Aug 24, 2023 City Council Special Meeting

[00:00:02]

LEO HERE ON A GOOD THURSDAY.

[1. Call to Order]

WE WE DO WANT YOU GUYS TO SEE THAT WE THOROUGHLY INVESTED IN THESE BUDGET CUTS.

WE'RE EVEN MONITORING BATTERY BACKUPS AT THIS POINT.

SO SHARING MICROPHONES, WHATEVER IT TAKES, KEEP THE BUDGET LOW.

UM, I WANT TO OPEN US UP IN PRAYER HERE TODAY AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND KIND OF MOVE FORWARD.

SO IF YOU GUYS WOULD BOW YOUR HEADS WITH ME TODAY.

FATHER GOD, WE ARE EXCEEDINGLY GRATEFUL THAT WE'RE THIS HEALTHY, THAT WE HAVE THIS ENERGY, THAT WE HAVE THIS FREEDOM, THAT WE GET TO COME INTO THIS PLACE THAT YOU'VE ORCHESTRATED OUR SCHEDULES.

YOU'VE TAKEN CARE OF OUR FRIENDS, OUR FAMILIES, OUR NEIGHBORHOODS.

YOU'VE ALREADY WORKED OUT ALL THE DETAILS IN OUR LIVES.

SO WE'RE THANKFUL THAT YOU'RE IN CHARGE.

AND SO WE JUST HUMBLY SUBMIT OURSELVES TO YOU HERE TODAY.

WE ASK HOLY SPIRIT THAT YOU WOULD FALL IN THIS ROOM.

YOU WOULD JUST GIVE US WORDS IN OUR MOUTHS AND ON OUR LIPS.

YOU'D GIVE US THE RIGHT ATTITUDE.

YOU'D GIVE US VISION.

WE PRAY FOR STRENGTH AND COURAGE.

WE PRAY FOR WISDOM AND DISCERNMENT.

WE ASK FOR YOU TO GO BEFORE US AND LEAD US AND LET US FOLLOW YOU BECAUSE WE CAN TRUST YOU.

SO WE THANK YOU FOR THIS MEETING HERE TODAY.

WE PRAY FOR A CASUAL CONVERSATION WHERE WE CAN WORK TOGETHER AS AN ORGANIZATION AND ENJOY THE TIME THAT'S SPENT HERE.

WE PRAY FOR EFFICIENCIES AND ASK YOU TO JUST SHARPEN THE EDGE OF OUR AX.

HELP US TO CUT EVERY TREE DOWN THAT YOU WANT, CUT DOWN AND HELP US TO NOURISH EVERY TREE THAT YOU WANT TO SEE GROW.

BLESS THIS CONVERSATION.

IN JESUS NAME. AMEN.

AMEN. OKAY, SO SOMEBODY'S GOT A BIRTHDAY TODAY AND HE'S 38, SO I DON'T KNOW A LOT ABOUT THE HISTORY OF AMARILLO DEPUTIES, SO I'M JUST GOING TO MAKE THIS UP.

BUT HE IS THE YOUNGEST DEPUTY OF THE CITY OF AMARILLO.

SO, YOU KNOW, MISTER ANDREW FREEMAN, YOU GUYS BE SURE AND SMACK HIM ON THE BACK REALLY HARD AND TELL HIM HAPPY BIRTHDAY IN BETWEEN THE BREAKS HERE.

SO I DO WANT TO GO AHEAD AND HAND THIS OVER TO MISS LAURA STORRS, IF YOU CAN, TELL US WHAT YOU NEED FROM STAFF AND HOW YOU KIND OF WANT TO DIRECT THIS

[2. City Council Budget Workshop]

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MAYOR.

APPRECIATE YOU AND THE REST OF COUNCIL BEING HERE FOR, I THINK, MAYBE OUR SEVENTH DAY OF REVIEW.

SO I THINK TODAY IS WHERE WE'RE GOING TO GET A LOT OF THINGS ACCOMPLISHED.

WE'VE GOT SEVERAL ITEMS THAT WE HAD ON OUR LIST TO FOLLOW BACK UP WITH YOU ALL ON.

SO WE'RE GOING TO KIND OF SPORADICALLY GIVE THOSE TO YOU THROUGHOUT THE MORNING AND TALK THROUGH THEM AS AS THEY COME UP.

WE ALSO HAVE CERTAIN ITEMS RELATED TO THE CITY'S BUDGET THAT WE NEED TO GET DIRECTION FROM YOU ALL TODAY.

WE DO HAVE DEADLINES TO GET THIS BUDGET APPROVED AND THE PROPERTY TAX RATE APPROVED.

I'LL POINT OUT TWO MEETINGS THAT ARE OF GREAT IMPORTANCE SCIENCE COMING UP.

AND THERE WILL BE PUBLISHED NOTICES IN THE NEWSPAPER AND ON OUR WEBSITE, SOCIAL MEDIA THROUGH VARIOUS COMMUNICATION OUTLETS.

AND THAT IS OUR MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 12TH.

WE WILL BE DOING A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE BUDGET AND WE'LL DO THE FIRST READING ON APPROVING THE BUDGET AND APPROVING THE TAX RATE, THE PROPERTY TAX RATE.

THEN THE SECOND MEETING OF IMPORTANCE IS ON SEPTEMBER 19TH, WHICH WILL BE ONE WEEK LATER.

THOSE ARE BOTH ON TUESDAYS, AND WE WILL DO A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPERTY TAX RATE AND THEN WE WILL DO THE SECOND AND FINAL READING ON BOTH THE BUDGET AND ON THE PROPERTY TAX RATE.

SO YOU ALL HAVE SOME FLEXIBILITY TODAY TO GIVE US DIRECTION.

AS YOU ALL RECALL, YOU ALL SET THE TOP END OF A PROPERTY TAX RATE AT YOUR LAST MEETING ON AUGUST 15TH AND YOU SET THAT AT THE STATE TOP END.

SO THE STATE LAW ALLOWED TOP END, WHICH IS OUR VOTER APPROVAL TAX RATE.

AND WE'RE GOING TO JUST QUICKLY TOUCH BASE ON THAT AND KIND OF TALK THROUGH A COUPLE OF THINGS AS A REMINDER ON THAT.

AND THEN WE'RE JUST GOING TO START WORKING OUR WAY THROUGH THE LIST.

SO AS YOU ALL KNOW, GENERAL FUND IS WHERE THE BULK OF THE CITY SERVICES RESIDE.

AND SO AS A REMINDER, THE TWO BIGGEST FUNDING SOURCES INSIDE YOUR GENERAL FUND ARE YOUR SALES TAX AND YOUR PROPERTY TAX.

SO I WANTED TO KIND OF START THERE AS AN RECAP SOME THINGS THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT OVER THE LAST FEW WEEKS.

SO FIRST, LET ME BRIEFLY TALK ABOUT SALES TAX.

SO AS YOU REMEMBER, WE HAVE HAD EXTREMELY LARGE GROWTH IN SALES TAX THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS COMING OUT OF COVID.

WE SAW I THINK I THINK IT WAS SOMEWHERE 30 TO 36 MONTHS OF CONTINUED SALES TAX GROWTH.

WE DID SEE A PULLBACK, A LEVELING THE LAST COUPLE OF MONTHS.

AND THEN THIS THIS MONTH, WE SAW A LARGE AUDIT ADJUSTMENT COME THROUGH THAT ACTUALLY BROUGHT US DOWN ABOUT 20.

[00:05:02]

SO WE DON'T WANT TO NECESSARILY OVERREACT BECAUSE THERE WERE THERE WAS A LARGE AUDIT ADJUSTMENT AND THOSE THINGS HAPPEN FROM TIME TO TIME.

AND SO WE ARE KIND OF ON A WAIT AND SEE WHAT WHAT COMES IN THIS NEXT MONTH, IF YOU'LL REMEMBER, ON OUR PROJECTIONS AND STEPHANIE, HAS IT PULLED UP RIGHT THERE. AND I THREW HER THROUGH A LOOP BECAUSE I TOLD HER I WAS GOING TO START ON PROPERTY TAX AND THEN I WOUND UP STARTING ON SALES TAX FIRST.

SO SHE DID GREAT BACK ON THE FIRST DAY OF OR THE FIRST FEW DAYS OF BUDGET REVIEW.

WE HAD A REALLY BIG POWERPOINT.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GUYS STILL HAVE THAT AVAILABLE, BUT THERE IS A SLIDE IN THERE THAT SHOWS OOPS, AND IF I CAN GET TO IT REAL QUICK, IT'S ON SLIDE.

SIX. AND IT'S PULLED UP ON THE SCREEN THERE.

SO IT LOOKS LIKE THIS.

SLIDE SIX ON THAT BIG POWERPOINT WE WE BROUGHT.

SO AS A REMINDER.

WE BUDGETED $68 MILLION THIS YEAR.

WE WERE ON TRACK TO HIT CLOSER TO ABOUT 7576 MILLION THIS YEAR.

WE HAD BUDGETED CONSERVATIVELY IN ORDER TO NOT BUILD TOO MUCH INTO ONGOING OPERATING EXPENSES.

SO WE TALKED ABOUT HOW FOR THIS NEXT YEAR, RIGHT NOW, THE WAY THE PROPOSED BUDGET IS BUILT, WE HAVE 73 AND ONE HALF MILLION BUILT INTO YOUR SALES TAX PROJECTIONS.

WE TALKED ABOUT HOW THERE COULD BE ANOTHER 2 MILLION, 2.4 MILLION JUST TO BRING US KIND OF LEVEL WITH THIS YEAR.

NOW, AGAIN, WE DID SEE THE PULL BACK IN AUGUST.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, WE MAY NOT HIT A FULL 75 OR 76 MILLION THIS YEAR.

SO THIS WE STILL HAVE ONE MORE MONTH AND WE'LL HAVE TO SEE HOW THAT GOES.

SO I WANTED TO REMIND YOU ALL THAT WE KIND OF HAD PUT THAT 2 MILLION, 2.4 MILLION KIND OF IN OUR BACK POCKET TO TALK ABOUT LATER.

SO I WANTED TO BRING THAT BACK TODAY AS A REMINDER.

SO YOU CERTAINLY WANT TO ENCOURAGE US TO CONSIDER BEING SOMEWHAT CONSERVATIVE WITH THOSE NUMBERS BECAUSE THEY DO FLUCTUATE SO MUCH AND WE DON'T HAVE ANY ANY KIND OF DIRECT CONTROL OVER IT.

IT'S JUST BASED ON SPENDING IN OUR LOCAL ECONOMY.

AND SO, AGAIN, 73 AND ONE HALF MILLION IS BUILT INTO YOUR PROPOSED BUDGET, YOUR BIG THICK BUDGET BOOK IN THE AND THE BUDGET THAT IS POSTED ONLINE.

BUT THEN WE WE POSSIBLY HAVE ABOUT TWO, 2.4 TO 2.4 MILLION THAT WE MIGHT WANT TO TALK ABOUT AS WE PROCEED THROUGH TODAY.

SO THAT WAS THE FIRST THING I WANTED TO REMIND YOU THEN IF YOU'LL PULL OUT YOUR OTHER PRESENTATION, THAT WAS FOR PROPERTY TAXES.

WE WENT OVER THAT ON AUGUST 9TH.

IT IT HAS THE AUGUST 9TH DATE ON THE FRONT.

AND I THINK STEPHANIE WILL PULL THAT UP HERE IN A SECOND AS WELL.

IF YOU WILL PULL OUT YOUR PROPERTY TAX PRESENTATION AND GO TO PAGE 17 OR SLIDE 17.

AND I KNOW WE HAVE BEYOND INUNDATED YOU ALL WITH PAPER OVER THE LAST FEW WEEKS.

SO I APPRECIATE Y'ALL'S PATIENCE WITH US.

AND I KNOW IT'S BEEN A LITTLE CHALLENGING TO KEEP IT ALL STRAIGHT.

SO IF YOU CAN GO TO YOUR PROPERTY TAX PRESENTATION, IT'S ALSO UP ON THE SCREEN HERE.

WHAT WE LOOKED AT ON THIS PRESENTATION WAS A COMPARISON BETWEEN OUR CURRENT YEAR APPROVED RATE.

AND I'LL GIVE YOU ALL JUST A SECOND, SO I APOLOGIZE.

I KNOW Y'ALL ARE SHUFFLING THROUGH PAPER.

ARE YOU GOOD? I'M SORRY.

OKAY, LET'S. YOU GOOD? OH, OKAY.

WELL, IT'S UP HERE ON THE SCREEN FOR YOU TO SEE AS WELL.

SO AS A REMINDER, YOUR PROPERTY TAX RATE IS MADE UP OF TWO COMPONENTS.

ONE IS OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE.

THAT'S WHAT PAYS FOR THE DAY IN, DAY OUT OPERATIONS OF YOUR GENERAL FUND.

AND THEN THERE'S AN INTEREST IN SEEKING PORTION OF THAT THAT PAYS FOR ALL THE OUTSTANDING DEBT THAT IS SUPPORTED BY PROPERTY TAXES.

AS A REMINDER, THE BULK OF THOSE DEBT ISSUANCES WERE RELATED TO THE VOTER APPROVAL.

PROPOSITION ONE AND PROPOSITION TWO BONDS FROM 2016.

THAT WAS FOR STREETS AND FOR PUBLIC SAFETY.

THAT IS THE MAJORITY OF WHAT YOUR INTEREST IN SEEKING PORTION OF YOUR RATE IS PAYING FOR.

THERE'S DEFINITELY SOME OTHER PROJECTS AND WE CAN CERTAINLY COVER THOSE AGAIN IF YOU NEED TO.

SO ON THIS PAGE, THIS IS A COMPARISON BETWEEN OUR CURRENT YEAR APPROVED PROPERTY TAX RATE AND THE VOTER APPROVAL TAX RATE, WHICH IS THE TOP END, THE ONE THAT YOU ALL SET AS THE TOP END AT YOUR LAST MEETING.

AND IT COMPARES WHAT KIND OF REVENUE DIFFERENCES WE'RE GOING TO SEE.

SO THE ONE OF IMPORTANT IMPORTANCE TO TALK ABOUT TODAY IS ON YOUR OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE SIDE.

[00:10:03]

AS A REMINDER, A MILLION OF THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN BUILT INTO THE BUDGET THAT'S SITTING BEFORE YOU.

SO THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL 3.9 MILLION FROM WHAT IS EVEN INSIDE THIS BOOK HERE.

NOW, THIS BOOK IS A COMPLETELY BALANCED BUDGET.

IT WAS OUR OUR BEST SHOT AT, YOU KNOW, A PROPOSED BUDGET FOR YOU GUYS TO KIND OF START WORKING WITH.

SO THERE IS ANOTHER 3.9 MILLION.

3.9 MILLION.

2.4. 2.4.

FOR SALES TAX? YES.

AND THEN 3.9.

FOR PROPERTY TAXES.

OKAY. SO I JUST I WANTED TO START THERE.

AND AGAIN, THAT IS AS A REMINDER AND IT'S KIND OF SMALL ON THIS SCREEN.

WE WENT OVER IT IN THE PUBLIC MEETING AS WELL ON AUGUST 15TH, WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE.

SO ON $100,000 HOME.

SO IF BY SOME CHANCE SOMEONE'S HOUSE STAYED 100,000 IN THIS YEAR AND THE VALUES 100,000 NEXT YEAR, SAY A HOME OR A PIECE OF PROPERTY, WHATEVER THAT IS, THAT WOULD ACTUALLY RESULT IN A $1 PER MONTH DECREASE.

AND THE REASON FOR THAT IS YOU WILL HAVE TO LOWER YOUR PROPERTY TAX RATE.

SO OUR CURRENT PROPERTY TAX RATE IN TOTAL IS 40.62 $0.08.

YOU HAVE SEEN SUCH LARGE APPRAISED VALUE GROWTH AND AGAIN, YOU'LL HAVE NO INFLUENCE ON THAT.

THAT IS ALL DONE BY THE POTTER RANDALL APPRAISAL DISTRICT.

SO THEY DO THE VALUATIONS AND THEN HAND IT OVER TO US.

SO WE HAVE SEEN A LARGE AMOUNT OF GROWTH THIS YEAR.

AND SO YOU HAVE TO BRING YOUR TAX RATE DOWN AT THE MAXIMUM YOU CAN DO IS 39.876 I'M SORRY, 39.86 $0.07.

SO WHAT THAT MEANS ON $100,000 HOME, IF THE VALUE DIDN'T CHANGE YEAR OVER YEAR, THE PROPERTY TAX PIECE FOR THE CITY OF AMARILLO WOULD ACTUALLY GO DOWN.

NOW, IN REALITY, I THINK MOST PEOPLE SAW A GROWTH IN THEIR APPRAISED VALUE.

SO WE CERTAINLY SAW APPRAISED VALUES COME IN VERY STRONG YEAR OVER YEAR.

AND SO AN AVERAGE HOME IN THE CURRENT YEAR VERSUS WHAT AN AVERAGE HOME IS IN THIS UPCOMING YEAR, YOU WOULD ACTUALLY THEY WOULD SEE A $3 PER MONTH INCREASE ON THEIR PROPERTY TAX BILL IF THE MAXIMUM TAX RATE WAS ADOPTED.

SO THE REASON FOR THAT IS, STEPHANIE, CAN YOU FLIP TO THE NEXT SLIDE JUST REAL QUICK, PLEASE? PERFECT. AT THE VERY BOTTOM OF THIS SLIDE, IT SHOWS YOU THAT IN 2022, SO THE CURRENT YEAR WE'RE IN, THE AVERAGE HOME VALUE WAS JUST OVER 188,000. THE AVERAGE RESIDENTIAL HOME VALUE IS GROWING TO ALMOST 200,000.

SO THAT'S SHOWING THAT MOST OF OUR RESIDENTIAL CITIZENS SAW A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN THEIR VALUE.

SO YEAR TO YEAR, COMPARING THE TWO RATES, EVEN THOUGH THE RATES GOING DOWN, THE MAXIMUM RATE YOU ALL COULD ASSESS IS GOING DOWN, THEY WOULD SEE A $3 PER MONTH INCREASE ON THAT PROPERTY TAX BILL.

SO THAT IS JUST KIND OF A REMINDER OF WHERE WE'RE AT FROM A PROPERTY TAX STANDPOINT.

SO AGAIN, TO RECAP SALES TAX, WE GOT ABOUT 2.4 THAT WE CAN DISCUSS AS WE GO THROUGH TODAY.

AND THEN WE'VE GOT ABOUT ANOTHER 3.9 THAT'S NOWHERE INCLUDED IN THIS BUDGET THAT WE COULD TALK ABOUT TODAY AS WELL.

SO I KIND OF JUST WANTED TO START THERE.

ARE THERE QUESTIONS THAT I CAN ANSWER FROM COUNCIL ON ANY OF THAT? AND WE CAN WE WILL STILL TALK ABOUT THIS CERTAINLY AS WE GO THROUGH THE DAY TODAY.

YEAH. QUESTIONS COUNCIL.

I GOT A FEW THINGS JUST TO GO BACK TO.

UM, BECAUSE I THINK IT'S GOOD TO PULL THE NUMBERS OUT.

SO THE TOTAL 3.5% OF THE INCREASE.

IN THE IN THE TAX VALUE.

SO CAN WE PULL THAT NUMBER OUT? YES. WHAT I'M IDENTIFYING THERE IS YOU HAD NEW PROPERTY THAT CAME ON THE TAX ROLLS OF $354 MILLION.

YES. OKAY.

SO THAT'S ALL NEW.

THAT'S ALL NEW REVENUES TO US.

PLUS, WE GET TO TAKE A 3.5% INCREASE.

THAT'S CORRECT. ON NOT ONLY THAT AMOUNT, BUT THEN ON THE PREVIOUS AMOUNT.

RIGHT. SO WOULD YOU.

YES. CAN YOU PULL ALL THAT TOGETHER AND TELL US WHAT WE'RE WORKING WITH IN MILLIONS? YES. IN JUST THE 3.5.

SO ALTOGETHER, NEW PROPERTY AND THE 3.5 INCREASE IS THE 4.9 MILLION.

THAT'S THE FULL GROWTH.

[00:15:01]

9 MILLION.

SO IF WE HAD JUST KEPT THE TAX RATE FLAT AND JUST SAID, LOOK, WE'RE NOT GOING TO WE'RE NOT GOING TO INCREASE TAXES ON PROPERTIES, THE 3.5 WOULD DECREASE OUR REVENUES, 4.9 MILLION MINUS THE NEW VALUE.

SO LET ME PULL UP THE NEW VALUE NUMBER REAL QUICK.

YEAH, BECAUSE YOU'D HAVE TO TAKE THE NEW VALUES OUT, RIGHT? YES. SO THERE IS A NO NEW PROPERTY TAX RATE.

SO IF YOU WERE TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT, STEPHANIE, IF YOU CAN FLIP BACK TO GO BACK A COUPLE OF SLIDES TO THE NO NEW TAX REVENUE.

GREAT. PERFECT RIGHT THERE.

SO THIS IS ON SLIDE EIGHT OF THAT SAME PRESENTATION.

ON SLIDE EIGHT, YOU WILL SEE THAT YOU WOULD NEED TO LOWER YOUR PROPERTY TAX RATE TO 37.59 $0.08 IN ORDER TO NOT CAPTURE ANY ADDITIONAL REVENUE YEAR OVER YEAR RELATED TO THAT 3.5%.

OKAY. SO WHAT THAT ALLOWS IS IT DOES ALLOW YOUR INS RATE TO MOVE AS NEEDED, BUT IT COLLECTS THE SAME AMOUNT OF MONEY.

SO IT'S ESSENTIALLY THE TAX RATE THE CITY WOULD PASS TO COLLECT THE SAME TAX REVENUE AS LAST YEAR, THE YEAR WE'RE IN RIGHT NOW USING THE NEW APPRAISED VALUES, 3 MILLION.

SO YES, ABOUT SO THE NEW REVENUE.

GIVE ME JUST A SECOND AND I APOLOGIZE.

LET ME PULL MY SPREADSHEET UP REAL QUICK.

AND I THINK THE REASON THAT'S IMPORTANT IS BECAUSE WE WANT TO LOOK AT A BUDGET THAT'S A WORKING BUDGET.

AND SO WE'RE LOOKING AT WHAT WHAT DO WE HAVE TO COUNT ON LIKE THIS YEAR AND NEXT YEAR.

SO THAT'S A 3.5% INCREASE, BUT THAT'S A YEAR OVER YEAR.

WE THINK ABOUT THIS A LOT OF THE TIME JUST AS A A, YOU KNOW, LIKE IN YOUR HOUSEHOLD BUDGET, YOU'RE GOING TO SIT DOWN, YOU'RE GOING TO FIGURE OUT HOW MUCH MONEY YOU HAVE FOR THE MONTH. WELL, THAT'S NOT WHAT YOU DO WHEN YOUR BOSS COMES TO YOU AND SAYS, HEY, I'D LIKE TO GIVE YOU A CAR ALLOWANCE, YOU KNOW, OVER THE NEXT TEN YEARS, THIS IS WHAT YOU EXPECT EVERY MONTH.

AND SO WE GET TO LOOK AT THIS.

THAT 3.5% GETS BUILT IN NEXT YEAR, PLUS YOU HAVE ANOTHER 3.5% ALTERNATE.

AND SO THAT'S A $3 MILLION INCREASE YEAR OVER YEAR.

SO WHAT YOU GET AND I MEAN IN THIS NUMBER AGAIN IS AND YOU WILL SEE THIS NUMBER POSTED IN SOME OF THE NOTICES THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE PUTTING OUT.

YOU'RE GOING TO GET ABOUT A LITTLE OVER 1.4 MILLION FROM YOUR NEW PROPERTIES ALONE, 1.4 MILLION FROM YOUR NEW PROPERTIES ALONE.

SO JUST DO THE STRAIGHT MATH.

AND THAT'S SO IT'S THE 4.9 MINUS.

THE 1.4 IS WHAT YOU'RE ACTUALLY ABLE TO CAPTURE FROM THE 3.5% GROWTH THAT THE STATE LAW ALLOWS YOU TO CAPTURE. SO NEW PROPERTIES ADDED 1.4 MILLION TO OUR BUDGET? THAT IS CORRECT.

AND THAT'S A DIRECT RESULT OF ALL NEW GROWTH.

AND WE CAN POINT TO SOME EDC STUFF.

WE CAN POINT TO SOME BIG BUSINESS GROWING.

BUT THEN DO YOU HAVE ANY DO YOU HAVE ANY PROJECTIONS ON LIKE WHAT'S COMING ON THE TAX ROLL? SO AS YOU ALL WATCH EDC AND YOU LOOK AT, WELL, HERE'S A $550 MILLION BUILDING, HERE'S A $600 MILLION BUILDING.

THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT ARE COMING IN.

AND THEN AS WE LOOK BACK OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS, WELL, WE WE BUILT THESE AND THEN WE YOU KNOW, WE'RE REBATING THE PROPERTY TAX FOR SO MANY YEARS. DO YOU GUYS HAVE AN ABILITY TO KIND OF FORECAST LIKE, OH, WELL, THIS IS WHERE WE'RE GOING TO SEE THESE START TO ROLL ON AND HERE'S HOW MUCH THAT WOULD IMPACT.

WE CAN CERTAINLY WORK WITH EDC TO.

COME UP WITH A SCHEDULED TIME THAT THEY WOULD COME ON.

YOU KNOW, PROBABLY BETTER THAN ANYONE, MAYOR, THAT SOMETIMES THINGS DON'T GO ACCORDING TO SCHEDULE.

BUT WE COULD WE COULD FORECAST OUT SOME OF THOSE KNOWN LARGE PROJECTS THAT WOULD BE COMING ON THE PROPERTY TAX ROLL.

WE COULD MAYBE LOOK OUT OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS OR SO.

VERY SIGNIFICANT ONES, YOU KNOW, ALREADY STARTED DIRT WORK, ALREADY DOING, YOU KNOW, THINGS, THINGS YOU COULD PROJECT.

YEP. SO YEP, WE CAN CERTAINLY WORK ON THAT.

I DO NOT HAVE THAT AVAILABLE RIGHT NOW, BUT WE CAN WORK ON THAT AND GET THAT TO YOU ALL.

SO IF I CAN GO THROUGH THAT, THAT'S THE, THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION OF WHAT IS THE TOTAL 3.5% INCREASE OF THE TAX RATE IS 3.5 MILLION.

SO THAT'S AN EASY ONE TO REMEMBER THIS YEAR, PLUS THE 1.5 OR 1.4.

SO YOU'RE WORKING WITH ROUGHLY $5 MILLION.

THAT IS CORRECT, YES.

BUT AGAIN, A MILLION OF THAT'S ALREADY BEEN BUILT INTO THIS BUDGET.

YES. OKAY. YEP.

OKAY, NOW HELP US KIND OF COMPARTMENTALIZE AND DISSECT THE GENERAL FUND AMOUNT FROM THE TOTAL BUDGET AMOUNT, IF YOU WOULD, BECAUSE A LOT OF TIMES I THINK WE WORK OFF OF, OH, WELL, EVERYTHING ALL ADDED UP TOGETHER INCLUDED.

[00:20:03]

SO YOU KNOW, THOSE ENTERPRISE FUNDS NEED TO COME OUT AND WE COULD GO AND JUST GET THAT PORTION THAT WE REALLY GET TO EFFECT.

THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. SO IF YOU COULD GO BACK TO THE FIRST PRESENTATION, THE BIG THICK ONE THAT WE STARTED WITH FOR YOUR PROPOSED BUDGET.

AND GO TO SLIDE THREE AND I'LL GIVE STEPHANIE A SECOND TO PULL THAT UP AS WELL.

AND STEPHANIE, I REALLY APPRECIATE YOU FLIPPING BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN PRESENTATIONS FOR ME.

BUT IF YOU WANT TO TURN TO SLIDE THREE ON THE FIRST PRESENTATION.

ON THIS SLIDE AND WE'LL GIVE STEPHANIE JUST A SECOND.

IT LOOKS LIKE THIS.

YOU ALL SEE THAT? OKAY. AND IT. YES.

YEP. SO THAT IS SLIDE THREE FROM THE FIRST PRESENTATION AND THIS BREAKS IT DOWN.

STEPHANIE, ARE YOU JUST A SECOND.

MY POWERPOINT, JUST. OH, ABSOLUTELY.

I CAN ADD A LITTLE BIT ON THE SALES TAX CONVERSATION.

WE WERE ABLE TO PULL THAT AUDIT INFORMATION AND IT WAS ONE BIG TAXPAYER OUT OF OUR GENERAL SERVICES CATEGORY.

IT WAS 80 MONTHS OF AUDITS GOING BACK TO 2012, RANGING FROM 80.

IT'S A LONG.

YEAH, IT WAS A WE WERE TALKING WITH THE COMPTROLLER'S OFFICE AND SOMETIMES THEY'LL EITHER PREPAY SALES TAX AND IT'S SOMETHING THEY END UP NOT HAVING.

IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT'S TAXABLE.

MAYBE A CONSTRUCTION PROJECT THEY WERE WORKING ON AND THEY END UP NOT PAYING AS MUCH.

SO WE HAD 80 MONTHS RANGING FROM 19 TO 30,000 A MONTH.

SO IT REALLY IS A BLIP.

IT'S NOT THAT WE HAD LIKE A PERFORMANCE ISSUE.

IT'S NOT A RETAIL CATEGORY.

SO HOPEFULLY THAT PROVIDES A LITTLE, LITTLE COMFORT LEVEL.

THE GENERAL SERVICE CATEGORY IS USUALLY 15 TO 20% OF OUR MONTHLY COLLECTIONS OVERALL.

SO WHAT CATEGORY WAS.

UTILITIES. IT'S SORRY, REAL QUICK BEFORE WE MOVE ON.

THE AUDIT WAS IN THEIR FAVOR AND THEY THEY'VE MORE OR LESS OVERPAID OR PRE-PAID.

AND THEN THEY NETTED THAT OUT IN ONE MONTH OF SHORT PAY.

EXACTLY. NOW, DOES THAT ZERO THEM UP AND THEN THEY'RE PAYING AGAIN NEXT MONTH.

YES. OKAY.

SO WE'LL SEE WHAT THEY LOOK LIKE NEXT MONTH AND SHOULD BE BACK ON TRACK.

A FEW QUESTIONS ON THIS. SO THAT WAS THE 22% REDUCTION THAT WE SAW.

YES. YOU'RE LIKE, WHOA, WHAT HAPPENED? THAT WAS IT. YEAH. SO OUR OUR AUDIT FOR THAT MONTH ENDED UP BEING 1.9 MILLION.

SO THAT'S BECAUSE WE ACTUALLY HAD SOME THAT OVER OR HAD TO CATCH UP.

SO IT NETTED OUT. BUT THAT TAXPAYER WAS OVER 2 MILLION OF A NEGATIVE AUDIT.

GOOD. YEAH. AND SO IF YOU FACTOR THAT INTO REAL SALES TAX COLLECTED, WHAT IS THE TREND? YOU KNOW, AS THE TREND TRENDING WHERE IT HAS BEEN OR WAS IT.

DID IT GO LOWER EVEN AFTER ACCOUNTING FOR THAT? I THINK OVERALL IT'LL STILL BE TRENDING FAIRLY WELL.

WE DID SEE RETAIL THAT MONTH CAME DOWN -3%.

FOOD WAS UP 6%, PROFESSIONAL SERVICES UP 21%.

SO WE'RE STILL SEEING STRONG, STRONG GROWTH.

IT'S NORMAL TO SEE RETAIL FLUCTUATE MONTH BY MONTH A LITTLE BIT.

BUT OVERALL, I DON'T.

ANTICIPATE IT BEING A FLAT DROP.

AGAIN, THAT WAS JUST BECAUSE OF THE AUDIT THIS MONTH.

AND THOSE NUMBERS LAG TWO MONTHS.

TWO MONTHS, CORRECT? TWO MONTHS.

AND WE WILL GET THE NEXT MONTH SALES TAX HERE IN ABOUT 2 OR 3 WEEKS.

IT'S THE SECOND WEDNESDAY, SO WE'LL KIND OF KNOW MAYBE WHAT.

BUT WE DID HEAR THAT AS THEY'RE CONDUCTING AUDITS, THERE'S A CHANCE THAT THEY'RE AUDITING KIND OF THINGS IN THIS AREA, BUT THAT ONE'S KIND OF AN EXTENUATING ONE. SO MAYBE NOT.

BUT WE COULD WE ALWAYS HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SEE AUDIT ADJUSTMENTS.

SOMETIMES THEY'RE SOMETIMES THEY'RE TO THE GOOD.

A COUPLE HUNDRED THOUSAND THERE.

YES. SO WE'LL UPDATE YOU ALL ONCE WE KIND OF SEE THE SEPTEMBER NUMBERS COME IN.

AND THAT'S JUST A NORMAL AUDIT THAT TAKES PLACE.

YES. I MEAN, THAT WAS A ROUTINE AUDIT THAT WE JUST CAUGHT THIS.

AND YEAH, THAT THE STATE THAT THE STATE DOES WITH THE TAXPAYERS.

SO I'M ASSUMING THE TAXPAYERS CAME BACK AND SAID, WAIT, WE WE PREPAID THIS AND ENDED UP NOT BEING TAXABLE.

GIVE US A REFUND. OKAY, GOTCHA.

OKAY. SO NOW ON ON YOUR SCREEN HERE AND ON THIS SLIDE THREE, THIS IS JUST A SUMMARY OF WHAT IS FILED RIGHT NOW AS THE PROPOSED BUDGET.

SO. ON THIS.

THE VERY TOP LINE THERE IS YOUR GENERAL FUND.

SO, YES, THERE IS CURRENTLY A FILED BUDGET OF $467 MILLION FOR THE ENTIRE CITY.

[00:25:03]

SO, MAYOR, I THINK THAT MIGHT GET TO THE POINT YOU WERE BRINGING UP.

AND THAT IS WHERE, AGAIN, THAT $245 MILLION, THAT'S THE EXPENSE SIDE.

BUT THAT IS WHAT THE SALES TAX AND THE PROPERTY TAX IS SUPPORTING.

THOSE ARE THE TWO LARGEST REVENUE SOURCES.

SORRY, THAT'S UPDATED, BUT NOT WITH THE SALES TAX.

THAT'S CORRECT. IT DOES NOT HAVE THE 2.4 BUILT INTO THAT NUMBER AND IT DOES NOT HAVE THE ADDITIONAL 3.9 MILLION IN PROPERTY TAX THAT COULD BE TWEAKED HERE.

SO THOSE WOULD BE THOSE COULD BE IN ADDITION TO THIS 245.

SO NOT UPDATED.

SO REALLY 250 MILLION.

YES. OKAY.

WHAT WAS SO THIS IS BUDGET TO BUDGET, CORRECT? YES, SIR. WHAT'S OUR FORECAST FOR WHAT WE'RE GOING TO SPEND THIS YEAR? DO YOU KNOW IF COMPARED TO THAT, LET ME.

250 AND AND I GUESS THE TOTAL I JUST WONDERED THE ACTUAL SPENDING.

GIVE ME JUST A SECOND. WE HAD A HANDOUT AND YOU'RE NOT ASKING PROPOSED.

YOU'RE ASKING WHAT WE CURRENTLY I SAID WHAT ARE WE.

YEAH. WHAT DO WE SPEND? PROJECTED VERSUS ACTUAL.

YEAH. SO. SO WE PROJECTED OUR BUDGET AT 490, INCLUDING TO ROUGHLY 240IN THE GENERAL OPERATING FUND.

I JUST WONDERED WHAT DID WE ACTUALLY SPEND THIS YEAR COMPARED TO THE 240 AND THE OR THE REVISED ESTIMATE THROUGH SEPTEMBER? WHAT WE'RE EXPECTING? YEAH, THE FORECAST.

GIVE ME JUST A SECOND.

I APOLOGIZE.

I DIDN'T HAVE THAT HANDY.

BECAUSE AS I RECALL, THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS BUDGET INCLUDED CIVIC CENTER.

CORRECT? CORRECT.

SO THAT WAS THE NO FOR 2220 DEBT SERVICE PAYMENT.

HAD THAT. OKAY. NOT THE CAPITAL BUDGET, JUST THE DEBT SERVICE PIECE OF IT.

OKAY. GOT IT.

WE HANDED THIS OUT TO. I'M JUST TRYING TO FIND.

LET COUNCIL MEMBER SIMPSON.

IF I CAN COME BACK TO YOU, I APOLOGIZE.

I'M NOT FINDING IT RIGHT HERE.

I'VE GOT IT IN MY EMAIL.

I THINK WE EVEN POSSIBLY HANDED SOMETHING OUT TO ALL OF YOU GUYS THAT HAD THAT REVISED ESTIMATE NUMBER.

SO IF WE.

I APOLOGIZE. LET ME COME BACK TO THAT.

OKAY? YEP. ALL RIGHT.

SO WITH THAT, I'M LOOKING BACK AT MATT.

DO YOU HAVE THAT HANDY? OKAY. YEP, WE'RE LOOKING.

SO WE'LL GET THAT TO YOU IN JUST A SECOND.

SO WITH THAT BEING SAID.

I THINK A COUPLE OF THINGS RELATED TO THE GENERAL FUND WE NEEDED TO MAYBE TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT.

I HAD A COUPLE OF ITEMS THAT, WELL, WE'RE GOING TO NEED DIRECTION ON SEVERAL THINGS, BUT I THINK RELATED TO MAYBE PROPERTY TAX, SALES TAX, SOME OF THOSE KIND OF THINGS.

THERE WERE A COUPLE OF.

LIKE BIGGER TICKET ITEMS. NO. THERE'S ONE THAT LOOKS SORRY.

IT LOOKS JUST LIKE THIS, BUT IT HAS.

YEAH. ANYWAYS, OKAY, WE'LL FIND IT HERE IN A SECOND.

SO THE COUPLE OF ITEMS I WANTED TO MAYBE TALK ABOUT RELATED TO YOUR GENERAL FUND DOLLARS.

TWO THINGS I WANTED TO BRING UP AGAIN, JUST A REMINDER, WE HAVE AN OPTION ON THE TABLE RELATED TO THE COLA FEATURE OF THE TMS. SO THAT IS THE RETIREMENT FUND FOR ALL OF YOUR CIVILIANS AND ALL OF YOUR POLICE SWORN PERSONNEL.

AND THEN THE OTHER ITEM THAT I WANTED TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WAS IN YOUR CAPITAL PROJECTS, WE DID HAVE A STREET PROJECT THAT WE TALKED ABOUT POTENTIALLY DOING A DEBT ISSUANCE ON TO COME UP WITH THE MATCH DOLLARS, THE GRANT MATCHING DOLLARS, AND WE NEED ABOUT $3 MILLION TO COME UP WITH THE MATCH. SO WE WENT OVER WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE FROM A PROPOSED DEBT STANDPOINT.

WITH THAT BEING SAID, YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT IF WE ISSUED DEBT, YOU WOULD SEE IT ROLL INTO YOUR IN'S SIDE OF YOUR PROPERTY TAX RATE NEXT YEAR.

SO THE WAY IT WORKS IS YOU DON'T BUILD ANYTHING INTO YOUR TAX RATE THAT HASN'T OCCURRED YET.

SO GOING BACK TO THE CIVIC CENTER PROJECT, WE HAD AUTHORIZATION TO ISSUE DEBT, SO WE HAD TO WE KNEW THE DEBT SERVICE WAS POTENTIALLY OUT THERE, SO WE BUDGETED FOR IT.

BUT WE WE COULDN'T WE DIDN'T BUILD IT INTO THAT TAX RATE BECAUSE WE HADN'T TAKEN THE FORMAL ACTION BY THE TIME THE BUDGET WAS FILED.

AND SO IN THIS CASE, IF YOU TURN TO PAGE, IF YOU WANT TO TURN IN YOUR BOOKS TO PAGE 829.

[00:30:04]

SO THANK YOU, MATT. LET ME PULL THIS UP REAL QUICK.

IT IS.

FROM A REVISED STANDPOINT, WE ARE LOOKING AT SPENDING CLOSER TO $505 MILLION IN TOTAL THIS YEAR.

SO THE GENERAL FUND WOULD COME UNDER WHAT WAS BUDGETED AT 200 AND JUST UNDER $238 MILLION.

DID YOU EMAIL IT TO STEPHANIE? OH, STEPHANIE, I THINK YOU HAVE A PAGE IN YOUR EMAIL THAT IF YOU DON'T MIND PULLING UP WHICH ONE IT DOES.

PERFECT. THANK YOU.

YEP. HERE IN JUST A SECOND, SHE'LL PULL THAT UP.

SO A LOT OF WHAT WE'RE SEEING IS SOME ADDITIONAL CAPITAL SPENDING AND THEN OUR DEBT SERVICE NUMBER IS COMING DOWN OVERALL.

BUT CAPITAL, WE'RE LOOKING TO SPEND A LITTLE BIT MORE.

AND I THINK SOME OF THAT WAS RELATED TO LIKE SOME ARPA DOLLARS THAT WE ARE SPENDING.

AND THEN OUR WATER AND SEWER OPERATING.

THERE WE GO. PERFECT.

AND I WILL PRINT COPIES OF THIS FOR YOU GUYS.

AND WE'LL GET THIS TO YOU ALL IN JUST A SECOND.

SO WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO SEE ON THIS IS CAN I COMPLICATE THINGS? SURE. FLOODING EXPENSES IN THIS CURRENT YEAR.

IS THAT CORRECT, FLOYD? ARE YOU GOING TO ACCOUNT FOR THE FLOODING COST IN THIS CURRENT YEAR? SO IF WE WENT FROM A $500 MILLION BUDGET AND WE'RE GOING TO SPEND 505.

HOW MUCH OF THAT'S DUE TO THE FLOODING? SO ON THAT.

HANG ON JUST A SECOND.

NO, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE DO NOT HAVE PLANS TO SPEND ANYTHING.

THERE MAY HAVE BEEN ADDITIONAL COSTS RUNNING THROUGH WATER AND SEWER.

LET ME LET ME GET FLOYD TO WEIGH IN ON THAT.

GO AHEAD. WELL, THE FLOODING CAME INTO DIFFERENT.

TYPICALLY, YOUR YOUR ENTERPRISE FUNDS, THE DRAINAGE UTILITY AND THE WATER AND SEWER.

MOST OF THE INITIAL RESPONSE WAS COVERED UNDER EXISTING OPERATIONAL EXPENSES.

AND YES, THOSE ACTUAL FIELD RESPONSES TO PUMPS AND THOSE THINGS ARE IN THE EXISTING BUDGET OR THAT EXISTING CAPITAL IN EYES.

SO THE RESPONSE COMPONENT IS ALL IN THE EXISTING BUDGET, IN THE REVISED ESTIMATE.

OKAY. YOUR YOUR NEXT STEPS ARE ARE IN THE CIP AND THE CAPITAL AND IN THIS PROPOSED BUDGET FOR CONSIDERATION. DOES THAT HELP YOU DEFINE DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? IT DOES. SO I MEAN, LIKE ORIGINALLY THERE WAS A $100,000 PUMP REQUEST AND THEN THERE WERE ADDITIONAL RENTALS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

THOSE ARE ALL IN THIS CURRENT $238 MILLION EXPENSE.

THE EXISTING FISCAL YEAR REVISED ESTIMATE.

THEY WILL BE WITHIN THOSE NUMBERS.

YES. AND THEY COME OUT OF THE ENTERPRISE SIDE ON WATER AND SEWER.

THEY COME OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND SIDE, DEPENDING ON WHO'S OUT THERE WORKING, THERE'S SOME GENERAL FUND COST AND STREET DEPARTMENT RESPONSE AND SOME OF THOSE.

BUT THEY THEY WERE ABSORBED IN THE DEPARTMENT'S BUDGET IN THAT REVISED ESTIMATE AND REFLECTED IN THAT NOT TO GET OFF SUBJECT, BUT JUST A QUICK UPDATE FROM YOU, FLOYD, IF YOU'VE GOT ANY GOOD NEWS ON FEMA, TDM, ANY POTENTIAL REIMBURSEMENTS, IT'S STILL WORKING.

IT'S STILL IN THE WORKS.

I'VE GOT PHONE CALLS. WE'VE BEEN GOING BACK AND FORTH.

THANK YOU. I WOULD JUST CAUTION IT'S CHALLENGING.

IT'S A CHALLENGING PROCESS.

NOTHING BUILT INTO ANY OF THIS IS EXPECTING A REIMBURSEMENT, RIGHT? NOT AT THIS TIME.

AND THEN ALL OF OUR COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH EVERYTHING HAVE BEEN ACCOUNTED FOR.

EITHER WE ALREADY SPENT IT TO TO MITIGATE THE FLOOD OR WE'VE PUT IT IN CIP FOR WHAT WE'RE PLANNING ON DOING IN OUR DRAINAGE FUND.

WE'RE STILL DEVELOPING ALL THE COST AT THE WASTEWATER PLANT, SO THE WASTEWATER PLANT IS STILL A VARIABLE AND THEN PROBABLY STREETS, RIGHT? WHATEVER DAMAGE. WE HAVE SOME MORE INFORMATION.

ONE THING THAT WE HAVE DONE IS COUNCIL APPROVED EARLY IN THE SPRING FOR US TO DO THE PAVING ASSESSMENT.

OKAY. SO THAT GAVE US AN OPPORTUNITY TO GET THAT COMPANY TO COME BACK AND LOOK AT THOSE STREETS.

AND WE HAVE A NEW PAVING ASSESSMENT THAT REFLECTS WHERE THEY WERE IN THE SPRING BEFORE THE RAIN AND AFTER.

WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF SUBMITTING THAT TO FEMA RIGHT NOW TO SEE ABOUT BECAUSE THEY HAD BASICALLY DECLINED ANY COST ESTIMATES RELATED TO THE

[00:35:04]

NOW, WE'VE ASKED FOR AN EXTENSION OVER THE AUGUST DEADLINE THAT EXISTS.

SO WE'RE WE'RE WORKING DAILY WITH THAT PROCESS.

THANK YOU, SIR. SORRY, MISS LAURA.

NO, YOU ARE.

YOU ARE GREAT.

THE THE ITEMS THAT ARE COMING IN AGAIN, WATER AND SEWER IS LOOKING LIKE WE WILL SPEND MORE THAN ANTICIPATED IN THERE.

I WAS LOOKING THROUGH KIND OF WHAT WE HAD TALKED ABOUT BEFORE.

ELECTRICITY COSTS ARE UP.

SO THAT IS CERTAINLY SOME PRESSURE ON THAT FUND.

WE ALSO HAVE SOME OF THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES THAT WE'VE BEEN UTILIZING.

I'LL LET FLOYD TALK ABOUT THAT REAL QUICK AS WELL.

AND SO THAT'S KIND OF PUSHING US UP OVER BUDGET AS WELL.

AND MOST OF THOSE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ARE RELATED TO THE HOLLYWOOD ROAD PLANT, WHETHER IT WAS PRIOR TO THE FLOOD OR DURING AND AFTER THE FLOOD.

OKAY. AND THEN SOME OTHER ITEMS. AND IT'S JUST KIND OF THE WAY THEY FLOW THROUGH THE REVISED ESTIMATES.

SO THEY MAY HAVE BEEN INCLUDED LIKE IN CAPITAL PROJECTS BEFORE.

SO DOWN IN FLEET, IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE OVER SPENDING THEIR BUDGET.

BUT THE WAY WE WORK IS WE BUDGET ALL OF THE REPLACEMENTS OF THE VEHICLE AND EQUIPMENT IN A CAPITAL PROJECT FOR THE BUDGET.

AND THEN WHEN WE START SPENDING IT, WE SHIFT IT ALL INTO AN OPERATING LINE ITEM SO THEY CAN START PUTTING THOSE PLACING THOSE ORDERS THROUGH.

AND THEN AS THEY COME IN, WE CAPITALIZE THOSE VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT THAT COME IN.

AND SO THEY'RE ACTUALLY COMING IN ON BUDGET THERE.

IT'S JUST A SHIFT.

THEN ON THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS AREA, WHAT THAT IS FOR THE MOST PART IS IT IS US EITHER GETTING SOME INTEREST EARNINGS, WHICH IS A GREAT THING ON SOME OF OUR OUTSTANDING BOND PROCEEDS.

SO IT'S ALLOWING A LITTLE BIT MORE MONEY TO BE SPENT.

IT'S ALSO US SPENDING DOWN SOME OF THE DOLLARS RELATED TO ARPA THAT WERE NOT NECESSARILY SET UP AS CAPITAL PROJECTS BECAUSE WE RECEIVED ADDITIONAL DIRECTION FROM CITY COUNCIL DURING THIS YEAR TO GO AHEAD AND SPEND SOME OF THOSE CAPITAL PROJECTS BECAUSE IT'S BEEN THOSE DOLLARS AS CAPITAL PROJECTS.

AND SO THAT IS WHY THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS LINE ITEM IS A LITTLE HIGHER THAN WHAT WAS IN THE ORIGINAL BUDGET.

BUT OTHER THAN THAT, YOU CAN SEE THERE ON YOUR GENERAL FUND WE'RE LOOKING TO THE BUDGET WAS SET AT 239 MILLION AND WE'RE LOOKING TO COME IN CLOSER TO ABOUT 30 237.5 MILLION.

SO QUESTIONS ON THAT COUNCIL MEMBER SIMPSON DOES THAT GET YOU WHAT YOU WERE NEEDING? OKAY. LAURA, CAN I ASK A QUESTION? YES. ONE OF THE MOST BASIC QUESTIONS IN BUDGETING, BUT FOR EVERYBODY TO UNDERSTAND.

SO WE HAD BUDGETED FOR THE 2022, 2023 BUDGET AT 490.

YES. OKAY. 830 WE CAME IN AT 505.

420. YES.

SO BIG QUESTION IS YES.

WHERE I MEAN, WHAT DO WE DO WITH THAT 15 MILLION? WHERE DID IT COME FROM? OKAY, SO THAT'S WHAT I WAS I WAS EXPLAINING JUST A SECOND AGO.

SO IN WATER AND SEWER, WE HAVE THOSE ADDITIONAL PROFESSIONAL EXPENSES.

AND THEN OUR ELECTRICITY BILL CAME IN HIGHER THAN WE ANTICIPATED.

AND SO WHAT WE DO IS ANY TIME IF IT'S UNBUDGETED, WE EITHER KIND OF BALANCE IT THROUGH A CAPITAL PROJECT.

SO WE WE EITHER DELAY A CAPITAL PROJECT.

SO FLOYD COULD TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT.

WE HAVE AN ANY.

WE HAVE ANY PROJECT SET UP.

AND SO WE EITHER SPEND LESS IN THAT TO COVER THOSE OPERATING COSTS OR WE DO IF IF, YOU KNOW, REVENUES ARE COMING IN STRONGER THAN ANTICIPATED, WE CAN CAPTURE THOSE DOLLARS AND SPEND THOSE.

FLOYD, DID YOU WANT TO ADD ANYTHING ON THAT? YES. AND IN THIS CASE, THE FIRST DESCRIPTION WAS ACCURATE, THAT THERE WERE EXISTING CAPITAL PROJECTS THAT OBVIOUSLY WE'RE GOING TO KEEP THE ELECTRICITY RUNNING AT THE WATER PLANT AND THE WASTEWATER PLANTS.

SO THEY BECOME A PRIORITY.

SO WE TAKE WE TOOK THOSE FUNDS, PUT THOSE TWO RESERVES BASICALLY, AND THEN SPENT THEM ON THE OPERATIONAL SIDE.

AND THAT'S JUST THAT'S JUST PART OF THE FLUCTUATION IN OPERATION OF A WATER UTILITY THAT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE IN A DROUGHT.

YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE MUCH MORE EXPENSES THAN YOU HAVE, BUT YOU'LL HAVE REVENUE.

AND SO IF THE REVENUE MATCHES, YOU TAKE THAT REVENUE AND PAY YOUR ADDITIONAL ELECTRIC EXPENSES.

IN THIS CASE, WE'RE SEEING THE NORMAL WATER DEMAND AND THAT HIGHER ELECTRICITY BECAUSE OF RATES.

SO WE WE HAVE A CAPITAL PROJECT SUCH THAT WE MAINTAIN THE RESERVES FOR OUR BOND RATING.

OKAY. SO AND I GET THAT.

I MEAN, I GET, YOU KNOW, IT'S A NET ZERO THOUGH.

LIKE IF WE PULL FROM A CIP PROJECT, WE MOVE IT.

IT'S A NET ZERO. IT IS A NET ZERO, BUT YET THE BOTTOM LINE IS NOT A NET ZERO.

YES. SO IN ASKING THAT, WHAT DO OUR REVENUES LOOK LIKE?

[00:40:04]

YES. YES.

IT WAS AS GOOD OF AN ESTIMATE AS WE HAD AT THAT POINT IN TIME.

THAT IS CORRECT. NOW, AGAIN, SALES TAX HAS COME IN.

STRONGER PROPERTY TAX COLLECTIONS HAVE COME IN, STRONGER WATER AND SEWER REVENUES ARE DOING WELL.

DRAINAGE REVENUES ARE DOING WELL BECAUSE WE BUDGET WE BUDGET CONSERVATIVELY ON BOTH SIDES ON THE REVENUE, HOPING THAT WE WILL EXCEED OUR BUDGET ESTIMATES. AND THEN ON THE EXPENSE SIDE, WE'RE BUDGETING CONSERVATIVELY AS WELL, ALSO HOPING WE COME IN SLIGHTLY LOWER THAN ANTICIPATED.

SO WITH THAT THOUGHT, IT LOOKS LIKE A BIG NUMBER BECAUSE IT'S 15 MILLION, BUT IT'S REALLY JUST 3%.

I MEAN, IT'S NOT THAT BIG OF A VARIANCE.

IT'S A BIG NUMBER.

BUT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT BIG NUMBERS.

YES. SO AS WE MAKE MORE AS THE CITY REVENUES MORE, THAT'S WHAT OFFSETS THE ADDITIONAL EXPENSES IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

SO, YES, THAT IS CORRECT.

YES. SO EXPENSES.

ONE OTHER THING THAT I JUST WANT TO TALK THROUGH, BECAUSE WE'RE CONTINUING TO WORK THROUGH THE COMPLETION OF THOSE 2016 VOTER APPROVAL PROJECTS SO THAT I THINK ALL THE PUBLIC SAFETY FUNDING HAS PRETTY MUCH BEEN SPENT.

WE DO HAVE SOME STREET PROJECTS THAT ARE STILL IN THE WORKS.

THE WAY WE BUDGET THOSE EACH YEAR IS WE SHOW THAT WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND FINISH SPENDING THE REMAINING AMOUNT IN THOSE PROJECT FUNDS IN THE REVISED ESTIMATE, BECAUSE WE'VE ALREADY BUDGETED FOR ALL THOSE PROJECTS.

SO WE DON'T WANT TO BUDGET FOR THE EXACT SAME PROJECT YEAR OVER YEAR OVER YEAR BECAUSE THEY'RE ALREADY APPROVED AND IN THE WORKS.

SO THE BIG PIECE ALSO ON THAT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS LINE ITEM.

SO IT LOOKS LIKE WE WENT FROM 114 TO 133 MILLION.

MOST OF THAT IS ARE THOSE STREET PROJECTS THAT ARE ONGOING.

WE DIDN'T PUT THEM IN THE IN THE APPROVED BUDGET BECAUSE THEY WERE ALREADY APPROVED A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO, BUT THEY'RE IN THE WORKS.

SO EVERY YEAR WE SHOW IT AS WE'RE SPENDING IT DOWN BECAUSE WE'RE NOT SHOWING THAT THERE'S ANY MONEY LEFT OVER FOR NEW PROJECTS TO BE APPROVED BECAUSE THERE'S NOT.

THEY'RE JUST YEAR OVER YEAR PROJECTS.

AND SO I KNOW THAT CERTAINLY PROBABLY CREATES SOME CONFUSION ON THIS PIECE OF PAPER.

BUT THERE IS SOME REALLY GOOD LOGIC BEHIND IT BECAUSE WE WE DON'T NEED ANY KIND OF A NEW AUTHORIZATION TO SPEND THAT MONEY BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY BEEN AUTHORIZED.

SO THAT'S PROBABLY THE BIGGEST PIECE THAT YOU'RE SEEING ON THIS PAGE FROM AN OVERSPENDING STANDPOINT BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY BEEN APPROVED.

WE'RE JUST SHOWING THAT MONEY BEING SPENT DOWN.

AND IF YOU NEED AN UPDATE ON THAT, I'M SURE FLOYD COULD KIND OF TALK ABOUT THOSE.

BUT I THINK THOSE FINAL STREET PROJECTS ARE HEAVILY IN THE WORKS AT THIS POINT.

SO. OH, YEAH, THE GEORGIA STREET PROJECT WILL BE IN FRONT OF YOU SOON.

IT'LL ADVERTISE FOR BIDS SOON AND SHOULD BE IN FRONT OF YOU.

AND THEN WE'LL DISCUSS THE SCHEDULE OF THE OTHER PROJECTS AND THE FUNDING FOR THE OTHER PROJECTS AS WE GET THAT ONE IN FRONT OF YOU TO TO MAKE SURE WE'RE KEEPING IT AS SIMPLE AS POSSIBLE. YES.

LET'S GO BACK TO THE TREND QUESTION THAT LES IS GOING FOR.

YES. SO IF WE JUST GO TO THE GENERAL FUND, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING TO SPEND TWO.

$138 MILLION IN THE CURRENT BUDGET YEAR.

YES, SIR. WHAT DID WE REVENUE? AND THEN GOING BACK TO DON'S QUESTION, WHAT WERE THE TOTAL REVENUES IN 2223 FOR ALL FUNDS, FOR EVERYTHING. SO DID WE REVENUE 505 AND THAT'S WHY WE SPENT 505.

AND DO WE SEE A TREND OF.

EXCEEDING REVENUES FROM PROJECTIONS? YES, THAT IS CORRECT.

AND SO I WILL POINT YOU IN YOUR BUDGET BOOKS TO PAGE.

LET'S JUST START ON PAGE ONE.

SO IT'S IN YOUR SUMMARY TAB, RIGHT BEHIND YOUR SUMMARY TAB THERE ON PAGE ONE.

AND LET'S JUST WE DON'T HAVE A GOOD WE WILL IN YOUR APPROVED BUDGET BOOK, BUT WE DON'T HAVE A FULL CASH FLOW THAT SHOWS REVENUES AND EXPENSES ON, YOU KNOW, ON THE ENTIRE CITY.

BUT WE HAVE IT BROKEN DOWN BY EACH BIG CATEGORY INSIDE YOUR BUDGET BOOK.

SO WE'RE GOING TO WALK THROUGH THOSE REAL QUICK.

GO TO PAGE ONE.

PAGE ONE, YOU HAVE YOUR ORIGINAL BUDGET.

SO YOU HAD PLANNED ON GETTING TOTAL REVENUES.

WE HAD BUDGETED TO GET TOTAL REVENUES OF 217.4 MILLION THIS YEAR.

IN GENERAL FUND. WE ACTUALLY ARE GOING TO COME IN CLOSER TO 229.4 MILLION.

DO YOU ALL SEE THAT? AND THAT'S IN THE MIDDLE COLUMN THERE.

OKAY. SO THEN IF YOU GO DOWN THE PAGE, TOTAL EXPENDITURES, WE THERE'S THAT NUMBER, THERE'S THE 239.3 THAT WE HAD ANTICIPATED SPENDING THIS YEAR.

AND IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE GOING TO COME IN CLOSER TO 237.6.

AND STEPHANIE'S GOT THIS UP ON THE SCREEN.

THIS IS ALSO POSTED OUT ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE UNDER THE FILED PROPOSED BUDGET.

OKAY. SO THERE'S YOUR REVENUES AND YOUR EXPENSES THEN IF YOU WANT TO GO TO.

[00:45:05]

PAGE 25 IS A SIMILAR COMPARISON OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT FOR WATER AND SEWER.

OKAY. SO WE ANTICIPATED TOTAL REVENUES BEING 146.9 MILLION.

THEY'RE ACTUALLY SLIGHTLY LOWER AT 100.

WE'RE ANTICIPATING THEY'RE GOING TO BE SLIGHTLY LOWER AT JUST ABOUT $145 MILLION.

SO THE FIRST COLUMN TO THE SECOND COLUMN.

THANK YOU, STEPHANIE, FOR KIND OF WALKING US THROUGH IT.

THEN ON THE EXPENSE SIDE, WE LOOKED AT WE LOOKED AT SPENDING 153.9 MILLION AND IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO COME BELOW.

AND SO THAT'S WHERE THIS LOOKS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT BECAUSE THIS IS SPLIT BETWEEN OPERATIONS CAPITAL AND DEBT SERVICE.

SO A PIECE OF WHAT'S ON THIS PAGE 25 IS RIGHT HERE.

SO YOU SEE YOUR 64 MILLION, 55,000 IF YOU GO TO THE MIDDLE.

THERE WE GO. STEPHANIE'S HIGHLIGHTED ON THE SCREEN THERE THAT TIES BACK TO THIS PAGE RIGHT HERE UNDER WATER AND SEWER.

THEN THE CAPITAL PIECE OF 59.2 RIGHT BELOW.

SHE'S HIGHLIGHTING THAT ONE.

IT'S INCLUDED IN THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS LINE ITEM ON THIS PAGE.

OKAY. AND THEN DOWN BELOW ARE THE PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST PAYMENTS, DEBT SERVICE PAYMENTS.

SO ACTUALLY, THAT'S ANOTHER PLACE WE'RE SEEING SOME SAVINGS.

WE HAD ANTICIPATED OUR DEBT SERVICE PAYMENTS WERE GOING TO COME IN MUCH HIGHER THAN ANTICIPATED.

PART OF THAT'S DUE TO THE TIMING OF WHEN WE ISSUED SOME DEBT THIS YEAR AND HOW THOSE DEBT AMOUNTS ARE STRUCTURED.

SO THAT'S OVERALL WHERE YOU'RE SEEING THE BIGGEST SAVINGS FROM YOUR PROPOSED BUDGET TO YOUR REVISED ESTIMATE.

YOU CAN'T SEE IT AS EASILY HERE BECAUSE PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST IS INCLUDED DOWN IN YOUR DEBT SERVICE LINE ITEM.

WE LIKE TO MAKE THIS A PUZZLE FOR YOU GUYS SO YOU CAN, YOU KNOW, SO YOU CAN FOLLOW IT.

SO IT'S JUST IT'S IT'S DIFFERENT WAYS OF LOOKING THROUGH YOUR OVERALL BUDGET.

SO TO YOUR POINT, I THINK COUNCIL MEMBER TIPPS WE ACTUALLY CAME IN A LITTLE BIT LOWER ON WATER AND SEWER REVENUE, BUT WE'RE GOING TO OVERALL SPEND A LITTLE BIT LESS THAN ANTICIPATED. WE ARE GOING TO SPEND MORE IN OPERATIONS, BUT WE'RE SPENDING LESS IN DEBT SERVICE PAYMENTS THAN ANTICIPATED.

OKAY. SO WE'RE WITHIN THOSE CONSTRAINTS.

SO WE MAY BE RECEIVING A LITTLE BIT LESS, BUT WE ARE ALSO SPENDING A LITTLE BIT LESS.

SO THE NEXT ONE, IF YOU GO TO PAGE 43, YOU CAN LOOK AT YOUR DRAINAGE.

UTILITY FUND.

ON PAGE 43IN THE BUDGET BOOK, WE SHOW REVENUES WERE ANTICIPATED TO COME IN AT 12.5 MILLION AND THEY CAME IN STRONGER THAN WE ANTICIPATED.

THEY CAME IN AT $13.8 MILLION.

THEN DOWN BELOW, EXPENSES CAME IN PRETTY MUCH RIGHT ON.

SO WE HAD ANTICIPATED SPENDING ABOUT 15.1 MILLION.

AND WE ARE GOING TO SPEND RIGHT AT ABOUT 15.1 MILLION.

OKAY. SO THAT'S ALL WITHIN THE CONSTRAINTS THERE AS WELL.

OKAY, SO YOUR NEXT ONE.

OH, I SKIPPED. I THINK I SKIPPED AIRPORT.

I'M SORRY, STEPHANIE, IF YOU'LL GO BACK TO PAGE 35, IF YOU ALL WANT TO TURN TO PAGE 35.

OKAY. PAGE 35.

YOU HAD WE HAD ANTICIPATED COLLECTING ABOUT 18.9 MILLION IN REVENUES FOR AIRPORT.

AND IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S GOING TO BE CLOSER TO 19.2 MILLION.

THEN ON THE EXPENSE SIDE, WE HAD ANTICIPATED SPENDING ABOUT 21.9 MILLION.

THAT'S GOING TO COME IN A LITTLE LOWER AT 20.6 MILLION.

RIGHT. OKAY, THEN.

DO YOU ALL WANT ME TO KEEP GOING THROUGH ALL THE FUNDS? TELL ME WHAT'S HELPFUL FOR YOU GUYS.

I THINK THE BIGGEST THING, THE AMOUNT THAT YOU'RE SEEING COME IN HIGHER IF YOU NET EVERYTHING OUT, THE 505, THE EXTRA AMOUNT WE'RE SPENT SHOWING WE'RE SPENDING IS REALLY SPENDING DOWN THOSE STREET PROJECTS FROM THE 2016 VOTER APPROVAL PROJECTS SINCE THOSE ARE STILL IN THE WORKS.

WE ARE SHOWING ANY CASH ON HAND BEING SPENT THIS YEAR, EVEN THOUGH THEY PROBABLY WON'T FULLY BE SPENT THIS YEAR.

BUT WE DON'T WANT TO MISLEAD OUR COUNSEL OR MISLEAD OUR CITIZENS THAT WE HAVE THIS EXTRA MONEY SITTING OUT THERE TO GO AHEAD AND APPROVE FOR NEW PROJECTS AND TO SPEND IN OTHER WAYS, BECAUSE ALL THOSE PROJECTS HAVE ALREADY BEEN APPROVED AND THEY'RE ALREADY IN THE WORKS.

IT'S JUST A MULTI YEAR PROJECT TO SPEND DOWN THOSE DOLLARS, SO WE DON'T NEED TO APPROVE THEM AGAIN.

WE JUST NEED TO SHOW THOSE DOLLARS BEING ACTUALLY SPENT.

[00:50:01]

THEY'VE ALREADY FULLY HIT THE PROPERTY TAX RATE.

CITIZENS WILL NOT SEE ANY FURTHER INCREASES RELATED TO THOSE PROJECTS THAT ARE ONGOING.

THAT'S A WONDERFUL CLARIFICATION TO MAKE.

THANK YOU. YES.

SO LET ME ASK AND ONCE AGAIN, JUST TRYING TO GENERALIZE A LITTLE BIT.

SO YOU HAVE $490 MILLION IN A PROPOSED BUDGET.

YOU SPENT 505 MILLION.

SO IF YOU WERE TO RUN A TRUE REVENUE.

ON THAT CURRENT YEAR, YOU WOULD PULL IN FUNDS THAT COME IN ON AVAILABLE PREVIOUS DEBT ISSUANCES? THAT IS CORRECT. SO THERE'S OUTSTANDING.

THAT'S NOT BEING SHOWN HERE.

YES. SO THERE'S OUTSTANDING BOND PROCEEDS THAT WE'RE HOLDING BECAUSE WE CANNOT USE THEM FOR ANYTHING ELSE EXCEPT FOR THOSE APPROVED PROJECTS.

I THINK COUNCIL MEMBER CRAFT AND I WERE TALKING A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT.

YOU ALL RECEIVED A QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT FROM US, I BELIEVE, YESTERDAY, AND IT'S A SNAPSHOT IN TIME OF EVERYTHING WE HOLD FROM A CASH STAMP, CASH AND INVESTMENT STANDPOINT.

A LOT OF THE MONEY THAT'S SITTING IN OUR MONEY MARKET ACCOUNTS ARE FROM EXISTING BOND PROCEEDS THAT ARE FOR MULTI YEAR PROJECTS.

SO WE CAN'T HAVE OUR COUNCIL REAUTHORIZE THEM FOR SOME BECAUSE THEY'RE ALREADY LOCKED INTO PROJECTS, THEY'RE ALREADY TIED TO OUTSTANDING DEBT ISSUANCES.

SO THERE WAS MONEY SITTING ON HAND THAT WE DIDN'T BUDGET FOR THIS PAST YEAR THAT WE'RE SHOWING BEING SPENT DOWN THIS YEAR BECAUSE IT'S BEEN APPROVED IN PRIOR YEARS.

OKAY. DOES THAT KIND OF MAKE SENSE? YEAH, I THINK WE'RE GETTING THERE.

OKAY. SO REVENUES USUALLY WILL NOT SHOW IN THAT CURRENT BUDGET WHEN YOU'RE GIVING A BUDGET REVENUE VERSUS LIKE IF YOU WERE GOING THROUGH AN AUDIT.

SO IT'S NOT IT'S ALREADY BEEN RECOGNIZED AS REVENUE IN A PRIOR YEAR.

EXACTLY. SO IT'S JUST SIMPLY CASH ON HAND AS YOU WALK INTO ENDS UP IN YOUR EXPENSES, THOUGH.

YES. AND THEN YOU WOULD ACTUALLY HAVE TO RUN SEVERAL YEARS CONGRUENTLY TO SEE WHERE THOSE REVENUES ARE.

SO BEING SPENT OUT.

THAT'S A GREAT POINT. YEAH, KIND OF.

IN CONSTRUCTION, WE DO A WORK IN PROGRESS.

YES. SO LIKE WE ALMOST HAVE INVENTORY.

SO LIKE IF I DON'T FINISH A JOB IN A FISCAL YEAR, I HAVE TO PULL ALL OF THE EXPENSES, ALL OF THE INCOME OUT SO THAT I GET IT IN ONE YEAR.

YES. WHAT'S CONFUSING ABOUT GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTING IS YOU'RE GOING TO LEAVE HALF OF IT IN.

YOU'RE GOING TO PULL THE OTHER HALF OF IT OUT.

SO YOU'D HAVE TO PULL IT LATER TO SEE DID YOU EVEN HIT BUDGET ON THAT STREET PROJECT IF YOU WERE LOOKING AT AN ACTUALS VERSUS ESTIMATES? BUT THEN THAT'S CORRECT.

TO CONFUSE THINGS A LITTLE BIT MORE, YOU DON'T HAVE AN ACTUAL REVENUE THAT'S EASY TO FOLLOW, MEANING ONCE YOU GET OUTSIDE OF THAT GENERAL FUND AND EVEN PROBABLY INSIDE OF THE GENERAL FUND.

SOMETIMES YOU REVENUE MONIES THAT DON'T END UP IN THESE PROJECTIONS OR IN THESE REVISED ESTIMATES.

THAT IS CORRECT. OR THEY MAY REVENUE AND WE MAY SPEND THEM IN A IN A FUTURE YEAR.

SO TO YOUR POINT, EXACTLY WHEN WE WERE LOOKING BACK AT GENERAL FUND, WE SHOWED EXTRA REVENUE COMING IN THIS YEAR THAN WHAT WE ANTICIPATED.

WE'RE NOT SHOWING US SPENDING THAT, THOUGH.

THAT'S WHAT WE'RE BRINGING BACK TO YOU GUYS NOW FOR NEXT YEAR TO SAY HOW DO YOU WANT TO SPEND THIS IN CAPITAL PROJECTS? BECAUSE IT'S REVENUE WE RECEIVED WE'RE RECEIVING THIS YEAR THAT WE'RE NOT SPENDING THIS YEAR BECAUSE WE'RE NOT AUTHORIZED TO SPEND IT.

IT WASN'T IN THE APPROVED BUDGET.

AND SO NOW WE HAVE IT AND WE NEED YOU GUYS TO AUTHORIZE US TO SPEND IT IN A FUTURE YEAR.

SO LET'S GO BACK TO THAT NUMBER.

SO WE PULLED THAT AMOUNT IN.

YES. PROJECTED GENERAL FUND CURRENT EXPENSES IS $238 MILLION.

WE'RE GOING TO SPEND 238.

THAT'S CORRECT. AND WHAT DID WE HAVE REVENUE IN THAT YEAR? NOT PROJECTED, BUT REVENUE.

HOW MUCH DID WE. SO THAT GOES BACK TO THE PAGE ONE, RIGHT? THAT FIRST PAGE IN THE BUDGET BOOK, PAGE ONE, WE HAD PROJECTED REVENUE TO BE 217.4.

IT'S GOING TO COME IN CLOSER TO 229.4.

OKAY. SO EQUATE THAT IN HOW YOU SPENT THE 238.

SO WHAT WE'RE ALSO DOING, JUST TO COMPLICATE THINGS EVEN MORE, IS EVERY YEAR, IF WE RECEIVE MORE REVENUE THAN WE HAD PLANNED, WE RECOGNIZE THE REVENUE, BUT WE HOLD IT, WE RESERVE IT, WE PUT IT IN OUR RESERVES UNTIL WE CAN GET COUNCIL TO AUTHORIZE US TO SPEND IT.

SO WE'RE CONSTANTLY REBALANCING ANY EXCESS RESERVES THAT WE HAVE.

SO WHAT YOU'RE SEEING IS EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE BUDGETED 217.4 MILLION IN REVENUE, WE SHOWED WE WERE GOING TO SPEND 239.3. THAT'S BECAUSE WE HAD EXTRA MONEY ON HAND THAT WE NEEDED TO SPEND DOWN.

AND LAST YEAR, SAME TIME OF YEAR, COUNCIL APPROVED US TO GO AHEAD AND SPEND THAT IN A CAPITAL PROJECT.

[00:55:01]

THEY SHOW UP IN A DIFFERENT FUND.

THAT'S REFLECTED IN THE ONE TIME EXPENDITURES.

YES, THAT IS CORRECT.

YES, SIR. YEP.

AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING AGAIN.

SO CERTAINLY WANT TO EMPHASIZE HOW MUCH FUN GOVERNMENTAL BUDGETING IS.

I'M SURE Y'ALL ARE ALL ENJOYING IT THOROUGHLY AT THIS POINT.

I KNOW. ABSOLUTELY.

SO, YOU KNOW, IF YOU GUYS EVER DECIDE NOT TO RUN AGAIN, MAYBE Y'ALL CAN COME JOIN OUR BUDGET TEAM.

SO NO, THANKS.

NO. OKAY.

SO, YES, IN SOME OF THIS IN THE WAY IN WHICH WE DON'T REALLY GET TO TRACK IT, WE CAN'T GO VERIFY IT.

WE YOU KNOW, WE'RE WORKING IN LARGE AMOUNTS OF MONEY OVER FIVE, SIX YEARS.

YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF TRUST IN THE IN THE FACT OF LIKE, OKAY, WELL, WHAT DO I HAVE RIGHT NOW? WE'RE JUST GOING TO ASK THE QUESTION. I MEAN, WE'RE JUST ASKING THE QUESTION LIKE, HOW MUCH MONEY DO I HAVE LEFT OVER? OKAY. SO IF YOU LOOK LOOK AT PAGE ONE, LET'S LET'S JUST START HERE.

PAGE ONE, VERY TOP LINE.

WE THOUGHT WE WERE GOING TO HAVE AVAILABLE FUNDS ON HAND OF $72.6 MILLION.

ONCE WE WORKED ALL THE WAY THROUGH LAST YEAR, WE WENT THROUGH AN AUDIT.

EVERY ALL OUR BOOKS GOT TRUED UP.

ALL THE ENTRIES GOT MADE.

AUDITORS LOOKED AT EVERYTHING, LOOKED THROUGH TRANSACTIONS AND SAID, THIS IS GOOD.

WE ACTUALLY ENDED UP WITH $77.3 MILLION ON HAND.

OKAY, SO THAT WAS MORE THAN WE NEEDED.

SO NOW WE NEED TO SHOW SOME OF THAT BEING SPENT.

SO WE'RE RUNNING THAT THROUGH AS PART OF AND PART OF IT WAS APPROVED TO BE SPENT THIS YEAR AND PART OF IT WILL FLOW THROUGH FOR YOU GUYS TO AUTHORIZE IN THE BUDGET SPENDING THIS YEAR.

OKAY. SO WE STARTED THIS YEAR WITH I GUESS 5 MILLION OR ABOUT FOUR AND ONE HALF MILLION MORE THAN WE ANTICIPATED.

SO WE'VE BROUGHT THAT BACK TO YOU GUYS TO SPEND THROUGH YOUR CAPITAL PROJECT.

SO YOUR ONE TIME SPENDING TO COUNCIL MEMBER CRAFT POINT.

SO THE OTHER THING IS, IS WE SHOW ALL OF OUR AUTHORIZED SPENDING THIS YEAR.

SO WE COLLECTED OUR REVENUE, WE SPENT ALL OF OUR AMOUNTS AND WE THINK WE'RE GOING TO START NEXT YEAR AT $69 MILLION.

SO THAT'S IN YOUR PROPOSED NUMBER.

AND AGAIN, THAT'S JUST AN ESTIMATE.

WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY.

WE STILL HAVE ABOUT A MONTH AND A HALF LEFT.

AND SO WE JUST HAVE OUR BEST REVENUE PROJECTIONS AT THIS POINT.

CAN I ASK A LESS QUESTION? YES. WHAT WOULD THE TREND BE OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS IN JUST THIS ONE LINE ITEM, AVAILABLE FUNDS FROM PREVIOUS YEAR VERSUS YOUR REVISED ESTIMATE OF ACTUALS? YES. AND SO LIKE YOU DID GREAT LAST YEAR, YOU GOT 4.7 MILLION WAS THE YEAR BEFORE 7.8 AND THE YEAR BEFORE THAT 3.1.

YEAH, I CAN PULL THOSE FOR YOU.

SO I'LL TELL YOU THIS, DURING PRIOR TO COVID, THAT NUMBER WAS COMING VERY CLOSE YEAR OVER YEAR.

DURING COVID, IT GOT SQUEEZED A LITTLE BIT MORE.

AND AS SOON AS COVID HAPPENED, WE HAD ALL THIS INFLUX OF MONEY COMING IN FROM HOT TAX, FROM SALES TAX.

WE HAD GOVERNMENT STIMULUS MONEY COMING IN.

WE HAD ALL SORTS OF THINGS COMING IN.

SO THAT NUMBER STARTED SPREADING MORE.

IT HAS COMPRESSED MORE IN THE LAST YEAR OR TWO.

SO, YES, I CAN GET YOU A TREND OF THAT.

YES. JUST KIND OF A POLICY QUESTION.

I MEAN, IS IT OUR POLICY TO HAS TO BE ONE TIME CAPITAL EXPENDITURES ON THAT EXCESS REVENUE? YES. SO YES AND NO.

MAYBE. SO IF WE THINK WE WILL CONTINUE RECEIVING THAT SAME AMOUNT OF REVENUE IN A FUTURE YEAR, THE BEST ONE TO TALK ABOUT IS SALES TAX.

THAT'S WHAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT.

SO WE HAVE KEPT THAT BUDGET A LITTLE BIT MORE CONSERVATIVE THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS BECAUSE THE FEDS WERE CONTINUING TO RAISE INTEREST RATES.

WE KNEW THAT THERE WAS GOING TO BE SOME PRESSURE ON THE ECONOMY.

WE ALSO KNEW THERE WAS A LOT OF STIMULUS MONEY OUT IN THE ECONOMY AROUND WHEN COVID WAS GOING ON.

AND SO WE KNEW SOME OF THAT WAS BEING SPENT OUT.

SO WE WEREN'T SURE HOW THAT WAS GOING TO AFFECT SALES TAX.

SO ANY TIME WE COLLECTED MORE IN SALES TAX THAN WE HAD PLANNED IN A YEAR, WE BROUGHT THAT BACK TO COUNCIL AND SAID, HOW DO YOU WANT TO SPEND THESE ONE TIME DOLLARS WE RECEIVED IN THIS PAST YEAR IN CAPITAL PROJECTS? BUT THEN WE STARTED TALKING TO COUNCIL ABOUT, WELL, WHAT DO WE REALLY THINK SALES TAX IS GOING TO DO FROM HERE? AND THAT'S THE DISCUSSION WE'VE STARTED.

WE'VE BEEN HAVING.

OKAY, HOW HIGH ARE WE COMFORTABLE SHOWING THOSE SALES TAX REVENUE PROJECTIONS? ANYTHING THAT WE RAISE UP, THOSE SALES TAX REVENUE PROJECTIONS, WE ESSENTIALLY COULD BUILD INTO ONGOING EXPENSES.

SO THAT'S WHERE THE $2.4 MILLION SALES TAX NUMBER WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT.

WE TALKED ABOUT VERY FIRST THING THIS MORNING.

THAT'S A DECISION THAT WE NEED SOME GUIDANCE FROM COUNCIL ON.

DO YOU WANT US TO PUT IT IN THE BUDGET AND BUILD IT IN AS AN ONGOING OPERATING EXPENSE?

[01:00:01]

PROPERTY TAX IS EASY, MUCH EASIER TO PREDICT, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE ONCE WE KNOW WHAT OUR RATE IS, WE KNOW WHAT OUR COLLECTIONS ARE GOING TO BE.

BUT SALES TAX IS A LITTLE BIT MORE OF THE UNKNOWN ASPECT.

AND SO RIGHT NOW WE DO HAVE ADDITIONAL OPERATING EXPENSES BUILT INTO THE BUDGET RELATED TO GROWING THAT SALES TAX NUMBER.

BUT WE HAVE ANOTHER TWO MIL, 2.4 MILLION THAT WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT.

YOU KNOW, DO WE WANT TO BUILD IT IN AS ONGOING EXPENSES OR DO WE WANT TO SAY, I THINK WE NEED TO YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO WAIT, SEE WHAT SALES TAX REALLY DOES AND JUST CAPTURE ANY ONE TIME SAVINGS. OKAY.

DOES THAT HELP? I THINK SO.

GREAT. OKAY, SO WE'LL GET YOU A FIVE YEAR TREND OF THE AVAILABLE FUNDS.

THAT'D BE GOOD. AND THEN TO.

POLICE. ONE'S QUESTION OVER HERE.

COUNCILMAN. CRAFT.

CAN WE GET A BEST PRACTICES FOR OTHER MUNICIPALITIES WHEN THEY SEE CONSISTENT REVENUES OVER THREE YEARS OR FIVE YEARS? OR WHAT'S THE BEST PRACTICE ON SAYING, OKAY, WELL, THIS IS PART OF MY BUDGET.

YOU KNOW, THIS CAN GO TO LABOR, THIS CAN GO TO PERSONNEL, THIS COULD GO TO A RAISE VERSUS THE THE THE PHILOSOPHY THAT I THINK WE'RE KIND OF WORKING UNDER OF, YOU KNOW, WE PROJECT THIS AND THEN WHATEVER COMES IN AFTER ALL GOES TO CIP.

AND THEN THE BALANCE IN THAT OF WHAT'S BEST PRACTICES ON A 100 SQUARE MILE CITY THAT'S A STANDALONE THAT HAS, I DON'T KNOW, A MILLION MILES OF STREETS AND PIPES THAT WE NEED TO GET TO THAT WE KNOW WE DON'T HAVE THE BUDGET FOR.

SO AND ARE THERE ANY POLICIES THAT CAN HELP US IN THE FUTURE FOR GROWTH WITH NEW COUNCILS OR NEW, YOU KNOW, NEW STAFF MEMBERS THAT COME ON THAT HELP BALANCE THAT OUT? YOU KNOW, DO WE HAVE SOME GOOD ECONOMISTS THAT HAVE ALREADY WEIGHED IN ON THIS? CAN WE SEE TRENDS OVER THE YEARS WHEN A CITY DOES GROW FROM 200,000 PEOPLE TO 250,000 PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, WHAT DOES THAT DEBT ISSUANCE LOOK LIKE VERSUS HOW ARE YOU BALANCING YOUR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, SPENDING, CASH VERSUS BORROWING MONEY? ALL OF THAT TOGETHER IS KIND OF WHAT YOU'RE ASKING US TO DO.

AND WHAT WE'RE ASKING IS HELP.

LIKE HOW CAN YOU HELP US WITH PEOPLE THAT HAVE ALREADY DONE IT? BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S REALLY WHERE WE'RE GOING TO END UP AT THE END OF THE DAY HERE TODAY, WOULDN'T YOU SAY? YES. NOW.

APPARENTLY I'VE BEEN TALKING TOO MUCH.

SO A COUPLE OF THINGS ON THAT.

ONE IS IT'S ALWAYS GREAT TO LOOK AT FUTURE PROJECTIONS, BUT PLEASE CERTAINLY REALIZE THAT YOU ONLY ARE ALLOWED TO APPROVE ONE YEAR'S BUDGET AT A TIME.

SO WE WE ABSOLUTELY NEED TO LOOK INTO THE FUTURE, BUT WE NEED TO BE CAREFUL THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT CURRENT YEAR AS WELL BECAUSE THAT'S THE ONLY THING WE HAVE ABILITY TO AUTHORIZE.

WE CAN ABSOLUTELY I MEAN, WE CAN TALK TO ECONOMISTS.

ACTUALLY, EVERYTHING I'VE BEEN HEARING FROM ECONOMISTS IS, YOU KNOW, WATCH OUT FOR SALES TAX, THAT IT'S COMPRESSING A LOT ACROSS THE STATE.

BUT AGAIN, WE'RE IN A LITTLE BIT UNIQUE OF AN AREA.

AND I THINK THAT'S THE OTHER THING.

WE CAN ABSOLUTELY BRING YOU A SALES TAX POLICY.

WE CAN LOOK AT BEST PRACTICES.

WE CAN SEE WHAT EVERYBODY ELSE IS DOING.

BUT I THINK TO YOUR POINT IS WE ARE ALSO VERY UNIQUE.

SO WE NEED TO BE CAREFUL, A LITTLE BIT CAREFUL ABOUT THAT AS WELL, BECAUSE WHAT'S HAPPENING AT TIMES IN OUR ECONOMY MAY OR MAY NOT BE REFLECTING WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE STATE AND POTENTIALLY THE NATION.

BUT YES, I MEAN, WE CAN PULL ANYTHING YOU YOU ALL WANT ON THIS.

OBVIOUSLY, I DON'T HAVE THAT TODAY.

AND SO I'LL HAVE TO WORK THROUGH THAT.

AND JUST AS A REMINDER, THOUGH, WE'RE WE ARE PRESSED ON DEADLINES.

WE'RE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE DECISIONS FOR FOR ONE YEAR.

WE CAN CONTINUE WORKING ON IT AS WE GO FORWARD.

BUT WE HAVE TO APPROVE A BUDGET.

AND SO WE HAVE TO APPROVE A PROPERTY TAX RATE SO I CAN CONTINUE BRINGING YOU ANY INFORMATION YOU WANT.

BUT AT SOME POINT WE'LL HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION AND WE'LL NEED THAT WITHIN WITHIN LESS THAN A WEEK TO GET THINGS POSTED PROPERLY.

THE QUESTION THAT I THAT I PROPOSE IS A TEN MONTH ANSWER.

OKAY. AND AND I UNDERSTAND THAT.

AND WE WANT TO LEARN THAT AS WE GO, NOT TRYING TO FIGURE THAT PART OUT ON THE MACRO SCALE.

OKAY. WITH WITH LIMITED STAFF AND HOURS, WE UNDERSTAND ON THE MICRO SCALE, WE NEED TO GET OUR FEE STRUCTURE SET ON ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH.

WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE WITH WITH THIS PACKAGE OF STREETS OR WITH THAT DRAINAGE FUND.

TOTALLY GET THAT.

LOOKING FORWARD FOR POLICY, THOUGH, WE HAVE A YEAR AND A HALF LEFT TO CREATE POLICY.

WE WANT TO CREATE REALLY GOOD POLICY.

SO WE JUST NEED HELP.

ABSOLUTELY. MAYOR, IF I COULD WEIGH IN JUST A SECOND ON THAT.

[01:05:01]

SO YOU JUST UNDERSTOOD THE BEST DESCRIPTION THAT WE CAN GET ON HOW OUR CAPITAL IS FUNDED.

SO YOU KNOW THAT THERE'S THIS OUTSTANDING NEED IN ROADS AND STREETS AND DRAINAGE, BUT ROADS BASICALLY.

SO THAT WAS THE PURPOSE OF THE PDP TO IDENTIFY MOST MOST CITIES OUR SIZE HAVE EXCUSE ME, HAVE A DEFINED METHOD TO FUND THAT CAPITAL.

WHAT YOU JUST HEARD WAS WHY THE HISTORY OF AMARILLO, WHERE STREETS COMPETE WITH FIRE STATIONS, WITH OTHER EMERGENCY SERVICES NEEDS AND ALL OF THOSE AND WHAT YOU'RE LEFT YOUR FUNDING SOURCE IS BASICALLY THAT WHAT'S NOT SPENT OR WHAT ADDITIONAL REVENUE YOU SEE.

SO THAT'S HOW THE CAPITAL IS FUNDED.

SO PDP, THE PARTNERS FOR DEVELOPMENT PROGRESS COMMITTEE THAT ESTABLISHED ABOUT TWO AND A HALF YEARS AGO, THREE YEARS AGO, HAS BEEN BRINGING THESE EXPENSES TO A CITIZENS COMMITTEE TO IDENTIFY WHAT OTHER COMMUNITIES DO IN A BEST PRACTICE SO THAT YOU DON'T HAVE THIS MONSTER OF STREETS COMPETING WITH FIRE STATIONS AND AND EMERGENCY SERVICES, THESE THINGS THAT YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE IN THE CAPITAL.

SO BEST PRACTICES IS THERE'S A FUNDING SOURCE FOR EACH OF THOSE IDENTIFIED.

THE FIRST STEP IN THAT TEN YEARS AGO WAS THE FIVE YEAR CIP JUST HAVING A FIVE YEAR LOOK AT THE CIP, WHICH YOU'LL GET LATER, GIVES YOU A VISION OF WHAT EACH OF THOSE YEARS FUNDING IS GOING TO BE DEDICATED TO.

OKAY, SO IS THERE AN AVENUE TO GET MORE FUNDING OR DEDICATE FUNDING IN THAT FIVE YEAR PLAN, TEN YEAR WINDOW? THAT'S THE BEST PRACTICES OF BOTH OF THOSE.

THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE A FIVE YEAR LOOK AT THE CIP.

THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE PDP LOOKING AT IT.

IT'S THE LONGER YOU OUT, YOU CAN LOOK AT THIS AND THEN IDENTIFY FUNDING SOURCES THAT ARE GOING TO IMPACT THOSE.

I'M NOT SAYING THE ANSWERS TO THOSE, BUT ABILENE INSTITUTED A BORGER AND ABILENE INSTITUTED STREET, A STREET MAINTENANCE FEE THAT CAME A DEDICATED FEE TO THOSE ROADS THAT DOESN'T COMPETE WITH THOSE.

THAT'S ONE AVENUE.

THERE'S DIFFERENT AVENUES THAT DIFFERENT ENTITIES TAKE.

I JUST WANTED TO THROW THAT IN THAT DISCUSSION.

SO YOU HAVE A VISION OF THE FIVE YEAR PLAN TIME WITH THAT DISCUSSION.

THAT'S WHY YOU GET A FIVE YEAR WINDOW OF THE CIP.

SO YOU CAN SEE HOW THIS CURRENT FUNDING IS GOING TO LAND AS RECOMMENDED.

THAT DOESN'T MEAN THINGS WON'T POP UP IN THAT FIVE YEAR WINDOW.

DOES THAT HELP IN THAT DISCUSSION? SO AGAIN, IT'S A TEN MONTH WINDOW.

WHAT I'M. TALKING ABOUT A FIVE, TEN YEAR WINDOW.

IT'S EVEN LONGER. AND THE OTHER THING YOU'RE GOING TO SEE FROM A BEST PRACTICE STANDPOINT IS A FROM BEST PRACTICES.

MOST COMMUNITIES, ESPECIALLY GROWING COMMUNITIES, LARGER COMMUNITIES HAVE BEEN ISSUING DEBT ON AN ANNUAL BASIS TO FUND THEIR CAPITAL PROJECTS FOR FOR DECADES.

AND SO THEY HAVE DEBT THAT'S ROLLING OFF EVERY SINGLE YEAR THAT THEY CAN ISSUE NEW DEBT TO FUND THEIR CAPITAL PROJECT NEEDS WITHOUT NECESSARILY IMPACTING OR A LESSER OF AN IMPACT ON THE PROPERTY TAX RATE.

UNFORTUNATELY, WE DO NOT HAVE THAT SITUATION HERE.

WE DON'T HAVE ANY DEBT ROLLING OFF THE BOOKS.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, IF A POLICY WAS TO BE ADOPTED POTENTIALLY WHERE WE STARTED A DEDICATED DEBT ISSUANCE PLAN EVERY SINGLE YEAR TO FUND CAPITAL PROJECTS, YOU COULD BUILD TOWARDS THAT, IT WOULD BE MORE OF A TEN, 20 YEAR LOOK.

I MEAN, IT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE DONE OVER A REALLY LONG PERIOD OF TIME.

AND SO, AGAIN, THAT'S WHY ANOTHER THING WE ARE UNIQUE TO A CERTAIN EXTENT.

WE FUND FOR A CITY OUR SIZE.

MOST DON'T FUND ALL THEIR CAPITAL THROUGH CASH.

WE FUND THE VAST MAJORITY OF OURS WITH CASH.

SO IT'S GOING TO BE A LITTLE BIT TRICKY FOR US TO TRY TO BRING FORWARD BEST PRACTICES BECAUSE SOME OF THOSE TOOLS ARE NOT GOING TO BE AVAILABLE TO YOU GUYS.

BUT THERE ARE TOOLS WE COULD LOOK ABOUT LOOK AT POTENTIALLY UTILIZING IN THE FUTURE.

THE OTHER THING AND ANDREW HAD MENTIONED THIS IS WE'VE BEEN TALKING FOR A WHILE ABOUT A SALES TAX POLICY SINCE WE ARE SO DEPENDENT ON OUR SALES TAX SINCE IT'S OUR NUMBER ONE REVENUE SOURCE.

THERE ARE SOME GREAT POLICIES OUT THERE THAT WE WANT TO BRING FORWARD FOR YOU GUYS TO LOOK AT.

AND IT BASICALLY STATES, YOU KNOW, IF SALES TAX STARTS SLOWING DOWN, IF IT STARTS FLATTENING, IF IT DROPS 2%, 5%, YOU TAKE THIS STEP, THEN YOU TAKE THAT STEP, THEN YOU DO THIS STEP.

AND SO IT PUTS IT IN A POLICY TO HELP PROTECT THE OVERALL BUDGET.

AND ANYTHING THAT WOULD BE ABOVE AND BEYOND.

WELL, AND I DON'T KNOW IF THE POLICY ADDRESSES IT, BUT GO AHEAD.

AND IT'S STUFF WE DID DURING COVID.

YES, NOT FORMALLY, BUT YOU FREEZE POSITIONS, YOU STOP CIP PROJECTS.

JUST YOU KNOW, IF YOU SEE A DOWNTICK IN SALES TAX ONE MONTH, YOU IMPLEMENT THAT STAGE DEPENDING ON WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE.

JUST SO GOING INTO, YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE PUSHING THE NEEDLE ON YOUR REVENUES AND SETTING THOSE ASIDE, HOW WILL YOU ADJUST THROUGHOUT THAT YEAR?

[01:10:09]

YES. I'M NOT STEERING THIS CONVERSATION.

WE HAVE THE OPTION THOUGH AND MEANING WE JUST US FIVE TO HOLD THE TAX RATE FLAT NO 3.5% INCREASE.

WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING IS A VERY LIMITED WINDOW OF, OKAY, LET'S INCREASE THIS 3.5% AND LET'S GAIN THE TOTAL MILLION WOULD BE THREE AND A HALF, 3.5 MILLION.

YES, SIR. OKAY. SO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE $3.5 MILLION ADDITIONAL MONIES TO GET TO ALL OF OUR PRIORITIES.

AND THAT'S GOING TO HELP US LEAVE THE, LET'S SAY, THE FIVE OR THE 4.7 MILLION THAT WE HAD IN ADDITIONAL MONIES THAT CAME IN TO GO TO CIP.

SO WE'RE TRYING TO GET TO $5 MILLION WORTH OF STREETS AND ROADS AND INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WE NEED, AND WE'RE INCREASING OUR GROWING BUDGET, 3.5 MILLION.

WHAT PREVENTS US FROM.

MONETIZING THAT 3.5% AND ISOLATING ONE 1% OR 1 MILLION AND GOING OUT AND ISSUING A DEBT ISSUANCE OF $13.5 MILLION AGAINST THAT 1% INCREASE BECAUSE WE'RE SHOWING A BALANCED BUDGET.

YES. SO AND IF I BUILD THAT IN YEAR OVER YEAR NOW I HAVE $13.5 MILLION THAT I CAN GO GET TO STREETS ON EVERY YEAR OR I CAN GO GET TWO ADDITIONAL BECAUSE IT IS A BEST PRACTICE IN THE WAY OF I HAVE INCOME AND I DON'T WANT TO GO BORROW MONEY IF I DON'T HAVE CONSISTENT INCOME TO MAKE MY DEBT SERVICE PAYMENT.

BUT IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY PAY OFF.

IF YOUR BOSS SAYS HE'S GOING TO PAY YOU $1,000 A MONTH MORE AND YOU SAY, OKAY, WELL, I'M GOING TO SET THAT $1,000 A MONTH ASIDE UNTIL I SAVE UP $80,000 AND THEN I'LL GO BUY THAT NEW TRUCK.

WILL THAT $1,000 A MONTH MAY COST YOU $500 PER MONTH OF OF DEBT SERVICE ON THAT $80,000 TRUCK.

SO CAN CAN WE EARMARK THAT? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN DO? SO IF YOU GO BACK TO THIS SLIDE HERE, THIS IS IN THE PROPERTY TAX PRESENTATION, STEPHANIE, BACK TO THAT SLIDE 17.

THERE'S TWO PIECES OF YOUR PROPERTY TAX RATE.

IF YOU ISSUE DEBT, IT GOES DOWN IN INTEREST AND SINKING.

YOU CAN'T NOW, YOU COULD LOWER THE OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE IN ANTICIPATION OF IT COMING INTO THIS INTEREST AND SINKING PIECE, BUT IT WILL NOT HIT UNTIL THE NEXT YEAR.

RIGHT. BUT IT KEEPS MY IT KEEPS ME WITHIN MY 3.5%.

SO ALL I'M SAYING IS CASH A PHILOSOPHY OF CASH ONLY VERSUS A PHILOSOPHY OF CASH AND BORROW.

YES. GOOD DEBT.

YEAH. RIGHT. AND WITHIN MY 3.5%.

AND THEN ALSO STILL ADDRESSING COLA AND EVERYTHING ELSE BASED ON THESE OTHER SAVINGS THAT WE THAT WE'RE TRYING TO FIND.

YES, ABSOLUTELY.

YOU COULD DO THAT. SO IF I'M HEARING YOU CORRECTLY, YOU'RE SAYING INSTEAD OF MAYBE CAPTURING THE FULL OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE INCREASE THAT'S ALLOWED BY STATE LAW, YOU WOULD PULL BACK ON THAT SLIGHTLY IN ANTICIPATION OF ISSUING DEBT FOR AN OFFSETTING AMOUNT OR DEBT SERVICE PAYMENTS OF AN OFFSETTING AMOUNT THAT THEN WOULD SHOW UP THE NEXT YEAR IN THE PROPERTY TAX RATE ON THAT INTEREST.

AND LEGALLY, MAKE SURE I'M SAYING THIS RIGHT.

I NEED $3 MILLION TO MATCH A STREET PROJECT OF 18 MILLION.

CORRECT? IS THAT WHAT THE TOTAL WAS? YEAH, YOU HANG ON. LET ME DO THE MATH.

I THINK IT'S 18 MILLION, BUT BUT YOU CAN CORRECT IT.

SO IF I TAKE THE CASH THAT I'VE WORKED REALLY HARD TO SAVE AND I GO PUT ALL $3 MILLION OVER THERE TO GET THAT MATCH, THAT'S THAT'S CONSERVATIVE BUSINESS.

THAT'S FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE, I THINK WE SHOULD DO THAT.

I DON'T WANT TO TAKE THAT $3 MILLION CASH AND SET IT OFF TO THE SIDE AND THEN INCREASE MY TAX RATE ON TOP OF MY 3.5% BECAUSE THEN I'M GROWING MY TAX RATE WHEN I DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO BECAUSE I AM FISCALLY CONSTRAINED.

AND THEN I DIDN'T USE MY $3 MILLION TO BORROW ANY MONEY.

I JUST PUT IT ALL INTO A CASH PROJECT.

SO CAN I TAKE THAT MILLION AND UTILIZE IT TO GO BORROW $13 MILLION TO TAKE OUT OF THAT 13.5.

TAKE THE THREE FOR THE MATCH.

YES. YEAH, YOU COULD.

SO FOR $1 MILLION OF DEBT SERVICE, YOU GET ABOUT 13.3 MILLION IN PROJECTS.

YOU SEE WHERE MY HEAD IS, RIGHT? ABSOLUTELY. YEAH. I MEAN, WE ABSOLUTELY SHOULD DO THAT LEGALLY WITH WHERE I WANT TO GO.

NO. NOW, LET ME THROW A CAVEAT IN THERE JUST FOR YOUR AWARENESS.

ANY AMOUNT THAT YOU DO NOT CAPTURE ON THE FULL 3.5% INCREASE IS SET ASIDE AND CAN BE RECAPTURED IN A FUTURE YEAR FOR UP TO THREE YEARS.

SO THAT'S THIS COUNCIL.

BUT THAT'S BEYOND YOUR YOUR INITIAL TERM AS WELL OR THE CURRENT TERM AS WELL.

[01:15:01]

SO IT'S SB TWO THAT KEEPS ME FROM IF I ROLL THAT INTO INS, IT DOESN'T COUNT AGAINST MY 3.5.

SO I'M ACTUALLY GOING TO END UP WITH 3% INCREASE INSTEAD OF 3.5 OR WHATEVER THE THAT IS CORRECT.

AND SO WHATEVER IS NOT SO A MILLION, ESSENTIALLY $1 MILLION, WHATEVER THAT TRANSLATES TO ON A ON A TAX ON THE TAX RATE, IT'S I THINK IT'S THREE QUARTERS OF A PENNY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT WOULD BE SITTING THERE ESSENTIALLY FOR POTENTIAL USE ON OPERATIONS IN A FUTURE YEAR.

BUT WE'RE TALKING AND WE'RE HAVING A GREAT DISCUSSION.

AND I KNOW WE'RE WE'RE I'M GLAD WE ORDERED LUNCH.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PDP.

WE'VE GOT TO HAVE A PDP PROGRAM.

THIS IS THE ONLY VEHICLE THAT WE CAN ALL GET IN AND IT DRIVES THIS MILE PER HOUR AND IT TAKES THIS MUCH GAS AND YOU'VE GOT TO FILL THIS TANK IF YOU WANT TO GO THERE, WHICH MEANS WE'RE GOING TO PUT A FEE ON YOUR WATER BILL.

THAT'S THE ONLY WAY WE CAN TALK ABOUT STREETS.

NO, NO, SIR.

LIKE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT $13 MILLION PER YEAR EARMARKED TO GET THE STREETS ON A $400 MILLION ISSUE THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE IN THE NEXT 20 YEARS.

WELL, HOW MUCH OF THAT AM I REALLY ABLE TO GET TO IN ONE YEAR? CAN WE PAVE MORE THAN $13 MILLION WORTH OF STREETS IN ONE YEAR? AND STILL DRIVE BECAUSE I WOULD PREFER TO BE ABLE TO DRIVE.

YES. THE ANSWER IS YES.

13. 13,000,000 IN 1 YEAR IS A VERY REASONABLE EXPECTATION NOW.

AND KEEP IN MIND, I DON'T HAVE TO.

GO AHEAD. THIS IS ONLY $113 MILLION ISSUANCE, SO YOU WOULD HAVE TO DO IT AGAIN AND IT WOULD BE BUILT INTO THE BUDGET BECAUSE I'M GETTING THIS MONEY EVERY YEAR.

YES, BUT YOU'RE PAYING DEBT SERVICE ON THAT EVERY SINGLE YEAR.

SO. SO YOU HAVE THAT MILLION DOLLARS LOCKED IN TO SPEND FOR 20 YEARS ON THAT ONE, $13 MILLION ISSUANCE.

BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS, IS WE'RE FINDING THIS MONEY YEAR OVER YEAR, AND THIS IS A PRACTICE OF OF EXPANDING A $1 MILLION CASH RESERVE THAT I COULD EXPECT YEAR OVER YEAR INTO ISSUING THAT DEBT SO THAT, LET'S SAY YOU DIDN'T DO A 20 YEAR LET'S SAY YOU DID A SEVEN YEAR, IT ROLLS OVER IN SEVEN YEARS.

IT'S BUILT INTO MY TAX RATES.

BUT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A MUCH HIGHER DEBT SERVICE PAYMENT PAYING IT OFF IN SEVEN YEARS.

SO $1 MILLION ISN'T GOING TO GET YOU 13.

SO WE NEED A 20 YEAR.

YES, 20 YEARS FROM NOW.

SOMEBODY SITTING IN MY CHAIR IS REALLY THANKFUL.

YES, THAT IS CORRECT.

TO THERE EVERY YEAR BUDGET.

THAT IS CORRECT. FOR A GROWING COMMUNITY.

NOW, WE DON'T HAVE THESE PROBLEMS IF WE DON'T GROW.

SO AS LONG AS WE'RE NOT BUILDING ROADS AND STREETS AND ADDING NEW HOUSES AND TRYING TO BRING INDUSTRY HERE.

BUT IT IS IT IS IGNORANT TO SAY, LET'S GO TAKE OUR SALES TAX REVENUES AND LET'S GO AND INCENTIVIZE COMPANIES TO COME HERE AND PUT BILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF ASSETS ON OUR TAX ROLLS.

AND THEN LET'S NOT LET'S LET'S NOT HAVE A BUDGET THAT THAT ALLOWS FOR THAT GROWTH, THE MAINTENANCE OF THAT GROWTH.

SO I'M LOOKING LIKE YOU ARE.

I HEAR WHERE PDP'S GOING, NOT SPEAKING AGAINST IT.

I'M JUST SAYING THERE'S MORE THAN ONE TRUCK WE CAN ALL GET INTO.

AND I WANT TO KNOW BECAUSE WE'VE DONE A REALLY GOOD JOB OF GOING ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE THE BOOK AND NOW WE'RE COMING BACK.

SO I JUST WANT TO TAKE FIVE QUICK MINUTES AND GET GET COUNCILS UNDERSTANDING.

DO YOU DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHERE WHERE THIS PHILOSOPHY COMES FROM? DO YOU SEE WHAT THE TOTAL IS? DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE, THE, THE MECHANISMS? AND THEN LET'S LET'S SEE WHAT ELSE WE NEED TO ASK LAURA BECAUSE IF WE GET ON THIS ROAD, IT'S GOING TO BE REAL HARD TO GET OFF OF IT.

AND WE'RE ON A ROAD RIGHT NOW THAT I PROMISE YOU, IT'S HARD TO GET OFF OF THAT ROAD, WHICH IS JUST WHATEVER YOUR CASH IS, THAT'S WHAT YOU GO GET TO.

OR YOU GO AND YOU SEE SOMETHING, RIGHT? THAT'S THE ROAD WE'RE KIND OF ON.

AND I'M NOT SAYING IT'S A BAD ONE, BUT SPIN THE SPIN THE CASH THAT YOU CAN SAVE EVERY YEAR ON AS MANY CIP PROJECTS AS YOU CAN GET TO AND THEN GO TELL YOUR YOUR TAXPAYER THAT IN A FUTURE YEAR WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO INCREASE YOUR YOUR TAX RATE ON A CO.

AND I DON'T LIKE THAT.

DOESN'T MEAN I WON'T DO IT.

MAY HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, BUT LIKE LOOKING FOR ALTERNATIVES.

SO A LITTLE FEEDBACK ON ALL THIS.

SO EXPLAIN TO ME.

SO IF IF THAT'S THE TRUCK WE GET INTO, I GET IN THAT ONE.

THE VOTER APPROVAL TAX RATE.

SO WHAT I HEAR YOU SAYING IS WE WOULDN'T TAKE THAT RIGHT BECAUSE IT HAS TO GO A PORTION OF IT HAS TO GO TO THE INS SIDE, CORRECT.

THAT IS THAT IS THE OPTION THAT YOU ALL ARE LOOKING AT.

SO POTENTIALLY, I THINK WHAT THE MAYOR IS TALKING ABOUT IS SO RIGHT NOW, THE VOTER APPROVAL TAX RATE IS SAY THIS IS SLIDE 17.

ON THE NOT THE PRESENTATION, THE PROPERTY TAX PRESENTATION.

AND STEPHANIE HAS IT UP THERE ON THE SCREEN FOR US.

SO RIGHT NOW, THE VOTER APPROVAL TAX RATE IS SET AT 39.876 I'M SORRY, EIGHT $0.67.

[01:20:03]

SO THAT WOULD LOWER DOWN THE TAX RATE.

AND I'M JUST ESTIMATING.

SO LET'S SAY IT COMES IN, IT WOULD COME IN CLOSER TO RIGHT AROUND $0.39.

OKAY. FLAT ESSENTIALLY.

AND THEN WITH THE INTENTION THAT WE WOULD ISSUE DEBT THIS YEAR FOR ABOUT 13 MILLION, THAT WOULD COST US $1 MILLION A YEAR ANNUALLY GOING FORWARD. SO INSTEAD OF GETTING THE 1 MILLION UP HERE IN THE OPERATIONS PIECE NOW THE NEXT YEAR, IT WOULD AUTOMATICALLY THE EXTRA MILLION WOULD AUTOMATICALLY BE BUILT DOWN IN THE INS PIECE.

OKAY. SO NOW YOUR INS RATE WOULD GO UP BY I MEAN, IT CHANGES A LITTLE BIT EVERY YEAR.

SO MAYBE THREE QUARTERS OF A PENNY.

ALL RIGHT. SO THEN NEXT YEAR, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A NEW O&M AMOUNT THAT PRODUCES FROM NEW PROPERTY AND FROM THE THREE AND ONE HALF PERCENT SOME EXTRA MONEY. YOU COULD THEN AGAIN SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT, WE'RE NOT GOING TO CAPTURE ALL OF THAT.

WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND ISSUE MORE DEBT KNOWING AND THEN KNOWING THAT IT'S GOING TO HIT THIS BOTTOM PART OF THE TAX RATE.

SO THEN IT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT YOU ALL WOULD WOULD ESSENTIALLY BE LOOKING AT POSSIBLY DOING EVERY SINGLE YEAR.

SO YOU WOULD LOWER THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED AMOUNT ON THE O&M SIDE.

KNOWING THAT IT WAS INSTEAD GOING TO FLOW INTO THE INSIDE IN A FUTURE YEAR.

AND WE ALSO AT THE SAME TIME BUILD OURSELVES A MARGIN WHICH ANY BUSINESS PERSON WOULD TELL YOU IS IMPORTANT WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING YEAR OVER YEAR FOR THAT BAD YEAR. SO NOW I'M NOT COMING TO MY MY TAXPAYER AND ASKING THEM TO VOTE OR APPROVE A BOND OVER THAT 3.5%.

I'M COMING BACK AND SAYING, OKAY, I'VE ALLOWED MYSELF THIS HALF A PERCENT, THIS HALF A PERCENT, THIS HALF A PERCENT.

SO I GET 3.5 PLUS 1.5 IN 1 YEAR.

AND I'M SORRY, WE HAVE TO DO IT, BUT WE HAVE TO DO IT IF YOU HAD TO.

AND SO WE HAVE TO BE, I THINK, CONSCIENTIOUS OF THE FACT THAT LIKE, WE MAY NOT PASS A BOND IN THE CURRENT CLIMATE.

AND IF WE HAVE BAD YEARS AND WE DO LOOK IN A IN A CLIMATE WHERE SALES TAX IS LOW AND, YOU KNOW, PURSE STRINGS ARE REALLY TIGHT, WE STILL HAVE TO FUNCTION WITHIN THAT.

SO IT GIVES ME IT'S TWOFOLD.

YOU KNOW, IT'S $13 DOLLARS A YEAR GOING TOWARDS THE STUFF THAT I'VE GOT TO GET TO.

IT'S ALSO BUILDING, YOU KNOW, AM I SAYING A HALF A PERCENT? WHAT WOULD WHAT WOULD IT REALLY BE EQUATED TO YEAR OVER YEAR? COULD WE FORECAST THAT ON ON THE ON THE MILLION DOLLAR 3.5? YOU KNOW, WHAT AM I REALLY PUTTING UP THERE ON THAT TOP LINE IN THIS THAT DOESN'T HIT THAT SO IF IT GOES FROM.

$0.32 TO $0.30.

WHAT IS THAT PERCENTAGE ON MY 3.5? SO RIGHT NOW YOU'RE GETTING LET'S CALL IT A MILLION AND A HALF ON EVERY PENNY.

OKAY. SO IF WE'RE SO JUST THE MATH WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, SO.

SO YOU WOULD BE AT.

67/10 OF A PENNY.

I MEAN, IT'D BE IT'D BE 1%, LET'S SAY ONE POINT LESS.

YEAH. WELL, NO, SO O OF.

OKAY, NOW YOU'VE LOST ME ON.

WELL, I'M SORRY. I'M LOSING YOU.

WHAT I'M TRYING TO TRACK IS MOVING FORWARD.

IF YOU DON'T CAPTURE THE FULL 3.5% INCREASE THAT YOU'RE ALLOWED TO.

YEAH. AND YOU PUT IT ON IRONS YEAR OVER YEAR.

MOVING FORWARD, HOW MUCH PERCENTAGE IS LEFT ON THAT? 3.5% NEXT YEAR? WELL, AND SO IT WOULD BE ABOUT 1% BECAUSE IF 3.5% GIVES YOU THREE AND ONE HALF MILLION, YOU KEEP A MILLION BACK.

A MILLION WOULD BE 1%.

BUT THE WAY AND IT'S NOT ON A PERCENT, IT'S IT'S A PORTION OF A TAX RATE THAT YOU GET TO RESERVE FOR A FUTURE YEAR, WHICH WOULD BE 0.67 OF A PENNY.

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? SO 67/10 OF A PENNY AND THAT THAT NUMBER GROWS UNLESS WE HAVE A CONSTRICTION IN VALUES, WHICH I MEAN, WE'VE ALL SEEN IN OUR LIFETIMES, VALUES HAVE CONSISTENTLY CONSTRICTED.

THEY DON'T LIKE.

I'VE NEVER BEEN DOWN TO THE TAX OFFICE OR PRAYED AND, AND GOT IT TO GO MY WAY.

SO AND THEN WE WOULD ASSUME THAT THAT LIFE, YOU KNOW, IN IN THE UNITED STATES IS GOING TO CONTINUE TO COST MORE LIKE IT HAS.

SO WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT COLAS AS THOUGH THIS IS FACTUAL.

EVERY YEAR, IF YOU'RE A RETIREE AND YOU'RE ON A FIXED INCOME, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE DO WITH LESS TO GO PAY FOR MORE.

THIS IS A FACT.

NONE OF US ARE GOING TO ARGUE THIS YET.

[01:25:02]

WELL, I MEAN, IT COULD JUST COST LESS.

I MEAN, WE COULD JUST REVENUE LESS.

WE COULD, YOU KNOW, SALES TAX COULD COME IN FOR LESS.

THERE'S A SMALL VARIABLE IN THERE THAT YOU ACTUALLY GET TO CONTROL, WHICH IS HOW MUCH YOU HAVE TO SPEND TO LIVE.

BUT THE COST OF GOODS HISTORICALLY DOES NOT COME DOWN.

YOU KNOW, $5 PER GALLON FOR A BUCKET OF PAINT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT I GET TO PUT IN MY EQUATION WHEN I'M DOING A TAKEOFF, LIKE THAT'S 30 YEARS AGO.

SO I JUST THINK THIS IS HELPFUL IN TALKING THROUGH ALL THIS.

SO LET ME LET ME STOP TALKING AND SEE IF ANYBODY ELSE WOULD WOULD WANT TO WEIGH IN ON DID I LOSE YOU SOMEWHERE IN THIS MATH PROBLEM? MR. MAYOR, UH, I THINK YOU JUST SOLVED THE PROBLEM.

BE TRUTHFUL. YOU BUY THE PRESENTATION YOU JUST GAVE.

I THINK YOU STUMBLED UPON A BEST PRACTICE METHOD.

FOR US TO FINANCE.

WHAT WE CAN FINANCE WITHOUT HAVING TO PUT THE BURDEN FULLY ON THE TAXPAYERS.

AND WE CAN DO IT OVER A PERIOD OF TIME, CREATING PLENTY OF INCOME FOR THE CITY TO FUND THE THINGS WE NEED TO FUND.

AND IN IN SO DOING, WE'RE RELIEVING FUNDS TO DO OTHER THINGS.

SO I THINK FROM YOUR EXPLANATION, IT'S VERY GOOD EXPLANATION.

I THINK I CAN SEE US MOVING FORWARD WITH SOMETHING SIMILAR TO THAT.

SO GOOD JOB.

SO SO I THINK LET ME MAKE SURE I'M GOING INTO REMEDIAL WORK HERE.

SO LET ME MAKE SURE. SO WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS THE POTENTIAL OF LOWERING OUR TAX RATE TO TO COME UP WITH $1 MILLION ADDITIONAL THEN WITH THE PLAN OF LEVYING THAT THROUGH THE INS SO TAXPAYERS WILL GET A BUT BUT THAT BUT THAT DEBT ISSUANCE WOULD NOT COME UP IN THIS YEAR'S TAX BILL OR IT WILL. SO IT'LL BE A YEAR LATER.

SO IT'LL BE A YEAR LATER. SO SO THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF A BREAK OTHER THAN THAT IS CORRECT.

AND THEN I THINK WHAT I HEAR YOU SAYING, MAYOR, IS IT LOOKS LET'S SEE HOW THIS GOES.

AND THEN EACH YEAR, BECAUSE THEN WE'VE COMMITTED THAT $1 MILLION FOR A 20 YEAR PERIOD, BUT THEN WE'RE LOOKING AT, OKAY, THE NEXT YEAR, CAN WE COME UP WITH ANOTHER MILLION DOLLARS SO THAT NOW WE HAVE $2 MILLION COMMITTED FOR, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT PERIOD OF TIME AND DOING THAT.

LISTEN, THERE'S NO OTHER WAY THAT WE'RE GOING TO SOLVE THIS ISSUE OTHER THAN GOOD DEBT.

I MEAN, THERE'S NO WAY IN THE WORLD.

SO I JUST DO WANT TO ASK ONE QUESTION BECAUSE I KNOW IT'S COME UP AND I DON'T KNOW MUCH OF ANYTHING AT ALL ABOUT IT.

AND I THINK I CAN SEE WHAT A PRO MAY BE TO IT.

BUT THE STREET FEE TELL ME WHAT THE PROS AND CONS ARE TO ATTACKING THIS ISSUE RATHER THAN THAT OF DOING A STREET FEE.

OBVIOUSLY, YOU ARE YOU ARE PUTTING A MONTHLY CHARGE ONTO A STREET ASSESSMENT FEE, AS ABILENE AND BORGER DID.

IT IS JUST LIKE A WATER BILL.

IT'S A MONTHLY FEE ADDED TO THAT THAT IS SIGNIFICANT SOMEWHERE AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF 10 TO $14 PER MONTH.

AND THAT BUT THAT MONEY THEN IS DEDICATED TO THAT STREET.

THIS DEBT ISSUANCE METHOD THAT THE MAYOR TALKED ABOUT IS MORE WHAT A CITY LIKE LUBBOCK HAS USED IN THE PAST TO GET WHERE THEY ARE, WHERE WHERE THEY DON'T HAVE A STREET ASSESSMENT FEE, BUT YET THEY USE THIS DEBT METHOD.

IT'S A VERY ACCEPTABLE METHOD.

THERE'S A LOT OF NEGATIVES TO A STREET ASSESSMENT FEE.

IF YOU ARE AWARE YOU WERE AROUND IN 2012, THAT'S WHEN WE CREATED THE DRAINAGE UTILITY AND IT COMES WITH ALL OF THAT.

THERE'S A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF EDUCATION UNDERSTANDING WITH THE PUBLIC AND THEN YOU WILL ALWAYS HAVE THAT THAT, THAT IT'S A TAX, NOT A FEE.

THAT ISSUE COMES OUT OF THAT BECAUSE IT'S AUTHORIZED UNDER A FEE SECTION OF LAW, NOT THE TAX SECTION OF LAW.

AND THEN IMPLEMENTATION OF THAT TAKES A TIME, TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND EDUCATION COMMUNICATION FOR STREET ASSESSMENT FEE.

AGAIN, THAT'S THE THAT'S THAT'S THE NEGATIVES.

THE POSITIVE THEN IS YOU WOULD HAVE A DEDICATED FEE THAT GOES TO STREETS THAT DOESN'T ADDRESS THAT.

THERE ARE OTHER COMMUNITIES USE LIKE A ON THE NEW CONSTRUCTION USE IMPACT FEES AND THOSE THOSE ARE NOT A GOOD FIT IN AMARILLO BECAUSE OF THE CHALLENGES RELATED TO HOW YOU SPEND THAT MONEY.

THAT IMPACT FEE METHOD WOULD COME WITH DEBT ISSUANCE, JUST LIKE THE MAYOR IS TALKING ABOUT.

UNDER THIS ONE, YOU CAN'T TAKE AN IMPACT FEE AND CHARGE ENOUGH ON NEW CONSTRUCTION TO PAY FOR A ROAD.

YOU WOULD HAVE TO ISSUE DEBT, BUT THAT WOULD BE FOR GROWTH PROJECTS.

SO THOSE WERE ALL DISCUSSED IN PDP.

THIS DEBT METHOD WAS NOT IT WAS NOT PUT ON THE TABLE IN THAT.

[01:30:04]

CAN I ADD SOMETHING ON THAT SINCE WE'RE TALKING PROS AND CONS? BECAUSE I WANT TO I WANT TO ADD INTO THAT JUST A LITTLE BIT.

SO OKAY, SO A AND YOU CAN VIEW THESE AS PROS OR CONS, POSSIBLY THE THE METHODOLOGY THAT I THINK WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT RIGHT HERE IS TAKES A COUNCIL TAKING ACTION EVERY SINGLE YEAR, YEAR AFTER YEAR AFTER YEAR.

AS YOU KNOW, COUNCILS HAVE TWO YEAR TERMS. AND SO AT THIS POINT, TWO YEARS IS ALL THAT IS GUARANTEED THAT YOU ALL WILL HAVE, YOU KNOW, THE ABILITY TO AFFECT.

BUT YOU COULD SET A PLAN IN PLACE AND HOPE THAT THE NEXT COUNCILS DO IT ON A STREET ASSESSMENT FEE.

WITH ALL THE CHALLENGES THAT COME IN PLACE, IT'S SET AND COUNCILS DON'T HAVE TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION YEAR AFTER YEAR OTHER THAN POTENTIALLY ADJUST FEES.

THE OTHER THING, AND THIS COULD BE A PRO OR CON ON A STREET ASSESSMENT FEE POTENTIALLY COUNCIL HAS MORE ABILITY TO WORK THROUGH HOW IT AFFECTS MAYBE RESIDENTIAL VERSUS COMMERCIAL, WHERE A PROPERTY TAX RATE, AS YOU KNOW, YOU ALL HAVE NO ABILITY TO AFFECT WHO IT IT'S ALL DONE PROPORTIONATELY WITH VALUES.

OKAY. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? AND THAT CAN BE A PRO OR A CON.

SO I JUST WANTED TO CERTAINLY MAKE YOU ALL AWARE OF THAT.

I SAT THROUGH THAT PDP PROGRAM AND I DISAGREED WITH THE OUTCOME OF THAT.

JUST DO THE FACT THAT THE CITIZENS WERE LED DOWN A BREADCRUMB TRAIL TO COME TO A.

SOLUTION. UH, I FEEL LIKE YOU PUT ANOTHER FEE ON A BILL.

THE CITIZENS AREN'T GOING TO LIKE IT.

THEY THINK THEY'RE ALREADY PAYING MORE THAN THEY NEED TO PAY NOW.

I THINK WITH THE MAYOR'S SOLUTION AND I UNDERSTAND WE ONLY GOT A TWO YEAR FEED, BUT IF IT WORKS, IT'LL CONTINUE ON.

AND THAT'S THE THING WE GOT TO LOOK AT.

WE'VE GOT TO LAY OUT THE BEST PRACTICES FORWARD AND PUTTING A FEE ON EVERY CITIZEN FOR EVERYTHING WE DO IS NOT THE ANSWER. I MEAN, I JUST TOTALLY AGAINST FEES PERSONALLY.

NOW, I UNDERSTAND WE'VE GOT TO HAVE SOME.

AND BUT NO, I DON'T DISAGREE WITH YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER.

THAT'S WHY I BROUGHT UP THAT AS THE NUMBER ONE NEGATIVE.

OKAY. THAT IS THE NUMBER ONE NEGATIVE.

NOW, WHERE STAFF IS, IS WE'VE HAD THIS DECADES AND DECADES OF NOT HAVING A FUNDING SOURCE AND THAT'S WHY OUR ROADS ARE WHERE THEY'RE AT AND THAT'S WHY THAT'S WHERE STAFF IS STUCK WITH THE ANSWER WHEN WHETHER IT'S A DEVELOPER THAT COMES IN AND NEEDS A ROAD OR WHETHER IT'S THE STAFF OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE.

SO YES, WHAT WE'RE AFTER IS WHAT THE COMMUNITY IDENTIFIES.

AND YOU AS ELECTED OFFICIALS, IDENTIFY AS THE PATH BEST TO SOLVE THIS.

I WANT TO ADD IN ONE OTHER THING.

THIS IS PRETTY MUCH WHERE WE'RE AT IN WATER AND SEWER UTILITIES, WHERE OVER THE PAST 20 YEARS, WE'VE ISSUED SERIES OF DEBTS THAT ARE GOING TO ASSIST YOU AND THE FUTURE COUNCILS IN IN THAT PROCESS.

SO WE'VE IMPLEMENTED THIS IN THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY SIDE, WHICH WAS MY BACKGROUND.

THAT'S WHERE WE CAME OUT OF THIS IS A CONTEMPORARY BEST PRACTICE FOR THAT.

GO AHEAD. WELL, AND I'M JUST TRYING TO LEARN BECAUSE WE'RE YOU KNOW, WE'RE AT THIS ISSUE AND I HAVEN'T CAUGHT UP TO SPEED.

I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, OKAY, WHAT ARE THE PROS AND CONS TO IT? I DON'T THINK I KNOW ENOUGH TO EVEN SAY I LIKE THE MAYOR'S PLAN.

I THINK IT'S A GOOD STRATEGY.

I MEAN, I WAS THINKING THAT I MEAN, YES, THE PROS AND NOT THE PROS TO THE CITIZENS, BUT THE PROS TO THE COMMUNITY.

I MEAN, WE ARE PAYING A FEE, BUT IT PROVIDES YOU A CONSISTENT REVENUE SOURCE.

I WOULD AND I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH REVENUE IT'S GENERATING, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHETHER IT ALLOWS YOU TO GET TO THOSE PROJECTS FASTER OR GET MORE DONE THAN, SAY, THE PLAN THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.

SO I'M JUST TRYING TO GET IN MY MIND AND I THINK WE'RE AT THE CLOSE OF THE WINDOW TO MAKE A DECISION ON NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET THAT IT THAT IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD CONSIDER.

BUT I'M JUST TRYING TO GET AN IDEA IN MY HEAD OF.

SO CURRENTLY WE FUND ABOUT TWO AND ONE HALF MILLION CASH FOR STREETS AND THAT TYPICALLY YOU KNOW WHEN YOU HAVE MATCHES FOR GRANTS FOR AN OVERPASS AND THOSE AND THE THINGS, IT JUST EATS IT UP IMMEDIATELY WHAT THE THAT A $13 MILLION OR $10 MILLION.

I MEAN I'M NOT ASSUMING ALL 13 MILLION WOULD GO TO A ROAD.

I'M ASSUMING THERE'S OTHER PRIORITIES WITHIN THE ORGANIZATION.

SO IF YOU COULD IF YOU COULD WEDGE OUT 8 TO 10 MILLION FOR ROADS ANNUALLY, THEN YOU HAVE SOMETHING THAT WOULD PUT YOU IN A POSITION TO WITH THE BONDS OUT OF 2016, WE DID THE QUADRANTS.

[01:35:03]

WITH THAT, YOU WOULD STILL HAVE SOME OVER OVERRIDING CHALLENGES.

BUT MY MY FIRST GUESS IS ABOUT HALF, HALF OVERLAY, HALF RECONSTRUCTION, WHICH WITH THE EXISTING FUNDING THEN THEN YOU HAVE THE OVERLAYS GO YOUR YOUR SEAL COATS, YOUR MAINTENANCE, THE MAINTENANCE IS THE BIGGEST PIECE.

IF WE CAN ENHANCE THE MAINTENANCE, WHICH WE DID UNDER THOSE QUADRANTS, WE DID 20 PLUS MILLION OF MAINTENANCE, WHICH STOPPED THE DETERIORATION. OKAY.

SO WHAT YOU SAW IN THE STREET ASSESSMENT, WHEN WE BRING THAT FORWARD, YOU'LL SEE THAT THAT COMPONENT STOPPED IT.

BUT THAT'S A 5 TO 7 YEAR WINDOW.

AND THEN THE DETERIORATION STARTS AGAIN.

SO ENHANCING ALL THREE AREAS IS CAN OCCUR WITH THAT LEVEL OF FUNDING.

WILL IT ADDRESS IMMEDIATELY? NO, BUT IT'S A HUGE STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.

AND JUST ONE MORE QUESTION AND WHAT WAS PROPOSED BY THE PDB AS THEY WERE PUTTING TOGETHER A PRESENTATION? HOW MUCH MONEY? I MEAN, DID THEY GET TO THE POINT OF SAYING, HERE'S A RECOMMENDED FEE AND HOW MUCH WOULD THIS GENERATE? THEY WERE AT THAT POINT.

THAT WOULD BE THE NEXT STEPS AS WE GO THROUGH ABOUT A 3 TO 6 MONTH WINDOW.

THAT WAS THE NEXT STEP AS THEY IDENTIFIED THIS AS THEIR PREFERRED METHOD TO MOVE FORWARD.

WHERE WE'RE AT WITH THAT IS IT'S NOT A COMMITMENT, IT'S A RECOMMENDATION.

AND THAT WAS JUST WITH THAT CONSULTANT AND THOSE LOOKING FOR CONTEMPORARY FUNDING SOURCES AND WHAT BEST PRACTICES ARE IN OTHER CITIES.

AND MANY CITIES ARE CHOOSING THAT ROUTE.

IT DOES HAVE A HUGE POLITICAL CHALLENGE RELATED TO IT.

NOW, THEY ALSO TALKED ABOUT OTHER OPTIONS, BUT.

THEY ALSO INCLUDED A GROWTH COMPONENT IN THAT THAT WE HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO PROVIDE UNDER OUR CURRENT POLICIES FOR DEVELOPMENT, ARTERIALS, THE PORTIONS OF THE ARTERIALS THAT ARE THE CITY'S RESPONSIBILITY UNDER THE CURRENT SPECS.

SO THE NEXT STEP AFTER IDENTIFYING THAT WOULD BE EVALUATING THESE SPECIFICATIONS AND WHO PAYS FOR WHAT.

BUT DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? I THINK SO. SO REALLY, THEY HAVEN'T GOTTEN TO THE THEY HAVEN'T GOTTEN TO THE NUTS AND BOLTS TO SAY WHETHER THIS COULD GENERATE $7 MILLION A YEAR, $40 MILLION A YEAR.

WE JUST I MEAN, I'M SURE IT'S ALL SCALABLE CAPABILITY.

SO THE OTHER THING THAT REAL QUICK AND THEN THE OTHER THING THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IS WITH THIS CONSISTENT FUNDING, OUR GRANT APPLICATIONS GO WAY UP.

YES. SO NOW NOW WE CAN GO OUT AND WE CAN ASK FOR A $20 MILLION GRANT THAT MAYBE, YOU KNOW, 90% OF THE MUNICIPALITIES CAN'T QUALIFY FOR IT BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE 4 OR $5 MILLION TO PUT INTO THAT.

AND WE MAY NOT KNOW THAT WE COULD GO GET THAT.

SO SO WE INCREASE OUR ABILITIES TO DO MORE THAN JUST, LET'S SAY WE EARMARKED 8 MILLION A YEAR OUT OF THE 13 OR EVEN TEN, YOU WOULD HAVE A SET POLICY THAT WOULD ALLOW YOU TO GO AND PURSUE THOSE GRANTS.

THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT, MAYOR.

OVER THE LAST 20 YEARS IN WATER AND SEWER UTILITIES, WHEN WE STARTED THIS PLAN AND WE STARTED COMMITTING TO A STEP BY STEP ADDRESSING THOSE ISSUES THAT WE IDENTIFIED OVER A 20 YEAR PLAN BASED OFF OUR MASTER PLANS.

THAT'S WHEN WE STARTED SEEING THE SUCCESS WITH THE TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD, WHICH IS THE GRANT PROGRAM FOR WATER AND SEWER UTILITIES.

WE HAVE SEEN OVER $180 MILLION OUT OF THAT PROGRAM OVER THAT 15 YEAR WINDOW THAT YOU DIDN'T SEE BEFORE.

THERE WAS A COMMITMENT TO HAVING A LOCAL REVENUE SOURCE TO ADDRESS THE PROBLEM.

IT OPENS THE WINDOW FOR THOSE FEDERAL.

AND RIGHT NOW WE'RE IN THE FIVE YEAR WINDOW OF THE IJA FOR THE INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT AND JOBS ACT FUNDING, AND THAT IS OUT THERE.

AND IT IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT RELATED TO NOT ONLY STREETS, BUT YOU'RE SEEING THESE OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE REGIONAL CRIME CENTER, THE FIRE TRAINING CENTER, AND EVERY OTHER OPPORTUNITY THAT WE CAN FIND IN THE GRANT PROGRAM.

REMEMBER, IF YOU HAVE A FUNDING MECHANISM FOR THESE STREETS, IT'S NOT EATING UP YOUR MATCH FOR THOSE.

SO IT BENEFITS EVERYBODY IF WE HAVE SOME FORM OF IT, THE ENTIRE CITY AND OUR COMMUNITY, IF WE HAVE SOME FORM OF FUNDING SOURCE FOR THESE ROADS.

CRAFT YEAH.

SO JUST AS A GENERAL SCOPE, YOU KNOW, AS A QUESTION FOR LAURA AND ANDREW, I MEAN, AT WHAT POINT DO WE HAVE LIKE A MAX OUT ON HOW MUCH DEBT WE CAN ISSUE OR HOW MANY CEOS OVER TIME, YOU KNOW, HOW MANY CAN BE ACTIVE? YEAH, I BELIEVE IT'S WELL, I'LL HAVE TO GO BACK AND REFRESH MY MY MEMORY, BUT I THINK IT'S LIKE WE CAN'T DO MORE THAN I'M JUST PULLING THIS UP OVER A DOLLAR ON THE TAX.

A DOLLAR OF THE TAX RATE.

NOW, KEEP IN MIND, OUR TAX IS AT $0.40.

[01:40:01]

OKAY. SO IT'S NOT LIMITED TO HOW MANY CARS YOU HAVE ISSUED.

IT'S LIMITED ON. THAT IS CORRECT.

IT'S IT'S THERE'S A STATE LAW AMOUNT.

AND AGAIN, YOU GUYS, PLEASE NOTE, I'M NOT SAYING THAT THAT'S THE ACTUAL NUMBER.

IT'S APPROXIMATELY THAT THERE'S A STATE LAW NUMBER, BUT OUR CITY CHARTER RESTRICTS IT EVEN MORE.

AND SO I THINK IT'S ACTUALLY A LITTLE OVER A DOLLAR, BUT I'M JUST GOING TO SAY MAYBE A DOLLAR.

SO WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE IN UP THERE IS ESSENTIALLY YOUR INS PIECE COULD GO AS HIGH AS $1 WHERE WE'RE AT 7.7 CENTS RIGHT NOW.

SO THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF CAPACITY THERE.

I THINK THE MAYOR AND I ONE DAY, ACTUALLY, I DON'T KNOW IF HE REMEMBERS THIS WHEN HE FIRST GOT ON TO COUNCIL IN PLACE.

ONE, WE TALKED ABOUT THE FIVE YEAR PLAN.

AND IF WE COULD DO EVERYTHING LIKE COULD WE DO IT WITHIN A TAX RATE? AND I THINK WE RAN A NUMBER.

AND I MEAN, NOW I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU'D GET ALL THOSE PROJECTS DONE REALISTICALLY, BUT WITHIN THE CAPACITY OF WHAT LAW ALLOWS, WELL, TECHNICALLY YOU COULD GET IT ALL DONE.

I THINK SO. ANYWAYS, IT WAS JUST I DON'T KNOW IF YOU REMEMBER THAT, BUT WE DID IT KIND OF ROUGH MATH IN OUR HEAD ONE DAY.

IT WAS, IT WAS KIND OF INTERESTING.

BUT YEAH, THERE'S A WE HAVE A LOT OF ROOM FOR CAPACITY, SO IT'S REALLY JUST, YOU KNOW, THE DIRECTION THAT COUNCIL WANTS TO GO AND JUST WHAT WE THINK, YOU KNOW, CITIZENS, YOU KNOW, CAN CAN WORK WITH.

REALISTICALLY FROM THAT STANDPOINT, HOW MUCH A YEAR WOULD THAT BRING IT UP? ARE YOU OKAY? SORRY. HOW? HOW MUCH WOULD WE GO UP WITH THE CO THE NEXT YEAR? APPROXIMATELY. OKAY, SO IN WHICH SCENARIO? IN THE $13 MILLION SCENARIO.

SO IF YOU ISSUED A $13 MILLION CO APPROXIMATELY, YOU'RE GOING TO GO YOUR TAX RATE.

SO RIGHT NOW YOU'RE AT 7.7 $0.05 ON THE ON THE INTEREST AND SINKING SIDE IT WOULD GO UP 0.0067.

SO A LITTLE OVER HALF A PENNY.

IT'S REALLY NOT GOING TO AFFECT ANYBODY THAT MUCH.

IT'S NOT A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE ON THE OVERALL TAX RATE.

YEAH, I THINK THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.

AND AS JUST JUST A COMPLICATED CAVEAT TO IT, AS APPRAISED VALUES GROW, IT'S A LESSER AMOUNT OF A TAX RATE.

SO RIGHT NOW IT'S, YOU KNOW, A LITTLE OVER HALF A PENNY.

IT COULD BE RIGHT AT HALF A PENNY BY NEXT YEAR POSSIBLY.

ANOTHER THING I WANTED TO BRING UP DURING THAT CONVERSATION, THEY HAD ACTUALLY COME BACK WITH A $23 A MONTH.

FEE IS WHAT THEY BROUGHT TO THE COUNCIL, WHICH $23 A MONTH IS A LOT OF MONEY.

SO AND THAT NUMBER, I MEAN, THEY HAD A RANGE OF NUMBER, IF I RECALL, TOM, BUT THAT 23 WAS IN THE RANGE OF 15 MILLION A YEAR OF REVENUE FOR THE CITY.

THAT $23 WOULD HAVE GIVEN US THE ABILITY TO REVENUE BOND.

HOW MUCH? WELL, IT WOULD HAVE GIVEN YOU CASH OF 15 MILLION.

I WOULD HAVE GIVEN US 15 MILLION CASH.

SO WE WOULD HAVE A COMBINATION OF CASH VERSUS DEBT.

YOU WOULD SPLIT THAT OUT.

OKAY. JUST TO GO BACK REAL QUICK, I DO WANT TO GO BACK TO TO MAYBE WHAT LAURA HAD ADDRESSED IN CURRENT COUNCIL AND OUR CURRENT VISION AND FUTURE COUNCILS AND WHAT THEY CAN AND CANNOT DO.

I DO WANT TO KEEP IT, YOU KNOW, IN THE PERSPECTIVE OF WE'RE MAKING DECISIONS THAT CURRENT COUNCILS MAY THEORETICALLY BE ABLE TO CHANGE, BUT BUT IN THE REALITY OF IT, THEY CAN'T AND THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BECAUSE LIKE IF WE PUT A 50% COLA IN, WE'RE SAYING WE'RE GOING TO PUT THAT IN THE BUDGET.

FUTURE COUNCIL COULD PULL IT OUT, RIGHT? SO BRIAN AND I HAVE DISCUSSED THIS A LOT AND I THINK OUR BEST LEGAL INTERPRETATION AT THIS POINT IS THAT BASED ON THE WAY STATE LAWS EVEN CHANGED SINCE 2011, ONCE IT'S PUT IN IT, IT I DON'T THINK LEGALLY CAN COME OUT.

SO THAT WOULD BE THE I'M LOOKING AT BRIAN.

BUT I THINK THAT'S THAT'S OUR BEST INTERPRETATION AT THIS POINT.

YES AND IT BECOMES A NON VOTER ISSUE SO THAT THAT IN THE IN THE AREA OF OKAY WE'RE HAVING A BAD YEAR WE'RE WE DON'T HAVE THESE FUNDS COSTS ARE UP WHATEVER IT IS YOU KNOW DO WE DO WE CLOSE DOWN A PARK? DO WE DO WE NOT WEED EAT THESE FIELDS? DO WE DO WE REMOVE THE COLA? LIKE THAT'S NOT PART OF THEIR CONVERSATION, RIGHT.

SO WHAT'S NOT GOING TO BE PART OF THEIR CONVERSATION IS, HEY, THESE GUYS ARE GETTING US 13 PLUS MILLION DOLLARS EVERY YEAR TO GET TO ALL THESE GRANTS AND AND A GOOD SOURCE OF OUR REVENUE HERE IS BUILT ON SOLID CONSERVATIVE BUSINESS PRACTICES.

YOU KNOW WHAT? LET'S TAKE THAT 0.67 CENT, YOU KNOW, BACK OFF AND LET'S JUST GO CASH FUND.

THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE PART OF THEIR THEIR INCLINATION EITHER, IN MY OPINION, BECAUSE WHEN YOU PUT GOOD POLICIES AND GOOD PROCEDURES INTO.

THE BUDGET.

I THINK FUTURE COUNCILS WILL SEE THAT AND THEY'LL ADHERE TO THAT.

AND I HOPE THAT EVERYBODY THAT'S WATCHING THIS GETS TO SEE LIKE, HOW GOOD ARE THESE GUYS?

[01:45:03]

NONE OF THIS IS IS EVER I MEAN, NONE OF THIS IS EVEN PART OF A SCRIPTED CONVERSATION.

I THINK YOU KNEW YOU WANTED TO TALK ABOUT 3 OR 4 THINGS, BUT YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON OVER HERE.

AND THIS IS MY FIRST TIME TO PRESENT THIS THIS PROPOSAL BECAUSE I WANT TO DO IT, YOU KNOW, LEGALLY AND OUT AND OPEN AND WHERE EVERYBODY CAN HEAR IT.

AND IF IT'S A BAD IDEA, I'LL JUST TAKE IT LIKE, HEY, I CAME UP WITH THE BAD IDEA.

THAT'S WHY IT WON'T WORK.

AND THAT'S HAPPENED FOR THE LAST TWO YEARS.

I MEAN, NORMALLY I COME UP WITH AN IDEA AND THEY TELL ME, WELL, HERE'S WHY YOU CAN'T DO THAT LEGALLY.

THEY'VE LIMITED THIS AND THIS, THIS PREVENTS THAT.

AND SO I BELIEVE THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS REALLY GOOD.

AND THEN WHEN WE WHEN WE IMPLEMENT SOMETHING LIKE THIS, WE MOVE FORWARD.

THE PUBLIC GETS TO SEE THAT AND YOU GET TO ELECT PEOPLE THAT ARE LIKE MINDED THAT WILL CONTINUE THESE TYPES OF GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICES.

SO WE'RE LEVERAGING OUR OUR CASH WITH DEBT, WITH GOOD DEBT, WE'RE IDENTIFYING THE FACT THAT WE HAVE MORE EXPENSES THAN WE HAVE INCOME. MEANING YOU'RE NOT GOING TO CASH FUND YOUR WAY OUT OF THESE GROWTH ISSUES.

AND WE'RE ALSO SUPPORTING THE EDC IN A TREMENDOUS WAY OF GO AND COMPLICATE US WITH MORE OF THESE SAME GROWTH ISSUES.

AND WE THINK THIS IS A GOOD PROBLEM TO HAVE.

WE WANT GROWTH, BUT THEN WE STILL WANT TO TRY TO CASH FUND OUR WAY OUT OF THESE PROBLEMS THAT COME ALONG WITH GROWTH.

NOBODY RUNS THEIR HOUSEHOLD LIKE THIS.

NOBODY BUILDS A FAMILY LIKE THIS, LIKE THIS IS THE WAY IN WHICH WE GROW.

THESE ARE GOOD THINGS.

THESE ARE GOOD POLICIES. AND I HAVE EXPERTS THAT THAT ARE HANDLING THESE THINGS, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THEY'VE LIVED IT FOR 20 YEARS AND THEY KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT. SO I THINK STAFF CAN HEAR WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO AND THEY SHOULD BE GETTING EXCITED.

I THINK KYLE, YOU KNOW, ON HIS CIP BUDGET WILL ACTUALLY SAY, OKAY, I GET TO GO TO WORK FOR FIVE YEARS AND GET SOME STUFF DONE AROUND THIS TOWN. AND SO I WANT TO BOIL THIS DOWN TO A BUDGET ISSUE AND PUT THIS OVER ON THE SHELF SO WE CAN GO DEAL WITH TRASH AND WEEDS NEXT.

SO I LIKE WHERE WE'RE GOING.

I'M NOT GOING TO TRY TO OVERSELL IT.

I GOT TO KEEP US MOVING OR WE'RE NEVER GOING TO GET THROUGH A BUDGET.

ANY ANY LEGAL ISSUES, ANY ETHICAL, ANY CONCERNS, ANYTHING YOU WANT TO PULL BACK ON THIS.

OTHERWISE I'M WANTING TO GO DOWN THIS ROAD.

YEAH, I THINK WE ABSOLUTELY CAN FOLLOW THIS DIRECTION.

ONE THING I WANTED TO MENTION, BECAUSE I THINK WE KIND OF TOUCHED BASE ON THIS, THERE'S THERE'S DIFFERENT LEGAL WAYS THAT YOU CAN ISSUE DEBT.

AND I JUST WANTED TO VERY BRIEFLY TALK ABOUT THAT.

SO WE'VE KIND OF TOUCHED ON IT.

THERE'S REALLY THREE MAIN DEBT INSTRUMENTS AVAILABLE.

WE TALKED ABOUT CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION.

YOU ALL HAVE THE ABILITY AS CITY COUNCIL TO ADOPT AN ORDINANCE TO ISSUE.

WELL, FIRST YOU HAVE TO APPROVE, I BELIEVE IT'S A RESOLUTION TO POST NOTICE, TO ADVERTISE THAT WE'RE PLANNING TO ISSUE CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION.

YOU HAVE TO WAIT ABOUT TWO MONTHS AND THEN THAT ALLOWS ANYONE THAT DISAGREES TO GO THROUGH A PROCESS, TO PETITION FOR IT TO GO TO AN ELECTION INSTEAD.

IF THAT DOES NOT OCCUR, YOU CAN ISSUE THE DEBT.

OKAY. THE OTHER OPTION IS, OR ONE OF THE OTHER OPTIONS IS GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS.

THOSE YOU MUST TAKE TO A VOTE.

YOU CAN ONLY GO TO THE VOTERS IN MAY AND NOVEMBER.

SO JUST KEEP THAT IN MIND.

AND WE'VE ALREADY MISSED THE NOVEMBER DEADLINE.

SO THE NEXT AVAILABLE OPPORTUNITY WOULD BE IN MAY OF 2024.

AND THEN THE THIRD OPTION ARE TAX NOTES.

AND YOU HAVE THERE'S NO ADVERTISING, THERE'S NO GOING TO THE CITIZENS.

BUT IT'S A VERY SHORT TERM ON THOSE WHICH WE WOULD NOT NORMALLY RECOMMEND, ESPECIALLY FOR A STREET PROJECT, BUT WE COULD IF NEEDED.

AND SO THEY HAVE A MUCH HIGHER ANNUAL DEBT SERVICE PAYMENT BECAUSE YOU'RE PAYING IT OFF IN SEVEN YEARS INSTEAD OF LIKE IN 20 YEARS, WHICH YOU WOULD ON A CO OR A G OR ON A GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND.

SO I JUST WANTED TO TO GO THROUGH THAT.

JUST BRIEFLY WITH YOU, CAN YOU DESCRIBE LIKE REVENUE BOND LIKE WATER AND SEWER? ABSOLUTELY. BOND OKAY.

SO THAT'S LET'S SAY WE TOOK THIS AND PUT IT ON OUR IRONS SIDE.

EITHER WHY IT WILL OR WON'T QUALIFY FOR A REVENUE BOND VERSUS A SEAL.

THAT IS A FANTASTIC QUESTION.

SO ANYTHING THAT'S PAID FOR BY THE PROPERTY TAX RATE, YOU REALLY JUST HAVE THE THREE OPTIONS, GENERAL OBLIGATION, BOND CERTIFICATE OF OBLIGATION OR A TAX NOTE.

IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT AN ENTERPRISE FUND LIKE WATER AND SEWER OR YOUR DRAINAGE FUND, THEY HAVE THEIR OWN CREDIT RATING TOO.

SO YOU CAN DO A REVENUE BOND.

AND SO THEY ARE BACKED BY THE REVENUE THAT'S PRODUCED IN THOSE AREAS.

SO THROWING A CAVEAT IN THERE, PDP HAD TALKED ABOUT A STREET ASSESSMENT FEE.

POTENTIALLY IF WE SET UP A STREET ASSESSMENT FUND, EVENTUALLY IT COULD POSSIBLY HAVE ITS OWN CREDIT RATING AND YOU COULD ISSUE REVENUE BONDS THAT ARE FULLY BACKED BY THE REVENUE OF THAT STREET ASSESSMENT FEE.

[01:50:01]

AND SO YOU'RE LOOKING AT A GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND, A CERTIFICATE OF OBLIGATION OR A TAX NOTE.

DOES THAT HELP? OKAY, FANTASTIC.

SO I THINK THAT'S IT.

I MEAN, THE PLAN THAT YOU ALL ARE TALKING ABOUT.

ABSOLUTELY. AND WE CAN WE CAN WORK WITH YOU GUYS ON THAT.

WHAT WE WOULD RECOMMEND, JUST WELL, I DON'T WANT TO GET TOO DEEP IN THE WEEDS, BUT WE WOULD BRING THE DEBT ISSUANCE.

LET ME JUST SAY THIS. WE'D PROBABLY BRING IT CLOSER TO THE MIDDLE OF THE YEAR BECAUSE WE'D WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT FIRST PAYMENT RELATED TO THAT NEW DEBT ISSUANCE CORRESPONDS IN NEXT FISCAL YEAR WHEN WE'D BE COLLECTING THE PROPERTY TAX MONEY FOR IT.

SO JUST HEADS UP ON THAT.

SO BUT WE HAVE A LOT OF THINGS WE'D HAVE WE COULD DO AHEAD OF TIME BEFORE A DEBT ISSUANCE ANYWAYS.

SO IF I WANT TO MAKE SURE I'VE GOT THIS RIGHT, MAYOR, WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS POTENTIALLY WITHHOLDING A MILLION OFF OF THE POTENTIAL AMOUNT WE COULD CAPTURE ON THE OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE SIDE OF THE PROPERTY TAX RATE.

LOOKING TO UTILIZE THAT FOR A DEBT ISSUANCE.

WE COULD TALK THROUGH THAT, BUT POTENTIALLY A CO AND WE WOULD DO THAT IN THIS NEXT UPCOMING YEAR.

AND THEN KNOW THAT A PROPERTY TAX RATE WOULD INCREASE SLIGHTLY IN THE FOLLOWING YEAR TO COVER THAT OUTSTANDING DEBT SERVICE.

I THINK YOU GOT IT CORRECT.

AND TO PUSH IT FORWARD A LITTLE FURTHER.

YES. IN LIEU OF A CO BEING RECOMMENDED BY STAFF FOR THE MONIES FOR THE STREET PROJECT, THIS WOULD BE INCLUSIVE.

SO WE WOULD DO THIS CO UNDERNEATH OUR MAXIMUM 3.5%, BUT THEN NOT COMING BACK AND ASK FOR THE $3 MILLION CODE TO GO AND DO THE GRANT MATCH.

OKAY. WE WOULD TAKE THAT MONEY OUT OF THIS OR THE PROPERTY TAX RATE, RIGHT.

PERFECT. SO, SO WE'RE AVOIDING THE CO RECOMMENDATION THERE.

AND YOU KNOW, LET'S SAY THE 40 CENT INCREASE, IF I'VE GOT THAT RIGHT ON, SAY A WATER BILL FOR LIKE MOSQUITO AND DIFFERENT WAS IT IT'S NOT VORTEX BUT THERE'S A NAME FOR IT.

VECTOR VECTOR VECTOR.

THERE YOU GO. SO LIKE THE VECTOR PROGRAM, THINGS LIKE THIS, WHAT WE'RE WHAT WE'RE GETTING TO NOW IS, IS HOW DO WE FUND THESE THINGS THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING REAL HARD TO TO PULL BACK ON? AND THEN WHERE DID WE FIND SOME OTHER MONIES OVER HERE THAT WE'VE GOT THAT WE WANT TO TALK THROUGH HERE AND HOW DO WE WORK TOWARDS COLA? SO BEFORE WE GET INTO THE COLA CONVERSATION, DO WE WANT TO TRY TO DO FEES? AND BECAUSE THOSE ARE THE THINGS THAT ARE DUE.

SO IN THE HOMEWORK THAT'S DUE, I MEAN, WE'VE GOT FEE STRUCTURES.

SO YES, WE CERTAINLY CAN DO THAT AND WE'VE GOT SEVERAL FEES THAT WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT.

SO WE COULD DO A COUPLE OF WAYS.

WE COULD GO THROUGH MAYBE YOUR GENERAL FUND FEES FIRST AND THEN TALK WATER AND SEWER AND THEN TALK DRAINAGE FEES OR HOWEVER, I MEAN, DOES THAT WORK FOR YOU OR.

YEAH, SO LET ME LET ME BE A LITTLE MORE COURTEOUS.

IT'S 10:00. LET'S TAKE A QUICK BREAK.

THAT WAY, ANYBODY THAT NEEDS TO CAN CAN PULL AWAY FOR A MINUTE.

UM, I THINK THE BEST USAGE OF OUR TIME IS TO COME BACK.

UM, THE FEES THAT, THAT I KNOW ARE GOING TO REQUIRE SOME, SOME CONSIDERATION AND NOT SAYING EXCLUSIVE TO THIS, BUT I THINK THE PRIORITIES ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH IS A IS A IS A DIFFICULT ONE TO UNDERSTAND.

DRAINAGE FEE IS ONE THAT I THINK IS GOING TO HAVE SOME DISCUSSION.

WATER AND SEWER MAY BE AFFECTED A LITTLE BIT WITH WHAT ELSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE, BUT THAT 1ST MAY BE A SHORTER DISCUSSION.

WHAT ARE THE OTHER FEES THAT YOU GUYS HAVE MAPPED OUT THAT WE NEED TO GET ON TODAY? ALL RIGHT. SO SO LET ME GO BACK TO MY.

ALL RIGHT. SO WE'VE TOUCHED ON PROPERTY TAXES.

WE'LL NEED FINAL DIRECTION ON THAT SALES TAX AT SOME POINT, BUT WE CAN CIRCLE BACK TO THAT ONE ON OTHER FEES WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT.

YOU MENTIONED WATER AND SEWER.

WE WE NEED TO TALK THROUGH DRAINAGE.

WE NEED TO LOOK AT SOLID WASTE FEES.

WE NEED TO LOOK AT ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH FEES AND THEN POTENTIALLY A QUESTION ABOUT SOME PARK FEES AND THEN WHICH FALLS INTO SOME OTHER AREAS. GO AHEAD.

YEAH, THE KIDS INC CONVERSATION ON WHAT THEY PAY IS ALSO ON THE LIST.

OKAY. SO WE'RE WE'RE GOING TO SAY WE HAVE TILL 2:00 TODAY.

IT'S KIND OF WHERE WE'VE KIND OF BUDGETED EVERYONE'S TIME.

IS THAT IS THAT GOOD FOR YOU GUYS? OKAY. AND THEN WE'LL WORK THROUGH LUNCH, YOU KNOW, 15 MINUTES AND THEN HUSTLE BACK.

LET'S TAKE IT'S 1005.

WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A TEN MINUTE BREAK.

BE BACK HERE AT 1015.

THANK YOU. AS EVERYONE'S KIND OF SITTING BACK DOWN, I'VE GOT SOME HANDOUTS ON SOME REQUESTED INFORMATION.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO SPEND MUCH TIME ON THIS UNLESS YOU ALL JUST WANT TO.

AND SO HANG ON.

DON'T SAY THAT. I'M RECOMMENDING IF YOU WANT TO GET THROUGH A BUDGET, WE MIGHT JUST WANT TO BRIEFLY TALK ABOUT THESE.

SO. SO THERE'S TWO HANDOUTS HERE.

[01:55:01]

ONE OF THESE IS A TOTAL TAX REVENUE PER CAPITA BY TYPE.

DO YOU REMEMBER THOSE PROPERTY TAX GRAPHS WE LOOKED AT? AND WE COMPARED OURSELVES TO EIGHT LARGER CITIES, EIGHT SMALLER CITIES? WELL, THE QUESTION CAME IN, OKAY, WELL, THAT'S GREAT FROM A PROPERTY TAX STANDPOINT, BUT FROM A SALES TAX AND HOT TAX STANDPOINT, WHERE ARE WE AT? SO THIS GRAPH THAT SAYS TOTAL TAX REVENUE PER CAPITA BY TYPE SHOWS, PROPERTY TAX, SALES TAX AND HOT TAX FOR EACH OF THOSE 16 COMMUNITIES PLUS US AND KIND OF WHERE THAT LIES.

SO SO YOU CAN SEE THE BLUE IS IN THE PROPERTY TAX AMOUNT, THE RED IS SALES TAX.

AND THEN THE SMALL PIECE IN EACH COMMUNITY IS THAT HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX.

SO THIS ONE HERE AND THEN ON THE BACK, BECAUSE ANDREW IS OUR SALES TAX WHIZ, HE GAVE US ALL THE INFORMATION BECAUSE SALES TAX IS NOT SALES TAX IS NOT SALES TAX FROM COMMUNITY TO COMMUNITY.

SO EVERYBODY USES IT A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY.

THERE'S A REGULAR RATE, THERE'S A PROPERTY TAX RELIEF PIECE, SOME OTHER PIECES AND CERTAIN ONES, SOME THEY PUT TOWARDS A TYPE A EDC, SOME TOWARDS A TYPE B, EDC, AND THEN THERE'S LIKE A CITY TOTAL TAX RATE AND THEN THE STATE PIECE.

SO JUST FOR SOME LIGHT READING FOR YOU ALL AT SOME POINT IN TIME, RIGHT? SO JUST WANTED TO KIND OF HAVE THAT CAVEAT IN THERE.

SO THAT'S THIS GRAPH HERE.

THE OTHER ONE, THE OTHER ONE IS KIND OF LOOKING AT A COMPARISON OF TAX RATES BY PERCENTAGE AGE THE WAY OURS IS BROKEN DOWN COMPARED TO THOSE OTHER 16 COMMUNITIES AS WELL.

ONE SIDE IS POTTER COUNTY, ONE SIDE IS RANDALL COUNTY FOR YOU ALL BECAUSE THERE IS A LITTLE BIT OF A DIFFERENCE.

AND SO YOU CAN SEE ON IT THE BLUE PIECES ARE THE CITIES PORTIONS.

IN ALL OF THESE COMMUNITIES, THE RED IS THE COUNTY, THE GREEN, WHICH IT LOOKS LIKE JUST ABOUT EVERY COMMUNITY IS THE LION'S SHARE, OR AT LEAST, YOU KNOW, THE BIGGEST PIECE OF IT GOES TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS.

THEN THOSE THAT HAVE A JUNIOR COLLEGE, THERE'S A PURPLE PIECE, AND THEN THERE'S SOME OTHER THINGS, LIKE IN OUR CASE, THAT'S THE WATER DISTRICT THAT'S ON THE PROPERTY TAX BILL. SO JUST FOR YOUR INFORMATION, I HOPE THAT MAYBE KIND OF LETS YOU SEE AGAIN, WE ARE NOT APPLES TO APPLES.

STEPHANIE, I'VE GOT I HAD SENT YOU SOME EMAILS, I THINK, LAST NIGHT WITH SOME PROPERTY TAX GRAPHS IF YOU GET A CHANCE.

AND THEN ALL THIS IS, IS JUST TO AGAIN, WE ARE NOT THE SAME AS OTHER COMMUNITIES, BUT IT'S STILL THAT IS ONE WAY OF LOOKING AT US COMPARED TO OTHERS. THERE WE GO.

SO THE ONE ON THE SCREEN THERE IS THE COMPARISON OF THE TAX RATES COMPOSITION.

WE'VE GOT ONE FOR POTTER AND THEN ONE FOR RANDALL.

AND SO THE BOTTOM PIECE IS THAT LIGHT BLUE IS THE CITY PIECE.

THE RED IS THE COUNTY, THE GREEN IS THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, PURPLE IS JUNIOR COLLEGES.

AND THEN THERE'S A TINY LITTLE BLUE PIECE OF OTHER AT THE VERY TOP.

SO JUST FOR YOUR INFORMATION, IT WAS SOMETHING WE TALKED ABOUT.

SO QUESTIONS ON THAT.

YES, GO AHEAD.

WELL, WHAT IF YOU'RE SAYING TO YOURSELF, OH, YES, I DID.

OH, MAN, THEY'RE ALREADY DROPPING.

WE'RE SHOWING.

ON THE TAX RELIEF.

PROPERTY TAX RELIEF? YES. CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT TO ME? YES. SO WHAT HAPPENED? AND I BELIEVE. OH, I THINK IT WAS IN THE 90S WE ADOPTED.

OKAY. SO THE SAME AROUND THE SAME TIME THE EDC WAS RELATED.

WE ADOPTED AN ADDITIONAL 0.5% OF PROPERTY TAX RELIEF THAT LOWERED THE PROPERTY TAX RATE AND ADDED IN A PIECE INTO THE SALES TAX RATE.

SO TO HELP KEEP THAT PROPERTY TAX RATE DOWN A LITTLE BIT INSTEAD, THIS IS TO BRING MORE IN THROUGH THE SALES TAX SIDE.

DOES THAT. ALL RIGHT.

YEAH. IT EQUATES TO DO WHAT? WHAT IT EQUATES TO FOR PROPERTY TAX.

WORKSHEET WE HAVE THAT WORKSHEET SHOWS THE SALES TAX CREDIT.

RIGHT. ON.

ARE YOU TALKING ON? HANG ON.

TALKING ABOUT THE ONE ON THIS.

YES. WOW. OKAY, HANG ON JUST A SECOND.

YEP. OKAY.

SO OUR ESTIMATED SALES TAX RELIEF THAT WE RECEIVE ON THE PROPERTY TAX SIDE IS ABOUT $25.5 MILLION.

SO OUR PROPERTY TAX RATE WOULD PRODUCE ANOTHER, I GUESS, 25 AND ONE HALF MILLION, BUT THAT WE HAVE INSTEAD SHIFTED OVER TO OUR SALES TAX RATE INSTEAD OF BEING ON

[02:00:03]

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? SO INSTEAD OF HAVING KEEPING THE PROPERTY TAX RATE HIGHER, WE SAID INSTEAD WE WANT PEOPLE TO HAVE A CHOICE, RIGHT? BECAUSE SALES TAX, I GUESS, IS MORE OF A CHOICE.

AND SO WE LOWERED THE PROPERTY TAX RATE AND INCREASED THE SALES TAX RATE STATE.

WITH THE CITY, BUT IT'S GOING TO THE BECAUSE IT WENT TO THE EDC.

AS SOON AS WE ADOPTED IT.

YEAH. OKAY.

BUT WE DID THIS WITH THE STATE, MEANING OUR PORTION OF THE SALES TAX WAS WHAT WE WERE GETTING FROM THE STATE, OR WE GOT AN ADDITIONAL 50 0.5 THAT IS FROM THE STATE. YES.

SO, SO WE WENT TO THE STATE AND SAID, HEY, LET US KEEP MORE OF THE SALES TAX.

YES. VERSUS SENDING IT TO THE STATE AND WE WILL KNOW IT WAS ACTUALLY AN ADD ON.

YEAH, THEY WERE ALWAYS AT 6 TO 5 AND THEN THEY GAVE CITIES A CAPACITY TO GO UP TO TWO.

WE JUST WE JUST INCREASED THE SALES TAX RATE FROM SEVEN AND A HALF TO EIGHT AND A QUARTER OR WHATEVER.

YES. SO WE WENT I GUESS IT WOULD HAVE BEEN SEVEN AND SEVEN AND THREE QUARTERS TO EIGHT AND A QUARTER IS WHAT IT WENT UP.

THAT ADDITIONAL AMOUNT THE CITIES ALWAYS KEPT.

AND THEN WHAT WE DID WAS WE DECIDED, OH, WE'LL TAKE THAT AMOUNT AND WE'LL PUT IT INTO AN EDC.

AND WE DID THAT IN THE FORM OF A AND THAT WAS THE VOTERS APPROVE THAT? YES. THE PROPERTY TAX RELIEF WAS VOTERS.

YES, IT WAS VOTER APPROVED AS WELL.

YEP. SO KIND OF THE MISUNDERSTANDING IS, IS THAT THERE'S TWO HALF A PERCENT.

THERE'S A THERE'S A HALF A PERCENT THAT GOES TO EDC AND THEN THERE'S A HALF A PERCENT THAT THE CITY STILL HAS.

WHAT WE'RE WHAT WE'RE CORRECTING IS, IS THAT THOSE ARE THE SAME HALF A PERCENT.

NO, NO. SO YOU GOT 1% REGULAR, HALF PERCENT PROPERTY TAX RELIEF, HALF, HALF A PERCENT EDC.

YES. FOR A TOTAL OF 2%.

OKAY. AND THEN ALL OF OUR BUDGETS, YOUR BUDGETING AND YOU'RE SHOWING THAT WE GET ONE AND ONE HALF PERCENT, THAT IS SALES.

THAT IS OUR COLLECTION. AND WHAT THAT'S DOING IS IT'S REDUCING DOWN ON THE PROPERTY TAX SIDE BY $25.5 MILLION.

SO BECAUSE OUR BECAUSE WE HAVE THAT IF WE LOOK AT OUR OTHER CHART HERE, LET'S JUST DO RANDALL COUNTY.

STEPHANIE, DO YOU HAVE.

OH, I'M SORRY. SO IF OUR RATE IS LOWER.

YES. LET'S SAY WE'RE 19.6.

IF I'M. NO, LET'S GO CITY 18.7% OF OUR TOTAL TAX BILL AND WE WANT TO COMPETE WITH LUBBOCK.

DOES LUBBOCK HAVE THIS SAME THING ON THEIR DO THEY HAVE TO HAVE LESS SALES TAX? THEY'RE ACTUALLY AT A 0.38.

THEY ONLY HAVE A 1.5%.

LET'S LOOK AT MCKINNEY BECAUSE THEY'RE 0.00.

SO MCKINNEY IS RIGHT THERE NEXT TO US.

SO WE GET 18.7% OF OUR REVENUES THROUGH PROPERTY TAXES.

THEY GET 24.7.

SO THE NARRATIVE THAT'S ALWAYS BEEN OUT THERE IS, WELL, WE SHOULD GET 24.7.

WE NEED TO RAISE OUR PROPERTY TAXES.

WELL, MCKINNEY DOESN'T HAVE THIS OTHER HALF A PERCENT OF SALES TAX ON THEIR PROPERTY TAX RELIEF.

SO IF WE ADDED THAT BACK IN, WHAT WOULD MY PERCENTAGE GO TO IF I'M TRYING TO COMPARE TO MY NEXT NEIGHBORING CITY? SO GO TO THIS GO TO THIS PAGE NOW AND FIND MCKINNEY.

RIGHT. SO MCKINNEY DOES HAVE A 2% SALES TAX RATE, BUT THEIR THE WAY THEY SPLIT IT IS THEY KEEP 1%.

HALF A PERCENT GOES TO TYPE A EDC AND THE OTHER HALF TO EDC.

THAT IS CORRECT. SO EVERYBODY DOES IT JUST A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY.

AND SO AGAIN, THIS IS LIKE THE THIS IS THE LIKE TRYING TO SHOW IT APPLES TO APPLES, RIGHT? WHICH IS REALLY TRICKY.

AND LIKE LUBBOCK'S, THEY THEY HAVE A COUNTY THAT HAD A HALF CENT SALES TAX, SO THEY HAD LESS FLEXIBILITY.

SO THEY DID AN EIGHTH OF A CENT TO THEIR TYPE A SALES TAX, EDC.

AND THE BENEFIT OF THAT IS THAT WE CAPTURE ALL THAT INSTEAD OF DIVVYING UP THE TAX, THE PROPERTY TAX, WE DON'T GET A LOT OF THAT RIGHT. SO THE BENEFIT OF THIS IS THE SALES TAX GOES STRAIGHT TO US.

I MEAN, IT'S IT'S A CONSUMPTION TAX, BUT WE'RE CAPTURING ALL OF THAT VERSUS DIVVYING IT UP BETWEEN THE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT.

RIGHT. THE CITY IS CONTROLLING THE WHOLE 2% VERSUS A COUNTY TAKING A PIECE OF IT.

YEAH. UNDERSTOOD.

DOES THAT HELP? OKAY, EXCELLENT.

YES, SIR. I DO THINK IT'S WORTH POINTING OUT ON THE CHART THAT HAS THE COMPARISON OF TAX RATES BY PERCENTAGE.

THIS ONE HERE. YES.

THAT THE CITY OF AMARILLO IS THE LOWEST OF ALL OF THESE.

THAT IS CORRECT.

AND JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, OUR OUR CURRENT COUNTY IS THE HIGHEST OF ALL OF THESE AS A PERCENTAGE.

RANDALL COUNTY'S IN KIND OF IN THE LOWER THIRD WHEN IT LOOKS PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL.

BUT IT DOES LOOK LIKE POTTER IS IS THE HIGHER HIGHEST PERCENTAGE.

BUT RANDALL IS KIND OF IT'S KIND OF IN THE LOWER THIRD, ACTUALLY.

YEAH. NO.

SO AND IF ANYBODY WANTS TO KNOW WHEN POTTER COUNTY MEETS, WE CAN FIGURE OUT THEIR MEETING AND YOU CAN GO OVER THERE AND.

OKAY. JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WERE CONTINUING TO PROVIDE SOME OF THE INFORMATION THAT YOU ALL HAVE REQUESTED.

[02:05:06]

SO I THINK NEXT.

LET'S TALK. SHOULD WE DO? OKAY, LET'S SEE IF ANTHONY SPANIEL.

MINE'S COMING UP.

AND ARE YOU ALL GOOD TO TALK ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH FEES? I THINK WE'RE GOING TO SWITCH NOW OVER TO FEES, IF THAT'S OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. SO LET'S JUST START WITH ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH.

TAKE ONE AND PASS IT ON.

HEY, GOOD MORNING. AND WE HAVE A HANDOUT COMING AROUND IF YOU'LL JUST TAKE ONE AND PASS IT.

AND THEN. DID YOU GET IT, STEPHANIE? I DID. OKAY. AND THEN, STEPHANIE, HOPEFULLY YOU HAVE THIS IN YOUR EMAIL TO PULL UP AT SOME POINT.

GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE.

I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO GET BACK TO WORK ON THIS AND PRESENT YOU A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT MODELS HERE.

SO FROM OUR LAST TIME WE WE DISCUSSED, I WANT TO GO OVER THE GOALS THAT I HEARD.

SO I HEARD COST NEUTRAL.

I HEARD SIMPLIFIED FEE SCHEDULE HIGHER RATE FOR OUT OF THE CITY MORE EQUITABLE.

THROUGH MY RESEARCH I DID FIND A LIMITATION I HAVE TO WORK WITH, WHICH IS COST RECOVERY ONLY IN MY FOOD PROGRAM SO I CAN ONLY COST RECOVER.

THAT'S A STATE LAW STATUTE.

I CAN'T MAKE MONEY AND SPLIT IT UP AMONGST OTHER AREAS.

I CAN ONLY COST RECOVER.

SO WHAT WE DID IS WE BROKE ALL OF OUR PROGRAMS DOWN INTO EXPENSES.

THAT'S THAT'S A MODEL THAT I'VE NEVER DONE BEFORE.

WE ALWAYS LOOKED AT THE PROGRAM AS A WHOLE.

NOW WE'RE LOOKING AT INDIVIDUAL PROGRAMS BY THEMSELVES, WHICH I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT.

IT'S REALLY ENLIGHTENED ME AND WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE.

SO I PROPOSE TWO MODELS FOR YOU GUYS AND YOU'LL HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF YOU.

ESSENTIALLY, OUR FEES WILL CHANGE A LITTLE BIT.

AND I KIND OF WANTED TO SHOW YOU THAT IN OUR FOOD PROGRAM WE HAD AN EIGHT TIER SYSTEM AND A WHOLE BUNCH OF OTHER FEES THAT WE CHARGE.

THE PROPOSITION OR THE PROPOSAL THAT WE'RE DOING IS MOVING THAT DOWN TO A FOUR TIER SYSTEM.

SO FROM 8 TO 4 AND THAT WILL GENERATE A COST RECOVERY OF.

AND LET'S SEE.

IT'S 900 AND SOMETHING THOUSAND, BUT IT'LL BASICALLY COST RECOVERY.

SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE END OF THE 21 MODEL, IT'LL SHOW ALL THOSE BREAKDOWNS HERE.

OKAY. SO OUR OUR FOOD HYGIENE COST RECOVERED ABOUT $959,000.

OUR ONSITE SEWAGE FACILITY, THOSE PERMITS WOULD NEED TO REALLY BE ADJUSTED.

SO WE ARE NOT COLLECTING WHAT WE NEED TO TO COST RECOVER THAT PROGRAM AT 100%.

AND IT SHOWS THAT THAT CHANGE THEIR WASTEWATER TREATMENT PROGRAMS, THE SAME RECREATIONAL WATER PROGRAMS, THE SAME THERE WOULD BE SOME SOME ADJUSTMENTS THERE IN ORDER TO COST RECOVER. I DID WANT TO SAY WE WE ARE PROPOSING TO CUT SOME FEES OUT OF HERE AND KIND OF ROLL THEM INTO OUR PERMIT COSTS TO MAKE THIS THING A SIMPLIFIED.

SO YOU DON'T HAVE ALL THESE DIFFERENT FEES ON YOUR BILL.

IT'S REALLY JUST ROLLED IN AND SIMPLIFIED.

SO BY STATE STATUTE, WE CAN NO LONGER CHARGE A CERTIFIED FOOD MANAGER FEE.

SO THAT'S BEING CUT OUT.

SO WE ALSO ARE DOING THAT IN OUR RECREATIONAL WATER PROGRAM, CUTTING THAT FEE OUT, CUTTING OUR TECHNOLOGY FEE THAT WE CHARGE.

WE'RE WE'RE CHOPPING THAT OUT AND JUST KIND OF ROLLING IT INTO THE COST FOR SIMPLIFICATION.

SO LET ME MAKE SURE I GO OVER EVERYTHING I WANTED TO TELL YOU.

WITHIN THIS MODEL HERE.

THERE WILL BE SOME THERE WILL BE SOME USERS THAT ARE MORE IMPACTED THAN OTHERS.

OKAY. AND I WANTED TO MAKE SURE TO TELL YOU THAT.

MOST IMPACTED WOULD PROBABLY BE THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS.

WE HAVE FIVE SCHOOL DISTRICTS WITHIN OUR JURISDICTION, AND IN OUR CURRENT FEE STRUCTURE, THEY HAVE A BREAK.

SO WE PUT THEM AT THE ALMOST THE LOWEST, LOWEST RATE, REGARDLESS OF THEIR SIZE.

OKAY. SO WE'LL WE'LL CUT THAT BREAK OUT AND WE'LL THEIR FEES WILL BE BASED TRULY ON ON SIZE SQUARE FOOTAGE WE HAVE THIS RATE SYSTEM WILL BE LESS THAN 15,000 WILL BE ONE RATE SQUARE FEET OF THE FACILITY.

OVER 15,000 WILL BE ANOTHER RATE.

SCHOOLS ARE BIG. THEY'RE LARGE.

WE DO A LOT OF WORK THERE, SO WE WON'T GIVE THEM THAT BREAK ANYMORE.

ALSO IMPACTED WILL BE OUT OF THE CITY LIMITS, SO EVERYONE WILL GET THE SAME THE SAME TIER RATE IN OUR FOOD PROGRAM, BUT ANYTHING OUTSIDE WILL ALSO BE SURCHARGED $150 ON TOP TO KIND OF COST RECOVER THAT A LITTLE BIT BETTER.

WE'RE SPENDING MORE TIME OUT THERE.

WE'RE DRIVING FARTHER, THERE'S MORE COSTS INCURRED.

SO I THINK THAT IS A MORE EQUITABLE, A MORE EQUITABLE SITUATION.

BUT JUST KNOW THAT THERE WILL BE IMPACTED A LITTLE BIT BETTER.

OUR ON-SITE SEWAGE FACILITY PROGRAM.

THAT'S ALL COUNTY WORK.

THOSE FEES WILL HAVE TO GO UP QUITE A BIT TO COST RECOVER THAT PROGRAM.

OUR CURRENT CHARGE IS ABOUT $440 FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION THAT WILL NEED TO GO UP TO ABOUT $800 TO COST RECOVER.

WE WON'T ADDITIONALLY CHARGE THEM AN OUT OF CITY LIMITS FEE BECAUSE THEY'RE ALL OUT OF THE CITY LIMITS.

[02:10:02]

HOTEL, MOTELS OR HOTEL, MOTEL ASSOCIATION OR THAT INDUSTRY.

THOSE PERMITS WILL NEED TO GO UP TO ABOUT $500 A PIECE IN ORDER TO COST RECOVER THAT.

AND HONESTLY, THAT'S A THAT'S OUR NEWEST PROGRAM.

IT'S ONLY BEEN IN PLACE FOR ABOUT 4 OR 5 YEARS, I BELIEVE, AND IT'S BEEN HEAVILY SUBSIDIZED FOR QUITE A LONG TIME.

WE HAVEN'T REALLY BEEN CAPTURING WHAT IT COSTS TO RUN THAT PROGRAM.

SO THOSE WILL NEED TO GO UP QUITE A BIT IN ORDER TO COST RECOVER.

SO IN THESE MODELS, WHAT YOU'LL SEE IS IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE ACTUAL BUDGET LINES, YOU GO DOWN TO THE GENERAL FUND SUBSIDY, IT'LL BE ABOUT 444,000 ON A 21 PERSON.

THAT'S WHAT WE'RE AT CURRENTLY.

OKAY. WE HAVE SOME MONEY SITTING OUT THERE IN GENERAL FUND 184,000 FOR A PROGRAM.

WE RUN THE WASTEWATER PRETREATMENT PROGRAM.

WE RUN THAT FOR UTILITIES.

WE DO ALL THE WORK, WE COLLECT, ALL THE REVENUE GOES INTO THEIR BUDGET AND THEN THEY REIMBURSE GENERAL FUND.

SO YOU'LL HAVE TO ADD THAT BACK INTO OURS.

AND ESSENTIALLY ON THE 21 MODEL WILL BE ABOUT 260,000 SHORT.

THAT'S TRULY OUR VECTOR CONTROL PROGRAM, WHICH HAS NO REVENUE SOURCE.

I UNDERSTAND THAT GAVE YOU GUYS A LITTLE HEARTBURN LAST TIME.

SO WE HAVE NO REVENUE SOURCE FOR THAT.

AND THEN OUR SANITARY NUISANCE PROGRAM, WHICH IS REQUIRED BY STATE LAW, HAS ALSO HAS NO REVENUE SOURCES.

EVERY OTHER PROGRAM WE RUN WILL BE COST RECOVERED AT 100% MINUS THOSE TWO AND THE 21 MODEL, THAT WOULD BE ABOUT $260,000 SHORT. OKAY.

AND WHAT I PROPOSED INITIALLY WAS ADDING A POSITION AS THE 22 MODEL.

I ALSO WANTED TO THROW THAT OUT THERE BECAUSE THAT IS A TRUE NEED THAT I HAVE.

THAT'S A TRUE NEED THAT WILL BE ADDING ONE PERSON INTO MY VECTOR CONTROL PROGRAM.

AND IF YOU LOOK AT THOSE NUMBERS, WE DID THE EXACT SAME THING.

WE COST RECOVERED ALL THE PROGRAMS AND THE NUMBERS ARE MOSTLY ALL THE SAME OTHER THAN OUR VECTOR CONTROL PIECE.

HANG ON JUST A SECOND, ANTHONY.

IF Y'ALL GO TO THE VERY LAST PAGE OF YOUR PACKET, THAT'S WHERE HE'S AT NOW.

SORRY. JUST MAKING SURE THEY'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE AS YOU.

THANK YOU. SO ALL THE NUMBERS ARE THE SAME IN BOTH MODELS EXCEPT THE EXPENSES ON THE VECTOR CONTROL PIECE.

SO ON THE 21 MODEL, IT ALL WASHES DOWN TO ABOUT 260,000 SHORT BECAUSE NO REVENUE IN VECTOR, NO REVENUE IN SANITARY NUISANCES.

AND THE 22 MODEL, IT'S ALL THE SAME.

IT ALL COST RECOVERS 100% AND THEN IT WASHES DOWN TO 371,000 SHORT BECAUSE OF THE VECTOR CONTROL, BECAUSE OF THE SANITARY NUISANCE.

IF I DON'T HAVE A REVENUE SOURCE FOR THAT.

AND THAT'S WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE.

NOW, LIKE I SAID, THAT 22 MODEL, THAT'S THAT'S A TRUE ASK.

I REALLY NEED THAT. AND I APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION OF IT.

YOU KNOW, THIS THIS FISCAL YEAR I'VE GOT ONE AND A HALF INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE WORKING IN THAT PROGRAM ALMOST ALL SUMMER LONG.

THEY'RE WORKING 12 TO 15 HOURS A DAY.

AND I HAD A CONVERSATION WITH HIM AFTER OUR LAST DISCUSSION LIKE, HEY, DO YOU GUYS THINK YOU CAN CONTINUE ON WITH WHAT WE GOT, MAYBE DO MORE WITH LESS? AND THE RESPONSE WAS WAS EYE OPENING TO ME AND I JUST WANTED TO SHARE THAT.

IT'S LIKE THE RESPONSE CAME BACK AS, HONESTLY, WE'D RATHER NOT WORK 15 HOURS A DAY ALL SUMMER LONG.

SO IF I COULD HAVE AN EXTRA BODY TO HELP ME ACCOMPLISH THAT MISSION, THAT'S WHAT I NEED.

THAT'S THE THAT'S THE NEED.

AND I PROPOSE YOU BOTH MODELS BOTH WAYS.

SO, YOU KNOW.

SO IF I COULD ASK OR MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE ON THIS.

SO I THINK WHAT ANTHONY HAS BROUGHT BACK TO YOU ALL IS ANOTHER VERSION OF A OF A FEE STRUCTURE THAT IS MORE SIMPLIFIED, THAT IS TRULY LOOKING AT FULL COST RECOVERY WHERE POSSIBLE.

BUT IN ORDER TO DO THAT, I THINK OF NOTE IS UP IN THE FOOD HYGIENE PROGRAM.

THERE'S I HATE TO SAY IT, THERE'S GOING TO BE WINNERS AND LOSERS ON IT.

AS YOU SIMPLIFY A FEE MODEL, ONE OF THE AREAS WE KNOW IS GOING TO BE HEAVILY IMPACTED IS GOING TO BE IS GOING TO BE THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS.

AND SO JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT COUNCIL IS AWARE OF THAT.

MOST OR ACTUALLY ALL OF THOSE HAVE ALREADY ADOPTED THEIR BUDGET FOR THE YEAR.

AND SO THIS WOULD BE A CHANGE AND IT'S A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT INCREASE, I BELIEVE, FOR ALL THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS.

THE OTHER ONES, THROUGH THESE STRUCTURE FEE STRUCTURE CHANGES OUT OF CITY LIMITS IS CERTAINLY GOING TO SEE A MUCH LARGER IMPACT.

BUT THAT'S TRULY CAPTURING THAT OUT OF CITY LIMITS COST, YOU KNOW, THE DRIVING OUT OF TOWN, ALL OF THAT.

SO THAT WOULD BE IMPACTED.

THE OTHER HEAVY GROUP THAT WOULD BE IMPACTED IS GOING TO BE THE HOTELS.

AND SO AGAIN, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT COUNCIL IS AWARE OF THOSE THINGS.

AND THEN THE OTHER BIG POINT OF REFERENCE IS WE WE UNDERSTOOD THAT COUNCIL MAYBE DIDN'T HAVE THE WILLINGNESS TO LOOK AT A VECTOR FEE, SO THAT WOULD THEN DEFAULT TO SALES TAX AND PROPERTY TAX COVERING THE VECTOR COSTS.

[02:15:03]

AND THEN WHAT SANITARY NUISANCE NUISANCES ARE APPLIED TO JUST CITY OF AMARILLO AREA? THERE IS NO REVENUE SOURCE, SO THAT WOULD COME FROM SALES TAX AND PROPERTY TAX.

SO IN ONE SCENARIO WE'RE LOOKING AT ABOUT 270 MILLION.

I'M SORRY, 270,000 AND THEN THE OTHER ONE ABOUT 369,000.

AND I WANTED TO SAY TWO ADDITIONAL THINGS ALSO IN TERMS OF EQUITY, OUR MOBILE FOOD UNITS.

YES, THANK YOU. PRIOR MODEL, CURRENT CURRENT FISCAL YEAR, THEY PAY A VERY LOW RATE BECAUSE THEY ARE IT'S BASED UPON SQUARE FOOTAGE.

SO WHAT FOR AN EQUITABLE STANDPOINT, I PROPOSE TO MOVE THEM TO THE HIGHER RATE REGARDLESS OF SQUARE FOOTAGE.

SO WE WOULD CARVE OUT AND SAY MOBILE FOOD UNITS WILL GO HIGHER.

THEY DON'T HAVE TO PAY PROPERTY TAX.

THEY DON'T HAVE TO PAY WHAT IT TAKES TO TO RUN A BRICK AND MORTAR BUSINESS.

I THINK IN TERMS OF EQUITY THAT WOULD BE MOST EQUITABLE IS TO MOVE THEM UP.

ADDITIONALLY, I WANTED TO SAY, OH, IN COMPARISON, ON THE VECTOR PROGRAM, WE DID DO A QUICK COMPARISON TO LUBBOCK AND I JUST JUST KIND OF WANTED TO SHARE THAT WITH YOU.

LUBBOCK HAS FIVE FTES TO THEIR PROGRAM.

WE HAVE 1.5 CURRENTLY.

SO JUST TO KIND OF PUT THAT IN PERSPECTIVE, THAT THAT KIND OF HELPS JUSTIFY THE NEED A LITTLE BIT.

AND ANTHONY, THIS WOULD BE AN OCTOBER 1ST START OF FEE CHANGES.

IT WOULD BE OCTOBER 1ST.

AND ONE OF THE ASKS THAT I WOULD I WOULD ASK FROM YOU GUYS IS IF YOU LIKE IT, IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, I JUST NEED SOME DIRECTION ON WHAT WHICH WAY YOU'D LIKE TO GO BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF WORK THAT GOES INTO MAKING THIS HAPPEN AND I NEED TO REALLY GO OUT AND START ENGAGING MY MY IMPACTED USERS.

I NEED TO ENGAGE. RESTAURANT ASSOCIATION, HOTEL, MOTEL ASSOCIATION, POTTER COUNTY, RANDALL COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICTS.

I NEED TO GET TO WORK ON SOME OF THESE THINGS.

AND THAT'S WHY I'VE ASKED FOR SOME DIRECTION.

AND CAN YOU TELL THEM ALSO, WHEN PEOPLE PAY, IT'S BASED ON THEIR ANNIVERSARY OF GETTING THEIR ORIGINAL PERMIT, NOT ONE TIME OF YEAR THAT YOU GET THE REVENUE.

THAT'S CORRECT. SO THESE THESE REVENUES COME IN EVERY SINGLE DAY.

IF THE PERMITS ARE VALID FOR A YEAR FROM WHEN THEY APPLY THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION DATE AND WE GET APPLICATIONS EVERY DAY.

SO THAT TARGET MOVES.

I MEAN, WE WE TAKE IN MONEY EVERY SINGLE DAY.

WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME YOU HAD A FEE SCHEDULE CHANGE? SO OUR FEE SCHEDULES CHANGE.

THEY GO UP EVERY YEAR BY 3% OR CPI THAT'S BUILT INTO OUR CURRENT BUDGET.

SO THEY GO UP A LITTLE EVERY YEAR.

BUT IN TERMS OF A MASSIVE STRUCTURE OVERHAUL, I MEAN, IT'S BEEN A LONG TIME.

WE BUILD THESE A LITTLE AT A TIME, I THINK.

I DON'T KNOW, SIX, SEVEN, EIGHT YEARS AGO, WE KIND OF WE HAD THIS MASSIVE ADJUSTMENT AND THEN IT'S JUST BEEN MINOR ADJUSTMENTS FOR PROBABLY THE LAST DECADE.

OKAY. SO YOU CONDENSED THIS THIS TIER SYSTEM, YOU JUST CONDENSED THIS SEVEN TIER SYSTEM WAS BASED ON SQUARE FOOTAGE, CORRECT.

AND OTHER THINGS.

I MEAN, WE HAVE. YES.

YES, SIR. SO IT'S IT'S SQUARE FOOTAGE.

WE ALSO HAVE CARVE OUTS FOR VENDING MACHINES AND SNACK ONLY CHILD CARE CENTERS AND UMBRELLAS AND FARMERS MARKETS.

AND THERE'S ALL THESE INDIVIDUAL CARVE OUTS THAT PRODUCE THAT EIGHT TIER SYSTEM.

OKAY. SO WITH THE FOUR TIER SYSTEM, DID YOU JUST, I MEAN, EXPAND IT? I MEAN, FROM SQUARE FOOTAGE, DID YOU JUST MAKE THAT A BIGGER RANGE? WE WENT WE WENT FROM FOUR OPTIONS TO TWO UNDER AND OVER 15,000FT².

OKAY. THERE'S STILL A FARMERS MARKET CARVE OUT BECAUSE IT HAS TO BE FROM STATE LAW.

WE'RE STILL GOING TO RECOMMEND SOME MINOR CARVE OUTS FOR THINGS THAT LIKE UMBRELLA PERMITS AND CATERING PERMITS AND THESE SMALL FACILITIES THAT REALLY DON'T WE DON'T PUT A LOT OF EFFORT INTO.

SURE, I WOULD RECOMMEND KEEPING THEM LOW BECAUSE IF NOT, I THINK WHAT WILL HAPPEN IS THEY'LL JUST ALL GO OUT OF BUSINESS.

SO IF WE IF WE UPPED THEIR FEES REALLY, REALLY HIGH FOR, SAY, A SNACK ONLY CHILD CARE CENTER, WHEN I SAY GO OUT OF BUSINESS, THEY'LL CLOSE THEIR PERMITS OUT.

THEY WILL STOP SERVING AND WE'LL JUST LOSE THEM ALL.

YEAH. SO I WOULD RECOMMEND NOT DOING THAT.

I'D LIKE TO KEEP WHAT I HAVE ON THE BOOKS BECAUSE THESE NUMBERS ARE BASED UPON THAT.

AND IF WE MAKE REAL CRAZY CHANGES, THEN WHAT'LL HAPPEN IS I MAY GET A 20 OR 30% DROP NEXT YEAR AND I'LL MISS THE MARK TREMENDOUSLY FOR YOU. I DON'T WANT TO MISS THE MARK.

SO YOU FEEL THIS FEE SCHEDULE THAT YOU PROPOSED? I MEAN, YOU FEEL LIKE IT'S EQUITABLE.

I MEAN, LIKE AND LIKE LAURA SAID, THERE'S GOING TO BE WINNERS AND LOSERS BOTH WAYS.

BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU LOOK AT BIG PICTURE AND FOOD ONLY, THAT'S MORE THAN 50% OF MY PROGRAM.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT BIG PICTURE, I WOULD SAY MAJORITY OF THOSE 1950 FACILITIES WILL PROBABLY BE OKAY.

I MEAN, THEY'RE GOING TO COME OUT ON TOP OF THIS CANYON, IS GOING TO GOING TO TAKE A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A HIT.

AND THEN SOME OF THESE FACILITIES THAT WE TALKED ABOUT, LIKE THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS HAVE HISTORICALLY BEEN SUBSIDIZED.

[02:20:02]

SO THEY'LL BE SOME OF THE ONES THAT WILL MAKE UP A LOT OF THAT.

WHICH AND WHICH IN TERMS OF EQUITY, I MEAN, IT'S PROBABLY EQUITABLE.

I MEAN, WHAT'S THE DOLLAR LOOK LIKE IF YOU'RE A SCHOOL? SO I THINK OUR SCHOOL DISTRICT PERMITS TYPICALLY, YOU KNOW, THEY PRIOR THEY WERE LIKE $300 A PERMIT AND THEN THE REVENUE ON THOSE WOULD BE LIKE $50,000 A YEAR.

SO THEY'RE GOING FROM $300 A PERMIT TO 720IN AMARILLO AND 870 OUTSIDE. SO AT 300, WE'RE 50.

I MEAN, IF ANYBODY CAN DO QUICK MATH ON 300, WE WERE 50,000, RIGHT? 850, WHAT WOULD THAT BE? I MEAN, BUT THEN WE'RE LOOKING AT A BUDGET THAT HAS A REVENUE OF HOWEVER MANY MILLION.

RIGHT. SO IN FOOD SERVICE, OUR SCHOOL DISTRICT SITS SITS APART A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY THAN, YOU KNOW, MOM AND POP RESTAURANT.

YEAH. BUT YOU'RE SAYING THAT'S THE LARGEST PERCENTAGE INCREASE, BUT THAT POSSIBLY COULD BE THE SMALLEST INCREASE IN THEIR GROSS.

SO IF I HAVE A FOOD TRUCK THAT REVENUES TEN GRAND A MONTH.

YOU KNOW THE THE THE 152 TO THE TWO 50TH MAY BE A BIGGER INCREASE THAN IF I'M REVIEWING SAY AS A SCHOOL DISTRICT.

I DON'T KNOW EVEN KNOW WHAT THE BUDGET WOULD BE.

BUT FROM A $300 FEE TO A $720 ONE TIME OF YEAR FEE.

RIGHT. I TOTALLY AGREE.

ONE TIME OF YEAR. AND AND WHILE THESE ARE BIG INCREASES, WE ARE TALKING $300 A YEAR.

YEAH. I MEAN, THAT'S IT'S NOT A LOT OF MONEY.

THE SCHOOLS CHALLENGE IS JUST GOING TO BE THIS FIRST YEAR HAVING TO FIND IT AND NEXT YEAR THEY'LL BUILD IT IN SURE TIMING RECOMMENDATION ON HOW TO PHASE.

YOU KNOW, AND I MEAN, I THINK THERE'S PROS AND CONS TO BOTH.

I THINK THERE'S PROS AND CONS.

THERE'S A PRO TO RIPPING IT OFF AND LET'S RIPPING OFF THAT BAND AID AND LET'S FIX IT, YOU KNOW, AND I MEAN, THERE'S CONS ASSOCIATED WITH I MEAN, WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO HEAR ABOUT IT. SO IF I COULD JUST ADD, I THINK WHAT MIGHT BE A RECOMMENDATION IS IF THERE'S A WAY WE COULD WORK WITH MAYBE A SIMILAR STRUCTURE TO WHAT WE ALREADY HAVE BUILT IN THIS YEAR JUST BECAUSE OF THE TIMING STANDPOINT AND MAYBE WITH SOME ADJUSTMENTS TO HELP US GET CLOSER TO FULL COST RECOVERY WITH A LARGE CHANGE MAYBE TO COME IN ON THE NEXT YEAR, SOMETHING TO GIVE LOTS OF TIME TO KIND OF WORK THROUGH AND EXPLAINING THE REASONS FOR IT AND HOW WE GOT TO IT.

AND SO AND THEN AS THESE ENTITIES ARE DEVELOPING THEIR BUDGETS FOR THE NEXT YEAR, THEY WOULD KNOW THAT THAT THIS CHANGE IS COMING AND THEY NEED TO GO AHEAD AND BUDGET FOR THOSE IMPACTS. IT'S JUST IT'S JUST A THOUGHT.

SO BUT I MEAN, WE CERTAINLY COULD GO AHEAD AND MAKE THE CHANGE NOW AND THE REVENUE DIFFERENCE IF YOU DID THAT.

SO WE'RE GOING TO COST RECOVER THAT PROGRAM REGARDLESS.

IT'S JUST IF WE WANT TO SPREAD IT OUT AMONGST EIGHT TIERS OR DO WE WANT TO CONDENSE AND DO IT ON FOUR TIERS, WE'RE GOING TO COST RECOVER REGARDLESS.

THOSE FEE STRUCTURES WILL BE BUILT UPON A COST RECOVERY MODEL.

DO YOU WANT THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS, FOR EXAMPLE, TO PAY A LOW FEE AND EVERYONE ELSE KIND OF PAY A HIGHER FEE AND MAKE UP THAT DIFFERENCE? OR DO YOU WANT THEM IN THE HIGHER BRACKET AND EVERYONE ELSE COMES DOWN? SO WE JUST HAVE TO BALANCE IT, OKAY.

REGARDLESS, WE'LL COST RECOVER.

OWN YOUR EMPLOYEE.

WARNING? YES, SIR.

UH, WOULDN'T THE.

WE'RE PAYING OVERTIME TO THOSE PEOPLE WORKING 15 HOURS A DAY, RIGHT? NOT A LOT. MOST OF THEM WANT THE TIME OFF, SO WE.

WE OFFER $11,000 A YEAR FOR MY ENTIRE PROGRAM IN OVERTIME.

AND WE DON'T GO OVER THAT 11,000.

SO MOST OF THEM THAT ARE WORKING 50, 60 HOURS A WEEK, WHAT WILL HAPPEN IS THE NEXT WEEK THEY'LL TAKE OFF.

SO IT BALANCES OUT.

BUT I MEAN, WE'RE WORKING REAL HEAVY ONE WEEK AND THEN THEY'RE LIKE, WE'RE NOT DOING ANYTHING THE NEXT WEEK.

SO IT I NEED I WOULD REALLY APPRECIATE IT IF THAT NOT KILL YOUR ORGANIZATION IT CAN WORKING HEAVY ONE WEEK AND THEN JUST IT'S DEAD STOP NEXT IT SURE CAN YEAH IT'S IT'S A CHALLENGE.

IT'S REALLY HARD SOMETIMES WE'RE RESPONDING TO WE'RE RESPONDING TO THE RAINFALL.

SO I MEAN, ONE WEEK YOU MAY HAVE A HEAVY RAINFALL AND THEN YOU'VE GOT TWO WEEKS OF DRY PERIOD AND THEN YOU HAVE ANOTHER.

SO WE HAVE SOME TIME, BUT THOSE ARE THOSE EMPLOYEES THAT HANDLE THE VECTOR SYSTEM.

CAN THEY BE USED ELSEWHERE? SO WHEN JOHN SAID WE HAD A WE WE RESPOND TO RAINFALL.

IT'S TRUE. BUT KEEP IN MIND, WHEN IT RAINS REAL HEAVY AND THE NEXT WEEK, IT DOESN'T THE WATER DOESN'T GO AWAY.

SO WE'RE WORKING TYPICALLY IN VECTOR.

IT STARTS IN MARCH AND IT GOES ALL THE WAY TILL OCTOBER, NOVEMBER.

[02:25:02]

MOST OF MOST OF THE MOSQUITO ISSUES COME FROM PEOPLE.

SO THEY'RE STILL WATERING THIS PROGRAM.

THE ONE AND A HALF WE HAVE CURRENTLY KEEP IN MIND, ONE OF THE ONE AND A HALF DOES A WHOLE LOT OTHER STUFF.

THE HALF IS DEDICATED TO VECTOR, SO THE TWO AND A HALF THAT WE'LL BE GETTING TO, MOST OF THEM WILL BE DEDICATED VECTOR ALL YEAR LONG.

EVEN IN THE WINTER TIME, WE'RE GOING TO BE WE'RE GOING TO BE IDENTIFYING PROPERTIES, WORKING WITH PROPERTY OWNERS TO FIX DRAINAGE ISSUES, TO TO GIVE US EASEMENT ACCESS OR ACCESSES TO TREAT THEIR PROPERTY, TO WORK WITH THEM ON ON ABATEMENT PLANS.

I MEAN, THIS IS GOING TO BE A THIS IS A 12 MONTH PROGRAM.

GOTCHA. MY TEAM DOES A GREAT JOB.

I THINK IF I HAVE ANOTHER YEAR LIKE I HAD THIS YEAR, I JUST DON'T WANT TO LOSE PEOPLE.

AND I DON'T KNOW HOW I ASK SOMEBODY TO WORK THAT MANY HOURS.

WE DON'T WANT YOU TO LOSE PEOPLE EITHER.

IT'S HARD. AND, YOU KNOW, ONE ONE POSITIVE ONE THING TO TELL YOU IS IN MY AREA, IT'S KIND OF UNIQUE.

WE'RE ALMOST ALL DEGREED PROFESSIONALS REQUIRES YOU TO HAVE A BACHELOR'S DEGREE SPECIFIC IN SCIENCE WITH 30 HOURS.

SO IT'S VERY LIMITED POOL.

AND THEN WE SPEND TWO YEARS TRAINING THEM, GETTING THEM CERTIFICATE CERTIFIED AND LICENSED.

SO RETENTION IS A PRIORITY.

TURNING PEOPLE OVER IS SO DETRIMENTAL TO US AND THE ORGANIZATION, HONESTLY.

CAN I ASK YOU ABOUT YOUR RECREATIONAL WATER? THAT'S JUST YOUR POOLS, CORRECT? YES, SIR. AND SO THAT'S A LOT OF YOUR HOTEL, MOTEL, BASICALLY APARTMENT COMPLEXES, HOTEL, MOTEL, STATE REQUIREMENT.

IT'S NOT A STATE REQUIREMENT TO DO THAT, BUT IT IS A TOP PRIORITY FOR A PUBLIC HEALTH PROGRAM.

I WOULD HIGHLY RECOMMEND KEEPING THAT PROGRAM WE HAVE.

WE HAVE A LOT OF ACTIVITY IN THOSE.

YOU HAVE A LOT OF DROWNINGS.

YOU HAVE A LOT OF WATERBORNE ILLNESSES THAT COME OUT OF SWIMMING POOLS THAT ARE UNTREATED UNMAINTAINED.

SO WE WE PERMIT AND WE INSPECT CORRECT POOLS THAT ARE PUBLIC ONLY, NO PRIVATE.

WE DON'T DO PRIVATE, JUST PUBLIC.

OKAY. SO WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT A HOTEL THAT HAS A POOL REQUIRED TO GET AN INSPECTION AND REQUIRED TO PAY THE PERMIT FEE ANNUALLY.

CORRECT. PERMIT FEE.

RIGHT NOW INCLUDES THE INSPECTION FEE.

500 COVERS EVERYTHING.

SO YOU DIDN'T GO.

I APOLOGIZE. NO, GO AHEAD.

PERMIT FEE. CURRENTLY YOU HAVE A PERMIT.

THEN YOU PAY A REGISTRATION FEE FOR YOUR CPO CERTIFIED POOL OPERATOR LICENSE.

THEN YOU PAY A TECHNOLOGY FEE.

WE'RE ROLLING ALL THOSE INTO ONE, INCLUDING THE INSPECTION.

SO THE INSPECTION IS THE PERMIT FEE.

IT'S ALL THE SAME. IT'S ALL THE SAME THING.

OKAY. SO WE GO FROM I'M JUST GOING TO SAY I HAVE AN ANNUAL AND I ADD THE CPO AND THE TECH FEE TO THE 291.

RIGHT. THAT'S MY NORMAL FEES, 360, 370, WHATEVER THAT IS FOR ONE UNIT, MOST PROPERTIES HAVE 2 OR 3 UNITS, SO ADDITIONAL UNITS ARE 114 SO IF I HAD THREE UNITS THEN THEN I WOULD BE PAYING LESS AT THE $500 THAN I WOULD BE IN THE CURRENT STRUCTURE.

CORRECT. SO KEEP IN MIND, ANNUAL WITH TWO ADDITIONALS TECH AND A CPO, YOUR THREE, 4 OR 5, YOUR SIX, SEVEN, SIX, 650 IT'D BE GOING TO $1,500 WOULD BE GOING TO 1500 BECAUSE IT'S 500 PER UNIT, IT'LL END UP HAPPENING.

WHAT I ANTICIPATE HAPPENING IS FACILITIES THAT HAVE THREE UNITS WILL HAVE A POOL, A SPA AND AN INTERACTIVE WATER FEATURE.

THEY'LL PROBABLY KILL THE INTERACTIVE WATER FEATURES.

THEY'RE HARD TO MAINTAIN.

THEY REQUIRE A LOT OF EXTRA STUFF AND A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T NEED THEM.

THE SPRAY JETS, THE THINGS, THE FANCY WATERFALLS, STUFF LIKE THAT.

THEY'LL PROBABLY CLOSE THOSE PERMITS OUT AND YOU'LL JUST HAVE TO.

SO YOU'LL END UP HAVING A POOL AND A SPA AT 1000 BUCKS VERSUS 650.

YEAH. WOULD WE BE WILLING TO NOT INSPECT INTERACTIVE WATER FEATURES DUE TO THE REDUCTION OF RISK IN HEALTH? YEAH. SO IF THEY POOL, IF THEY PULL THE PUMPS AND CAP THE LINES, WHICH MOST PEOPLE ARE DOING ANYWAYS, WE JUST WON'T, WE WON'T INSPECT.

I'M JUST CURIOUS IF I'M INSPECTING THE POOL AND THE SPA, YOU KNOW, LET'S SAY THE SPA IS THE ONE THAT TYPICALLY GROWS THE MOST BACTERIA OR WHATEVER.

AND THEN I HAVE A JET SYSTEM THAT HAS A FOUNTAIN LOOKING, YOU KNOW, FEATURE OR WHATEVER, LIKE WOULD ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH BE WILLING TO FOREGO THOSE PERMITS AND JUST LOOK AT THE POOL AND THE SPA SINCE IT'S NOT A MANDATORY.

I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

I WOULD BE WILLING TO DO THAT.

WE WOULD STILL LOOK AT THEM, BUT WE WOULD PROBABLY LUMP THEM.

JUST WOULDN'T BE A SEPARATE FEE.

IT JUST WOULDN'T BE A SEPARATE FEE. WE COULD STILL YOU STILL GET TO CONTROL SOMEWHAT OF THE HYGIENE AND THE AND THE HEALTH ASPECT.

SO WE'RE NOT REDUCING, YOU KNOW, PUBLIC HEALTH, LET'S SAY PUBLIC HEALTH OR PROTECTIVE SERVICES THERE, BUT THEN WE WOULDN'T HAVE THAT FEE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT.

THAT'S CORRECT. SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WOULD THIS WOULD PROBABLY CHANGE NEXT YEAR, RIGHT?

[02:30:04]

IS $500 RECOUPS THE COST OF WHAT I HAVE TODAY.

SO IN THAT MODEL, WHICH I WOULD TOTALLY BE WILLING TO DO, THAT MAY REDUCE DOWN BY A PERCENTAGE POINT.

YOU KNOW, I DON'T EVEN KNOW HOW MANY INTERACTIVE WATER FEATURE PERMITS WE HAVE 20.

SO THIS NUMBER WOULD HAVE TO IN TURN GO UP TO RECOUP THE SAME AMOUNT.

VERY LITTLE OR MAYBE SUBSIDIZED OR SUBSIDIZED OR MAYBE SAY THAT THAT $500 FEE INCLUDES ONE WATER FEATURE.

SURE. BUT WHAT I WAS SAYING IS IN MY TOTAL NUMBERS, I WOULD HAVE TO REDUCE THOSE IN ORDER TO RECOUP THE SAME AMOUNT.

THE MONEY GOES UP OR SUBSIDIZES.

YES. RIGHT. IT PROBABLY WOULDN'T BE A LOT.

I MEAN, YOU MAY 2ND DOLLARS MAY DO THAT.

OKAY. AND DO WE SEE DO WE SEE ISSUES ON POOLS? LIKE DO WE HAVE A LOT WE HAVE HEALTH REGISTERED COMPLAINTS, HEALTH ISSUES.

I GOT SICK AT THIS HOTEL, THIS POOL TON.

OKAY. SO BUNCH A TON WOULD BE LIKE IN THE HUNDREDS PER YEAR.

YES. WE TAKE MORE ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS ON SWIMMING POOLS THAN ANY OTHER PROGRAM.

SUSPENDED PERMITS.

WE GET MORE COMPLAINTS FOR WATERBORNE ILLNESSES.

THIS IS A VERY HIGHLY ACTIVE PROGRAM, MORE SO THAN THE ICE MACHINE IN THE RESTAURANT.

ABSOLUTELY. OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. UM, THAT PROGRAM IS BUSY, TOO.

KEEP IN MIND, IT'S 52% OF OUR WE SPEND A TON OF TIME THERE.

REAL QUICK. I'LL HAND IT OVER.

ONSITE SEWAGE DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE WELL.

CORRECT. SO ALL THAT'S SEPARATE ALL THROUGH THE STATE.

SO WE DON'T PERMIT OR LICENSE WELLS BUT THE INSPECTIONS, WE MAINTAIN SETBACKS.

SO WE STILL DO REVIEWS.

RIGHT. AND YOU'RE CHARGING FOR THOSE REVIEWS ON A SEPARATE FEE? NO, THAT'S PART OF IT'S ALL INCLUDED.

SO THIS IS A WELL AND SEPTIC, YOU KNOW, FEE MORE OR LESS FROM FROM YOUR DEPARTMENT BECAUSE AND IF YOU HAD A IT WOULDN'T BE ANY DIFFERENT ON THE FEE IF I WAS JUST PUTTING A SEPTIC SYSTEM IN LET'S SAY I ALREADY HAD A WELL IT'S YEAH, IT'S THE SAME.

YOU STILL GOT THE SAME DISTANCE SETBACKS ALL THE SAME STATE CRITERIA.

SO I'M JUST PUTTING THIS IN PERSPECTIVE.

IF I CALL AND I GET A TYPICAL SEPTIC SYSTEM QUOTED AT, SAY, SIX GRAND RIGHT NOW, THAT'S INCLUDING WAY UP LIKE 13 GRAND, 13,000, PROBABLY NOT 14, 15.

THEY'VE DOUBLED IN PRICES JUST BECAUSE ALL THE FEES AND EVERYTHING.

AND THAT'S I DON'T THINK IT HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH THIS.

RIGHT. I THINK IT'S JUST CONSTRUCTION COSTS.

CONSTRUCTION COSTS HAVE JUST GONE THROUGH THE ROOF.

OKAY. SO.

YOU'RE SAYING YOU'RE GOING TO MOVE IT FROM 440 TO 800 ROUGHLY.

WHY DO YOU PUT NEW CONSTRUCTION? NEW CONSTRUCTION AND THEN.

NO. ON THE EXISTING.

YOU SAID HALF COST. SO I'M JUST NOT I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING.

YOU'RE SAYING IT COSTS YOU THE SAME AMOUNT TO GO LOOK AT AN EXISTING ONE VERSUS NEW CONSTRUCTION.

SO WE CURRENTLY HAVE A NEW CONSTRUCTION PERMIT AND AN IF IT'S ALREADY IN THE GROUND AND THEY DO REAL ESTATE TRANSACTIONS, WE TYPICALLY GET CALLED OUT TO LOOK AT THEM FOR OPERATION EFFICIENCY AT THAT TIME.

OKAY, WE CHARGE $170 FOR THAT.

WE HAVE TONS OF PROBLEMS WITH DOING THOSE INSPECTIONS.

AND HONESTLY, I WOULD LOVE TO STOP.

I TRIED TO STOP.

WE HAD A COUPLE OF OUR ENTITY PARTNERS THAT SAID, NO, YOU'RE THE ONE, WE ONLY WANT YOU TO DO IT.

WE DON'T WANT ANYBODY ELSE TO DO IT.

SO WE EITHER PROVIDE A DISTRICT WIDE OR NOT.

SO WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING THIS YEAR IS TO BREAK THAT NEW CONSTRUCTION PERMIT INTO A RESIDENTIAL AND A COMMERCIAL PERMIT.

WE SPEND A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME ON COMMERCIAL TYPICALLY, SO THAT FEE WILL BE A LITTLE BIT HIGHER.

AND THEN FOR EASE OF GROWTH, WE'RE JUST GOING TO SAY EXISTING OR JUST HALF THE COST OF THE NEW CONSTRUCTION.

I THINK IT'S AN EASY WAY TO TRACK.

IT'S AN EASY WAY TO GROW THAT WE DON'T DO A LOT OF EXISTING AS IT'S 4 OR $500.

WE MAY DO TEN OR 20 OR 30 A YEAR.

AND IF THAT WENT TO ZERO, I'D LOVE TO STOP THAT PROGRAM.

MOST HOME INSPECTORS DO THAT.

CURRENTLY. IN TERMS OF BUDGET.

WE DON'T EVEN BUDGET OUR NUMBERS ON ANY EXISTING.

I DON'T EVEN ADD IT INTO THE MODEL.

DO YOU ALLOW FOR A THIRD PARTY? IF I HAD A CHOICE ON AN EXISTING, YOU WOULD STILL.

THIRD PARTIES. WE DO ALLOW IT.

OKAY. SO.

SO IF WE'RE NOT BEING COMPETITIVE AT THE 450, I AS THE CUSTOMER COULD GO AND USE A THIRD PARTY INSPECTOR IF IF IT'S 200 BUCKS AND THAT'S ALL I'M WILLING TO PAY.

CORRECT. AND I HOPE THAT'S THE GOAL, IS TO NOT BE COMPETITIVE THERE.

GOTCHA. YES, SIR.

UH, YEAH. QUESTION.

I HAVE. YOU SAID YOU HAVE A LOT OF PROBLEMS WITH POOLS, ICE MACHINES.

DO WE WHEN WE FIND A PROBLEM LIKE THAT, DO WE FIND FIND THE VIOLATOR? SO HOW HOW ENFORCEMENT WORKS IN OUR DEPARTMENT?

[02:35:01]

SO WE'RE MY TEAM IS GOING OUT THERE TEACHING PEOPLE, CHANGING BEHAVIORS THROUGH EDUCATION.

WHEN THAT FAILS, WE'RE REALLY GOOD AT THAT.

BUT WHEN THAT FAILS, WE REQUIRE CORRECTIONS.

SO WE ARE MAKING PEOPLE FIX THINGS AND AND GIVING THEM TIME AND BEING EQUITABLE IN THAT ALL THAT STUFF HAPPENS.

BUT WHEN THAT FAILS, WE ENFORCE AND WE SUSPEND PERMITS, WE WRITE TICKETS, WE DO THAT.

THERE'S A THAT'S A PIECE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH.

IT'S A VERY SMALL PIECE IN TERMS OF ALL THE INTERACTIONS AND ALL THE INSPECTIONS THAT WE DO IN A YEAR.

I MEAN, WE WE MAY WRITE TEN TICKETS, MAYBE, MAYBE LESS THAN THAT, FIVE TICKETS IN A YEAR'S PERIOD OF TIME, EDUCATIONAL, EDUCATIONAL REGULATORS.

THEN WE ENFORCE I COULD UNDERSTAND FIRST TIME EDUCATIONAL SECOND TIME.

I THINK YOU NEED TO.

GO AHEAD AND RECOUP YOUR COSTS FOR HAVING TO GO BACK OUT.

AND WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF THAT BUILT IN IN TERMS OF WHAT'S CALLED REINSPECTION FEES.

SO WE GO OUT, WE SAY, HEY, THIS IS A PROBLEM.

YOU GOT TO FIX IT IN TEN DAYS.

WE COME BACK IN TEN DAYS AND IT'S STILL A PROBLEM.

WE CHARGE A REINSPECTION FEE TO RECOUP OUR COST.

WE GO BACK OUT A THIRD TIME, WHICH REQUIRES A THIRD INSPECTION.

THEY DON'T DO IT. IT'S A HIGHER TIER REINSPECTION FEE THAT USED TO GO UP QUITE A BIT.

WE'VE CONDENSED THOSE DOWN INTO TWO ON THE THIRD TIME.

THEY DON'T FIX IT. WE WRITE TICKETS.

DO YOU HAVE A BREAKDOWN OF THOSE? ARE THEY IN HERE SOMEWHERE? I DIDN'T GIVE YOU A COPY OF THE OF ALL THE FEES THAT WE CHARGE, BUT THAT THAT'S IN OUR OUR FEE SCHEDULE THAT I CAN I CAN GIVE YOU A COPY OF.

THANK YOU. OH I'M SORRY.

IS IT IN MISCELLANEOUS, JOHN.

SECOND PAGE. IT'S ON THE SECOND PAGE.

THANK YOU. SORRY, JOHN.

I DID GIVE YOU A COPY, GENTLEMEN, TO KEEP US MOVING ALONG HERE.

I THINK WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS IT'S PROPORTIONAL.

I THINK IT IS MORE FAIR IN THE OVERALL, IT'S SIMPLER, IT'S EASIER.

I THINK WHAT WE'RE REALLY NEEDING TO DISCUSS HERE IS DO WE DO WE HOLD WITH WHERE WE'RE AT AND NOT IMPLEMENT THESE THIS THIS NEW SYSTEM, OR DO WE GO AHEAD AND IMPLEMENT THIS NEW SYSTEM? AND REALLY WHAT I'M HEARING IS, IS FROM OUR HOTELIERS, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A FEW ON THERE THAT THAT ARE GOING TO SEE A LITTLE BIT OF AN INCREASE IN COST.

BUT HONESTLY, I THINK WHAT I GET MORE COMPLAINTS ON FROM THEM IS THE EFFICIENCY AND THE SPEED AT WHICH WE'RE WILLING TO TO GET THEM OPEN.

I HAVE YET TO HAVE ANYBODY TELL ME THEY THEY, YOU KNOW, DIDN'T WANT TO PAY IT.

WHAT THE ISSUE IS, IS IT TOOK YOU TOO LONG TO GET THERE OR OR YOU WERE YOU WERE HARD TO DEAL WITH OR YOU CITED ON SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, THAT WASN'T CONSEQUENTIAL TO HEALTH. SO THOSE ARE THINGS THAT I'M SURE YOU ALREADY ARE WORKING ON AND CONTINUE TO WORK ON.

BUT THEN REALLY, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT PIECE IS THE ONLY OTHER ONE.

AND SO I JUST WOULD LIKE TO KNOW FROM COUNCIL, IF YOU GUYS WANT TO WANT TO MOVE FORWARD NOW OR IF YOU WANT TO MOVE FORWARD LATER AND JUST ABSORB THE THE THE COST ON THE SUBSIDIZED MONIES.

AND THEN WITH THIS WORKING BUDGET KIND OF COMING THROUGH THE END OF MOSQUITO SEASON AND ALL THIS OTHER STUFF, WHAT I'D RATHER DO IS I'D RATHER BUDGET THAT POSITION INTO YOUR INTO YOUR DEPARTMENT, BUT NOT NOW.

I MEAN WE CAN TAKE IT BACK UP IN SIX MONTHS AS WE SET ASIDE MONIES FOR THAT.

WHAT DOES THAT DO TO YOU? IF WE IF WE DON'T DO THAT NOW JUST BECAUSE I THINK I THINK YOU GUYS HAVE WORKED REALLY HARD AND YOU'RE COMING TO THE END OF THAT REALLY HARD SEASON AND AS WE GET INTO FALL, IT'S GOING TO SLOW DOWN ANYWAY.

SO ARE WE ADDING A POSITION WE DON'T NECESSARILY NEED UNTIL NEXT MARCH? THAT'S A GOOD POINT. AND I WILL SAY TWO THINGS TO THAT.

I THINK WE CAN DEFINITELY HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF TIME AND LAPSE THAT A LITTLE BIT.

BUT KEEP IN MIND, I'VE GOT TO I'VE GOT TO RECRUIT AND THEN I NEED PROBABLY 2 TO 3 MONTHS TO TRAIN IN THAT POSITION.

IT'S NOT A DEGREED PROFESSIONAL, THAT POSITION SPECIFICALLY, BUT I NEED PROBABLY 2 TO 3 MONTHS TO TRAIN AND LICENSE.

IT DOESN'T REQUIRE A STATE LICENSE, SO WE CAN LAPSE.

ABSOLUTELY. I'D PROBABLY FEEL PRETTY COMFORTABLE WITH MAYBE THREE MONTHS IF I CAN HAVE THEM READY TO GO FOR MARCH.

SO MAYBE A COMPROMISE ON THAT WOULD BE WE COULD ADD IN THE POSITION, WE COULD HOLD IT AND NOT FILL IT TILL MAYBE AROUND JANUARY 1ST ISH, GIVE HIM A FEW MONTHS TO GET THEM TRAINED AND CERTIFIED AND THEN READY TO GO AS SOON AS VECTOR SEASON.

THE THE HEIGHT OF VECTOR SEASON IS IN SWING.

WOULD THAT SEEM REASONABLE OR.

ANYONE OR ANY THOUGHTS ON THAT? LISTEN, A GUY THAT'S TOLD NO ONCE AND COMES BACK AGAIN, I THINK HE'S REALLY PRETTY PASSIONATE ABOUT NEEDING IT.

[02:40:01]

BUT I, I DON'T KNOW IF I'D HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT.

I DON'T THINK IT'S A IT'S A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.

I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION ON THE FEE ROLLOUT.

SO I SEE PRICE INCREASES GENERALLY ROLLED OUT ONE OF THREE WAYS ALL AT ONE TIME.

WE GIVE YOU A YEAR IN ADVANCE NOTICE TO ABSORB IT OR YOU THROW IT OUT AND YOU SEE WHAT STICKS.

IN OTHER WORDS, YOU HAD THE FREEDOM.

IF YOU GET A IF YOU GET A REALLY A LOT OF FEEDBACK.

SO MAYBE YOU THROW IT OUT THERE AND HALF THE CUSTOMERS PAY IT, DON'T SAY A THING, BUT THOSE THAT DO HAVE SOMETHING, YOU HAVE THE YOU HAVE THE WILLINGNESS, DEPENDING ON YOUR JUDGMENT, TO SAY, OKAY, WE'LL WE'LL WAIT TILL THE END OF THE YEAR.

IF YOU IF YOU HAD AN IDEAL SITUATION, WHICH ONE OF THOSE THREE WOULD YOU DO ALL AT ONE TIME, YEAR LONG NOTICE OR THROW IT OUT AND SEE WHAT STICKS? I THINK THERE ARE PROS AND CONS TO BOTH, AND I DON'T ALWAYS SAYS, YOU KNOW, HONESTLY, HONESTLY, COUNCIL MEMBER.

I MEAN, IF WE WANT TO DO THE ROUTE OF SIMPLIFIED HIGHER RATE FOR OUT MORE EQUITY, I MEAN IT DOESN'T HURT TO RIP THAT BAND AID OFF, BUT WE'RE GOING TO HEAR ABOUT IT.

WE'RE GOING TO HEAR ABOUT IT. I JUST THINK YOU NEED TO KNOW THAT.

I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR ABOUT IT EITHER WAY.

YEAH, MY OPINION IS WE RIP THE BAND AID OFF.

IT'S AN ANNUAL FEE.

AND THAT'S JUST I'M A BUSINESS OWNER.

I GET IT. THAT'S JUST MY OPINION.

THROWING IT OUT THERE. WELL, AND I DO THINK IT'S JUST THE WHATEVER WE CAN DO AND THIS IS THIS IS WHERE I THINK REALLY YOU AND OUR AND OUR COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENT REALLY NEEDS NOT ONLY TELLING THE END USE CUSTOMERS ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON, BUT TELLING THE COMMUNITY, HERE'S WHAT WE'RE DOING AND HERE'S WHY WE'RE DOING THIS.

AND, YOU KNOW, AS WE SIT HERE AND TRY TO PUT THE BUDGET TOGETHER, IT'S PAINFUL IN SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE DOING, YOU KNOW, AND THE DEPARTMENTS HAVE REALLY TRIED TO DO WHAT THEY CAN TO KEEP EXPENSES DOWN, BUT THAT FREES UP $1 MILLION FOR US TO TO ADDRESS A PROBLEM THAT'S BEEN DECADES IN THE MAKING, WHICH IS STREETS.

SO IT'S COMPLICATED TO FIGURE IT OUT.

AND EVERYBODY'S JUST WORRIED ABOUT THE IMPACT ON THEM.

BUT I THINK THE COMMUNICATION COMPONENT OF THIS AND MAKING SURE THAT EVERYONE IN YOUR ORGANIZATION ALL THE WAY DOWN TO YOUR FRONT LINE PEOPLE, THAT WHEN THEY'RE ASKED THAT QUESTION ABOUT WHY THE FEE IS GOING UP, THAT THEY CAN GIVE A REALLY GOOD, SOLID ANSWER TO IT.

I ABSOLUTELY AND HONESTLY, THINGS HAVE CHANGED DRASTICALLY FOR US.

I MEAN, COST COST OF PROVIDING SERVICES IN THE LAST TWO YEARS HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ROOF ONE AND TWO, WE'VE BEEN STATUTORILY TAKEN AWAY. TWO PROGRAMS OUR ABILITY TO COLLECT ON ALCOHOL HAS GONE SEPTEMBER 1ST.

THAT'S $100,000 LOSS TO OUR DEPARTMENT THAT HAS TO BE RECOUPED SOMEWHERE ELSE.

AND THEN OUR ABILITY TO CHARGE FOR CERTIFIED FOOD MANAGERS, THAT'S ANOTHER 80,000 GONE SEPTEMBER 1ST.

BOTH OF THOSE ARE GONE.

DO WE DO WE VECTOR CONTROL ALL OF THE SCHOOL PARKS? WE DO. OKAY.

MAN, I'D BE IN FAVOR OF MOVING THIS FEE STRUCTURE FORWARD JUST AS IT IS AND ADDING THE POSITION NOW, JUST GIVING YOU THE OPPORTUNITY. AND THEN, YOU KNOW, AS A COMPANY WE CHARGE QUITE A BIT AND WE DON'T APOLOGIZE FOR NOT BEING THE CHEAPEST OR THE LOWEST BID, BUT WE DEFINITELY APOLOGIZE FOR NOT GIVING YOU THE BEST SERVICE.

SO LIKE WITH AN INCREASE OF COST, WE EXPECT A GOOD INCREASE IN SERVICE AND SERVICE QUALITY.

SO I THINK WHAT WE WANT TO BE TELLING OUR CUSTOMERS IS, YES, SIR, IT DID GO UP AND WE'RE ON TOP OF IT.

YOU'RE YOU'RE GETTING TOP QUALITY TIER SERVICE.

SO I THINK WE JUST MOVE FORWARD WITH IT.

AND I APOLOGIZE FOR THE LACK OF WARNING AND THE BUDGET AND WE'RE NEW.

AND SO WE'LL KNOW WE KNOW MORE MOVING FORWARD.

BUT THIS IS A TRANSITIONAL TIME AND THIS IS WHAT CHANGE LOOKS LIKE.

SO AND I CAN MAKE A PROMISE TO YOU, A-PLUS SERVICES, ALL WE SHOOT FOR, NOTHING LESS ALL THE TIME.

WE WILL FALL SHORT OF THAT SOMETIMES.

BUT MOST EVERYONE OUT THERE HAS MY CELL PHONE NUMBER AND THEY CAN CALL ANYTIME.

AND OUR ENTIRE DEPARTMENT IS ON CALL 24 OVER SEVEN.

WELL, I KNOW THAT I HAD PLANNED ON GETTING A BUNCH OF PHONE CALLS AFTER THE FLOODING, NOT ONLY FOR FLOODING ISSUES AND PROPERTY ISSUES, BUT THEN MY MY IMMEDIATE THOUGHT WAS, MAN, THE MOSQUITOES ARE GOING TO BE CRAZY AND WE'RE JUST GOING TO GET EATEN ALIVE.

AND I DIDN'T TAKE ONE PHONE CALL ON ON A MOSQUITO ISSUE.

AND I'M NOT SAYING WE DIDN'T HAVE THEM LIKE BUT I DIDN'T NOTICE THEM ANY WORSE THIS YEAR THAN ANY OTHER YEAR.

AND I HAD 21IN OF RAIN.

THERE'S A VERY SPECIFIC REASON FOR THAT.

I BELIEVE YOU'RE RIGHT.

APPRECIATE YOU ALL. THANK YOU FOR DOING A GOOD JOB.

UM, WE OKAY WITH MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS FEE STRUCTURE, GUYS? ANY ANYTHING ON YOUR SIDE? SO YOU HAVE THE DIRECTION YOU NEED.

YOU KNOW, I'M GOING TO HIT THE GROUND RUNNING WITH THIS.

THANK YOU. SO, YES, HE WILL START COMMUNICATING PROBABLY TODAY.

SO JUST SO JUST SO WE CAN MAKE SURE WE HAVE PLENTY OF TIME TO COMMUNICATE BEFORE IT STARTS.

SO, YES, THANK YOU ALL FOR THAT DIRECTION.

[02:45:01]

YOU'VE GOT A GOOD REASON FOR WHAT'S WHAT'S HAPPENING.

YOU'VE GOT TO BE VERY WELL VERSED ON THAT.

I MEAN, TO JUST OPENLY COMMUNICATE OF WHAT'S GOING ON, COST GOING UP, SERVICE GOING UP.

AND WE'LL DEFINITELY WORK ON A CONSISTENT MESSAGE AND WE'LL WE'LL PUT THAT TOGETHER FOR YOU ALL AS WELL SINCE YOU'LL GET THE PHONE CALLS AND THE EMAILS JUST BROUGHT TO.

THE COUNCIL'S PLACE FOR.

ALL THINGS ENVIRONMENTAL.

BUT I HAVE CALLED FORWARDING ON MY CELL PHONE MAYOR BACK.

THANK YOU, GUYS. THANK YOU, GUYS.

ALL RIGHT. I THINK UP NEXT, COULD WE TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT PARKS AND REC? WE HAVE A COUPLE OF ITEMS WE WANTED TO TOUCH BASE WITH YOU ALL ON.

AND WE HAVE MICHAEL KASHUBA COMING UP.

AND I'VE GOT A HANDOUT.

SO ONE OF THE JOYS OF BUDGETING IS THE TIME OF YEAR IT FALLS IN AND IN PARKS AND RECREATION.

THAT IS ONE OF THE MOST CHALLENGING TIMES OF YEARS BECAUSE THEY'RE THE HEIGHT OF THEIR SEASON HAS NOT OCCURRED WHEN WE TELL THEM TO START SETTING A BUDGET.

SO WE HAVE MICHAEL KASHUBA UP HERE TO TALK ABOUT AN ADDITIONAL FEE CHANGE THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO RECOMMEND RELATED TO THE AQUATICS AREA. AS YOU KNOW, WE JUST CAME OFF THE POOL SEASON AND SO WE HAVE HANDED OUT A PAGE THAT TALKS ABOUT THAT SHOWS KIND OF THE BREAKDOWN ON THE CURRENT FEE VERSUS THE PROPOSED FEE.

DO YOU ALL HAVE ANY EXTRA OVER THERE? CAN YOU GIVE ONE TO MICHAEL? I'M SORRY, YOU'VE GOT THIS.

OKAY. OKAY. JUST MAKING SURE HE HAD THE SAME THING.

THANK YOU. AND SO ON THIS, I'LL LET MICHAEL RUN THROUGH IT.

AND THEN WE'VE GOT A COUPLE OF OTHER QUICK THINGS TO TALK ABOUT, PARKS AND THEN WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT FEE AREA.

MAYOR AND COUNCIL. SO AS MISS STORRS JUST STATED, WE JUST WENT THROUGH OUR AQUATIC SEASON AND WANTED TO WE PRESENTED THIS TO THE PARK BOARD ON AUGUST 9TH AND GOT THEIR INPUT.

THEY WERE THE ONES THAT RECOMMENDED THESE FEE INCREASES.

SO ESSENTIALLY WHAT THEY'VE ASKED FOR IS A $5 ENTRY FEE AT SOUTHWEST AND SOUTHEAST POOLS.

WE USED TO HAVE A STAGGERED FEE SYSTEM THERE WHERE IT WAS ANYWHERE FROM $2 FOR A NON SWIMMER TO $4 FOR AN ADULT.

THEY RECOMMENDED JUST A FLAT FEE OF $5 FOR ANYBODY GOING INTO ONE OF THOSE TWO POOLS AND THEN ALSO RECOMMENDED A FLAT RATE GOING INTO THOMPSON.

WE HAVE BEEN CHARGING $5, SO BUMPING THAT TO SEVEN AND THEN ALSO LOOKING AT ADJUSTING THOSE FEES.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE SEEN AND WE'VE GOT A CHART, I DON'T KNOW IF STEPHANIE WANTS TO BRING IT UP OR NOT.

WE'VE BEEN TRACKING ALL OF OUR POOLS AND YOU CAN SEE SO BLUE.

THE DARK BLUE IS THOMPSON.

THOMPSON HAS DONE EXTREMELY WELL.

KIND OF THE AQUA COLOR IS SOUTHEAST POOL.

AND THEN ORANGE IS SOUTHWEST.

SOUTHWEST IS ABOUT RECOVERING ABOUT A THIRD OF OUR JUST OUR STAFF COSTS, NOT TO MENTION A LOT OF OUR OTHER FEES, CHEMICAL FEES, THINGS LIKE THAT.

SO THAT WAS THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE PARK BOARD, WAS TO START ADJUSTING AND ADJUSTING THAT COST RECOVERY.

AS YOU CAN SEE, THE REVENUE FOR THOMPSON IS FAIRLY SIGNIFICANT.

IT MORE THAN COVERS THE COST OF OUR STAFF AT THAT LOCATION.

SO AGAIN, THESE ARE JUST RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO START IMPROVING THAT COST RECOVERY.

RIGHT NOW, AQUATICS IS ABOUT 45% COST RECOVERY.

SO AGAIN, JUST TAKING STEPS TO WORK TOWARDS THAT.

ONE OF THE OTHER CHALLENGES OBVIOUSLY HAS BEEN SOME OF THE DAMAGE AT THE POOL.

SO THERE WILL HAVE TO BE SOME AT SOUTHWEST.

WE WOULD HAVE TO MAKE SOME IMPROVEMENTS THERE IF WE WANT TO REOPEN THAT FACILITY DUE TO SOME OF THAT VANDALISM.

SO THOSE ARE SOME OTHER COSTS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT AS WE MOVE FORWARD.

BUT THAT'S THAT'S ONE OF THE CHALLENGES WITH WITH SOUTHWEST SPECIFICALLY.

SO. OKAY.

AND SO BOTTOM LINE, MAYBE JUST SIMPLIFYING SOME OF THE FEE STRUCTURES AT THE SWIMMING POOLS ON THIS PAGE, YOU'LL SEE THAT IT ACTUALLY IS ANTICIPATED TO GET US POSSIBLY A LITTLE BIT MORE REVENUE AT ABOUT 17,000.

SO CAN I SAY ONE MORE THING? OH, I'M SORRY. AND THIS IS SOMETHING OBVIOUSLY IF COUNCIL WANTS THE PARK BOARD TO TAKE A DEEPER DIVE INTO IT TO SEE FEASIBILITY OF SOME OF THESE FACILITIES, BECAUSE SOME OF THEM, LIKE I SAID, ARE NOWHERE NEAR COST RECOVERY.

WE'VE GOT THOMPSON THAT'S DOING VERY WELL.

SOUTHEAST, I THINK WITH SOME FEE ADJUSTMENTS, COULD PROBABLY GET CLOSER.

I THINK THE ONE THAT WE'VE STRUGGLED WITH IS SOUTHWEST.

THERE'S DAYS WHERE YOU'RE ONLY MAKING A COUPLE HUNDRED BUCKS, BUT YOU'RE SPENDING WAY MORE IN STAFF HOURS, SO WE'D BE HAPPY TO TAKE A DEEPER DIVE WITH THE PARK BOARD IF THAT'S COUNCIL'S DIRECTION.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A DEEPER DIVE IN THAT.

AND WHAT IS IT EVEN POSSIBLE FOR COST RECOVERY AND THE REASONS AND I MEAN I THINK I KNOW THE REASONS OF.

[02:50:04]

BUT IS IT FEASIBLE TO KEEP IT OPEN? YOU KNOW, WE CAN WORK WITH THE PARK BOARD ON THAT.

I THINK THE CHALLENGE THERE IS THERE'S OTHER FACILITIES THAT ARE CLOSE, AND I THINK A LOT OF THE BUSINESS GOES TO EITHER ONE OF THOSE TWO FACILITIES.

AND, YOU KNOW, SOUTHEAST SERVES THAT GEOGRAPHIC REGION.

THERE'S NOTHING COMPETING.

THOMPSON THE SAME THING.

I THINK SOUTHWEST, YOU'VE GOT COMPETING BUSINESSES, SO WE CAN TAKE A DEEPER DIVE INTO THAT.

AND POTENTIALLY COMING WITH AN OPTION OTHER THAN A SWIMMING POOL FOR THAT FACILITY.

SO JUST A HEADS UP, IF WE WOULD BE EXPLORING ALL OPTIONS ON THAT.

YEAH. COULD YOU GET US A WHEN YOU'RE WORKING UP TO COME BACK? HOW MANY PEOPLE ACTUALLY USE SOUTHWEST AND THE TIMES OF DAYS AND BREAK THAT DOWN FOR US A LITTLE BIT? ABSOLUTELY WE CAN WITH THIS CHART.

WE CAN BREAK IT DOWN BY WE'VE GOT IT BROKEN DOWN BY DAYS.

WHAT THEY'RE PURCHASING, WHETHER IT'S ADMISSION CONCESSIONS, WE CAN ALSO BREAK IT DOWN BY DAY OF THE WEEK.

SO WE'D BE HAPPY TO DO THAT.

AND WHAT I'M THINKING, IF COUNCIL IS OKAY WITH THIS, WE WILL GET THIS EMAILED OUT TO YOU GUYS ALONG WITH A FURTHER BREAKDOWN.

WOULD THAT BE OKAY? OKAY, GREAT.

ANY CONCERNS ABOUT THIS RECOMMENDED POOL FEE CHANGE? I GUESS MY ONLY QUESTION IS WHY IS IT SO MUCH DIFFERENT WITH SOUTHEAST AND SOUTHWEST AND THOMPSON? I MEAN, YOU HAVE ALL THESE DIFFERENT STIPULATIONS WITH.

YOU KNOW, I CAN KIND OF EXPLAIN THAT.

AND THEN WHY HAS ONE POOL COST MORE TO GO TO THAN THE OTHER? WELL, SO ESSENTIALLY, SOUTHEAST AND SOUTHWEST ARE BOTH THE OLD STYLE POOL BUILT IN PROBABLY 60S OR 70S.

AND SO THEIR RATES ARE GOING TO BE DIFFERENT THAN THOMPSON, WHICH IS OBVIOUSLY THE NEW AQUATIC FACILITY WHICH HAS SLIDES LAZY RIVER.

SO THAT'S WHERE WE'VE GOT A STAGGERED FEE, THE STANDARD POOL VERSUS A LITTLE BIT MORE OF AN AQUATIC FACILITY WITH MORE AMENITIES.

SO THAT'S WHY THOMPSON'S FEE IS A LITTLE BIT HIGHER THAN WHAT SOUTHEAST AND SOUTHWEST HAS BEEN.

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? YEAH. SO, I MEAN, AS FAR AS LIKE YOU TAKE GOLF, FOR EXAMPLE, I KNOW I'M GETTING DOWN A RABBIT HOLE HERE, BUT DO WE LIKE WITH THE GOLF STUFF? DO WE ARE THEY DIFFERENT FEES AT EACH LOCATION OR ARE THEY ALL THE SAME FEES? THERE ARE DIFFERENT FEES AT THE DIFFERENT GOLF COURSES.

SO COMANCHE'S A LITTLE BIT LOWER THAN WHAT WE TYPICALLY CHARGE OVER AT ROSS.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. PERHAPS THE MOST CRITICISM THAT I'VE TAKEN IS JUST THE PARK FEES FOR RESERVING THE PARKS.

WHERE IN OUR BUDGET BOOK DID YOU HAVE ALL OF THOSE? SO WE CAN LOOK AT THOSE REAL QUICK.

WHICH ONE? THE SPECIAL FEES.

YES. THOSE WOULD HAVE GONE IN LAST YEAR.

RIGHT. WHERE DO YOU BUDGET FOR THOSE? THEY WOULD GO IN.

LET ME FIND IT. IT'LL BE UNDER PARK ADMIN.

OKAY. SO IN YOUR BUDGET BOOKS, YOU'RE GOING TO BE.

AGE 2122.

SOME OF WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO BE ON PAGE THREE, 390 IN YOUR BOOK IS WHERE YOUR REVENUE IS GOING TO SHOW UP.

DO YOU SEE THE SECOND LINE? SORRY, THAT PRINT'S A LITTLE SMALL THERE.

BUT THE SECOND LINE IS YOUR SPECIAL EVENT APPLICATION FEES.

AND YOU'LL SEE WHERE HISTORICALLY WE'VE RECEIVED ABOUT ANYWHERE FROM 2000 TO 3000 AND WE'RE ANTICIPATING THAT IS TO BE CLOSER TO ABOUT 15,000IN THIS NEXT YEAR.

OKAY. I'M NOT ON THE RIGHT PAGE.

YOU SAID 390, 390.

YES, GO UP TO THE VERY TOP.

BUT THE SECOND SET OF NUMBERS THERE OR THE SECOND LINE OF NUMBERS, THE FIRST ONE IS PRETTY MUCH ZEROS, BUT THE SECOND ONE IS SPECIAL EVENT APPLICATION FEES.

DO YOU SEE? RIGHT, RIGHT. SO WHAT I'M WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET INTO IS THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT IT COSTS TO RESERVE THE PARKS AND WHICH ONES ARE BEING RESERVED.

DO WE HAVE THAT ON A SCHEDULE SOMEWHERE THAT WE'VE GOT IT REFER TO? WE'VE GOT THE RATES THAT ARE IN THE FEE ORDINANCE AND THEN I'VE GOT SOME INFORMATION I'D BE HAPPY TO SHARE WITH COUNCIL THAT BREAKS IT DOWN A LITTLE BIT FURTHER IN TERMS OF THE DIFFERENT LOCATIONS THAT WE'VE BEEN RESERVING AND ALSO THE THE ACTUAL FEES.

SO THE FEES THEMSELVES, WHAT WE USED TO DO IS BREAK IT DOWN BY IF YOU WANT A DUMPSTER, IF YOU WANT ALL LITTER FEE, WHAT WE DID WAS WE WRAPPED IT ALL INTO ONE FEE.

THE OTHER THING THAT WE DID WAS WE ADDED PRE SITE POST SITE VISITS FOR STAFF TO GO OUT THERE AND MAKE SURE BECAUSE THAT WAS ONE OF THE BIGGEST MISSING LINKS.

I THINK IN TERMS OF DAMAGE TO OUR FACILITIES IS WE WEREN'T GOING OUT THERE SHOWING WHERE PEOPLE COULD PARK THEIR FOOD TRUCKS AND WHERE THEY COULD PUT TENTS UP.

AND SO ON THE BACK SIDE, STAFF WAS SEEING A LOT OF DAMAGE.

SO WE GO OUT AND HELP THEM FACILITATE, SHOW THEM WHERE ALL THOSE DIFFERENT CONNECTIONS ARE, WHERE THEY CAN PUT STUFF ON THE BACK SIDE.

STAFF GOES OUT THERE TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE WASN'T DAMAGE.

IF IT WAS, THEN OBVIOUSLY WE HOLD THAT DEPOSIT.

SO WE BASICALLY WRAPPED IT ALL INTO THAT FEE.

SO IN THAT FEE, SO FOR A SMALL EVENT, WHICH IS 2 TO 500 PEOPLE IS $1,000, THERE'S A $55 NONREFUNDABLE APPLICATION FEE.

THE PRE SITE VISIT, WHICH IS 70 BUCKS, WHICH IS STAFF TIME AND COST TO GO OUT THERE, POST SITE VISIT OF 70 TO GO BACK OUT THERE AND RE INSPECT IT DUMPSTER FEE OF 50

[02:55:06]

SO THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO THAT FACILITY IS THAT 500.

SO THAT'S WHERE WE GET THAT $1,000.

AND THE SAME THING FOR THE LARGER EVENTS.

IT'S JUST THAT RENTAL COST IS A LITTLE BIT BIGGER BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT MORE PEOPLE TAKING UP THAT SPACE.

RIGHT. I APPRECIATE THE REVIEW ON THAT.

JUST BECAUSE WE DIDN'T WE WEREN'T ALL PART OF THAT.

AND SO SOME OF IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF CATCH UP.

BUT I'M LOOKING AT THIS, YOU KNOW, $2,225 WORTH OF REVENUES AND YOU'RE LOOKING AT 15,000 AND YOUR PROJECTED REVENUES.

WHY WOULD YOU SEE THE UPTICK? I THINK A LOT OF IT DURING COVID, SOME OF THE ACTIVITY WENT DOWN.

SO IT'S JUST PROJECTING WHERE WE ANTICIPATE THAT COULD GO WITH SOME OF THESE SPECIAL EVENT FEES.

SO WHAT I'M WHAT I'M SEEING IN THE PUBLIC IS MORE OF THE SPECIAL EVENTS THAT ARE NON PROFIT.

THEY'RE COMMUNITY, THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, IT'S BRAIDS AND FADES OR WHATEVER.

AND SO THEY'RE THEY'RE NOT THEY'RE NOT A TYPICAL CUSTOMER.

LIKE IF I HAD A BUSINESS AND I NEEDED TO, TO HAVE A VENUE FOR 500 OF MY EMPLOYEES FOR THE END OF THE YEAR PARTY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

SO AND, AND I UNDERSTAND THE NEED TO BE ABLE TO RESERVE THE ENTIRE PARK.

AND I ALSO UNDERSTAND THE SERVICE ASPECT ALONG WITH THAT.

WHAT I DON'T SEE HERE IS LIKE A RETURN ON, ON THIS STRUCTURE.

YOU KNOW, I MEAN, WE REVENUE $2,200.

THAT'S THAT'S TWO PARK RESERVATIONS POTENTIALLY.

DO WE HAVE MORE THAN THAT? I'M JUST NOT SEEING IT HERE OR I CAN GET THAT NUMBER FOR YOU.

I WOULD ANTICIPATE WE'RE GOING TO SEE MORE THAN THAT IN TERMS OF THOSE PRIVATE EVENTS THAT ARE RENTING THE WHOLE FACILITY.

SO I CAN GET YOU SOME UPDATED NUMBERS AND MAKE SURE THAT THESE ARE WITH THE PARKS BOARD THAT DOES A GOOD JOB.

AND THEY THEY THEY SPEND A LOT OF TIME WE'RE REFERRING THESE POOL FEES BACK DOWN TO THEM BECAUSE THOSE AREN'T RELEVANT TO THIS CURRENT YEAR.

I MEAN, IT'LL BE IN THIS NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET.

WE COULD WE COULD ALWAYS AMEND IT, RIGHT? IF IT TOOK A MINUTE TO GET THESE FEES, ARE YOU LET ME MAKE SURE.

WHICH FEES ON THE POOL FEES.

I'M TALKING ABOUT THE POOL FEES.

THEY THEY HAVE ALREADY VETTED THOSE AND THEY ARE BRINGING THIS IS THEIR THE PARKS BOARD RECOMMENDATION ON.

OKAY. I THOUGHT I THOUGHT COUNCILMAN TIPPS ASKED TO REFER THAT BACK DOWN.

THAT WAS THE SOUTHWEST. NO, THAT WAS FOR OPTIONS RELATED TO THE OVERALL USE OF SOUTHWEST POOL, THE FEASIBILITY OF KEEPING.

SO THERE YOU GO. THANK YOU.

YES. WELL, THEN IN THAT IN THAT FEASIBILITY CONVERSATION THAT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE WITH PARKS, I'D LIKE TO HEAR, YOU KNOW, WE WENT TO A $1,200 COST TO RESERVE A PARK.

I MEAN, HOW MANY OF THOSE CUSTOMERS DID WE LOSE? ARE WE GOING TO LOSE? DO THEY WANT TO LOOK AT THAT AGAIN AND LOWER THAT TO FIVE, SIX, 700 BUCKS? ARE WE ARE WE ABLE TO TO BALANCE THAT OUT AND THEN BRING SOMETHING BACK MID-YEAR THAT WE COULD WE COULD WORK TOWARDS? BECAUSE I THINK THAT IF I LOOK AT THE THE RECOVERY OF $2,200 VERSUS THE TIME AND ENERGY SPENT TO EXPLAIN OR TO APOLOGIZE OR TO REWORK DIFFERENT EVENTS AROUND A LACK OF BUDGETING, I'VE SPENT WAY MORE TIME AND ENERGY ON IT THAN THAN WHAT I'VE REVENUE.

YEAH, WE'D BE HAPPY TO TAKE IT BACK TO THE PARK BOARD.

OKAY. I'D LOVE TO GET A RELOOK AT THAT.

SO, AND JUST ENSURING I'VE GOT DIRECTION AS WELL.

SO WE'LL LEAVE THEM AS IS, BUT TAKE THEM BACK DOWN TO PARKS BOARD TO RELOOK AT AND MAYBE BRING AN ADDITIONAL AND WE'LL HAVE UPDATED NUMBERS WITH IT TOO, JUST TO MAKE SURE WHAT WE WERE DOING BEFORE WHAT WE'RE CURRENTLY DOING, HOW MANY PEOPLE WE'VE LOST.

WE'LL BE HAPPY TO DO THAT. AND KASHUBA HAS DONE A GREAT JOB OF TAKING THEM ONE AT A TIME.

SO AS WE HAVE PEOPLE THAT DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT, OH, I DON'T HAVE TO PAY A FEE AT ALL, I JUST DON'T GET TO RESERVE THE ENTIRE PARK.

BUT, BUT I REALLY DON'T NEED THE ENTIRE PARK AND IT'S OPEN ANYWAY OR WHATEVER.

HE'S DONE A GOOD JOB OF WORKING THROUGH THOSE CUSTOMER SERVICE ISSUES.

SO I'M NOT SEEING AS IT A BUDGETARY ITEM ISSUE, I THINK THIS IS MORE OF US TRYING TO WORK WELL WITH OUR PARKS BOARD.

YEAH, YEAH, WE'RE HAPPY TO DO THAT.

OKAY. OKAY.

SO THE NEXT ITEM TO TALK ABOUT ON PARKS, I THINK WAS RELATED TO HISTORICALLY, THE CITY OF AMARILLO HAS PROVIDED A SUBSIDY TO KIDS INC AND THAT IF YOU WILL LOOK ON PAGE FOUR 38IN YOUR BOOK.

ON PAGE 438, THERE WAS $36,000 THAT HAD BEEN PAID ANNUALLY TO KIDS INC.

IT'S DOWN TOWARDS THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE UNDER THE OTHER AGENCIES LINE, AND THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT HAD COME AS A RECOMMENDATION AS WELL FROM THE PARKS BOARD.

AND I'LL LET MICHAEL KIND OF WALK THROUGH MAYBE JUST A QUICK HISTORY OF IT AND WHERE WHERE THAT RECOMMENDATION KIND OF CAME FORWARD.

SO AS THE PARK BOARD WAS REVIEWING KIND OF OUR COST RECOVERY GOALS, OBVIOUSLY WE'VE MADE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS FOR GOLF.

[03:00:07]

THE PARK BOARD KIND OF RECOMMENDED THE SAME APPROACH WITH THE KIDS INC AGREEMENT.

ESSENTIALLY YEAR ONE, THEY RECOMMENDED JUST ENDING THE AGREEMENT BUT NOT CHARGING ANY FEES.

YEAR TWO GOING UP, FEES 50%, AND THEN YEAR THREE GOING TO 100% FEE.

SO KIND OF A STAGGERED APPROACH OVER THREE YEARS.

SO YEAR ONE IS JUST ENDING THE AGREEMENT.

YEAR TWO WOULD BE RECOUPING 50% OF THE REVENUES.

YEAR THREE WOULD BE 100%.

SO WE ANTICIPATE THE AGREEMENT IS 36 AND WE ANTICIPATE WE'RE LOSING ABOUT 15,000 IN LOST REVENUE FROM THOSE FIELD RENTALS.

AND COULD YOU ALSO TALK ABOUT HOW OTHER WE WORK WITH OTHER AGENCIES AND WE CURRENTLY CHARGE THEM.

TALK ABOUT THAT AND EVEN HOW WE GOT TO THIS RECOMMENDATION, I GUESS.

SO A LOT OF OUR YOUTH SPORTS GROUPS ARE REQUIRED TO PAY THOSE FEES.

THE KIDS INC AGREEMENT GOES WAY BACK AND BASICALLY EXCLUDES THEM FROM PAYING ANY OF THOSE FEES.

SO THEY USE OUR FACILITIES.

THEY JUST DON'T PAY ANYTHING FOR THE USE OF THOSE FACILITIES.

SO A LOT OF OUR OTHER ASSOCIATIONS ARE BASEBALL, SOFTBALL, SOCCER, ALL THOSE DIFFERENT GROUPS ARE REQUIRED TO PAY THOSE RENTAL FEES.

KIDS INC IS EXCLUDED FROM THAT.

SO AGAIN, YEAR ONE, THE RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE JUST TERMINATING THE AGREEMENT, ENDING IT, AND THEN YEAR TWO GOING 50% FEES, YEAR THREE GOING THE REST JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY CAN STAGGER IT IN THEIR BUDGETS AS WELL.

AND WE THINK THE THOUGHT PROCESS BEHIND THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT WAS THAT THEY WERE WE WERE PARTNERING WITH THEM TO HELP PROVIDE SOME YOUTH SPORTS OPTIONS, I GUESS, IN THE COMMUNITY.

AND SO IT WAS THEM ESSENTIALLY RUNNING THE PROGRAMS AND US PROVIDING FACILITIES FOR THEM.

SO I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO TOUCH ON ANY OF THAT.

YEAH, IT'S AN ATHLETIC SUPERVISORY AGREEMENT.

AND SO YOU'VE GOT THAT GROUP THAT PROVIDES THOSE RECREATIONAL FACILITIES AND OR ACTIVITIES, BUT YOU'VE ALSO GOT OTHER GROUPS THAT ARE DOING THE SAME THING.

AND A LOT OF THEM ARE STARTING TO SEE OVERLAPPING PROGRAMS. SPECIFICALLY ON THE SOCCER SIDE, BASEBALL, SOFTBALL ARE PRETTY MUCH SEPARATE, BUT WE SEE SOME OVERLAP WITH THE SOCCER.

SO. SO.

PREVIOUS TO THIS AGREEMENT WITH KIDS INC, HOW MUCH MONEY WERE WE SPENDING AS A CITY TO RUN THOSE PROGRAMS? THIS IS AN OLD AGREEMENT.

I WOULD HAVE. I DON'T KNOW THAT WE EVEN HAVE THAT DATA.

THAT WAS DECADES AGO.

A COUPLE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS TO FACILITATE GAMES AND TRASH AND SCOREBOARDS.

YOU WOULD HAVE TO GO WAY BACK NOW.

ONE THING I WILL SAY IS YOUTH SPORTS ARE WHERE A LOT OF CITIES MAKE REVENUE.

SO IN THIS CASE, WE'RE ACTUALLY LOSING REVENUE.

SO AN AREA THAT MOST CITIES TYPICALLY HAVE RECREATIONAL PROGRAMS WHERE THEY ARE FACILITATING IT AND THAT TENDS TO BE ONE OF THE REVENUE STREAMS. SO IN THIS CASE, WE'VE ACTUALLY LOST THAT REVENUE STREAM.

SO, YOU KNOW, IT SEEMS AS THOUGH THEY WERE THEY WERE A GOOD PARTNER FOR A LONG TIME IN THE WAY OF WE WEREN'T HAVING TO STAFF AND MAN THAT AND RUN A WHOLE NOTHER DEPARTMENT.

HOWEVER, YOU'RE SAYING THE REVENUES THROUGH THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN GREATER BUT THEN KIDS INC WAS HITTING KIND OF THAT MODERATE TO LOW INCOME WHERE IF YOU'RE NOT PLAYING CLUB SPORTS, YOU'RE ABLE TO PLAY KIDS INC SPORTS STAY HOME.

SO ON THE REVENUES, WE WERE SEEING A QUALITY OF LIFE BALANCE THERE IN PROVIDING, YOU KNOW, RECREATION AND UTILIZING THAT.

I THINK THAT I THINK THAT PAYS DIVIDENDS OVER TIME.

I ALSO SEE HOW LIFE HAS CHANGED, THINGS HAVE CHANGED.

KIDS INC HAS CHANGED, SO THEY'RE PUTTING IN A $50 MILLION FACILITY.

SO A THREE YEAR PHASE OUT ISN'T ISN'T A TERMINATION OF THE AGREEMENT BECAUSE WE DON'T WE DON'T WANT TO PARTNER WITH THEM.

IT'S THAT WE WON'T PARTNER WITH THEM BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE THEIR OWN FACILITIES.

SO IT'S NOT A IT'S NOT A NEED, I THINK, FOR US TO WORK OURSELVES OUT OF A LONG TERM PROBLEM.

AND I JUST WOULD WANT COUNCIL TO HEAR AND THE PUBLIC TO HEAR LIKE WE DON'T HAVE A TEN YEAR SUBSIDY HERE OF, OF, YOU KNOW, WE'RE JUST CONSTANTLY PAYING THEM AND WE'RE CHARGING THE OTHER GUY IN AN UNFAIR WAY.

NOW, THE OTHER GENTLEMAN ISN'T ISN'T BRINGING FORTH A $50 MILLION ASSET TO OUR TO OUR TAX BASE.

AND AND BRINGING IN SALES TAXES FROM ALL OVER DEFINITELY THE PANHANDLE BUT STATEWIDE FOR FOR DIFFERENT EVENTS.

SO LIKE WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT EVERY TIME I GO TO DALLAS FOR CLUB BALL, YOU KNOW, IT'S 1500 BUCKS TO GET DOWN THERE AND GET BACK.

WELL WELL, AMARILLO WILL HAVE THAT $1,500 HIT IN HOTELS AND SALES TAX AND FOODS AND REVENUES.

SO KIDS INC IS STILL A VERY VALUABLE PARTNER MOVING FORWARD.

SO I SAY ALL THAT TO JUST SAY IT'S A $37,000.

YOU KNOW, THI I GUESS, RIGHT? IS THAT WHAT FOR THEM TO CONTINUE TO MANAGE WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO MANAGE AND ARE THEY STILL UTILIZING OUR FIELDS? ARE WE STILL GOING TO HAVE THEM FOR THE NEXT TWO YEARS? ARE THEY STILL PROVIDING THAT SAME SERVICE?

[03:05:03]

IT'S JUST A STAGGERED APPROACH TO SLOWLY RECOVERING THOSE COSTS.

SO WE WOULD END THAT AGREEMENT, BUT THEY WOULD STILL BE USING OUR FACILITIES.

AND THEN YEAR TWO, OBVIOUSLY WE WOULD START TO INCREASE THE REVENUES IN TERMS OF THE RENTALS.

AND THEN YEAR THREE AND DEPENDING ON WHERE THEIR PROJECT IS, THEY MAY BE COMPLETELY BUILT BY THAT POINT.

SO IT MAY BE A MUTE POINT IN A COUPLE OF YEARS.

MAYOR, IF I COULD CLARIFY THAT 36,000 IS AN AMOUNT WE ARE PAYING THEM.

I UNDERSTAND. OKAY. YES.

YEAH. AND THEN SO WE'RE TALKING TWO SIDES, US PAYING THEM AND THEN EVENTUALLY THEM PAYING US.

YES. AND I THINK THE COMPROMISE IN THERE AND I DON'T DISAGREE WITH THE DIRECTION THAT YOU'RE GOING, AND I DEFINITELY APPRECIATE THE REASON THAT YOU'RE GOING THAT WAY, BECAUSE IT IS A DESIRE OF, OKAY, WE HAVE TO TREAT ALL OUR CUSTOMERS THE SAME AND WE'VE GOT TO GET AWAY FROM SOME OF THESE DEALS THAT DON'T MAKE SENSE.

AND WE'RE SEEING THAT ON OUR SIDE AND US WILLING TO RENEGOTIATE DIFFERENT THINGS.

THIS ONE STILL PROVIDES A SERVICE FOR THOSE KIDS.

INC SPORTS. THEY'RE STILL MANAGING THEIR OWN SCHEDULES.

THEY'RE COORDINATING COACHES AND UMPIRES AND THINGS LIKE THAT THAT YOU DON'T HAVE UNLESS YOU'RE ABLE TO PAY FOR CLUB BALL, YOU KNOW? SO LIKE THERE'S A FINANCIAL BARRIER THERE FOR SOME KIDS IN AMARILLO.

AND SO IN ORDER TO NOT IMPACT THAT, I WOULD PROPOSE A COMPROMISE OF STICKING WITH YOUR FEE SCHEDULE INCREASE FOR THE RENTAL ON THE FIELDS, BUT NOT REMOVING THE $36,000 FEE THAT WE'VE BEEN PAYING THEM AND JUSTIFYING THAT IN THE WAY OF THOSE ARE THOSE ARE STAFF MEMBERS THAT WE'RE NOT HAVING TO APPLY TO PROVIDE THOSE SAME SERVICES UNTIL THEIR NEW FIELDS ARE CONSTRUCTED.

YOU HAVE SOMETHING OH, I WAS JUST GOING TO ADD, ONCE THEY'RE DONE WITH THEIR FIELDS, THEN THEY'RE ALSO GOING TO BE A PAYING CUSTOMER TO RENT MORE FIELDS FROM US FOR THOSE LARGER TOURNAMENTS THAT THEY DON'T. THEY WON'T HAVE THE SPACE FOR EITHER.

SO IT'S GOING TO BE A CITYWIDE TYPE TOURNAMENT.

SO I THINK LATER ON WE'LL SEE THE BENEFIT OF OF THAT AS WELL.

OKAY. YES, MA'AM.

OKAY. I JUST I FEEL LIKE THERE IS A RETURN ON THAT INVESTMENT.

I KNOW THAT I INCENTIVIZE STUFF ALL OVER TOWN AND I SAY WE AS A CITY AND WE BUDGET FUNDS TO GET YOU TO COME TO THE CIVIC CENTER AND WE'RE GIFTING YOU ALLOWANCES.

THIS IS A VERY, VERY SMALL INCENTIVE THAT I THINK STILL PAYS OFF AND HAS PAID OFF AND THAT IT ALSO HITS A PART OF OUR OUR COMMUNITY THAT NOBODY SERVICES THAT ONE EXCEPT THEM.

SO I WOULD JUST ASK FOR YOUR YOUR FEEDBACK ON THAT IF YOU FEEL LIKE THAT'S A MISTAKE, IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S OKAY TO MOVE FORWARD WITH.

I THINK IT'S DEFINITELY SOMETHING WE CAN WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH.

WE HAVE HAD SOME OF THE OTHER ASSOCIATIONS THAT PROVIDE A SIMILAR SERVICE, HAVE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT SUBSIDY.

BUT, YOU KNOW, WE'D BE HAPPY TO MOVE FORWARD THAT WAY.

OKAY. AND BY MOVING FORWARD, WOULD THAT WOULD THE MAYBE THE RECOMMENDATION BE TO THE 36 AND THEN SHIFT IT OUT LIKE A THREE YEAR PHASING PLAN ONCE THEIR FACILITY IS BUILT OR JUST JUST CONTINUE TO PAY IT UNTIL THEY THEY MOVE INTO THEIR NEW UNTIL THEY FINISH THEIR FACILITY.

I CHARGE THEM ZERO THIS YEAR, 50% NEXT YEAR.

OKAY. WAS IT ZERO LAST YEAR? 50%. SO THEN WE WOULD JUST REDUCE THAT SUBSIDY ANNUALLY? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SUGGESTING? SO YEAR ONE, NO, NO REDUCTION OF SUBSIDY, JUST FEES FOR USING THE FIELDS START TO INCREASE.

SO WE WOULD PAY THEM OUT AND THEN RECOUP THE FEES BACK STARTING IN YEAR TWO.

GET 50%. YES.

AND SO BUT THEN THE SUBSIDY WOULD CONTINUE UNTIL THEIR FACILITIES ARE FULLY COMPLETED.

CURIOUS IF ANYBODY WANTS TO SPECULATE ON WHAT THEIR FEES WOULD BE, SAY, FIVE YEARS FROM NOW AFTER THEY'VE GROWN AND THEY HAVE BIG TOURNAMENTS THAT THEY CAN'T HANDLE, ARE THEY HAVE YOU ALL DONE PROJECTIONS ON THAT? WE HAVEN'T. WE HAVEN'T.

TYPICALLY, THEY PROVIDE FOR REC PROGRAMS. WE HAVEN'T RUN THE NUMBERS ON THE TOURNAMENTS BECAUSE USUALLY MOST OF OUR TOURNAMENTS ARE DONE BY THOSE OTHER ASSOCIATIONS.

SO THEY'RE TYPICALLY DONE BY THE BASEBALL GROUP, SOFTBALL GROUP, SOCCER GROUP, NOT NECESSARILY DONE BY KIDS INC.

THEY'RE PROVIDING MORE OF THE LEAGUE ACTIVITIES.

SO WE HAVEN'T RUN THOSE NUMBERS.

WE COULD LOOK AT WHAT THE POTENTIAL COULD BE, BUT TYPICALLY THEY'RE NOT THE ONES BRINGING IN THE TOURNAMENTS CURRENTLY.

WE COULD WORK WITH JIMMY LACKEY AND HIS TEAM ON SOME PROJECTIONS.

TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE 3 TO 5 YEARS OUT.

I MEAN, I'VE LOOKED AT OTHER PROJECTIONS IN OKLAHOMA AND OTHER PLACES WHERE THEY'VE IMPLEMENTED THESE TYPES OF PARKS, AND THIS IS WHAT WE WANT.

AND AS A CITY, WE DON'T HAVE $50 MILLION TO GO PUT THESE FACILITIES IN OR WE WOULD GLADLY REVENUE ALL OF THOSE FUNDS AND TURN THIS THING AROUND.

BUT ALLOWING A PRIVATE PARTNER LIKE THIS TO TO COME IN AND DO THIS, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE KEEP IN MIND WE'RE GAINING A LOT LONG TERM.

I KNOW THAT I'LL SEE THIS RETURN, YOU KNOW, ON SALES TAX ALONE, BUT I APPRECIATE YOUR WILLINGNESS TO UNDERSTAND BOTH SIDES AND LOOK AT IT.

AND AND I DON'T WANT YOU TO PULL BACK ON YOUR YOUR YOUR VISION AND YOUR.

YOUR TASK OF CONTINUING TO WRITE EVERYTHING AND GET IT SELF SUSTAINING.

BUT THEN IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE, I SEE SOME BENEFITS THAT AREN'T NECESSARILY REFLECTED ON THE BUDGET.

[03:10:04]

AS AS KIDS INC AWARE THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING THIS.

YES. OKAY. YES, I'VE TALKED WITH JIMMY AND IT SEEMS TO BE I MEAN, I'M SURE HE DOESN'T LOVE IT, BUT, YOU KNOW, HE'S AWARE OF THE CONVERSATION.

WELL, I THINK KIDS THINK I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY BEEN AROUND FOR GENERATIONS, VERY IMPORTANT TO PEOPLE.

AND SO I THINK IF HE IF HE IF HE FEELS LIKE THIS IS FAIR, THEN I THINK THAT'S A GOOD THING AS WELL.

OKAY. AND THEN I THINK THAT'S IT ON PARKS.

I JUST.

YES, SIR.

WANT TO ASK YOU ABOUT THE FEE PROPOSAL FOR TENNIS.

LIKE WE TALKED ABOUT.

WE TALKED ABOUT A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHATEVER.

I'VE TALKED TO SEVERAL.

OBVIOUSLY, I'M OUT THERE AND TALKING TO THEM.

THE PROPOSED FEE GOING FROM I DON'T KNOW, THERE'S PAGE 21, PAGE 21.

YEAH, THERE YOU GO. THAT OUTLINES IT FOR YOU ALL.

YEAH. PRETTY SIGNIFICANT JUMP LIKE WE TALKED ABOUT IN DISCUSSING WITH EVERYBODY OUT THERE.

OF COURSE, IT'S THE PICKLEBALL COMMUNITY, NOT SO MUCH THE TENNIS COMMUNITY IS RIGHT NOW.

WE'RE I THINK WE'RE UNDER CHARGING, ESPECIALLY WITH WHAT'S OUT THERE IN THE MARKET.

THERE'S A FEW OTHER FACILITIES THAT HAVE POPPED UP.

AND AT THIS JUMP, WE'RE GOING TO BE WAY OVER THEM.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE, YOU KNOW, AT A MAXIMUM OF LIKE $5 AS OPPOSED TO AND NOW I KNOW WE'RE ABOUT COST RECOVERY AND WE WANT TO DO THOSE THINGS.

BUT WE'VE GOT SOME UNIQUE CHALLENGES OUT THERE RIGHT NOW THAT IT'S OVERCROWDED AND WE JUST DON'T HAVE A CITY FACILITY THAT CAN HOST.

AND WE'RE GROWING THAT PICKLEBALL COMMUNITY IS GROWING LIKE CRAZY.

AND AGAIN, WE'VE HAD DISCUSSIONS ON FUTURE ON WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE AND WE'RE COLLECTING DATA AND WE'RE DOING THOSE THINGS TO BE ABLE TO JUSTIFY THAT.

BUT I WOULD RECOMMEND THIS I THINK IT TAKING THE JUMP THAT WE'RE GOING TO TAKE, WHICH I KNOW IT SOUNDS KIND OF RIDICULOUS.

IT'S YOU THINK IT'S A DOLLAR A TIME, BUT THERE'S PEOPLE THAT PLAY QUITE A BIT.

I THINK WE STILL OFFER THE SILVER SNEAKERS THING AND THE, YOU KNOW, THERE'S SEVERAL THINGS LIKE THAT.

AND HOPEFULLY THIS WILL PUSH PEOPLE TOWARDS AN ANNUAL PERMIT STILL, BUT THOSE THAT DON'T.

WHAT I'D LIKE TO SEE IS LIKE THE $5 MAX.

I THINK THAT MAKES IT A LITTLE MORE SENSE.

IT'S A LITTLE BIT EASIER TO KEEP THE NUMBERS UP, BUT NOT.

PUSH THEM SOMEWHERE ELSE.

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? YEP.

AND WE'D BE HAPPY TO LOOK AT THAT.

THAT'S WE'VE ACTUALLY SEEN THE THE TENNIS REVENUES COME IN A LITTLE BIT BETTER THAN WE HAD ANTICIPATED.

SO I THINK THIS ACTUALLY WORKS WELL WITH KIND OF WHERE WE'VE BEEN GOING WITH OUR COST RECOVERY.

SO WE CAN ABSOLUTELY LOOK AT THAT.

WE CAN MAKE A RECOMMENDATION BACK.

WE'VE GOT A VERY SHORT WINDOW.

WE'RE OUT OF TIME KIND OF SO WHAT WE COULD DO, BUT WE COULD JUST REDUCE THE RATES IF YOU I MEAN, WE COULD DO IT PROPORTIONALLY DOWN OUTDOOR COURTS FOR 50 OUTDOOR COURTS AFTER 535 SENIORS.

SO WE WOULD JUST BASICALLY DROP THEM ALL DOWN $1.50.

I'LL BE HONEST WITH YOU, THERE'S NO CHANGE IN FEES BEING CHARGED OUT THERE.

IT'S ALL THE SAME. I MEAN, I'M JUST TELLING YOU, YOU GO OUT THERE, I MEAN, IT'S JUST ONE I MEAN, IF YOU SHOW UP, IT'S THREE BUCKS.

THERE'S NO ASK OF.

OH, SO YOU'RE JUST SAYING YOU WANT TO JUST GO TO A FLAT FEE, SIMPLIFIED AT A FLAT? YEAH. YOU COULD JUST DO A FLAT FEE LIKE WE'RE DOING WITH AQUATICS.

SIMPLIFIES IT A LOT AND THEN WE'LL JUST DO.

WHAT WOULD THE RECOMMENDATION FOR INDOOR BE? JUST GOING UP A DOLLAR FOR INDOOR USE, A COUPLE OF DOLLARS FINE, LIKE $7.

I MEAN, THAT WAY YOU'RE RECOUPING THAT.

SO WE WOULD JUST DO $2 ON ANY INDOOR COURT.

SO IT WOULD BE FIVE FOR OUTDOOR, SEVEN FOR INDOOR.

YEAH, I THINK THAT MAKES IT EASY.

WE'RE GOOD WITH THAT. ANYTHING ELSE, GUYS? COUNCIL GOOD WITH THAT? EVERYBODY'S GOOD.

$5 OUTDOOR, $7.

I HEAR COUNCILMAN TIPPS IS IN FAVOR OF COST RECOVERY, BUT HE DOES HAVE A LINE THAT HE DOESN'T WANT TO CROSS.

SO I UNDERSTAND THAT.

HEY, I'M JUST SAYING.

YEAH. ALL RIGHT.

AND THEN WE WILL PROVIDE UPDATES THROUGHOUT THE YEAR, CONTINUED UPDATES ABOUT RESTROOMS. WE'LL JUST LEAVE IT AT THAT IF THAT WORKS FOR COUNCIL.

YEP, PERFECT.

EXCELLENT. THANK YOU FOR THAT.

THANK YOU, MICHAEL. WE APPRECIATE YOU.

NEXT, IF WE COULD BRING UP ALAN HARTER.

HE'S GOT SOME CONFLICTS THIS AFTERNOON, SO IF POSSIBLE, WE WANTED TO GO AHEAD AND COVER OUR SOLID WASTE FEES AND DRAINAGE FEES.

YES, PLEASE.

AND THEN I WANTED TO SHARE SOME INFORMATION AS WE DID A DEEPER DIVE.

AND I'LL JUST DO THIS REAL QUICKLY AS HE'S SITTING DOWN.

WE DID A DEEPER DIVE INTO THE SCHOOL CROSSING GUARD PROGRAM AND WE PULLED APART ALL THE PIECES TO LOOK AT THE DOLLAR AMOUNTS AND IT LOOKS LIKE THE FULL COST OF THAT PROGRAM. AND AGAIN, NOT NOT DOING ANY KIND OF A SALARY OR A HOURLY RATE INCREASE FOR THOSE EMPLOYEES.

THAT PROGRAM COSTS JUST A LITTLE OVER 200,000 A YEAR.

SO WE HAD IT IN HERE AT ABOUT 360, WHICH WHEN WE WENT WE.

YES. AND AS WE DISSECTED ALL OF IT, WE'RE PROBABLY CLOSER TO A LITTLE OVER 200,000.

ALSO, WE DID LOOK INTO THE FEE ASSOCIATED WITH.

[03:15:05]

SORRY, I LOST A TRAIN OF THOUGHT FOR A SECOND, REGISTERING YOUR VEHICLES.

WE DID VERIFY THAT IS A COUNTY, A COUNTY FEE, NOT A CITY FEE.

SO WE HAVE NO ABILITY TO HAVE ANY KIND OF INFLUENCE ON IT.

SO IF COUNTIES DECIDED TO CHARGE THAT FEE FOR CHILD SAFETY, IT WOULD HAVE TO GO TO A SCHOOL CROSSING GUARD PROGRAM.

AND SO OUR UNDERSTANDING IS EITHER THEY WOULD HAVE TO, I GUESS, EITHER SUBMIT IT TO THE CITY OR THEY COULD TAKE OVER THE SCHOOL CROSSING GUARD PROGRAM POSSIBLY.

AND SO THE CITY IS MAXIMIZING ALL THE FEES THAT WE CAN COLLECT RELATED TO CHILD SAFETY FEES THAT THE STATE THAT STATE LAW ALLOWS.

AND AGAIN, THAT IS ONLY FOR CITATIONS THAT ARE ISSUED WITHIN THAT SCHOOL ZONE AREA.

AND IT'S SO IT'S LIMITED BY ACTUAL CITATIONS.

AND THEN WHATEVER'S ACTUALLY PROCESSED THROUGH AND PRODUCES SOME SORT OF A FEE FROM A COURT PROCESS, THOSE ARE COMING IN AROUND 11,000 A YEAR VERSUS OUR COST OF THE PROGRAM AT ABOUT 200, A LITTLE OVER 200,000 PER YEAR.

SO JUST WANTED TO BRING THAT CLARIFICATION AS WE DUG A LITTLE DEEPER INTO ALL OF THAT.

AND HOPEFULLY THAT ANSWERS MAYBE SOME QUESTIONS THAT CAME ABOUT.

I THINK THAT WAS YESTERDAY.

NOW, IF WE WERE TO SAY IT WENT TO THE SCHOOL AND THEY TOOK OVER THE CROSSING GUARD PROGRAM, THEN THOSE FUNDS COULD GO TO A DIFFERENT USE BECAUSE WE WOULDN'T HAVE A PROGRAM THAT IT WOULD BE MANDATED TO GO TO.

SO. UM, SO WHAT I WHAT I UNDERSTAND SO FAR WE HAVE A BUDGETED ITEM OF 362, WHICH WE'RE ONLY SPENDING A LITTLE MORE THAN 200. THANK YOU FOR REQUESTING THAT CLARIFICATION.

SO WE HAD ALLOCATED WE WERE THE AMOUNT THAT'S IN THEIR BUDGET IS THEIR TOTAL BUDGET FOR THE TRAFFIC AREA.

WE HAD INCORRECTLY SAID THAT OF THAT BUDGET, ABOUT 360,000 WAS RELATED TO THE SCHOOL CROSSING GUARD PROGRAM, BUT ACTUALLY IT'S A LITTLE OVER 200,000.

ALL THE REST OF THAT IS ALREADY TIED UP IN OTHER TRAFFIC AREAS, WHATEVER THAT MAY BE.

OKAY. VARIOUS THINGS. SO IT'S NOT LIKE WE DON'T HAVE $160,000.

NO, I'M SORRY.

UM, OKAY. AND THEN I WOULD LIKE STAFF TO RESEARCH AND LET'S SEE, BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS DOLLAR 50 FEE HAS ALREADY BEEN ADOPTED OR INSTITUTED IN BOTH COUNTIES. OKAY? AND THAT IF WE ARE THE ONES THAT HAVE THAT CROSSING GUARD PROGRAM, THEN WE MAY BE THE OBSTACLE, MEANING WE MAY HAVE TO PASS THAT THROUGH.

SO SO THE CASSIE'S CHILD ADVOCACY CENTERS OF TEXAS MAY NOT BE GETTING THE MONIES THAT THAT THE COUNTIES ARE COLLECTING UNLESS WE PARTICIPATE.

SO IF I CAN DIRECT STAFF TO TO ENGAGE IN THAT AND SEE IF WE HAVE A ROLE, IF WE DON'T HAVE A ROLE, THEN THAT'S GREAT.

BUT IF WE DO, WE WANT IT.

YEAH, WE CAN DO THAT. WE CAN RESEARCH THAT PIECE OF IT.

NOT THAT IT'S FINANCIAL FOR US IN ANY WAY, BUT BUT WE MAY TO ALLOW THOSE DOLLARS, WE MAY HAVE THAT PROGRAM THAT ENABLES THEM TO COLLECT THAT MONEY IN ORDER TO HELP THOSE KIDS.

YES, WE WILL RESEARCH THAT AND WE WILL PROVIDE SOME FEEDBACK TO COUNCIL ON THAT.

SO WITH THAT BEING SAID THEN, OH, AND I APOLOGIZE.

DO YOU WANT TO START? SOLID WASTE? YEAH, THAT'D BE GREAT. DID MATT SEND YOU ALL THIS? I DON'T THINK I GOT THE LATEST.

IS THAT DRAINAGE OR SOLID? THIS IS SOLID. OH, I DID GET THAT.

THANKS. EXCELLENT. IF YOU'LL TAKE ONE AND PASS THIS AROUND.

SO LAST WE TALKED WITH SOLID WASTE.

WE'VE GIVEN A FEW OPTIONS FOR RATE INCREASES ON THE RESIDENTIAL SIDE VERSUS COMMERCIAL VERSUS THE TIPPING FEE, WHICH IS OUT AT THE LANDFILL.

WE'VE GIVEN I THINK I DON'T REMEMBER NOW MAYBE FOUR DIFFERENT SCENARIOS ABOUT NINE, I THINK, ON HERE.

NO, NO, NO, BEFORE AND NOW HERE WE HAVE NINE, I THINK, OR THE INITIAL ONES WERE ON HERE.

SO WE'VE GOT A WHOLE WE HAVE LIKE A MENU FOR YOU GUYS TO LOOK AT HERE AND JUST DIFFERENT WAYS TO STILL ACHIEVE THIS DUMPSTER REPAIR PROGRAM AND THEN ALSO TO INCLUDE THE INCREASES NEEDED TO COVER INFLATIONARY TYPE COSTS IN ALL AREAS RELATED TO SOLID WASTE.

SO WITH THAT, ALAN, DO YOU WANT TO KIND OF TALK US THROUGH LOGIC ON THIS? I DO, YEAH. I WANT TO COVER IT'S A DUMPSTER REPLACEMENT PROGRAM.

I DIDN'T CATCH THE WORDING ON THERE.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE CLEAR THAT WE HAVE A SEPARATE REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE PROGRAM.

THIS WOULD BE FOR REPLACEMENT OF DUMPSTERS IN RESIDENTIAL COLLECTION.

LAST TIME WE MET, A FEW QUESTIONS CAME UP THAT FRANKLY EMBARRASSED ME AND SHOWED A LACK OF PREPARATION ON MY PART.

AND SO WENT BACK AND DID SOME HOMEWORK WITHOUT DOING ANYTHING UNETHICAL OR LYING.

WE WERE ABLE TO FIND SOME RATES FOR COMMERCIAL WASTE HAULERS THAT WE COULD COMPARE TO.

AND WHAT WE FOUND WAS THAT A BASE RATE, WHICH IS ONE ONE CONTAINER BEING EMPTIED TWICE A WEEK, WAS ABOUT $200 FROM OTHERS.

RIGHT NOW I THINK WE ARE CHARGING WELL, WE WERE PROPOSING WITH A 5% INCREASE TO BE AT 150.

SO WE WERE SOMEWHERE UNDER THAT. SO THERE'S QUITE A BIT OF ROOM FOR GROWTH IN COMMERCIAL.

[03:20:02]

BASICALLY THE ONLY OTHER REGIONAL LANDFILL THAT'S COMPARABLE TO OURS IS THE SOUTHWEST LANDFILL, THE ONE THAT IS OWNED AND OPERATED BY REPUBLIC NEAR THE CITY OF CANYON.

THEIR CURRENT TIPPING FEE IS $30.47 PER TON.

I BELIEVE WE'RE AT 3517 AND SO WE ARE ALREADY OVER THEIR TIPPING FEE.

SO I JUST WANTED YOU ALL TO HAVE THOSE NUMBERS AS COMPARISON.

AND SO I WANT TO THANK COUNCIL MEMBER TIPPS FOR MAKING ME GO BACK AND DO MY HOMEWORK THERE.

AND I MEAN THAT. I'M BEING BEING HONEST.

NO, ABSOLUTELY.

I SHOULD HAVE BEEN PREPARED WITH THAT.

SO THANK YOU. UM, FRANKLY, I THINK WITH THE THE INPUT THAT I HEARD FROM YOU LAST TIME WE MET, SCENARIO ONE AND TWO WOULD BE THE SCENARIOS THAT I WOULD PROPOSE FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.

I THINK THEY SHOW A REDUCTION IN WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO INCREASE RESIDENTIAL OF 8%.

WE'RE REALLY PUTTING THAT BURDEN MORE ON THE COMMERCIAL AND TIPPING FEE.

REALLY. SCENARIO TWO, I THINK, WOULD BE IF I HAD A PERSONAL RECOMMENDATION THAT WOULD BE AT A 8% INCREASE FOR RESIDENTIAL 17 FOR COMMERCIAL, BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT WE HAVE THE ROOM THERE TO INCREASE THAT WITHOUT BECOMING UNCOMPETITIVE AND THEN 9% FOR OUR TIPPING FEE, WE CAN INCREASE THAT SOME.

BUT WE ARE ALREADY QUITE A BIT OVER ALMOST 20% OVER WHAT THE SOUTHWEST LANDFILL IS.

AND SO I THINK SCENARIO TWO, JUST FROM WHAT I HEARD FROM YOU, ACHIEVES THE DIRECTION THAT YOU GAVE ME.

BUT BY ALL MEANS, IF YOU WANT TO TALK THROUGH SOME OTHER OPTIONS, I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO DO THAT.

NOW, SCENARIO TWO YOU HAVE OVER UNDER.

SO WE'RE UNDER SO SCENARIO TWO WOULD BE A LITTLE BIT UNDER WHAT I PROPOSE TO DO.

THERE IS JUST INCREASE COMMERCIAL AND I WAS CRUNCHING SOME NUMBERS RIGHT BEFORE I CAME UP.

JUST INCREASE INCREASE THAT ABOVE 17% UNTIL WE GET TO WHERE WE'RE RIGHT AT THE DOLLAR VALUE THAT WE NEED.

I THINK IT WOULD BE LESS THAN.

I CAME UP WITH LESS THAN $1 PER ACCOUNT.

IT'D BE 18%.

OKAY, SO 18% WOULD GET.

YEAH, BUT YOUR TIPPING FEE IS GOING TO BE YOUR IMPACT THERE OF YOU'RE GOING TO PUSH MORE PEOPLE TO THE OTHER LANDFILL AT THAT 15% INCREASE.

NO, THAT WOULD BE SO WE'D BE DOING A 9% INCREASE ON SCENARIO ONE.

YES, I'D BE AFRAID THAT WE WOULD PUSH PEOPLE TO THE OTHER NUMBERS STRAIGHT.

HE WAS REFERENCING THE 21 -21,000.

OH, I APOLOGIZE ON SCENARIO ONE.

SO ON SCENARIO TWO, YOU'RE EXCESS $60,000.

WITH THIS AMOUNT, IT'S THE OPPOSITE.

IT WOULD BE WE'D BE UNDER BY 60,000.

AND SO WHAT I'D PROPOSE WITH SCENARIO TWO WOULD BE JUST TO INCREASE THAT COMMERCIAL LINE INSTEAD OF 17% TO 18% TO GET US RIGHT AT A THE AMOUNT THAT WE NEED TO FUND THE DUMPSTER REPLACEMENT PROGRAM. SO IF YOU HAVE IT IN PARENTHESES, THAT'S THAT'S A THAT'S AN EXCESS.

OKAY. SURE YOU GET ALL SORTS OF. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR WOULD BE SCENARIO TO AN INCREASE, INCREASE THE COMMERCIAL LINE ITEM INSTEAD OF 17 TO THE 18% AND THEN JUST LEAVE IT AT THE 60,000 OR TRY TO INCREASE THE NO BY RAISING COMMERCIAL UP TO 18%.

THAT WOULD BASICALLY MAKE THAT ZERO.

THE IT WOULD BE RIGHT AT THE DOLLAR VALUE THAT WE NEED.

GO AHEAD. SO WHY WOULD JUST A QUESTION, WHY WOULD WE NOT PUSH THE COMMERCIAL RATE MAYBE UP 20%? SO WE'RE STILL COMPETITIVE TO BE AT 180? OKAY. YOU KNOW, WHEN THE COMPETITIVE RATE OUT THERE, I GUESS, IS 200.

WHY WOULD WE NOT? I MEAN. GET AS MUCH AS WE CAN GET.

YEAH. NO, I MEAN IT. STILL STAY COMPETITIVE.

I UNDERSTAND MY LOGIC. THERE IS JUST STICKER SHOCK, I THINK, FOR SOME OF OUR LONGER TERM CUSTOMERS AND A KNEE JERK REACTION OF LOSING SOME OF THEM, EVEN THOUGH IT WOULD IT WOULD STILL BE CHEAPER FOR THEM TO STAY WITH US.

FRANKLY, I THINK THEY MIGHT GET BETTER SERVICE WITH THE PRIVATE WASTE HAULER.

OKAY. SO THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

SO, YEAH, WE CAN'T GET TO RIGHT AT 200 AND EXPECT TO KEEP.

NO. AND I AGREE. SO SO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS OUR SERVICE IS.

LESS THAN A PRIVATE CARRIER.

IT HAS BEEN HISTORICALLY BECAUSE OF STAFFING ISSUES.

NOW, I THINK WE'VE MADE GREAT IMPROVEMENTS IN THAT OVER THE PAST YEAR, BUT I KNOW OUR CUSTOMERS HAVEN'T FORGOT THAT.

I MEAN, THERE WAS A TIME LAST SUMMER WHERE MR. FREEMAN, MYSELF AND DONNY HOOPER RENTED A TRAILER, HOOKED IT TO MY PERSONAL PICKUP TRUCK, AND WERE GOING AROUND ON A SATURDAY PICKING UP TRASH AT COMMERCIAL SITES BECAUSE WE DID NOT HAVE THE DRIVERS TO SERVICE THEM.

THEY HAVE NOT FORGOTTEN THAT.

I KNOW I HAVEN'T, AND I'M SURE THEY HAVEN'T EITHER.

AND SO WHILE I THINK OUR SERVICE IS SIGNIFICANTLY BETTER THAN IT WAS A YEAR AGO, I KNOW THAT'S STILL FRESH ON THEIR MINDS.

OKAY. SO WITH THE INNOVATION TECHNOLOGY, WITH THOSE SENSORS THAT WE'RE PUTTING ON THE DUMPSTERS, DO THEY NOT ARE THE COMMERCIAL ARE THEY USING THAT AS WELL? NO. WE DID A PILOT PROGRAM FOR ANOTHER ANOTHER PRODUCT CALLED NORD SENSE THAT IS BASICALLY A RADAR DETECTION SYSTEM THAT WE PLACED INSIDE THE DUMPSTER.

THAT COULD SENSE HOW FULL IT WAS.

I WOULDN'T SAY THE PILOT PROGRAM WAS SUCCESSFUL.

IT DOES READ IT.

IT READS IT VERY WELL.

[03:25:01]

WE NEED TO FIND A WAY TO MAKE THOSE SENSORS A LITTLE BIT MORE PROTECTED.

WE FOUND THAT WE LOST A LOT OF SENSORS BECAUSE PEOPLE WERE THROWING LARGE ITEMS AT THE BIGGER COMMERCIAL DUMPSTERS AND WHAT'S IN A RESIDENTIAL.

AND SO WE FOUND THAT THEY WERE BREAKING OFF.

AND ONCE THEY BREAK OFF, WE LOSE THEM.

AND THAT'S A REPLACEMENT COST AND TIME THAT IS AN ISSUE.

THE OTHER THING THAT WOULD TO REALIZE THE BENEFIT OF ONLY EMPTYING COMMERCIAL DUMPSTERS WHEN IT'S NEEDED WOULD REQUIRE A REWRITE OF THE ORDINANCE SO THAT INSTEAD OF SAYING, OKAY, REGARDLESS OF IF YOU NEED IT OR NOT, WE'RE GOING TO SERVICE YOU THREE TIMES OR FIVE TIMES PER WEEK, IT'S GOING TO BE YOU'RE GOING TO PAY A FLAT FEE.

AND THEN FOR EVERY ADDITIONAL SERVICE ABOVE WHATEVER THAT BASE SERVICE IS, YOU'RE GOING TO PAY MORE.

AND SO THOSE ARE THE NEXT STEPS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT.

BUT IT'S GOING TO TAKE SOME SOME TIME TO EVALUATE THAT AND REWRITE THE ORDINANCE.

OKAY. SO WE STILL DON'T HAVE THAT TECHNOLOGY TO LEVERAGE WITH THEM TO SAY, NO, THE PILOT WAS SUCCESSFUL AND SHOWED, I THINK, THAT IT WOULD WORK, I SHOULDN'T SAY I THINK SHOWED THAT IT WOULD WORK, BUT IT'S JUST NOW WE HAVE TO DO THE LEGWORK ON ACTUALLY CHANGING OUR OPERATIONAL STRUCTURE.

OUR ORDINANCE TO IMPLEMENT IT IS THAT I MEAN, IS THAT.

DOWN THE LINE A LITTLE BIT.

OKAY. DEFINITELY.

THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE PERCEIVE.

RIGHT HERE THAT WOULD BE IN THE NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET, THAT THIS IS A OPERATIONAL EFFICIENCY THING THAT WE CAN BRING FORWARD IN NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET AND THEN HAVE THESE ISSUES A PROPOSAL TO SOLVE THOSE ISSUES.

SO STEP AT A TIME WE WERE BRINGING THAT FORWARD BECAUSE AS A COMMERCIAL USER I WOULD SAY, WELL, THAT'S GREAT.

I DON'T WANT YOU EMPTYING MY DUMPSTER WHEN IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE EMPTIED AND YOU CHARGE ME.

ABSOLUTELY. THAT'S WAY BETTER, YOU KNOW? OKAY. OKAY.

THANK YOU. QUESTIONS ON THIS.

OKAY. COUNCILMAN TIPPS.

IF I CAN ASK YOU TO JUST CONTINUE WITH YOUR POTENTIAL RECOMMENDATION.

LET'S SAY YOU'RE WORKING ON SCENARIO TWO, IS THAT CORRECT? YES. YOU'RE PROPOSING TO INCREASE COMMERCIAL TO 18%.

I MEAN, I WOULD SAY THAT THERE MIGHT BE STICKER SHOCK, BUT I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW WHERE SERVICE IS.

WELL, YOU KNOW, LET'S TALK ABOUT THAT STICKER SHOP.

YOUR PROPOSED RATE IS 168 AT 17%.

SO AT 18%, WHAT'S MY PROPOSED RATE? HAVE TO DO THE MATH ON THAT.

AND THEN WHAT'S CURRENT RATE? SO STEPHANIE'S GOT IT. I'M SORRY.

OH, AWESOME. SORRY.

OKAY, SO WE'RE GOING UP TO $170.

I CAN READ THAT PART.

IS THAT $0.12? THAT'S MONTHLY? YES.

AND HOW MANY HOW MANY SERVICES DOES THAT GET ME AT THAT RATE? THAT'S TWO SERVICES PER WEEK.

PER WEEK WITH ONE CONTAINER.

IF I'M RUNNING A IF I'M RUNNING A RETAIL SHOP OR, YOU KNOW, A COFFEE SHOP, I'M PAYING $170 PER MONTH TO MY CITY.

THAT'S INCLUDED IN MY WATER BILL AND EVERYTHING ELSE.

SO THERE'S AN EASE OF USE IN SETTING THOSE SERVICES UP.

INSTEAD OF PAYING 168, I'M PAYING 170.

SO A $2 FEE DIFFERENCE? OH YEAH. I DON'T THINK THERE'S STICKER SHOCK ON THAT.

I THINK AS WE WHAT I MEANT WAS IF WE WERE GETTING CLOSER TO $200 BUT BUT OUR CURRENT RATE IS WHAT, 141 5050.

YEAH. 151.

THAT WOULD BE WITH A 5% RATE INCREASE WOULD BE 151 SO IT'S EVEN LESS THAN 145 OR WHATEVER.

SO WE WOULD BE.

SO THE STICKER SHOCK IS IT COST ME 25 OR $30 MORE AS A COMMERCIAL ENTITY.

NOW ON THE RESIDENTIAL SIDE, WHERE AM I RIGHT NOW? CURRENT RATE. SET $18.

I GET 17 AND CHANGE.

SO IT'S IT'S GOING TO GO TO IN COUNCILMAN TIPPS.

IT'S GOING TO GO UP $5.

FOR 8% TO 2290.

DO YOU HAVE IT? SO IN THE CURRENT WELL.

ONE FAMILY RESIDENCE.

WELL, I DON'T KNOW. MAYBE THIS ISN'T RIGHT ON.

ON PAGE 16, IT'S SHOWING THAT IT'S $21.

YEAH, THAT SOUNDS RIGHT.

THAT LOOK RIGHT. OKAY, SO REALLY, IT'S ONLY GOING TO GO UP LIKE A DOLLAR.

OR LESS. WE MAY HAVE AN ERROR ON THIS 8% INCREASE.

THAT'S GOING GONNA BE ABOUT A DOLLAR. RIGHT.

IT WOULD BE A DOLLAR. YEAH. SO I WAS JUST WRONG ON WHAT I THOUGHT THE CURRENT WAS.

WE'RE NOT QUITE AS LOW AS WE WERE THINKING.

SO WE'RE. THAT'S RIGHT. WE'RE OVER $20.

WE'RE GOING TO BE BELOW $23 ON THE RESIDENTIAL SIDE.

WE'RE ALMOST 150.

WE'RE GOING TO BE 170 ON THE COMMERCIAL SIDE.

AND INCLUDED IN ALL THAT IS WE GET GOOD LOOKING DUMPSTERS, YOU KNOW, ALL OVER TOWN THAT WE HAVEN'T HAD FOR A WHILE.

WELL, INCLUDED IS WE GET STARTED DOWN THE PATH OF THAT.

I MEAN, THAT'S A THAT'S A 13 YEAR REPLACEMENT CYCLE.

SO YEAH, ONE OF 13 YEARS YOU SAID YOU WERE LEAVING IN I THINK YOU SAID YOU WOULD LEAVE IN 2 OR 3 MONTHS FROM NOW.

AND SO WE THOUGHT YOU WOULD GET IT ALL DONE BY THEN SEVEN CALENDAR DAYS FROM NOW.

NO, UNFORTUNATELY NOT.

YOU'RE NOT COUNTING, ARE YOU NOT? WELL, NO, I JUST. NO, TODAY'S THURSDAY AND THURSDAY.

THE MATH IS EASY THERE, SO I CAN DO IT IN MY HEAD.

OH, THERE YOU GO. OKAY, EASY MATH THERE.

HE'S AN ENGINEER. YEAH.

OH, I'M TERRIBLE AT MATH IN MY HEAD.

FOR AN ENGINEER, I HAVE BACKUP CALCULATORS TO MY BACKUP CALCULATORS.

OKAY, SO BACK TO COUNCILMAN TIPPS PROPOSAL HERE.

DO YOU WANT TO TWEAK THAT OR DOES COUNCIL THINK WE CAN MAKE THAT ANY BETTER TO BALANCE THIS EQUATION OUT?

[03:30:07]

IS THAT RIGHT? ON THE RESIDENTIAL SIDE, LEAVING THE TIPPING FEES WHERE THEY'RE AT OR LEAVING THEM AS SUGGESTED IN SCENARIO TWO.

HOW'S THAT? YEAH. CORRECT.

OKAY. SO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND.

SO YOU'RE SAYING LEAVING THE RESIDENTIAL AT 8% OR DO YOU WANT TO MOVE THAT BACK DOWN TO FIVE? I THINK THAT WOULD REDUCE IF YOU INCREASE THE COMMERCIAL.

OH, NO, I'M SORRY.

NO, THAT LEAVES IT AT 8%.

YOU'RE RIGHT. BUT THAT'S A 3% INCREASE FROM THE 5% THAT YOU HAD PROPOSED IN JUST A STANDARD MOVING FEE THAT'S ALWAYS GOING TO GO UP. SO REALLY WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING IS A 13% INCREASE IN ORDER TO GET THE DUMPSTERS ON THE RESIDENTIAL SIDE.

NO, THE 8% INCLUDES THE 5% FOR JUST COST GOING UP.

IT'S ONLY 3% TO IMPLEMENT THE DUMPSTER REPLACEMENT.

RIGHT. BUT I'M JUST SAYING, IN THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL, WE WERE GOING TO MOVE UP 13.

THAT'S RIGHT. 14%.

AND WE'RE JUSTIFYING THAT IN THE WAY THAT WE NEED THESE DUMPSTERS.

AND SO THIS PUT US ON THAT THAT RECOVERY PROGRAM TO REPLACE ALL THESE IN THE NEXT 13 YEARS.

YES. WE BASICALLY PUT THE FULL BURDEN ON THE RESIDENTIAL CORRECT RATE.

YEAH. SO WHAT WE'VE DONE IS WE'VE WE'VE PULLED THAT BURDEN ALMOST BY HALF BACK DOWN ON THE RESIDENTIAL SIDE.

SO THAT INCLUDES ALL THE COSTS THAT WE CAN'T CONTROL, WHICH IS FUEL AND LABOR AND WHATNOT.

THAT ALSO GETS ALL THE DUMPSTERS ON THAT SIDE.

BUT IT ACTUALLY MAKES US A LITTLE MORE COMPETITIVE, WHICH I THINK OUR COMMERCIAL PROVIDERS WOULD APPRECIATE SINCE WE WE OWN THE LANDFILL AND THEN THE TIPPING FEE. WHAT DID WE DO? WE WENT UP 9%.

SO LIKE, DOES DOES IT HELP YOU TO GO UP TO 10% ON THE TIPPING FEE AND REDUCE THE RESIDENTIAL TO SEVEN? I MEAN, I DON'T THINK SO BECAUSE I THINK WE'RE ALREADY PUSHING THE TIPPING FEE QUITE A BIT ABOVE WHAT THE SOUTHWEST LANDFILL IS.

OKAY. ANYBODY WANT TO WEIGH IN ON OTHER OPTIONS? SO JUST CLARIFY, THE COMMERCIAL WILL BE 18% OR 20%.

SO, DON, GO AHEAD AND TELL US WHAT YOU WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING.

WELL, I THINK I THINK IF WE GO CAPTURE THE 20, I THINK I DON'T THINK WE SEE STICKER SHOCK.

AND AGAIN, BUT I JUST DON'T KNOW.

SERVICE. IF YOU'RE LIKE, HEY, SERVICE, WE'RE STILL JUST NOT THERE.

NO, I THINK WE'RE 20. WE'D BE THERE ON SERVICE.

WE'RE STILL THERE ON SERVICE AND WE'RE STILL VERY COMPETITIVE.

AND I THINK 20 MIGHT ALLOW US ALSO THEN TO LOOK AT WHAT WE COULD EITHER BRING DOWN THE RESIDENTIAL OR THE TIPPING FEE A LITTLE BIT.

BECAUSE BY BRINGING THE COMMERCIAL UP TO 20, WE WOULD HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF ROOM TO BRING DOWN EITHER RESIDENTIAL OR TIPPING FEE.

I MEAN, I THINK WE JUST I THINK WE'RE WE JUST NEED TO USE WISDOM AND SAY, OKAY, HOW CAN WE CAPTURE AS MUCH AS WE CAN WITHOUT AFFECTING VOLUME? RIGHT. I MEAN, ANY BUSINESS DECISION, IT'S LIKE, WHAT CAN WE DO? WE'RE STILL COMPETITIVE IN THE MARKET, BUT YET WE DON'T WANT TO PUSH PEOPLE AWAY EITHER.

YOU KNOW, WE'RE STILL REMAINING COMPETITIVE.

I THINK I CAN MAKE THAT RECOMMENDATION FOR YOU, DON.

I THINK YOU'RE I THINK YOU'RE ON THE 20.

I THINK YOU'RE ON TRACK THAT THE 20 ON COMMERCIAL ISN'T GOING TO HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.

I THINK THE TIPPING FEES WE NEED TO LEAVE AT THE RATE PROPOSED BECAUSE WE'RE NOT WE'RE NOT SUPER COMPETITIVE THERE.

YEAH. SO IT IS IT WILL BE A BUSINESS DECISION BASED OFF COST TO DRIVE TO CANYON THE FEW EXTRA MILES.

SO THEY WILL BE MAKING A BUSINESS DECISION AND YOU'LL START PUSHING THAT WITH THAT.

SO I THINK THE TIPPING FEES ON ON TWO AT 9% IS WHERE YOU SHOULD LAND.

YEAH. THE QUESTION IS, DO YOU WANT TO DO A REDUCTION BACK FROM THE 8% ON RESIDENTIAL SINCE YOU WENT UP THE 2% FROM 18 TO 20? WELL, SO ALAN, WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS ON THE RESIDENTIAL, A LOT OF THAT IS JUST ALMOST LIKE COST OF GOODS, RIGHT? I MEAN, THE 5% IS THE 5% IS JUST KEEPING PACE LIKE RIGHT.

FOR THE MATERIALS, WHATEVER.

RIGHT? CORRECT. SO BUT WE HAVE A WHOLE LOT MORE RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMERS THAN WE DO COMMERCIAL.

YEAH. NOW, REMEMBER, MAINTAINING RESIDENTIAL AT 8% THERE.

WE DO HAVE THOSE OPERATIONAL COSTS AND THAT WOULD JUST.

PROBABLY REDUCE OPERATIONAL COST EXPECTATIONS IN THE NEXT BUDGET.

IF WE SAW ADDITIONAL REVENUE OVER THE PROJECT AMOUNT, I WOULD LEAVE IT AS IS.

I WOULD JUST FOR SCENARIO TWO, WHAT I WOULD RECOMMEND IS LEAVE EVERYTHING AS IS INCREASE THE COMMERCIAL TO 20 INSTEAD OF 17.

I'M GOOD WITH THAT RECOMMENDATION.

I THINK THAT'S HAS THE LEAST IMPACT, NEGATIVE IMPACT ON CUSTOMERS.

LOOKING AT OTHER OPTIONS.

YEAH. AND WE AND WE REDUCE THE POTENTIAL THE ORIGINAL ASK TO RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMERS BY 6%.

SO I THINK THAT'S A GOOD SCENARIO.

I DON'T SEE ANY PROBLEMS WITH IT.

DOES LAURA OR ANDREW?

[03:35:02]

OKAY, GOOD TO GO.

YEAH, ALL COUNCILS GOOD WITH THAT.

WE CAN MAKE THAT CHANGE QUICK.

I DON'T KNOW IF WE'VE EVER ASKED THIS QUESTION.

A BALLPARK ON THE NUMBER OF DUMPSTERS WE HAVE.

SO FOR RESIDENTIAL DUMPSTERS, WE HAVE 18,000 ROUGHLY IN THE FIELD RIGHT NOW.

AND SO IF THIS GOES INTO EFFECT WITH THE NEW FISCAL YEAR ON OCTOBER 1ST, WHEN WILL CITIZENS BE SEEING THIS INVESTMENT PAY OFF FOR THEM? SO WE ALREADY HAVE ANNUAL CONTRACTS FOR ORDERING DUMPSTERS.

IN FACT, I THINK WE JUST ARE WORKING WITH PURCHASING NOW ON RENEWING THAT CONTRACT.

AND SO WE HAVE MONEY IN THE OPERATIONAL BUDGET.

SO THEY'RE ALREADY SEEING NEW DUMPSTERS GO OUT.

THIS WILL JUST ALLOW US TO BUY MORE NEXT YEAR.

AND SO REALLY WITHIN THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR, THEY'LL DEFINITELY START SEEING MORE DUMPSTERS COMING OUT, BUT THEY'RE ALREADY SEEING DUMPSTERS BEING REPLACED.

NOW THIS JUST ALLOWS IT TO GROW WELL.

AND AS I TALK WITH PEOPLE AND I TALKED ABOUT THIS ISSUE, I DON'T THINK PEOPLE REALLY HAD A LOT OF HEARTBURN OVER AN ADDITIONAL AMOUNT OF INVESTMENT.

BUT YOU HAVE TO REMIND PEOPLE, THIS IS A 13 YEAR THING.

I UNDERSTAND THAT.

BUT BUT, BOY, IF THERE'S WAYS AGAIN, COMMUNICATION, BEING ABLE TO MAXIMIZE THE ROLLOUT OF THIS SO THAT PEOPLE DO UNDERSTAND AND YES, IT'S GOING TO TAKE A WHILE TO GET AROUND. BUT BUT REALLY, YOU KNOW, TELLING PEOPLE, YES, WE'VE RAISED THIS, BUT THERE'S AN INVESTMENT AND THERE'S A PAYOFF.

I MEAN, NUMBER ONE, WE'RE WE'RE GOING TO CUT IT ABOUT HALF IN TIME.

BUT, YOU KNOW, JUST LOOKING AT ANY WAYS THAT WE CAN MAXIMIZE TO LET PEOPLE KNOW THAT THAT WE'RE TRYING TO ADDRESS THIS PROBLEM BECAUSE OF ALL THE THINGS THAT PEOPLE TALK ABOUT, THE THING THAT THEY SEEM TO LOVE, NUMBER ONE OR NUMBER TWO OR NUMBER THREE ARE DUMPSTERS.

AND SO I THINK IF WE CAN SHOW THEM THAT WE'RE RESPONDING TO THAT, AND I THINK I THINK THAT'LL BE A GOOD THING, SIR.

OKAY. YES.

SO THEN NEXT WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT DRAINAGE.

BUT I WANT TO NOW APOLOGIZE BECAUSE I WAS JUST INFORMED THAT I WAS SPEAKING INCORRECTLY ABOUT OUR SCHOOL CROSSING GUARD PROGRAM.

APPARENTLY THE CHANGE THOSE COUNTY THE COUNTY'S MADE TO START COLLECTING THAT REGISTRATION FEE, THEY JUST STARTED SUBMITTING THOSE DOLLARS TO US IN THE LAST COUPLE OF MONTHS. SO WE'VE STARTED TO SEE THOSE REVENUES COMING IN.

SO IF LET ME LET ME DIRECT YOU TO PAGE 488IN YOUR BUDGET BOOK AND TELL YOU SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO CORRECT IN THE BUDGET ON PAGE 488, YOU'LL SEE YOUR TRAFFIC DEPARTMENT.

AND IF YOU LOOK DOWN TOWARDS THE BOTTOM OF THE REVENUE SECTION, WHICH IS THERE AT THE TOP, YOU'LL SEE MR ASSESSED CHILD SAFETY OR CHILD SAFE.

SO NORMALLY ALL WE'VE RECEIVED ARE THOSE MUNICIPAL COURT CHILD SAFETY FEES THAT COME FROM THE CITATIONS.

WE NOW, JUST SINCE I THINK THE END OF MARCH WAS THE FIRST TIME WE RECEIVED A CHECK, THE COUNTIES ARE SUBMITTING US CHECKS NOW FROM THE FEES THEY'RE COLLECTING.

AND SO AT THIS POINT IN THE YEAR, WE ARE UP TO $130,000 IN THAT LINE ITEM.

SO, MAYOR, THANK YOU FOR CONTINUING TO PRESS ON THAT.

AND SO WE ARE GETTING THOSE REVENUES, SO I WILL WORK WITH BRIAN ON THAT.

BUT IF WE ARE LOOKING AT SPENDING ABOUT 200,000 A YEAR, IF WE ARE NOW THROUGH ALMOST THE END OF AUGUST AT ABOUT 130,000, I THINK WE'LL STILL BE A LITTLE BIT BELOW IF WE'RE I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW HOW THE REVENUES WILL COME IN BECAUSE WE JUST STARTED RECEIVING THEM.

WE WILL START WATCHING THIS VERY CLOSELY BECAUSE ANYTHING THAT EXCEEDS I'M LOOKING BACK AT BRIAN, I THINK ANYTHING THAT EXCEEDS OUR COST ON THAT SCHOOL CROSSING GUARD PROGRAM THEN COULD POTENTIALLY GO TO SOME CHILD ADVOCACY AGENCIES.

AND SO WE'RE IN NEW TERRITORY NOW.

AND SO THIS WILL BE A PROGRAM WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO KIND OF WATCH CLOSELY AND BALANCE.

AND WE WILL STAY IN COMMUNICATION WITH OUR PARTNERS ON THAT.

AND I MEAN, JUST DOING ROUGH MATH, I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING TO HIT THAT THIS YEAR, BUT THAT COULD CHANGE ON INTO NEXT YEAR.

SO I THINK BECAUSE WE'RE ALL LEARNING AND I'M LEARNING ABOUT THIS AS WELL.

AND SO IT WAS IT'S SOMETHING NEW THAT I HAD A QUESTION ON.

YOU GUYS ARE HAVING TO FIELD IT AS IT COMES IN.

I KNOW IT WAS VOTED IN IN 22, I GUESS, RIGHT? I THINK THAT'S RIGHT, BECAUSE WE WERE WORKING WITH THE COUNTIES CLOSELY BACK IN 22.

BUT LIKE OR AS I MENTIONED, I DON'T KNOW WHEN THE EFFECTIVE DATE WENT, BUT WE STARTED RECEIVING MONEY IN AT THE END OF MARCH OF 23.

SO WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO CONFIRM, YOU KNOW, I BELIEVE THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, THE COUNTIES ARE COLLECTING OUTSIDE OF THE CITY LIMITS, YOU KNOW, AND HOUSING IN THEIR BUDGET.

BUT THEN I BELIEVE 100% OF IT IS GOING TO THE CAC.

AND SO, LIKE IF WE'RE IF WE'RE IF IF THEY'RE COLLECTING IT ON OUR BEHALF INSIDE OF THE CITY LIMITS, WE'D WANT TO KNOW IF THAT'S HOW THAT ACTUALLY COMES THROUGH, BECAUSE I THINK THAT IS HOW IT WOULD BE PAID IS, YOU KNOW, IT WOULD BE OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS VERSUS INSIDE CITY LIMITS.

[03:40:03]

I THINK IT WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT IF THEY WERE PASSING THAT MONEY TO THE CACS AND WE WERE NOT OR IF WE WERE, IF WE WERE JUSTIFYING A COST FOR THE CROSSING.

SO WHAT I UNDERSTAND IS, IS BECAUSE WE HAVE A CROSSING GUARD PROGRAM, IT ALLOWS US TO PARTICIPATE.

IT ALLOWS THOSE COUNTIES TO PARTICIPATE.

HOWEVER, I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT MONEY WAS EVER EARMARKED FOR US TO PAY OUR CROSSING GUARDS AS MUCH AS IT WAS EARMARKED LEGISLATIVELY TO ASSIST IN CHILD ADVOCACY FOR ABUSE AND NEGLECT AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

SO THIS IS NON PROFIT AND THEN WE AS COUNCIL ARE LOOKING EVERYWHERE IN THE BUDGET FOR MAXIMIZING REVENUES AND ALSO EFFICIENCIES.

HOWEVER, WE ARE NOT LOOKING AT A FEE THAT'S BEING COLLECTED ON BEHALF OF A NON PROFIT FOR US TO TRY TO KEEP ADMINISTRATION OR JUSTIFY COST.

AGAIN, BRIAN HAS RESEARCHED THE LAW THAT WAS ADOPTED.

IT STILL REFERS BACK TO YOU SHALL SPEND IT ON CROSSING GUARDS AND ONLY EXCESS CAN GO TOWARDS SOMETHING ELSE.

SO THAT GENERAL OPINION ON IT.

YEAH. SO WE WOULD WANT TO KNOW THAT IF WE HAVE ANY LATITUDE AS COUNSEL TO SUBSIDIZE OUR CROSSING GUARD PROGRAM, YOU KNOW, THAT WE'VE CURRENTLY BEEN DOING FOR YEARS, OR IF THIS NOW HAS TO GO AND PAY OUR CROSSING GUARD PROGRAM AND THEN THE ADDITIONAL MONIES ARE, THEN WE CAN CLARIFY THAT.

AND THEN IT'S MAYBE A MATTER OF ANOTHER ENTITY TAKING OVER THAT PROGRAM.

MAYBE WE SUBSIDIZE THEM SO OURS CAN GO WHERE IT NEEDS TO.

TO GO. THERE'S A COUPLE OF OPTIONS.

WE WILL ALSO VERIFY WITH THE COUNTIES THAT THEY ARE ONLY I WOULD IMAGINE THEY'RE ONLY SUBMITTING FEES ASSOCIATED WITH THOSE COLLECTED INSIDE THE CITY LIMITS TO US.

BUT WE CAN WE CAN DOUBLE VERIFY THAT AS WELL.

GREAT. I KNOW IT'S ALL NEW AND WE'RE.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE ON THAT.

YEAH, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT AS WE MOVE FORWARD, WE'RE LOOKING AT INTENT LAW AND BALANCING TOGETHER WITH WITH, YOU KNOW, HOW THIS FINANCIALLY IS COMING TO US.

OKAY. BUT THANK YOU FOR DIGGING THAT UP AND LOOKING AND THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR PATIENCE AS IT'S CONTINUED TO EVOLVE EVEN JUST OVER THE PAST COUPLE OF DAYS.

SO WE'RE. YES, MA'AM.

YEP. OKAY. WE'LL PROVIDE MORE ON THAT.

SO NOW LET'S MOVE ON TO DRAINAGE.

AND I'VE GOT SEVERAL HANDOUTS, SO YOU GUYS BEAR WITH US A SECOND.

OKAY, SO TAKE ONE OF THESE.

OH. THAT.

OKAY, STEPHANIE, IF WE GET THAT ONE WILL PROBABLY COVER LAST.

IF WE COULD START FIRST, WE SENT ONE THAT HAS THERE'S GOING TO BE THREE PIECES OF PAPER COMING AROUND.

THERE'S ONE THAT SHOWS.

OH, AND THEN FLOYD, IF YOU DON'T MIND SHARING WITH THEM, I'M SORRY, I SHOULD HAVE KEPT ONCE YOU GET YOUR COPIES, IF THERE'S EXTRA SHARE WITH.

THANK YOU. SO THERE'S THREE PIECES OF PAPER COMING AROUND.

FIRST IS THAT WILL GO OVER.

THERE WE GO. THANK YOU, STEPHANIE.

IS THE DRAINAGE UTILITY RATES AND THIS IS SINCE INCEPTION OF THE DRAINAGE UTILITY FEE THROUGH THE CURRENT YEAR. AND SO WHAT YOU SEE IS THE SMALL TYPICAL AND LARGE RESIDENTIAL CHARGES AND THEN THE COMMERCIAL CHARGE. AND SO IF YOU LOOK ACROSS, YOU'LL SEE WHERE IT STARTED ON OCTOBER 1ST OF 2012 ALL THE WAY THROUGH THAT SECOND TO LAST BOX IS THE OCTOBER 1ST, 2022 RATE THAT IS CURRENTLY BEING CHARGED.

SO YOU'LL SEE KIND OF SOME CHANGES IN THOSE RATES OVER TIME.

AND I THINK THE ONE THAT'S PROBABLY QUOTED THE MOST IS THE TYPICAL, WHICH WAS $2.51 A MONTH BACK IN OCTOBER 1ST, 2012.

AND IT IS NOW AT $3.36 PER MONTH.

AND THAT'S JUST UNDER A 40% INCREASE SINCE INCEPTION.

SO SO THAT'S FOR YOUR INFORMATION.

THE NEXT ONE IS THERE IS A DRAINAGE PROJECTS LIST THAT LOOKS LIKE THIS.

AND WHAT THIS IS THIS THESE ARE THE DRAINAGE PROJECTS SINCE INCEPTION, SINCE THE VERY BEGINNING OF THE DRAINAGE UTILITY SYSTEM.

AND SO WHAT THIS DOES SO THIS GOES BACK TO OCTOBER 1ST OF 2012, AND THESE ARE THE VARIOUS PROJECTS.

SOME OF THEM ARE STILL IN THE WORKS AND SOME OF THEM, THE ONES THAT SAY CLOSED BY THEM, HAVE BEEN FULLY COMPLETED.

AND THEN YOU'LL SEE THAT FAR RIGHT COLUMN THERE SHOWS CLOSED ACTUAL EXPENSE.

[03:45:03]

WELL, ACTUALLY, I DON'T THINK THAT COLUMN IS ACTUALLY RELATIVE.

I THINK WHAT YOU REALLY WANT TO LOOK AT IS JUST THAT SECOND TO LAST COLUMN THAT CLOSED TOTAL ACTUAL EXPENSE.

OH, I SEE WHERE IT'S GOING.

I'M SORRY. YEAH. THE CLOSED IS WHAT'S ACTUALLY BEEN CAPITALIZED ALREADY.

YEAH. OKAY. THROUGH THE ACCOUNTANTS.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT APPLIES FOR DISCUSSION.

YEAH. THANK YOU, FLOYD.

SO MAYBE PUT A STAR ABOVE THAT TOTAL ACTUAL EXPENSE.

THAT'S THE COLUMN. THOSE ARE THE DOLLARS THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING THROUGH.

THAT'S WHAT WE'VE ACTUALLY SPENT ON THESE VARIOUS PROJECTS SINCE THE INCEPTION OF THE DRAINAGE UTILITY FUND.

THANK YOU, STEPHANIE, FOR SHARING THAT AS WELL ON ON THE SCREEN.

SO IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT, I WOULD DEFINITELY POINT YOU TO FLOYD HARTMAN.

HE COULD GIVE YOU ALL KINDS OF INFORMATION ON THAT.

THEN THE THIRD ONE THING ON THAT LIST, AND SO I APPRECIATE YOU PUTTING TOGETHER ONE THING I THINK AND I KNOW WE JUST PROBABLY REPORTED THIS OUT OF A SYSTEM, BUT ONE THING I THINK WOULD BE VERY BENEFICIAL IS THAT IF WE COULD PUT EACH OF THESE AND SOME OF THEM ARE NOT REALLY GERMANE OR THEY'RE NOT, BUT BUT PUT THESE THINGS IN A LAYMAN'S TERMS. SO, OKAY, SO IF I'M A CITIZEN READING.

OKAY, PILGRIM ALLEY, ABERDEEN.

OKAY. SO EXACTLY WHAT WE BECAUSE I THINK IT WOULD BE GREAT TO SHARE THIS LIST WITH THE PUBLIC BECAUSE I NEVER SEEN THIS LIST BEFORE.

AND I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE QUESTIONS AS TO WHERE THIS IS GOING, WHAT WE'RE DOING, BECAUSE I LOVE THE LIST.

BUT AND EVEN IF WE'RE SHARING THINGS SUCH ON SOCIAL MEDIA, TO HAVE A PHOTO OF SOMETHING THAT WE'VE DONE AND JUST SAY HERE, HERE'S PART OF WHERE YOUR MONEY IS GOING, BECAUSE THE DISCONNECT IS AND NOT THAT THE INFORMATION IS OUT THERE, BUT PEOPLE JUST DON'T KNOW WHERE THE MONEY IS GOING.

AND OBVIOUSLY, WHEN YOU GET A, YOU KNOW, NEARLY TWO PAGE LIST THAT WE'VE BEEN INVESTING THIS MONEY OVER TIME AND, YOU KNOW, THEY MAY NOT HAVE SEEN THE PROJECT.

SO, I MEAN, IF WE COULD, YOU KNOW, AT SOME POINT, DOES IT HAVE TO BE RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE? BUT BUT TO HAVE A LIST AVAILABLE AND IT GIVES THE TRANSLATION OF EXACTLY WHAT DID WE DO IN THIS PROJECT SO THAT LES SIMPSON CAN UNDERSTAND IT.

AND THEN, YOU KNOW, BE SURE TO TELL PEOPLE THIS IS WHERE THE MONEY IS GOING.

THIS IS WHAT WE'RE DOING ON A REGULAR BASIS WITH WITH THE DRAINAGE UTILITY FEE.

NO, I. I HEAR YOU.

I THINK THAT'S AN EXCELLENT IDEA.

MIKE AND I WILL WORK ON THAT.

AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR STOPPING ME.

PLEASE STOP ME IF I'M MOVING OVER SOMETHING TOO QUICKLY.

THE THIRD PIECE OF PAPER IS TWO SIDED.

THERE'S A COLORED THING ON ONE SIDE, A COLORED LIST OF PROJECTS ON ONE SIDE, AND FLOYD'S GOING TO INTERPRET THAT FOR US.

AND THEN ON THE OTHER SIDE, I WILL WALK YOU THROUGH THIS REAL QUICK.

SO ONE THING THAT WE PUT TOGETHER WAS WHAT DOES IT LOOK LIKE WITH CURRENT YEAR? AND I USE THE CURRENT YEAR APPROVED BUDGET AND THE CURRENT YEAR PROPOSED BUDGET THAT'S FILED IN THE BOOK.

SO THAT HAS A 5% RATE INCREASE WITH NO DEBT ISSUANCES THAT'S GOING TO PRODUCE ABOUT $3.2 MILLION IN CASH CAPITAL CASH FUNDED CAPITAL.

WHAT WOULD IT LOOK LIKE IF GOING FORWARD? WE DID FIVE YEARS IN A ROW OF OF.

A 10% RATE INCREASES AND YOU'RE GOING TO SEE THE 11% ON THERE AND SAY, WELL, WHY IS IT 11%? 1% FOR GROWTH, 10% FOR A TRUE RATE INCREASE? AND THEN IF WE TOOK ALL OF THAT MONEY GENERATED FROM A 10% RATE INCREASE AND ROLLED IT INTO A DEBT ISSUANCE, SO WE WOULD BE DOING FIVE CONSECUTIVE DEBT ISSUANCES.

WHAT WOULD THAT LOOK LIKE? AND SO THAT PRODUCES SEVERAL YEARS OF CAPITAL FUNDING.

SO WHAT IT'S LOOKING LIKE ON AGAIN, THIS PAGE HERE, IT'S EASIEST MAYBE TO SEE DOWN IN THAT CAPITAL LINE ITEM, WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PAGE. SO CAPITAL THIS YEAR, LAST YEAR WAS 8.85 MILLION I'M SORRY, IN THE CURRENT YEAR IS 8.85 MILLION.

OF THAT 5 MILLION WAS A DEBT ISSUANCE.

THE PROPOSED BUDGET HAS 3.2 MILLION IN CASH FUNDING.

THE NEXT YEAR IT WOULD BE $13 MILLION IN CAPITAL, 10 MILLION IN DEBT ISSUANCE, 3 MILLION IN CASH FUNDING.

THE YEAR AFTER THAT, 2526 WOULD BE 14.3 MILLION IN CAPITAL, 3 MILLION CASH FUNDED, 11.3 MILLION IN DEBT FUNDING.

THE YEAR AFTER THAT, IT WOULD PRODUCE 17.7 MILLION CAPITAL, 3 MILLION CASH FUNDED, 14.7 MILLION DEBT FUNDING.

AND THEN THE YEAR AFTER THAT, 18.3 MILLION IN CAPITAL WITH 15.3 MILLION IN BOND PROCEEDS AND 3 MILLION CASH FUNDING.

SO WITH THAT, FLIP IT OVER TO THE NEXT PAGE AND THEN I THINK WE'LL LET FLOYD KIND OF TALK THROUGH.

SO JUST A ROUGH PROJECTION OF WHICH PROJECTS THAT WOULD BE THE GREEN WOULD BE THE FIRST YEAR WHERE YOU HAVE THE 13 MILLION, THEN EACH SUBSEQUENT YEAR OF THAT DEBT ISSUANCE IN DIFFERENT COLORS THERE.

[03:50:03]

SO VERSUS WHAT WE HANDED OUT LAST TIME WE HANDED OUT THE FOUR OPTIONS LAST TIME, THIS WAS AN OPTION FIVE COMPARED TO THAT, AGAIN, WHAT WE HAD TALKED ABOUT LAST TIME, REMEMBER, WE HAD THE ONE DEBT ISSUANCE, THE ONE RATE INCREASE, MAYOR ON OPTION FOUR WAS 47% AND DO ALL THE PROJECTS.

THIS JUST GIVES YOU A VISION OF HOW EACH YEAR YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO DO THAT IF YOU DID EQUAL RATE INCREASES.

AND THIS IS THE SAME PROJECT LIST.

IF YOU ALL DIRECT US TO GO FORWARD, I STILL HAVE TO REFINE THIS WITH STAFF AND PRIORITIES THAT YOU MIGHT WE MIGHT PRIORITIZE DREDGING UP OR DOWN DEPENDING ON NEEDS.

LAWRENCE LAKE IMPROVEMENTS WOULD BE UP OR DOWN, BUT ALL THE FIRST FOUR OPTIONS ARE STILL AVAILABLE.

THIS JUST SHOWS YOU BASED OFF THIS REVENUE PROJECTION, HOW IT WOULD BREAK DOWN IN EACH SUBSEQUENT YEAR.

OKAY. RATHER THAN ALL AT ONCE ON THAT ITEM, THAT SCENARIO FOUR.

SO IT GIVES YOU A FIFTH OPTION QUESTION ON FINANCE.

WHEN YOU HAVE A BOND 2016, YOU DIDN'T FUND THAT BOND ALL AT ONCE, RIGHT? BUT YOU STILL SHOWED INCREASES ON THE MONIES IN YOUR MONEY MARKET ACCOUNT.

IS THAT CORRECT? ON THE 2016 BOND INVESTMENTS? YEAH. SO HERE'S MY QUESTION.

OKAY, GO AHEAD. YEP.

WE INCREASE THE DRAINAGE FEE 50% ALL IN YEAR ONE.

OKAY. OR WE INCREASE THE DRAINAGE FEE 50% OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS.

YES. OR 44% ON THIS ISSUANCE.

RIGHT. YOU GOT FOUR YEARS HERE AT 11%.

YES. AND I APOLOGIZE BECAUSE I THINK I CUT OFF THE FIFTH YEAR.

IT DIDN'T PRINT. RIGHT. SO YEAH.

SO ANYWAY, YOU'RE GETTING THERE.

BUT YEAH, EXACTLY. WE WOULD EITHER EITHER GETS THE SAME AMOUNT OF WORK DONE FOR OUR COMMUNITY.

HOWEVER, FINANCIALLY DOES IT BENEFIT ME TO ISSUE THAT DEBT MORE IN YEAR ONE THAN IT DOES EACH CONSECUTIVE YEAR? OKAY.

FROM FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, THERE'S RISK AND BENEFIT.

OKAY. YEAH. I WAS GOING TO SAY THERE'S PROS AND CONS.

I'LL LET YOU START AND THEN I'LL CHIME IN ON MY SIDE.

THE BENEFIT FROM OPERATIONAL SIDE IS IF YOU ISSUED THE ALL OF IT AT ONCE, THEN WE KNOW THOSE THAT PROJECT CAN MOVE FORWARD AND GO.

IF YOU DO THIS FIVE YEAR PLAN, THEN INFLATION, OTHER THINGS CAN IMPACT OPERATIONALLY.

OKAY. NOW THIS IS PROJECTING FINANCIAL RISK TO AND I'LL LET YOU COVER THOSE NOW.

YES. SO, OKAY, A COUPLE OF THINGS.

SO FROM I THINK LET'S TALK ABOUT PROS FOR A SECOND.

SO PROS WOULD BE YOU'D GO AHEAD AND SET YOUR YOU'D GET YOUR BOND PROCEEDS, YOU'D HAVE A LOCKED IN INTEREST RATE.

ANYTHING YOU'RE NOT USING, YOU WOULD HAVE WE WOULD HAVE INVESTED AND YOU'D BE EARNING INTEREST ON IT.

NOW, THESE ARE TAX EXEMPT BONDS.

SO THERE IS AN ARBITRAGE CALCULATION WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH AND I WON'T GO INTO THAT.

BUT BASICALLY WHAT THAT MEANS IS IF WE EARN TOO MUCH INTEREST ON THE MONEY SITTING IN THE BANK, WE HAVE TO PAY THE IRS BECAUSE THESE ARE TAX EXEMPT BONDS.

SO THAT'S JUST A VERY SIMPLIFIED DEFINITION OF KIND OF HOW ARBITRAGE WORKS.

SO BUT WE CAN WORK THROUGH THAT.

SO WE COULD CERTAINLY WORK THROUGH THAT.

SO ANOTHER THING FROM I'D SAY MAYBE A PRO STANDPOINT IS THAT IT WOULD BE A CERTAINTY YOU ALL WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY WITHIN YOUR TWO YEAR TERM TO TO SET THIS IN PLACE WHEN YOU STAGGER IT OUT.

I THINK THERE'S SOME PROS AND CONS THERE FROM A PRO STANDPOINT IS, YOU KNOW, YOU ARE NOT YOU'RE ISSUING THE DEBT AS YOU NEED IT.

YOU HAVE MORE CERTAINTY OF WHAT THE PROJECT COSTS ARE GOING TO BE AT THAT POINT IN TIME.

SO YOU CAN ALIGN THAT DEBT ISSUANCE MORE PROPERLY WITH IT.

THE OTHER ONE MAYBE A CON ON IT IS.

AS YOU ALL WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY FOR SURE TO AFFECT TWO YEARS OF IT.

BUT THEN YOU WOULD HOPE THAT THE NEXT COUNCIL THAT'S IN PLACE, WHICH COULD ESSENTIALLY BE YOU ALL AS WELL, BUT WOULD FOLLOW THAT SAME PLAN TO FINISH OUT THAT FIVE YEAR PROCESS.

WE HAVE SEEN COUNCILS DO THIS.

YOU KNOW, PREVIOUS COUNCIL DID TWO SETS OF FIVE YEAR PLANS THAT HAD BEEN PUT IN PLACE BY THE COUNCIL BEFORE THEM.

SO CERTAINLY IT'S NOT.

I THINK THAT GOES TO YOUR POINT, MAYOR.

EARLIER WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE STREET PROJECTS IS IF A SOLID PLAN IS PUT IN PLACE, IT WOULD BE REASONABLE FOR COUNCILS TO CONTINUE THAT PLAN GOING FORWARD.

SO WE'VE ALSO EXPERIENCED COUNCIL WHEN THEY TRANSITIONED THAT THEY INSERTED A PRIORITY PROJECT OF THEIR OWN ONE YEAR AND MADE IT A SIX YEAR PLAN. YES. OKAY. SO WE'VE SEEN COUNCILS WORK WITH THE FIVE YEAR WINDOW OR EVEN LONGER OF THIS AND THAT'S A BENEFIT OF THE CIP AND AT LEAST IT'S CONSTRICTED TO DRAINAGE.

SO LIKE YOU FUTURE COUNCIL CAN'T MOVE IT ANYWHERE ELSE.

SO LIKE, I MEAN, YOU MAY NOT WANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THESE PROJECTS, BUT THEN IF WE ISSUE THIS, YOU HAVE DEBT SITTING THERE THAT YOU'RE JUST GOING TO CHOOSE NOT TO SPEND OR

[03:55:07]

SO YOU'RE YOUR HANDS ARE TIED A LITTLE BIT.

THAT'S A GOOD POINT.

SO AND JUST THE FUTURE COUNCIL COULD CHANGE THE PROJECT LIST.

YES. YES, ABSOLUTELY.

WHICH WE WE MAY WANT TO CHANGE THAT PROJECT LIST AS WELL.

IT ALLOWS FLEXIBILITY THERE, TOO.

YES, GO AHEAD.

ALL RIGHT. SO IN TALKING ABOUT THIS FEE, WE HAD A COUPLE OF PHILOSOPHIES WOULD AS A CUSTOMER.

WOULD I RATHER BE COMMUNICATED VERY WELL WITH THAT? I HAVE ALL OF THESE PROJECTS THAT ARE LISTED WITH THE INTENT THAT THEY'RE GOING TO GET TO THEM, BUT NOT NECESSARILY A COMMITMENT LIKE BECAUSE WE CAN ONLY COMMIT TO WHAT WE CAN GO PUT A SHOVEL IN THE GROUND ON.

WOULD I RATHER GET A 10% INCREASE OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS OR WOULD I RATHER GET A 50% INCREASE? SO WHAT I'M WHAT I'M LOOKING AT IS THE THE IT'S CUMULATIVE.

IT HAS TO DO WITH HOW MUCH IT COSTS ME TO HAVE THAT HOUSE.

SO NOT ONLY AM I LOOKING AT MY DRAINAGE TAX, RIGHT, NOT JUST THAT FEE ASSOCIATED WITH IT, BUT IF I LOOK AT THAT AS THAT'S PART OF MY TAXES, YOU JUST BROKE IT OUT ON MY WATER BILL.

FINE, FAIR ENOUGH.

THEN GIVE ME THE SAME RECIPROCATION IN I'M WORKING ON YOUR TAXES.

SO IF I INCREASE THE DRAINAGE TAX BUT DECREASE THE OTHER TAXES, THEN LET'S ALL AGREE THAT ALL HITS YOUR BOTTOM LINE THE SAME.

AND WHAT HAVE I DONE? IF I'VE DECREASED THE 3.5% IN ORDER TO GO TO THE INS SIDE IN THIS FIRST YEAR, WHICH IS ACTUALLY GOING TO HIT YOUR BOTTOM LINE AS A DECREASE IN YOUR TAXES, INCREASED YOUR DRAINAGE TAX 50% ALL AT YEAR ONE.

WHAT DID I DO? WELL, IF I RUN A MATH PROBLEM AND YOU'LL HAVE TO SEE IF I DID THIS RIGHT, BUT YOU'RE TELLING ME I'M GOING TO INCREASE MY TAX ON A $100,000 HOUSE WITH THE CURRENT PROPOSED HIGH TAX RATE OF $1 A MONTH OR 100 AND WELL, I'M SORRY, DECREASE 199,000. OKAY.

ON THAT SCENARIO, AN AVERAGE RESIDENTS WOULD SEE A $3 A MONTH INCREASE.

ACTUALLY, THAT'S GOING TO CHANGE BASED ON WHAT WE $200,000 HOUSE.

I'M GOING TO SEE A $36 PER YEAR INCREASE IN MY TAXES TO THE CITY.

YES. BUT IT'LL ACTUALLY GO DOWN BASED ON WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT THIS MORNING.

ALL RIGHT. SO, YES, BUT I'M JUST ASSUMING WE TAKE ALL WE CAN GET, WE LEAVE IT AND THEN WE GO AND WE WORK ON THE DRAINAGE TAX SEPARATE.

OKAY. SO NOW WE'RE COMBINING THOSE IN THE WAY THAT WE'RE WORKING THIS.

SO NOW I HAVE A $36 A YEAR INCREASE ON MY $200,000 HOUSE.

WELL, ON MY ON MY AVERAGE COST FOR MY DRAINAGE TAX, YOU KNOW, IT'S COSTING ME.

IT WOULD GO FROM 336 TO IT'D GO UP $1.50.

IS THAT RIGHT, FLOYD? YOU DON'T HAVE THAT.

FUCK THAT. THAT. I'M ASSUMING WE'RE SOMEWHERE AROUND $1.70 PER MONTH.

I'VE GOT IT RIGHT HERE. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS FLOYD THAT WE HANDED OUT LAST TIME.

OKAY, SO ON THE.

HANG ON. LET ME GET TO IT.

ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE 18% INCREASE? OH, NO, THE 4750.

THE 47% INCREASE WOULD GO.

WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? IT WOULD GO FROM 336 TO $4.94.

OKAY. SO 336 TO 494, LET'S CALL IT A $1.58 A MONTH.

SORRY. SO A $1.50 TIMES 12 IS 18 BUCKS.

THERE YOU GO. OKAY. SO I'M CHARGING YOU $18 MORE ANNUALLY AND I'M REDUCING $36 ANNUALLY.

SO YOUR NET GAIN IS $18 ANNUALLY.

IF WE'RE GETTING DOWN TO THE IT'S $36 INCREASE.

ON. ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT ON THE DID I DO THE DID I DO THE MATH WRONG? BECAUSE WE SAID $3 PER MONTH INCREASE ON AN AVERAGE HOME.

YES. AT THE AT THE GIVEN RATE.

YES. LET ME SAY IT AGAIN, BECAUSE MAYBE I'M CONFUSING MYSELF.

I'M SORRY IF I'M 12 MONTHS IN A YEAR, $3 A MONTH, $36 PER PLAYER ON AN AVERAGE $200,000 HOUSE INCREASE.

RIGHT. $36.

$36 INCREASE PER YEAR.

PER YEAR. YEP. OKAY.

DOLLAR 50 A MONTH INCREASE.

12 MONTHS. $18 INCREASE ON THE DRAINAGE TAX.

RIGHT. SO IF I IF I PULL THAT NUMBER DOWN 1 MILLION, WHAT DOES THAT DO TO THAT $36 A YEAR INCREASE? HOW MUCH DID THAT REDUCE THAT DOWN AND HOW MUCH DID I OFFSET MY $18? AND I KNOW WE'RE TALKING PENNIES, BUT IT MATTERS, RIGHT, JESSE? IT DOESN'T. OKAY.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FOUR BILLS ON ONE STATEMENT ALONE.

AND SO WITHOUT RAISING ALL OF THEM UP ANYWHERE FROM FIVE, FOUR, NINE, TEN, AND IT'S AN INDIVIDUAL WHICH IS A SMALL PROPERTY OWNER, ONE

[04:00:07]

THEY'RE PAYING THAT PRICE INCREASE.

AND WHEN WE HAVE A COST OF LIVING GOING UP AT 30%, WE'RE SAYING WE'RE GOING TO RAISE THE CITY COST TO THE CITIZENS ANOTHER 18, 20%. SO AND YOU'RE NOT GETTING ANY MORE SERVICE.

YOUR SERVICES HAVE IMPROVED.

RIGHT. SO WE WE'VE GOT TO IMPROVE THOSE SERVICES.

WE'VE GOT TO HAVE DUMPSTERS THAT DON'T HAVE HOLES IN THE BOTTOM OF THEM, HAVE LIDS ON THEM.

WE'VE GOT TO PAY FOR THE COST OF SERVICE.

WE'VE GOT TO HAVE SERVICES.

SO LIKE WE NEED PUMPS THAT WORK AND WE NEED AREAS OF TOWN THAT DON'T FLOOD.

AND WE'VE SEEN THE COST THAT HITS MY BOTTOM LINE ON THAT.

SO I WOULD DEFINITELY INCREASE SERVICES ACROSS TOWN.

ON THE DRAINAGE FOR NOT THE FIRST TIME, BUT IN IN IN A MASS SCALE.

FOR THE FIRST TIME I'VE BEEN ABLE TO TARGET MARTIN ROAD AND THAT'S IT, RIGHT? SO THIS PROPOSAL WOULD ACTUALLY HIT EVERYBODY'S BOTTOM LINE, I WOULD THINK, ACROSS THE CITY THAT EXPERIENCES ANY KIND OF FLOODING.

SO IN THE WATER, BILL, YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOT TO TALK THAT NEXT.

BUT LIKE THAT WOULD BE THE OTHER PART THAT YOU'RE YOU'RE LOOKING AT WHERE IF YOU'RE IF YOU'RE THE GUY LIVING IN THAT ONE HOUSE AND YES, I'M NETTING THIS OUT TO WHERE WE'RE NOT SPENDING QUITE AS MUCH ON TAXES, BUT WE'RE GETTING OUR STREETS DONE AND THERE'S NO STREET FEE INVOLVED.

AND WE'VE WE'VE FLIPPED THE SCRIPT ON THAT.

THAT'S VERY HELPFUL.

UM, WHAT ARE WE DOING TO YOUR, YOUR WATER BILL? SO I THINK THAT'S COMING NEXT.

BUT DO WE HAVE THE AMOUNT ON THE 1 MILLION? SO. I'M SORRY.

I'M ESTIMATING.

AND AGAIN, PLEASE.

I'M ROUNDING A LITTLE BIT.

SO ON AN AVERAGE HOME GOING.

SO AN AVERAGE HOME WAS 188,000 LAST YEAR.

IT'S ABOUT 200,000 THIS YEAR.

TAX RATE THIS LAST YEAR WAS 40.62 $0.08.

I'M ESTIMATING WE'LL HAVE A TAX RATE OF ABOUT 39.2 CENTS, PULLING DOWN THAT MILLION.

WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE IS IT WOULD BE A $20 PER YEAR INCREASE.

SO WE WERE TALKING ABOUT A 36.

THAT IS CORRECT, YES.

SO THAT'S ABOUT A SIX. SO IT'S GOING TO COST YOU $2 A YEAR DIFFERENCE FOR ME TO MANIPULATE THESE MONIES FOR THE GOOD OF MY COMMUNITY TO THE BEST OF OUR ABILITY.

NOW WE STILL HAVE WATER FEE AND I GET THAT.

BUT IN THE INSTANCE OF YOU GETTING ANOTHER WATER BILL WITH THREE MORE FEES ON IT, YOU KNOW, FOR THE MOSQUITO PROGRAM AND FOR THE STREET PROGRAM AND WHATEVER ELSE ATTACHES ITSELF, THAT'S WHERE THAT'S WHERE I REALLY HESITATE IN BEING ABLE TO TO CHECK AND BALANCE THAT, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW I'VE GOT TO BE ACCOUNTABLE TO YOU ON THESE TAX DOLLARS.

BUT, YOU KNOW, ON THESE FEES, THE ONLY ONE WE'RE ACCOUNTABLE TO IS THE IS US UP HERE.

UNLESS YOU'RE CALLING US, YOU KNOW, LIKE THERE'S NO SET INCREASE ON THESE FEES.

SO IF WE PUT A STREET FEE IN A FUTURE, COUNCIL CAN SAY, LET'S GO UP 50% ON THAT STREET FEE.

RIGHT? AND SO, LIKE RIGHT NOW, WHAT I'M SAYING IS, IS I DISLIKE THE FACT THAT THE DRAINAGE FEE HAS HISTORICALLY BEEN UNDER CHARGED BECAUSE IT CHARGES PEOPLE WITH NOT ENOUGH MONEY TO ACTUALLY SERVICE THE CUSTOMER.

AND SO I'D LIKE TO CORRECT THAT ONE THING, BUT THEN I'D LIKE TO PREVENT THE OTHER FEES FROM BEING ABLE TO COME IN TO THE SYSTEM WHERE THERE'S LESS CONTROL IN THE ACCOUNTABILITY TO OUR CONSTITUENTS.

SO DISCUSSION QUICKLY ON DRAINAGE FEE.

I'M LEADING THIS.

I'M STEERING THIS CONVERSATION.

I LIKE THE 50% INCREASE.

I DON'T I MEAN, I DON'T MIND IF YOU TELL ME FIVE YEARS IN ADVANCE.

I'D JUST LIKE TO KNOW THAT THAT ACTUALLY GETS IT DONE.

AND IN YEAR SIX, I SHOULDN'T EXPECT SOMETHING.

AND I DON'T KNOW THAT WE CAN COMMUNICATE THAT VERY WELL.

BUT I CAN TELL YOU IF WE PUT 50% INCREASE ON THIS, I DON'T HAVE THE ABILITIES TO GO DO MORE PROJECTS THAN THIS.

I DON'T THINK, UNLESS SOMETHING CHANGED.

SO I'M NOT TRYING TO RAISE YOUR DRAINAGE FEE IN YEAR TWO, THREE, FOUR.

NOW SOMETHING ELSE COULD COME UP.

YES, SIR. COULD WE TELL THE CITY? THE CITY BUILDING.

UM, WE'RE. WE'RE CONSIDERING ALL THINGS WE UNDERSTAND, BUT THEN.

KEEP IN MIND, IT'S NOT THE CITY'S AUTHORITY.

IT'S THE AUTHORITY OF THE STATE THAT ALLOWS YOU TO BUILD ON YOUR OWN PRIVATE PROPERTY AS LONG AS YOU'RE NOT WITHIN A CERTAIN FLOODPLAIN.

SO SOME OF IT IS MY ABILITY TO CONTROL HOW YOU CONSTRUCT INSIDE THE CITY LIMITS.

BUT A LOT OF IT IS YOUR ABILITY TO BE A PERSONAL PROPERTY OWNER.

AND WE WE LIKE PERSONAL PROPERTY RIGHTS.

YOU KNOW, WE'RE A GOVERNMENT CAN'T TELL YOU EVERYTHING.

SO THERE'S A BALANCE IN THERE.

COUNCIL. I WAS A LITTLE BIT HESITANT AT THE LARGE ONE TIME FEE, BUT I THINK MY CHANGING MY THINKING IS CHANGING A LITTLE BIT ON THAT AND HAS CHANGED A LITTLE BIT ON THAT

[04:05:07]

I MEAN, I DON'T SEE ANYTHING ON THERE THAT WE SAY, WELL, MAYBE THAT PROBLEM WILL GO AWAY AND WE'LL NEVER HAVE TO DO IT.

SO WE HAVE A WE HAVE A CHANCE HERE TO.

YES, MAYBE DIP OUR TOE IN IT AND SEE WHAT WE CAN GET DONE.

COME BACK AGAIN. COME BACK AND AGAIN, COME BACK AGAIN.

BUT THAT'S THAT'S NOT GOING TO CHANGE, YOU KNOW, THE NEEDS THAT ARE ON THIS PAGE.

SO AND TO YOUR POINT, I THINK, YES, WHEN IT STARTED, IT WAS IT WAS NOT FUNDED AT A LEVEL.

BUT I'LL STILL GO, AS I ALWAYS DO, GO BACK TO THE COMMUNICATION PART OF IT.

SO I THINK THAT'S THAT'S THE PART OF IT THAT I THINK WE HAVE TO FOCUS ON, AS WELL AS MAKING SURE.

I MEAN, WHEN WE'VE GOT THESE PROJECTS OUT THERE, THERE SHOULD BE A SIGN SAID, THIS IS YOUR DRAINAGE UTILITY FEE AT WORK.

I MEAN, THIS IS THIS IS YOUR MONEY AND THIS IS THE INVESTMENT THAT YOU'VE MADE.

AND PEOPLE SHOULD GET SICK OF SEEING THEM ALL OVER TOWN BECAUSE WE'RE DOING ALL THESE PROJECTS.

BUT RIGHT NOW, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES IT MAY BE AND MAYBE WE HAVE THOSE SIGNS AND I JUST HAVEN'T SEEN THEM.

BUT I THINK THIS IS AN INVESTMENT THAT'S WORTH IT, AND I THINK IT'S THE RIGHT WAY TO PROCEED.

YEAH, I WOULD AGREE. I THINK IT'S THE BEST USE OF FUNDS WITH THE LEAST IMPACT TO THE CITIZENS.

I MEAN, FOR $2.

IF WE'RE LOWERING THAT RATE AND WE'RE INCREASING THIS, BUT FOR A $2 NET WITH THE PROJECTS THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO AND LEVERAGE THAT THAT CASH.

AND I THINK IT'S IT'S A WIN WIN ALL THE WAY AROUND.

WE GET A LOT MORE DONE WITHOUT ON THE BACKS OF THE CONSTITUENTS.

IS THIS THE BEST WAY TO SPEND THAT MONEY? THAT'S MY QUESTION ON THE MONEY WE'RE GOING TO COLLECT.

IS IT FIXING THESE THINGS OR FIXING THE COMPLETE INFRASTRUCTURE? SO THE OTHER ONE, I MEAN, SO THE OPTION FOR HAD A LIST OF PROJECTS.

OKAY. WHICH IS VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT IS ON THIS LIST.

SO WHAT I'M THE WAY I CAN IF WE FOCUS ON LIKE WE DID ON 2016 WHEN WE PUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD QUADRANT PROJECTS IN THERE WHERE THE SEALCOAT WENT IN FRONT OF I SAID IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE, THAT'S PAYING FOR IT.

YOUR BIGGEST BANG FOR YOUR BUCK IS THE DREDGING, GETTING US BACK TO AN AREA WHERE WE CAN HAVE ONGOING DRAINAGE.

OBVIOUSLY YOUR LAWRENCE LAKE AND YOUR PLAYA EVANS CAME UP IN THE RECENT EVENT AS PRIORITIES AND IMPACT OUR PUBLIC AT A VERY HIGH LEVEL.

ANY WHOEVER HAS THE FLOODING EVENT IN FRONT OF THEIR HOME, TOM IS GOING TO TELL YOU, PUT THE MONEY THERE.

OKAY. WHAT'S THE PERCENTAGE OF THE POPULATION OF OF THE PEOPLE THAT GET FLOODED? WELL, AGAIN, THAT'S IT'S VERY LOW.

YOU'RE ASKING.

IT'S VERY LOW. YEAH.

I MEAN, WHAT YOU'RE WHAT YOU'RE ACTUALLY LOOKING AT IS DON'T GET ME WRONG, I FEEL SORRY FOR THOSE PEOPLE THAT GET FLOODED, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, I'M FIXING A VERY SMALL PORTION WHEN I'M TRYING TO HELP THE WHOLE.

AND WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THIS KIND OF MONEY, IS THIS THE BEST PLACE TO SPEND THAT MONEY? SO YOU'RE TRAVELING PUBLIC.

THE FULTON BELL 15 INCH DOME HELPS THAT TRAVELING PUBLIC.

THERE'S THERE'S A MILLION WAYS TO LOOK AT IT.

TOM, WHAT'S THE BEST PLACE TO SPEND THE MONEY? CORRECT. SO I'M JUST GOING TO SAY OFF OF OPERATIONAL EXPERIENCE AND MY EXPERIENCE OF RUNNING THIS, THAT'S WHY THIS LIST IS RECOMMENDED, BECAUSE IT HAS THE BIGGEST BANG FOR THE BUCK RELATED TO THE PUBLIC CHALLENGES THAT WE'VE FACED.

ONE OF THESE IMPACTS OUR HIGHEST WATER RESCUE AREA.

OKAY. SO THAT IMPACTS NOT ONLY THE TRAVELING PUBLIC, BUT THE FIRE DEPARTMENT.

OKAY. SO THAT'S WHAT CAPITAL PRIORITIZATION DOES.

IT SAYS, HERE'S A LIST OF PROJECTS.

AND WE BELIEVE BASED OFF THE CRITERIA THAT WE'VE IDENTIFIED, INCLUDING ALL OF THE TRAVELING PUBLIC, THE FLOODING AND RESCUE AND THREATS TO LIFE SAFETY, HEALTH, THIS LIST OF PROJECTS GETS YOU IN THE BEST SPOT.

NOW, IT DOES INCLUDE SOME GROWTH PROJECTS.

THE 34TH AND GRAND CHANNEL IS BECAUSE OF GROWTH.

THE 77TH PUMPS ARE BECAUSE OF GROWTH.

BUT REMEMBER, WE'RE A GROWING COMMUNITY AND YOU CAN'T ACCOMPLISH WHAT THAT GROWTH PROJECT ACCOMPLISHES, IS PREVENTING

[04:10:03]

IN THE FUTURE.

OKAY. BACK TO THE PLAYA LAKE QUESTION.

REMEMBER, WE'RE STARTING WITH A WITH A NATURAL PLAYA LAKE AND THEN THE MAYOR HIT IT.

RIGHT. THOSE HAVE BEEN EVALUATED BY ENTITIES INCLUDING FEMA AND A BOUNDARY DRAWN THAT SAYS OUTSIDE OF THAT BOUNDARY, THAT PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS DECISION. DRIVE THAT TRAIN.

SO WE'RE WORKING WITHIN THE PARAMETERS OF FEDERAL, STATE, LOCAL AND PRIORITIZATION.

IT'S A VERY COMPLEX ANSWER.

ANYBODY COULD ARGUE WITH ME ON ANY GIVEN MOMENT THAT THIS OTHER PROJECT IS MORE IMPORTANT.

OKAY. AND WE'VE HAD THOSE MARTIN ROAD BECAME THIS, CEDAR MEADOW BECAME THIS, THAT LIST, THAT LIST THAT YOU HELD UP FIRST, THAT ONGOING LIST.

THAT IS WHY THEY WERE DONE, BECAUSE SOMEWHERE SOMEBODY IDENTIFIED THOSE AS A PRIORITY AT THAT TIME.

I CAN GO DOWN EACH ONE, YOU KNOW, GEORGIA STREET STORMWATER.

MCCARTY THAT WAS AN IMPORTANT PIECE OF FLOODING RELATED TO TO ARTERIAL DRIVING AND SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS.

LOOP 335 STORMWATER.

I'M JUST SURE THAT'S RELATED TO TEXTILE IMPROVEMENTS.

FARMERS GEORGIA AND WESTERN, THE 4 MILLION THERE, THAT WAS THE FIRST PHASE OF A MULTIPLE PHASE PROJECT TO ALLEVIATE DRAINAGE NOT ONLY IN THE FARMERS GEORGIA WESTERN AREA, BUT PROVIDE CAPACITY ULTIMATELY TO THE WEST SIDE OF I 27.

AND THERE'S A WHOLE AREA OVER THERE THAT IS FLOODS UNDER MINIMAL RAIN EVENTS.

AND THOSE THOSE ARE JUST PUZZLE PIECES AT THE TIME THAT GET US THERE.

THIS LIST ENHANCES EACH OF THOSE.

SO BEING ABLE TO SAY THAT THERE'S NOT SOMEBODY THAT'S GOING TO STAND AT THAT PODIUM AND SAY, WELL, THERE'S A BETTER PLACE TO SPEND THE MONEY THAT WILL HAPPEN.

I UNDERSTAND.

MY QUESTION IS NOT PARTICULARLY.

THE DRAINAGE.

BUT WE'VE GOT WATER INFRASTRUCTURE.

WE'VE GOT SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE.

WHERE DOES THAT? FALL IN WITH THESE PROJECTS.

I MEAN, WHAT ARE THE MORE IMPORTANT? GETTING WATER? TO OUR CITIZENS AND SEWER ARE FIXING DRAINAGE.

THAT'S THAT'S MY QUESTION.

OKAY. CAN I JUMP IN REAL QUICK? SO I'M I GET TO LOOK AT MY CHIEFS BECAUSE THEY'RE COURTESY ENOUGH TO COME IN HERE.

AND, YOU KNOW, I SEE IT'S LIKE ASKING THE QUESTION OF, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S MORE IMPORTANT, POLICE OR FIRE? WELL, KIND OF DEPENDS ON WHICH ONE YOU NEEDED.

AT THE MOMENT, THEY'RE BOTH HIGHLY IMPORTANT.

SO LIKE I CAN'T ONE YEAR SAY, WELL, POLICE ARE MORE IMPORTANT AND THEN THE NEXT YEAR SAY, WELL, FIRE IS MORE IMPORTANT.

YOU KNOW, WE SAW FIRES THIS LAST YEAR, SO LET'S POLICE LESS.

THIS IS NOT A GOOD BALANCED BUDGET IN THE WAY THAT WE'RE WORKING TOGETHER.

SO DRAINAGE DOES NOT COMPETE WITH SEWER AND WATER.

THEY'RE SEPARATE ENTITIES.

NOW, WHAT COMPETES IS MR. FRAMERS UTILITY BILL AT THE END OF THE MONTH WITH HIS GROCERY BILL.

THAT'S WHAT I HAVE TO BE MINDFUL OF IS DID I TAKE $5 OUT OF HIS GROCERY BILL THAT HE CAN'T AFFORD IN ORDER TO HELP THE GOOD OF THE PUBLIC? AND SO I JUST GO BACK TO THE DRAINAGE FEE.

AND I'M NOT SAYING THIS, BUT IT IS A BLACK AND WHITE ISSUE.

IF YOU'RE GOING TO BE IN THE BUSINESS OF PREVENTING DRAINAGE, YOU HAVE TO CHARGE AN ADEQUATE AMOUNT OF MONEY TO PUT THE INFRASTRUCTURE IN TO HELP PROTECT THAT COMMUNITY.

NOW, WE CAN'T PROTECT IT FROM EVERYTHING, BUT WE WOULDN'T HAVE A SHERIFF AND A DEPUTY AND CALL THAT A POLICE DEPARTMENT.

YOU KNOW, SO WE BUDGET, YOU KNOW, HALF OF OUR PERSONNEL COSTS FOR A HEALTHY POLICE DEPARTMENT.

AND WE WANT TO WE WANT TO HAVE AN IMPACT ON CRIME.

RIGHT NOW, WE'RE WE'RE NOT BUDGETING ADEQUATELY TO HAVE A DRAINAGE DEPARTMENT.

AND SO DO WE WANT TO GET OUT OF THE DRAINAGE BUSINESS? I'M NOT SAYING THAT'S EVEN POSSIBLE, BUT I'M JUST SAYING LIKE, I WOULD RATHER YOU CHARGE ME NOTHING AT ALL AND JUST LET ME KNOW, HEY, I SHOULDN'T HAVE BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY HERE.

IT'S GOING TO FLOOD AND IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN TO YOU.

AND YOU JUST SHOULD HAVE KNOWN BETTER.

WELL, THAT IS KIND OF THE WAY THE WORLD HAS WORKED FOR A LONG TIME UNTIL WE'VE GOTTEN OURSELVES TO A POINT TO WHERE, NO, WE'RE GOING TO STEP IN.

WE'RE GOING TO HELP YOU. WE'RE GOING TO MONITOR THIS.

WE'RE GOING TO MITIGATE THAT.

BUT WE CAN'T DO THIS AT $2, YOU KNOW, ON A TYPICAL FEE PER MONTH.

SO I'M STILL ADVOCATING FOR THE 50% INCREASE.

BUT I DID TAKE A TEXT HERE OF LIKE, WELL, WHY DO YOU WANT TO RAISE IT ALL IF YOU CAN'T SPEND ALL THE MONEY? SO AM I COLLECTING MORE MONEY THAN I NEED.

SO I DON'T WANT TO RAISE IT IF I CAN'T SPEND IT.

SO I WOULD ASK YOU, OKAY, SO SHOULD I WOULD I BE BETTER TO GO TO THE 10% AND JUST COMMUNICATE IT TO THE PUBLIC THAT WE'RE GOING TO GO UP EVERY YEAR ACTUALLY STRATEGIZING? PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION IS WE UNDERSTAND THAT CAPITAL PROJECTS AND DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING HAS A WORKLOAD.

[04:15:05]

BUT IF YOU WERE TO, WE WILL ADJUST APPROACH TO MATCH WHAT YOUR PRIORITY IS.

IF YOU WERE TO ISSUE ALL OF THIS IN ONE ISSUANCE, I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE THE STANDARD APPROACH OF THROWING IT IN CAPITAL PROJECTS IN DEVELOPMENT WITH THE PUBLIC WORKS.

WE WILL HAVE A PROJECT MANAGER OVER THIS SPECIFIC SET AND WE WILL PROCEED TIMELY ON IT OUTSIDE OF THE EXISTING RESOURCES AND CAPITAL PROJECTS.

IN OTHER WORDS, I HEAR AND I'VE EXPERIENCED THAT CHALLENGE, MAYOR, AND THIS WILL BE PROSECUTED TIMELY, NOT UNDER THE SAME MODEL THAT WE'VE DONE OVER THE LAST DECADE.

I SEE HIM SHAKING HIS HEAD.

HE KNOWS. WHAT I'M SAYING IS I'M NOT GOING TO FAIL BY HAVING FIVE YEARS OF NOT DOING THIS.

WE WILL HAVE A PROJECT MANAGER.

I LEARNED THAT WE HAVE PROJECT MANAGERS IN THE ORGANIZATION OUTSIDE OF UTILITIES AND DRAINAGE THAT CAN HELP US DO THIS.

WE HAVE WE'RE STRUCTURING THAT THIS WILL OCCUR TIMELY NO MATTER WHICH ONE OF THESE PLANS YOU PUT INTO PLACE.

OKAY. AND I'VE IDENTIFIED WORKLOADS THAT THAT WITH KYLE'S WORKLOAD, THIS IF YOU DID THE TEN YEAR PLAN, IT MIGHT WORK WITHIN KYLE'S WORKLOAD.

IF YOU DO THE 50%, THERE ARE ADDITIONAL RESOURCES NEED THAT PROSECUTE THESE PROJECTS TIMELY AND WE WILL INITIATE THAT IMMEDIATELY UNDER PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND EXTERNAL ENGINEERING THAT GETS IT DONE TIMELY.

HOW MANY YEARS DO I HAVE LEFT WITH YOU IF THINGS GO LIKE I MEAN, DO I GET THREE YEARS? WELL, YOU KNOW, THE MORE THIS GOES AND THE HIGHER THE STRESS GOES, THE MORE I'M ENJOYING IT.

SO. OKAY, SO WE'RE LOOKING AT FIVE NOW.

SO I DO HAVE I DO HAVE ASK THEM.

THEY ALL AGREE.

BUT I'VE SAID IT WRONG BEFORE, SO I'M JUST GOING TO KEEP GROWING THE NUMBER.

I HAVE A 30 YEAR VET, I THINK I SAID 27 LAST YEAR.

I DON'T KNOW. I'M TELLING YOU, I'VE TARGETED A RETIREMENT DATE, BUT IT HAS NOT BEEN APPROVED BY THE ULTIMATE AUTHORITY.

OKAY. I HAVE A HUMAN RESOURCES AVAILABLE RIGHT NOW.

THE ULTIMATE AUTHORITY STILL HASN'T APPROVED THAT DATE.

OKAY. WELL, WE'RE TALKING TO HER, SO JUST LETTING YOU KNOW.

BUT I SEE THE BENEFITS NOW.

I DON'T WANT TO TAKE IN MONEY THAT I.

THAT I SHOULDN'T, YOU KNOW, I DON'T WANT TO TAX YOU IN ADVANCE AND THEN SIT ON THE PHONE SAYING, I DEFINITELY DON'T AGREE WITH HOW WE CARRIED OUT THE STREETS, YOU KNOW, AND SO, LIKE, WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO THAT AGAIN.

BUT THE MODEL I WOULD SUGGEST, MAYOR, WE'RE USING AN ARMY AND THE DELAY ON ARMY IS DELIVERY OF PRODUCT.

BUT WE KNOW HOW TO PROSECUTE THE PROJECTS TIMELY AND WE KNOW WHAT THE ROADBLOCKS ARE.

AND I DON'T WANT KYLE AND HIS TEAM OVERLOADED SUCH THAT THE EXISTING NEED THEY HAVE IS NOT ADDRESSED EITHER.

SO IT'S A IT'S A IT'S MATCHING THE RESOURCES THAT WE NEED.

YOU MAKE YOUR CHOICE BASED OFF THE BEST BUSINESS DECISION AND WE WILL MATCH THE RESOURCES TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN.

SO I'VE I'VE, I'VE DEFINITELY LAID IT OUT ON MY SIDE.

I'M OKAY WITH EITHER ONE.

THESE ARE GOOD PLANS MOVING FORWARD.

SO IF WE COMMUNICATE CORRECTLY, YOU KNOW, WE TELL THE PUBLIC UP FRONT, HEY, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE 10% INCREASE ON THIS.

THEN THEY THEY ARE READY WILL EMAIL ME THAT LIKE IT'S GOING TO HIT THE SAME WHETHER I'M TAKING PAYMENTS OR I COLLECT IT ALL AT ONCE.

IT REALLY DOESN'T HIT ANY DIFFERENT.

IT'S STILL A TAX.

I STILL DON'T LIKE IT.

WHY AM I PAYING FOR THAT GUY ACROSS TOWN WHEN HE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN BETTER? LIKE WE'RE IN THAT BUSINESS.

WE AS A COMMUNITY HAVE TAKEN THIS ON.

THIS IS THE SYSTEM THAT WE HAVE AND WE HAVE SOME REGULATORY GUIDELINES THAT WE HAVE TO ABIDE BY AND THERE'S LIABILITIES INVOLVED.

SO I WOULD JUST ASSUME CHARGE AND DELIVER ON THAT.

BUT EITHER ONE OF THESE WORKS, SO I'M GOOD IF STAFF OR COUNCIL CAN RECOMMEND IT, I'M I'M GOING TO PUT MYSELF OUT THERE AND JUST TELL YOU, I THINK I CAN WORK YOUR TAX BILL DOWN ENOUGH TO WHERE IT'S A $2 A YEAR AVERAGE ON THAT $200,000 HOUSE, INCLUDING THIS INCREASE ON THE DRAINAGE.

NOW WE GOT TO TAKE WATER AND THE REST OF IT SEPARATE.

BUT JUST ON THESE TWO ITEMS ALL COMING OUT OF YOUR BUDGET, IT'S $2 A YEAR FOR ME TO GO GET $40 MILLION WORTH OF WORK DONE. NET WITH A 13,000,000 MILLION INCREASE THAT COULD GO WORK TOWARDS SOME STREETS AND OTHERS.

I SAW A HAND REAL QUICK.

I HAVEN'T BEEN ON THIS COMMITTEE FOR.

THE DEAL IS OUTSIDE OF RESOURCES TO HELP SPEND THIS MONEY AND GET ON THESE PROJECTS.

IS STREAMING IT OUT, WHICH IS OUR RESOURCES.

YOU BROUGHT THAT UP DURING OUR PDP STUFF.

THAT MAKES SENSE BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE GET WE HIT THE STREETS AND IT'S SIX, SEVEN YEARS TO GET TO THE STREETS.

[04:20:06]

OR MAYBE NOT. WELL, LET'S HOPE SO.

NO. AND YOU ADD IN YOU ADD IN COUNCIL MEMBER SIMPSON'S REQUEST, THIS WOULD BE COMMUNICATED.

THERE WOULD BE FOLLOW UPS, MUCH MORE OF THAT THAN YOU SAW IN THE 2016.

SO LET'S LET'S GO BACK TO COUNCILMAN SHORTLAND'S ISSUE.

I GET THAT YOU CAN'T YOU'VE GOT TO SEPARATE DRAINAGE FROM TAXES, BUT THEN IT'S ALL YOUR MONEY AT THE END OF THE DAY.

SO IT IS A COMPETING NOW.

I CAN'T COMPETE. WHAT'S MORE IMPORTANT, FIRE OR POLICE.

THAT'S NOT THAT'S NOT IN MY SCOPE.

BUT WHAT I DO WANT TO SAY TO YOU IS, IS IS THIS MONEY WELL SPENT? I MEAN, THIS IS THE THE BEST RETURN ON YOUR INVESTMENT FOR LONG TERM GROWTH FOR AMARILLO, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE IT DOES PROVIDE FOR FUTURE ARTERIALS.

IT DOES PROVIDE FOR FUTURE GROWTH.

IT WILL ALLOW US TO MANAGE SOME OF THESE OTHER DEVELOPERS THAT ARE GROWING WITHIN OUR CITY LIMITS THAT ARE CAUSING US PROBLEMS. LIKE I HAVE MORE PROBLEMS COMING MY WAY THAN I'M GETTING TO RIGHT NOW AND I CAN'T JUST CONTINUE TO DAISY CHAIN THESE THINGS TOGETHER AND THIS LAST FLOODING EVENT SHOWED THAT. SO I DON'T KNOW IF I'M I DON'T KNOW THAT THE BEST QUESTION TO ASK IS SHOULD WE SPEND THE MONEY OR NOT? I FEEL LIKE WE WE ALMOST HAVE TO OR.

YOU KNOW, PROPOSE A DIFFERENT SOLUTION.

BUT I THINK IT'S HOW WE SPEND THE MONEY OR HOW WE COLLECT THE MONEY THAT PROBABLY MATTERS IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE.

SO COUNCILMAN SCHERLEN YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE THAT GIVES YOU, YOU KNOW, SOME, SOME DRAWBACK ON, ON THIS OR.

NO, I I'M NOT OPPOSED TO SPENDING MONEY.

I'M OPPOSED TO. HOW WE'RE GOING TO SPEND THE MONEY.

GOT YOU. SO YOU WANT YOU JUST WANT A LITTLE BIT MORE CONTROL ON WHERE THAT MONEY'S DIRECTED ON THOSE PROJECTS.

CORRECT. UNDERSTOOD.

GO AHEAD. WELL, I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY, I FEEL LIKE THAT'S REALLY A BETTER SCENARIO.

IF YOU ISSUE IT NOW, YOU ALL WILL BE THE COUNCIL THAT HELPS US FIGURE OUT PRIORITIZATION ON THOSE PROJECTS.

SO IF IT GETS APPROVED SEPTEMBER, WE'RE GOING TO ROLL RIGHT INTO THAT FIRST YEAR.

CIP, LAY EVERYTHING OUT, WORK THROUGH THE INFLATIONARY ASPECTS OF IT, AND HAVE A SOLID PLAN THAT YOU ALL WOULD OVERSEE.

ALLEN HOW MUCH TIME YOU GOT? YOU GOT TO GO RIGHT NOW. JUST A COUPLE MINUTES.

YES, SIR. OKAY.

SO IN THE WAY IN WHICH WE STRUCTURE THIS FEE, DOES THAT MATTER TO YOU WHETHER YOU'RE GETTING IT? BECAUSE LIKE, IF WE.

SEVEN DAYS LATER, HE MAY NOT WELL KNOW, HEY, I AM YOUR INTERIM PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR REGARDLESS, AND FRANKLY, I'M STILL A CITIZEN AFTER THIS TIME.

SO IT DOES VERY MUCH MATTER TO ME FROM A PUBLIC WORKS FROM A DRAINAGE OPERATIONS STANDPOINT.

I DON'T THINK IT DOES.

I LIKE WHAT MR. FREEMAN SAID IN REGARDS TO BY GETTING IT ALL UP FRONT.

THIS COUNCIL IS THE ONE WHO IS ABLE TO HELP PRIORITIZE THOSE PROJECTS.

AND I THINK MR. HARTMAN POINTED OUT THE PLAN FOR THAT.

THERE IS A PLAN FOR ADDRESSING THEM IN A TIMELY MANNER.

SO FROM THAT STANDPOINT, I THINK I AGREE WITH YOU WITH THE HIGHER RATE INITIALLY, JUST GET IT GOING.

SO LET'S TALK OURSELVES OUT OF THIS OR LET'S MOVE FORWARD.

50% ALL AT ONCE.

WE COMMUNICATE TO THE PUBLIC, HEY, WE'RE NOT RAISING YOUR FEE.

WE'VE GOT THE MONEY. WE'RE GOING TO CHARGE YOU THE ADEQUATE AMOUNT.

AND WHEN WE GO DO ALL THIS WORK, YOU'LL SEE THE BENEFIT IN IT, AND THEN WE'LL REEVALUATE IT.

WHAT ELSE IS NEEDED? BECAUSE I KNOW THIS DOESN'T GET TO EVERY NEED OR LET'S LET'S GO FORWARD WITH 10% AND LET'S TRY AND COMMUNICATE THAT.

SO STAFF NEEDS DIRECTION ON WHAT YOU WANT BROUGHT TO YOU SEPTEMBER 12TH.

I WILL TELL YOU ONE THING I THINK AND IT'S OUR SYSTEM, IT'S SET UP THIS WAY WHERE THIS BOARD CHANGES EVERY TWO YEARS.

AND WHAT I THINK HAS HAPPENED A LOT OVER TIME IS IT'S JUST PUT OURSELVES ON A MUCH MORE SHORT TERM THINKING BECAUSE FOR WHATEVER REASON, WE DON'T WANT TO THINK LONG TERM.

WE DON'T WANT TO YOU KNOW, WE DON'T WANT TO.

AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, IT'S THE SYSTEM WE HAVE.

AND I'M NOT PROPOSING CHANGING IT, BUT I JUST THINK IT IS TOO OFTEN WE'RE JUST MYOPIC IN THE SHORT TERM FOR WHATEVER REASON, AND IN MANY CASES WE SHOULD BE.

BUT AS I LOOK AT THIS AND I LOOK AT THIS TYPE OF COMMITMENT, YOU KNOW, I'VE GOT TO ASK MY DO I DO I FEEL COMFORTABLE COMMITTING OUR COMMUNITY? I'M ONLY HERE FOR TWO YEARS.

YOU KNOW, IS THIS SOMETHING THAT I FEEL STRONGLY ENOUGH TO COMMIT OURSELVES TO, TO MAKE SURE THAT IT HAPPENS? I DO. IN THIS CASE, I JUST THINK AND AS PEOPLE HAVE SEEN WHAT'S GOING ON AND KNOWING THAT THE FUNDAMENTAL THINGS THAT WE'VE GOT TO BE ABLE TO DO, YOU KNOW, I WOULD I WOULD NOT HAVE A PROBLEM DOING DOING IT ALL AT ONE TIME AND COMMITTING TO THIS JUST AND THE QUESTION IS, I MEAN, SOMEBODY ELSE COULD GET ELECTED AND THEY COULD CHANGE IT, YOU KNOW? WELL, THAT WOULD NOT BE A I MEAN, AND IT COULD HAPPEN.

BUT BUT I THINK, YOU KNOW, I WOULD HOPE THAT WE WOULD JUST KIND OF THINK LONG TERM AND STRATEGICALLY ABOUT THE MAJOR ISSUES THAT WE FACE, OTHER ISSUES THAT MAYBE THEY COULD BE

[04:25:09]

BUT I THINK THIS IS PRETTY MUCH OF SIGNIFICANT IMPORTANCE TO THE COMMUNITY.

I'M GETTING. YOU GOT ANYTHING? STILL STAYING ON. I STILL STAND ON THE ONE TIME INCREASE.

SO, MAYOR, JUST CLARIFY.

ARE WE TALKING THE 47.1 ORIGINALLY OR ROUNDING UP TO FLAT 50%? IT'S 47%.

WE'RE JUST SAYING 50. SO IT'S EASY TO DOUBLE CHECK BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO HEAR.

BUT YEAH, NO, THE 47% INCREASE, IT'S WHAT'S REQUESTED.

AND YOU GUYS DELIVER, YOU KNOW, GO GET THE STUFF PUT IN IN ACTION.

YOU GOT SEVEN DAYS.

THAT'S PLENTY OF TIME TO GET THIS STARTED.

WELL, IF YOU NEED A CONSULTANT AFTER THE SEVENTH DAY, GIVE ME A CALL.

WE PUT THAT OUT THERE.

EVIDENTLY WE'VE GOT SOMETHING IN THE BUDGET FOR THAT.

YEAH. HIS HOURLY RATE MAY GO UP, THOUGH.

I'M GUESSING WE PAY $10 A MEETING.

YEAH. NO, I'M GOOD.

UNLESS I GET SOMETHING ELSE TO TALK US OUT OF IT.

I'M GOOD WITH THE 50% INCREASE, KNOWING THAT WE'RE GOING TO REDUCE YOUR TAXES FROM THE VOTER APPROVAL TAX RATE AND COMPREHENSIVELY TRYING TO COMMUNICATE THAT TO OUR COMMUNITY, AT LEAST IN YEAR ONE.

AND I DON'T MIND IF WE PUT IT OUT THERE, OH, BY THE WAY, WE'LL HAVE $13 MILLION HERE.

THAT'S GOOD DEBT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH OTHER PROJECTS.

SO OKAY, YOU GOT WHAT YOU NEED.

YES, SIR. APPRECIATE IT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU ALL. YOU GOT ANYTHING ELSE? WE WANT TO LET PEOPLE EAT LUNCH? YEAH, I THINK LUNCH WAS DELIVERED A LITTLE OVER AN HOUR AGO, SO IT MIGHT BE GOOD FOR US TO GRAB THAT REAL QUICK.

AND WE'RE MAKING PRETTY GOOD HEADWAY.

WHAT DO YOU WHAT DO YOU HAVE LEFT? I HAVE LEFT.

WE NEED TO TALK, OBVIOUSLY, ABOUT WATER AND SEWER FEES.

I NEED TO PROVIDE SOME INFORMATION RELATED TO THE CIVIC CENTER THAT WAS REQUESTED.

WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT THE MRS COLA.

WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT A POTENTIAL THE POTENTIAL DEBT ISSUANCE FOR AIRPORT.

MAKE SURE WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE THERE.

AND THEN I NEED TO TALK ABOUT THE RECOMMENDED PAY CHANGES THAT ARE BUILT INTO THE BUDGETS TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE'S ON THE SAME PAGE OR GET DIRECTION ON THAT.

OKAY. AND PROVIDE JUST A COUPLE OTHER INFORMATION THAT YOU ALL WANT TO LET PEOPLE EAT LUNCH IS WHAT WE'RE SAYING.

NO, I'M KIDDING. OKAY, SO LET'S DO COLA.

I'LL TELL YOU WHAT. CAN.

DOES ANYONE HAVE TO BE GONE BY TWO ON COUNCIL? CAN YOU STAY TILL THREE? ANYBODY GOT TO GO IT TO? OKAY, LET'S.

LET'S GIVE OURSELVES TILL THREE TO GET THROUGH AS MUCH AS WE CAN.

LET'S TALK COLA FIRST, BECAUSE THIS IS A BIG PART OF THE PUZZLE.

YOU'RE NOT REALLY GOING TO FIGURE OUT THE REST OF EVERYTHING UNTIL YOU DECIDE THIS YEAR, NEXT YEAR, WHATEVER YOU'RE DOING.

SO Y'ALL COMFORTABLE EATING IN FRONT OF EVERYBODY? WE JUST GO GRAB THEM AND BRING THEM BACK IN HERE.

DO YOU WANT 15 MINUTES TO TRY TO EAT AND CHEW QUICKLY? LET'S DO THAT. OKAY.

WORK. OKAY. SO WE'RE GOING TO TAKE 15.

WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A QUICK 15 AND BE RIGHT BACK.

THANK YOU, GUYS. DID SOME ECONOMIC IMPACT FOR YOU.

AND THEN THE VERY LAST PAGE IS A TEN YEAR HISTORY OF THE CIVIC CENTER SUBSIDY.

AND IT IT HAS CHANGED FROM BY ABOUT $1 MILLION OVER THAT TEN YEAR PERIOD, GOING FROM ABOUT 1.6 TO 2.6 ANTICIPATED FOR NEXT YEAR.

SO WITH THAT, WE IT WAS JUST ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.

WE I DON'T THINK WE NEED ANY FURTHER GUIDANCE AT THIS POINT FROM YOU ALL THIS WILL BE A CONTINUED CONVERSATION GOING FORWARD.

IF YOU HAVE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS ABOUT ANY OF THIS INFORMATION, IF YOU WILL, PLEASE LET ANDREW KNOW.

LET ME KNOW. LET RICH KNOW.

LET FLOYD KNOW. WE WILL GET YOU THE INFORMATION OR WE CAN TALK FURTHER.

BUT JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE PROVIDED ALL OF THIS FOR YOU GUYS.

AND WITH THAT, THEN WE WILL TAKE A COMPLETE PIVOT.

AND I THINK WE WERE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND TALK ABOUT THE MRS COLA.

IS THAT RIGHT, MAYOR? YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU FOR THAT.

SO WE'LL WE'LL READ THIS AND WE'LL WE'LL LEARN A LITTLE BIT MORE.

WE ACTUALLY HAVE A COUPLE THOUGHTS ON THAT AND CIVIC CENTER AND A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT PLANS.

AND SO WE'LL WE'LL TAKE SOME TIME TO BRING THAT BACK UP AS A SEPARATE TOPIC THAT WE CAN TALK THROUGH DIFFERENT.

YES, I THINK WHAT WE HAVE WE HAVE WHAT WE NEED FOR THE BUDGET THAT WE'RE GOING TO BRING TO YOU ALL ON SEPTEMBER 12TH.

BUT WE WILL CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION, TO YOUR POINT, MAYOR, INTO THIS NEXT YEAR ABOUT SOME IDEAS OVER THERE.

LOVE THAT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

OH, GO AHEAD. NO, GO AHEAD.

I AM GOING TO ASK TOBY HUDSON, WHO'S HERE, IF HE WOULDN'T MIND COMING UP HERE, COMMANDER OF OUR SWAT TEAM.

[04:30:06]

OH, THANK YOU. I FELT LIKE MASTER CHIEF MIGHT BE OVERDOING IT SLIGHTLY, SO.

AND WE GET TO DRILL HIM NOW.

HE IS THE PRESIDENT OF OUR POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION.

IS THAT CORRECT? YES, SIR.

OKAY. AND SO HE'S BEEN KEY AND INSTRUMENTAL IN WORKING AND SPEARHEADING ALL THIS.

AND SO I THINK HE HAS EVERYTHING THAT WE NEED IN THE FORM OF ANSWERS TO OUR QUESTIONS.

AND MRS STORRS CAN CAN LEAN INTO ALL THE FINANCIAL COMPLICATIONS AND CONSEQUENCES OF WHAT THIS DECISION WILL DO TO A BUDGET. SO IF I COULD, I'D LOVE FOR MRS STORRS TO GIVE US A LITTLE HISTORY ON KIND OF WHAT HAPPENED, HOW WE GOT HERE AND WHAT THIS OPPORTUNITY LOOKS LIKE ONE MORE TIME.

YES, ABSOLUTELY. THANK YOU, MAYOR.

SO HOW DID WE GET HERE? SO BACK IN ABOUT 2010, MRS DID A HARD LOOK AT THEIR THEIR INVESTMENTS THERE. THEY DID A STUDY OF KIND OF THEIR ACTUARIAL VALUATIONS, WHICH ARE DETERMINED THE RATES THAT CITIES HAVE TO PAY IN TO ENSURE THAT WE HAVE THE BENEFITS THAT ARE PROMISED TO OUR RETIREES UPON THEIR RETIREMENT.

SO THAT IS A CALCULATION.

THAT'S A FORM OF IT'S A FORM OF THE INCOME THAT THEY MADE DURING THEIR CAREER YEARS OF SERVICE.

THERE'S A FEW FACTORS AND THEN THERE'S, YOU KNOW, HOW LONG THEY MIGHT LIVE.

THERE'S A LOT OF FACTORS THAT GO INTO IT.

SO WHEN THEY DID THAT IN 2010 ISH, THEY THEY MADE SOME SIGNIFICANT CHANGES TO MAKE THE PLAN EVEN STRONGER TO AS FAR AS FISCALLY STRONGER, I WILL SAY.

AND SO BY DOING THAT, IT CHANGED SOME OF THE ACTUARIAL VALUATIONS AND IT CREATED A LARGE INCREASE IN TO THE RATE THAT CITIES HAD TO CONTRIBUTE INTO THE PLAN TO CONTINUE AS IS.

AT THAT POINT IN TIME, WE HAD A 70% REPEATING COLA FOR ALL OF OUR RETIREES.

SO WHAT THAT MEANS IS EACH YEAR A CPI COMES OUT, OUR RETIREES WOULD GET EQUAL TO WHAT 70% OF THAT AMOUNT IS AND THEY WOULD START RECEIVING IT ON JANUARY 1ST, AT LEAST ONE YEAR AFTER THEIR RETIREMENT.

SO WHEN THIS HAPPENED BACK IN ABOUT 2010, THE CITY OF AMARILLO WAS FACED WITH A VERY CHALLENGING DECISION.

AND SO CITY COUNCIL DECIDED TO OPT OUT OF PROVIDING THAT REPEATING COLA.

AND I DON'T HAVE THOSE NUMBERS RIGHT IN FRONT OF ME, BUT IT WAS WE WERE LOOKING AT OUR CONTRIBUTION RATE GOING UP SOMEWHERE, I THINK AROUND 25% FOR TO KEEP THAT IN PERSPECTIVE.

RIGHT? NOW THE CITY OF AMARILLO PAYS IN 11.8% PER EMPLOYEE ON EACH PAY PERIOD.

AND SO, AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, THAT WAS ALMOST DOUBLING WHAT WE WERE PUTTING IN.

WE DID NOT HAVE THE FUNDING IN THE BUDGET FOR THAT.

SO CITY COUNCIL HAD TO MAKE A CHALLENGING DECISION TO PULL THAT OUT.

SO EVER SINCE 2011, OUR RETIREES AND HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY KIND OF AN INCREASE.

SO THEY HAVE BEEN ON A FIXED INCOME OF WHATEVER THEY WERE RECEIVING AT THAT POINT IN TIME.

AND THEN ANYONE WHO HAS RETIRED SINCE THEN HAS RECEIVED A FLAT AMOUNT.

THAT HAS NOT CHANGED AT ALL.

AND AS YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, INFLATION HAS BEEN OCCURRING ESPECIALLY IN PRETTY HEAVILY IN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS.

AND ALSO, YOU KNOW, SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS, SOME OF THOSE THINGS HAVE GONE UP, OUR RETIREES HAVE.

AND AGAIN, TO CLARIFY, OUR RETIREES AND MRS ARE ALL OF OUR CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES AND OUR POLICE OFFICERS.

OUR FIREFIGHTERS HAVE A SEPARATE PENSION PLAN.

SO SO ARE ALL OF THOSE IN MRS HAVE HAD FLAT BENEFITS SINCE 2011.

SO I BELIEVE THERE WERE THREE DIFFERENT OCCURRENCES WHERE THE POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION, THE CITY OF AMARILLO, OTHERS FROM THE STATE, HAD TEAMED UP TO TRY TO GET SOME LEGISLATION CHANGED AT MS. THE WAY THE LAW IS WRITTEN IS IF YOU DROP A REPEATING COLA, THE ONLY WAY TO ADD BACK IN THE REPEATING COLA IS TO GO BACK AND CATCH UP ALL THE COLAS THAT YOU MISSED FOR EVERY PERSON YOU MISSED BACK FROM THE LAST TIME YOU HAD A COLA IN PLACE THAT HAD CREATED A FINANCIAL BARRIER FOR THE CITY OF AMARILLO.

SO WITH THE POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION, WITH SOME REPRESENTATIVES HERE IN OUR AREA AND THE CITY OF AMARILLO, WE TOOK, I THINK IT WAS THE THIRD OR FOURTH TRY AT GOING TO THE STATE LEGISLATURE.

AND WE WE WERE AMAZINGLY SUCCESSFUL THIS LAST STATE LEGISLATURE ROUND.

[04:35:01]

SO I'M SORRY, BUT THEY THEY HAVE GIVEN US THEY HAVE ALLOWED US TO HAVE A THREE YEAR WINDOW THAT THAT IS BASICALLY IT.

IT ALTERS STATE LAW FOR THREE YEARS AND THEN IT WILL GO BACK TO THE WAY IT WAS.

SO WHAT THAT MEANS IS ANY CITY THAT'S THAT HAS OPTED OUT OF A COLA HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADD BACK IN A COLA WITHOUT GOING BACK AND CATCHING UP ALL THE COLAS THEY MISSED.

SO AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, THAT'S A IT'S A PRETTY LARGE NUMBER, YOU KNOW, CATCHING UP ALL RETIREES FROM COLAS GOING BACK TO 2011 UNTIL NOW 20 WHAT WOULD BE 2024 TIMES BY STATE LAW HAS THREE OPTIONS FOR COLA.

THERE'S ONE AT A 30% OF CPI, THERE'S ONE AT 50% OF CPI, AND THEN THERE'S THE 70% OF CPI, WHICH IS WHAT THE CITY HAD HAD HISTORICALLY.

SO THE CITIES, ALL CITIES IN TEXAS NOW HAVE A THREE YEAR WINDOW.

SO IT COULD GO INTO EFFECT AND YOU CAN ONLY ONE TIME OF YEAR OPT IN.

YOU CAN IT ONLY GOES IN EFFECT ONCE A YEAR TO TO ADD A COLA BECAUSE IT'S ALWAYS DONE ON JANUARY 1ST.

SO THE CITY OF AMARILLO, ALONG WITH THE REST OF THE STATE, HAS THREE CHANCES TO DO SOMETHING WITH THESE COLAS WITH THIS CARVE OUT ON STATE LAW.

111 20 411 25 AND ONE 126 SO TMS HAS STATED THAT THEY JUST NEED TO KNOW ESSENTIALLY BEFORE THE END OF THE PRIOR CALENDAR YEAR.

SO I WOULDN'T RECOMMEND BEFORE LIKE ON DECEMBER 31ST, BUT ESSENTIALLY IF ACTION IS TAKEN BEFORE DECEMBER 31ST, IT COULD GO INTO THE FOLLOWING JANUARY 1ST. SO LET'S TALK ABOUT NUMBERS REAL QUICK AND THEN I'LL PASS IT OVER TO TOBY TO TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE FROM THEIR STANCE AND KIND OF A RECOMMENDATION THEY HAVE BROUGHT FORWARD.

SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THREE OPTIONS HERE OR WE'RE LOOKING AT THREE OPTIONS HERE.

SO A 30% COLA.

AND AGAIN, SO IF CPI IS, SAY, AT 5%, IT WOULD BE 30% OF A FIVE OF 5% INCREASE OR A 50%, WHICH WOULD BE I CAN DO THAT MATH, 2.5% AND THEN OR A 70% OF, OF OF 5% CPI.

SO TO ADD IN A 30% COLA WITHOUT THIS CATCH UP FEATURE, WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT WITH THE MOST RECENT NUMBERS MRS IS PROVIDED IS FROM A GENERAL FUND STANDPOINT, WE NEED ABOUT $2.5 MILLION.

SO AND I TALK ABOUT GENERAL FUND AND TOBY AND I HAVE TALKED A LOT ABOUT THIS BECAUSE WE REALLY THIS APPLIES TO THE WHOLE CITY.

BUT THE LARGEST BARRIER OF THE CITY HAS FROM A FUNDING STANDPOINT IS ON THE GENERAL FUND.

THAT IS WHERE THE BULK OF YOUR EMPLOYEES ARE AT.

THAT IS ALSO WHERE THE LARGEST DOLLAR AMOUNT.

ASSOCIATED WITH RETIREMENT FUNDING GO IN AND THAT'S THROUGH YOUR GENERAL FUND.

SO AND AS YOU CAN SEE, YOU KNOW, 2.5 MILLION IS IS WHAT IT WOULD TAKE TO DO A 30% COLA ON BEGINNING ONE ONE OF 24 TO DO THE ENTIRE CITY, YOU WOULD ADD AN ADDITIONAL MILLION DOLLARS.

NOW, THE BULK OF THAT'S PROBABLY GOING TO BE THROUGH OUR WATER AND SEWER FUND.

SOME WILL BE IN DRAINAGE, SOME WILL BE IN AIRPORT JUST WHEREVER WE HAVE EMPLOYEES.

OKAY. SO THAT WOULD KIND OF BE SPREAD OUT ACROSS THOSE TO DO A 50% COLA, WE'RE LOOKING AT ABOUT 4.6 MILLION TO THE GENERAL FUND FOR THE WHOLE CITY.

AND THAT TOTAL AMOUNT COMES IN AROUND 6.1 MILLION.

AND THEN FOR THE 70% COLA, WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT ABOUT 6.9 MILLION TO THE GENERAL FUND AND THE TOTAL CITY COST WOULD BE ABOUT $8.9 MILLION.

SO LET ME LET ME CLARIFY A COUPLE OF THINGS AND THEN I'LL PASS IT BACK OVER TO TOBY.

SO, SO ONE THING THAT WE DID VERIFY WITH TMS IS YOU HAVE THE OPTION TO GO UP ON THE COLORS YOU CAN'T GO DOWN.

OKAY. AND THEN ALSO THE LEGAL INTERPRETATION IS ONCE THE COLA IS PUT IN PLACE, WE WE THE WAY STATE LAW IS WRITTEN NOW, UNLESS THERE'S A CHANGE COMING FORWARD, THE THE LEGAL INTERPRETATION IS WE COULDN'T PULL IT BACK OUT.

SO. FOR INSTANCE, YOU COULD START AT ONE OF THE LOWER COLAS, FOR INSTANCE, THIS YEAR, AND YOU STILL HAVE THREE YEARS.

IF THERE'S MORE MONEY THAT CAN BE LOCATED ON AN ONGOING BASIS TO POSSIBLY GO UP TO ONE OF THE HIGHER ONES, YOU ALSO COULD WAIT AND DO NOTHING NOW AND PUT IN A COLA NEXT YEAR OR PUT WELL, POTENTIALLY YOU ALL THAT THE NEXT YEAR WOULD BE OUTSIDE OF THIS TERM IN OFFICE.

AND THEN THE OTHER ITEM I WANTED TO POINT OUT WAS, SORRY, I JUST LET ME PASS IT TO TOBY NOW.

ACTUALLY, I SAY THAT. LET ME LET ME PASS IT TO TOBY.

BUT LET ME FIRST JUST SAY, DO YOU ALL DO YOU ALL HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THESE ARE THESE ARE NOT ONE TIME DOLLARS.

[04:40:06]

SO WHEN YOU'RE WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE GENERAL FUND NUMBERS, SO IT'S TWO AND ONE HALF, 4.6 AND 6.9 MILLION FOR THE THREE OPTIONS.

OKAY. WE HAVE TO LOCATE AN ONGOING FUNDING SOURCE.

SO REALLY, THAT'S YOUR PROPERTY TAX.

IT POTENTIALLY COULD BE YOUR SALES TAX, BUT IT HAS TO BE WITHIN A KNOWN AMOUNT OF SALES TAX, NOT A SPECULATION AMOUNT OF SALES TAX, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.

ONCE THAT FUNDING SOURCE IS DEDICATED TO FUND ONE OF THESE COLA OPTIONS, IT'S IN PLACE.

AS LONG AS YOU DON'T TOUCH THAT MONEY GOING FORWARD, IT'S IT'S IN PLACE GOING FORWARD.

WHEN WE FIRST STARTED TALKING ABOUT THIS, I TOLD TOBY AND NORM AND ALL THE OTHERS THAT WE WORKED WITH ON THIS, YOU KNOW, WE REALLY HAD THREE HURDLES. THEY WERE ABLE TO WORK WITH CLETE AND WITH OUR OUR REPRESENTATIVES TO GET OVER HURDLE ONE, WHICH WAS CHANGING STATE LAW.

THAT HURDLE WE HAD NOT BEEN SUCCESSFUL WITH, I THINK, 2 OR 3 DIFFERENT TIMES.

THE SECOND HURDLE WAS THAT WE WE IMAGINED FOR THE PROPERTY TAX RATE TO EVEN COVER ANY OF THE OPTIONS, WE WERE PROBABLY GOING TO HAVE TO GO TO A VOTER APPROVAL TAX RATE ELECTION.

SO WHERE YOU WENT ABOVE THAT TOP END RATE AND YOU'D HAVE TO TAKE IT TO AN ELECTION.

SO I TOLD THEM, I SAID, OKAY, HURDLE TWO IS TALKING A COUNCIL INTO GOING TO AN ELECTION AND THEN HURDLE THREE, WHICH MIGHT EVEN BE THE MOST CHALLENGING, IS HOW DO YOU TAKE IT TO CITIZENS AND GET THEM TO VOTE FOR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

I MEAN, THERE ARE CHALLENGES.

SO THREE BIG HURDLES WE ARE NOW LOOKING AT.

HI, NORM. WE ARE NOW LOOKING AT WE'VE OVERCOME THE FIRST HURDLE.

THE SECOND HURDLE REALLY DOESN'T EVEN EXIST AT THIS POINT BECAUSE WE DO HAVE SOME CAPACITY WITHIN THE TAX RATE THAT WE DID NOT EVER DREAM WE WOULD HAVE.

AND THEN SO THAT KIND OF PUTS, YOU KNOW, THE SECOND TWO HURDLES A LITTLE BIT ON A BACK BURNER AT THIS POINT.

SO WITH THAT.

Y'ALL STOP US FOR QUESTIONS AT ANY POINT, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO HAND IT OVER TO TOBY AND IN FRONT OF YOU THAT YOU SHOULD HAVE A HANDOUT.

AND IT'S UP ON THE SCREEN.

AND I'M SURE TOBY WILL BE KIND OF TALKING THROUGH THIS AS WELL.

AND WE ALSO HAVE NORM FISHER HERE, AND HE IS ONE OF THE PAST PRESIDENTS OF THE POLICE OFFICER ASSOCIATION AS WELL.

SO. ALL RIGHT.

YEAH. THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCILMAN, FOR HEARING FROM US.

YOU KNOW, WE CAME AND PRESENTED THIS BACK IN JANUARY, BUT WHAT I KIND OF FORGOT IS THAT THAT WAS A DIFFERENT COUNCIL MINUS THE MAYOR.

AND SO WE KIND OF EXPLAINED THE HISTORY OF THIS ONCE BEFORE, AND WE WERE ACTUALLY STILL IN THE MIDDLE OF TRYING TO GET THE LEGISLATION PASSED.

WE WERE JUST ADVISING COUNCIL WHAT WAS COMING UP.

SO WE DID GET THE LEGISLATION PASSED.

LAURA'S RIGHT IN 2011, 2013 AND 2019, THERE WERE ATTEMPTS TO GET LEGISLATION PASSED TO GET PAST THIS CATCH UP PROVISION AND THEY FAILED MISERABLY.

THEY EITHER DIED ON THE FLOOR OR IN COMMITTEE OR DIDN'T EVEN MAKE IT TO COMMITTEE.

THERE WERE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT WERE OPPOSED TO THIS, MOSTLY BECAUSE THE WAY THE CATCH UP PROVISION WAS BUILT INTO THE LAW, IT WAS ACTUALLY BUILT IN TO KIND OF HOLD CITIES ACCOUNTABLE AND KEEP THEM IN TO PROVIDING THOSE RAISES TO RETIREES.

SO IF YOU IF THE CITY GOT OUT, OBVIOUSLY THEY HAD TO PAY THE CATCH UP PENALTY.

SO MOST CITIES DIDN'T GET OUT.

AMARILLO WASN'T UNIQUE.

THERE WERE 26 CITIES THAT SOMETIME UP UNTIL NOW HAVE OPTED OUT.

I DON'T HAVE THE ENTIRE LIST OF CITIES, BUT GARLAND, GRAND PRAIRIE, ABILENE, SEVERAL CITIES OUR SIZE BUDGET WISE OR POPULATION WISE, WE'RE IN THAT AND A LOT OF OTHER SMALLER CITIES.

SO THIS WOUND UP AFFECTING A LOT OF PEOPLE.

LIKE I SAID, THERE WAS A LOT OF OPPOSITION TO SOME OF THIS STUFF TO JUST MAKE SURE THAT ALL CITIES WERE STAYING RESPONSIBLE.

SO THAT'S WHY THE LAW IS BUILT WITH A SHORT WINDOW.

SO IT'S BASICALLY A MULLIGAN SAYING WE WISH WE WOULDN'T HAVE GOT OUT OR WE DIDN'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO CATCH BACK UP.

OKAY, YOU GUYS CAN START OVER.

BUT AFTER THIS, THE RULES STILL APPLY.

SO THAT'S THAT'S WHAT THIS LAW DOES.

IT EXPIRES.

OUR OUR HOPE AND OUR GOAL, OBVIOUSLY, IS TO GET BACK TO THE ORIGINAL STATE WHERE AMARILLO OSCEOLA WAS, BECAUSE THIS IS NOT ONLY AFFECTING RETIREES, THIS AFFECTS RETENTION AND RECRUITING.

I KNOW WHEN NORMA AND I STARTED AS POLICE OFFICERS, WE PROBABLY WERE YOUNG ENOUGH.

WE WEREN'T LOOKING AT OUR RETIREMENT, BUT IT TAKES A FEW YEARS TO FIGURE OUT, HEY, I'M GOING TO HAVE TO RETIRE AT SOME POINT.

WHAT'S THIS GOING TO LOOK LIKE? AND SO THAT STARTS BECOMING A MAJOR RECRUITING PIECE IN KEEPING AND RETAINING NOT JUST POLICE OFFICERS, BUT CITY EMPLOYEES ALL OVER THE PLACE.

SO. THIS WILL DEFINITELY AFFECT MAINTAINING GOOD EMPLOYEES AND KEEPING THEM IN

[04:45:07]

SO IT DOESN'T JUST AFFECT RETIREES, IT AFFECTS ALL OF US.

WE HAD A LARGE GROUP OF RETIREES HERE THIS MORNING.

WE TIMED SOME OF THEM OUT.

SOME OF THEM HAD TO GO FOR VARIOUS APPOINTMENTS STUFF, BUT THAT IT REALLY DOES AFFECT THESE GUYS.

AND I CAN TELL YOU THAT, YOU KNOW, JUST SOME OF THE PEOPLE THAT SHOWED UP IN THIS ROOM TODAY ARE PEOPLE THAT MENTORED ME, PEOPLE THAT SOME OF THEM ACTUALLY WATCHED ME GROW UP IN THIS TOWN AND PROBABLY CAN'T BELIEVE THAT I'M A POLICE OFFICER TO THIS DAY.

BUT THESE GUYS WERE WERE INSTRUMENTAL IN MY CAREER.

SOME OF THEM WORKED IN SCHOOLS, SOME OF THEM WORKED IN SWAT, SOME OF THEM WORKED ALL OVER THE PLACE AND DID A PHENOMENAL JOB.

AND WE KIND OF OWE IT TO THESE GUYS BECAUSE WHEN THEY WERE WORKING, THEY BELIEVED THAT THEY WERE GOING TO GET A SMALL COST OF LIVING RAISE.

NOW 30, 50 OR 70% OF CPI, WHICH IS ROUGHLY INFLATION, IS NEVER GOING TO MATCH.

SO THEY'RE ALWAYS GOING TO BE FALLING A LITTLE FARTHER BEHIND.

BUT THESE GUYS HAVE LITERALLY BEEN ON A FIXED INCOME WITH NO RAISE SINCE WHATEVER DAY THEY RETIRED.

YEAH, IF IT WAS PRIOR TO 2010, THEN THEY HAVEN'T THEY HAVEN'T RECEIVED THE RACE SINCE THEN OR SINCE THEY'VE RETIRED SINCE THEN.

SO IT'S A MAJOR COMPONENT.

I KNOW YOU GUYS ARE GOING TO HAVE TO FIND THE FUNDS TO PAY FOR IT.

SO WE DID GO THROUGH AND THEY WANTED TO KIND OF GIVE YOU GUYS SOME OPTIONS BECAUSE I DON'T THINK IT WAS UP TO US TO JUST DEMAND A FULL, FULLY FUNDED 70% COLA RIGHT OFF THE BAT.

SO WE WROTE IN SOME OPTIONS, BASICALLY BUILDING UP FROM THE LOWER RATE UP TO THE TOP COURSE.

OUR OPTION ONE WOULD BE A FULLY FUNDED 70% COLA.

THAT WOULD BE BACK TO WHERE WE STARTED BASICALLY IN 2009 2010.

OPTION TWO WOULD BE AN IMPLEMENTATION OF A 50% COLA ON JANUARY 1ST OF 2024 AND THEN HOPEFULLY FOLLOWING BY A PLAN TO INCREASE THAT TO A 70% BY JANUARY 1ST OF 2025.

SO THAT ALLOWS THE CITY TO KIND OF COME IN AT A LOWER, LOWER INITIAL COST AND THEN AND THEN WORK TO BUILD UP TOWARDS THAT MAXIMUM AMOUNT.

OPTION THREE IS AN IMPLEMENTATION OF THE OF THE LOWEST LEVEL ALLOWABLE BY LAW, AND THAT'S THE 30% COLA TO TO START ON JANUARY 1ST OF 24 AND THEN BUILD THAT TO A 50% BY THE NEXT YEAR AND THEN A 70% RIGHT BEFORE THIS LAW BASICALLY EXPIRES. SO IT WOULD STILL GET US BACK TO THE STARTING POINT.

IT WOULD JUST TAKE US LONGER TO GET THERE AND ALLOW YOU GUYS TIME TO LOOK FOR WAYS TO BUDGET AND FUND THAT.

SO AGAIN, THOSE ARE JUST OPTIONS FOR YOU GUYS TO CONSIDER.

I DON'T KNOW IF CITY STAFF HAS COME UP WITH ANYTHING DIFFERENT THAN THAT OR IF YOU GUYS HAVE ANY KIND OF IDEA FOR SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN THAT.

I WOULD JUST. I WOULD JUST END BY SAYING, OF COURSE, THE IMMEDIACY OF THIS IS PRETTY IMPORTANT TO US, NOT ONLY FOR THE RETIREES, BUT AMARILLO REALLY LED THIS CHARGE DOWN AT THE STATE LEGISLATOR LEGISLATURE GETTING THIS PASSED.

IT WAS A PRETTY BIG DEAL THROUGH AT LEAST I KNOW THE POLICE, LABOR ORGANIZATIONS DOWN THERE IN AUSTIN, NOT JUST CLEAT, WHICH REPRESENTS US, BUT SOME OTHER LABOR ORGANIZATIONS HAD TO COME TOGETHER. WE ALL HAD TO SIT AT A TABLE AND KIND OF WORK OUT THE DETAILS OF THIS.

IT AFFECTS A LOT OF CITIES.

IT AFFECTS A LOT OF RETIREES AND EMPLOYEES.

SO BECAUSE WE DROVE THAT TRAIN, I WOULD BE DISAPPOINTED IF AMARILLO WASN'T THE FIRST TEAM TO JUMP BACK IN AND SAY, YOU KNOW, WE WE SOLVED THIS PROBLEM OR WE WE GOT THIS WINDOW AVAILABLE.

AND SO WE'RE ALL IN SOME OF THESE CITIES WEREN'T EVEN AWARE THAT THIS WAS GOING TO HAPPEN BECAUSE FORTUNATELY THE CITY STAFF AND US WORKED TOGETHER ON THIS.

THERE ARE SOME CITIES THAT ARE OPPOSED TO THIS BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT TO PAY THE EXTRA MONEY.

SO THIS WAS A JOINT EFFORT BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE AMARILLO POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION.

BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THIS IS SUSTAINABLE SO WE DON'T WANT THE CITY TO HAVE TO DROP THIS AGAIN.

AND THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THAT'S STILL POSSIBLE.

YOU MAY UNDERSTAND SOMETHING DIFFERENT.

SO I THINK THAT ONE IS STILL A LITTLE BIT QUESTIONABLE.

IT WOULD PROBABLY COME DOWN TO ATTORNEYS FIGHTING IT OUT.

I'M LOOKING AT BRIAN NODDING HIS HEAD.

SO I THINK THERE'S MAYBE A COUPLE OF INTERPRETATIONS OF THAT.

SO, YEAH, BUT I THINK TO HIS POINT, THOUGH, IS THIS.

[04:50:01]

I THINK, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THE CITY IS SUCH A BIG OPERATION WITH SO MANY MOVING PARTS, IF YOU TAKE TOO MUCH FROM ONE FOR ONE, IT CAN CERTAINLY OFFSET AND HURT ELSEWHERE. AND SO I THINK THAT'S WHERE CERTAINLY WHAT I'M HEARING FROM THIS GROUP AND IT WAS VERY INTERESTING, THERE WAS I LEARNED A LOT THROUGH THIS LEGISLATIVE SESSION. I WILL SAY THAT APPARENTLY THERE'S POLITICS RUN A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT AT THE STATE LEVEL.

BUT THERE WAS BUT IT WAS ONLY BECAUSE I KNOW LIKE CLEAT, WHICH IS THE STATE POLICE ASSOCIATION, I'M PROBABLY SAYING THAT WRONG.

BUT THEY HAD BEEN ADAMANTLY OPPOSED TO THE OTHER VERSIONS WE HAD BROUGHT FORWARD IN THE PREVIOUS YEARS THAT TOBY WAS TALKING ABOUT, AND THEY CAME ALONGSIDE THIS PROPOSAL THIS TIME.

SO IT WAS A VERY UNIQUE SITUATION THAT IT JUST SEEMED LIKE MAYBE THE STARS ALIGNED AND THE RIGHT PEOPLE GOT ON THE RIGHT PAGE AT THE RIGHT TIME.

AND SO AGAIN, I LOVE THAT THEY PUT A THREE YEAR WINDOW IN PLACE.

SO IT'S NOT I MEAN, HEY, THIS IS YOUR ONE CHANCE AND THAT'S ALL YOU GET.

BUT IT DOES ALLOW AND I THINK BY THEIR ILLUSTRATION HERE, THERE'S SOME DIFFERENT OPTIONS WE COULD TALK ABOUT.

AND ANDREW AND I, I SAY ANDREW HAS PROBABLY BRAINSTORMED SOME OTHER IDEAS THAT WE COULD EVEN TALK THROUGH AS WELL.

SO, I MEAN, THERE'S A THERE'S SEVERAL VERSIONS OF THIS WE COULD TALK ABOUT.

BUT, YOU KNOW, ONE THING THAT I THINK WE NEED TO, YOU KNOW, AND THIS GOES BACK TO THE VERY START OF TODAY, YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOT WE HAD TALKED ABOUT SALES TAX.

WE HAD TALKED ABOUT A $2.4 MILLION NUMBER IN SALES TAX.

AS I MENTIONED, WE NEED A KNOWN SUSTAINABLE REVENUE SOURCE TO SUPPORT THIS.

I AM A LITTLE HESITANT TO SAY THAT THAT 2.4 MILLION IN SALES TAX MIGHT BE THE RIGHT ONE IF WE WERE ABOUT THREE WEEKS FROM NOW, I MIGHT BE ABLE TO SAY THAT. BUT I THINK THERE'S STILL A LITTLE BIT OF UNCERTAINTY THERE.

WE ALSO TALKED ABOUT PROPERTY TAXES EARLIER TODAY BASED ON, I THINK, THE MODEL THAT COUNCIL IS LOOKING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH.

WE HAD TALKED ABOUT HOW IN THE MAXIMUM TAX RATE THERE WAS 4.9 MILLION, BUT A MILLION WAS ALREADY BUILT INTO THE BUDGET.

SO WE'RE TALKING 3.9.

WELL, NOW THE MODEL THAT THAT COUNCIL HAS RECOMMENDED IS, OKAY, NOW DROP THAT DOWN EVEN ANOTHER MILLION BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT DOING SOME DEBT ISSUANCES TO ADDRESS SOME STREET PROJECTS AND DO A GRANT MATCH FOR THE ONE STREET PROJECT.

SO NOW INSTEAD OF THREE, 3.9 MILLION MORE THAT WE HAD SOME WIGGLE ROOM ON, WE'RE PROBABLY AT ABOUT 2.9.

SO WITH 2.9 GOING BACK TO WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT, THAT FOR SURE COULD GET YOU POTENTIALLY THE 30% COLA AT THIS POINT IN TIME. I DON'T.

NO, WE MIGHT COULD STRETCH TO A 50.

I THINK WE WOULD NEED TO TALK ABOUT PROS AND CONS OF THAT.

ANDREW DO YOU WANT TO ELABORATE A LITTLE BIT? YEAH. SO WE ALSO GOT WITH MRS ABOUT AS FAR AS TIMING TO GET IN BETWEEN JANUARY 1ST.

AND AS LAURA MENTIONED, YOU HAVE TILL THE END OF THE CALENDAR YEAR.

SO ONE OTHER OPTION MIGHT BE ADOPT THE BUDGET IN OCTOBER 1ST WITH THE 30% APPROVED.

THEY KNOW THEY HAVE IT AND WE'LL WORK THROUGH THIS WORKING BUDGET.

WE'LL HAVE A COUPLE MORE MONTHS, SEE HOW SALES TAX DOING, SEE IF THERE'S OTHER OPPORTUNITIES, AND THEN YOU CAN COME BACK AGAIN AND GIVE US DIRECTION POTENTIALLY TO BUMP UP MAYBE TO THE 50% COLA ALL BY JANUARY 1ST.

SO IT'S BASICALLY TWO BITES AT IT TO GET IT TO JANUARY 1ST.

JUST A FOURTH, FOURTH SCENARIO TO CONSIDER.

I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION ON THAT.

SO WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THESE THREE YEARS, RIGHT, 25, 26 AND THEN 24, THOSE THREE YEARS, I MEAN, SAY WE ADOPT A 30% COLA OR A 50% COLA, YOU KNOW, AND SAY WE CAN'T GO TO 70 UNTIL 2027, IS THAT FEASIBLE OR IS THAT THREE YEAR WINDOW IT FOR AS FAR AS BUMPING UP THE RAISES? SO MY MY UNDERSTANDING THE WAY IT WOULD WORK IF WE WERE TO GO UP TO A 70% IN 2027, THE CATCH UP FEATURE WOULD COME INTO EFFECT BECAUSE WE'D BE OUTSIDE THE THREE YEAR WINDOW.

SO YES, WE WOULD STILL HAVE THAT OPTION, BUT IT WOULD BE A LARGER NUMBER THAN WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AT THIS POINT.

THE OTHER MAYBE DISCLAIMER I WANT TO PUT OUT THERE.

THESE ARE THE MOST RECENT NUMBERS RUN BY TMS BASED ON OUR CURRENT ACTUARIAL VALUATION.

[04:55:03]

THESE NUMBERS WILL CHANGE FOR IMPLEMENTATION IN ONE 125.

SO IF WE DON'T DO ANYTHING, THESE NUMBERS WILL CHANGE.

I JUST DON'T KNOW IF THEY'LL GO UP, GO DOWN.

IT'LL KIND OF DEPEND ON WHAT CPI IS DOING, WHAT THE INVESTMENT ACTUAL RETURN IS FOR TMS, AMONG OTHER FACTORS.

SO THESE ARE THE ABSOLUTE KNOWN NUMBERS FOR ONE 124 IMPLEMENTATION.

BUT JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU ALL ARE AWARE THAT THESE NUMBERS WILL FLUCTUATE SOMEWHAT WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THESE SAME AMOUNTS THIS SAME TIME NEXT YEAR.

I PERSONALLY FEEL LIKE WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO FUND THIS.

I THINK WE'VE DONE OUR RETIREES WRONG.

THEY WENT TO WORK IN GOOD FAITH THINKING THEY HAD A RETIREMENT PLAN, KNOWING.

AND BACK IN 2010, I BELIEVE YOU SAID WE AS A CITY STOPPED THAT.

SO IN MY OPINION, WE DID OUR RETIREES WRONG BY DOING THAT.

AND AS WAS STATED HERE BY LAURA AND TOBY, THIS IS A VERY BIG RECRUITING TOOL, NOT JUST FOR THE POLICE OFFICERS, BUT FOR CITY EMPLOYEES AS WELL, BECAUSE AT THAT POINT WE'LL BE ABLE TO RECRUIT, GIVING PEOPLE A GOOD RETIREMENT PLAN THAT THEY CAN GROW ON.

NOW, WE WERE LOOKING AT BUDGET ITEMS. I'M LOOKING AT THIS LIST WE HAD HERE THAT WE HAVE A 230 SOMETHING, I BELIEVE, JOBS THAT.

ARE AREN'T AREN'T FILLED.

YES, SIR. WHICH ALLOWS US WITH THE WORKING BUDGET TO PUT THAT MONEY INTO THIS PROGRAM AS WELL, IF WE NEED TO.

AND AS A COUNCIL, WE COULD BRING THOSE UP AS WE NEEDED TO FILL THEM.

SO I THINK THERE'S MORE OPTIONS TO LOOK AT BEING ABLE TO FUND THIS THAN JUST WHAT WE HAD LOOKED AT ORIGINALLY.

THAT WAS ONE OF THE REASONS I ASKED FOR THIS LIST BECAUSE.

I KNOW AT THE END OF THE DAY, I WOULD LIKE TO FIND OUT FOR SURE FROM THE DIRECTORS AND THINGS HOW MANY OF THESE EMPLOYEES DO WE ACTUALLY NEED TO HAVE? BECAUSE IF A DEPARTMENT IS RUNNING GOOD WITH WHAT WE GOT, I DON'T KNOW IF WE NEED TO CONTINUE.

AND IT'S JUST LIKE, I'M NOT PICKING ON YOU GUYS BACK HERE.

MARTIN BUT THEY HAVE 20 OFFICERS DOWN.

I DON'T THINK WE'LL HAVE 20 OFFICERS FULFILLED BY THE END OF THE YEAR.

I HOPE WE DO, BUT WE MAY NOT, WHICH WE COULD USE SOME OF THAT MONEY FOR THIS YEAR.

BUT THAT'S JUST MY THOUGHT I THINK WE NEED TO GET BACK TO.

TREATING OUR EMPLOYEES GOOD, GIVING THEM A GOOD RETIREMENT MAKES THEM WANT TO STAY STAY HERE LONGER.

WE JUST NEED TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE WANT TO GO ABOUT IT.

I WAS JUST GOING TO ADD. HANG ON JUST A SECOND.

GOING OVER THAT. YEAH.

I WAS GOING TO ADD TO YOU GUYS NOT.

NOT TO BEAT A DEAD HORSE.

OF COURSE, I LISTENED TO ALL THE BUDGET TALKS THIS MORNING AND FUNDING AND PROPERTY TAX TALKING ABOUT MAYBE NOT CAPTURING THAT 3.5% AND AND THEN WEIGHING THAT WITH FEES, OBVIOUSLY THE NEEDED FEES FOR DRAINAGE AND ALL THAT.

SO THE NUMBERS CLEARLY ARE OVER MY HEAD BECAUSE I'M JUST A POLICEMAN.

BUT I KNOW THIS.

IF WE'RE WHETHER WE ASK OUR CITIZENS TO PAY 36 EXTRA DOLLARS A MONTH OR WE ASK THEM TO PAY $2 EXTRA A MONTH, DEPENDING ON HOW YOU GUYS DECIDE, THESE GUYS THAT HAVE WORKED AND RETIRED FROM THE CITY HAVE NOT GOT $1 EXTRA PER MONTH SINCE THEY RETIRED.

THEY ARE FIXED.

AND I KNOW THAT'S SOMETIMES THAT'S A PRIVATE PUBLIC SECTOR ARGUMENT.

BUT IF YOU LOOK AT SOCIAL SECURITY, WHICH IS PAID IN BY MOST EMPLOYEES, IS PRIVATE AND PUBLIC.

THOSE GUYS GOT, I BELIEVE IT WAS AN 8.7% RAISE THIS LAST YEAR TO MATCH INFLATION.

OUR EMPLOYEES AREN'T GETTING THAT.

OUR RETIREES AREN'T GETTING THAT.

SO THAT REALLY HITS HOME TO ME WHEN I THINK ABOUT COMPOUNDING YEARS.

AND, YOU KNOW, THERE WERE YEARS OF VERY LOW INFLATION, SO 30% OF 1% INFLATION IS VERY SMALL.

[05:00:07]

BUT IT IT MIRRORS THE ECONOMY.

THIS LAST YEAR, INFLATION WAS ROUGHLY 9%.

SO YOU START COMPOUNDING THOSE YEARS AND YOU ADD IT UP TEN, 12, 13 YEARS WITHOUT A RAISE.

AND IT BECOMES PRETTY SIGNIFICANT FOR FOR THESE GUYS.

SO I JUST WANT YOU GUYS TO CONSIDER HOW YOU FUND IT.

AND I KNOW YOU GUYS GOT A LOT OF OF COMPETING INTERESTS AND THERE'S ONLY SO MUCH MONEY TO GO SO FAR.

BUT THIS IS A REALLY, REALLY IMPORTANT PIECE FOR THESE GUYS.

OFF. AND I MENTIONED THIS TO YOU PRIVATELY, TOBY, BUT PUBLICLY, I JUST WANT TO SAY CONGRATULATIONS FOR GETTING THIS TO WHERE IT IS AND TO GET A BILL PASSED. AND THERE ARE MANY MORE THINGS, INCLUDING FEEDING AN ELEPHANT THROUGH THE EYE OF A NEEDLE THAN GETTING A BILL PASSED AND SIGNED NO LESS BY THE GOVERNOR.

SO CONGRATULATIONS ON ALL YOUR HARD WORK AND YOU'VE GOTTEN TO THE ONE YARD LINE.

AND NOW WE NEED TO GET OVER THE GOAL LINE.

AND I THINK IT'S MY COMMITMENT TO TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO HOW TO GET THERE.

A COUPLE QUESTIONS I DO HAVE.

SO IF.

SO LET'S SAY, FOR EXAMPLE, IF WE TAKE OPTION NUMBER THREE AND IT'S 30 AND 50.

DOES DOES THAT COMMIT THE NEXT COUNCIL TO GOING TO 70 OR IS THAT A IS IT AN INDEPENDENT DECISION OF THAT COUNCIL? AND THEN ONCE YOU GO TO THE 70 LEVEL, THEN YOU'RE COMMITTED TO THAT FOR THE LONG TERM? THAT IS CORRECT. AND SO SO LET ME TALK TO YOUR FIRST QUESTION.

NO, ANYTHING THAT THIS COUNCIL ADOPTS AS FAR AS A COLA IS CONCERNED LOCKS US IN.

AT THAT RATE, IT HAS NO COMMITMENT TO A FUTURE INCREASE, ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

SO IT JUST LOCKS IT IN.

SO WHETHER IT'S 30, 50 OR 70, THAT IS WHAT IT WILL BE IN THEORY FROM THERE GOING FORWARD, UNLESS A FUTURE COUNCIL TAKES ANOTHER STEP OR THIS COUNCIL TAKES ANOTHER STEP TO ADOPT AN INCREASED RATE.

AND THEN ON YOUR I THINK YOUR NEXT QUESTION IS THAT SO THE WAY AGAIN, THE WAY TMS WORKS AND LET ME LET ME PULL OUT MY NUMBERS HERE.

SO. IT'S IT'S A TWO FOR ONE MATCH.

SO ALL OF OUR EMPLOYEES OFF THE TOP HAVE 7% WITHHELD OUT OF THEIR PAYCHECKS.

THAT GOES DIRECTLY INTO THE RETIREMENT.

OKAY. WHICH IS A LOT MORE THAN WE KNOW.

YOU KNOW, MAYBE THE PRIVATE SECTOR NORMALLY DOES, BUT THAT'S HOW MRS WORKS.

THEN IN THEORY, THE CITY I MEAN, YOU DO THE MATH.

A TWO FOR ONE MATCH MEANS THAT THE CITY WOULD BE PUTTING IN 14%.

IF YOU REMEMBER EARLIER, I SAID OUR CURRENT CONTRIBUTION RATE IS 11.85%.

WELL, WHAT THAT ESSENTIALLY TRANSLATES TO IS THAT GIVEN ALL THE OPTIONS THAT WE HAVE FOR OUR RETIREMENT, I THINK OUR EARNINGS HAVE BEEN DOING A LITTLE BIT BETTER.

AND SO WE'RE ABLE TO KEEP THAT CONTRIBUTION RATE A LITTLE BIT LOWER.

AND I DON'T WANT TO GO INTO DETAILS ABOUT THAT BECAUSE IT'S AN ACTUARIAL CALCULATION THAT I ONLY UNDERSTAND ABOUT THIS, MUCH OF IT.

BUT TO GO TO ONE OF THESE COLA OPTIONS.

SO LET ME PUT IT IN THIS.

SO RIGHT NOW WE'RE AT 11.85% TO GO TO THE VARIOUS COLA OPTIONS, TO GO TO THE 30% WITHOUT THE CATCHUP FEATURE IT OUR RATE WOULD GO UP TO 14.9%.

TO GO UP TO THE 50%, WE WOULD HAVE A CONTRIBUTION RATE GOING UP TO 17.57% AND THEN THE 70% IS 20.44%. SO FROM A BUDGETING STANDPOINT, WHAT THAT MEANS IS ALL WE'RE DOING IS TAKING THAT RATE AND APPLYING IT TO SALARY, RIGHT.

AND THEN RUNNING A NUMBER.

SO WHAT HAPPENS THEN IS AS A COUNCIL MAKES A CHOICE TO PUT THE COLA BACK IN AND THEY HAVE A SUSTAINABLE FUNDING SOURCE, FUNDING IT THAT'S FUNDED FROM THERE ON OUT.

SO AS THE ORGANIZATION GROWS, IT WOULD BE PART OF, I GUESS, ESSENTIALLY THE OVERALL GROWTH COMPONENT OF THE CITY AS A WHOLE.

SO AS YOUR POTENTIAL WORKFORCE MAY NEED TO GROW A LITTLE AS THEY'RE GETTING RAISES EACH YEAR, IN THEORY, YOUR SALES TAX IS ALSO GROWING, YOUR PROPERTY TAX IS ALSO GROWING.

AND SO IT'S ALL GROWING VERY PROPORTIONATELY.

SO IN THEORY, THERE'S IT'S A ONE TIME DECISION AND THEN A FUTURE COUNCIL, IF THEY WANT TO MAKE A DIFFERENT ONE, IT WOULD BE A ONE TIME DECISION AT THAT POINT AND THEN IT SETS THE COURSE GOING FORWARD.

DOES THAT KIND OF HELP ADDRESS YOUR QUESTION? AND THEN MY OTHER QUESTION IS THE NUMBER OF RETIRED CITY RETIREES, IS THAT A PRETTY CONSISTENT NUMBER OVER TIME, OR IS THERE FLUCTUATIONS OF THE NUMBER OF RETIREES THAT WE HAVE? SO I'M I'M COMPLETELY SPEAKING OFF THE CUFF HERE BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE THE NUMBERS TO BACK THIS UP, BUT I COULD GET THEM.

BUT I WOULD PRETTY MUCH GUARANTEE THAT THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE RETIRING FROM THE CITY OF AMARILLO IS DECREASING OVER TIME.

[05:05:08]

I WOULD NOT SAY THAT WITH OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT AT ALL.

THEY'RE PROBABLY STAYING VERY CONSISTENT AND GROWING A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE THEIR WORK, THEIR AUTHORIZED FORCE HAS GROWN.

BUT THEN OVERALL, IF YOU LOOK AT THE PATTERNS OF EMPLOYEES, THEY'VE CHANGED A LOT OVER THE YEARS, YOU KNOW, WHERE PEOPLE WOULD GET INTO A JOB AND STAY IN A JOB UNTIL RETIREMENT. I THINK WE'VE SEEN SOME CHANGE IN THAT, ESPECIALLY SINCE COVID.

WE'VE SEEN A LOT MORE MOVEMENT AROUND JOBS.

I THINK SOME OF OUR YOUNGER GENERATIONS ARE NOT STAYING IN.

SO MAYBE TO YOUR POINT, WE MAY SEE A LITTLE BIT OF A SLOWDOWN IN RETIREES GOING INTO OR CITY EMPLOYEES GOING INTO RETIREMENT WHERE WE MAY SEE A LITTLE BIT OF GROWTH FROM THE PD, THE PD SIDE.

BUT I DON'T THINK WE'RE FULLY GROWING ALTOGETHER.

SO REALLY, ANY FLUCTUATION, THIS NUMBER IS GOING TO BE BASED STRICTLY ON THE CPI ADJUSTMENT AND NOT SO MUCH ON NUMBERS OF ANYTHING.

IT MAY BE A FEWER NUMBERS OF PEOPLE THAT ARE WELL.

AND THE OTHER THING TOO IS THE WAY THAT THESE THESE CONTRIBUTION RATES ARE CALCULATED IS THAT YOU ARE FUNDING THE RETIREMENT OF THAT EMPLOYEE AND THAT EMPLOYEE, THIS EMPLOYEE, THAT EMPLOYEE, ANY CITY EMPLOYEE OVER THE LIFE OF THEIR CAREER.

OKAY. SO YOU'RE SO AS YOU HAVE MORE PEOPLE WORKING FOR THE CITY, YOU'RE PUTTING MORE DOLLARS IN SPECIFICALLY FOR THAT PERSON THAT IN THEORY WILL WILL SATISFY WHAT THEIR NEED IS THROUGHOUT RETIREMENT.

AND AGAIN, IT'S VERY COMPLEX CALCULATIONS.

THE OTHER THINGS THAT WE SEE AFFECT THE RATE OVER TIME ARE THINGS LIKE AS MORTALITY TABLES CHANGE.

SO AS THE POPULATION AS A WHOLE STARTS LIVING LONGER, THAT CAN CHANGE SOME OF THESE NUMBERS A LITTLE BIT, THESE CONTRIBUTION RATES, BECAUSE NOW INSTEAD OF, YOU KNOW, THE AVERAGE LIFESPAN, I'M MAKING THIS UP, BUT THE AVERAGE LIFESPAN OF BEING 80 THAT NOW IT'S 85, WELL, THAT'S ANOTHER FIVE YEARS THAT WE GOT TO FACTOR IN.

WE THE ACTUARIES HAVE TO FACTOR IN INTO CONTRIBUTIONS GOING INTO THIS PLAN.

THE OTHER THING THAT CAN AFFECT IT IS OBVIOUSLY INVESTMENT RETURNS.

AND SO AND THAT'S CHANGED A LOT OVER THE YEARS AS WELL.

AND SO, I MEAN, THERE ARE DEFINITELY SOME FACTORS.

I DO NOT ANTICIPATE ANY BIG CHANGES TO MRS LIKE WHAT WE SAW BACK IN AGAIN, I WANT TO SAY IT WAS AROUND 2010, 2011, WHERE THEY KIND OF REVAMPED EVERYTHING.

WE'RE NOT ANTICIPATING ANYTHING LIKE THAT AGAIN.

BUT THERE WILL BE SOME CHANGES AS CPI CHANGES, WORKFORCE POTENTIALLY CHANGES MORTALITY CHANGES, AND THEN INVESTMENT RETURNS CHANGE AS WELL. THANK YOU. YES.

ARE YOU? I WAS ON.

WELL WITH TMS. IS THERE A VESTING PERIOD? YES, THERE IS A FIVE YEAR VESTING PERIOD, YES.

AND AT THAT POINT, IT'S 100%.

WELL, NO.

YEAH. TO GET THE MATCH.

SO TO GET THE MATCH.

YES, ABSOLUTELY.

AND THEN BUT THEN AFTER THAT, IS THERE A VESTING PERIOD FOR THE EMPLOYEE TO RECEIVE? YES, YOU CAN DO.

THE CITY HAS ADOPTED A 20 YEAR RETIREMENT.

SO 20 YEARS IN ANY YEAR OR ANY AGE OF SERVICE, YOU CAN RETIRE.

SO AT THAT TIME, THOUGH, YOU'RE STILL CONTRIBUTING.

YOU'RE CONTRIBUTING YOUR 7%.

THE CITY IS MATCHING YOUR 14%.

THEN YOU'RE ALSO DRAWING A 5% COMPOUND INTEREST ON THAT YEARLY.

SO TO LET YOU KNOW TOO, THOUGH, THE THING THAT HELPS THE FUND IS PEOPLE COME AND WORK FOR THE CITY FOR FIVE, TEN, 15 YEARS.

THEY LEAVE. THEY DON'T GET THEIR RETIREMENT WELL, THE CITY DOESN'T GET THEIR MONEY BACK.

THAT STILL STAYS IN THE FUND.

AND WHAT MAKES IT FUN? IT'S PROBABLY ONE OF THE BEST IN THE UNITED STATES.

MRS IS PROBABLY ONE OF THE BEST IN THE UNITED STATES AS FAR AS THE MUNICIPAL RETIREMENT SYSTEM.

SO WE HAVE A VERY SOLVENT FUND AND A VERY GOOD FUND.

BUT JUST ANOTHER POINT I WANT TO I WANT TO SAY IS, YOU KNOW, THAT'S THE THING WITH THE MORTALITY RATES, WITH MEDICAL SCIENCE AND WITH THINGS.

NOW, OUR RETIREES, THEY'RE LIVING LONGER.

WE'RE ALL GOING TO LIVE LONGER BECAUSE BECAUSE OF THE STUFF THAT'S HAPPENING IN THE WORLD THAT'S HELPING US IN ADVANCE AS WE GET OLDER.

SO AND THAT IS A FANTASTIC POINT.

AND I WANTED TO ELABORATE ON ONE POINT THAT HE MADE.

SO THE WHAT THE CITY HAS IS THERE'S TWO FACTORS.

SO THERE'S A 20 YEAR RETIREMENT.

SO AT ANY AGE, AFTER 20 YEARS OF SERVICE, AN EMPLOYEE CAN RETIRE ALSO AT THE AGE OF 60 WITH FIVE YEARS OF SERVICE BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE FIVE TO BE VESTED AT AGE 60 WITH FIVE YEARS OF SERVICE.

YOU ALSO HAVE THE OPTION TO RETIRE.

JUST ADDING A LITTLE BIT TO THAT AS WELL.

SO. AND I DO AGREE THE PLAN IS SOLID.

IT IS A VERY, VERY WELL RUN RETIREMENT PLAN.

AND THE CITY OF AMARILLO IS VERY FORTUNATE TO HAVE THIS BENEFIT THAT WE CAN PROVIDE TO OUR EMPLOYEES.

AND AGAIN, I KNOW WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS QUITE A BIT.

YOU KNOW, AT TIMES, YOU KNOW, WE CAN'T ALWAYS COMPETE WITH PRIVATE SECTOR.

[05:10:02]

AND I THINK IF WE CAN DO ANYTHING RELATED TO A COLA, IT'S ONLY GOING TO MAKE THAT BENEFIT STRONGER TO HELP OUR RETIREES, BUT ALSO FOR RECRUITMENT AND RETAINMENT. SO SO TO GO BACK AND JUST DOUBLE CHECK AFTER YOU FACTORED EVERYTHING IN ACROSS THE BOARD, ALL DEPARTMENTS CONSIDERED.

YES. GENERAL FUND, 2.9 MILLION, 2.5, 2.5 MILLION FOR THE 30% INCREASE.

THAT IS CORRECT. OR FOR THE 30% OF WITH THE THE COLA.

YES. THE 30% SIP, 30% OF SIP IS WHAT YOU'D BE BE ADJUSTING.

EXACTLY. AND THEN YOU WERE 4.1 MILLION.

4.9. 4.6 MILLION.

YOU HAVE BETTER MEMORY THAN ME.

YES. 4.6 ON ON THE 50%.

YES. OKAY. SO STEERING THE CONVERSATION JUST A LITTLE BIT HERE.

THE THE PERCEPTION IS, IS, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE THREE YEARS, SO WE HAVE THIS YEAR, THEN WE HAVE NEXT BUDGET, THEN WE HAVE THE BUDGET AFTER THAT.

AND WHEN YOU KIND OF GO THROUGH THAT A LITTLE BIT, YOU REALIZE, WELL, ACTUALLY I HAVE TWO YEARS, I HAVE THIS BUDGET AND I HAVE NEXT BUDGET.

SOMEBODY ELSE COULD HAVE THE OTHER BUDGET, YOU KNOW, REALLY.

AND THEN WHEN YOU FACTOR IN THE ACCOUNT OF.

IT'S LIKE ANY BUSINESS OR ANY ANY EVEN HOUSEHOLD BUDGET.

IF YOU DON'T ALLOCATE SOMETHING AND YOU DON'T PUT AN INTENTION ON WHERE THE MONEY GOES FOR SOME WEIRD REASON, AT THE END OF THE YEAR, THE MONEY'S JUST GONE.

YOU KNOW, SO SO WE DON'T WANT TO MAKE A HABIT OF, OF, YOU KNOW, LOOSELY ALLOWING BUDGETS TO JUST SIT AND REMAIN THINKING, OKAY, WE'RE GOING TO DO A GOOD JOB OF SAVING THOSE MONIES AND NOT PUTTING THEM WHERE THEY GO.

OUR WORKING BUDGET IDEA IS IS A REALLY GOOD BUDGET IDEA, BUT THEIR COMFORT NEEDS TO COME IN.

THE FACT THAT WE HAVE SOME INTENTIONS ABOUT WHERE THE MONEY IS GOING TO GO.

WE'VE ALREADY IDENTIFIED POTENTIAL PROJECTS AND PRIORITIES.

WE JUST HAVEN'T HAD THE TIME TO GO AHEAD AND KNOW, WELL, THIS IS NUMBER ONE, THAT'S TWO.

AND THIS ONE OVER HERE IS FIVE.

YOU KNOW, SO SO WHAT WE'RE HAVING TO DO IS LOOK AT IT TODAY.

DO WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO SAY, OKAY, WELL, THIS IS ONE, THIS IS THREE AND THIS IS FIVE.

WE REALLY DON'T, YOU KNOW, SO WE NEED THE ADDITIONAL TIME IN THIS WORKING BUDGET SENSE.

BUT BUT WITH THE INTENTION OF KNOWING THAT WE'RE GOING TO IDENTIFY THESE THINGS, YOU KNOW, THROUGHOUT THIS FIRST YEAR, AND THEN THE SECOND YEAR, BUDGET'S GOING TO BE EVEN SMOOTHER. AND WE WOULD HOPE TO IDENTIFY EVEN MORE EFFICIENCIES AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

WHAT COUNCILMAN SCHERLEN IS SAYING ABOUT THE 230 VACANCIES AND WHAT THAT EQUATES TO DOLLAR WISE.

UM, I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING YOU COULD LOOK AT OVER A YEAR.

I'D HATE TO LOOK AT THAT WITH LESS THAN A YEAR.

YOU KNOW, I'D HATE TO GO 2 OR 3 MONTHS DOWN THE ROAD AND GET SOME SENSE OF CONFIDENCE.

HEY, WE'RE GOING TO BE GOOD WHERE WE'RE AT.

LET'S JUST FREEZE EVERYTHING AND AND CAPTURE THESE MONIES IN OUR BUDGET AND GO SPEND THEM.

YOU MAY NOT HAVE THE RIGHT LEVEL OF SERVICE IF YOU DO THAT.

HOWEVER, I THINK THAT WITH THE ABILITY TO IDENTIFY SOME MONIES FOR STREETS INFRASTRUCTURE LIKE WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER, AND THEN THE SAVINGS, WHICH I'M STILL AT THE 4.9 MILLION.

SO I HAVE THE 3.9 PLUS, I HAVE THE MILLION IN MY BUDGET.

SO I'M AT 4.9.

AND THEN AND THEN IF YOU BACK OFF A MILLION FOR A POTENTIAL DEBT ISSUANCE, THEN YOU'RE AT 3.9.

YEAH. HOWEVER, I'M LOOKING AT THE 4.9 MILLION PLUS THE 2.4 MILLION.

OH, AND THE SALES TAX ON TOP OF THAT? YES, SIR. IF I JUST WAS WILLING TO LEAVE IT FLAT OUT AND TALKING ABOUT A CORRECTION, I THINK IF WE SAID, HEY, LET'S BUDGET EVERY DOLLAR AND LET'S PROJECT PROJECT A FLAT SALES TAX, THAT THAT COULD STILL EVEN BE CONSIDERED FAIRLY CONSERVATIVE.

BUT BUT IN A MARKET WHERE YOU HAVE SOME ECONOMISTS THAT ARE TELLING YOU THAT YOU SHOULD FEEL A PULLBACK HERE, THAT'S PRETTY AGGRESSIVE IF WE DON'T HAVE, YOU KNOW, A WORKING BUDGET WHERE WE'VE EARMARKED SOME THINGS, WHERE WE KNOW WE GIVE OURSELVES A LITTLE BIT OF MARGIN.

IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, WE WE ARE GIVING OURSELVES A LITTLE BIT OF MARGIN.

SO I'M AT 2.4 PLUS ONE PLUS 3.9.

UM, YOU KNOW, I SEE SOME SAVINGS IN DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS IN SOME OF THESE NOT HIRING FREEZES, BUT REQUESTED POSITIONS.

THERE'S ONE DEPARTMENT THAT WAS ROUGHLY $600,000 AND I THINK WE WOULD BE COMFORTABLE AT 300 IN A PERSONNEL INCREASE.

AND I CAN SPEAK TO THAT MORE HERE LATER.

BUT THEN WE ALSO HAVE, YOU KNOW, OUR PARKS AND REC.

YOU KNOW, I HAVE AN OFFER ON THE TABLE THAT WE HAVEN'T FULLY WORKED OUT YET, BUT WITH AISD ON THE SCHOOL, IF WE WERE ABLE

[05:15:07]

UM, YOU KNOW, I WAS CURIOUS.

I SAW ABOUT $1 MILLION ON THE INSURANCE.

ARE YOU COMFORTABLE WITH WHAT YOU BUDGETED? YOU USED ABOUT A MILLION LESS.

SO IN A WORKING BUDGET PHILOSOPHY, WE DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO HAVE THAT FULL BUDGET.

IF WE SEE THE TREND THAT OUR INSURANCE COSTS ARE ACTUALLY WORKING A LITTLE BIT MORE IN OUR FAVOR.

SO WOULD WE POTENTIALLY HAVE ANOTHER MILLION DOLLARS IN INSURANCE SAVINGS CONSERVATIVELY? I THINK WE I COULD STOMACH THAT.

YES, SIR. SO SO I'M JUST AND KEEP IN MIND, I'M NOT TAKING ANY MONEY OUT OF YOUR BUDGET.

I UNDERSTAND. I'M JUST MOVING IT INTO THE CENTER OF THE TABLE WHERE MAYBE YOUR ARM CAN'T REACH IT QUITE AS EASILY.

SO YOU'VE GOT TO CLIMB UP AND GET UP THERE IF YOU NEED IT, WHICH IS FINE.

AND WHEN WE NEED IT, WE'LL GET UP ON ON THAT.

SO. THE 3.5% INCREASE WITH A MILLION OUT OF THAT.

THAT GIVES ME 13 PLUS CHANGES, ALL OF THAT.

SO IF WE ADD THAT UP, THAT'S TWO, FOUR, THREE, FOUR, SEVEN FOUR.

YOU KNOW, I'M AROUND $9 MILLION PRETTY EASY.

I COULD STRETCH THAT TO TEN.

LOOKING THROUGH SOME STUFF.

SO I WOULD ASK COUNCIL, YOU GUYS HAVE ALL BEEN RUNNING KIND OF YOUR OWN LEDGER.

WHERE DO YOU WHERE DO YOU GUYS SIT ON WHAT YOU THINK WE'VE GOTTEN DONE HERE OVER THE LAST.

OH, I DON'T KNOW. IT FEELS LIKE 18 MONTHS OF BUDGET WORKSHOPS.

YOU GUYS SEE THE SAME $910 MILLION CONSERVATIVE SAVINGS.

YEP. OKAY.

ANYTHING ON YOUR END? COUNCILMAN.

SIMPSON. I'LL SEE IT WHEN I SEE THAT BUDGET COME OUT AND IT SAYS THAT IN THERE.

I'M NOT DOUBTING IT. NO, I'M NOT.

I'M NOT DOUBTING IT. NO.

AND WHEN YOU'RE TALKING WORKING BUDGET, YOU'RE JUST SAYING WE HAVE TO HAVE A BALANCED BUDGET.

BUT WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A WORKING BUDGET THAT ALLOWS US TO RESERVE SOME MONEY TO LOOK AT DOING THINGS.

SO WE'RE JUST NOT TYING UP EVERY DOLLAR THAT WE'RE SPENDING.

BUT IT GIVES US AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE ABLE TO IMPACT THINGS BECAUSE THINGS COULD CHANGE THROUGHOUT THE YEAR AND DIFFERENT PRIORITIES CAN COME OUT.

SO I LIKE THE IDEA, YOU KNOW, OF BEING ABLE TO DO THAT AND EVEN TO THE POINT OF, YOU KNOW, INCENTIVIZING A DEPARTMENT TO STAY UNDER BUDGET, YOU KNOW, IF A DEPARTMENT FINISHES UNDER BUDGET AND WE'VE GOT SOME OF THAT WORKING BUDGET LEFT AND THEY HAVE A PROJECT FOR $1 MILLION THEY'D LIKE TO DO, I SURE WOULD CONSIDER GIVING THEM THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT AND IF IF WE HAD ANYTHING.

BUT BUT NO, I, I THINK THAT'S A GOOD IDEA.

IT JUST GIVES US SOME MORE FLEXIBILITY TO BE ABLE TO DO SOME THINGS THAT AREN'T TIED UP.

OBVIOUSLY, IT'LL BE PART OF A BALANCED BUDGET.

SO IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'LL TAKE CARE OF.

AND I GUESS WHAT AS USUAL, WHATEVER WE DO NOT SPEND THIS YEAR, WE WILL ROLL OVER INTO CAPITAL FINANCE.

BUT I DO THINK WITH ALL THE NEEDS AND THE THINGS THAT ARE GOING ON, I'D LIKE TO RETAIN THAT FLEXIBILITY, YOU KNOW, DURING THE BUDGET YEAR TO BE ABLE TO ADDRESS THINGS ON AN AS NEEDED BASIS AND RUN THE REST A LITTLE BIT TIGHTER.

WE'RE HELPING OVER HERE ON OUR CIP SIDE WITH THIS 13 MILLION BECAUSE WHAT THEY'RE REALLY USED TO IS, MAN, WE JUST IDENTIFIED 5 MILLION OR 7 MILLION. OUR NEEDS ARE 50 MILLION.

PLEASE GIVE US THE FIVE.

AND SO IF WE CAN GET THIS WORKING IN THAT DEBT ISSUANCE AND KIND OF ROLL OVER, YOU KNOW, WITHIN OUR OUR TERMS, I MEAN, THAT'S A $26 MILLION POTENTIAL.

27 AND SO THAT THAT HELPS TO FREE UP SOME OF THIS OTHER WORKING CAPITAL THAT WE HAVE.

AND YOUR MIKES ARE ALL DEAD.

SO I THINK I'M JUST GOING TO HOLD IT RIGHT HERE.

Y'ALL ARE GOOD.

I MEAN, IT'S 9.3 AND I'M DOWN TO 8.3.

IF I PULL THE MILLION OUT TO GO BORROW THE 13.

SO LET ME GIVE UP THE 300,000 THAT I THINK I FOUND IN ONE DEPARTMENT, YOU KNOW, AND I'M AT EIGHT.

EVEN IF I WASN'T WILLING TO RENEGOTIATE SOMETHING WITH MY SCHOOL DISTRICT, WHICH I THINK IS VERY FAIR, I'M AT 7.5.

I WOULD THINK THAT TAKING THE LEAD ON THIS IS IMPORTANT IN KIND OF LEADING THE WAY IN THE STATE.

AND I THINK IT HELPS WITH RECRUITMENT AND RETAINAGE AND EVERYTHING ELSE.

BUT I DON'T SEE THE THE DETRACTION IN STEPPING OUT CAUTIOUSLY.

SO I WOULD GO 30% IN THIS CURRENT BUDGET, WHICH IS 30% MORE THAN I THOUGHT I WAS GOING TO DO IN THIS BUDGET.

I MEAN, I REALLY THOUGHT THIS BUDGET WAS GOING TO BE A HARD ONE.

WE WERE GOING TO REACH FOR COLA AND THE NEXT BUDGET AND THEN IN THAT TIME FRAME, IF THINGS WENT WELL, MAYBE WE COULD STRETCH TO THE 50.

IN MY MIND, I'VE NEVER HAD THE 70 JUST BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND HOW TIGHT IT IS ACROSS THE CITY AND ALL OF THE ORGANIZATION.

[05:20:05]

IN THIS CURRENT BUDGET AS PROPOSED ON SEPTEMBER 12TH, 20, IN THE NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET, WHICH WE GET TO CONTROL, I WOULD NEED YOU GUYS TO TELL ME WHAT DOES THAT DO TO YOU DIFFERENTLY THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE 30 AND 20 IN THIS YEAR'S BUDGET BUT BREAK IT OUT OVER THE TWO SEPARATE YEARS? SO WHAT BENEFIT IS IT IN TRYING TO CAPTURE ALL 50% CURRENT VERSUS SPLITTING IT OUT OVER TWO BUDGET CYCLES BECAUSE 20% PLANNED IN THE NEXT BUDGET CYCLE IS BETTER FOR STAFF? I THINK IN WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ORCHESTRATE.

YEAH, SURE. I UNDERSTAND THE THE NEED TO START CONSERVATIVELY AND THE BENEFIT OBVIOUSLY IS MORE MONEY FOR THE RETIREES AT A AT AN INITIAL 50% AND CAPTURING THAT 50% ON THE CURRENT CPI WHICH IS HIGH.

BUT IF WE ULTIMATELY GET TO THE 50% BY WORKING IT CAUTIOUSLY AND CAREFULLY, THEN OF COURSE THAT'S A WIN FOR EVERYBODY.

IT'S IT'S A IT'S MUCH BETTER THAN ZERO, WHICH IS WHAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW FROM A I GUESS, A SELFISH STANDPOINT FROM THE POLICE OFFICER'S ASSOCIATION GOING INTO NEXT BUDGET TALKS AND BUDGET YEAR WILL BE A MEET AND CONFER YEAR, WHICH IS WHEN THE ASSOCIATION AND THE CITIES START NEGOTIATING A NEW AGREEMENT, LABOR AGREEMENT.

SO WE WOULD HAVE COMPETING INTERESTS.

OBVIOUSLY, WE STARTED THIS WHOLE ISSUE AND WE WANT TO FURTHER THAT, BUT WE'RE ALSO GOING TO HAVE TO WORK FOR CURRENT EMPLOYEES TOO.

AT THAT TIME. SO THAT'S WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE FOR US.

BUT I UNDERSTAND IT'S MUCH BIGGER PICTURE FROM YOU GUYS.

GOT ANYTHING TO ADD TO THAT? I DON'T I DON'T HAVE THE NUMBERS OF WHAT THE THE DIFFERENCES WOULD BE BETWEEN THE TWO.

I DON'T KNOW HOW IT WOULD AFFECT ANYBODY, BUT I THINK THE BASE LEVEL IS JUST GETTING US IN THE DOOR AT THE 30% THAT'S GETTING US IN THE DOOR RIGHT NOW IS IS BETTER THAN NOTHING BECAUSE I THINK.

LIKE I SAID, YOU GUYS WILL SET A PRECEDENT BY JUMPING BACK IN AND HELPING THESE RETIREES OUT.

AND THAT'S JUST I MEAN, ALL THE CITY RETIREES AND JUST HELPING THEM OUT.

AND I THINK IF YOU JUST DO THAT RIGHT NOW, IT WILL HELP THEM.

AND THEN YOU GUYS CAN LOOK AT THE NUMBERS NEXT YEAR, WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE JUMPING TO THE 50.

SO SO I WOULD ASK IF COUNCIL, ANYBODY OPPOSED TO TRYING TO GET IN TO THIS AT 30% IN THE CURRENT BUDGET WITH GIVE GIVE ME THE 8.3 MILLION.

JUST LET'S JUST SAY THAT THAT'S FACTUAL AND WE CAN START AT THAT HIGH OF A NUMBER.

TELL ME YOUR NUMBER AGAIN. 8.3.

I TOOK THE MILLION OUT.

I GOT ALL THE WAY UP TO 9.3.

I CAN RERUN THEM IF YOU NEED ME TO.

YES, I WILL SIT DOWN WITH YOU.

AND MAYBE WE CAN COMPARE NUMBERS TO SALES TAX.

THAT'S YOUR MILLION PLUS.

THAT'S THE ADDITIONAL PROPERTY TAX.

SO THAT'S AROUND 75.

THERE WAS 300 IN A IN A DEPARTMENT THAT I CAN IDENTIFY.

OKAY. AND THEN THERE'S 500 OUT OF PARKS BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO SHIFT THAT OVER TO WATER AND SEWER ON, ON THE, THE WATER BILLING FEE.

WHAT WERE YOU ASKED? WHAT ABOUT THE EXCESS THAT WE'RE BRINGING OVER FROM THE PREVIOUS YEAR'S BUDGET? OH, WE HAVE WE HAVE EIGHT.

YEAH, WE HAVE THAT RECOMMENDED TO GO TOWARDS THE CAPITAL PROJECTS THAT ARE BUILT INTO YOUR.

EXACTLY. SO WHAT I'M NOT DOING IS I'M NOT CAPTURING ANY MONEY AWAY FROM CIP.

SO I'M NOT REDUCING ANYTHING THAT YOU'RE PUSHING INTO THE NEXT YEAR.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL WORKED HARD.

THEY'VE GOT THAT MONEY GOING.

YOU KNOW, IF WE CAN AGREE WHERE IT'S ALL GOING, MAYBE THE PRIORITIZATION OF IT'S WHAT WE TALK ABOUT, BUT WE LEAVE IT ALONE.

AND THEN I THINK THAT MIGHT HAVE EVEN PULLED IN THE MILLION DOLLARS FOR THE INSURANCE.

OKAY. I'VE GOT THAT. AND THAT'S JUST AN ESTIMATE VERSUS ACTUAL YOU JUST DIDN'T SPEND IT.

SO I WOULD JUST REDUCE IT DOWN TO WHAT YOUR CURRENT IS, NOT NOT REDUCING THE INSURANCE BY ANY MEANS.

SO DON'T LET ANYONE HEAR ME SAY I'M TRYING TO REDUCE INSURANCE COVERAGE.

IT'S JUST THE PROJECTION IS HIGHER THAN WHAT THE ACTUAL COST WAS THIS LAST YEAR WITH TONS OF VARIABLES.

RIGHT. UM.

SO DOES COUNCIL HAVE ANY ISSUES IN LOOKING AT TRYING TO PUT $2.5 MILLION INTO THIS WORKING BUDGET TO GET US AT A 30% COLA? NO, AND I THINK TO YOUR POINT, EVEN NEXT YEAR WITH THE MEET AND CONFER, I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO SEE FROM THIS COUNCIL WE'RE WE'RE REALLY FOR THE EMPLOYEES.

WE'RE TRYING TO GET EMPLOYEES.

BETTER PAID, YOU KNOW, SO WE CAN RETAIN.

SO THOUGH YOU'RE SAYING YOU MIGHT BE WORKING AGAINST IT, IT'S WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME TEAM BUT ALL WORKING WITHIN THE CONSTRAINTS OF LIMITED RESOURCES, RIGHT? SO IF, IF WE HAD UNLIMITED RESOURCES, IT'D BE GREAT.

EVERYBODY GETS EVERYTHING, ALL THE PROJECTS, EVERYTHING.

BUT THAT'S JUST NOT THE CASE.

AND WE HAVE TO KEEP THE TAXPAYER IN MIND AS WELL.

SO. I THINK MY OPINION BY ENTERING INTO THE 30%, WE'RE THERE.

[05:25:03]

AND THEN NEXT YEAR, WE LOOK AT BUDGET AND SEE WHAT WE FIND.

WE'RE AGAIN, I THINK WE'RE ALL ELECTED TO BE GOOD STEWARDS OF THE TAXPAYERS DOLLARS, AND THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE TO DO, BUT ALSO HONOR THE SERVICE OF EVERYBODY THAT'S GONE BEFORE.

I MEAN, EVEN CURRENT INCLUDED, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT'S A GREAT BENEFIT.

SO I'M IN COMPLETE AGREEMENT WITH THE 30%.

YOU YOU'RE GIVING US A LITTLE GRACE IN THE WAY OF I NEED YOU TO, YOU KNOW, COMPETE AND NEGOTIATE HARD ON BEHALF OF ALL OF OUR RETIREES AND CURRENT I MEAN, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WILL AFFECT THEM AND BENEFIT THEM.

BUT AT THE SAME TIME, YOU'VE GOT A BRAND NEW MAYOR.

YOU KNOW, I'M STILL TRYING TO REMEMBER WHAT TMS STANDS FOR.

YOU HAVE FOR NEW COUNCIL.

THEY JUST HEARD A TMR. NOW THEY KNOW MORE.

BUT WE WE'RE COMING AT THIS REALLY GREEN.

WE'VE WORKED REALLY HARD TO GET THIS BUDGET AS TIGHT AS WE CAN AND THEN TO JUST STRETCH OUT TO THE 50 IS A PRETTY BIG ASK FOR A NEW COUNCIL.

THE INTENTION OF US TO GO TO 50 IS NOT A BIG ASK.

I THINK YOU CAN HOLD US ACCOUNTABLE TO THAT AND THAT'S THAT'S THE DIRECTION WE WANT TO GO.

I CAN'T MAKE ANY PROMISES UNTIL WE WORK REAL HARD FOR A YEAR AND STEWARD ALL THE MONIES WELL SO THAT WE HAVE THE MONEY TO PUT INTO THERE.

BUT I DON'T THINK YOU SEE ANY ANY SLACK ON THIS SIDE OF THE TABLE.

SO IF YOU ALL ARE COMFORTABLE WALKING AWAY AT THE 30, WE WOULD LOVE TO BE ABLE TO OFFER THAT AND KIND OF PUT THAT IN OUR BUDGET UNLESS I HEAR FROM COUNCIL THAT SOMEBODY WOULD REALLY RATHER PUSH TO THE 50.

AND IF YOU HAVE A DIFFERENT PLAN OR ADDITIONAL MONIES, I DEFINITELY CAN LET YOU WEIGH IN ON THAT.

HOW DOES THAT HIT YOU GUYS? ARE YOU OKAY WITH WORKING WITH IT FOR NOW? YES, ABSOLUTELY.

I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU GUYS FOR FOR CONSIDERING IT.

AND I KNOW YOU GUYS ARE FOR THE EMPLOYEES AND FOR THE FIRST RESPONDERS AND FOR ALL ALL THE THE CITY AS AN ORGANIZATION, WHILE YOU'RE TRYING TO BE RESPONSIBLE, ESPECIALLY THIS EARLY IN YOUR IN YOUR TERM, AND MAKE SURE THAT YOU'RE NOT OVERSTRETCHED.

SO I KNOW THAT'S THAT'S A TOUGH ASK ON ANYBODY TO COME IN AND JUST A COUPLE OF MONTHS FIGURE OUT A MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR BUDGET AND THEN AND THEN PIECE IT OUT AND GET NEW ASKS IN THE MIDDLE OF THAT.

SO YEAH, THIS HAS BEEN A LONG TIME COMING.

THIS HAS BEEN A PROBLEM HERE.

SO ANYTHING THAT WE CAN GET IN AND AND STAY IN AND THEN WORK TO INCREASE IS A HUGE, HUGE WIN FOR THESE GUYS.

I JUST WANT TO SAY ONE THING. WE WERE ONLY ABLE TO DO THIS BECAUSE THE REPRESENTATIVE FOR PRICE FOR PRICE WAS ON OUR SIDE THE ENTIRE TIME.

HE FOUGHT HARD IN COMMITTEE.

HE SHOWED UP WITH HIS COMMITTEE.

HE SIT DOWN AND WE HAD TO REWRITE A BUNCH OF THIS LEGISLATION AND HE HAD NO PROBLEMS DOING THAT.

AND HE SHOWED UP FOR EVERY EVENT AND WOULD CONSTANTLY TEXT, EMAIL AND KEEP ME AND TOBY AND LORI AND THE WHOLE LOOP OF EVERYTHING THAT WAS GOING ON.

SO WE'RE GOING TO LOSE A REAL GREAT MAN IN AUSTIN BY HIM LEAVING AT THE END OF HIS TERM.

BUT I JUST WANT TO LET YOU KNOW THIS IS THE REASON IT WAS POSSIBLE WAS BECAUSE OF HIM.

SO JUST LET YOU ALL KNOW THAT.

THANK YOU. WE WE REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.

THANK YOU ALL. AND WE WILL CONTINUE AS WE WORK THROUGH THIS WORKING BUDGET IF IF FUNDS BECOME AVAILABLE AND WE'RE GOING IN IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.

I DON'T WANT ANYBODY TO HEAR ME SAY THAT WE CAN'T DO ANYTHING FOR A YEAR.

WE'RE JUST MAKING A COMMITMENT FOR NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET AND WE'RE GOING TO WORK THIS BUDGET EVERY MONTH.

SO REALLY APPRECIATE Y'ALL'S TIME.

THANK YOU GUYS FOR BEING HERE.

YEAH, I'M DISAPPOINTED WE CAN'T DO MORE.

I WISH WE COULD DO 50. I WISH WE COULD DO 70 RIGHT NOW.

AND I HOPE ALL THE RETIREES KNOW THAT WE'RE SUPPORTIVE OF THAT.

AND AND WE'LL FIGURE OUT A WAY TO DO THE BEST WE CAN, BUT HOPEFULLY FEEL GOOD ABOUT GETTING TO THIS POINT.

SO WE'RE GOING TO KEEP WORKING.

THANK YOU ALL. APPRECIATE IT.

THANK YOU, GUYS. OKAY.

MAYOR, WE.

YEAH, WE'VE GOT TWO THINGS I COULD DO.

ONE THING VERY QUICK. BOTH OF THESE ARE FLOYD.

IT'S GOING TO BE THE FLOYD SHOW. WE NEED TO TALK WATER AND SEWER FEES, AND THEN.

OH, I KNOW, I KNOW.

SO THE OTHER ITEM WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT.

THANK YOU. THERE IS A PROPOSED $3 MILLION DEBT ISSUANCE FOR AIRPORT TO DO THOSE HANGAR REPAIRS THAT ARE TIED BACK INTO THAT LEASE.

AND AGAIN, THOSE REVENUES ARE PROPOSED TO BE PAID FOR.

I'M SORRY, THOSE THE DEBT SERVICE AMOUNTS ARE PROPOSED TO BE PAID FOR OUT OF EXISTING REVENUE, AIRPORT REVENUES THAT HAVE BEEN HISTORICALLY GOING TOWARDS SOME ADVERTISING COSTS. BUT AS MIKE CONNOR MENTIONED, I THINK YESTERDAY, SORRY, IT'S ALL STARTING TO RUN TOGETHER, THAT HE FELT THIS WAS MORE IMPORTANT TO GO AHEAD AND TO GET THOSE HANGAR REPAIRS IN PLACE.

SO ANY THOUGHTS ON THAT? LEASE REVENUES, 500 PLUS A YEAR? THAT IS CORRECT.

SO THE $3 MILLION PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT FOR THE RAIL SYSTEM, WE DO HAVE A HOW LONG IS THE TENURE OF THE OF THE LEASE.

[05:30:01]

I DON'T KNOW BUT I CAN FIND OUT.

OH GOSH, THEY'VE BEEN THERE A WHILE.

SO IT'S A RENEWABLE, IT'S TYPICALLY ON A FIVE YEAR CYCLE, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHERE WE'RE AT IN A FIVE YEAR CYCLE.

I THINK IT WAS RENEGOTIATED A COUPLE WHAT WE WOULD WHAT WE WOULD ASK AND I SAY WE RENEWABLE.

WHAT I'D WANT TO KNOW IF COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO DIRECT IS I THINK WITH THIS AMOUNT OF MONEY GOING OUT, WE MIGHT WANT TO, YOU KNOW, NOT JUST PUT THAT OUT THERE AND LEAVE THE LEASE UNTOUCHED.

SO LET'S SAY IT'S A FIVE YEAR LEASE AND WE'RE THREE YEARS INTO IT.

WELL, LET'S SIGN ANOTHER FIVE YEAR LEASE AND PUT THE 3 MILLION INTO IT.

THEY SHOULD BE HAPPY WITH THAT, I WOULD HOPE.

AND THEN, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR AN INCREASE IN THE LEASE AMOUNT OR IF IT'S BUILT IN, WE'RE OVER EVERY YEAR IT INCREASES A SET AMOUNT.

AM I SO ARE YOU ASKING US TO RENEGOTIATE THE LEASE TO PAY THE DEBT SERVICE ON THE 3 MILLION? NO, I'M JUST ASKING TO EXTEND THE LEASE TO PROTECT THIS AMOUNT OF DEBT SERVICE.

OKAY, SO. SO IF I ONLY HAD A YEAR LEFT ON A LEASE, I'D HATE TO GO PUT $3 MILLION INTO IT.

AND THEN FOR SOME REASON THEY WERE TO PULL OUT.

NOW I'VE GOT PROPERTY FOR FOR LEASE THAT MAYBE DIDN'T NEED THE RAIL SYSTEM.

SO THIS IS PRETTY SPECIFIC TO THEIR NEEDS.

NO, WE'LL GET THAT AND WE'LL UPDATE YOU.

AND THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM THAT WE HAVE THIS IN THAT MANNER AND THEY'VE BEEN LEASING FROM US FOR 30 YEARS.

SO I DON'T THINK IT WOULD PROBABLY BE UNREASONABLE FOR US TO REQUEST A LEASE TERM OF 20 YEARS BECAUSE THAT'S THE THAT WOULD BE THE TERM OF THE DEBT THAT WE'D BE ISSUING WOULD BE 20 YEAR COS.

AND SO IF, IF THAT SEEMS REASONABLE WE COULD APPROACH THEM AND SEE IF WE COULD ALIGN THOSE TOGETHER TO KIND OF LOCK IT IN.

THOUGHTS ON THAT. DIDN'T, DIDN'T HE MENTION THEY MIGHT BE WANTING ANOTHER HANGER YESTERDAY.

YES. THEY HAVE APPROACHED US OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS THAT THEY HAVE BEEN WANTING TO THEY, THEY HAVE APPROACHED US FOR SOME ASSISTANCE ON CONSTRUCTING ANOTHER HANGER.

BUT, YES, I THINK THEY WOULD LIKE TO EXPAND IF THEY COULD HERE.

YES, THEY NEED MORE SPACE QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS ON THAT IF WE'RE ABLE TO ALIGN THOSE.

YOU GUYS ARE COMFORTABLE WITH A DEBT ISSUANCE.

ANY ANY RESERVATIONS ON ANY OF THAT? NO. SO WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO TO WORK THAT LEASE, MAKE SURE IT'S FAIR ON BOTH SIDES AND THEN BRING IT BACK.

NOW, ARE YOU NEEDING TO BRING THAT BACK IN BUDGET OR ARE YOU BRINGING THAT BACK AT ANY TIME? YES, ANY TIME.

OKAY. AND WE WOULD WELL, YES, WE AND WE COULD TIME THE DEBT ISSUANCE WITH THE NEGOTIATING PART OF THAT.

YEAH, WE COULD DO THAT. GOOD ON OUR SIDE.

ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT.

THAT ONE IS DONE. SO THE LAST THING I THINK WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT, UNLESS ANYONE ELSE HAS ANYTHING THEY WANT TO TALK ABOUT.

AND IF YOU GUYS WAKE UP IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT, Y'ALL PROBABLY DON'T DO THIS.

IT'S JUST ME THAT WAKE UP IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT AND THOUGHT, OH MY GOSH, I FORGOT TO ASK ABOUT THIS.

OR DID WE TALK ABOUT THAT? IF IF SOMETHING LIKE THAT COMES UP, PLEASE SEND ME AN EMAIL OR TEXT ME OR CALL ME AND LET'S TALK ABOUT IT.

SO DON'T LOSE SLEEP OVER ANYTHING THAT WE MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE TALKED ABOUT OR TALKED ABOUT MULTIPLE TIMES IN THE BUDGET.

SO WITH THAT, AS A REMINDER ON YOUR WATER AND SEWER FEES, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO TURN IN YOUR BOOK TO LET ME PULL THE PAGE REAL QUICK, WE CAN WE HAVE A BUILT IN 5% RATE INCREASE INTO THE WATER AND SEWER FEES, AND THAT WAS TO ADDRESS THE ONGOING INFLATIONARY COSTS THAT WE'RE SEEING IN THAT AREA.

AND THOSE ARE OUTLINED ON PAGE 33.

AND THEN ON PAGE 34, IN YOUR BUDGET BOOKS, WHAT CURRENT RATES WOULD LOOK LIKE.

AND AGAIN, IT VARIES BASED ON SIZE OF METER.

I WOULD THE TOP TWO ON PAGE 33 AND THE TOP TWO ON PAGE 34 ARE THE MOST COMMON RESIDENTIAL SIZE METERS.

SO JUST KIND OF KEEPING THAT IN MIND.

SO THAT IS WHAT THE RATE WOULD LOOK LIKE WITH A 5% RATE INCREASE.

SO WITH THAT, I'LL HAND IT TO FLOYD FOR ANY EXPANSION ON THAT.

OKAY. YES. AND WHAT THAT PRODUCES FOR YOU, IF YOU WANT TO TURN BACK TO PAGE 25, WE ARE LOOKING AT CASH FUNDED CAPITAL OF ABOUT $33 MILLION FOR WATER AND SEWER.

NOW, THAT RATE INCREASE IS NOT PRODUCING THAT MUCH.

THE RATE INCREASE IS HELPING COVER INFLATION.

AND THEN IF YOU'LL REMEMBER, FLOYD AND JOHN COLLINS STARTED VERY QUICKLY AS SOME THINGS TRANSPIRED OVER THE PAST YEAR TO KIND OF PAUSE OR SLOW DOWN SOME PROJECTS AND RECAPTURE SOME OF THOSE FUNDS, KNOWING THAT WE WERE PROBABLY GOING TO NEED TO REPRIORITIZE SOME THINGS GOING FORWARD BECAUSE SOME EVENTS WERE OCCURRING, THAT THINGS WERE EVOLVING.

SO A LOT OF THIS CASH FUNDED CAPITAL WAS BASICALLY UN FUNDING, PRIOR APPROVED PROJECTS AND BRINGING THEM FORWARD WITH A NEW PRIORITY.

[05:35:01]

THERE YOU GO. SO THIS AND SO OUR TYPICAL GOAL CURRENTLY UNDER EXISTING FUNDING FROM HERE, FROM THE PAST DECADE HAS BEEN TARGETING 10 MILLION IN CASH CAPITAL.

AND WE'RE WANTING TO, OVER TIME GET THAT TO 15.

NOW, HAVE WE GOTTEN THERE? TYPICALLY NOT, NO.

I THINK WE'VE BEEN CLOSER TO ABOUT 12.

BUT YES, FLOYD AND I ARE ALWAYS KIND OF WORKING ON TRYING TO BUILD THAT UP.

IT'S JUST A GIVE OR TAKE, YOU KNOW, HOW MUCH CAN WE SQUEEZE OVER A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME? SO THE OTHER THING THAT AS A REMINDER AND FLOYD CAN EXPAND UPON THIS IS AS WE KNOW THAT THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED WITH THE WASTEWATER PLANT. THIS BUDGET IS NOT BUILT TO ADDRESS ALL OF THAT.

THIS BUDGET IS BUILT TO START DESIGN AND KIND OF THE RESEARCH SIDE OF ALL OF THAT.

AND THEN WE WILL BE BRINGING BACK STARTING PROBABLY IN NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET AN IDEA.

AND AS SOON AS WE GET THOSE, WE'LL START TALKING TO YOU ALL ABOUT THAT.

JUST AS SOON AS WE'RE ABLE TO START KIND OF TYING DOWN WHAT THOSE NUMBERS REALLY ARE GOING TO LOOK LIKE AND START KIND OF FORMULATING A PLAN, BECAUSE WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO BE TALKING, I'M GUESSING, A 3 TO 5 YEAR PERIOD PLAN TO ADDRESS SOME OF THIS.

AND SO THERE WILL BE OPTIONS AND WE'LL WANT YOUR FEEDBACK ON IT.

BUT AS A REMINDER, WE DON'T HAVE ANY OF THAT BUILT IN.

AND FROM WHAT I HEARD FROM FLOYD AND FROM JOHN WAS THIS IS NOT THE BUDGET TO BUILD THAT IN.

FOR THAT THEY NEED SOME TIME TO ESSENTIALLY DO THEIR HOMEWORK AND GET THE DESIGN DONE BEFORE WE START BUILDING IT INTO A BUDGET.

IS THAT FAIR? FLOYD OKAY, SO.

WHERE ARE WE GOING TO ADDRESS THE CONCERNS WE TALKED ABOUT LAST TIME OF WATER RATES? WAS. DID YOU HAVE MORE? OH, ON WATER RATES.

SO THE LAST TIME WE MET THERE WAS VOICED CONCERNS ABOUT INCOMES ON THE LOWER.

ON THE LOWER LEVELS.

OH, AND WHERE ARE WE GOING TO LOOK AT ANYTHING OTHER THAN ACROSS THE BOARD? 5%. AND WE CAN CERTAINLY TALK ABOUT THAT.

THE OTHER THING THAT IS BUILT INTO THE BUDGET IS, AS A REMINDER, WE HAVE BUILT IN AN AMOUNT TO CHANGE UTILITY BILLING SOFTWARE, WHICH HAS JUST CONTINUED TO BE A STRUGGLE FOR US SINCE WE IMPLEMENTED IT BACK IN 2018.

AND SO WITH THAT, IN CONJUNCTION WITH THAT, WE WOULD LIKE TO COMPLETE A WATER STUDY THAT WE A WATER RATE STUDY IS WHAT I SHOULD SAY, SORRY, A WATER RATE STUDY THAT IS ONGOING THAT WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO BRING BETTER RECOMMENDATIONS BACK TO THAT POINT.

FLOYD, AS FAR AS YOU KNOW, THE TIERS OR THE BASE RATE, YOU KNOW, AND IF THERE'S SOME OPTIONS THAT MAYBE YOU ALL COULD LOOK AT ON THE BASE RATE, WE CAN WE DON'T HAVE TO DO A FAT A FLAT FIVE, A 5% INCREASE ACROSS THE BOARD IN THIS ONE BY ANY MEANS.

BUT IF WE DO CHOOSE TO DO SOMETHING ACROSS ALL, WE WILL CERTAINLY FOLLOW UP WITH THE RESULTS FROM A WATER RATE STUDY WITH SOME OPTIONS, YOU KNOW, ON BASE FEES VERSUS THE TIERED RATES THAT ARE USED MORE FOR CONSERVATION EFFORTS.

SO MY QUESTION WAS MORE THAT IS WHERE WE WERE AT.

YEAH. IS THE COUNCIL INTERESTED IN HAVING ANY DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THAT NOW VERSUS WHEN WE GET THE EXPERT INPUT? YEAH, MAYBE SO.

HOW MUCH IS THIS WATER RATE STUDY GOING TO COST? I THINK IT WAS 50,000 OR LESS.

AND WE'VE ALREADY ALREADY HAVE IT APPROVED IN THE BUDGET AND IT'S ALREADY PARTIALLY UNDERWAY.

MAN, I MEAN, CAN WE CAN WE UNDERSTAND WHERE WE ARE JUST WITH OUR OWN DATA IN THE WAY OF IF WE'RE GOING TO END UP AFTER WE GET A WATER RATE STUDY STILL WANTING TO GO TOWARDS? LOOK, THESE USERS THAT ARE ON THIS VERY LOW TIER ARE THE ONES THAT ARE IMPACTED MOST BY $2 A MONTH.

BUT THEN THIS USER OVER HERE THAT THAT HAS 100,000FT² IN THEIR BUILDING AND THEY RUN $100 MILLION A YEAR THROUGH THIS COMPANY.

LIKE, YOU KNOW, I'M SORRY, BUT THE $28 A MONTH JUST DOESN'T MATTER, YOU KNOW, EVEN THOUGH IT'S A LARGE INCREASE.

SO ALONG THOSE LINES, MAYOR, I'VE DONE THIS A YEAR OR TWO.

UH HUH. OKAY. SO INSTEAD OF HAVING TO PAY AN EXPERT, IF YOU LEFT THE BASE CONNECTION FEE FOR A THREE QUARTER AND A ONE INCH RESIDENTIAL METER AT THE SAME RATE IT IS TODAY, AND YOU ADJUSTED ALL THE OTHER RATES AT 6% INSTEAD OF 5%, YOU PROBABLY GAIN 20 $30,000.

OKAY. JUST BASED OFF MY KNOWLEDGE OF HISTORY OF RUNNING THIS SYSTEM.

NET 20 OR 30,000 INCREASE.

YEAH. INCREASE. YES.

VERSUS WHAT IF YOU MOVE THEM ALL?

[05:40:02]

BUT I WILL TELL YOU THAT YOU COULD LEAVE A ONE INCH BASE CONNECTION FEE WHERE A RESIDENT ON A SET INCOME HAS UP TO 3000 GALLONS SO THAT THEY CAN USE UP TO 3000 GALLONS IN A MONTH.

IT WOULD NOT CHANGE THEIR RATE AT ALL IF YOU ADJUSTED EVERYBODY ELSE, INCLUDING COMMERCIAL 6% INSTEAD OF 5%.

EVERYTHING BUT THOSE TWO BASE FEES.

RIGHT. INCLUDING THE THE TIERED FEES ABOVE A ONE INCH AND A THREE QUARTERS.

SO LET'S JUST SAY A ONE INCH METER.

A THREE QUARTERS INCH USES 5000 GALLONS.

THOSE 2000 GALLONS ABOVE THREE WOULD BE AT A 6% INCREASE.

OKAY. THEY'RE MAKING A CHOICE TO USE THAT WATER.

OKAY. SO THAT THAT'S WHAT I HEARD FROM THE RESIDENT THAT SPOKE, WAS THAT WE NEED SOME KIND OF CONSIDERATION.

WHEN I LOOKED AT OTHER ENTITIES THAT THE THE BASE CONNECTION FEE WITH THAT BASE CONNECTION WAS WHAT WAS REDUCED.

OKAY. ALL I'M SAYING IS YOU TAKE 16 BILLION GALLONS SOLD IN A YEAR, AND CONSIDERING THAT THE MAJORITY OF THAT WATER IS ON ON A TIERED RATE ABOVE THE BASE FEE.

OKAY. THAT YOU WOULD HAVE MORE REVENUE THAN A 5%, INCLUDING THOSE TWO BASE FEES PLUS 20 OR 30 GRAND.

NOW, FROM LAUREN MAX CONSIDERATION, I'M ASSUMING THERE'S 50,000 PLUS METERS OF THOSE TWO SIDES ON THAT BASE FEE AND YOU WOULD LOSE A DOLLAR A MONTH PER METER BY NOT RAISING THAT.

THAT'S THAT'S WHAT I'M SO I'M BASING IT THAT YOU WOULD LOSE A LITTLE OVER $50,000 A MONTH BY NOT RAISING THOSE TWO BASE FEES.

SO YOU'RE TALKING ON THE RESIDENTIAL SIDE, RESIDENTIAL, RESIDENTIAL ON THE BASE FEE, NO IMPACT.

AND YOU'RE TALKING ON THE WATER AND THE SEWER SIDE? BOTH? YES. AND THEN ON ANYTHING ABOVE THAT IS A 6%.

SO IT WOULD GO TO WHO USES THE WATER, PAYS FOR IT.

AND TO GO FURTHER TO THAT, WHAT'S THE DIFFERENTIAL BETWEEN, YOU KNOW, OURSELVES AND OUR NEIGHBOR TO THE SOUTH, SAY, CANYON? WHAT IS THEIR AVERAGE? ISN'T IT 3 TO 4 TIMES WHAT WE PAY? IT'S NOT THAT MUCH DIFFERENCE.

THERE'S WE HAVE THAT CHART SOMEWHERE.

IT'S A LARGE DIFFERENCE.

IT'S A YOU KNOW, IT'S THE DRAINAGE FEE THAT'S THAT'S SO DIFFERENT BETWEEN LIKE US AND LUBBOCK.

BUT, BUT I'M ONLY GOING TO THE POINT OF ON THE COMMERCIAL SIDE, YOU KNOW, IF I'M LOOKING AT PUTTING A BUSINESS IN AMARILLO THAT USES A LOT A LARGE AMOUNT OF WATER, AM I GOING TO GET TURNED AWAY, YOU KNOW, OR PUSHED BACK FROM THAT 6% INCREASE VERSUS A 5% INCREASE? THE DIFFERENCE ON THAT WOULD BE ABOUT.

$0.04 PER MONTH.

BETWEEN A FIVE AND 6%, NOT ON A LARGE COMMERCIAL FOR A COMMERCIAL, FOR A COMMERCIAL, FOR THE COMMERCIAL OR FOR THE PER THOUSAND, PER THOUSAND.

SO IF THEY USE IF THEY USE 10,000, IT'S $0.40.

YEAH. OKAY. SO YEAH, THAT'S THERE'S NO SCIENCE BEHIND THAT.

THAT'S A GUT FEEL ASSESSMENT OF WHAT YOUR RATES WOULD BE.

AND THAT WOULD, IN MY OPINION, WE WOULD SEE THE COVERAGE OF THOSE INCREASED ELECTRIC EXPENSES AND THOSE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES THAT WE SAW IN THE BUDGET WITH THAT REVENUE.

WELL, FORGIVE ME FOR HAVING A GUT FEEL OF WHAT I THINK $50,000 IN THREE MONTHS OF STUDY WOULD DO, BUT I KIND OF HAVE THE GUT FEELING THAT I'M NOT GOING TO GET ANY BETTER DATA TO MAKE A DECISION HERE ON WHAT OUR INTENTION IS WITH THIS WATER BILL.

AND THEN WE CAN WE CAN STUDY THE HARD MOVE SIX MONTHS LATER AND STILL RECOMMEND THAT STUDY FROM AN EXTERNAL LOOK AT EQUITY IN OUR USERS BECAUSE THIS IS JUST ADDRESSES ONE COMPONENT OF EQUITY IN THE BUILDING.

IT DOES NOT ADDRESS COMPREHENSIVELY.

ARE WE EQUITABLE BETWEEN COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL? ARE WE EQUITABLE BETWEEN 50,000 AND 30,000? THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT THAT CONSULTANT CAN LOOK AT.

AND ALSO EQUITY BETWEEN THE WATER RATE AND THE SEWER RATE.

YES. YEAH. SO, YES.

WHAT ARE OUR EXPENSES EXACTLY? WHERE ARE OUR EXPENSES LANDING VERSUS WHERE WE'RE CHARGING THE FEE? IS IT IS IT RELATED TO THAT? SO I THINK THERE'S VALUE OF THE CONSULTANT.

THIS IS JUST IF IF TO ADDRESS THE CONCERNS TODAY, INSTEAD OF MOVING FORWARD WITH JUST A FLAT ACROSS THE BOARD 5% IF YOU WANTED TO, THERE'S THAT WOULD ADDRESS FIXED INCOME AS LONG AS THOSE FIXED INCOMES KNEW THAT IT'S LIMITED THAT BENEFITS LIMITED TO THE FIRST 3000. ONCE THEY GO ABOVE THAT, THEY'RE PAYING AN ADDITIONAL 6% INSTEAD OF 5%.

OKAY, JUST A QUESTION.

WHERE DOES IT HOW DOES THIS CONSULTANT GIVE US MORE DATA THAN WHAT WE HAVE ALREADY? IS THERE NOT SOMEBODY THAT CAN COMPILE IT THAT WE HAVE? THIS IS JUST A QUESTION LIKE COMPLETE IGNORANCE HERE.

I FEEL LIKE WE HAVE ALL THE DATA.

WHY CAN WE NOT SEE THE SAME STUFF?

[05:45:02]

YOU KNOW, ONE TIME 15 YEARS AGO, WE DID A COORDINATED STUDY WITH GLENDALE, ARIZONA, AND THAT WAS BECAUSE THEY WERE VERY SIMILAR IN SIZE. AND THOSE SO THE CONSULTANTS HAVE ACCESS TO EXTERNAL DATA THAT WE CAN BRING IN AND COMPARE.

IS THAT NOT ALL PUBLIC RECORD? TYPICALLY. YEAH.

SO WE COULD GET IT.

YEAH. IT'S JUST A MATTER OF MANPOWER.

MAYBE THAT MAY BE A BETTER ANSWER FOR WHY WE GET A CONSULTANT.

WE JUST DON'T HAVE THE TIME OR THE MANPOWER TO DO IT.

YES. SO I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY A FAIR STATEMENT.

SO AGAIN, AND I'M JUST I'M JUST BEING REAL HERE, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, WE TALKED ABOUT THIS LAST WEEKEND WAS DONE TO COMPILE A REPORT, YOU KNOW, ON SOMEONE'S TIME OFF.

WE ARE ARE CONSTRAINED, YOU KNOW, AND IT TAKES A HIGHER LEVEL OF EXPERTISE.

THIS ISN'T SOMETHING THAT WE COULD HAND A PROJECT WE COULD HAND TO, YOU KNOW, JUST ANY LEVEL OF EMPLOYEE IN OUR FINANCIAL AREA.

I ALSO KNOW THAT THERE ARE CERTAIN CERTAIN MODELING TOOLS THAT ARE ALREADY BUILT, BUT, YOU KNOW, THOSE CONSULTANTS HAVE THOSE, YOU KNOW.

AND SO WHAT I APPRECIATED THROUGH THE LAST WATER RATE STUDY THAT WE CONDUCTED IS THEY COULD BUILD OUT VARIOUS OPTIONS LIKE, OKAY, WELL, WHAT ARE YOU WANTING TO SEE? YOU KNOW, WHERE WHERE ARE YOU WANTING TO FOCUS CERTAIN THINGS ON? AND IT WAS MUCH EASIER TO RUN DIFFERENT SCENARIOS JUST BECAUSE THEY HAVE ALL OF THAT ALREADY BUILT.