all go paperless. That doesn't work that way. So are we okay to pending making
sure that emails count as written communication are we okay to send this to the board.
as well. Okay, thank you. Then we can move on to the budgets. So you had some relatively good news from
the LGF. Yeah, I think this tends to happen about every year. The first go around, I get pretty conservative
with my tax estimates and we don't get a windfall, but we generally get
wind up with a few thousand dollars more in tax revenue after the DLGF workshop. And then again, that
happened again this year. You can see a little over 10,000 of additional tax revenue estimated by DLGF.
You can also see then in the tax for the revenue, we also did increase OCC cardboard recycling revenue
by 3,000 after we got the rebate for June.
The year-to-date figure bumped up significantly when we did that. So based on what was presented in
July, we have an additional just over $13,000 in revenue. So that's good news. Conversely, I spent it.
Wow, that was fast.
So you'll see a little over a $13,000 increase in expenses from what was presented in July and I will
say that a good chunk of that actually went into training and education for you know employee continuing
ed and training and then about then travel expenses which would be related to getting employees to and from
the trainings when we identify them. But I did try to, as you go through the memo, identify where there
were differences from what was presented in July 9th. I think the other big difference was in vehicle
repair and maintenance. Talked with Van Horn Tinting and
We've, if you recall, we had $50,000 appropriated this year to get a new administrative vehicle. And
something I was gonna talk about during the other items. We'll go ahead and do it now. So hybrid vehicles
that would suit our needs are hard to come by, but we did work with Royal Toyota South
Toyota Sienna is about the only hybrid minivan that is available on the market. So we've moved forward
with getting one ordered through them. And the $5,000 is to put a wrap on that. So instead of hanging
it, we'll put a vehicle wrap on it that will have graphics on our logo, and we haven't designed it yet.
kind of talked with them more about what the vehicle and what we'd be looking to doing. And they said
that $5,000 would be sufficient to do whatever we wanted to do there. So that's that increase in the
budget. Back to the van. So you're going to see at the board meeting a claim for $1,000 to Royal Toyota.
That is the deposit on the vehicle that is coming.
They're not on the lot. They're not on the lots anywhere. They are sold before they get to the lot.
So we have one order. It's a hybrid. It's a hybrid. And probably looking at end of October, beginning
of November on delivery on that. Yeah. That seems to be a thing. I recently looked at Toyota's.
and specifically Toyota's are not. They don't have a large inventory. They are in demand. They're sold
before they get to the lot. Even things like the hybrid Camry's in the spot. They've got to wait six
weeks to get delivery. Popular cars. Yeah. That's what I drive, so. Yeah.
But anyway, I think those are the, I mean, there's some other smaller ones, but the big, the training
and education and vehicle repair and maintenance are the two big increases. And fuel, right? Fuel went
up like a thousand, and that was more of a cushion than a necessity. We already had that bumped up some
in the July, because I think we all know that gas costs a little more. It's a yo-yo.
All right. Thank you for the memo which tells us what changed. It's a lot and I appreciate it. I guess,
yeah, we don't so something left to decrease. I got to look at the math on that because we are in the
capital. We also had
$12,000 increase from July. But then that's, that's for, we already had a big bump there. We talked
about purchasing the new roll off containers. So that, to check the math on that, but everything seems
to balance. But that's. Yeah, that's $12,000. So it must have been a decrease somewhere. Yeah.
So that, but that's, that would, you know, that would be one more roll off box than we were planning
on buying, compact or buy. Okay. Well, if you can find that decrease and add it to the memo from the
board, that'd be good. Yeah. It may be multiple decreases of a thousand or 2000 that added up to that
difference. Okay.
questions or comments on the revised budget proposal. That's the operating operating. Yeah, so then
that's resolution 2026-10 and you have that resolution and all the supporting documentation in the packet.
Then 2026-11 is the debt service budget for the final payment. Yes.
against but we'll pop apple juice because we can't pop champagne in the government. But then I and I
just on page 50 in the packet is kind of the summary of the debt service budget proposal. I just I did
want to confirm that that kind of makes sense to everybody. We've kind of been talking about this the
last couple of budget cycles but we're going to have to be loaning money.
because of the way the tax disbursements come versus when the payments are made. So based on that workshop
at DLGF we're looking at an $89,360 balance on December 31st after we pay back the existing temporary
loan. So that means we'll have to in January loan $47,875 to the debt service fund for that February payment.
which should also leave the $750 for the administrative fee. Not sure when that will come due. They
usually do that in the fall. That's when we have two payments a year. So it wouldn't surprise me to
see it come in March, April timeframe, because we've made the last payment. And everybody will be closing
out the bond on their books. But that loan should cover all of that.
Based on calculations from DLGF, the tax disbursements in June and December, we'll balance the fund.
What is the $24,000 loan repayment account? We had to loan $24,000 to make the payment, the August payment.
For this year? Yeah, for the payment that was approved at the last board meeting. Because revenue comes
in December.
Okay, so that was the same reasons. Right. Yeah, that's what I think we were going back a couple of
budget cycles. We said that for the last three, maybe four payments, the operating fund was going to
have to loan money to the debt service fund because the tax disbursements, in essence, are in arrears.
As long as it's got enough money to make the loan, then time's fine.
Well, the payment will be made regardless of how much the tax disbursement is. And we will figure out
how to reconcile any discrepancies when all is said and done. We will not default on final payment.
And then the QCAT fund resolution 2026-12 obviously substantial decrease in the balance of that because
we just appropriated money out of it for a roof. But and I did mention at the July board meeting and
it doesn't have to be right now but you know that fund balance is about a thousand and thirty dollars
by the end of the year. That's that is the current fund balance but that's what we base budget off of
by the end of the year.
it may or may not be a little more, I don't know if we'll get any interest on it with that level of
balance or not. But so I think, but I think given that the board needs to consider, do we want to make
an attempt to refund that capital fund or do we want to close that out and revert that money back to
the cash reserves? The statute,
You know, we'll see what happens with revenues, with all the changes to the tax laws and stuff. The
statute does allow for units to budget. It's maybe 3%, 5% max of the budget can be appropriated to be
transferred to a cumulative capital fund on a manual basis. What's the benefit of doing that? Well,
since it's hard to budget,
million dollars in one year if you have a project coming up and you want to build a fund so that when
you're ready to purchase land or build a building you have that cumulative capital fund that you can
do that with. But the interest earned is not more in a QCAT fund than in our operating fund, right?
Correct. Now there I would need to check there might be investment options similar
to operating cash reserves that we could do with Kim Cat Fund which might present opportunities for
a higher interest yield. But I would want to check the statutes to see what options and or limits there
are on what can be done investment-wise with cumulative capital funds.
At what point should we make that decision? I mean, if we want to replenish some of the QMCAF fund,
we could do that with the 27 budget, right? Well, we could. I'd hate to reinvent the wheel with this.
Plus, what you have... It would be cash balance that we... Well, right. I think we would have the option
at the end of the year if we have unspent appropriated funds.
that we could transfer those to the cumulative capital fund. I just went by what I was referring to
earlier is that you have the ability to actually build that into your budget as well which is something
for you know for the 20-28 budget if that's what the board wishes to do you know that we could attempt
to appropriate funds specific for a transfer to the cumulative capital fund so that we don't have to
worry about trying to have unspent appropriations at the end of the year that could be transferred.
We could just build it into the budget if the revenues are there to support such an appropriation. But
we don't have to budget it. No. So it could. So like for 26 we didn't budget any transfer obviously.
At the end of this year, if the board decides, we don't want to mess with it, let's just close the CUME-CAT
fund, can we do that at the end of this year? I believe so. Okay. So we should, in the next few months,
we should. Right, yeah, like I said, it's not a decision that has to be made at the August meeting,
you know, but it's, you know, $1,000, that's capitalized, that's not going to do anything for you.
So I think it just makes sense to either make an attempt to replenish the fund or close it down. I think
having a QMCAT fund is a good idea simply because it it just sets aside mentally money and just having
it randomly there rather than
identifying kind of a strategic purpose. And I realize the purpose is for things like a new roof and
things that come up, but we had been talking about the, for instance, the leasing versus buying
of containers. If we looked at a cycle for replacement, then we could determine how much we wanted to
keep putting into. Yeah, now there are, I don't know,
I would need to look at the statute. There are restrictions on what QCAP funds can be used for. I mean
land and buildings I know for sure. Equipment I'm not so sure. But I'm not saying you can't.
I'm just right. I'm not positive on that one. And that's something that I should I will research and
then the board's ready to have that discussion. We will present that information that you know you know
here are the allowed uses.
for Hume Cap funds and you know does it make sense to replenish it or not. I will I will also add that
the current Hume Cap fund was established under the previous director. The district had a cumulative
capital fund way back when when it first started and that got closed out. And I don't recall what all
Larry had to but there were some steps involved to reestablish that fund.
It wasn't just going to Gateway and say, okay, we're now going to have a QCAT fund and here's the balance.
Any questions about any of the three funds and the proposed budgets? I wanted to
add a piece of information that I got by being on the fiscal committee of the city of Bloomington Common
Council. So we have engaged Reedy Financial for many months to make sense of SEA 1 and House Bill, what?
2110 or whatever. 1210. 1210, thank you. And so they've done some analysis
of the impacts expected from the changes to the property taxes. And I emailed you this a little while
ago. And so they estimate in 2029 when all of the changes have gone into effect, property tax levy loss
of $148,970 for the district.
For 2029? 29. How much? So almost $150,000. $149,970. And it wasn't the additional $19,000 and something.
Wasn't the total impact $168,000? Yes. Let's see. Right. It's the debt capacity that also
went down. Oh, okay. That was specific to destiny. So yeah, but and that's, yeah, I did see that and
I appreciate that. Although I was a little confused at first because it started off all talking about
lit. Yeah, I know. But the spreadsheet had a lot. But 150,000 is in line with, you know, I guess what
I would have been projecting based on
the increase to the cap impact for 26, and then the additional, what it went up for 27, looking into
28 or 29, getting into that $150,000 range, that is in line. And so, you know, the true fiscal impact
of it hinges on the growth quotient. Yeah. Yeah, there are assumptions that went into this estimate.
4%. Right. And that's, you know, for 27, and I'm curious to see if this is addressed in the next legislative
session, because for 27, we got a 6% growth quotient, because I don't know if it was intentional, but
the growth quotient cap that expired in 26 was not extended when they did Senate Enrollment Act 1.
So, you know, are we going to continue to get, not that it will be, you know, millions and millions
of dollars, but, you know, an unlimited growth budget? Will it be a true reflection of what the actual
assessed growth is? Or are they going to implement another cap? When did they start implementing caps?
I don't know.
It's been it's been on the books since I became director 10 years ago. So. Something I've always had
to deal with as director. And this year there were no camps. And so it's purely based on the. I guess
that depends on whose index you want to look at. I think there were some indexes that were pushing 9 percent.
that I saw, but I don't know what, those necessarily weren't the state's numbers. But yeah, so that's,
you know, it was nice to get that this year, obviously, particularly with the additional cap impact,
but I'm not going to hold my breath that we're going to be in the same boat next budget cycle.
It may have just been an oversight with all the other changes happening, but oops, we forgot to extend
the cat. And so, yeah, and so, you know, all that's going to play into the, you know, the true fiscal
impact of that cat hit going up to 150, $160,000. Yeah.
least with this unit of government, we don't have to deal with all of the changes. You're right. I'm
very thankful that I think that regardless of what happens, we're in a strong enough financial position
with cash reserves that we don't have to have a knee-jerk reaction to a substantial. Obviously, we can't absorb
$150,000 annual hit forever. But we don't have to turn right around and stop the program because we
lost $150,000. We have enough money to have time to plan for how to best address this and minimize the
impact on the residents. Yeah.
Other questions or comments on the budget proposals? So many, but none that can be answered. Same here.
I may be absent for the board meeting then. Are your comments? Wise choice. 100 gallons. Existential
kind of. OK.
I have plenty of questions about the city of Bloomington budget. This one I'm feeling pretty good about.
Yeah. And I will also throw out, and I don't know if Kate or Jodi can or want to weigh in, our operating
budget does have a 3.5% cost of living increase in it. That is based on the wage earner index that we
have historically used.
The last I got from the county council office, which was probably at least a month ago at this point,
was that the county was not looking at any cost of living increase. And I don't know where that sits
now. I know that if our COLA is significantly different than the counties, that raises
when we go before the county council for the adoption, it can sometimes raise questions with the county
representatives on our board. So it's in there. And I think it's justified. I mean, the budget in essence
is balanced. I think we're at an $8 deficit. It's justified based on how we have historically
determined what that would be. But obviously, the board at the August meeting, and for that matter,
the county council at the adoption hearing do have the authority to change that. What's the historical
trend? What have you done in the past? And specifically, the reason I'm asking is
the county gave a huge COLA just a couple of years ago. Well, yeah. I think the year before that, that
was all COVID impact stuff, we gave a huge COLA. That came up during the adoption hearings and over
the two or three-year span through and coming out of COVID, the COLA is balanced out between what we
gave and what the county gave.
So it's not that they're the same every year. But, you know, they're generally, I guess, other than
the COVID period, you know, we're generally pretty close. Well, we alternate years between the dollar
amount and the percentage. Yeah, across the board percentage and then a flat dollar amount based on
medium wages. Do you know,
where the negotiation stand with. Well, it's, um, so it's not really a negotiation. It's something that,
yeah, I don't. Um, I know that the recommendation from the commissioners was for 6% and the directive
from council president was zero. It will be somewhere.
In between. In between zero and six. OK. So yeah, and that's one of the other, I do the best I can to
take our index and what information that I have from the county and try to put us there where we're
going to be on par. But we do think so much earlier than the county that it's hard to do that. And I
think other than those two years with COVID,
We've always managed to be pretty close, so. I think that we might have a better idea. Well,
I don't know. We have some work we have to do around our own budgeting. But I think the idea is to keep
all the calculations at zero and see what happens and what we can do.
Well, and obviously the bottom line for all of us is, you know, the budget can absorb what it can absorb.
You have to keep things running and those expenses have to be assured. Well, I mean, it's also a matter
of priorities, right? If you say,
priority is going to be to make sure that our employees don't, in the economic context, make less next
year than they do this year. That could be put in like the base, the minimum, and then you could go
from there and say, okay, well, this means we have to cut this or cut that. Non-personal. I'm just saying
it's a philosophical.
And I will say too, and I think that, you know, you can see when you look at the budget comparison sheets,
on the expense side in particular, that, you know, when we, you know, going back to last year, you know,
I was pushing on staff, you know, not knowing, I did not know that the impact, the circuit breaker cap
didn't get continued. I was on then. We're going to have to find ways to cut money. You know, we've
got to be doing and I think that you can see when you look at that summary sheet and what some of our
year-to-date expenses are and and you know there's there's like a hauling line came down significantly.
You know so so we already had already had staff looking at ways you know that we could reduce expenses without
compromising services and we've done some of that and that's helped us be in a position to be able to
put that COLA increase in there for the employees. Yeah. We have that same discussion more broadly for
the whole county and one thing that we bump up against is there aren't very many
things that the county does that aren't statutorily required. We just don't really have a lot of,
I mean, we have some things like, you know, we'll bond for some things that could be put off.
But a lot, you know, we're trying to be very judicious about those choices and have been for
a little while, um, seeing this coming change on how we're doing things. Yeah, you're right.
You're right. And one thing that, that we've also talked about is it was several years ago, you probably
know the county did a lot of changing people from 40 hours to 35 hours work week, just to keep people
rather than
And then they did that without changing the wages. Correct. Yes. No, without changing the wages. Yeah.
So anyway, lots of variables. Yeah. Yeah. And there's certainly been, over the years, some creative
ways to deal with that and manage how it impacts the employees.
To put that out there, and I don't know if it'll become an issue at our board meeting, and I don't know
if it'll become a question or an issue with the council adoption hearings, but. What can the county
council do as far as, can they cut the budget when it comes to them for a specific reason or for specific
categories? Yeah. I don't have any inkling
that that would be a red flag. I really don't. But I'm just one person. I think 3.5 is justifiable.
Like I said, we're using the same CPIW wager or index that we've always used. And that's where it is.
It was like 3.4, so I just made it 3.5. That was easier to calculate. Oh, wow. But anyway, just to make
people aware that in case there are questions or issues that arise from that being in there based on
what the county decides that it can, wants to do, or not do. Yeah, that's a good point.
Any other comments or questions about the budget proposals? No, I think those issues are all really
good to discuss. I appreciate that. Thank you. Well, then we can move along to all other items deemed
appropriate. So who has something? Yes, Mr. McClassen.
A couple things. Any questions about the van that we're looking at purchasing? I've already put that
one out there. I have to say I'm a big fan of the idea. Fan of what? Of a hybrid. Yes, I'm a big fan
of that idea of doing the hybrid. If we're going to reduce waste, we might as well start with the vehicles we drive.
I agree that that's why we're doing it. I've never bought a car under this process before. I don't like
not going on a lot in test driving, but oh well. Which vehicle does that replace? It's really not going
to replace anything immediately. It ultimately is going to replace the butterfly mobile.
um but um uh you know it's it's the thing is it's 22 years old i know we've talked like many years about
we talked a few years ago because we had a bad run we had a bad run a few years ago with maintenance
costs just because you know i don't know if it was because it hit that 20 year mark or whatever but
a bunch of things went wrong and we fixed those and then quit having problems and
So, but it also gives us, you know, a vehicle that, you know, it won't be here in time, unfortunately.
But, you know, like we have the Association of Solid Waste District Conference coming up at the beginning
of October. We generally send four or five people to that. You know, so instead of everybody taking
their own car or taking one of the trucks that we have that has a king cab that gets 10 miles to the gallon,
or whatever it is. This gives us a more economical vehicle to take. It will also allow for outreach
opportunities that need a bigger display than that element. It's going to have more cargo space. But
I think the short answer is no.
declare a vehicle surplus property right away. We'll continue to run that thing till the wheels fall
off of it. So is the wrap for the truck or for the van going to be as pretty as the butterfly? I don't
know if it's going to be as elaborate.
but it'll be more our branding. Yeah, our logo will definitely be in there and be a color scheme that
matches the colors that are in our logo. We certainly have a website listed on there, some general ideas.
If Van Horn is who we choose to guide, that was one I knew that did it. So I called them just to say,
hey, what kind of ballpark, what kind of price do I need to budget to make this happen? But they said
that they could. And I assume other companies that do this, well, they have graphic designers. And they'll
take our ideas and throw some options at us. Cool. And then the roof.
Starts next week. Replacement of the administrative roof. And then the last thing is the September board
meeting. We have to do this every year because it conflicts with council budget work session. I think
the past two, maybe three years, we've actually just canceled it. We kind of make an effort
get business done at the August meeting so that there's nothing pressing that we have to address right
away. What happens with the utility easement or they've delayed this long if we got an extra month I
don't know. But at any rate you know we do need to think about and you know do we want to do we want
to. Is there a need to make an attempt to have a September board meeting and if so we will
At the very least have to change locations if not find another date and time. I do know that Councilor
Wilk's schedule based on council meetings and budget work sessions is going to be limited. But the district
office is always available and we would have the ability to do quite as good as tech services does but
we would have the ability to do virtual meetings from there.
this room would work for the board, right? Unless for some reason the public wants to show up. They
can still come in here. It's cozy. I mean, given how many weeks we have, it's probably. Yeah, but I
just wanted to put that out there. And it's not necessarily something that has to be decided at the
board meeting, but I think it needs to be put out there and you can communicate via email.
you know, as we approach September and decide if there's a need to meet. Yeah, I mean, it all depends
on whether we have agenda items, whether any of them are urgent. There will always be agenda items.
It's just a matter of how fast do they need to be added. All right. That was it? Does anybody else have
any items to bring up?
So I did want to follow up on that compactor rental versus lease question. Has Joey had a chance to
get any additional information? I know that he's requested it. He hasn't told me that he's requested
purchase pricing and asked about service agreement options. I don't know what information he's gotten
back from people yet. OK. Even he was out last week.
I know he was reaching out to manufacturers, potential vendors for the equipment well before that. And
we'll follow up with that. So we may want to have an executive committee meeting even if we don't have
a board meeting in September or late August. Because I think we do want to make some progress on that.
Yeah, and I just in that that brought to mind one other other item that. But. Chair Bruce Piedmont Smith
and I have had some discussions on. We're going to have to discuss the district's health insurance offerings.
I checked with legal counsel. There was a new. There was a new executive session
That was allowed for, but it was a, I forget the exact wording was you could have an executive session
regarding special exceptions to health insurance. The term that the issue that we have or attorney did
not believe that the special exception definition or lack thereof that there is so. Special exception.
I told him that he couldn't find it. Good question.
There's lots of special exceptions for zoning. Yeah. So. Well, I guess it's not talking about any particular
personnel, right? No, it's not specific. It's not specific to any one individual. It has to do with
eligibility for coverage. And a change that we're being
based with the insurance carriers. It's going to impact coverages that we can offer. I see. And that
is going to have to be done outside of the executive session, unfortunately. Yeah. At what point will
we have the information on
how and whether we can still offer coverage to employees that work less than 30 hours. You have it already.
So maybe that's another topic for the next executive committee meeting. All right. Anything else?
Um, actually, I just wanted to ask real quickly about the, um, the new program that, um, is collecting
hard to recycle. Oh, excuse me, hefty renew. Uh-huh. Yeah. Um, have you had much use of that? Uh, some.
Um, and we didn't necessarily expect, you know, a mad rush of people with, um,
You know, unfortunately, the bags aren't available locally. You've got to order them, get them delivered.
But we've had a few people that were holding on to things, hoping they'd find something other than disposable
to do. We've had, I think, a pretty good response to the social media postings that we put up about
it. You know, people excited about it. Where do I get the bags?
So I think it's been received well and people, the word is getting out. What we don't have at this point
is feedback from Rumpke on, in fact, I don't even know if they pulled a load that would have the bags
in it yet or not. So I'm wondering about the bags because we have
purchase them online. Is it even legal to have the district purchase them and then resell them?
I don't know. I would ask the attorney and then that would also be something we'd have to work out with
Brump or with Hefty
or whoever is producing the bag. Amazon sells the bag. Who's Amazon supplier? Because that's who we
would have to be working with. We can't buy from Amazon and you sell them. We have to be a retailer
of them. I don't know if we can be a retailer. That would be a legal question. Let me just make sure
I understand how this works. People have to buy these bags online.
and they get them at home and then they fill them up and they bring them to the district. And then Romkey
picks them up. Well, Romkey has us putting them in the bins with all our rigid plastics. And then when
all the plastics get to Cincinnati, they pull the renew bags out because they run the renew program
in the Cincinnati area.
I was wondering why everybody had to have their own bag, but it's because it goes in with the other
plastics. Yeah, and that bag is to keep them separate. The purpose for piloting it at just one site
is, are the bags going to survive intact? That's the real question. Because they don't do it this way
at other places?
Why is that? Well, they do, but they're transported from the residence to the sorting facility. They're
not transported from our collection facility to a transfer station, put into another truck, transported
to Cincinnati, and dumped again. Handled more. Yeah. I've got to get myself some new bags. Because when
I was in Germany, I was just amazed. They recycle everything, every piece of packaging.
You just put it in with the recycling, with the plastic. Well, and I noticed that Wild Birds Unlimited
here in town has a collection of bird seed bags. And I talked to Vintlinger a little bit about this
program, and he was kind of interested in more information. He would be happy to be a retailer selling
those bags, but for their own use currently, he will
because he right now drives them to Cincinnati. Okay, yes. Okay, I think we're almost done. We're just
talking about the Hefty Renew program.
I think we're about done. Yeah, I think we're about done. I think we're done. We're good. Thanks, Joey.
Thank you. Bye-bye. Good night. Good night. I was just watching you answer the phone. I was like, well,
who's calling her? Right. Must be important.
Anyway, just, you know. Right. And it's good to know that. And I appreciate that. But I think, you know,
since we're piloting it right now, I don't want, there's no reason for anybody to make any,
take any steps, make any effort to be a retailer until we know that this is something that's going to
continue. Sounds reasonable. All right. If there's nothing else, I think we can adjourn. Thank you.
Let's do that. Thank you.