[00:00:03]
>> GOOD MORNING. I'D LIKE TO WELCOME EVERYBODY HERE TO A BUDGET WORKING SESSION.
[1. Call to Order]
WE'RE OPTIMISTIC AND HOPEFUL TO GET THROUGH THIS HERE BY LUNCHTIME TODAY.I KNOW THAT STAFF HAS PUT SOME ADDITIONAL HOURS IN THROUGHOUT THE WEEK TO TRY TO GET US WHERE WE NEED TO BE, AND SO WE'RE GOING TO APPROACH THIS WITH A TEAM EFFORT AND SEE WHAT WE CAN GET DONE HERE TODAY.
WE ALSO HAVE SEVERAL WEEKS LEFT TO WORK THROUGH THIS, SO WE'LL TAKE IT ONE AT A TIME AND GO THROUGH IT, MAKE SURE COUNCIL HAS WHAT THEY NEED, MAKE SURE STAFFS NEEDS ARE MET TO THE FULLEST EXTENT POSSIBLE.
I DON'T HAVE AN AGENDA IN FRONT OF ME HERE.
MS. STEPHANIE, DID WE PRINT ONE? DO YOU HAVE AN INVOCATION LISTED?
>> WE DO NOT. YOU CAN STILL DO AN INVOCATION AS PART OF YOUR CALL TO ORDER.
>> PERFECT. WELL, IF YOU GUYS WOULD, WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND DO THE INVOCATION.
WE WON'T DO THE PLEDGES TODAY, BUT IF YOU'LL JOIN ME IN PRAYER, WE'LL LIFT IT UP AND WE'LL GET STARTED RIGHT.
FATHER GOD IN JESUS NAME, WE THANK YOU FOR A GREAT MORNING.
WE THANK YOU FOR SO MANY THINGS THAT YOU TEACH US HERE IN THIS LIFE AND ON EARTH, BUT NOTHING MORE IMPORTANT THAN TO TREAT OTHERS THE WAY THAT WE'D WANT TO BE TREATED AND TO GLORIFY YOU IN THE PROCESS.
I PRAY YOU WOULD HELP US TO GIVE LITTLE OR NO REGARD TO WHAT THINGS LOOK LIKE AND WHAT OTHERS MAY THINK EXCEPT IN HOW WE REPRESENT YOU TO THEM.
I PRAY YOU'D MAKE AMARILLO A BEACON AND A LIGHT.
I PRAY YOU'D DO THAT FINANCIALLY.
WE THANK YOU FOR THE RAIN, WE THANK YOU FOR THE PROSPERITY.
WE THANK YOU FOR ALL THE MANY SUCCESSES THAT ARE HERE TO COME, AND WE GET TO WALK THROUGH THOSE AS LEADERS.
I PRAY YOU'D PUT THAT SERVANT'S HEART IN EACH ONE OF US AND HELP US TO APPROACH THIS WITH THE MINDSET OF IT TRULY IS ABOUT SERVING EACH OTHER, SERVING YOUR COMMUNITY, AND ULTIMATELY SERVING YOU AS THE KING.
WE PRAY YOU'D PUT YOUR WORDS IN OUR MOUTH AND ON OUR LIPS HERE TODAY AND LIGHTEN OUR EYES AND HELP US TO STAY FOCUSED AND DILIGENT FOR THE GOOD OF THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY, IN JESUS NAME, WE PRAY, AMEN.
THANK YOU, GUYS. WE ARE GOING TO DO PUBLIC COMMENT.
[2. Public Comment]
MS. CITY SECRETARY TOLD ME THAT I DIDN'T HAVE ANYBODY SIGNED UP.BUT EVEN THOUGH I SAID I WANTED TO START WITH OPTIMISM, I DON'T WANT TO BE QUITE THAT OPTIMISTIC, SO I WILL SEE IF I'VE GOT ANY HANDS.
IF YOU WANT TO COME FORWARD, MA'AM, WE'LL START WITH YOU.
>> SORRY, I DIDN'T GET HERE IN TIME TO SIGN UP.
LITTLE 5-YEAR-OLD WAS BEING OBSTINATE THIS MORNING.
>> FIRST, MAYOR, I WANT TO PRAISE YOU FOR YOUR PROFESSIONALISM.
I HEARD YOU ON MICHAEL J, AND I REALLY LIKE YOUR INTERVIEW ON THAT.
SORRY IF I SOUND LIKE A BROKEN RECORD, BUT AGAIN, I HOPE YOU'LL PROTECT OUR WATER BILL WITH NO MORE FEES AND INCREASES THAT HAVE BEEN GOING ON SINCE 2016, ESPECIALLY FOR THOSE OF US OUT IN POTTER COUNTY BECAUSE WE'RE NOT FACING JUST CITY INCREASES, BUT ALSO FROM POTTER COUNTY WITH THE FUTURE OF THE POTTER COUNTY JAIL, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE AND WHAT TAX INCREASE WE'RE GOING TO GET OUT THERE.
LISTENING TO THE BUDGET, WATCHING CITY MANAGEMENT ASK FOR MORE AND MORE MONEY, IT'S CONCERNING BECAUSE, FOR US, ESPECIALLY OUT IN PLEASANT VALLEY, WE DON'T SEE ANY IMPROVEMENTS.
WE DON'T SEE ANY MAINTENANCE UNTIL RECENTLY, AND THAT'S BECAUSE WE HAD TO VOICE OUR CONCERNS.
SLOWLY, BUT SURELY, WE ARE STARTING TO SEE A LITTLE BIT OF PROGRESS, BUT WHAT ABOUT OUR TAXES FROM THE LAST 65 YEARS? WHERE DID THOSE ALL GO TO? BECAUSE NOTHING WAS REINVESTED BACK INTO PLEASANT VALLEY.
WE SEE MILLION DOLLAR ASKED FOR A PARK, SEVEN MILLION DOLLARS IN LED LIGHTS.
IS THAT REALLY A NEED OR IS THAT A WANT? WE HAVE TO MAINTAIN WHAT WE ALREADY HAVE BEFORE WE GO REACHING AND GRABBING FOR NEW SHINY THINGS? YES, NEW SHINY THINGS ARE NICE, BUT ARE ALL OF THEM SO NECESSARY THAT WE FORGET ABOUT WHAT WE ALREADY HAVE? THEN WE SEE MILLIONS BEING SPENT ON NON-TAX PAYING CITIZENS, AND THEN OUR SENIOR CITIZENS HAVE BEEN DISPLACED, AND THEY'VE BEEN PAYING INTO THE SYSTEM THEIR WHOLE LIFE, AND WHERE ARE THEY NOW? WHERE'S THEIR BUILDING? I HAD A WHOLE DIFFERENT SPEECH WRITTEN OUT, BUT I'M BEING LED TO SAY SOMETHING ELSE AND I WANT TO SOUND LIKE A BROKEN RECORD.
I'M GOING TO CUT IT SHORT, AND I'M JUST GOING TO SAY, I HOPE THE HOLY SPIRIT GUIDE YOU ALL LEAD YOUR CONSCIENCE ON YOUR DECISION, AND AS MICHAEL J SAID,
[00:05:04]
"WHAT ARE WE PAYING UPPER MANAGEMENT FOR IF WE CAN'T GET THE BUDGET RIGHT? IS THAT WHERE OUR TAXES AND FEES ARE GOING IS JUST FOR RAISES AND NOT ACTUAL IMPROVEMENTS." THANK YOU. I GOT TO GO TO BOARD TRAINING.I'D LOVE TO STAY AND LISTEN TO THE REST OF THIS, BUT I GOT TO GO.
>> MR. KINK, IF YOU COME FORWARD, SIR.
[NOISE] JAMES KINK IN THE CITY.
IT'S FUNNY HOW THE TAX MAN HAS SHOWED UP IN DIFFERENT WAYS THROUGHOUT OUR LIVES. EVERYBODY KNOWS.
YOU COULD SING THE SONG, THEY'RE TAXING HERE, TAXING THERE, TAXING THERE.
ONE THING THAT CONCERNS ME, AND IT ALWAYS HAS EVER SINCE WE STARTED USING AN ENTERPRISE FUND IS THAT SURE, IT'S PAYING FOR SOME NECESSARY CHORES, WATER, SEWER.
NOW IT'S GOING INTO THE WASTE, ALSO, AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN, A DRAINAGE FEE SHOWS UP ON THERE.
NOW WE'RE CONSIDERING, AND I HOPE IT FALLS FLAT A STREET FEE.
THAT TYPE OF SITUATION THERE, WE HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO VOTER CONTROL.
WHAT WE NORMALLY HAD VOTER CONTROL ON WAS HOW MUCH MONEY WE'RE GOING TO SPEND ON THE STREETS THROUGH OUR PROPERTY TAX AND THROUGH YOU GUYS ALLOCATING IT TOWARD OUR STREETS.
SURE, THERE WAS BONDS IN THE PAST THAT HAD TO BE APPROVED.
IT SEEMS LIKE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT REALLY DISTURBING NOWADAYS THAT STATES COME DOWN AND SAID, "HEY, YOU CAN'T GO OVER THREE-AND-A-HALF.
NOW YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GO NOT OVER TWO-AND-A-HALF." DON'T BE SCARED OF US. BRING IT TO US.
IF YOU'VE GOT A GOOD PLAN, BRING IT.
BUT IF YOU DON'T, QUIT DODGING JUST BY OKAY.
I'M SORT OF DOUBLE TALKING HERE.
I REALIZE YOU'RE GOING TO GET THE THREE-AND-A-HALF BECAUSE EVERYTHING COSTS MORE.
EVERYBODY OUGHT TO LISTEN TO YOUR INTERVIEW ON MICHAEL J.
I'M WATCHING SAUSAGE BEING MADE HERE, AND A FEE IS NOTHING BUT A TAX, BUT WHEN IT CHANGES TO A FEE, THEN WE LOSE INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY AND FREEDOM TO CONTROL THAT FEE AS LITTLE AS WE CAN.
KEEP THAT IN MIND BECAUSE AS WE TALKED ABOUT, IT MIGHT START AT THREE DOLLARS IF YOU DID SOMETHING IF YOU ACTUALLY DID THAT, WHICH I'M STILL SAYING, DON'T DO IT.
IT GOES UP TO EIGHT. I WAS ON THAT COMMITTEE WHERE WE COULDN'T DETERMINE WHAT WE WERE GOING TO DO.
THERE WERE SHOUT-OUTS OF ABOUT 20 BUCKS RIGHT OFF THE BAT.
THAT HITS EVERYBODY, RETIREES AND ALL, SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. HAVE A GOOD DAY.
>> YES, SIR. PLEASE COME FORWARD.
>> GOOD MORNING. IT'S NICE TO BE HERE SO EARLY INSTEAD OF LATE IN THE AFTERNOON.
IT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT. CHRIS PITMAN.
I JUST WANT TO EMPHASIZE MY COMMENT ON TUESDAY FROM CITY COUNCIL, AS I SUSPECT MANY WILL DO TODAY OF THIS REPEATED PATTERN THAT WE SEE NOT ONLY HERE IN AMARILLO, WHERE WE BUILD VERY, VERY EXPENSIVE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT THEN REQUIRES VERY EXPENSIVE MAINTENANCE, AND THEN WE GET FURTHER INTO DEBT.
WE THEN HAVE TO RAISE TAXES, IMPLEMENT FEES, BUT THEN WE BUILD MORE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT IS TOO EXPENSIVE TO BUILD AND TOO EXPENSIVE TO MAINTAIN.
THIS IS A PATTERN NOT UNIQUE TO AMARILLO, BUT TO CITIES ACROSS TEXAS AND ACROSS THE UNITED STATES.
IT SHOULD BE NO SURPRISE THAT WHEN WE LOOK AT OUR LARGER TEXAS CITIES, AUSTIN, DALLAS, HOUSTON, EVEN SAN ANTONIO, THEY ARE STARTING TO RECOGNIZE THIS PATTERN OF WHAT HAPPENS WHEN WE ARE CAR FIRST APPROACH.
LIKE I MENTIONED ON TUESDAY, WHEN WE BUILD BIG ROADS, WE GET MORE CARS, WHICH MEANS MORE PARKING, WHICH MEANS MORE ROADS, WHICH MEANS WE NEED MORE INFRASTRUCTURE TO CONTROL ALL OF THE DRAINAGE AND WATER ISSUES.
NOT ONLY IS THAT A BURDEN ON CITIZENS AND A BURDEN ON OUR CITY, WE THEN HAVE TO INCREASE, LIKE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT TODAY, INCREASING FEES AND TAXES, WHICH PUTS AN EVEN GREATER BURDEN ON CITIZENS.
[00:10:02]
NOW, CITIZENS HAVE LESS FUNDS TO PUT INTO THEIR LOCAL ECONOMY TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE A HEALTHY CITY.I ENCOURAGE THE BOARD TODAY, AGAIN, AS WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THESE THINGS, WHAT CAN WE DO TO REPLACE CAR FIRST APPROACH WITH MORE SENSIBLE INFRASTRUCTURE SUCH AS WALKING AND BIKING, WHERE INSTEAD OF COSTING CITIZENS AND COSTING THE CITY A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF MONEY, WE CAN SAVE THEM MONEY AND USE THOSE FUNDS FOR MORE IMPORTANT THINGS LIKE PARKS AND SCHOOLS, AND LIBRARIES.
AGAIN, I ENCOURAGE US TO REALLY THINK ABOUT WHERE WE ARE PUTTING THOSE FUNDS BECAUSE IT IS UNSUSTAINABLE AND TO THINK OTHERWISE WOULD BE TO DENY HISTORY AND DENY WHAT WE ARE SEEING HAPPENING ACROSS THE COUNTRY. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, CHRIS. APPRECIATE YOU.
DO I HAVE ANYONE ELSE HERE TODAY WHO'D LIKE TO OFFER PUBLIC COMMENT? MS. BULLER PLEASE COME UP.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I HADN'T PLANNED TO SPEAK TODAY, BUT BECAUSE I WAS ON THE PARTNERSHIP FOR DEVELOPMENT PROGRESS, AND YOU WILL SEE MY SIGNATURE ON THE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE COUNCIL, WHICH INCLUDED THE POTENTIAL FOR A DISCUSSION ABOUT THE FEE, I'D LIKE TO BRING A COUPLE OF THINGS TO MY NEIGHBOR'S ATTENTION.
ONE WAS THAT AT THE TIME THIS DISCUSSION CAME UP, I BELIEVE, AND I'M TALKING FROM MEMORY, SO I COULD BE WRONG, PLEASE DOUBLE CHECK ME.
WHEN THE LEGISLATURE PASSED THE TRIGGER LIMITS FOR TAXING ENTITIES TO HAVE TO GO TO THE VOTERS, OUR TAX RATE WAS 35 CENTS.
THE CITY TO THE SOUTH THAT WE'RE MOST OFTEN COMPARED TO, THEIR TAX RATE WAS 78 CENTS, AND YET WE WERE MET WITH THE SAME TRIGGERS.
I UNDERSTAND YOUR CHALLENGE SINCE THEN, BECAUSE WE HAD A DIFFERENT THRESHOLD THAN EVERYBODY ELSE DID.
WE HAD BEEN PRETTY TIGHT FISTED WITH OUR TAXES ALL ALONG.
WHEN WE GOT TO THE DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT, I AGREE WITH MR. SCHENK, IT IS 100% OF TAX.
WHETHER WE CALL IT A FEE OR WHETHER WE CALL IT A TAX, IT'S COMING OUT OF THE TAXPAYER'S POCKET, SO YOU CAN CALL IT WHAT YOU WANT.
I WILL SAY THAT PART OF THE DISCUSSION WAS, WHO PAYS? IF IT'S A TAX, THE PROPERTY OWNER PAYS.
IF IT'S A FEE, AND IT GOES ON THAT WATER BILL, THE PROPERTY USER PAYS, AND THAT'S A SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE, AND WHETHER YOU ALL AS A REPRESENTATIVES OF OUR NEIGHBORS WANT TO DO IT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER THAT'S AN IMPORTANT A PIECE OF THE THOUGHT PROCESS.
THE OTHER THING WE TALKED ABOUT WAS BECAUSE THE CITY ENGINEER AT THE TIME SAID, I THINK HE WAS GETTING ABOUT 12 MILLION A YEAR AND TO REALLY MAINTAIN THE STREETS AND ROADS LIKE THEY NEEDED TO BE, HE NEEDED 30.
EVEN OUT OF THAT 12 MILLION, FREQUENTLY, THAT WAS THE PLACE WHERE WE WENT WHEN WE HAD AN EMERGENCY CAPITAL NEED THAT WASN'T FUNDED. THAT WAS WHERE WE WENT.
HIS HANDS WERE TIED AT THE TIME.
THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT.
THE IDEA WAS, AND I AGREE, THOSE THINGS DO TEND TO CREEP UP.
THE SAME DISCUSSION WAS HELD WHEN WE ADDED THE DRAINAGE FEE AND I THINK YOU ALL HAVE KEPT THE DRAINAGE FEE AT A REASONABLE NUMBER AND DONE GOOD THINGS WITH THAT MONEY.
MY HOPE IS THAT IF WE DO THIS, WE DO REMEMBER THAT IT'S A TAX.
IT'S NOTHING MORE THAN A TAX, AND WE'RE REALLY JUST DECIDING WHO PAYS FOR IT AND WHETHER OR NOT WE CAN FIT IT INTO OUR TRIGGER LEVELS.
THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR, AND CHAIRMAN.
>> THANK YOU, MS. BULLER. APPRECIATE YOU, MA'AM.
[NOISE] ANYONE ELSE HERE WHO WOULD LIKE TO OFFER PUBLIC COMMENT? WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND MOVE INTO
[3. City Council Budget Workshop]
THE WORKSHOP PORTION OF OUR BUDGET. I'LL HAND IT OVER TO [OVERLAPPING]>> MAYOR, CAN I MAKE ONE COMMENT? WOULD THAT BE OKAY?
>> I JUST WANTED TO BECAUSE THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION, BUT ONE THING I WANT TO DO, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE RECOGNIZE AND AFFIRM THE EXCEPTIONAL WORK THAT'S GONE INTO PREPARING THIS YEAR'S BUDGET.
BUT I WANT TO START WITH THE WORD THAT KEEPS GETTING THROWN AROUND, WHICH IS SHORTFALL.
I KEEP HEARING THIS WORD. LET ME JUST ASSURE PEOPLE, THERE IS NO SHORTFALL.
IN FACT, WHEN YOU LOOK AT OUR BUDGET, OUR GENERAL FUND REVENUES ARE UP.
THE CHALLENGE IS THAT EXPENSES ARE RISING FASTER THAN REVENUE, NOT BECAUSE OF MISMANAGEMENT, BECAUSE COSTS GO UP, AND ALSO BECAUSE, PREVIOUS COUNCIL, INCLUDING ONE THAT I WAS INVOLVED IN, HAVE MADE SIGNIFICANT DECISIONS THAT IS INCREASING OUR SPENDING.
I SERVED ON A COUNCIL ALONG WITH TWO OTHERS HERE.
TOGETHER, WE RIGHTLY VOTED AND I SUPPORTED BECAUSE IT WAS WORTHY TO GIVE HISTORIC DOUBLE DIGIT RAISES TO OUR POLICE AND FIRE DEPARTMENTS.
WE REINSTATED COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENTS TO RETIREES WHO HAD NOT HAD AN INCREASE IN MORE THAN A DOZEN YEARS,
[00:15:02]
AND WE INVESTED IN WOMEN'S HEALTH.I BELIEVE THOSE WERE THE RIGHT DECISIONS TO MAKE.
BUT WHEN STATE LAW CAPTURE PROPERTY TAX GROWTH AT 3.5%, AND YOU NEVER KNOW WHERE YOUR SALES TAX IS GOING TO GO, BUT YOU'RE INCREASING SALARIES BY 10% OR MORE IN DEPARTMENTS THAT MAKE UP NEARLY HALF OF THE GENERAL FUND, THE BUDGET IS GOING TO GET TIGHTER.
THAT'S NOT FAILURE, THAT'S JUST MATH. BUT LET'S BE CLEAR.
WE'RE SPENDING MILLIONS MORE THAN WE WERE JUST A FEW YEARS AGO, AND FOR THINGS THAT THIS COMMUNITY WANTS AND THE THINGS THAT ARE WORTHY.
BUT THAT'S THE CONTEXT OF THE BUDGET THAT WE'RE WORKING WITHIN. THERE'S NO SHORTFALL.
WHAT WE HAVE IS A GAP, A GAP BETWEEN HOW FAST EXPENSES ARE GROWING AND HOW MUCH REVENUE THAT WE CAN COLLECT.
NOW, I'VE HEARD THIS CALLED THE WORST BUDGET EVER.
THIS IS ONE OF THE BEST PREPARED BUDGETS I'VE SEEN, NOT JUST IN MY TIME ON COUNCIL, BUT IN 30 YEARS OF WORKING WITH MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR BUSINESS BUDGETS AND IT'S BECAUSE OF THE PEOPLE THAT ARE ON THE ROWS HERE ON THE FRONT.
LAST WEEK'S WORKSHOP MADE THAT CLEAR.
STAFF FIELDED DOZENS OF TOUGH DETAILED QUESTIONS AND ANSWERED THEM WITH CLARITY, PROFESSIONALISM, AND TRANSPARENCY.
THEY ALSO CORRECTED MISUNDERSTANDINGS THAT SOME OF US HAD ABOUT HOW THE BUDGET WORKS.
I LEARNED SOME THINGS AS WELL AND THAT MATTERS. LET'S NOT FORGET.
THIS BUDGET THAT WAS PROPOSED REFLECTS MANY OF THE PRIORITIES THAT WERE CLEARLY EXPRESSED ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL.
PUBLIC SAFETY, EMPLOYEE RAISES, RETIREE SUPPORT.
STAFF DIDN'T INVENT THESE PRIORITIES, IN FACT, THEY LISTENED TO WHAT WAS SAID, AND THEY BUILT A BUDGET AROUND IT.
LISTEN, CAMPAIGN PROMISES ARE EASY.
BUDGETS ARE HARD, AND SOMETIMES THE CHECKS WRITTEN ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL CAN'T BE CASHED BY THE BUDGET.
THAT'S WHERE LEADERSHIP COMES IN.
WHEN STAFF SAW THE GAP, THEY DID WHAT WE EXPECTED THEM.
THEY BROUGHT UP OPTIONS TO HELP US SAVE RAISES AND TO MAINTAIN SERVICES AND INVEST IN OUR PEOPLE.
THAT'S THEIR JOB TO ADVISE COUNSEL, TO OFFER GUIDANCE, TO PROVIDE SOLUTIONS, BUT IT'S ONLY AN OPTION.
>> THE SUGGESTION THAT THE STREET FEE WAS SOME SURPRISE IS WELL SURPRISING.
IT WAS INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET BOOK FROM THE START.
IT APPEARED ON OUR AGENDA BEFORE THE BUDGET WORKSHOP, AND A CERTAIN SOCIAL MEDIA ACCOUNT RUN BY SOMEONE WE ALL KNOW, POSTED ABOUT IT WELL BEFORE IT EVEN CAME UP FOR DISCUSSION.
IT WAS NO SECRET. MORE IMPORTANTLY, THIS ISN'T A NEW IDEA.
IN 2022, A CITIZENS COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED IMPLEMENTING A STREET MAINTENANCE FEE.
THE CITY COUNCIL IN 2022 VOTED UNANIMOUSLY 5-0 TO ACCEPT THAT RECOMMENDATION AND MOVE FORWARD WITH IMPLEMENTATION.
THEY ALSO VOTED 5-0 TO PAY A CONSULTANT TO DEVELOP A PLAN.
WE CAN DEBATE IT, WE CAN REJECT IT, BUT IT DIDN'T COME OUT OF THIN AIR.
YOU'RE DOING AN EXCELLENT JOB AND A LOT OF WORK UNDER PRESSURE.
TO MY COLLEAGUES, I APPRECIATE YOU ASKING THE TOUGH QUESTIONS AND STAYING FOCUSED.
ALTHOUGH EARLY IN OUR TERM, I BELIEVE THAT WE ARE AT A CROSSROADS.
A MAJOR CROSSROADS THAT EACH OF US HAS TO DETERMINE WHAT PATH WE WANT TO TAKE FORWARD? DO WE WANT TO RETURN TO A COUNCIL WHERE FROM THIS DIAS, PEOPLE ARE CALLED DIRTY, ACCUSED OF BEING CRIMINALS COMPARED TO CHILDREN, AND WHERE A STAFF IS TOLD YOU MAKE ONE MISTAKE AND YOU COULD BE OUT OF A JOB.
OR DO WE WANT TO BE SOMETHING BETTER, A THOUGHTFUL PROFESSIONAL COUNSEL THAT GOVERNS IN CONSTRUCTIVE WAYS? ISN'T IT OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO SOLVE PROBLEMS AND BRING CLARITY, NOT CONFUSION AND CHAOS? AREN'T WE READY TO DO EXACTLY THAT? EACH OF US HAS A PATH TO CHOOSE.
LET'S GET TO WORK FOR THE CITIZENS OF AMARILLO. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN. I APPRECIATE THAT.
I HAVE NO DOUBT THAT YOU ARE READY TO MAKE THE HARD DECISIONS AND GET TO WORK.
I THINK BECAUSE, WE ARE PUTTING IT OUT THERE, I THINK IT PROBABLY WOULD BE GOOD TO ADD A LITTLE CONTEXT BEFORE WE HAND IT OVER TO THE STAFF.
I WANT TO TAKE AN OPPORTUNITY TO TALK ABOUT, WHAT WE SIGNED UP TO DO AND WHERE WE CURRENTLY STAND.
COUNCILMAN SIMPSON, I AGREE WITH YOU.
THERE'S NOT A BUDGET SHORTFALL.
THERE ARE BUDGET REQUESTS ABOVE THE CURRENT BUDGET THAT I BELIEVE IS ONE OF THE BEST BUDGETS WE'VE SEEN IN DECADES.
IN LOOKING AT WHAT WE SIGNED UP TO DO, WE SIGNED UP TO DO OUR JOB, WHICH IS, WE HAVE A SET AMOUNT OF MONEY,
[00:20:04]
AND IT'S UP TO US TO HELP PRIORITIZE THAT MONEY AND PUT IT WHERE IT NEEDS TO GO, AND THAT IS WHAT IS THE LUXURY OF BEING AN ELECTED REPRESENTATIVE.HOWEVER, THEY'RE STILL OUR BOSS.
AT ANY GIVEN POINT IN TIME, WHEN WE NEED MORE MONEY, THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO GO AND ASK THEM.
THEN WE'VE LEARNED A WHOLE LOT, AND I CONTINUE TO LEARN MORE AND MORE, AND I'M SURE I'LL LEARN MORE TODAY.
BUT THERE'S ALL THESE MECHANISMS AND TOOLS LIKE COS AND DIFFERENT THINGS WHERE WE CAN GO OUT AND WE CAN OBLIGATE A REVENUE BOND OR WHATEVER.
THERE'S EVEN A PATH FOR JIMMY JOE TO GET A PETITION TOGETHER AND COME AND FORCE THAT TO A BALLOT.
BUT EVERYTHING HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO COME BACK TO THE VOTER.
IF YOU TELL US NO, WE HAVE TO BE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT.
WE THEN HAVE TO DO THE HARD WORK.
US FIVE ARE THE ONES THAT HAVE TO COME TO YOU AND SAY, WELL, YOU TOLD ME NO, SO YOU GET TO DRIVE ACROSS STREETS THAT ARE WEARING OUT AND DON'T GET MAINTAINED.
WE DON'T GET TO ADD THE POLICE OFFICERS.
WE DON'T GET TO HAVE THE NICE PARKS, WE DON'T GET TO DO THESE THINGS.
IT'S NOT UP TO US TO FIGURE OUT A WAY AROUND YOU.
IT'S UP TO US TO SUBMIT TO THE SYSTEM THAT WE HAVE HERE, WHICH IS GOOD CIVICS, AND IT'S GOOD SERVANT LEADERSHIP, LIKE WE STARTED OFF TALKING ABOUT.
I THINK ANYTIME WE PUT SOMETHING IN PLACE WHERE THREE PEOPLE CAN UNILATERALLY DICTATE WHATEVER THE COST IS WITH NO RELEVANCE FOR YOU TO HAVE A VOICE.
WE BORDER ON THAT ILLEGAL TAX.
THE STATE CONSTITUTION DOES A GOOD JOB OF OUTLINING, WHAT IN ILLEGAL TAXES AND HOW WE DON'T EVER WANT TO GET TO THAT.
EVEN IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT A STREET UTILITY, NOT A STREET ASSESSMENT, THEN YOU'VE GOT TO GO THROUGH A CAREFUL PROCUREMENT PROCEDURE IN ORDER TO PUT THAT INTO PRACTICE, AND SO I WOULD SAY THAT IN MY REVIEW OF THE BUDGET LAST YEAR OR LAST WEEK AND WALKING THROUGH IT.
I REALLY, I DIDN'T SEE IT BECAUSE IT SAID STREET ASSESSMENT.
A STREET ASSESSMENT IS A ONE TIME FEE.
A STREET UTILITY IS A MONOPOLY OF SOMETHING WITHIN YOUR CORPORATE CITY LIMITS THAT A MUNICIPALITY CAN IMPOSE.
IF WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED, WHICH I BELIEVE IT TO BE, IS A STREET UTILITY.
IT'S FOR MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS.
IT WILL GO INTO PRACTICE, AND IT WILL BE SET UP IN A WAY WHERE WE WILL HAVE TO PASS AN ORDINANCE.
THIS ORDINANCE WILL HAVE TEETH.
YOU'LL BE LIABLE FOR A CLASS C MISDEMEANOR.
WE'LL HAVE TO THEN SAY, HEY, ARE WE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND NOT CHARGE SENIORS FIXED INCOME? ARE WE ONLY GOING TO CHARGE BUSINESSES? ARE WE GOING TO CHARGE RESIDENTIAL? YOU HAVE SO MANY THINGS BEFORE YOU THAT THEY WEREN'T PRESENTED IN ANY DISCUSSIONS BEFOREHAND, AND COUNCILMAN SIMPSON, I'LL SAY, I LIKE YOUR YOU'VE BEEN THE LEAD DOG ON PUTTING THINGS ON A ROLLING AGENDA.
DON'T SURPRISE ME. DON'T PUT SOMETHING ON ME ON A FRIDAY AND MAKE ME VOTE ON IT ON A TUESDAY.
SAME WAY WITH A BUDGET WORKSHOP A STREET UTILITY NEEDS TO BE GIVEN A LOT OF RUNWAY.
IF YOU WANT TO LAUNCH THIS 737, YOU NEED A LONG RUNWAY TO GET THAT UP.
WE WOULD NEED, AS A COUNCIL BODY TO BE WORKING WELL WITH STAFF IN WORKING THROUGH ALL THOSE NUANCES AND THINGS YOU NEED.
YOU THINK ABOUT LIKE UPS, FEDEX, AMAZON, ALL OF THESE COMPANIES THAT ARE USING THE ROADWAYS, CONCRETE COMPANIES, EVERYTHING THAT'S COMMERCIALIZED.
WAY MORE SO THAN YOU THINK ABOUT THAT INDIVIDUAL THAT MAY LIVE AT A PROPERTY THAT THEY'VE PAID FOR.
THEIR TAXES ARE FROZEN, BUT NOW WE'RE GOING TO ASSESS THEM, 20, 40, $80 A MONTH.
WHO KNOWS? THERE'S NO CAP? THEY MAY NOT EVEN DRIVE.
DO THEY HAVE AN OPT OUT? I DON'T BELIEVE THEY DO.
NOW THEY'RE A CLASS C MISDEMEANOR CRIMINAL IN OUR COURT SYSTEM, IF THEY CAN'T PAY THAT FEE, EVEN THOUGH THEY MIGHT COULD PAY THEIR WATER, THEIR SEWER, THEIR GAS.
I THINK AS MUCH AS WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT A STREET UTILITY, I COULD WANT TO TALK ABOUT ABOLISHING PROPERTY TAXES.
PROPERTY TAXES IN AND OF THEMSELVES ARE INHERENTLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
BUT WE'VE ACCEPTED THEM BECAUSE WE RELY ON THE STATE LEGISLATURE TO KEEP THAT WITHIN YOUR VOICE AND THE VOTER APPROVAL.
IS IT RIGHT THAT I COULD WORK MY ENTIRE LIFE, PAY OFF MY HOUSE, OWN IT OUTRIGHT, AND STILL PAY A TAX FOREVER.
WELL, IT DEPENDS ON HOW GOOD THAT CHIEF OF POLICE IS AND THE SERVICES THAT ARE PROVIDED AND MY WILLINGNESS TO CONTINUE IN THAT SYSTEM.
THEN IT DEPENDS ON THOSE VOICES THAT I ELECT.
THEY GO DOWN TO THE STATE LEGISLATURE AND THAT THEY OPERATE AT THE LOCAL LEVEL,
[00:25:02]
AND HOW MUCH MY VOICE GETS HEARD.IF YOU REMOVE THAT, IT'S TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION, AND I BELIEVE WE FOUGHT WARS OVER THAT BEFORE.
I'D LIKE TO KEEP US MOVING FORWARD AND WE HAVEN'T EVEN DECIDED WHETHER WE CAN DO EVERYTHING WE NEED TO DO WITH OUR CURRENT BUDGET.
HOW DO WE GO FROM RUNNING ONE OF THE BEST BUDGETS THAT TOOK CARE OF EVERYTHING, AND WE'RE NOT OVER BUDGET.
WE'VE TAKEN CARE OF ALL OF OUR NEEDS WITHIN THE CURRENT BUDGET, TO MY KNOWLEDGE.
I HAVEN'T BEEN ADVISED THAT WE ARE OVER ANY BUDGET, BUT THEN WE HAVE A FEW ASKS.
WE WANT TO ADD SOME POSITIONS, WE WANT TO INCREASE SOME PAY SALARIES.
CAN WE FIND THAT WITH INEFFICIENCIES? I BELIEVE WE CAN, AND I'D LIKE TO.
NOW, IF WE WANT TO HAVE AN IMPLEMENTATION OF A BUDGET ON OCTOBER 1ST, YOU KNOW WHAT DOESN'T WORK WITH THAT? A STREET UTILITY.
THIS IS GOING TO TAKE NINE MONTHS.
WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO GO OUT AND HIRE AN ENGINEERING FIRM, WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO UPDATE THAT PAVING CONDITION INDEX.
WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO BRING BACK ALL PARAMETERS WHERE WE CAN SHOW VALUE TO OUR CUSTOMERS.
THEN WE HAVE TO DECIDE, IS IT SIX MILLION A YEAR FOR MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS? IS IT 15 MILLION A YEAR? BECAUSE THE WAY I UNDERSTAND IT, THAT STREET FEE CAN'T PAY FOR IMPROVEMENTS.
IT CAN'T TAKE THAT TWO LANE TO A FOUR LANE.
IT CAN ONLY MAINTAIN WHAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE.
I THINK IF WE GO DOWN THIS TRACK, IT'S A DANGEROUS TRACK BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO PUT YOU AGAINST US, AND NOW THERE'S EVEN MORE OF AN INVITATION FOR YOU TO PUSH BACK AGAINST THOSE COS THAT WE HAVE BUILT IN.
COUNCILMAN SIMPSON, I THINK YOU WERE ON BOARD IN OUR CURRENT BUDGET PLAN OF YEAR AFTER YEAR, WE WORK WITHIN OUR BUDGET, WE FIND THAT MILLION DOLLAR DEBT SERVICE.
WE BORROW THAT 12 MILLION, THAT 13 MILLION EVERY YEAR TO GET TO AS MUCH AS WE CAN ON THOSE STREET IMPROVEMENTS, PLUS WE KEEP OUR 15 MILLION OVERALL BUDGET.
WE'RE TURNING OUT 25-$30 MILLION A YEAR.
THEN WHEN WE FOUND EXTRA MONIES, WHERE DID WE PUT IT? WE PUT IT IN THE STREETS.
WHY ALL OF A SUDDEN, WHY ON A THURSDAY AFTERNOON, I WAS SURPRISED.
I HONESTLY THOUGHT IT SAID STREET ASSESSMENT, YOU WERE GOING TO TRY TO FUND IT WITH A CO. WHY WOULD I THINK ANYTHING DIFFERENT? IMPLEMENTATION OF A STREET UTILITY IS SOMETHING THAT I WENT TO OVER 20 MEETINGS DURING THE PDP SESSION LISTENING AND LEARNING, AND WE WERE WALKING THAT ONE REALLY SLOW.
WE HAVEN'T DISCUSSED ANYTHING, AND NONE OF US REALLY EVEN KNOW WHAT THAT ANIMAL IS.
THAT WAS MY CRITICISM, AND THAT'S STILL MY CRITICISM.
IMPLEMENTATION OF A VALID BUDGET ON OCTOBER 1ST IS WHAT WE'RE HERE TO DO TODAY.
THE STREET UTILITY IS NOT EVEN SOMETHING THAT I WOULD BE COMFORTABLE EVER DOING, BUT EVEN IF YOU GUYS WERE WHY PHASE INTO SOMETHING LIKE THAT AND RUN YOUR BUDGET IN THE RED, KNOWING THAT YOU CAN'T JUST GO ADD A FEE TO SOMEBODY'S BILL, AND JUST ALL OF A SUDDEN DO THIS ON OCTOBER 1ST.
THIS SOUNDS LIKE A '26 '27 BUDGET DISCUSSION WITH SIX MONTHS OF WORKSHOPS AND ENGINEERING FIRMS AND A LOT OF PEOPLE, PARTICIPATING IN THAT.
THAT IS WHO YOU ARE AS A SERVANT LEADER.
THAT'S WHAT YOU SIGNED UP TO DO.
THAT'S WHAT I'VE SEEN YOU DO A GOOD JOB OF OVER THE LAST TWO YEARS.
I APPRECIATE THAT YOU'VE DONE A GREAT JOB OF PUTTING THINGS OUT THERE IN ADVANCE SO THAT THERE IS DISCUSSION.
I'M ONLY ASKING FOR US TO MAINTAIN CONSISTENCY IN FRONT OF YOU, OUR BOSSES.
I KNOW I'VE SPOKEN THERE QUITE A BIT.
I'VE WRAPPED UP A FEW THINGS THAT I DIDN'T FIGURE WE'D GET TO TILL LATER, BUT WOULD INVITE MAYBE A DIFFERING OPINION OR ASK COUNSEL IF YOU GUYS WANT TO WEIGH IN BEFORE WE GET TO THE WORKSHOP.
>> JUST ONE QUESTION, IF YOU CAN HELP ME UNDERSTAND BECAUSE WHERE THIS IS, BECAUSE WHEN THIS CAME UP IN 2022, IT CAME TO COUNSEL THE PLAN FROM THE COMMITTEE AND YOU SUPPORTED IT.
YOU YOU VOTED 5-0 TO ACCEPT THE REPORT, WHICH SAID, WE WANT TO MOVE FORWARD THE PROCESS OF IMPLEMENTATION, AND THEN ALSO THE COUNCIL VOTED TO GO AHEAD AND FUND A CONSULTANT TO TAKE THOSE STOPS.
TO TAKE THOSE NEXT STEPS TO DO IT.
I JUST WONDERED IF, HELP ME UNDERSTAND WHAT WHAT'S CHANGED FROM WHAT HAPPENED IN '22 VERSUS NOW.
>> TO GO BACK, I'D HONESTLY NEED TO PULL THE MINUTES AND SEE EXACTLY THE WAY THAT WAS WORDED AND WHAT WE WERE ACCEPTING OR NOT ACCEPTING.
I KNEW THAT COUNCIL WAS PUSHING FORWARD WITH THIS PLAN.
DURING THAT TIME, I WAS FORCED TO PICK MY BATTLES.
THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH BECOMING THE NO VOTE ON EVERYTHING.
[00:30:01]
THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS THAT, EVEN THOUGH YOU MAY NOT BE FULLY IN AGREEMENT WITH WHERE THE FINAL OUTCOME IS GOING, YOU HAVE TO ENDORSE THE PROCESS.IF I VOTED FOR ANYTHING, COUNCILMAN, IT WOULD BE, YOU GUYS THINK THIS IS A GOOD IDEA.
LET ME GIVE YOU WHAT YOU NEED.
LET'S TAKE THESE TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS, HIRE THIS FIRM.
LET YOU GO OUT, I'LL EVEN PARTICIPATE.
BUT THAT CONSENT FORM CAME TO ME WHERE I HAD CLOSE TO 50 PEOPLE THAT STARTED THAT PROCESS.
I KNOW THERE WAS WELL OVER 35 THAT ACTUALLY SHOWED UP PRETTY CONSISTENTLY.
THEN I WANT TO SAY THERE WAS LESS THAN 15 THAT SIGNED THAT.
WHEN IT WAS PRESENTED TO ME, IT WAS PRESENTED AS, IT'S UNANIMOUS.
EVERYBODY IN THE COMMUNITY WANTS THIS.
I'M SITTING THERE GOING, NO, NOT AT ALL.
I'VE GOT PLENTY OF CITIZENS THAT ARE STILL IN MY EAR SAYING, ABSOLUTELY NOT.
EVEN THE WAY IT WAS PRESENTED TOWARDS THE END, WE RAN OUT OF RUNWAY.
WOULD YOUR CONCERN BE THAT I'VE CHANGED BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THAT THERE'S ANY CONCERN?
>> I WONDERED IF SOMETHING BECAUSE AGAIN, I JUST LOOKED AT WHAT HAPPENED AND WHAT THE VOTE WAS.
I DIDN'T KNOW IN YOUR MIND, IF SOMETHING HAD CHANGED AND WHETHER OR BECAUSE I INFERRED THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD NEVER EVEN WANT TO PUT ON THE TABLE FOR CONSIDERATION.
>> DEFINITELY SOMETHING THAT I'M NOT WILLING TO PUT ON THE TABLE FOR CONSIDERATION.
WAS I WILLING TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS WITH MULTIPLE TOWN HALLS, FORMING THE COMMITTEE, HIRING THE FIRM? I WAS THEN, AND I STILL AM NOW BECAUSE I HAVE BOUGHT INTO THAT PROCESS.
NOW, I'M JUST UPFRONT ENOUGH TO TELL YOU, I'LL COME TO ALL YOUR MEETINGS AND I'LL HEAR YOU OUT, BUT I'M VOTING NO BASED ON THIS PRINCIPLE.
I THINK YOU CAN MAINTAIN BOTH OF THOSE.
THEN AT TIMES, WE HAVE TO ADMIT WHEN WE'RE WRONG.
I WOULD BECOME THE BEST ADVOCATE.
IF YOU SHOW ME, HEY, WE'RE GOING BROKE, WELL THERE'S NO OTHER OPPORTUNITY, IF WE HAD EVEN GONE TO OUR VOTERS, WHICH WE HAVEN'T YET, AND SAID, HEY, WE'VE NOW COMMUNICATED TO YOU OUR NEEDS, YOU'VE NOW SAID NO TO THOSE, WE'RE GOING TO EXERCISE ANOTHER METHOD.
I THINK SOMETIMES IN HARDER TIMES, YOU DO CHANGE, BUT CURRENTLY, WE HAVEN'T FULFILLED ANY OF THOSE WALKOUT STEPS.
BACK THEN IN '22, I FELT LIKE I WAS TRYING TO BE A GOOD COUNCIL MEMBER, BUT IT WASN'T UPON ME TO VOTE FOR ANYTHING OTHER THAN AN ACCEPTANCE OF WHAT THE ENTITY BROUGHT BACK.
>> NO, I APPRECIATE THE CLARITY ON THAT.
AGAIN, MY COMMENTS REALLY WERE VERY MINOR ABOUT THE STREET FEE.
IT'S JUST OVERALL, HOW WE'RE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD AND HOW WE'RE GOING TO LEAD THE COMMUNITY, AND THAT'S A SMALL PART OF IT.
BUT I THINK WE'RE READY TO DO WHAT WE NEED TO DO.
>> BUT I WANT YOU TO KNOW, IF YOU END UP IN FAVOR OF THE STREET FEE, I RESPECT THAT, AND I RESPECT PEOPLE IN OUR COMMUNITY THAT FEEL LIKE THAT'S THE WAY FORWARD.
AS MUCH AS I HOPE THEY RESPECT ME FOR KNOWING, I'M GOING TO BE AGAINST IT.
I THINK IT'S GOOD TO BE ABLE TO ADVOCATE AGAINST IT BECAUSE I SEE ANOTHER PATH FORWARD.
THEN THE DISCUSSION AND THE DEBATES HEALTHY AT THAT POINT.
WITH THE AMOUNT OF RESPECT THERE, I WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU UNDERSTAND MY POSITION. COUNSEL.
>> I'M JUST SAYING, YOU ASK, AS FAR AS GUIDANCE TO MOVE FORWARD.
I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE HELD. BUT THESE GUYS HAVE WORKED HOURS.
WE'VE WORKED HOURS TO MOVE FORWARD TO HEAR OPTIONS.
THEY'VE COME UP WITH OPTIONS, WHICH IS WHAT WE ASK FOR.
I THINK THIS IS A DISCUSSION TO YOUR COMMENTS ARE GREAT, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD, LISTEN TO OUR OPTIONS, AND THEN BRING THIS BACK TO REALLY DISCUSS BECAUSE WE DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THE OPTIONS ARE.
UNLESS SOMEBODY ELSE DISAGREES.
>> NO, I AGREE. I APPRECIATE YOU SPEAKING, AND WE HAVE TIME FOR THAT.
I DON'T WANT TO FEEL LIKE WE DON'T, BUT THE GOAL IS IS TO SEE WHERE WE ARE CURRENTLY.
WHAT DOES THE NEXT OPTION LOOK LIKE? HOW DO WE BREAK DOWN? ALL THOSE REVENUES LISTED, ALL THOSE ASKS LISTED.
I KNOW THE STAFF HAS BEEN DILIGENT TO WORK FOR US THIS WEEK.
IF I CAN, I'M GOING TO HAND IT OVER TO YOU GUYS AND LET YOU WALK US THROUGH IT.
>> ABSOLUTELY. COUNSEL, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO BE HERE AGAIN TODAY, AND WE'RE EXCITED TO BRING YOU BACK SOME OPTIONS.
I'M GOING TO TURN IT RIGHT OVER TO LAURA. I KNOW SHE'S EXCITED TO GET GOING, LAURA.
>> GOOD MORNING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.
AT EACH OF YOUR SPOTS, YOU SHOULD HAVE AN ORANGE FOLDER WITH SOME ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION IN IT, AND WE PROVIDED THESE TO STEPHANIE TO HELP PULL UP ON THE SCREEN TO GO OVER.
IN THIS PACKET, WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO GO THROUGH ALL OF IT.
IF WE DON'T, PLEASE NOTE THAT SOME OF THE INFORMATION IN THERE WERE ITEMS THAT WERE REQUESTED DURING LAST WEEK'S BUDGET REVIEW THAT WE'VE PLACED IN THERE.
IF YOU HAVE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS ABOUT THEM, PLEASE LET ME KNOW.
I'D BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO SIT DOWN AND WALK THROUGH THINGS WITH YOU IF WE DON'T GET TO IT.
WE'RE GOING TO START WITH THE FIRST ITEM IN YOUR PACKET, AND THIS WAS A REQUEST FROM COUNCIL TO SHOW OUR REVISED PROJECTIONS FOR THE CURRENT YEAR'S BUDGET,
[00:35:06]
ALONG WITH THE ORIGINAL BUDGET FROM THE CURRENT YEAR, AND THEN HAVE OUR PROPOSED BUDGET FOR THE FOLLOWING YEAR.IT'S THE LARGEST STAPLED PACKET IN YOUR FOLDER THERE.
ON THE VERY FRONT PAGE, IT SHOWS YOUR GENERAL FUND, ESTIMATED RECEIPTS, EXPENDITURES, AND AVAILABLE CASH.
THIS PAGE IS THE EXACT SAME AS PAGE 4 IN YOUR PRINTED BUDGET BOOK, EXCEPT IT HAS ONE ADDITIONAL COLUMN IN IT.
NONE OF THE NUMBERS HAVE CHANGED.
THIS IS JUST ADDING IN OUR ADDITIONAL PROJECTIONS FOR THE CURRENT YEAR.
I HAD EMAILED OUT A PDF TO ALL OF COUNCIL EARLIER THIS WEEK.
IT WAS A LARGE DOCUMENT, I THINK IT WAS OVER 500 PAGES.
IT WAS OUR DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS, WITH EVERY SINGLE LINE ITEM IN IT WITH A FEW YEARS OF ACTUALS, CURRENT YEAR BUDGET, A REVISED PROJECTION, A REVISED ESTIMATE, AND THEN OUR PROPOSED BUDGET FOR THIS NEXT YEAR AS IT'S FILED AT THIS POINT.
YOU CAN GO, IF YOU WOULD LIKE, AND LOOK THROUGH EVERY SINGLE DEPARTMENT.
WHAT I'VE GOT HERE FOR US TODAY IS LOOKING AT OUR MAJOR FUNDS.
I'VE GOT THE CASH FLOWS AVAILABLE, AND THEN RIGHT BEHIND, THESE CASH FLOWS ARE THE FUND TOTAL REPORTS BY LINE ITEM.
IT HAS THAT REVISED ESTIMATE NUMBER IN THERE, BUT THIS IS THE FUND IN TOTAL.
THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN A 600-PLUS PAGE DOCUMENT HAD I PRINTED IT ALL OUT, SO I THOUGHT WE WOULD KEEP IT A LITTLE BIT MORE CONSOLIDATED FOR OUR DISCUSSION TODAY.
A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT ON THE FRONT PAGE THERE, THE CASH FLOW.
AS I MENTIONED, WE HAVE THE FIRST COLUMN THAT SHOWS OUR ORIGINAL BUDGET FOR THE CURRENT YEAR THAT WE'RE IN.
THEN WHEN WE'RE DEVELOPING OUR BUDGETS, WE NORMALLY HAVE OUR DIRECTORS GO IN AND START WORKING ON THEIR BUDGETS IN ABOUT LATE APRIL, MAY TIME PERIOD.
AT THAT POINT, WE'VE GOT A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF ACTUALS FOR THE YEAR.
THE WAY WE STARTED BY BUILDING THE REVISED ESTIMATE NUMBER IS WE BROUGHT IN OUR ACTUALS THROUGH FEBRUARY BECAUSE THAT WAS THE CLOSEST MONTH THAT HAD BEEN CLOSED OUT AT THAT POINT, AND THEN BROUGHT IN ACTUALS FROM THE PRIOR YEARS, MARCH THROUGH SEPTEMBER, TO BUILD A REVISED ESTIMATE.
WE KNOW THAT THAT IS NOT NECESSARILY AN ACCURATE REPRESENTATION, BUT IT WAS A STARTING POINT FOR OUR DEPARTMENTS.
WE ASKED DIRECTORS TO GO IN LINE BY LINE AND UPDATE THEIR REVISED ESTIMATES.
WHERE DO YOU THINK YOU'RE GOING TO END THIS CURRENT FISCAL YEAR, AS FAR AS REVENUE COLLECTIONS AND AS FAR AS EXPENDITURES? NOW, AS A REMINDER, THE LARGEST COMPONENT OF OUR OPERATING BUDGETS IS OUR SALARIES AND BENEFITS.
THE FINANCIAL TEAM WORKS THROUGH BRINGING ACTUALS IN FOR THE FIRST PART OF THE YEAR AND THEN PROJECTING OUT THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH POSITIONS THROUGH THE REMAINDER OF THE YEAR.
AGAIN, THESE ARE JUST ESTIMATES.
WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHERE WE'RE GOING TO END THE FISCAL YEAR, BUT THIS IS OUR BEST GUESS AT THIS POINT IN TIME.
ON THIS PAGE HERE, AND THIS IS THE SAME THING FOR EACH OF OUR MAJOR FUNDS THAT ARE IN THIS PACKET.
ON THIS FIRST, THAT MIDDLE COLUMN ON THE REVISED ESTIMATE, I WOULD LIKE FOR YOU TO PULL OUT THE STAPLED PACKET THAT'S RIGHT BEHIND THIS BIG ONE THAT YOU'VE GOT IN FRONT OF YOU.
PULL OUT THE ONE THAT SAYS "AVAILABLE FUNDS CALCULATION", BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT THESE TWO DOCUMENTS SIMULTANEOUSLY.
I WANTED TO EXPAND A LITTLE BIT MORE ON HOW WE FORMULATE THE BUDGET.
ON THAT FIRST PAGE RIGHT HERE ON THE SCREEN, THIS CASH FLOW, THE ORIGINAL BUDGET, WE THOUGHT, THANK YOU, STEPHANIE.
I'M GOING TO HAVE STEPHANIE FLIPPING BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN DOCUMENTS FOR ME A LITTLE BIT.
STEPHANIE, YOU'LL GO BACK TO THE CASH FLOW FOR JUST A SECOND.
PERFECT. ON THE ORIGINAL BUDGET, WE THOUGHT WE WERE GOING TO START OUR CURRENT FISCAL YEAR THAT BEGAN OCTOBER 1ST, 2024, WITH ABOUT JUST UNDER $75 MILLION IN RESERVES.
AS WE WORKED THROUGH COMPLETING LAST YEAR AND WENT THROUGH OUR AUDIT, THEN WE CALCULATED WHERE WE ACTUALLY BEGAN THE YEAR FROM A RESERVE STANDPOINT, OUR AVAILABLE FUNDS.
YOU'LL SEE STEPHANIE JUST HIGHLIGHTED THAT $66 MILLION NUMBER.
IF YOU FLIP BACK TO THE AVAILABLE FUNDS CALCULATION, YOU WILL SEE THIS COMES STRAIGHT OUT OF OUR AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
THE WAY WE CALCULATE RESERVES IS WE START WITH OUR CASH AND INVESTMENTS PER OUR AUDITED FINANCIALS.
THEN WE BACK OUT ANY APPRECIATION OR ADD IN ANY DEPRECIATION IN INVESTMENTS.
[00:40:01]
THAT'S WHERE WE HAD JUST MARKED IT TO MARKET FOR AUDIT PURPOSES, BUT WE HOLD ALL OF OUR INVESTMENTS TO MATURITY, SO WE DON'T PLAN ON RECOGNIZING ANY OF THAT.THEN WE'D BRING IN ANY OF OUR ASSETS TO BE CONVERTED TO CASH.
WHAT THAT IS, IS THAT'S OUR ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE.
THOSE ARE THE THINGS THAT WE'RE PLANNING TO COLLECT ON IN MAYBE THE NEXT 30-60 DAYS AS OF THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR, WHICH WAS 9/30/2024.
BUT THEN WE HAVE TO BACK OUT ANY OF OUR UPCOMING SHORT-TERM LIABILITIES AND OUR ENCUMBRANCES.
AN ENCUMBRANCE IS ANY ITEM THAT WE ORDERED BY THE END OF LAST FISCAL YEAR THAT WE HAD NOT RECEIVED YET, AND WE THEREFORE HAD NOT BEEN INVOICED FOR YET.
WE DIDN'T HAVE A BILL TO PAY, SO IT WASN'T SITTING IN ACCOUNTS PAYABLE, BUT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY IT.
WE HAD ALREADY ORDERED IT, AND THIS IS PART OF GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING.
WE HAVE TO BACK THOSE ITEMS OUT BECAUSE WE'VE ALREADY PROMISED TO PAY THE ACCOUNTS PAYABLE, AND WE'VE ALREADY PROMISED TO PAY THOSE ENCUMBRANCES ONCE THEY COME IN.
THEN WE COME DOWN TO A NET AMOUNT, WHICH WE USE AS OUR STARTING POINT FOR OUR REVISED ESTIMATE FOR THE CURRENT YEAR. YES, SIR.
>> THE NEXT LINE, CONSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS BALANCES.
>> WE'VE ZEROED THAT ONE OFF OF THIS? GO AHEAD.
>> OUR GENERAL FUND DOES NOT HAVE ANY CONSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS.
OUR CONSTRUCTION FUNDS DO, OUR WATER AND SEWER FUND DO, OUR DRAINAGE FUND DOES, BUT OUR GENERAL FUND DOES NOT HAVE ANY CONSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS.
THEY TRANSFER MONEY TO CONSTRUCTION FUNDS.
IF YOU GO DOWN ONE SECTION THERE TO THE GENERAL CONSTRUCTION FUND, THAT'S THE BULK OF THE GENERAL FUND FUNDED CONSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS AT THE END OF SEPTEMBER 30TH.
>> THE ONLY REASON I ASK IS BECAUSE OVER ON THE GENERAL CONSTRUCTION LINE ITEM IN OUR GENERAL FUND, IT'S 10,480,000.
>> YES. THAT IS A TRANSFER TO THE GENERAL CONSTRUCTION FUND, AND THEN THOSE PROJECTS ARE COMPLETED INSIDE THE GENERAL CONSTRUCTION FUND.
>> IT'S ALWAYS ZEROED OUT ON THIS CALCULATION BECAUSE YOU PICK IT UP IN A DIFFERENT FUND?
>> THIS OVER HERE, THIS 10 MILLION IS A SET AMOUNT THAT WE SET.
THAT'S JUST WHAT WE PAY, AND WE KNOW THAT IN ADVANCE?
>> THAT IS CORRECT. IT'S JUST THE CASH FUNDING TO THE CONSTRUCTION FUND; THE CONSTRUCTION FUND HOLDS IT AND SPENDS IT AS THE CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETED, AND THAT'S WHERE WE SHOW THE CONSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS BALANCE.
>> JUST UNDER $66 MILLION, THOSE ARE ACTUAL AMOUNTS.
THAT'S WHERE WE ACTUALLY STARTED THE YEAR THAT WE'RE IN CURRENTLY.
STEPHANIE, IF YOU'LL FLIP BACK TO THAT CASH FLOW, THAT'S OUR STARTING POINT, OUR TRUE ACTUAL STARTING POINT FOR THE YEAR.
THEN WE COME DOWN THIS PAGE, AND AS I MENTIONED, WE DO OUR BEST TO ESTIMATE HOW MUCH OPERATING INCOME WE'RE GOING TO RECEIVE FOR THE YEAR, HOW MUCH GRANT INCOME WE'RE GOING TO RECEIVE FOR THE YEAR, AND THEN WHAT KIND OF TRANSFERS ARE GOING TO BE COMING IN FROM OUR OTHER FUNDS? THAT'S A LINE ITEM THAT I ADDED TO THIS CASH FLOW FOR YOU ALL PER YOUR REQUEST THIS PAST WEEK.
IF YOU'LL REMEMBER BACK TO PAGE 4, WE HAD IT ALL INCLUDED IN OUR OPERATING INCOME, AND I THINK THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION AS WE WERE TRYING TO TALK ABOUT FLEET IS TRANSFERRING MONEY TO GENERAL FUND AND HEALTH PLAN IS TRANSFERRING MONEY TO GENERAL FUND, AND GENERAL FUNDS TRANSFERRING MONEY OVER TO CONSTRUCTION FUNDS.
WE HAVE ADDED THESE TRANSFER LINE ITEMS IN EACH OF THESE CASH FLOWS TO HELP YOU ALL SEE TRANSPARENTLY WHEN WE'RE TRULY TAKING MONEY OUT OF ONE FUND AND BRINGING IT OVER TO ANOTHER FUND.
THAT LINE ITEM IS THERE, AND YOUR OPERATING INCOME LINE ITEM WENT DOWN BY THAT SAME AMOUNT.
THESE NUMBERS HAVE NOT CHANGED.
WE JUST ADDED THE LINE SO YOU COULD SEE IT A LITTLE BIT EASIER.
>> TAKE ME TO THAT REAL QUICK JUST SO I MAKE SURE I DON'T MISS THAT.
WHERE ARE THOSE INTERNAL TRANSFERS LOCATED?
>> RIGHT THERE. ON THE SCREEN THERE, IT'S THE THIRD LINE ITEM DOWN THAT TRANSFERS FROM OTHER FUNDS.
>> I'M SORRY. WHERE ARE THEY BROKEN DOWN SO WE CAN SEE THE AMOUNTS?
>> STEPHANIE, IF YOU'LL TURN ABOUT FOUR OR FIVE PAGES BACK IN THAT SAME PDF, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE A SECTION, IT'S ON THE BACK OF A PAGE, THAT'S CALLED TRANSFERS IN.
RIGHT THERE. STEPHANIE HAS GOT IT FOR YOU.
IT IS ON THE BACK SIDE OF THE FOURTH PAGE IN YOUR PACKET.
YOU'LL SEE THE BREAKDOWN OF YOUR TRANSFERS IN.
YOU'LL SEE THE CURRENT YEAR BUDGET WAS 14,375,000.
OUR REVISED ESTIMATE IS 10,642,000, AND THEN FOR NEXT YEAR, WE'RE PROPOSING TO BRING 10,979,000 IN.
YOU'LL SEE THAT THAT'S MADE UP OF A FEW LINE ITEMS. THE TOP THREE ARE YOUR CONSTRUCTION FUNDS THAT THE GENERAL FUND FUNDS FOR CAPITAL.
[00:45:04]
AS PROJECTS TAKE TIME, MONEY IS SITTING IN THE BANK EARNING INTEREST.WE BRING THAT INTEREST BACK TO GENERAL FUND EVERY SINGLE YEAR.
THEN AS YOU GO DOWN, YOU'LL SEE A TRANSFER IN FROM RISK MANAGEMENT FUND, A TRANSFER IN FROM EMPLOYEE INSURANCE FUND, THAT'S YOUR HEALTH PLAN.
THOSE ARE EXCESS RESERVES THAT IN THE CURRENT YEAR WERE APPROVED TO BRING BACK INTO THE GENERAL FUND, AND THAT WE'RE PROPOSING FOR NEXT YEAR.
YOU'LL SEE THOSE AMOUNTS HAVE FLUCTUATED.
THEY'VE GONE DOWN A LITTLE BIT.
THOSE ARE EXCESS RESERVES WE'RE RECOMMENDING TO BRING BACK TO GENERAL.
>> I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE LABEL THAT CORRECTLY BECAUSE I DON'T WANT ANY OF OUR EMPLOYEES TO FEEL LIKE THEIR PAY IN IS BEING REDUCED.
WHAT WE REALLY HAVE IS A BETTER RENEGOTIATED PBM CONTRACT.
THIS IS DUE TO DON TIPPS AND HIS INVOLVEMENT IN HOW MUCH WE'RE PAYING FOR PRESCRIPTIONS.
IS THAT WHERE THAT 1.9 AND TWO POINT?
>> PART OF IT COULD BE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT. YES, SIR.
>> IF WE'RE REALIZING SAVINGS BECAUSE WE'RE DOING A BETTER JOB NEGOTIATING WITH OUR RX, THEN THAT'S WHERE THIS IS COMING FROM?
>> YES. STEPHANIE, IF YOU'LL GO TO ABOUT THE THIRD TO LAST PAGE IN THAT PDF, YOU'LL SEE YOUR HEALTH PLAN FUND.
MAYOR, THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS UP.
THIS IS ABOUT THE THIRD TO LAST PAGE IN YOUR PACKET. THIS IS OUR HEALTH PLAN.
>> ARE ANY OF THESE PAGES NUMBERED OR THEY'RE ALL NUMBERED PAGE 1?
>> NO. I APOLOGIZE. THEY'RE NOT NUMBERED.
>> IF YOU'LL GET US THERE ALL TOGETHER BEFORE YOU GO ON.
>> IT IS ON THE THIRD TO LAST PAGE ON THE BACK SIDE OF THE PAGE.
>> THIRD TO LAST IN THE PACKET, MA'AM?
>> YES, SIR. EVERYBODY THERE? THANK YOU.
>> I APOLOGIZE. WE HAD A LOT OF WORK TO DO THIS WEEK, AND WE WEREN'T ABLE TO PROBABLY GET THESE LABELED AND NUMBERED QUITE AS WELL TO MAKE IT A LITTLE EASIER ON YOU ALL.
ON THIS PAGE, THIS SHOWS YOUR CASH FLOWS OF THE CURRENT YEAR AND OUR PROPOSED BUDGET FOR NEXT YEAR. THIS IS OUR HEALTH PLAN.
THE THING I WANTED TO NOTE IS THAT THE EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTIONS ARE OVER $22 MILLION.
EMPLOYEES ARE PUTTING IN ABOUT 3.5 MILLION EACH YEAR.
IF WE'RE BRINGING EXCESS RESERVES BACK, WE ARE NOT BRINGING EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTIONS BACK INTO THE GENERAL FUND.
EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTIONS ARE IN THE EMPLOYER.
THE CITY OF AMARILLO, IS PICKING UP THE BULK OF THE COST ASSOCIATED WITH OUR HEALTH PLAN.
I DID HEAR SOME COMMENTS THAT THERE WAS CONCERNS THAT WE WERE TAKING EMPLOYEE MONEY AND SENDING IT BACK TO GENERAL FUND.
THAT IS AN INACCURATE STATEMENT.
RIGHT HERE, IT SHOWS THAT THE BULK OF THE CONTRIBUTIONS INTO THE FUND ARE TRULY COMING FROM THE CITY OF AMARILLO AS THE EMPLOYER.
IF YOU'LL SEE ON THIS PAGE, IF YOU'LL GO DOWN UNDER THE SECTION THAT SAYS "DEDUCT EXPENDITURES", THERE'S A LINE ITEM THAT SAYS "TRANSFERS TO OTHER FUNDS", AND THERE'S THE AMOUNTS THAT ARE BEING TRANSFERRED TO THE GENERAL FUND.
IN THE CURRENT YEAR, IT'S 2.5 MILLION, AND THE PROPOSED FOR NEXT YEAR IS 1.9 MILLION.
DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, MAYOR?
>> I THINK SO. THEN JUST SO WE'RE TRACKING, THIS IS ALL OF THE MONIES THAT ARE AVAILABLE IN THAT EMPLOYEE INSURANCE FUND.
WHEN YOU'RE PROJECTING THIS SIX MILLION RESERVE, YOU'RE RIGHT AT THAT TARGET.
WHAT THIS IS COMMUNICATING TO US IS THAT THE BUDGET IS PROPOSED WITH THIS ONE TRANSFER OUT, THAT'S ALL OF THE EXCESS RESERVES THAT WOULD COME FROM THAT ACCOUNT FUND?
>> STEPHANIE, IF YOU'LL GO BACK, AND COUNCIL, IF YOU'LL GO BACK TO THE VERY FIRST PAGE OF YOUR PACKET AGAIN, TO YOUR GENERAL FUND.
WE'LL CONTINUE WALKING DOWN THIS.
WE ANTICIPATE OUR TOTAL REVENUES IN THE GENERAL FUND ARE GOING TO COME IN SLIGHTLY HIGHER THAN WHAT WE ANTICIPATED.
THAT IS ALWAYS WHAT WE HOPE FOR.
WE TRY TO BUDGET CONSERVATIVELY ON OUR REVENUES, HOPING WE WILL COLLECT MORE, BECAUSE WE BUILD OUR BUDGET OFF OF THOSE REVENUES, AND SO WE DON'T WANT TO BE TOO AGGRESSIVE IN OUR REVENUE PROJECTIONS.
THIS IS A GOOD THING THAT WE'RE HOPEFULLY GOING TO COLLECT A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN WHAT WE ANTICIPATED, AND MOST OF THAT IN THE CURRENT YEAR IS COMING FROM SALES TAX.
AS YOU GO DOWN, THEN YOU WILL SEE WE HAVE OUR ANTICIPATED EXPENDITURES.
YOU'LL SEE THAT OUR OPERATING BUDGET REQUESTS WERE AT 255 MILLION, AND WE THINK WE'RE GOING TO COME IN JUST A LITTLE LOWER THAN THAT, WHICH IS A GOOD THING, BY ABOUT 251 MILLION INSTEAD.
>> CAN I JUST RECAP REAL QUICK? I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ALL TRACKING IT.
OPERATING INCOME, ORIGINAL BUDGET WAS 240 MILLION.
WE ACTUALLY BROUGHT IN 245, AND I'M JUST LOOKING AT THE ONE LINE ITEM.
[00:50:01]
>> WELL, THAT'S YOUR BEST GUESS?
>> THAT'S OUR BEST GUESS. YES, SIR.
>> BUT THEN WITH PROPOSED BUDGET, [NOISE] AND I KNOW THAT'S A HARD ONE BECAUSE WE REALLY DON'T HAVE A PROPOSED BUDGET, BUT THAT INCLUDES ALL OF THE ASKS AND EVERYTHING ELSE THAT AS WE GO DOWN THESE EXPENDITURES, WE'RE WEIGHING THIS AGAINST THAT 253 NUMBER.
THAT IS HOW THE BUDGET IS FILED.
IT IS JUST AN IDEA OF HOW YOU COULD MOVE FORWARD, AND THEN YOU ALL ARE WELCOME TO MAKE CHANGES.
>> WE GET THAT, BUT THEN THE 253 DOES INCLUDE ALL OF THE RATE INCREASES.
IF WE'RE TO CHARGE A DOLLAR MORE PER MONTH FOR TRASH CAN, THEN THAT'S BUILT INTO THAT 253.
>> IF WE WERE LOOKING TO CHANGE THAT 253, BECAUSE WE HAVE ASKS THAT WE PRIORITIZE, ALL OPTIONS ARE ON THE TABLE, SO IT COULD BE A DOLLAR AND A QUARTER, NOT A DOLLAR, WHICH WOULD MAKE IT 254 INSTEAD OF 253 AS AN EXAMPLE.
>> YES. COUNCIL HAS THE LATITUDE TO MAKE CHANGES AS THEY SEE FIT.
>> SORRY, ONE MORE. THEN AS WE WORK DOWN THESE LINE ITEMS, ALL OF THESE LINE ITEMS ARE ANNUALIZED REOCCURRING MONIES.
MEANING, EVERYTHING THAT'S IN THIS 253, YOU'RE ANTICIPATING IT BEING PERPETUAL, AND SO WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT ONE-TIME SPINS WHERE THIS 253 CAN ONLY GO TO A ONE-TIME.
>> ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE OPERATING INCOME LINE ITEM OF 253? YES. THAT'S REVENUE.
THOSE ARE OUR RECURRING REVENUE SOURCES.
>> IF YOU GO DOWN THERE TO GENERAL CONSTRUCTION WITH ME REAL QUICK, JUST SO WE'VE GOT OUR MIND RIGHT, THIS 9.4 MILLION IS A REOCCURRING ITEM.
>> IT'S NOT FACTORED WITHIN THE REVENUES.
YOU'RE TAKING THAT 9.4 OUT OF RESERVES.
>> WE'RE TAKING THAT 9.4, STEPHANIE KEEPS SCROLLING UP A LITTLE BIT OUT OF THE OPERATING TRANSFERS COMING IN.
>> YOU'RE JUST SAYING THOSE OPERATING TRANSFERS ARE YOUR ONE TIME DEDUCTS.
>> THAT'S AS WE ARE BRINGING OVER SOME EXCESS RESERVES FROM A FEW OF OUR OTHER FUNDS.
WE, AGAIN, AS WE'VE BUILT IT, YOU ALL CAN CERTAINLY CHANGE IT.
YOU CAN TAKE THAT ONE TIME SAVINGS, AND WE'RE RECOMMENDING TO PUSH IT OUT INTO ONE TIME CAPITAL CONSTRUCTION.
>> BUT THEN, IS THERE ANY OTHER ITEM HERE THAT YOU'RE ALLOCATING TO THAT 10.6.
BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE REALLY IMPORTANT FOR COUNSEL IN KNOWING WHICH LEVERS THEY'RE TRYING TO PULL THAT WE'RE NOT PULLING ON A LEVER THAT'S JUST A ONE TIME.
IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE IN THE EXPENDITURES HERE THAT COME DOWN TO THAT 272 IS PROPOSED THAT IS CONSIDERED A ONE TIME SPEND?
>> WE ALSO HAVE OUR LIABILITY FOR COMPENSATED ABSENCES.
WE BUDGET FOR THAT ON A ONE TIME ANNUAL BASIS.
THE HOPE IS ALWAYS THAT WE'LL HAVE FUNDING FOR IT.
IF WE DO NOT HAVE FUNDING FOR THAT IN A YEAR, THEN ALL OF THE SICK LEAVE, ANNUAL LEAVE, AND COMP TIME THAT IS DUE TO AN EMPLOYEE WHEN THEY RETIRE OR THEY TERMINATE THEIR SERVICE WITH THE CITY FOR WHATEVER REASON, AND IT'S DUE TO THEM, THAT WOULD COME OUT OF EACH DEPARTMENTAL BUDGET.
RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE IT ALL COMING THROUGH OUR COMPENSATED ABSENCES FUND.
FOR INSTANCE, IF YOU HAD A SMALL DEPARTMENT WITH A TENURED EMPLOYEE THAT RETIRED AND THERE WAS A PAYOUT OF THEIR SICK AND ANNUAL LEAVE, IT COULD IMPACT THEIR DEPARTMENTAL BUDGET.
THEREFORE, WE HAVE A SEPARATE FUND THAT WE TRY TO PAY ALL OF THAT OUT OF INSTEAD.
>> YOU UTILIZE THAT ONE SEPARATE FUND, ALONG WITH THE GENERAL CONSTRUCTION FUND TO TRY TO BALANCE OUT ANY OF THOSE TRANSFERS THAT YOU'RE TREATING AS ONE TIME EXPENDITURES?
IF WE ARE ASKING ANY GOOD QUESTIONS ON MANEUVERING ANY OF THESE OTHER ITEMS, THEY'RE ALL CONSIDERED TO BE YOU COULD PUT THAT TO LABOR VERSUS, YOU KNOW, EQUIPMENT OR WHATEVER.
>> YES, IF YOU WANT. I MEAN, WE COULD GO OVER A COUPLE OF THESE BIG ONES.
THAT TOP ONE THERE IS YOUR PUBLIC HEALTH WOMEN'S CLINIC FUNDING, THE BULK OF THAT.
AGAIN, YES, YOU COULD PULL THAT LEVER, BUT YOU WOULD HAVE TO TAKE IT AWAY FROM THAT TO PUT IT INTO SOMETHING ELSE. IT IS RECURRING.
AS YOU GO DOWN THAT SOLID WASTE NUMBER, THAT'S BACKED BY RATES FROM OUR SOLID WASTE CUSTOMERS.
WE WOULD NOT RECOMMEND TAKING THAT AND PUTTING IT TOWARD SOMETHING THAT IS NOT SOLID WASTE RELATED.
>> WELL, BUT I DO, AND I'M SORRY, I'M GOING TO GET TO YOU, BUT I DO LIKE THE GOLF BALL ANALOGY.
NOW, WHY I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF CHARGING EXTRA FOR THE GOLF BALL, LIKE, I DON'T KNOW THAT COUNSEL WOULDN'T BE IN FAVOR OF CHARGING COMMERCIAL MORE ON THE WASTE IF THERE'S 10, 15% BELOW MARKET.
JUST IN MAKING SURE WE'RE TRACKING TOGETHER, COUNCILMAN TIPS.
>> NO, I THINK I MEAN, AS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE 25, 26, WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THIS YESTERDAY,
[00:55:01]
LET'S JUST ALL BE CLEAR SO THAT WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE.WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE TOTAL EXPENDITURES OF 2725 OR 272,490, THIS IS WITH THE STREET ASSESSMENT IN HERE.
TECHNICALLY, IF YOU PULL THAT OUT, WE'RE REALLY AT LIKE 288.
I MEAN, JUST TO BE CLEAR. THAT WAS.
>> YEAH, I JUST THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO BE AWARE OF IF YOU WEREN'T, BUT THAT IS.
REALLY THE TOTAL EXPENDITURES IF WE BROUGHT STREET DEPARTMENT BACK IN WERE AT 288.
>> WOULD YOU MIND SAYING THAT AGAIN JUST SO IT COMES ACROSS WHERE YOU'RE COMMUNICATING TO US BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO MISCOMMUNICATE ON OUR SIDE TO OUR COMMUNITY.
>> IT MIGHT BE EASIER TO SHOW IF YOU LOOK AT THE 24, 25 NUMBERS, SO OUR BUDGET OF 277.9 MILLION, AND THEN OUR REVISED PROJECTIONS OF 275.5 MILLION.
THAT INCLUDES THE STREET MAINTENANCE IN THOSE NUMBERS.
THEN, AS YOU WALK FORWARD TO THE PROPOSED BUDGET, AS IT'S FILED RIGHT NOW, THE 272.5 MILLION DOES NOT INCLUDE THE STREET MAINTENANCE.
THAT HAS BEEN PULLED OUT AND PUT INTO A SEPARATE FUND WITH A POTENTIAL SELF SUPPORTING REVENUE STREAM. YES, SIR.
>> CAN YOU REPEAT THAT ONE MORE TIME, PLEASE?
>> ABSOLUTELY. STEPHANIE'S GOT THEM HIGHLIGHTED ON THE SCREEN FOR THOSE FOLLOWING ALONG IN THE AUDIENCE.
OUR TOTAL EXPENDITURES FOR OUR CURRENT YEAR BUDGET OF 277.9 MILLION WHICH NOW WE THINK WE'RE GOING TO SPEND CLOSER TO THE 275.5 MILLION.
THAT DOES INCLUDE THE STREET MAINTENANCE FOR OUR COMMUNITY INSIDE THOSE NUMBERS.
THEN AS YOU WALK FORWARD TO OUR PROPOSED 25/26 BUDGET, THESE NUMBERS DO NOT INCLUDE THE STREET MAINTENANCE.
THOSE HAVE BEEN REMOVED FROM THIS FUND AND PUT INTO A SEPARATE FUND TO POTENTIALLY LOOK AT A SELF SUPPORTING REVENUE STREAM.
>> IF WE ARE COMPARING APPLES TO APPLES, THAT'S ALL I'M SAYING.
IF WE ARE COMPARING APPLES TO APPLES, JUST TO BE CLEAR.
>> WELL, I THINK IT'S GREAT. I THINK IT'S GREAT BECAUSE WE'VE SERVICED EVERYTHING AND WE'VE CONTINUED TO IMPROVE THE CITY.
WE'VE GOT ALL GOOD THINGS, GREAT MOMENTUM.
WE EVEN HAVE SOME RESERVES AND OTHER DEPARTMENTS, AND THEN WE'RE LOOKING AT 275 TO RUN THE ENTIRE CITY.
YOU WOULD NEED TO REDUCE THAT 275 TO 15 MILLION IF YOU PULL THAT STREET FUND OUT, AND YOU WOULD SPEND LIKE OVER HERE, SINCE YOU'VE REMOVED IT, YOU'RE PROPOSING A BUDGET OF 272, WHICH IS AROUND A $12 MILLION INCREASE IN ASKS. AM I CORRECT?
>> INCLUDED IN THIS THIRD COLUMN IS $12 MILLION WORTH OF PROPOSED REQUEST FROM STAFF IN MULTIPLE FASHIONS, NOT SAYING ANY OF THEM ARE BAD OR ANY OF THEM ARE GREAT.
I MEAN, THEY'RE JUST ASKS, AND THAT IS WHAT WE NEED.
BUT THEN HOW WOULD YOU IMPLEMENT THIS WITHOUT THE STREET FEE?
>> IF YOU WILL GO IN YOUR PACKETS TO THE NEXT ITEM, IT'S THE FIRST UNSTABLED ITEM.
IT'S THE VERY COLORFUL ONE WITH BLUE AND ORANGE ON IT.
WE'VE BEEN THROUGH MULTIPLE VERSIONS OF THIS TRYING TO MAKE THIS AS EASY TO UNDERSTAND AS POSSIBLE.
THERE'S A LOT OF NUMBERS, AND STEPHANIE'S GOING TO HAVE IT UP ON THE SCREEN.
COUNSEL, IF THE NUMBERS ARE TOO SMALL THERE IN YOUR PACKET FOR YOU.
WE DID A COUPLE OF THINGS HERE.
LET ME TALK ABOUT THE TOP FIRST.
WHAT WE DID IS WE LOOKED AT OUR LARGE REVENUE CHANGES YEAR OVER YEAR AS WE WERE SITTING IN THESE SAME SPOTS LAST YEAR.
WE WANTED TO SHOW THAT THE REVENUE INCREASES WE SAW LAST YEAR THAT WERE BUILT INTO THE CURRENT YEAR'S BUDGET VERSUS THE REVENUE INCREASES YEAR OVER YEAR THAT ARE FROM THE CURRENT YEAR'S BUDGET TO OUR PROPOSED BUDGET NEXT YEAR.
FIRST, LET'S START WITH OUR MAJOR CATEGORIES.
LAST YEAR, WE SAW ABOUT A $3.3 MILLION GROWTH IN OUR PROPERTY TAX REVENUE.
THIS YEAR, THAT NUMBER IS CLOSER TO.
IT'S A LITTLE OVER $3.7 MILLION GROWTH.
STILL PRETTY COMPARABLE YEAR OVER YEAR.
THE 3.7 IS ADDITIONAL ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT WE SAW THIS LAST YEAR. SALES TAX.
LAST YEAR, BUDGET TO BUDGET, WE SAW ABOUT A $2.1 MILLION INCREASE IN OUR SALES TAX REVENUE.
THIS YEAR OVER LAST YEAR, AS WE HAVE IT PROPOSED RIGHT NOW, WE'RE SEEING ABOUT A $3.2 MILLION INCREASE ON SALES TAX.
NOW, WE DO HAVE REBATES THAT WE ARE PAYING OUT.
LAST YEAR, WE DIDN'T SEE ANY CHANGES IN THOSE REBATES, BUT THIS YEAR,
[01:00:02]
WE HAVE A NEW REBATE THAT'S COMING ON, AND SO THAT REBATES GOING TO GROW BY ABOUT 417,000.THE NET OF TWO IS ABOUT A GROWTH OF ABOUT $2.7 MILLION.
THEN AS YOU COME DOWN, WE CAN LOOK AT OUR HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAXES NET OF OUR REBATE.
WE WERE PRETTY FLAT LAST YEAR.
THIS YEAR, WE'RE UP JUST SLIGHTLY BY ABOUT 445,000.
FRANCHISE FEES ACTUALLY DROPPED LAST YEAR FROM THE YEAR BEFORE BY ABOUT 1.8 MILLION.
THIS YEAR, THEY'RE ABOUT FLAT, ABOUT $100,000 UP.
INTEREST INCOME WAS ABOUT FLAT.
LAST YEAR IT WAS DOWN JUST SLIGHTLY.
THIS YEAR, IT'S UP ABOUT 393,000.
PAYMENT IN LIEU OF PROPERTY TAXES HAS STEADILY JUST INCREASED VERY SLIGHTLY FROM 125 MILLION YEAR OVER YEAR LAST YEAR TO 196 THIS YEAR.
WE HAVE INDIRECT COST REIMBURSEMENT.
THAT'S WHAT WE GET FROM ALL OF OUR GRANT FUNDS.
WE ARE ABLE TO CHARGE AN INDIRECT COST RATE.
LAST YEAR, YEAR OVER YEAR, IT GREW ABOUT 161,000.
THIS YEAR, WE ANTICIPATED GROWING ABOUT 550,000.
THEN IF YOU COME DOWN TO YOUR FTA GRANT.
WE TALKED ABOUT THIS LAST YEAR.
THIS IS YOUR FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION.
THIS IS TO SUPPORT OUR LOCAL TRANSIT OPERATIONS.
LAST YEAR, WE SAW ABOUT 1.5 MILLION GROWTH IN THAT REVENUE STREAM.
THIS YEAR, IT'S GOING THE OTHER WAY.
IT'S DROPPING BY ABOUT $1.4 MILLION.
ON YOUR BUILDING PERMITS, WE SAW IT JUST GROW SLIGHTLY LAST YEAR ABOUT 200,000.
THIS YEAR, WE'RE ANTICIPATING MAYBE ABOUT A $2 MILLION INCREASE.
WE'VE SEEN SOME REALLY GOOD GROWTH FROM THE BUILDING PERMIT SIDE.
>> I'M SORRY. 984. SORRY. THANK YOU.
I'M SORRY. IT GREW 200,000 LAST YEAR.
WE'RE THINKING THAT'S GOING TO BE CLOSER TO A MILLION THIS YEAR.
WE HAD A RATE INCREASE LAST YEAR THAT PRODUCED ABOUT $2.8 MILLION MORE.
THIS YEAR, AS IT'S FILED, WE HAVE A RATE INCREASE PROPOSED TO GENERATE ANOTHER $2 MILLION.
THEN, AS YOU COME DOWN, SWIMMING POOL REVENUE WAS FLAT LAST YEAR.
WE THINK IT'S GOING TO BE DOWN A LITTLE BIT GOING FORWARD.
THAT'S NORMALIZING AS WE'RE NOW FULLY UTILIZING THAT NEW THOMPSON POOL PARK POOL, AND SO IF YOU SEE THE TRAFFIC.
FINES. WE HAVE SEEN GOOD GROWTH IN THAT.
IT'S UP THIS YEAR BY ABOUT 643,000.
THEN IN YOUR WATER AND SEWER DRAINAGE ADMIN FEES, WE SAW GROWTH YEAR OVER YEAR, LAST YEAR, ABOUT 207,000 THIS YEAR.
WE'RE SEEING IT GROW A LITTLE BIT MORE BY ABOUT 384,000.
NOW, IF YOU COME DOWN TO THE WATER AND SEWER INTEREST INCOME, THIS WAS A RECOMMENDATION FROM COUNCIL LAST YEAR FOR US TO MOVE ANY OF OUR UNRESTRICTED INTEREST INCOME FROM OUR WATER AND SEWER FUND BACK TO OUR GENERAL FUND.
IT WAS BUDGETED AT 2.8 MILLION.
THIS YEAR, ON OUR REVISED ESTIMATE, WE ANTICIPATE THAT'S GOING TO BE CLOSER TO ABOUT 1.8 MILLION.
WE'RE RECOMMENDING NOT TO MOVE THAT INTEREST INCOME GOING FORWARD AS WE HAVE A LOT OF CONSTRAINTS COMING ON THAT WATER AND SEWER FUND IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS.
WE THINK THAT MONEY, WE'RE PROPOSING THE MONEY JUST STAY THERE. AS YOU COME DOWN.
>> ASK A QUICK QUESTION ABOUT THAT.
WE TOOK IN THE LAST YEAR'S BUDGET TO MAKE IT WORK.
WE TOOK $2.8 MILLION FROM WATER AND SEWER.
>> AND PUT IT IN THE GENERAL FUND.
WE TOOK $2.8 MILLION FROM WATER AND SEWER INTEREST INCOME THAT WASN'T FACTORED INTO ANY OF OUR BUDGETS.
IT WAS ONLY CAPTURED BECAUSE WE HAVE A LARGE AMOUNT OF WATER AND SEWER BONDS THAT ARE SITTING IN THAT PORTFOLIO THAT ARE EARNING INTEREST INCOME, AND THERE WAS A LEGAL OPINION THAT WAS GIVEN THAT YOU COULD MOVE UP TO A CERTAIN AMOUNT, WHICH WE HAD AGREED WITH YOU GUYS, IT WAS 2.8 MILLION.
TO YOUR GENERAL FUND AND STILL SHOW THAT YOU WERE DOING ALL THE WORK YOU COULD GET TO FOR THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY.
WE DIDN'T TAKE ANYTHING FROM RESERVE AND WE DIDN'T TAKE ANYTHING FROM RATE.
IT WAS ONLY THE INTEREST ON THE BORROWED MONIES.
ONE CLARIFICATION BECAUSE THAT'S REALLY CLOSE, BUT WE DID NOT, WE ARE NOT ALLOWED TO TAKE INTEREST FROM ANY BORROWED MONEY.
THIS IS INTEREST INCOME ON ANY WATER AND SEWER REVENUES THAT ARE INSIDE THE WATER AND SEWER FUND THAT ARE NOT RELATED TO DEBT OR TO BOND PROCEEDS.
THOSE INTEREST EARNINGS ARE RESTRICTED.
>> THAT'S GREAT CLARIFICATION. I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THAT.
YOU'RE SAYING WE HAVE ADDITIONAL INTEREST INCOME IN WATER AND SEWER FOR ALL THE BORROWED MONIES.
THIS WAS ONLY THE MONEY THAT WAS COMING OFF OF JUST THE POOLED MONIES.
>> THAT SIT IN WATER AND SEWER EVERY YEAR.
>> I MEAN, HOW MUCH WAS IT TOTAL? DID WE TAKE 2.8 OUT OF THREE OR DID WE TAKE 2.8 OUT OF SEVEN?
[01:05:03]
>> I WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK AND I CAN LOOK THAT UP IN JUST A SECOND.
>> I MEAN, FLOYD USED TO LIVE THERE.
I WANT TO SAY IT WAS $6 MILLION, AM I WRONG?
>> IT POTENTIALLY COULD HAVE BEEN.
BUT AGAIN, LIKE ANYTHING THAT'S RELATED TO BOND PROCEEDS, THOSE CANNOT EVEN BE USED FOR WATER AND SEWER OPERATIONS.
THEY CAN ONLY BE USED FOR PROJECTS.
>> BUT THOSE INTERESTS THAT ARE ON THOSE LARGE BONDS, BECAUSE WE DO HAVE LARGE BONDS, NORTHEAST INTERCEPTOR, AND SO ON, AND THOSE ARE LONG TERM PROJECTS.
WE WERE COMFORTABLE LAST YEAR BECAUSE THOSE ARE 3, 4 $5 MILLION, OR I'M SORRY, 03, 4, 5 YEAR PROJECTS.
YOU COULD ACCOUNT FOR SOME OF THAT INTEREST INCOME NOW, WHY IS STAFF RECOMMENDING NOT PUTTING ANY OF THAT MONEY BACK INTO BECAUSE IF WE NEEDED $1 MILLION IN THE GENERAL FUND SIDE, THIS IS LEGAL AND ONLY ON INTEREST.
IT DOESN'T EFFECTUATE ANY OF THE ACTUAL INCOME.
>> YEAH, YOU'RE CORRECT. IT IS LEGAL, BUT AGAIN, IT'S NOT RECOMMENDED BECAUSE AS WE KNOW, WE HAVE A WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT COMING UP, IT'S GOING TO BE VERY EXPENSIVE.
WE'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT HISTORIC RATE INCREASES THE NEXT SEVERAL YEARS, AND SO THE INTEREST INCOME IS A SUBSIDY TO THE RATE.
THIS HELPS THE RATE PAYERS OFFSET THE RATES THEY HAVE TO CHARGE.
WE RECOMMEND THAT STAY IN THE WATER AND SEWER TO HELP THE WATER AND SEWER FUND AS IT GOES FORWARD BECAUSE WE HAVE AN O'DONNE AND MICHAEL PRICE AND HIS TEAM HAVE WORKED ON.
WE HAVE A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF EXPENSES COMING UP JUST MAINTENANCE EXPENSES, SO THE FUND IS GOING TO NEED ALL THE HELP IT CAN GET.
WE REALLY RECOMMEND THAT THIS REVENUE, WHICH IS BEING PRODUCED BY WATER AND SEWER FUNDS STAY IN THE WATER SEWER FUND TO HELP OFFSET COST AS WE MAINTAIN OUR INFRASTRUCTURE AS WE GIVE.
>> THAT'S A REALLY GOOD DESCRIPTION AND EXPLANATION TODAY FROM THAT RECOMMENDATION.
WE DIDN'T HAVE THAT, I THINK, THE OVERALL CONTEXT.
I THINK WE'RE GAINING SOME GROUND. YES, SIR.
>> I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY AND POINT OUT WHAT LAURA MENTIONED.
IT'S NOT A RELIABLE REVENUE SOURCE BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY LOWER THAN OUR PROJECTIONS FROM LAST YEAR.
>> I APPRECIATE GETTING CLARITY ON THAT BECAUSE I GOT TO TELL YOU, I APOLOGIZE.
I MISSED THAT. I DID NOT REALIZE THAT THAT WAS HAPPENING LAST YEAR.
I MEAN, EVEN IF IT IS LEGAL, I MEAN, WE KNEW ABOUT THE HOLLYWOOD ROAD WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT A YEAR AGO.
I APPRECIATE 'CAUSE I AGREE WITH YOU.
WE'VE GOT A LOT OF MONEY, AND EVERY DOLLAR WE CAN PUT BACK THERE, EVERY DOLLAR WE CAN GET FROM OTHER SOURCES OTHER THAN RATE PAYERS IS GOOD, AND I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS SHIFTING THAT BACK OVER.
>> LAURA, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.
THIS IS VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT WE DO WITH THE BOND RESERVES THAT WE EARN INTEREST ON IT.
IT'S RESTRICTED, BUT LIKE WE WERE TALKING ABOUT, IT HELPS REDUCE THOSE PAYMENTS, PRINCIPAL PAYMENTS LATER.
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE WANTING TO DO WITH THIS.
>> ON THE INTEREST EARNINGS FROM OUR BOND PROCEEDS, THOSE CAN BE USED TO HELP DEFER SOME OF THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THOSE PROJECTS.
NOW, ONE THING TO KEEP IN MIND, AND I'M NOT TRYING TO MUDDY THE WATER, BUT WE DO HAVE ARBITRAGE CALCULATIONS EVERY YEAR, AND SO IF WE MAKE TOO MUCH INTEREST, WE HAVE TO SEND IT TO THE IRS.
THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE ACTUALLY ARE STARTING TO ENCOUNTER AT THIS POINT BECAUSE ALMOST ALL OF OUR DEBT ISSUANCES ARE 4.5% OR BELOW, AND WE'VE BEEN EARNING MORE INTEREST IN THAT, SO WE HAVE TO SEND IT TO THE IRS.
YES, INTEREST EARNINGS ARE UP TO A POINT CAN BE USED TO GO TOWARDS WHATEVER THE ORIGINAL DEBT WAS ISSUED FOR.
IF IT'S A WATER AND SEWER PROJECT, IT HAS TO BE USED FOR WATER AND SEWER PROJECT, AND IT CAN HELP DE SOME OF THOSE COSTS.
>> THIS, THOUGH, IT'S NOT RESTRICTED. WE'RE DOING IT.
THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO DO IT THE SAME WAY.
KEEP IT TO HELP OFFSET SOME OF THE INCREASES.
>> SOME OF THE OTHER COSTS. ABSOLUTELY.
>> YES, AND AS ANDREW POINTED OUT, THIS IS NOT A RELIABLE REVENUE STREAM SO IT WOULD NOT BE RECOMMENDED TO BASE YOUR PAY ROLL OFF OF THIS BECAUSE INTEREST RATES, THEY RISE, THEY FALL.
WE'VE SEEN GREAT INTEREST RATES LAST COUPLE OF YEARS SINCE COVID, BUT THEY ARE SING TO NORMALIZE, AND SO YOU HAVE TO REALLY BASE YOUR BIGGEST EXPENSE PAYROLL OFF OF RELIABLE REVENUE STREAMS, AND INTEREST IS NOT A RELIABLE REVENUE STREAM.
>> I THINK LAST YEAR DISCUSSION LENDED ITSELF TO ALL OF THE LARGE PROJECTS AND THE WILLINGNESS TO CONTINUE TO BORROW MONEY TO DO NORTHEAST INTERCEPTOR, WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT IMPROVEMENTS, AND SO I THINK WE WERE ALSO THINKING A LOT LIKE THAT 10 YEAR PLAN THAT WE WOULD HAVE CONTINUED BORROW DEBT, AND WE KNOW THAT WE WANT TO BE AS FAVORABLE TO BOTH SIDES OF OUR CITIZENS BILL.
THEIR WATER BILL AND THEIR TAX BILL, AND SO I'M NOT PUSHING AGAINST THAT.
YOU'RE SAYING IT WOULD BE AT COUNCIL'S DISCRETION IF WE WANTED TO MOVE $1 MILLION BACK OVER AND BE MORE CONSERVATIVE THAN WE WERE LAST YEAR.
BUT YOU DIDN'T OPT THAT, YOU JUST OPTED TO REMOVE THE FULL 2.8 MILLION, AND THESE ARE THE THINGS WHERE I COULDN'T GET IT IN MY HEAD LAST WEEK, BUT THIS IS GREAT.
IT MAKES MORE SENSE. THERE'S A DEDUCT THERE OF 2.8 MILLION, NOT A DEDUCT OF 1.8 AND LEAVING A MILLION THERE.
>> CORRECT. YES, WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT WE DO NOT TRANSFER ANY WATER AND SEWER INTEREST TO THE GENERAL FUND.
>> EVEN THOUGH THE RESERVES WILL BE HIGHER,
[01:10:01]
BECAUSE WE'RE REDUCING THE RESERVES 30 MILLION TO 21 MILLION IN PROPOSED BUDGET, SO YOU FREE UP $9 MILLION THAT YOU WERE MAINTAINING.YOU STILL RECOMMEND NOT TO TOUCH ANY OF THAT INTEREST, EVEN THOUGH YOU HAVE AN EXCESS OF RESERVE BECAUSE OF ALL OF THE ADDITIONAL UPDATES.
>> BECAUSE WE STILL HAVE A LOT OF OTHER PROJECTS THAT NEED TO BE DONE IN OUR WATER AND SEWER SYSTEM.
WE'RE RECOMMENDING THAT THOSE DOLLARS BE SPENT TO DO ONE TIME CAPITAL PROJECTS, AND AS YOU BUDGET IS FILED RIGHT NOW.
YOUR WATER AND SEWER FUND IS ACTUALLY LOOKING TO BE ABOUT 1.6 MILLION BELOW TARGET RESERVES.
THAT'S US TRYING TO PULL AS MUCH MONEY OUT OF THAT FUND TO GET CAPITAL PROJECTS DONE IN THE MEANTIME, KNOWING THAT THERE'S A LOT THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE IN THE COMMUNITY BEYOND JUST THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT.
>> BUT WE DON'T WANT TO HOLD THAT INTEREST.
WE WANT TO PUT THAT INTEREST INTO THOSE CAPITAL PROJECTS.
>> WE DON'T WANT TO PUT IT INTO PAY RAISES.
>> WE WANT TO KEEP IT ON THE SIDE OF ONE TIME EXPENDITURE.
>> THAT'S CORRECT. ARE WE READY TO GO BACK TO THE CHANGE LIST? WE JUST DISCUSSED THE WATER AND SEWER INTEREST INCOME CHANGE.
THE NEXT ONE DOWN IS OUR STATE PARTICIPATION.
THIS IS OUR FIRE DEPARTMENT AS THEY ARE BEING DEPLOYED.
THE STATE REIMBURSES US FOR THEIR COST.
THIS IS TRULY JUST OFFSET BY EXPENSE, BUT WE DID SEE A GROWTH IN THAT LINE ITEM YEAR OVER YEAR.
ALSO ON THE FIRE SIDE, WE DID ACTUALLY DROP OUR AIRPORT OR OUR FEE THAT WE CHARGE TO THE AIRPORT.
LAST YEAR AT THIS POINT, YEAR OVER YEAR, THAT FEE WENT UP ABOUT 256,000.
THIS YEAR, AS IT'S CALCULATED, THAT FEE IS SET TO GO DOWN ABOUT 390,000.
WE HAD THAT CHANGE IN OUR REVENUE.
ALL OF THESE WERE BUILT AS RECURRING REVENUE SOURCES IN THE PRIOR YEAR BUDGET AND/OR THE CURRENT YEAR BUDGET.
THIS IS ALL THE BLUE ITEMS. THE LAST ONE THERE WAS THE DRAINAGE INTEREST INCOME.
THIS IS SIMILAR TO WHAT WE JUST DISCUSSED ON WATER AND SEWER.
LAST YEAR, WE HAD BUDGETED TO BRING 1.3 MILLION OVER TO THE GENERAL FUND.
THIS YEAR, WE'RE NOT RECOMMENDING THAT WE BRING IT OVER THERE.
WE NEED TO KEEP THAT MONEY INSIDE THE DRAINAGE FUND.
>> WHAT WAS THE PROJECTION ON THAT ONE RIGHT NOW, LAURA. IT'S LIKE 250,000?
>> THAT ONE ALSO MUCH LOWER THAN WE WERE EXPECTING.
>> WE'RE NOT HOLDING TOO MUCH RESERVES.
>> EXPLAIN REAL QUICK. GO AHEAD. SORRY, COUNCIL.
>> THE AIRPORT FEE, WHY DID WE ADJUST IT OR LOWER?
>> THAT IS A CALCULATION THAT'S DONE THROUGH OUR INDIRECT COST PLAN, AND HONESTLY, ONE OF THE BIGGEST DRIVING FACTORS THAT WE SAW THIS YEAR IS, THE PRIOR YEAR, THEY HAD MORE FILLED POSITIONS.
THIS YEAR, THEY DIDN'T HAVE QUITE AS MANY FILLED POSITIONS, SO IT ACTUALLY BRINGS THE OVERALL FIRE DEPARTMENT COSTS DOWN SLIGHTLY FROM THAT POSITION THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT AS FAR AS WHAT'S CHARGED TO THE AIRPORT.
THE WAY WE CHARGE THE FEE IS THE TOWER HAS TO BE OPERATING, AND I'M GOING TO SEE IF JUSTIN CAN HELP ME HERE, BUT I THINK THE TOWER OPERATES FROM, LIKE, 6:00 A.M TO MIDNIGHT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, AND SO WE START PROPORTIONALLY, CHARGING BACK TO THE AIRPORT THE COST FOR THE FIRE SERVICE THAT'S OUT THERE AT THE AIRPORT DURING THE HOURS OF OPERATION FOR THE TOWER.
THIS NUMBER IS GOING TO EBB AND FLOW A LITTLE BIT.
WE ANTICIPATE NEXT YEAR, IT'S ABOUT A TWO YEAR LAG IN THE CALCULATION.
WE'RE GOING TO EXPECT NEXT YEAR, AND THEN, ESPECIALLY THE YEAR AFTER.
THIS FEE WILL GO UP QUITE A BIT BECAUSE OF THE RAISES THAT WERE IMPLEMENTED FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT IN THE CURRENT YEAR.
>> THANK YOU FOR CLARIFICATION.
>> THE DRAINAGE INTEREST INCOME, AND WHEN YOU'RE PROJECTING WHAT 250, IS THAT RIGHT? YOU SAID?
>> WELL, IN OUR REVISED ESTIMATE, YES.
>> WE GOT THOSE LAST NUMBERS OF LIKE WHAT'S BEEN EXPENDED.
WE AGREED TO BILL OUR CUSTOMERS FOR A $46 MILLION BORROWING CAPACITY, AND WE PHASE THAT IN, WE FUNDED WHAT 42 MILLION SO FAR, HADN'T EVEN BORROWED AT ALL?
>> THE AUTHORIZED AMOUNT WAS 42 MILLION, AND I BELIEVE WE'VE ISSUED ABOUT 39 MILLION UP TO THIS.
>> THAT WOULDN'T BE IN THIS NUMBER THOUGH.
>> YOU STILL HAVE REMAINING MONIES THAT YOU'RE GOING TO GO BORROW THAT ARE GOING TO GO ONTO THAT BILL ONCE WE GET THERE, BUT IT'S AT A CAP OF WHAT WE SAID WE WOULD DO.
THE COMMITMENT IS THERE, IT'S RELIABLE.
BUT WE'VE ONLY SPENT THREE MILLION OF THOSE MONIES SO FAR IN LAST WEEK'S UPDATE.
IF YOU'VE ISSUED 42, YOU GOT 38, 39 MILLION SITTING THERE, AND WE KNOW THESE PROJECTS ARE GOING TO START GOING OUT, BUT WE'RE PROBABLY NOT GOING TO SPEND DOWN $38 MILLION IN A YEAR.
IF YOU'RE GOING TO SPEND IT DOWN IN THE NEXT THREE YEARS, HOW ARE YOUR PROJECTIONS THAT LOW WITH A HIGH INTEREST RATE RIGHT NOW?
>> THESE ARE PROJECTIONS NOT ASSOCIATED WITH DEBT PROCEEDS.
>> WHAT ARE THESE PROJECTIONS FROM?
>> THOSE ARE SEPARATE. THIS WOULD BE LIKE FROM DRAINAGE RESERVES OR
[01:15:03]
JUST UNRESTRICTED MONEY THAT THEY HAVE IN THEIR FUND AT ANY GIVEN TIME.>> MUCH LIKE LESS, I THINK, LAST YEAR, MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT WE WERE MOVING THINGS BACK AND FORTH TO DIFFERENT SIDES, ALL LEGALLY AND WITH CONSERVATIVE VALUES BASED ON WE HAVE 3, 4, 5 YEARS OF SUBSTANTIAL BORROWED MONIES THAT WE CAN CALCULATE AND PROJECT.
WELL, WE JUST WON'T MAKE ANY INTEREST NEXT YEAR, BUT THESE NUMBERS RIGHT HERE DON'T ACCOUNT FOR ANY OF THE INTEREST IN THE PROJECTION.
>> NOT ANY OF THE INTEREST ASSOCIATED WITH THE BONDS.
>> IF WE WANTED TO CALCULATE THE INTEREST ASSOCIATED WITH THE BONDS, COUNCIL, WOULD THAT ALLEVIATE ANY CONSERVATIVE ISSUES? IF YOU KNOW, YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE $4 MILLION AND THEN THE NEXT YEAR, YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE 2.5, AND THEN THE YEAR AFTER THAT.
>> BUT THOSE HAVE TO BE SPENT ON ONLY DRAINAGE PROJECTS.
THOSE CANNOT BE SPENT FOR DRAINAGE OPERATIONS.
THEY CANNOT BE SPENT ON GENERAL FUND OPERATIONS.
THEY HAVE TO BE SPENT ONLY ON DRAINAGE PROJECTS, AND SO THE PLAN WILL BE, AS WE MAKE INTEREST, WHATEVER WE CAN KEEP.
IF WE MAKE TOO MUCH INTEREST, IT GOES TO THE IRS.
WE CAN'T SAY THAT WE'RE GOING TO MAKE ALL THIS MONEY SITTING ON $42 MILLION FOR A THREE YEAR PERIOD.
A LOT OF IT WILL GO BACK TO THE IRS.
>> BUT THE DEDUCT IS NOT NECESSARILY THE WAY WE WOULD NORMALLY DO IT.
IF WE HAD A DIRECTION AND A VISION LAST YEAR AND WE WANT TO GO BACK, WE'RE SWINGING THAT PENDULUM ALL THE WAY ACROSS IN LIKE A 2.8 AND A 1.3.
A $4.1 MILLION DEDUCT IN THE BUDGET, WE COULD EASILY CONSERVATIVELY BUDGET THAT IN OVER THE NEXT 2-3 YEARS.
>> WE ARE NOT ACHIEVING THOSE NUMBERS RIGHT NOW, THOUGH.
WE WOULD BE PROJECTING SOMETHING THAT'S NOT ACCURATE.
>> YOU WOULD BE PROJECTING THE NUMBER ON THE INTEREST.
>> ON THE UNRESTRICTED INTEREST, THE 2.8 IS GOING TO COME IN THIS YEAR CLOSER TO ABOUT 1.8, AND THEN ON THE DRAINAGE, IT WAS ESTIMATED TO BE ABOUT 1.3 MILLION.
IT'S ACTUALLY COMING IN CLOSER TO ABOUT 250,000, AND THOSE NUMBERS COULD GO DOWN THIS NEXT YEAR, IF THE FEDS ADJUST THE RATES ANY, THAT THEY CERTAINLY COULD COME DOWN A LITTLE BIT MORE.
>> I'LL JUST ASK COUNSEL TO LEAVE IT IN FRONT OF YOU ON THE TABLE AS A CONSIDERATION.
AS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RAISING A RAG OR DOING OTHER THINGS, THERE ARE SOME METRICS HERE THAT WOULD HELP US ON ONE TIME EXPENDITURES FOR SURE.
>> ON THE OTHER FACTOR CONSIDERS DONNY AND HIS TEAM'S DOING A REALLY GOOD JOB OF SPENDING DOWN THOSE PROJECTS, SO WE'LL HAVE LESS MONEY TO EARN INTEREST ON.
>> SAME THING AS WATER AND SEWER IS STILL A RECOMMENDATION THAT THE MONEY FROM THE DRAINAGE BE USED ON DRAINAGE.
IT ALSO HAS MANY NEEDS AS WELL.
>> YEAH, ONE THING AGAIN, GIVING ME CLARITY ON THIS, AND THIS CHART IS REALLY PERFECT TO RUN THROUGH THE LARGE REVENUE CHANGES BECAUSE IT GIVES YOU A 50,000 FOOT LEVEL THAT'S EASY AND DESCRIBES WHERE WE ARE, AND I KNOW WE'LL GO THROUGH THE EXPENDITURE CHANGES IN A MINUTE.
I APPRECIATE YOU PUTTING THAT TOGETHER.
BUT REALLY WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE IS, BECAUSE OF WHAT WE'VE DONE AND WE TOOK REALLY AGAIN, FUNDS THAT ARE NOT CONSISTENT OR WE DON'T KNOW, WE CAN'T DEPEND ON THEM YEAR FOR YEAR.
BUT THEN WE PUT IN EXPENSES THAT ARE YEAR FOR YEAR, AND WE'RE USING INCONSISTENT REVENUE SOURCES, AND THAT'S JUST NOT A GOOD FINANCIAL MODEL TO FOLLOW.
>> AGAIN, IT GOES TO WHY WE ARE WHERE WE ARE, BECAUSE WE'RE STARTING OUT OF THE HOLE.
WE'RE $4.1 MILLION BEHIND WHERE WE LAST YEAR BEFORE WE EVEN STARTED THE BUDGET BECAUSE OF THIS DECISION, AND IT'S A PAINFUL ONE, BUT I THINK IT'S A GOOD STRATEGIC ONE, BUT THAT GOES TO WHY WE'RE TRYING TO FILL THE GAP, AND THAT ADDED $4.1 MILLION OUT OF THE SHEET TO THE GAP THAT WE'RE NOW TRYING TO FILL.
>> THE INTEREST RATES, ARE THEY FIXED OR IS IT VARIABLE BASED ON BOND RATES?
>> WE DON'T HAVE A GUARANTEED NUMBER UNTIL BECOMES ON MARKETS MOVE?
>> YEAH, AND A LOT OF MONEY THAT WE HAVE IS EITHER IN MONEY MARKETS OR WE HAVE THEM PLACED THROUGH THE CEDARS PROGRAM, WHICH ARE ESSENTIALLY CDS.
THOSE EBB AND FLOW JUST BASED ON WHAT'S GOING ON, WE DO BUY SOME AGENCIES AND SOME TREASURIES.
BUT THOSE, AS YOU KNOW, HAVE BEEN FLUCTUATING A LITTLE BIT.
THEY'RE A LITTLE BIT UPSIDE DOWN FROM WHAT THEY NORMALLY ARE.
THE FURTHER YOU GO OUT, THE ACTUALLY LOWER YOUR INTEREST RATE IS AT THIS POINT.
WE'VE BEEN KEEPING THINGS PRETTY SHORT, TRYING TO ACHIEVE AS MUCH AS WE CAN ON THIS.
BUT ALL OF IT'S REGULATED BY STATE LAW, WHAT WE CAN INVEST IN.
>> THE CALCULATIONS ON PUSHING THAT OUT, WE DON'T HAVE A FIXED NUMBER.
WE WOULD JUST BE SPECULATING ON WHAT INTEREST RATES ARE GOING TO DO OVER THE NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS.
>> IT IS VERY CHALLENGING YES.
IF I OWN STOCK IN A COMPANY, AND I'M GETTING DIVIDENDS I CAN'T GO OUT AND PURCHASE SOMETHING THAT COST $100,000 AND SAY, OKAY, WELL, I'M GOING TO GET THIS MUCH DIVIDENDS.
>> BUT IF YOU GO OUT AND MAKE A PURCHASE, THINKING, I CAN AFFORD THIS BASED ON THE DIVIDENDS, BUT JUST LIKE THIS, THE INTEREST RATE,
[01:20:02]
THE AMOUNT OF IT A WIDELY VARY, WOULDN'T BE A VERY GOOD PERSONAL FINANCE STRATEGY, AND I SEE WHERE THAT APPLIES HERE.>> YES. THE NEXT ITEM DOWN, THOSE ARE WHAT WE HAD BUILT IN EITHER THE CURRENT YEAR AND/OR THE PRIOR YEAR'S BUDGET AS REOCCURRING REVENUE STREAMS. THIS NEXT ITEM DOWN, WE'RE STARTING INTO THE ONE TIME.
THESE ARE ESSENTIALLY WHERE WE EITHER IN THE CURRENT YEAR, ARE SPENDING DOWN EXCESS RESERVES FROM CERTAIN FUNDS OR IN THIS PROPOSED YEAR, WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT COUNCIL TAKE EXCESS FUNDS FROM SOME OF THESE OTHER AREAS, BRING THEM TO THE GENERAL FUND AND ALLOW THE GENERAL FUND TO SPEND THEM FOR ONE TIME CAPITAL.
WE HAVE A VERY DIFFERENT MODEL THAT WE'RE BUILDING OUT IN OUR FLEET FUND.
WE'RE VERY APPRECIATIVE OF OUR COUNCIL'S DECISIONS THAT WERE MADE THIS LAST YEAR TO ALLOW US TO START ENTERING INTO MORE OF A LEASING PROGRAM FOR A LARGE PORTION OF OUR FLEET, ALSO DOING DEBT ISSUANCES TO SUPPORT LARGE EXPENDITURES FOR OUR FLEET LIKE OUR FIRE APPARATUS AND OUR HEAVY EQUIPMENT.
THIS IS GOING TO TAKE US PROBABLY ABOUT 3-5, AND IN CERTAIN CASES, 10 YEARS TO BUILD OUT THIS TRUE PROGRAM.
WE DO ANTICIPATE IN THE NEXT YEAR OR TWO, WE MAY HAVE SOME EXCESS RESERVES COMING FROM FLEET.
WE DO NOT ANTICIPATE IN THE LONG RUN WE WILL HAVE EXCESS RESERVES EVERY YEAR WHERE WE NEED TO ADJUST RATES. YES, SIR.
>> CAN I POINT THIS OUT REAL QUICK BECAUSE YOU'RE WALKING US INTO THAT NEXT COLOR.
BUT YOU'RE REPRESENTING THESE ITEMS OVER HERE UNDER THE 24/25 BUDGET.
THAT'S A RECOMMENDATION TO GO AND AMEND MY CURRENT BUDGET?
>> NO, SIR. THIS IS HOW YOUR BUDGET WAS APPROVED.
>> BUT WE'RE ADDING THESE TOGETHER TO SHOW THE 19.9 IN THE CURRENT BUDGET.
WE JUST WALKED BACK EVERYTHING THAT PREVIOUS COUNSEL ADDED WITH THE 2.8, THE 1.3.
YOU'RE SHOWING IT OVER ON THE OTHER SIDE OF, WELL, WE'RE NOT RECOMMENDING THESE, BUT THEN THE TWO, AND THE 2.5, THOSE WEREN'T FACTORED IN CURRENT YEAR'S APPROVED BUDGET?
>> BACK THEN, WE KNEW WE WERE PULLING 2.5 FROM FLEET, TWO FROM RISK, AND 2.5 FROM HEALTH PLAN?
>> YES, SIR. THAT'S HOW COUNCIL APPROVED IT THIS TIME LAST YEAR.
>> YOU DID THAT DURING THE CURRENT YEAR'S BUDGET?
>> YES. THOSE NUMBERS ARE BEING MOVED IN THE CURRENT YEARS BUDGET. YES, SIR.
>> THE TRANSFER FROM THE HEALTH PLAN, THE 2.5, YOU'RE TREATING THAT AS A TRANSFER FROM THEIR RESERVE BECAUSE IT'S A ONE TIME FEE?
>> BUT THEN WERE WE NOT LOOKING AT THE HEALTH PLAN? I THOUGHT BASED ON DON'S RECOMMENDATION AND HIS WORK, WE THOUGHT WE WERE SALVAGING THAT MONEY FROM A RENEGOTIATED BETTER DEAL ON THE RX?
>> YES, SIR, BUT ALL HEALTH CARE COSTS CONTINUE TO GROW YEAR OVER YEAR.
AS WE DID SEE A GREAT SAVINGS COMING THROUGH OUR PRESCRIPTION PLAN IN THIS LAST YEAR.
IT'S ALL BASED ON USAGE OF OUR EMPLOYEES AND THOSE MEMBERS THAT ARE ON OUR HEALTH PLAN, AND AS YOU ALL ARE ALL AWARE, WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF AN RFP PROCESS RIGHT NOW, WE WILL BE BRINGING NEW CONTRACTS THAT WILL GO INTO EFFECT ON JANUARY 1, 2026.
WE WORKED WITH OUR HEALTHCARE CONSULTANTS TO HELP US PROJECT WHAT THE SPEND FROM A CLAIM STANDPOINT WOULD BE FOR HEALTH CARE COSTS AND PRESCRIPTION COSTS.
THAT'S WHAT'S BUILT INTO YOUR HEALTH PLAN BUDGET.
WE DID HAVE FAVORABLE CLAIMS LAST YEAR YEAR OVER YEAR THAT PRODUCED 2.5 MILLION.
IN THIS UPCOMING YEAR, WE ARE SEEING ADDITIONAL FAVORABLE CLAIMS VERSUS WHAT WE BUDGETED.
WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO MOVE A LITTLE BIT LESS, BUT ABOUT 1.5, I'M SORRY, I'M ON HEALTH PLAN, 1.9 MILLION FROM HEALTH PLAN OVER.
YOU CAN SEE THAT NUMBERS GOING DOWN, AND THEN WE'LL SEE WHAT THE NEW CONTRACTS PROJECTS.
>> CAN I ASK, COUNCIL, DID YOU GUYS REALIZE THAT YOU WERE LOOKING
FOR A REDUCED HEALTH CARE COST>> WE THOUGHT WE HAD A SAVINGS OF ROUGHLY 1.8, I THINK IS WHAT WE AGREED ON LAST YEAR IN THE BUDGET WHEN WE APPROVED IT.
YOU FELT LIKE THAT WAS CONSERVATIVE.
BUT THEN, DID YOU GUYS UNDERSTAND YOU WERE DOING A ONE TIME TRANSFER FROM THE HEALTH PLAN RESERVE FOR 2.5 MILLION? THEN WHERE DID THAT 2.5 GO IF IT WAS FROM A RESERVE FOR A ONE TIME SPEND IN CURRENT YEAR BUDGET?
>> IT'S STILL IN THE CAPITAL IF WE HADN'T SPENT IT? OTHERWISE, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN SPENT ON A PROJECT, BUT IT'S ALL GENERAL FUND CAP.
>> YES. WE'VE ALREADY SENT IT TO THE GENERAL CONSTRUCTION FUND, AND IT'S TIED TO THE PROJECTS THAT YOU ALL APPROVED THIS TIME LAST YEAR IN THE GENERAL CONSTRUCTION FUND BUDGET.
[01:25:04]
THOSE PROJECTS ARE ALREADY UNDERWAY AT THIS POINT.>> GREAT. COUNCIL, DID YOU GUYS REALIZE WE HAD DONE THAT LAST YEAR AS WELL? I'LL JUST BE ASKING MY TWO, COUNCIL MEMBERS.
TOM, YOU DON'T HAVE TO SAY ANYTHING OUT THERE?
>> I WILL SAY THAT WE WORK CLOSELY WITH OUR HEALTHCARE CONSULTANTS TO HELP US PROJECT WHAT CLAIMS WILL BE YEAR OVER YEAR, AND SO EVEN IN A YEAR WHERE WE'RE ACHIEVING SAVINGS, THERE'S NO GUARANTEE THAT THAT SAVINGS IS GOING TO OFFSET OTHER RISING COSTS ON PLAN SIDE.
>> THIS WENT INTO OUR WORKING BUDGET, CORRECT LAST YEAR?
>> WE MOVED THAT OVER INTO THE WORKING BUDGET IN THE ONE TIME FEE FOR THE CIP. THAT'S WHERE WE MOVED IT.
>> THAT WENT INTO THE SIX MILLION WORKING BUDGET OR THAT WENT INTO THE CIP THAT YOU ALLOCATED AND IT'S BEING SPENT?
>> I REMEMBER RIGHT, IT WENT INTO THE WORKING BUDGET. [OVERLAPPING].
>> IT MAY HAVE GONE INTO THE WORKING BUDGET DO YOU REMEMBER?
>> WE DECIDED WHERE [OVERLAPPING].
>> IT MAY HAVE BEEN A LITTLE BIT OF BOTH. THAT'S TRUE.
>> BECAUSE HE ONLY HAD ONE TIME OF THREE MILLION IN THE WORKING BUDGET.
IT WOULD HAVE COVERED THAT AND IT WOULD HAVE COVERED CIP PROJECTS, AND THEN THE BLUE WOULD HAVE COVERED YOUR THREE MILLION RECURRING WORKING BUDGET.
BUT WE DID THIS IN FLEET, WE DID IT IN RISK MANAGEMENT.
YOU GOT $7,000,000 RIGHT THERE, COUNCIL'S WORKING BUDGET WAS ONLY THREE MILLION ONE TIME [OVERLAPPING].
>> PLUS 10 MILLION IN CAPITAL.
THERE WAS 13 MILLION IN TOTAL ONE TIME.
>> THE NEXT ITEM DOWN IS OUR TRANSFER IN FROM OUR RISK MANAGEMENT FUND.
WE WERE ABLE TO BRING $2 MILLION OF EXCESS RESERVES TO THE GENERAL FUND IN THE CURRENT YEAR.
WE ANTICIPATE THAT AMOUNT NEXT YEAR WILL BE ABOUT 1.5 MILLION, AND THAT'S JUST EXCESS RESERVES, ESPECIALLY GIVEN SOME OF THE RECENT STORMS, WE'LL HAVE TO SEE WHAT OUR PREMIUMS DO THIS NEXT YEAR.
THEN ON DOWN, WE JUST TALKED ABOUT HEALTH PLAN.
DUE TO THE CLAIMS, WE WERE ABLE TO BRING 2.5 MILLION IN AS ONE-TIME SPENDING IN THE CURRENT YEAR BUDGET.
IN OUR PROPOSED BUDGET, WE ARE ANTICIPATING THAT TO BE AROUND $1.9 MILLION.
AGAIN, THIS IS NOT ALL OF YOUR REVENUE.
THIS IS JUST THE LARGE LINE ITEMS. THERE'S PAGES UPON PAGES OF REVENUE STREAMS. BUT LAST YEAR WHEN WE WERE SITTING AT THIS POINT, WE HAD ALMOST $20 MILLION IN EXCESS REVENUE ABOVE AND BEYOND THE PRIOR YEAR, SOME ONE-TIME, SOME ONGOING, THAT WE WERE WORKING TO FORMULATE THE EXPENSE SIDE OF THE BUDGET LAST YEAR.
THIS YEAR, WE DO HAVE ADDITIONAL REVENUE.
WE HAVE NINE MILLION REVENUE ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT WE HAD IN THE CURRENT YEAR'S BUDGET.
PART OF IT IS ONE-TIME, AND IT'S DOWN AT THE BOTTOM.
PART OF IT 6.7 MILLION OF IT IS ONGOING, AND 2.4 IS ONE-TIME.
WE DO HAVE ADDITIONAL REVENUES YEAR-OVER-YEAR, BUT WE DON'T HAVE AS MUCH ADDITIONAL REVENUE AS WE DID THE PRIOR YEAR.
THE PRIOR YEAR, THAT $20 MILLION WAS PUSHED INTO EXPENSE, PART ONGOING AND PART ONE-TIME.
WE ARE CONTINUING TO PAY FOR THAT ONGOING AGAIN THIS YEAR, SO THAT'S ALREADY ALL BUILT INTO YOUR EXPENSE BUDGET, AND THEN WE HAVE THIS ADDITIONAL NINE MILLION THAT WE'RE WORKING WITH TO HELP FORMULATE THE TOTAL BUDGET FOR THE GENERAL FUND, PART, ONE-TIME AND PART ONGOING.
IF I NEED TO ANSWER QUESTIONS, PLEASE STOP ME.
OTHERWISE, WHAT WE CAN START GOING THROUGH NOW IS SOME POTENTIAL CHANGES THAT COUNCIL COULD CONSIDER BASED ON THE FEEDBACK THAT WE GOT LAST WEEK [INAUDIBLE] SEEMS TO HAVE SOMETHING.
>> BEFORE WE DIVE INTO THAT, WE'RE ABOUT HALFWAY THROUGH OUR SCHEDULE A LOT OF TIME.
DO YOU WANT TO TAKE A BREAK REALLY QUICK OR DO YOU WANT TO KEEP ON POWERING THROUGH?
>> I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE A BREAK, AND THEN THAT WAY WE BREAK IT UP BECAUSE IT CAN GET PRETTY DAUNTING.
BUT CAN WE ANSWER ONE QUESTION BEFORE WE DO THAT? >> YES SIR.
>> BECAUSE WE HAVE A QUESTION ON THE TABLE TO THE STAFF AND WE DIDN'T GET TO IT, WHICH IS HOW TO IMPLEMENT THE STREET TAX.
IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THIS, WHERE WE CAME FROM TO GET OVER TO THIS PAGE WAS IDENTIFYING ALL OF THESE REVENUES AND ONE-TIME AND WHATNOT.
BUT WE WERE DISCUSSING THIS 272 MILLION WOULD ACTUALLY BE 288 MILLION IF YOU PUT THE STREETS IN THERE, ASSUMING THAT A STREET FEE IS NOT IMPLEMENTABLE.
MY QUESTION IS, HOW WOULD YOU PROPOSE TO RUN THAT BUDGET IN THE RED? DO WE HAVE RESERVES ARE GOING TO OFFSET THAT, OR ARE YOU GOING TO GO AHEAD AND IMPLEMENT THE FEE?
>> THAT IS EVERYTHING ELSE THAT I HAVE ON THIS PAGE HERE FOR US TO GO OVER, SO WE CAN GO AHEAD AND GO OVER THAT IF YOU WANT TO.
>> YOU'RE STILL ANSWERING THAT QUESTION?
>> YES, SIR. WE WERE JUST SHOWING YOU THE CHANGE IN REVENUES TO START WITH.
NEXT, WE'RE GOING TO WALK YOU THROUGH POTENTIAL CHANGES THAT COULD BE
[01:30:04]
MADE IF COUNCIL DOESN'T WANT TO CONSIDER A STREET MAINTENANCE FEE.WE'LL BRING THE STREET DEPARTMENT BACK INTO THE GENERAL FUND, AND WE HAVE PROPOSED CHANGES THAT COULD BE MADE IN ORDER TO DO THAT BASED ON THE NUMBERS THAT WE HAVE ON THIS PAGE.
>> I THINK YOU'RE ANSWERING A DIFFERENT QUESTION, BUT IS IT IMPLEMENTABLE? WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO IS TAKE A RECESS, COME BACK, BUT DO WE HAVE SOMETHING THAT WE COULD ENTERTAIN? DO YOU GUYS HAVE A PATH FORWARD SAYING, WELL, WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND PUT A FEE ON A WATER BILL AUGUST OR OCTOBER 1ST?
>> NO, I THINK WHAT THEY'RE SAYING, BUT WE'RE NOT EVEN TO THAT POINT.
IF WE CAN WORK THROUGH THIS BUDGET AND AVOID A MAINTENANCE FEE RIGHT NOW, I THINK WE'VE GOT A BUDGET THAT WE CAN DO.
I DON'T EVEN KNOW IF WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT THE STREET MAINTENANCE FEE UNTIL WE GET THROUGH THE BUDGET.
IF WE GET THROUGH THE BUDGET AND WE CAN CLOSE THE $15 MILLION, THEN THERE'S REALLY NO NEED TO IMPLEMENT THE STREET FEE THIS YEAR NOW.
MAY LOOK AT IT NEXT YEAR, THE YEAR AFTER THAT, BUT I THINK CLOSING THIS GAP IS THE END OF DISCUSSION.
>> IS THAT THE DIRECTION OF THE CONVERSATION FROM HERE FORWARD?
>> YES, SIR. WE HAVE AN OPTION TO BRING IT BACK IN WITHOUT ANY STREET MAINTENANCE FEE.
>> THESE ARE OPTIONS RIGHT HERE. I'D LIKE TO SEE WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE JUST FINISHING IT OUT, AND THEN WE CAN COME BACK.
THAT GOOD FOR YOU GUYS? WE'LL COME BACK HERE AT 10:15.
THANK YOU. BACK INTO SESSION AND HAND IT BACK OVER TO MRS. STORRS.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. WE'LL BE BRINGING THE SPREADSHEET UP IN A SECOND, AND JUST FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE, WE'RE MAKING SOME COPIES SO WE CAN HAND OUT SOME COPIES, IF YOU'LL BEAR WITH US AND FOLLOW ALONG WITH US ON THE SCREEN.
WE'LL HAVE SOME PRINTED COPIES HERE IN JUST A LITTLE BIT.
ON THIS PAGE, WE WENT OVER THE CHANGES ASSOCIATED WITH YEAR-OVER-YEAR REVENUE LAST YEAR, AND THEN YEAR-OVER-YEAR REVENUE ANTICIPATED FOR THIS YEAR.
BASED ON OUR FEEDBACK FROM COUNCIL LAST WEEK, WE CERTAINLY DID UNDERSTAND THAT WE NEEDED TO COME UP WITH AN OPTION TO ABSORB THE STREET MAINTENANCE BACK INSIDE THE GENERAL FUND WITHOUT ANY FEE ASSOCIATED WITH IT.
WE DID A COUPLE OF OPTIONS, AND THEY'RE TO THE RIGHT ON THIS PAGE.
I WANTED TO START ON THE REVENUE STANDPOINT.
STEFF, IF YOU'LL SCROLL A LITTLE BIT OVER TO THE RIGHT FOR ME.
WE HAVE THREE OPTIONS THAT WE'RE AT LEAST GOING TO TALK ABOUT, AND IF YOU DON'T WANT TO DISCUSS ANY OF THEM, WE DON'T HAVE TO DISCUSS SOME OF THEM, BUT THIS IS JUST OPTIONS WE PUT TOGETHER.
THE VERY FIRST COLUMN HERE IS NO STREET MAINTENANCE FUND AT ALL.
IT GOES BACK INTO THE GENERAL FUND.
THERE'S NO SEPARATE FUND ASSOCIATED WITH STREET MAINTENANCE.
THE SECOND OPTION THERE WOULD BE TO LOOK AT STARTING WITH A PORTION OF A STREET MAINTENANCE FEE, MAYBE A QUARTER OF WHAT WE ORIGINALLY HAD PROPOSED.
THEN THE THIRD OPTION THERE IS HALF OF A STREET MAINTENANCE FEE, SO IT WOULD BE ESSENTIALLY HALF OF WHAT WE PROPOSED ORIGINALLY.
LET'S START WITH THE NO STREET MAINTENANCE FEE.
WHAT I HAVE DONE IS I'VE PULLED OVER THESE MAJOR REVENUE SOURCES FROM THE COLUMN RIGHT NEXT TO IT, THE CHANGE FROM CURRENT YEAR BUDGET TO THE PROPOSED BUDGET, AND THEN I HAVE ABOUT FOUR ACCOUNTS THAT ARE READ ON THERE.
THESE ACCOUNTS, AS WE'RE DEVELOPING A BUDGET, AS YOU ALL ARE AWARE, OUR NUMBERS ARE CHANGING DAILY.
ACTUALLY, ON ONE OF THE DAYS DURING BUDGET REVIEW, I GOT THE EMAIL THAT WE HAD JUST RECEIVED SALES TAX NUMBERS.
WE HAVE TO, AT SOME POINT, STOP CHANGING OUR PROJECTIONS, FILE A BUDGET, AND PRESENT IT TO COUNCIL.
THERE WERE A COUPLE OF MAJOR REVENUE ITEMS. ACTUALLY, I LOOKED THROUGH MOST OF THESE TO SEE IF WE HAD ANY UPDATED NUMBERS THAT COULD POTENTIALLY HELP US IN OUR REVENUE PROJECTIONS FOR THIS NEXT YEAR.
THE FIRST ONE THAT I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT IS UP THERE, THE RED NUMBER AND IT'S RELATED TO OUR FRANCHISE FEES.
THIS IS THE HIGHEST POINT IN THE YEAR FOR WHEN WE RECEIVE FRANCHISE FEES.
OUR LARGEST FRANCHISE FEE IS ELECTRICITY.
AS YOU KNOW WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF OUR SUMMER MONTHS.
WE'VE HAD TO PULL THAT NUMBER BACK A LITTLE BIT JUST BECAUSE OF THE FUEL FACTOR AND BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN HAVING A LITTLE BIT MORE MILD OF A SUMMER.
BUT WE ARE SEEING SOME GROWTH IN THE CURRENT YEAR, WHICH ALLOWED US TO LOOK AT POTENTIALLY UPPING THAT REVENUE SOURCE BY ABOUT 255,000 FOR NEXT YEAR.
THAT IS SOMETHING THAT'S PROPOSED IN ALL THREE SCENARIOS. I'M SORRY.
WE WANTED TO GROW IT BY 154,000, SO IT WOULD BE 100,000 ORIGINALLY PLUS ANOTHER 154,000.
[01:35:01]
THE NEXT ITEM DOWN IS OUR INTEREST INCOME FOR OUR GENERAL FUND ONLY. WE UPDATED.WE HAVE ANOTHER MONTH OF INTEREST INCOME PROJECTIONS, AND THOSE ARE TRENDING FAIRLY WELL, SO WE THINK IT WOULD BE REASONABLE TO INCREASE OUR PROJECTION FOR NEXT YEAR BY ABOUT HALF A MILLION DOLLARS BASED ON WHAT WE'VE SEEN SINCE WE'VE BEEN PUTTING ALL THESE NUMBERS TOGETHER FOR BUDGET.
IF YOU COME DOWN A FEW MORE LINES, WE'RE LOOKING AT BUILDING PERMITS.
I WENT AND RAN ANOTHER MONTH WORTH OF THOSE, AND WE THINK WE CAN UP THOSE JUST A LITTLE BIT, MAYBE BY ABOUT $250,000, SO THE CHANGE BETWEEN THE 1,234,000 AND THE 984,000 THAT'S IN THE BLUE AREA.
THE NEXT ONE DOWN IS SOLID WASTE REVENUE.
WHAT WE WOULD RECOMMEND TO COUNCIL, IF THEY WOULD LIKE, WE WOULD RECOMMEND GOING AHEAD AND INCREASING THE SOLID WASTE FEES FOR THIS UPCOMING YEAR TO SUPPORT THE COST ASSOCIATED WITH PROPOSED RAISES FOR CIVILIANS.
SOLID WASTE HAS A LOT OF CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES THAT WORK IN THOSE DEPARTMENTS, AND SO WE WOULD RECOMMEND THAT THE SOLID WASTE FEES GET ADJUSTED TO SUPPORT ANY RAISE THAT GOES IN.
EACH OF THESE THREE SCENARIOS HAS DIFFERENT RAISED RECOMMENDATIONS, AND WE'LL GO OVER THAT IN JUST A SECOND.
THE OTHER THING IS, WE FEEL IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR THE SOLID WASTE FEES TO INCREASE IN ORDER TO SUPPORT THE ADDITIONAL TMRS AMOUNT NEEDED TO DO THE 70% COLA.
ON THE FIRST SCENARIO THERE, IT WOULD BE JUST ABOUT A 1% ADDITIONAL INCREASE.
IT'D GO FROM A 7% OVERALL RATE INCREASE TO AN 8%.
NOW, WE COULD TALK WITH COUNCIL ABOUT IF THEY WANTED TO LOOK AT DIFFERENT OPTIONS ON RESIDENTIAL VERSUS COMMERCIAL.
WE CAN DISCUSS THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE HERE IN A MINUTE.
AS YOU COME DOWN THE PAGE, AT THE BOTTOM OF THE REVENUE SECTION, IF WE BRING THE STREET DEPARTMENT BACK INTO THE GENERAL FUND, THEY HAVE A VERY SMALL AMOUNT OF MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE THAT THEY HAVE ANNUALLY, SO WE'D NEED TO BRING THAT REVENUE STREAM BACK INTO THE GENERAL FUND OF 13,250.
DOWN BELOW, WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT OUR LARGE EXPENDITURE CHANGES.
>> CAN I ASK A REAL QUICK QUESTION BEFORE WE GO THAT, JUST ON THAT.
WHAT STAFF HAS DONE IS GOING BACK AND SAID, WHERE CAN WE FINE-TUNE OUR REVENUES WITHOUT GOING TOO MUCH? WE DECIDED, WELL, PROPERTY TAX, SALES TAX PROBABLY PRETTY GOOD TO STAY WHERE WE ARE ON THAT.
>> THEN ALL THE OTHER FOUR AREAS, AND IF MY MATH IS CORRECT, THAT GETS US ABOUT 1.1 MILLION OR SO [OVERLAPPING].
>> IT'S A LITTLE OVER 1.2. YES, SIR.
>> LET ME MAKE SURE I'M TRACKING.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE THREE DIFFERENT COLUMNS IN THE QUARTER STREET AND THE HALF STREET.
WHAT ARE YOU CHANGING THERE IN HOW YOU'RE MOVING? OR IS THAT JUST A CONTINUATION AS YOU FALL FURTHER ON THE PAGE?
>> THE ONLY SPOT IT APPLIES TO WOULD BE THE SOLID WASTE RATE INCREASE, AND I WILL WALK YOU THROUGH THAT, MAYOR.
IT'S GOING TO MAKE MORE SENSE AS YOU COME DOWN THE PAGE AND LOOK AT IT FROM THE EXPENSE SIDE.
>> THEN THE OTHER QUICK QUESTION.
AM I SEEING THIS RIGHT? YOU GOT THREE MILLION IN INTEREST INCOME, THAT'S REALLY GOING TO PROJECT TO 3.8 MILLION, ALMOST 3.9.
>> YOU JUST NET THE DIFFERENCE AND ADD IT BACK.
IT'S GOING TO BE 3.5 MILLION? >> YES.
>> THAT'S THE INTEREST THAT WE'RE GOING TO MAKE ON THE 150 MILLION THAT YOU SHOW UNDER GENERAL FUND CASH AND INVESTMENTS?
>> YES, IT WOULD BE GENERAL FUND ONLY CASH AND INVESTMENTS. YES, SIR.
WE AVERAGED 4.7, WAS OUR TURNOVER.
I'M JUST LOOKING AT THAT NUMBER.
YOU'VE GOT ALL THE STUFF THAT FLUCTUATES IN AND OUT, LIABILITIES, ENCUMBRANCES, ALL THAT, BUT YOU HAVE A CASH AND INVESTMENTS YEAR-OVER-YEAR THAT YOU COULD LOOK AT.
IF YOU LOOK BACK AT '24/'25 CASH AND INVESTMENTS, '23, 150 TO 180 TO 160, WHATEVER, THAT'S THE NUMBER THAT SHOULD BE REVENUEING OVER 4% INTEREST?
>> THAT NUMBER FLUCTUATES THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE YEAR.
IT'S BASED ON HOW MUCH SALES TAX WE HAVE FOR THAT MONTH, AND THEN WHEN PROPERTY TAXES COME IN, WE HAVE MORE.
ONCE PROPERTY TAXES ARE ALL SPENT, WE HAVE A LOT LESS IN CASH AND INVESTMENTS IN OUR GENERAL FUND.
>> WE DON'T HAVE 150 ALL THE TIME.
IS THAT BASICALLY WHAT YOU SAY?
>> THAT'S THE PROBLEM. YOU DON'T HAVE ANYTHING THAT GIVES YOU A BASIS MINIMUM THAT WE SEE.
THAT 3.5 IS THE BEST WE'RE GOING TO DO IN GENERAL FUND INTEREST.
>> THAT IS OUR CONSERVATIVE PROJECTION, BECAUSE AGAIN,
[01:40:01]
WE DON'T WANT TO COME TO YOU ALL NEXT YEAR SAYING WE MISSED OUR REVENUE PROJECTIONS BY A MILLION DOLLARS, AND SO NOW WE'VE GOT TO FIND ANOTHER WAY TO SORT.>> BUT THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN THE INTEREST INCOME FROM WHAT'S ALLOWABLE, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE DID.
WE SAID, WELL, WE'RE ALREADY BASING A BUDGET FOR PAY RAISES ON INTEREST INCOME IN THE GENERAL FUND, SO WE FELT A LITTLE MORE COMFORTABLE BRINGING INTEREST INCOME OVER FROM DRAINAGE AND OVER FROM SEWER AND WATER THAT WAS ALLOWABLE.
BECAUSE IT WAS THE SAME METRIC, I THOUGHT.
YOU'RE SAYING 3.6 IS GOOD IN NOT ONE-TIME FEES, CONTINUAL FEES, GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURE.
>> THAT NUMBER WILL FLUCTUATE FROM ONE YEAR TO THE NEXT.
IT WILL GO DOWN SOME POTENTIALLY IN THE FUTURE.
IT COULD GO UP AS INTEREST RATES CHANGE.
>> BUT YOU'RE COMFORTABLE THERE.
>> DO YOU HAVE ANY COMFORT LEVEL ON THE OTHER SEWER AND WATER AND DRAINAGE TO PULL ANYTHING OVER? BECAUSE WE TOOK THEM ALL THE WAY TO ZERO.
>> WELL, IN THIS LAST YEAR, STAFF DIDN'T RECOMMEND MOVING IT OVER, BECAUSE THERE'S SO MANY NEEDS IN WATER AND SEWER AND DRAINAGE, AND SO STAFF IS MAKING THE SAME RECOMMENDATION THAT WE MADE LAST YEAR NOT TO MOVE IT OVER.
BUT IF COUNCIL DECIDES THEY WANT TO DO THAT, THEN WE WILL FOLLOW COUNCIL'S DIRECTION.
>> THANK YOU. I'M CAUGHT UP NOW.
>> I THINK IF WE GO DOWN TO THE BOTTOM, IT'S GOING TO ALL START MAKING A LITTLE BIT MORE SENSE.
AGAIN, THESE ARE JUST LARGE EXPENDITURE CHANGES IN OUR GENERAL FUND ONLY.
WE TALKED ABOUT A LOT OF THESE LAST WEEK.
LET'S START WITH JUST THAT FIRST COLUMN.
AS MENTIONED, THERE WAS STATE LAW THAT WAS CHANGED.
OUR POLICE OFFICER ASSOCIATION WORKED WITH THE STATE ASSOCIATION TO ALLOW THE CITY TO GET BACK INTO A PORTION OF A COLA FOR RETIREES.
WE'RE RECOMMENDING THAT WE GO AHEAD AND FUND THE FULL OPTION.
THIS WOULD GET US BACK TO WHERE WE WERE PRIOR TO 2011.
THIS IS THE LAST FOUR MONTHS THAT WE CAN DO THIS; THEN THIS OPTION GOES AWAY BECAUSE STATE LAW CHANGES BACK.
IT WAS A WINDOW OF OPPORTUNITY.
WE HAVE ABOUT JUST UNDER $2.1 MILLION IN THE GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO GET US TO THE LEVEL WE NEED TO FOR THAT COLA.
THE NEXT ITEM DOWN, WE TALKED ABOUT THIS LAST WEEK, IT WAS THE PAY STUDY OF $2.2 MILLION.
ON THE NEXT ONE DOWN WAS FOR CIVILIANS TO HAVE A 4% RAISE, WHETHER THAT'S COLA, MERIT, OR A COMBINATION.
THAT WAS GOING TO BE ABOUT $2.5 MILLION.
AS YOU COME DOWN A COUPLE MORE LINES, I'LL TALK ABOUT THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE HERE IN JUST A SECOND.
WE HAD BUDGETED IN WHAT'S FILED ONLINE, OUR PROPOSED BUDGET, PLEASE A 5% RAISE THAT COMES IN JUST A LITTLE BELOW $2.3 MILLION.
AS YOU COME DOWN A FEW MORE LINES, WE HAD A 4% RAISE BUDGETED FOR OUR FIRE SWORN PERSONNEL AT $1.6 MILLION.
AS YOU COME DOWN A LITTLE FURTHER, WE WERE LOOKING TO INCREASE THE IT CHARGES TO THE GENERAL FUND BY 1.8 MILLION, WITH 600,000 BEING BACKED OUT, THAT'S ASSOCIATED WITH OUR NEW FINANCIAL SOFTWARE.
IT WAS A $1.2 MILLION INCREASE TO THE GENERAL FUND TO HELP PAY FOR CONTINUED ADDITIONAL COST IN SOFTWARE AND FOR IT TO PUT SOME ADDITIONAL SECURITY MEASURES IN PLACE AROUND OUR SYSTEMS. THE NEXT LINE ITEM DOWN, OUR ELECTRICITY NUMBERS ARE COMING IN A LITTLE BIT MORE FAVORABLE THAN THEY HAD, AND I APOLOGIZE, BECAUSE APPARENTLY, I MISSPELLED ELECTRICITY, SO YOU'LL BEAR WITH ME.
I DO NUMBERS BETTER THAN WORDS SOMETIMES.
ELECTRICITY ACTUALLY YEAR OVER YEAR IT CAME DOWN A LITTLE BIT BY ABOUT 735,000.
THE NEXT LINE ITEM DOWN WAS THE MYAMARILLO.
AS A REMINDER, THIS WAS YOUR 311 CALL CENTER OPERATION THAT WE HAD RECOMMENDED GOING TO AN INTERNAL SERVICE FUND AND THEN CHARGING IT BACK TO THE USING DEPARTMENTS.
THE USING DEPARTMENTS INSIDE THE GENERAL FUND WOULD TOTAL A COST OF ABOUT $569,000.
THE NEXT ITEM DOWN IS LAST YEAR, THE COUNCIL HAD A ONE-TIME WORKING BUDGET OF THREE MILLION, AND WE DID NOT INCLUDE THAT IN THE CURRENT YEAR BUDGET.
ON DOWN, WE HAD ADDED AN ADDITIONAL MILLION DOLLARS INTO POLICE AND FIRE OVERTIME TO HELP WITH SOME OF THE ADDITIONAL COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE RAISES THAT WERE IMPLEMENTED THIS YEAR.
WE HAD SUPPLEMENTAL INCLUDED IN THE GENERAL FUND BUDGET OF JUST UNDER $1.2 MILLION.
IF YOU WANT TO PAUSE THERE FOR JUST A SECOND, AND IF YOU'LL PULL THE SHEET OUT DIRECTLY BEHIND THAT, THIS COLORED SHEET IN YOUR PACKET, THE BLUE AND ORANGE COLORED SHEET, THERE'S A PAGE THAT SAYS GENERAL FUND PROPOSED BUDGET CHANGES-SUPPLEMENTAL.
WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO SEE ON THIS PAGE IS UP AT THE VERY TOP OF THE PAGE; YOU'LL SEE WE HAVE SEVERAL THINGS THAT ARE RECOMMENDED TO BE IN THE BUDGET, AND THESE ITEMS ARE ALL COMPLETELY OFFSET BY REVENUE SOURCES.
[01:45:03]
EVERYTHING AT THE TOP, THERE ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE THAT HAS BLACK LETTERING ON YOUR PAGE, THAT IS ALL IN EVERY OPTION OF THE BUDGET THAT WE HAVE PUT HERE BEFORE YOU TODAY.ALL OF THOSE ITEMS ARE FULLY OFFSET TO THE TUNE OF, I THINK, THE DIFFERENCE WAS $1,100.
DID YOU ALL FIND THIS IN YOUR PACKETS? NOT YET.
>> IT SHOULD BE ABOUT THE FOURTH TO LAST PAGE IN YOUR PACKET THAT WAS IN YOUR FOLDER THERE.
>> THERE'S RED NUMBERS ON THE BACK OF ONE SIDE. DID YOU FIND IT? GREAT. AS YOU COME DOWN THE LIST, AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT THIS HERE IN JUST A SECOND.
BUT ON DOWN THE LIST, WHEN WE START GETTING INTO THE RED AMOUNTS TOWARDS THE BOTTOM.
ALL OF THOSE ITEMS ARE TOTALING THE 01,177,000 THAT IS INCLUDED ON THE FIRST PAGE WE WERE GOING OVER.
THIS WAS SOME OF THE NEW POSITIONS THAT WE DISCUSSED.
IT WAS SOME ADDITIONAL SOFTWARE NEEDS THAT WE HAD.
IT WAS ALSO SOME NEW VEHICLE LEASES THAT WE NEEDED TO SUPPORT OPERATIONS, SOME AMW OFFICERS, SOME PICKUPS FOR OUR FIRE DEPARTMENT.
THERE'S SEVERAL ITEMS IN HERE DOWN TOWARDS THE BOTTOM WHEN YOU GET INTO THE RED SECTION.
THOSE ITEMS ARE THE ONES THAT ARE TOTALING BACK ON YOUR PAGE THAT HAS THE BLUE AND ORANGE ON IT.
THOSE ITEMS AT THE VERY BOTTOM ARE TOTALING TO YOUR $1,177,000. THANK YOU, STEPHANIE.
THAT CORRESPONDS DIRECTLY BACK TO YOUR PAGE WITH THE BLUE AND THE ORANGE ON IT.
WE'LL BE REFERRING A LITTLE BIT BACK AND FORTH ON THIS.
I THINK COUNCIL WANTED TO SEE ALL THE NEW THINGS THAT WE HAD PUT INTO THE BUDGET. THIS IS THE LIST.
THIS IS THE LIST OF ITEMS BEYOND THINGS FOR RAISES, FOR THE PAY STUDY, FOR TMRS, COLA, THOSE THINGS.
THESE ARE THE INDIVIDUAL DEPARTMENT ASKS THAT WE HAD ORIGINALLY INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET.
>> JUST TO PAUSE REAL QUICK, IS STAFF RECOMMENDING SOME OF THESE THAT ARE COST-REVENUE, OR COST RECOVERY? YOU'RE RECOMMENDING THOSE DEPARTMENTS CANNIBALIZE THOSE MONIES AND GET THESE REQUESTS; YOU'RE NOT NECESSARILY TREATING THIS AS AN OVERALL GENERAL FUND.
AS AN EXAMPLE, YOU'RE LOOKING AT, LET'S PICK ONE EASY.
>> SOLID WASTE IS AN EASY ONE.
THERE'S A RATE INCREASE TO SUPPORT ALL OF THE EXPENDITURES WE DISCUSSED LAST WEEK.
>> DANGEROUS STRUCTURE PROGRAM.
>> DANGEROUS STRUCTURE PROGRAM.
>> DANGEROUS STRUCTURE. THANK YOU.
>> ANIMAL MANAGEMENT WELFARE, THOSE WOULD BE ADDITIONAL COSTS THAT ARE COMING OUT OF GENERAL FUNDS BECAUSE THERE'S NO RATE.
>> BUT THEN, IF YOU GO TO GOLF, YOU'RE GOING TO DO A SMALL GREEN FEE INCREASE, AND THEN YOU'RE GOING TO ASK FOR ADDITIONAL POSITION.
>> A RECLASS OF A POSITION, YES, OR A COUPLE OF POSITIONS. YES, SIR.
>> THERE'S NO REQUESTS FROM STAFF TO UTILIZE ANY OF THOSE LEVERS FOR GENERAL FUND TO DO LIKE SOME OF THESE OTHER ASKS THAT ARE ON THE PAGE.
YOU WANT TO KEEP THESE AS ONE ITEM, IF POSSIBLE.
>> YES. I WILL GO OVER THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS AS WE GO THROUGH THE OTHER COLUMNS ON THE PAGE.
THIS IS JUST THE PAGE THAT YOU CAN REFER BACK TO TO SEE THE FULL LIST OF REQUESTS.
STEPHANIE, IF YOU'LL GO BACK TO THE OTHER PAGE FOR ME. THANK YOU.
THE NEXT ITEM DOWN IS WHERE WE REMOVED THE STREET MAINTENANCE DEPARTMENT OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND, JUST UNDER $15 MILLION.
THEN THE NEXT ITEM DOWN IS OUR ONE-TIME CIP FUNDING FOR GENERAL FUND ACTUALLY WENT DOWN JUST A LITTLE OVER A MILLION DOLLARS IN NEXT YEAR'S PROPOSED BUDGET VERSUS THE CURRENT YEAR APPROVED BUDGET.
NOW LET'S GO TO THE RIGHT AND START TALKING THROUGH THE CHANGES THAT WE COULD POTENTIALLY LOOK AT.
THE FIRST COLUMN, AS A REMINDER, IS NO STREET MAINTENANCE FEE.
THE FIRST COLUMN THERE IS WHAT WE WOULD RECOMMEND OF THESE CHANGES TO STAY AT THE BUDGET, AND WHICH ONES WE'RE SAYING WOULD BE AN OPTION TO TAKE OUT OF THE BUDGET TO KEEP YOUR BUDGET STILL IN BALANCE.
THE FIRST THING WE WOULD SAY IS WE'RE RECOMMENDING ON THIS OPTION.
AGAIN, COUNCIL CAN MAKE CHANGES TO THIS.
THIS IS JUST A PROPOSED IDEA TO MAKE IT WORK.
KEEPING THE TMRS COLA DUE TO THE FACT THAT IT'S THE LAST TIME WE CAN LOOK AT SOMETHING LIKE THIS, AND WE DO KNOW OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT WAS IN FULL SUPPORT OF IT.
THE NEXT ITEM DOWN, WE'RE RECOMMENDING TO REMOVE THE PAY STUDY.
THE NEXT ITEM DOWN WITH NO STREET MAINTENANCE FEE AT ALL,
[01:50:03]
WE WOULD RECOMMEND REDUCING THE CIVILIAN RAISES FROM 4% DOWN TO 2%, AND THAT COULD BE COLA OR MERIT, OR BOTH; HOWEVER, COUNCIL DECIDED.AS YOU GO DOWN THE PAGE, WE ARE RECOMMENDING POLICE RAISES GOING FROM 5% DOWN TO 3%.
AS YOU GO DOWN A LITTLE FURTHER, WE WOULD RECOMMEND FIRE RAISES GOING FROM 4% DOWN TO 2%.
AS YOU CONTINUE GOING, WE WOULD RECOMMEND REDUCING THE IT CHARGES OF 1.2 MILLION NET TO THE GENERAL FUND DOWN TO JUST A $200 INCREASE TO THE GENERAL FUND.
WE WOULD KEEP THE SAVINGS IN ELECTRICITY.
WE WOULD RECOMMEND CUTTING OUT ANY OF THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH MYAMARILLO.
WE WOULD RECOMMEND JUST LEAVING THAT INSIDE THE WATER AND SEWER FUND WITH NO INCREASES TO THAT DEPARTMENT.
AS YOU KEEP COMING DOWN, WE WOULD CONTINUE TO KEEP THE ONE-TIME FUNDING FOR THE COUNCIL WORKING BUDGET OUT OF THE BUDGET.
WE WOULD ALSO, AS YOU COME DOWN, RECOMMEND-
>> CAN I STOP THAT REAL QUICK, OR JUST PAUSE ON THAT ONE REAL QUICK? THE COUNCIL ONE-TIME WORKING BUDGET WAS SPENT MUCH LIKE CIP.
I GUESS I'M HAVING A HARD TIME FOLLOWING WHY THAT FACTORS INTO THIS LIST.
>> LAST YEAR, THAT WAS A $3 MILLION AMOUNT, AND THIS YEAR IT'S ZERO SO IT'S A DECREASE OF $3 MILLION.
>> HELP ME UNDERSTAND WHERE IT'S AT IN THE BUDGET.
IF WE SPENT THE MONEY FOR THE ONE-TIME BUDGET, THE BUDGET'S GONE.
>> IT'S JUST REFLECTING THAT YOU'RE NOT GOING TO DO IT AGAIN THIS YEAR.
IT'S ALL IN CIP, THE ONE-TIME VERSUS CIP, AND THREE MILLION SET ASIDE.
>> BUT IT WASN'T BUILT INTO THE BUDGET LAST YEAR, SO CURRENT YEAR'S BUDGET, IT WAS JUST MONEY THAT WE DIDN'T SPEND.
>> IT WAS BUILT INTO THE BUDGET.
ONCE COUNCIL SAID WE WANT A WORKING BUDGET, THREE MILLION ONE-TIME, THREE MILLION ONGOING, THERE IS A LINE ITEM IN THE CURRENT YEAR BUDGET.
>> YOU WENT BACK AND PUT THAT IN THERE, SO THAT'S WHY YOU'RE PULLING IT OUT.
>>THAT THREE MILLION IS CURRENTLY BUILT INTO THIS TOTAL EXPENDITURE OF 275,498 AS REALIZED IN YOUR REVISED NATURALS.
>> AS WE GO BACK OVER TO THE OPTION FOR NOT HAVING A STREET MAINTENANCE FEE, HAVING IT BACK IN THE GENERAL FUND, WE JUST COVERED THE COUNCIL WORKING BUDGET.
THE NEXT ONE DOWN, WE HAD ADDED A MILLION DOLLARS TO POLICE AND FIRE OVERTIME; WE WOULD RECOMMEND REMOVING THAT.
ON THE SUPPLEMENTAL, WE WOULD RECOMMEND ONLY APPROVING THE REQUESTS THAT ARE FULLY SUPPORTED BY REVENUE SOURCES.
BACK TO THAT ATTACHED PAGE, IT WAS ALL THE ITEMS THAT ARE IN BLACK TOWARDS THE TOP OF THE FIRST PAGE.
IT WOULD BE ALL THOSE ITEMS. THEN, WHEN YOU GET DOWN TO THE FIRST LINE ITEM THAT SAYS DATA MINOR SOFTWARE OF 15,000, WE WOULD RECOMMEND STARTING TO CUT ALL OF THOSE ALL THE WAY TO THE END OF THE SECOND PAGE.
>> LAUREN, CAN I GO BACK ONE LINE ON THE POLICE AND FIRE ADDITIONAL OVERTIME? IF WE DON'T ALLOCATE A MILLION DOLLARS OR EXPECT A MILLION DOLLARS, WE'VE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT THAT'S NOT REALLY A CONTROLLABLE EXPENSE.
WE'RE GOING TO INCUR THAT, PROBABLY NO MATTER WHAT.
NOT JUST A MILLION, THAT'S JUST GOING TO BE AN OFFSET.
AT THE END OF THE YEAR, WE'RE JUST GOING TO BE SHORT, PROBABLY.
I MEAN, IS THAT WHAT YOUR PROJECTION WOULD BE?
>> WHAT WE WOULD DO IS OTHER DEPARTMENTS THEIR SAVINGS WOULD OFFSET IT, AND IT WOULD BE LESS AMOUNT THAT COULD GO TO ONE-TIME CAPITAL IN THE NEXT YEAR.
>> IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET, THE WAY WE HAD IT, WE'RE TRYING TO OFFSET AT LEAST A MILLION.
WE'RE TRYING TO GET AHEAD OF IT AND TAKE LESS.
>> A GREAT QUESTION. WE JUST COVERED THE SUPPLEMENTAL NUMBER.
AS YOU GO DOWN ON THE STREET MAINTENANCE DEPARTMENT, WE WOULD RECOMMEND NOT REMOVING THE 15 MILLION.
THEY HAD A SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST FOR SOME ADDITIONAL EQUIPMENT.
WE WOULD RECOMMEND CUTTING THAT REQUEST OUT OF THE STREET.
THE NEXT ITEM DOWN, CIP, WE WOULD STILL RECOMMEND KEEPING THE ONE-TIME SPENDING LOWER.
THEN THE LAST ITEM DOWN IS WE WOULD RECOMMEND REMOVING THE MUNICIPAL COURT CIP PROJECT OF 4.3 MILLION.
WHAT THIS WOULD DO TO YOUR RESERVES AS YOU GO DOWN.
I'M NOT SURE. DID YOU ALL BRING YOUR BUDGET BOOKS WITH YOU, THESE GIANT BOOKS? IF YOU GO BACK TO PAGE 4 FROM LAST WEEK, YOU WILL SEE THE NUMBERS THAT ARE ON THE BOTTOM OF THIS PAGE.
STEPHANIE, YOU DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO SWITCH TO IT.
I JUST WANTED FOR THEIR REFERENCE.
THAT'S WHERE THESE NUMBERS HAD COME FROM.
WE HAD ESTIMATED TARGET RESERVES THAT WERE TRYING TO HIT 52,764,000.
BRINGING THE STREET DEPARTMENT BACK IN THAT NUMBER TIES BACK TO THAT PAGE 4.
[01:55:01]
THIS NUMBER HERE AT THE BOTTOM, THE SECOND TO LAST NUMBER ON THIS PAGE, TIES BACK TO THAT PAGE 4 THAT WE COVERED WITH YOU GUYS LAST WEEK.IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE CLOSE TO THAT TARGET RESERVES, WE COULD BRING THE STREET DEPARTMENT BACK INTO THE GENERAL FUND WITH ALL THOSE OTHER CHANGES I JUST COVERED, AND WE'D BE WITHIN ABOUT $2 MILLION OF OUR TARGET RESERVES, AND WE FEEL LIKE THAT WOULD BE SUFFICIENT FROM A BUDGET STANDPOINT.
ARE THERE QUESTIONS ON THIS OPTION?
>> WITH THIS OPTION, SO LOOKING AT THE CHANGE IN THE REVENUES OF 1.1 BILLION OR WHATEVER THAT IS, AND THEN WITH THESE CHANGES THAT SAY NO STREET MAINTENANCE FEE, DOES THAT FULLY CLOSE THE GAP ON THE 15 MILLION?
>> YES, SIR, FULLY CLOSES THAT GAP.
>> WE'RE AT A POINT RIGHT NOW, IF WE JUST SAID, WE DON'T WANT TO CONSIDER ANY OTHER OPTIONS.
HERE'S OUR OPTION, AND WHAT WE HAVE TO GIVE UP IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO MAKE THE BUDGET WORK?
>> YES. THIS WOULD PRODUCE A BALANCED BUDGET FOR YOU ALL, THAT WOULD BE GOOD FOR YOU TO MOVE FORWARD WITH APPROVING.
>> JUST TO BE CLEAR, SO EVERYTHING ON THIS PAGE WITH THE RED.
>> EVERYTHING IN RED WOULD BE CUT OUT.
EVERYTHING IN BLACK IS STILL IN THERE.
>> YES, SIR. THERE'S ONE MORE PAGE I WANT TO GO OVER WITH YOU, GUYS, RELATED TO THIS.
I'M SORRY. I KNOW THIS IS A LOT OF INFORMATION, BUT IT ALL IS VERY PERTINENT TO THIS DISCUSSION.
THE THIRD TO LAST PAGE IN YOUR PACKET, THERE IS A REPORT THAT SAYS NEW FULL-TIME POSITION REQUESTS FOR FISCAL YEAR '25/26 BUDGET.
IF YOU'LL PULL THAT OUT JUST A SECOND, I WOULD LIKE TO TALK ABOUT THE NEW POSITIONS THAT THIS WOULD AFFECT.
ARE YOU ALL SEEING THAT? IT'S A ONE-PAGE ONE-SIDED DOCUMENT.
STEPHANIE'S GOT IT UP ON THE SCREEN HERE AS WELL.
IT WAS THE THIRD-TO-LAST PAGE.
>> IT'S A SINGLE PAGE BY ITSELF.
IT'S NOT IN THE PACKET, JUST A SINGLE PAGE.
>> DAVID LAST DID YOU LOCATE IT? MAYOR. GOOD.
>> YES, MA'AM. WHILE THEY'RE LOOKING FOR THAT, DO YOU HAPPEN TO HAVE THE TOTAL OF INCREASES SEPARATED FROM THE DEDUCTS ON THESE RECOMMENDATIONS? IF YOU ADD THE COLA AND THE OTHERS AS PER YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS, SAYS TOTAL NET CHANGE IS FIVE MILLION, BUT THAT CONFUSES ME WITH THE 15 MILLION.
I JUST WANT TO SEE WHAT THE TOTAL ADDITIONS ARE.
>> YOU WOULD JUST TAKE THAT NUMBER OUT OF THE $14 MILLION REDUCTION.
YOU'RE SAYING THAT DO THE MATH TAKING ANY OF THE NEGATIVE NUMBERS OUT? WHEN ARE YOU ASKING ME?
>> ON THIS NEW POSITION PAGE, IF YOU'LL REMEMBER BACK TO LAST WEEK, WE TALKED ABOUT HOW THERE WAS 44 NEW FULL TIME POSITIONS THAT WE WERE PROPOSING IN THE TOTAL CITY OF AMARILLO BUDGET.
THE FIRST COLUMN WITH NUMBERS IS THE PROPOSED BUDGET THAT'S FILED RIGHT NOW THAT WE WENT OVER WITH YOU GUYS LAST WEEK.
THAT IS THE 44 POSITIONS AT THE BOTTOM.
OF THOSE, GENERAL FUND HAD 16, WICK HAD ONE, WATER AND SEWER HAD NINE, AIRPORT HAD ONE, FLEET HAD ONE, IT HAD FOUR, AND MYAMARILLO HAD 12, FOR A TOTAL OF 44.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE SECOND COLUMN ON THIS NEW POSITION PAGE, THESE ARE THE CHANGES WE WOULD RECOMMEND.
WE WOULD TAKE THE NEW POSITIONS IN THE GENERAL FUND FROM 16 DOWN TO SIX.
YOUR SIX POSITIONS WOULD BE ASSOCIATED WITH THE NEW DANGEROUS STRUCTURE REMOVAL PROGRAM THAT WOULD BE SUPPORTED BY SOLID WASTE FEE INCREASES.
WE WOULD REDUCE WATER AND SEWER BY TWO POSITIONS THAT WERE DISCUSSED LAST WEEK.
WE WOULD KEEP AIRPORT AND FLEET THE SAME.
WE WOULD HAVE TO ELIMINATE ALL THE NEW IT POSITIONS, AND WE WOULD ELIMINATE ALL OF THE MYAMARILLO NEW POSITIONS.
THERE WOULD BE AN INCREASE FOR THE WHOLE CITY OF AMARILLO OF 16 POSITIONS.
>> A QUICK QUESTION. ON THE RECOMMENDATIONS UNDER GENERAL FUND, YOU'VE GOT SIX POSITIONS?
>> DO WE HAVE ANY IDENTIFIED VACANCIES? DID YOU GO BACK AND LOOK THROUGH ANY OF THOSE THAT WOULD HELP OFFSET ANY OF THOSE? I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CALL IT LIKE A RE-CATEGORIZATION OR IF YOU JUST SAY, WE'RE JUST GOING TO PULL THIS.
DO WE HAVE ANY IDENTIFIABLE MONIES AS YOU LOOKED THROUGH ALL DEPARTMENTS WHERE YOU WOULD RECOMMEND STAFF COULD LOOK AT IT AND SAY, WE'RE CONSTANTLY VACANT FIVE POSITIONS HERE THAT PAY $70,000 IN DEPARTMENT X.
WE'RE RECOMMENDING TO OFFSET THESE SIX POSITIONS WITH THESE DELETIONS OUT OF THESE DEPARTMENTS.
>> WE WENT THROUGH THAT EXERCISE LAST YEAR AND I THINK WE CUT MAYBE 20 SOME POSITIONS IN THE GENERAL FUND.
[02:00:01]
I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE ANY FURTHER CAPACITY TO DO THAT.I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION READY FOR TODAY.
>> BUT IF WE WERE LOOKING A LITTLE BIT MORE LIKE INCREMENTALLY AND NOT JUST ONE BIG CHANGE, LIKE A STREET FEE, BUT LOTS OF LITTLE CHANGES, DO YOU FEEL LIKE THAT'S WELL WITHIN THE TIME FRAME TO GO THROUGH AND SAY, WE JUST ALWAYS HAVE AN EXTRA POSITION HERE IN DEPARTMENT X, WE COULD PULL THAT ONE, AND THAT WOULD OFFSET THIS TO BALANCE THE BUDGET?
>> I THINK THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.
THE CONCERN WOULD BE ON THE SOLID WASTE POSITIONS.
THOSE ARE OFFSET BY A FEE INCREASE.
WE WOULD NOT RECOMMEND UNFUNDING A POSITION THAT IS FUNDED BY PROPERTY TAXES OR SALES TAX TO FUND A POSITION THAT IS SUPPORTING SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS.
THEN ONE OF THE POSITIONS, AND I FORGOT TO MENTION THE LAST TWO ON THERE, THE SIGNAL TECH II, THEY ARE OFFSETTING THAT.
THEY ARE UNFUNDING A POSITION TO FUND THAT NEW SIGNAL TECH POSITION.
THEN THE FIREFIGHTER, WE ARE LOOKING TO ADD ONE FIREFIGHTER TO COMPLY WITH OUR MEET AND CONFER AGREEMENT RELATED TO THEIR MINIMUM STAFFING MODEL.
WE WOULDN'T HAVE A POSITION AVAILABLE TO UNFUND IN THE FIRE DEPARTMENT.
WE COULD LOOK ACROSS THE CITY.
I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION FOR TODAY, THOUGH.
>> KEEP IN MIND, THE TIGHTER YOU GET ON THOSE VACANT POSITIONS, THE LESS YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE COVERAGE OF PUBLIC SAFETY OVERTIME.
THOSE ARE THOSE SALARY SAVINGS THAT HELP MAKE THAT UP AT THE END OF THE YEAR.
>> LAURA, I'VE GOT A QUESTION.
>> ON THE CALCULATIONS OF ALL, WHENEVER WE'VE GOT A QUARTER STREET MAINTENANCE FEE HALF, HOW MANY MONTHS ARE YOU FIGURING THAT? BECAUSE LET'S JUST SAY WE MOVED FORWARD WITH IT.
WHEN WOULD IT BE IMPLEMENTED? WOULD IT BE IMPLEMENTED OCTOBER 1? WOULD IT GO ON THE WATER BILL? HOW MANY MONTHS ARE WE FIGURING A FULL EIGHT DOLLARS IS GOING TO GENERATE 15.5 MILLION? IS THAT 12 MONTHS?
>> THAT WOULD BE UP TO COUNSEL TO DECIDE AS WE WORK THROUGH ALL OF THE DETAILS OF WHAT THAT STREET MAINTENANCE FEE WOULD LOOK LIKE.
WE COULD LOOK AT DIFFERENT OPTIONS ON THAT.
IDEALLY OCTOBER 1, WE MOST LIKELY WOULD NOT BE READY TO IMPLEMENT IT ON OCTOBER 1.
IN THE FIRST YEAR, MOST LIKELY IF COUNSEL DECIDED TO MOVE FORWARD, WE WOULD LOOK AT IMPLEMENTING THAT FEE SOMEWHERE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE YEAR AND STARTING TO BUILD UP TO THE FULL AMOUNT IN THE UPCOMING YEARS.
BECAUSE WE'D WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAD A GOOD PLAN IN PLACE THAT WAS FAIR AND EQUITABLE FOR EVERYONE AND THAT COUNSEL WEIGHED IN ON EXACTLY HOW THEY WANTED IT STRUCTURED.
I'M GOING TOSS IT OVER TO DONNY BECAUSE HE MIGHT WANT TO EXPAND.
>> THE EIGHT DOLLAR NUMBER WAS JUST ONE THAT WE GRABBED BASED ON AN AVERAGE OF WHAT WE SAW IN OTHER CITIES THAT WERE USING A STREET FEE.
WE REALLY HADN'T LANDED ON A SPECIFIC NUMBER.
WE WERE JUST TRYING TO COME UP WITH A CALCULATION AND WHAT IT WOULD TAKE TO DO THAT.
AGAIN, IT'S DIFFICULT TO DO WHEN IT GETS TO COMMERCIAL BECAUSE THERE'S SO MANY VARIANCES IN THE AMOUNT OF SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE DIFFERENT BUSINESS. DOES IT GENERATE?
>> I'M NOT WORRIED ABOUT THE DOLLAR AMOUNT OF THE FEE.
THIS IS CRUCIAL. HOW MANY MONTHS ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? DOES 15.5 MILLION, IS THAT GENERATED ON AN EIGHT DOLLAR FEE IN THE COMMERCIAL IN SIX MONTHS? IS THAT GENERATED OVER 12 MONTHS? THAT'S A KEY COMPONENT TO THIS CALCULATION.
>> AS IT GETS FULLY BUILT OUT, IT WOULD BE ON A 12 MONTH BASIS.
>> EVEN THESE PROJECTIONS ARE THAT WE'RE DOING THIS PROPOSED BUDGET WITH A QUARTER OR A HALF, NO, ONLY WITH IT.
A QUARTER, HALF, AND FULL, WE'RE STILL WAY SHORT.
LET'S JUST USE THE FULL, FOR EXAMPLE, AND WE SAY, HEY, LET'S DO THIS.
BUT BY THE TIME EVERYBODY AGREES AND WE DESIGN IT, WHO'S EXCLUDED, WHO'S NOT, ALL THE THINGS, WE MAY BE SIX MONTHS INTO THE FISCAL YEAR.
REALLY WE'RE NOT GENERATING 15.5, WE'RE AT 7.75.
>> WE COULD POTENTIALLY BE BASED ON HOW COUNCIL DECIDES TO SET THE RATES.
>> BUT THEN WE'VE NOT FUNDED THE STREET FEE OR FOR THE STREET DEPARTMENT, OR DO WE KEEP THAT IN HOUSE UNTIL THAT IS IMPLEMENTED?
>> YES, SIR. THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD DO.
>> BUT THE NUMBERS DON'T WORK IF YOU DO THAT.
>> WE WOULD ESSENTIALLY TAKE IT OUT OF ANY ONE TIME SAVINGS THAT WE WOULD BE SEEING IN NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET IN ORDER TO HELP COVER STREETS UNTIL WE COULD GET THAT FEE IN PLACE AND RUNNING FOR THE FULL.
>> THAT WOULD BE EXCESS RESERVES THAT WE NEED TO IDENTIFY NOW.
>> THEY COULD BE IDENTIFIED AS WE WALK THROUGH NEXT YEAR AS WELL.
IT ALL DEPENDS ON THE TIMING OF WHEN WE DECIDED TO START THAT FEE.
>> IT'S ALL ABOUT A CASH FLOW PROCESS.
OBVIOUSLY, WE DO TEND TO BUDGET CONSERVATIVELY FOR OUR REVENUES AND OUR EXPENSES,
[02:05:02]
AND SO THAT WOULD GO TO HELP OFFSET THAT.A LOT OF OUR THINGS LIKE YOUR SALES TAX, WE GIVE YOU A BUDGET OF 81.17 MILLION.
WE DON'T KNOW IF THAT ACTUALLY, IT'S MAYBE 82, MAYBE 80, MAYBE 84.
IT'S ALL A BUNDLE THAT SUPPORTS EACH OTHER.
IF POLICE GOES OVER, OTHER DEPARTMENTS PICK IT UP, IF STREET COMES UNDER, OTHER DEPARTMENTS PICK IT UP.
>> IT'S A CONCEPT OF PLAN THAT WE WANT TO PROPOSE.
WE'D HAVE TO FLESH IT OUT IF IT WAS TO GO BE FORWARD.
BUT IN THIS FIRST YEAR, THERE WOULD BE SOME FLOATING TO GET US TO THAT FINAL POINT.
IN THE FOLLOWING YEAR, IT'D BE FULLY IMPLEMENTED.
>> NO, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT THAT'S A LOT OF FLOATING.
IF WE WENT FULL $7.75 MILLION, THAT'S A LOT OF FLOATING.
IT GIVES ME A LITTLE DISCOMFORT OF THINKING, SO WE CAN MAKE UP 7.75 IN SIX MONTHS, BUT YET WE'RE TRYING TO TRIM THE BUDGET AND TRY TO FIGURE. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE?
>> SO WE'RE GOING TO EAT THIS?
>> ONE OF THE OPTIONS THAT I KNOW DONNY AND I HAD DISCUSSED WAS POTENTIALLY EVEN STARTING AT OCTOBER 1 WITH A BUILD UP TO EVENTUALLY MID YEAR GETTING TO WHAT THE FULL NUMBER IS JUST TO HELP EASE CITIZENS INTO SOME OF IT.
YOU WOULDN'T BE LOOKING AT 7.5 MILLION.
YOU MIGHT BE LOOKING AT A COUPLE MILLION.
>> PART OF THAT IS THE CHALLENGE ON YEAR 1 ON A FEE LIKE THIS, IS TRYING TO GET EVERYTHING IN PLACE AT A SET POINT IN TIME, KNOWING THAT WE PROBABLY ARE GOING TO NEED TO BUILD IN A LITTLE BIT OF WIGGLE ROOM FOR IT.
THAT'S A TECHNICAL TERM, WIGGLE ROOM.
FULLY IMPLEMENTED UNTIL A LITTLE PAST OCTOBER 1.
>> THAT'S ASSUMING WE EVEN SPEND THE FULL 15 MILLION ON STREETS.
WE MAY HAVE THE FIRST YEAR MAY BE A LITTLE TIGHT, AND MAYBE COMING OUT 13 MILLION.
SO THERE'S AN EBB AND FLOW AS YOU WORK INTO IT.
>> I GET IT. BUT I GUESS, AGAIN, IF WE GOT SOME WIGGLE ROOM, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO FIND RIGHT NOW.
BUT IF WE'RE LIKE, WE'VE GOT SOME WIGGLE ROOM MAYBE BUILT IN, BUT THAT'S WHERE WE'RE REALLY TRYING TO DIG DOWN AND SAY, WE WANT TO FIND EVERY BIT OF WIGGLE ROOM WE CAN IN ANY FEES OR ANYTHING BEFORE MAKING ANY DECISION OF ASSESSING ANOTHER TAX.
WE'VE GOT TO FIGURE THAT OUT FIRST.
BUT WHAT I HEAR YOU SAYING IS LIKE, WE'RE GOING TO FIGURE IT OUT LATER.
>> THE WIGGLE ROOM COMES JUST BY IMPLICATION OF THE BUDGET.
WHAT LAURA IS TALKING ABOUT IS, WE BUDGET LIKE 81 MILLION IN SALES TAX.
I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S GOING TO BE 82, 80.
WE BUDGET, SAY, 15 MILLION ON STREETS, MAYBE 13, MAYBE 16.
THAT PLAYS OUT AS A BUDGET PROGRESSES.
>> WE CAN'T TELL YOU EXACTLY WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IN THE NEXT 18 MONTHS.
WE CAN TELL YOU A GUESS, BUT THE WIGGLE ROOM COMES IN BY STUFF HAPPENING, WE MAKE DECISIONS, WE REALIZE OUR SALES TAXES COMING UNDER US.
WE HAVE TO START ADJUSTING EXPENDITURES DOWN.
I HAVE A BUNCH OF EMPLOYEES THAT GO WORK FIRM SUDDENLY, AND SO I'VE EXERCISE A BUNCH OF PAYROLLS THAT'S AVAILABLE.
IT ALL COMES INTO THAT PROCESS.
>> SURE. I FELT LIKE THAT'S A BIG COMPONENT OF THAT.
>> WE WOULD WORK HAND IN HAND WITH COUNSEL TO FINALIZE ALL OF THOSE AMOUNTS.
THIS IS JUST SETTING A PLAN, AND THEN WE WOULD WORK WITH YOU ALL TO FINALIZE WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE.
WE WOULD HAVE SOME CONTINGENCY IDEAS BUILT IN.
MAYBE WHAT WE WOULD RECOMMEND IS IF WE DON'T THINK THIS COULD GO IN FOR A FEW MONTHS, GET STARTED FOR A FEW MONTHS, WE MAY SAY, HEY, COUNSEL, WE MIGHT RECOMMEND INSTEAD OF 2.5 MILLION TO THE MILLION AND OVERLAY.
MAYBE WE WANT TO BRING THAT BACK A LITTLE BIT TO COVER THIS FIRST PART OF THE YEAR.
OR HEY, SALES TAX IS OUTPERFORMING, SO WE THINK WE HAVE SOME ROOM TO HELP COVER THE COUPLE OF MONTHS THAT STREET HAD TO REMAIN INSIDE THE GENERAL FUND BEFORE WE COULD GET THE FEE IN PLACE.
IT WOULD BE A COLLABORATIVE EFFORT BETWEEN STAFF AND COUNSEL TO COME UP WITH THE TRUE GAME PLAN.
THIS IS JUST ESSENTIALLY, DO YOU WANT TO DO IT OR NOT? DO YOU WANT TO DO A FULL AMOUNT OR DO YOU WANT GENERAL FUND TO COVER A PIECE OF IT? GIVE US SOME GUIDELINES AND THEN WE CAN FINALIZE IT AND WORK WITH YOU GUYS TO COME UP WITH HOW YOU WANT TO.
>> GIVEN THIS TIMELINE, I'M NOT SEEING THE WISDOM IN THIS BECAUSE IF WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET MONIES IN STARTING OCTOBER 1, BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE GAME PLAN IS DOWN THE ROAD, WHY WOULD WE INSTITUTE THAT NOW, RATHER THAN WAITING UNTIL THE NEXT BUDGET CYCLE WHEN WE HAVE TIME TO GO OUT TO THE PUBLIC WITH THE PLAN.
WE DEVELOPED THE PLAN FIRST AND THEN TAKE IT OUT TO THE PUBLIC.
I KNOW WHEN I WAS COACHING, I DIDN'T COME UP WITH A GAME PLAN AT THE END OF THE GAME OR MIDWAY.
I HAD A GAME PLAN AT THE BEGINNING, AND WE WORKED ON IT DURING THE WEEK, AND THEN WE WENT OUT AND WE PLAYED.
WHAT YOU'RE ASKING US TO DO IS GIVE OUR APPROVAL ON A PLAN
[02:10:02]
WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW THE NUMBERS, THAT WE WANT OUR TAXPAYERS TO JUST ACCEPT, BECAUSE NOW WE'VE DONE THIS, AS OPPOSED TO, IF WE WAIT AND WE START AFTER WE DEVELOPED THIS BUDGET, AND WE DEVELOPED THE PLAN AND THEN TAKE IT OUT TO THE PUBLIC TO GET THEIR APPROVAL, BECAUSE WE'RE ASKING THEM TO FOOT THE BILL.IT'S COMING OUT OF YOUR POCKET.
BUT THERE'S A HUGE CONSTITUENT CITY OUT THERE THAT DOESN'T GET A SAY IN THIS.
I JUST DON'T SEE THE WISDOM IN DOING A PROJECT, A PROGRAM THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE FULL DEVELOPMENT.
>> THAT IS WHY WE'RE PRESENTING AN OPTION.
IF YOU'LL DON'T WANT TO DO THAT, THAT'S JUST FINE WITH US.
JUST TELL US WHAT YOU WANT TO DO, AND WE CAN START WORKING THIS YEAR TOWARDS A PLAN FOR NEXT YEAR.
WE CAN DO A PARTIAL THIS YEAR.
WE CAN DO A FULL ONE THIS YEAR.
WE WERE JUST PRESENTING OPTIONS.
>> CAN I HAVE A LITTLE CLARIFICATION ON THE PAGE THAT HAS NO STREET MAINTENANCE AND THEN LARGE EXPENDITURE CHANGES.
CAN WE GO BACK TO THAT ONE REAL QUICK.
>> STEPHANIE, WILL YOU GO TO THE MULTICOLA PAGE REAL QUICK? SORRY, STEPHANIE'S JUST HAVING TO MULTI TASK.
>> NO WORRIES. I JUST WAITED TO ASK MY QUESTION TILL SHE LEFT.
[LAUGHTER] IF WE CAN SCAN OUT.
GO DOWN JUST A LITTLE BIT, STEPHANIE, PLEASE.
WE'RE GOING TO GET THE COLA, THE TMRS, 70% COLA.
ON THE PAY STUDY, WHAT I'M SEEING IN THE FIRST COLUMN, NO STREET MAINTENANCE.
THAT HAS BEEN ELIMINATED [OVERLAPPING].
>> WHAT WAS THAT AGAIN? PLEASE EXPLAIN THAT TO ME. WHAT WAS THE PAY STUDY?
>> THE PAY STUDY WAS, WE HAD PAID A CONSULTANT TO ANALYZE ALL OF OUR CIVILIAN POSITIONS AND DETERMINE HOW WE WERE PAYING VERSUS OTHER SIMILAR CITIES AND WHAT OUR CURRENT MARKET IS PAYING FOR SIMILAR TYPE JOBS.
THEN THEY HAD PUT FORTH A RECOMMENDATION ON WHAT THE STARTING WAGE SHOULD BE IN OUR POSITIONS.
IN ORDER TO GET OUR CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES ALIGNED WITH WHAT THAT PAY STUDY IS RECOMMENDING THAT THE CHANGES WE NEED TO MAKE TO BE COMPETITIVE IN THE MARKET, IT WAS GOING TO COST 2.2 MILLION.
>> THAT WOULD HAVE GONE DIRECTLY TO THE EMPLOYEES?
>> TO THE CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES. YES, SIR.
>> AS I CONTINUE DOWN, THEN IT SAYS THAT WE'VE GOT A CIVILIAN COLA OF 1.2, POLICE AT 3%, FIRE 810,000.
THAT IS THE AMOUNT IF WE DON'T DO THE STREET FEE, CORRECT?
>> YES. THAT'S HOW MUCH WE CAN AFFORD TO DO FOR EACH OF THOSE AREAS.
>> AT WHAT POINT CAN WE MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO ELIMINATE SOME CIP PROJECTS TO HELP FACILITATE THE RAISES.
THE RAISES ARE VERY IMPORTANT TO ME.
FOR INSTANCE, DO WE HAVE TO DO THE CITY HALL DEMO THIS YEAR?
>> VERY GOOD QUESTION. OUR CIP IS REALLY FUNDED OUT OF ONE TIME FUNDING, AND SO WE CAN'T TAKE IT OUT OF CAPITAL AND PUT IT TOWARDS RAISES BECAUSE RAISES ARE ONGOING.
WE WOULD NEED SOME AN ONGOING EXPENDITURE DECREASE OR AN ONGOING ADDITIONAL REVENUE TO DO RAISES FOR EMPLOYEES.
>> BUT CAN THOSE CIP FUNDS GO, FOR INSTANCE, FINISHING OUT THE SPACE HERE, THE 1.2, THE 15 THERE, OR THE SANTA FE PAVILION, FOR INSTANCE, FOR 500,000.
CAN YOU TAKE THE 500,000 AND GIVE IT TO SENIOR CITIZENS?
>> THAT 500,000 IS COMING FROM HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAXES, SO IT CAN ONLY BE USED ON TOURISM-TYPE EFFORTS, SO IT HAS TO STAY WITHIN OUR CIVIC CENTER AREA.
>> ONE LAST QUESTION AND GOING BACK TO THE GOLF BALL, GUYS.
>> IT'S ONLY $3. ABOUT $3 I DON'T KNOW. I HADN'T EVEN LOOKED.
BUT WHAT IF WE BECAME 100% COST RECOVERY IN ALL THINGS? CAN WE LOOK AT THAT? WHERE WOULD THOSE FUNDS GO, WOULD THAT GO TO SENIOR CITIZENS? WOULD THAT GO TO RAISES FOR STAFF? IF WE WERE 100% COST RECOVERY ACROSS THE BOARD.
>> THERE ARE CERTAIN AREAS IN OUR GENERAL FUND THAT WE CAN BE 100% COST RECOVERY, BUT THERE'S A LOT OF AREAS THAT WE CANNOT BE 100% COST RECOVERY? FOR INSTANCE, POLICE AND FIRE, THEY DON'T HAVE A WAY TO GENERATE REVENUE.
OBVIOUSLY, THOSE CAN'T BE FULL COST RECOVERY.
EVEN PARKS IS A GREAT EXAMPLE.
WE CANNOT COLLECT ENOUGH SWIMMING POOL REVENUE? WE WOULD HAVE TO MAKE OUR SWIMMING POOL FEES SO EXPENSIVE, NO ONE WOULD EVER GO TO OUR SWIMMING POOLS TO TRULY FULLY COST RECOVER WHAT WE ARE SPENDING ON OUR SWIMMING POOLS.
[02:15:03]
THESE ARE THE DECISIONS THAT COUNCILS HAVE TO MAKE.DO YOU WANT US TO CONTINUE PROVIDING CERTAIN SERVICES, KNOWING THAT THEY CAN'T BE FULL COST RECOVERY.
GOLF IS ONE OF OUR AREAS THAT WE ARE VERY CLOSE TO COST RECOVERY.
MOST OF OUR BUILDING SAFETY IS PRETTY MUCH 100% AT FULL COST RECOVERY.
THERE'S NOT MANY DEPARTMENTS THAT ARE AT FULL COST RECOVERY. EVEN TRANSIT.
TRANSIT USED TO BE CLOSER, NOT AT FULL COST RECOVERY, BUT THEY HAD MORE GRANT REVENUE COMING IN.
THAT GRANT REVENUE IS BEING CUT OUT.
FOR US TO CONTINUE PROVIDING TRANSIT SERVICES, WE HAVE TO PAY MORE IN SALES TAX AND OR PROPERTY TAX DOLLARS TO SUPPORT IT.
HONESTLY, IN OUR GENERAL FUND, THERE'S NOT A WHOLE LOT OF AREAS THAT ARE FULL COST RECOVERY.
>> CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT THOSE WOULD BE JUST FOR INSTANCE.
WE HAVE TRIED TO GET AS CLOSE AS WE CAN WITH OUR ZOO OPERATIONS.
TENNIS CENTER, I THINK, IS IT FULL COST RECOVERY. I'M LOOKING AROUND-
>> I THINK IT'S 88. IT'S CLOSE.
IT'S CLOSE. BUILDING SAFETIES IS FULL COST RECOVERY.
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH WAS PROPOSED TO GET VERY CLOSE TO FULL COST RECOVERY.
HOWEVER, BASED ON THE CONVERSATION LAST WEEK, WE HAVE PROPOSED ELIMINATING THE VECTOR CONTROL FEE.
THAT WAS PART OF THE SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST.
BUT IF COUNSEL WANTS TO PUT THAT BACK IN, THAT WOULD HELP PUT ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH AT FULL COST RECOVERY.
I'M TRYING TO THINK. LET ME LOOK AT OUR GENERAL FUND DEPARTMENTS. THAT'S ABOUT IT-.
>> I DON'T - >> THERE'S NOT A WHOLE A LOT HOME.
CIVIC CENTER, ALTHOUGH USE OF HOT TAX, IS NOWHERE CLOSE TO FULL COST RECOVERY.
IT'S ABOUT A TWO MILLION DOLLAR PLUS GAP I GUESS. >> IT'S ABOUT TWO MILLION.
>> TWO MILLION DOLLARS IS LIKE HALF OF THEIR OPERATING EXPENSE BUDGET, I THINK OR SOMEWHERE IN THE BALLPARK.
THERE'S A LARGE GAP ON THAT, BUT HOT TAX IS NOT MONEY THAT WE COULD USE FOR ANYTHING ELSE.
>> THAT CLARIFIES IT. I'M JUST SITTING HERE THINKING IF WE DON'T NEED TO DO A COUPLE OF THESE CIP PROJECTS, IT WOULD HELP I THINK THE MOST CRITICAL THING TO ME IS IS TAKING CARE OF STAFF, GETTING FOLKS PAID.
IF WE CAN PUSH SOME OF THESE CAPEX PROJECTS OR WHAT I CALL CAPEX, CIP PROJECTS DOWN A LITTLE BIT.
BUT IF WE CAN, I UNDERSTAND THAT.
BUT I DO NOT LIKE THAT THE PAY STUDY FOR THE EMPLOYEES HAS BEEN REMOVED.
THERE NEEDS TO BE SOMETHING THERE.
THAT WAS MY THINKING IS, HOW DO WE GET THAT? THEN HOW DO WE GET SOME MONEY TO THE SENIOR CITIZENS.
ANYWAYS, AND WHEN DO WE ASK THOSE QUESTIONS AS YOU GUYS, CAN WE BRING THAT BACK AND SAY, HEY, CAN WE MANIPULATE THAT?
>> I THINK TODAY IS A GREAT TIME TO START TALKING ABOUT THAT.
>> I'D ASK YOU, LIKE, HOW MUCH DO YOU HAVE LEFT, LAURA THAT YOU WANT TO STEER ON BEFORE WE JUST ORGANICALLY LET THE CONVERSATION GO BACK AND FORTH.
>> ALL I'LL SAY IS I'LL JUST BRIEFLY TOUCH ON THE LAST TWO COLUMNS IN THAT CHART THERE.
THESE WOULD BE IF WE DID, STEPHANIE, GO BACK TO WHERE YOU WERE.
YOU WERE ON THE RIGHT SPOT. THERE YOU GO.
THE SECOND TO LAST COLUMN IS IF WE DID A QUARTER OF THE STREET DEPARTMENT BEING SUPPORTED BY A MAINTENANCE FEE.
WE COULD INCREASE CIVILIAN RAISES UP TO 3%.
WE COULD INCREASE POLICE UP TO A 4% RAISE AND FIRE UP TO A 3% RAISE, WE COULD KEEP A LITTLE BIT OF THE IT CHARGES AND PUT 800,000 TOWARDS POLICE AND FIRE OVERTIME.
PRETTY MUCH EVERYTHING ELSE IS THE SAME TO IMPLEMENT HALF OF A STREET MAINTENANCE FEE TO SUPPORT THE STREET OPERATIONS.
WE COULD HAVE THE FULL 4% RAISE FOR CIVILIANS.
YOU COULD HAVE PART OF THAT GOING INTO A PAY STUDY, PART OF IT TO RAISES.
WE COULD CERTAINLY LOOK AT SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
THAT WOULD KEEP YOUR POLICE AT THE ORIGINAL 5% RAISE, YOUR FIRE AT THE ORIGINAL 4% RAISE.
IT WOULD PUT THE FULL MILLION DOLLAR BACK INTO YOUR POLICE AND FIRE OVERTIME.
IT WOULD ALLOW ALL THOSE SUPPLEMENTAL REQUESTS TO BE INCLUDED.
IF COUNSEL SAYS, HEY, WE DON'T WANT THE SUPPLEMENTAL, WE WANT TO PUT THE PAY STUDY IN OR WE WANT, FIRE TO HAVE THIS RAISE AND PLEASE TO HAVE THIS RATE.
IF YOU'LL TELL IF WE CAN GET SOME DIRECTION FROM YOU GUYS, THESE ARE JUST SOME OPTIONS BASED ON SOME OF THE FEEDBACK WE HEARD FROM LAST WEEK.
>> I THINK THAT IT WOULD BE MY OPINION THAT WE COMPLETELY REMOVE A QUARTER STREET MAINTENANCE, A HALF A STREET MAINTENANCE.
LET'S GET THAT OFF THE TABLE BECAUSE THERE IS NO APPETITE FOR THAT AT ALL, AS THAT'S BEEN FURTHER FLESHED OUT, AND THEN WE GO AND WE START WORKING DILIGENTLY ON THE NO STREET MAINTENANCE PIECE, AND THEN WE START TRYING TO WHITTLE DOWN AND GET SOME MONEY FOR THE PAY STUDY AND LOOK AT STAFF, AND IF THIS IS THE POSITION WE'RE IN.
WE ARE NOTHING WITHOUT THE STAFF.
WE ARE JUST BUILDINGS AND EQUIPMENT THAT IS NOT OPERATING ITSELF.
[02:20:01]
LET'S GET THIS CLEARED UP AND GET THE QUARTER OFF AND THE HALF OFF, AND THEN WORK WITH THAT ONE COLUMN AND MOVE FORWARD.>> I HEAR THE SAME SENTIMENT ON THE RIGHT SIDE.
I GUESS I WOULD GO TO COUNCILMAN SIMPSON, SEE IF ARE YOU GOOD MOVING FORWARD WITH THAT.
>> I THINK SO. I THINK COUNCILMAN REED BRINGS UP A GOOD POINT.
THIS HAS COME UP. WE'RE FLESHING IT OUT TODAY.
I THINK GOING WITH THAT AND SEEING WHERE WE CAN LAND TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT.
I'D LIKE TO DO JUST A QUICK BOUNCE ACROSS THE COUNCIL TO SEE MAYBE LIKE WHAT ARE YOUR MOST COMFORTABLE AREAS.
I'M ASKING FOR NOT A FULL RECOMMENDATION OR A DECISION, BUT WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO DRIVE TOWARDS, GIVE ME YOUR $10 MILLION WORTH OF ASKS HERE.
>> I THINK I DON'T HAVE $10 MILLION WORTH OF ASK IF WE GOT TO SAVE 15 MILLION.
BUT I AGREE SOME FORM OF RAISE AND BECAUSE I LIKE THE PROPOSAL THAT STAFF HAS BROUGHT BACK TO US AND BEING ABLE TO DO THAT.
I THINK LOOKING AT, WHAT MIGHT BE AGAIN, AN OPTION OR TWO ON THE RAISES, IF YOU JUST FEEL LIKE STICKING TO THIS 2%, 3%, WHATEVER IT MAY BE.
BUT I DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE ANY GREAT RECOMMENDATIONS OR CHANGES OUT OF WHAT THEY PROPOSE HERE.
THIS IS A BALANCED BUDGET, YOU MIGHT GET SHIFT A FEW THINGS AROUND, BUT I THINK THE FAIR THING ABOUT THIS, NUMBER 1, WE'VE TAKEN CARE OF THE COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT ON THE RETIREES, WHICH I THINK IS NOT ONLY BENEFICIAL TO THEM.
ANY OF THEM ARE SENIORS, BUT ALSO BENEFICIAL TO RECRUITING PEOPLE THAT ARE COMING TO BE ABLE TO RECRUIT.
I LIKE THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION ON BEING ABLE TO KEEP THAT IN PLAY.
THE ONLY ONE GOING BACK TO THE POSITIONS, AND I DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEMS WITH THE POSITIONS AND THAT TYPE OF THING, BUT I DO HAVE TWO QUESTIONS.
ONE IS, SO THE PID ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT.
I THOUGHT THAT WAS PAID BY PIDS.
>> IT WOULD TAKE A COUPLE OF YEARS, BUT IT WOULD EVENTUALLY BE, YES, SIR.
>> RIGHT NOW, WE DON'T HAVE ANY WAY TO GENERATE REVENUE OUT OF THAT. IT WOULD EVENTUALLY.
>> IT WOULD TAKE A COUPLE OF YEARS, YES, SIR.
>> IT'S NOT A $10 MILLION REQUEST, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF ANY OTHER COUNCIL MEMBER HAS GOT SOME REAL PAIN WHEN THEY LOOK AT THIS LIST OF POSITIONS THAT ARE PROPOSED THAT WE WON'T FEEL.
I DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY PAIN EXCEPT IN ONE AREA, AND THAT'S ANIMAL MANAGEMENT.
WE HAVE WE CONTINUE TO HAVE SERIOUS PROBLEMS WITH ANIMAL MANAGEMENT, ANIMALS IN OUR COMMUNITY, THOSE TYPES OF THINGS HAVE A LOT OF TURNOVER.
IF THERE IS A WAY THAT WE COULD BEEF UP OUR ANIMAL MANAGEMENT STAFF TO BE ABLE TO BETTER HANDLE THE PROBLEMS. I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH THAT WOULD COST US IN THE END.
I DON'T KNOW HOW THEIR COUNCIL MEMBERS FEEL, BUT, ANIMAL MANAGEMENT, I'M IMAGINING THAT'S PROBABLY A COUPLE $100,000, NOT LARGE, BUT THE POSITIONS THAT ARE ON THAT LIST, I WOULD SAY THAT'S ONE THAT IF WE COULD FIND A WAY TO FUND IT, I THINK IT'S MONEY THAT WE NEED TO SPEND AND INVEST, BECAUSE IT IS A PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUE.
>> YOU GOT ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANT TO ADD FOR WE JUST-
>> AGAIN, I WANT TO REITERATE THAT WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING ON THE PAY STUDY IN A 2.6% UNEMPLOYMENT CITY.
WE HAVE A LOT OF HEADWINDS COMING.
WE'RE GOING TO LOSE FOLKS, IF WE DON'T MAKE ADJUSTMENTS.
THAT'S GOING TO BE REALLY CHALLENGING.
THEN ALSO, I THINK THE CLA FOR THE CIVILIANS SHOULD ALSO BE INCLUDED.
EXCUSE ME, SO THE CLA MERIT CIVILIANS, THAT'S A 2%.
>> IT WOULD BE REDUCED DOWN TO 2%, YES, SIR.
>> REALLY, THE ONLY ONE I HAVE ANY HEARTBURN ABOUT IS WE'VE GOT TO ADJUST THE SALARIES, OR WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SOME REAL HEADS AND LOSE CONSTITUTIONAL KNOWLEDGE.
>> I HOPE I CAN HELP YOU. COUNCILMAN TIPS.
>> I THINK I AGREE WITH THE SENTIMENT MOVING FORWARD.
I THINK THE TMRS IS BODILY IMPORTANT.
I THINK WE CAPTURE THAT FOR SURE.
THE RAISES FOR POLICE, FIRE, AND THE ORGANIZATION.
I THINK THAT WE CAN'T LEAVE THOSE GUYS BEHIND.
I KNOW IT'S MAYBE A DIFFERENT TOPIC, BUT I WANT TO MOVE AWAY FROM CLA AND JUST GO TO A MERIT.
WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT UP HERE, BUT I THINK THAT'S A BETTER MOVE FORWARD.
I DON'T DISAGREE WITH COUNCILMAN SIMPSON ON THE ANIMAL MANAGEMENT.
I KNOW THAT'S A BIG ISSUE, AND IT IS A PART OF PUBLIC SAFETY.
IF WE CAN FIND THE MONEY FOR THOSE GUYS, I THINK IT WOULD BE GREAT.
I THINK MY OPINION ON THE PAY STUDY, DON'T DISAGREE ON THE NEED TO MAYBE IMPLEMENT BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO WASTE THE TIME, BUT MAYBE TIMING.
I DON'T KNOW THAT WE CAN CAPTURE IT THIS YEAR, PENDING ON THE BUDGET. BUT THAT'S WHERE I'M AT.
>> BUT I THINK I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING THAT'S BEEN SET UP HERE.
I THINK THOUGH THE PAY STUDY, AT THIS POINT, FOR A LOT OF OUR EMPLOYEES,
[02:25:02]
MAY BE MORE IMPORTANT, GETTING THEM TO WHERE THEY NEED TO BE.THEN LOOKING AT THE MERIT INCREASES AS OPPOSED TO THE COLA.
I LIKE THAT IDEA, BUT THAT ALSO GETS THOSE POSITIONS UP TO WHERE THEY TEND TO BE OR SHOULD BE.
THEN WE CAN WORK FROM THERE AT A LATER DATE.
BUT SAME WITH WHAT LESS HAD TO SAY THAT ANIMALS MANAGEMENT THAT WE HAVE A PROBLEM OVER THERE AS FAR AS STAFFING, AND IT'D BE GOOD THAT WE COULD IF WE'RE ABLE TO DO IT, THAT WE LOOK AT THAT.
>> ONE LAST QUESTION. ONE LAST STATEMENT.
I DO THINK WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT SOME MONEY FOR THE SENIOR CITIZENS.
IF WE'RE TOTALLY ZEROED ON THAT.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE, BUT I WOULD TAKE STAFF'S GUIDANCE ON GIVE YOUR OPINION ON THAT?
>> WOULD YOU BE TRYING TO DRIVE THAT TO YOUR PARKS AND REC OR TO YOUR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OR HOW WOULD YOU TRY TO DISTRIBUTE THAT?
>> I DON'T KNOW. I WOULD NEED STAFF'S HELP ON THAT.
>> WE HAVE A SENIOR SERVICES AREA INSIDE OUR PARKS AND REC DEPARTMENT.
WE COULD POTENTIALLY LOOK AT FUNDING A LITTLE BIT MORE IN THERE.
MAYBE IF YOU HAD AN IDEA OF HOW YOU WANTED TO.
>> BUT ONE THING I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IS BECAUSE, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IN PARKS AND RECREATION, THE LIBRARY, EVEN THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT.
THERE ARE PROGRAMS THAT WE ALREADY INVEST IN AND PROVIDE THOSE THAT ARE SENIOR FOCUSED.
>> AS WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS, I JUST WHAT I'D LIKE TO SEE IS, WHAT ARE WE ALREADY DOING? WHAT ARE WE ALREADY INVESTING IN SENIORS, A LIST OF THAT ACROSS THE DEPARTMENTS BECAUSE ALSO THERE MAY BE A NEED FOR A LITTLE BIT OF EDUCATION AWARENESS ON THOSE BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S SOME THAT THINK THAT THE CITY IS NOT INVESTING IN THAT.
WE ARE. MAYBE WE DO NEED TO INVEST MORE.
I GUESS THE QUESTION WOULD BE, WHERE WOULD WE INVEST THAT? IF WE COULD GET THAT.
ONE QUESTION I DO HAVE JUST OF STAFF, AND I KNOW THIS IS OFF THE CUFF, BUT IF WE'RE SAYING, WE WANT TO PAY THE PAY STUDY.
THAT'S $2.2 MILLION THAT WE'RE GOING TO PUT BACK IN UNDER THIS NO STREET MAINTENANCE BECAUSE WE SEEM TO HAVE LANDED ON.
WE MAY NEED TO STUDY IT. WHERE ARE WE GOING TO GET THE 2.2?
>> WE WOULD NOT RECOMMEND IMPLEMENTING THE PAY STUDY.
>> IF WE DO IMPLEMENT IT, AND I THINK THE QUESTION IS, AND WE THINK IT'S IMPORTANT, WHICH I DON'T ARGUE WITH THAT, YOU KNOW, WHERE DO WE FIND THE MONEY IN THE BUDGET TODAY?
>> I THINK IT'S A GREAT QUESTION, BUT I WOULD LOVE TO BE ABLE TO MAYBE TIGHTEN THAT UP A LITTLE BIT ON WHAT WE'RE ACTUALLY TRYING TO FIND.
MR. PATH, I THINK IF YOU TOOK THAT 2.2 OVERALL PAY STUDY, WHICH FROM MY OBSERVATION, IT LOOKS MORE LIKE A RANGE.
IT GIVES YOU A HIGH AND A LOW.
IT TELLS YOU WHERE IT'S SIGNIFICANT.
WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE FOR YOU TO COME BACK AND SAY, LOOK, IF I HAD A MILLION DOLLARS TO REALLY SQUARE UP SOME SEVERELY UNDERPAID POSITIONS WHERE IT'S CHRONIC.
WE'RE CONSTANTLY LOSING OUR WELDER BECAUSE EVERYBODY IN TOWN PAYS $45 AN HOUR, WE ONLY PAY 20.
THOSE PARTICULARS, YOU COULD BRING BACK, SAY, UP TO A MILLION DOLLARS, COULD WE GO TO WORK TRYING TO FIND THAT MILLION DOLLARS VERSUS JUST THROWING OUT A 2.2, THIS IS WHAT THE METRIC CALCULATED.
>> THE PAY STUDY COULD BE IMPLEMENTED OVER SEVERAL YEARS, SO YOU COULD OVER THE NEXT TWO, THREE YEARS, STEP YOUR WAY INTO THAT, AND SO THAT IS AN OPTION THAT YOU COULD LOOK AT AS WELL.
>> I THINK IF COUNSEL WAS WILLING TO, WE COULD DRIVE TOWARDS SAY AN IMPLEMENTATION OF 500,000 OR 750, IN CURRENT BUDGET.
BUT ONE THING THAT I'M CURIOUS ABOUT CAN I FREE UP $3 MILLION HERE? KEEP IN MIND.
WHAT I HEARD WAS, COUNSEL, WE BUILT INTO THE BUDGET A ONE TIME $3,000,000 ALLOWANCE.
THAT EXPIRES AT THE END OF THIS YEAR.
UNLESS THAT'S A RE OCCURRING BUDGET, THEN IT WAS A ONE TIME BUDGET, I DON'T NEED TO DEDUCT IT.
I'M CONCERNED THAT YOU'RE ACTUALLY DEDUCTING IT YOU'RE SHOWING IT AS A DEDUCT ON THE CURRENT YEAR PROPOSED BUDGET.
>> THIS IS JUST EXPLAINING THE CHANGE FROM THE CURRENT YEAR BUDGET TO WHAT'S PROPOSED IN THE NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET.
>> THAT'S WHAT WE ASKED. WE ASKED FOR ALL THE LARGE CHANGES BOTH POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE, SO WE CAN SEE REVENUES VERSUS EXPENSES.
THAT WASN'T BUILT IN. IT WAS JUST A CHANGE.
ANY MONIES THAT WE HAVE THAT WE CAN IDENTIFY THAT WILL PULL OVER TO, SAY, A $10 MILLION ASK, IF WE GROUP ALL THIS TOGETHER,
[02:30:01]
AND WE NEED TO GO FIND $10 MILLION.WE DON'T HAVE TO GO AND FIND 13 MILLION.
YOU'RE NOT CALCULATING THE THREE MILLION AS A LOSS.
>> IT'S WAS IN THE CURRENT YEAR BUDGET.
IT IS NOT IN NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET.
>> IN THE CURRENT YEAR'S BUDGET AS A ONE TIME EXPENSE.
YOU DIDN'T DEDUCT IT IN THE NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET?
>> IT IS THAT LINE ITEM IS NOT IN NEXT YEAR.
>> THIS JUST EXPLAINS WHEN WE LOOK AT OUR EXPENSES AND WHERE THEY ARE, AND IF THEY'RE UP 15 OR THE BALANCE OF THAT, IT JUST SAYS, HERE'S WHERE THEY ARE.
HERE'S WHERE OUR INCREASE HAS OCCURRED COMPARED TO LAST YEAR'S BUDGET.
>> LET ME RUN A FEW THINGS. I APPRECIATE THAT.
HERE WOULD BE MY PRIORITIES JUST SO COUNSEL CAN HEAR THEM.
TWO MILLION TMRS GET TO THAT 70% AS A LAST HORA, 2% MERIT.
THAT'S A 1.2, SO IT'S A 2% RAISE FOR EVERYBODY WHO WORKS HARD THAT ENJOYS BEING HERE, AND THEN APD 2.2 FIRE 1.6 AND THE OT OF ONE MILLION, 500K FOR THE SENIORS WOULD PUSH ME UP TO, I THINK, 10.5.
>> I WOULD PROPOSE ONE THING THOUGH, AND MR. PATH, I'M DEFINITELY NOT TRYING TO READ INTO ANYTHING, BUT I DO WANT TO EXTRAPOLATE A LITTLE BIT OF SALES TAX IS A PROJECTION, AND SO WE CAN'T FULLY COUNT ON THE SALES TAX.
IF WE DON'T BRING IN 81, IT COMES IN AT 79, THEN WE'VE GOT TO WORK THIS, BUT IT COULD COME IN AT 84.
RATHER THAN TRYING TO GO IN AND SAY, HEY, INCREASE YOUR SALES TAX PROJECTION TO HELP US FIND SOME OF THESE.
WHAT IF WE LOOK AT THE WATER AND SEWER INTEREST AND THE DRAINAGE INTEREST OF SAY, 3 MILLION COMING BACK OVER JUST AS A ONE TIME.
THAT WE GO AHEAD AND PULL THAT MONEY BACK IN TO HELP WITH SOME OF THESE OTHER ISSUES THAT WE'RE SHOWING BECAUSE I'M LOOKING AT THE OVER UNDER TARGET RESERVES.
WE'RE LOOKING AT 2 MILLION THAT WE'RE UNDER OUR TARGET RESERVES, SO I'M JUST CURIOUS WHY IF WE CAN GO AHEAD AND CAPTURE INTEREST BECAUSE YOU'RE WANTING TO HOLD THAT 100%.
NOW I'M NOT SAYING EVERY YEAR YEAR AFTER YEAR, BUT KIND OF YOUR PHASE IN APPROACH IS A PHASE OUT APPROACH.
THAT WAY WE JUST DON'T HAVE A BOTTOM LINE ISSUE.
>> YOU SAID THE KEY WORD AS A ONE TIME, THAT'S WHERE IT FAILS BECAUSE YOU'D BE BASING YOUR PAY OFF OF A ONE TIME, SO A YEAR FROM NOW, YOU'LL BE IN THIS SITUATION BUT WORSE.
>> ALL I'M DOING IS SOLVING MY BOTTOM LINE.
I'M NOT APPLYING THAT TO MY PAY INCREASES.
STILL HAVE TO FIND THE 10.5 IN PERPETUITY.
>> YOU WOULD THEN HAVE TO THEN IDENTIFY CIP'S TO ATTACH THE INTEREST, AND THEN FREE UP OTHER ONGOING EXPENSES TO THEN ACCOUNT FOR THAT RAISES.
CIP WOULD JUST BE A CHANGE IN AND I WOULD DEFINITELY LOOK AT THE CIP, LIKE THE PAVILION COST, THE FINISH OUT HERE, SOME OF THOSE THINGS ARE NATURALLY GOING TO GO AWAY IN NOT ADDING THE AMARILLO PIECE AND DOING SOME OTHER THINGS, SO THE CIP THAT WAS PROPOSED AT 113 OR NO, I'M SORRY, WHAT'S THE TOTAL CIP?
>> IT WAS A LITTLE OVER 113 MILLION.
>> 113 MILLION. THAT'S NATURALLY GOING TO COME DOWN.
>> IF YOU'LL DIRECT US TO, RIGHT NOW, THE ONLY CHANGE THAT WE HAVE IS THAT THE MUNICIPAL COURT CIP OF 4.3 WOULD BE GOING AWAY.
AMARILLO DID NOT HAVE ANY CIP IN THERE.
>> WHAT WAS THE INTERIOR FINISH OUT OF CITY HALL?
>> IT'S FINISHING REMAINING BOND PROCEEDS AND INTEREST ON THE CITY HALL DEBT ISSUANCE.
WE JUST HAD NOT PLANNED ON DOING THAT ADDITIONAL FINISH OUT, AND SO WE WERE COMING BACK TO COUNCIL SAYING, HEY, WE HAVE SOME OF THIS REMAINING BOND PROCEEDS.
ARE YOU ALL GOOD WITH US USING IT TO DEMOLISH OLD CITY HALL AND FINISH OUT A LITTLE BIT MORE SPACE IN NEW CITY HALL?
>> THE FINISH OUT FOR NEW CITY HALL FOR THE AMARILLO ADDITIONAL, OR IT WASN'T? I MISUNDERSTOOD. WHAT WAS IT FOR?
>> IT WAS GOING TO BE FOR POTENTIALLY GROWTH OF OUR INTERNAL AUDIT DEPARTMENT.
IT WAS ALSO FOR IT AND FOR OUR OE AND I TEAM.
>> MR. PATH, DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING.
I COULD USE IN A FOLLOW UP TO MAKE IT REAL CLEAR FOR EVERYBODY.
I THINK IT'D BE GREAT TO SEE THOSE CIP REVISIONS AS REQUESTS ARE CHANGING.
>> IT'S ON THIS PAGE RIGHT HERE IN FRONT OF YOU, SO THE MUNICIPAL COURT CIP SUBTRACTING THE 4,300,788.
THAT'S THE ONLY RECOMMENDED CHANGE WE HAVE AT THIS POINT, AND COUNCIL DRUG SYSTEM.
>> WELL, THEN I GUESS WE PROBABLY NEED DIRECTION.
WHAT I'M HEARING IS IS THAT WE PULL BACK AWAY FROM THE PAVILION, WE PULL BACK AWAY FROM THE INTERIOR FINISH, THINGS LIKE THAT.
COUNSEL, WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO DIRECT?
[02:35:01]
BECAUSE WE HAD A WHOLE LIST OF CIP, AND I THINK WE'RE TRYING TO PRIORITIZE NOT JUST THE ONGOING FUNDS, BUT THE ONE TIME FUNDS AS WELL.AS A REMINDER, THE FINISH OUT ON THE PAVILION, IF YOU ALL DON'T WANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT, IT WILL HAVE TO REMAIN AS SOME SORT OF A CIVIC CENTER TYPE PROJECT BECAUSE IT'S HOT FUNDS.
WE'RE JUST TALKING GENERAL FUND RIGHT NOW, CORRECT?
>> YES, WE'VE BEEN KIND OF JUMPING BACK AND FORTH A LITTLE BIT.
>> WE SHOULD CONTINUE WITH THE SANTA FE FINISH OUT, EVEN THOUGH WHAT HAPPENS IF WE DON'T DO THAT, IT GOES BACK INTO THE HOT FUNDS? IT HAS TO STAY FOR THE CIVIC CENTER.
>> IT COULD BE USED FOR ANOTHER CIVIC PROJECT.
>> THE CONVENTION AND VISITORS BUREAU COULD BE USED FOR NUMBER OF OTHER THINGS.
>> BUT IT CAN'T COME OVER INTO THIS.
>> I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THOUGH, IN THE OVERALL, I THINK COUNSEL NEEDS TO CONTINUE TO DIRECT A LOT OF THOSE PRIORITIES, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE'RE CIVIC CENTER RELATED, SO IF WE CAN GO GET AN ROI, ON THAT 1.2 AT THE SANTA FE BUILDING.
GREAT. BUT IF WE'RE GOING TO GO SPEND THAT ONE MILLION PLUS, AND WE DON'T HAVE THE POSITION IN PLACE, AND WE'RE NOT PRELEASED.
LET'S GET AN LOI AND SOME PRE LEASES READY TO GO BEFORE WE GO AND IMPLEMENT THAT, SO I WOULD LOVE TO PULL BACK AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE ON ALL OF THOSE AND STILL TRY TO DIG THROUGH AND SEE, DO WE FIND ANY MONIES THAT ARE NOW AVAILABLE RESERVES AS WE WORK INTO THIS NEXT YEAR BECAUSE ONCE AGAIN, WE TOOK OUR RESERVE AMOUNTS, AND WE LOWERED THOSE IN OUR FINANCIAL POLICY, SO THOSE RESERVES WILL BE AVAILABLE.
>> SINCE WE DID SUCH A LARGE PAY INCREASE IN THE CURRENT YEAR OVER YEAR FOR OUR PUBLIC SAFETY AREAS, WE WERE GOING TO HAVE TO BUILD UP OUR RESERVES BECAUSE WE DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH BASED ON THAT ADDITIONAL PAY INCREASE, AND SO BY LOWERING IT ON THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE FINANCIAL POLICY, WE'RE GOING TO BE HITTING OUR TARGET RESERVES.
WE WOULDN'T HAD TO HAVE PUT ADDITIONAL MONEY INTO RESERVES.
>> I'M JUST KEEPING IT TOTALLY SEPARATE IN MY MIND BECAUSE I'VE GOT ONE TIME RESERVE SPINS, THE CIP MONIES, SO THAT'S ANYTHING OVER ANY EXCESS OVER THE MINIMUM, AND THEN WE'VE LOWERED THAT MINIMUM DOWN.
YOU'RE SAYING YOU'RE JUST NOT HITTING THAT TARGET BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT ONGOING EXPENDITURES WITH PAY RAISES?
>> NO,SO THE TARGET RESERVES WE WERE TRYING TO HIT AT THIS POINT LAST YEAR WAS ABOUT 55 MILLION.
THE TARGET RESERVES WE'RE TRYING TO HIT NOW IN THE NEW YEAR WITH THE REVISIONS, WERE AT ABOUT A LITTLE OVER 52 MILLION.
THAT $2 MILLION DIFFERENCE IS BUILT INTO YOUR BUDGET ALREADY.
IT'S NOT ADDITIONAL SAVINGS ABOVE AND BEYOND.
IF THERE'S SOMETHING YOU WANT US TO CHANGE IN YOUR PROPOSED BUDGET, WE CAN DO THAT BY ALL MEANS.
>> BUT THOSE BUILT INS ARE ONE TIME.
>> A PAUSE FOR COUNSEL REAL QUICK AND TAKE ANY OTHER DIRECTION.
>> I'M GOOD. I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY THAT I THINK THAT THE PERCENTAGE OF A BIGGER NUMBER IS A BIGGER NUMBER.
I THINK WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE RESERVES, AND THAT'S WHERE WE DIDN'T CAPTURE THAT ONE TIME SWEEP, EVEN THOUGH THE POLICY CHANGED, AND WE WOULD THINK THAT THAT'D BE A BIG CHUNK WE COULD SWEEP OVER.
THAT'S CORRECT. NOW IT'S BIGGER.
>> I REALLY WOULD NOT BE IN FAVOR OF USING THAT INTEREST FROM WATER AND SEWER AND DRAINAGE.
I THINK IT JUST NEEDS TO SAY WHERE IT IS, NOT ONLY BECAUSE TO YOUR POINT, IT'S NOT CONSISTENT REVENUE, BUT IT'S A ONE TIME FIX THAT DOESN'T SOLVE OUR LONG TERM PROBLEMS, AND IT GIVES US A FALSE SENSE OF SECURITY, SO I WOULD JUST SAY, LET'S RIP THE BAND AID OFF, PLUS WE HAVE NEEDS THAT ARE IN THAT AREA.
I AGREE. IF I HAD TO PUSH ANYTHING, I WOULD SAY, AND THEN I WANT TO ASK STAFF A QUESTION JUST A SECOND.
BUT AS MUCH AS WE CAN INVEST INTO OUR EMPLOYEES, I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO BE FOCUSED ON.
I WOULD JUST ASK, WHATEVER WE'RE GOING TO DO FOR THE SENIORS, I'D REALLY LIKE TO SEE THAT BEFORE WE NECESSARILY INVEST IN IT IN THIS BUDGET.
I'D ALSO LIKE TO SEE WHAT WE'RE DOING.
AGAIN, JUST LIKE WE WANT TO LOOK AT A STREET MAINTENANCE FEE, WHERE WE DON'T REALLY HAVE A PLAN.
I'D JUST LIKE TO SEE WHAT ARE WE PLANNING ON DOING WHATEVER AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT IS.
BECAUSE RIGHT NOW, WE CAN PUSH AS MUCH MONEY AS WE CAN TO OUR EMPLOYEES AND INVESTING THEM, I THINK THAT WOULD BE THE PRIORITY FOR THIS YEAR FOR ME, AND IF WE WANTED TO SEE SOMETHING ELSE OR MAYBE THERE'S SOMETHING THAT COULD COME TO US BEFORE WE FINALIZE THE BUDGET ON, WHAT ARE WE GOING TO INVEST IF IT IS THE SENIOR SPACE, AND WHY IS THAT THE TOP PRIORITY, AND WHY DO WE NEED TO DO IT AND HOW WELL IT'S GOING TO BENEFIT THE COMMUNITY? MY QUESTION FOR, I GUESS, GRAYSON AND LAURA, SO AS YOU LOOK THROUGH THIS, WHAT CAUSES YOU THE BIGGEST CONCERN OF THE EXPENSES THAT WE'RE CUTTING OUT? WHAT DO YOU SAY, BOY, IF I DID NOT HAVE TO CUT IT OUT,
[02:40:01]
I'D REALLY LIKE TO NOT TO OR SOMETHING THAT, CAUSES YOU CONCERN THAT MAYBE WE MISSED OUT ON OR SOMETHING THAT WE HAVEN'T TALKED ABOUT YET?>> WHAT DO YOU WANT TO STAB AT IT OR?
>> I THINK, A PAY STUDY IS ALWAYS AN IMPORTANT TOOL TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN COMPETE WITH THE MARKET.
HOWEVER, I DO FEEL LIKE RAISES FOR CIVILIANS, IN MY OPINION, IS PROBABLY A HIGHER PRIORITY JUST TO ENSURE THAT WE CAN SOMEWHAT KEEP UP WITH THE GROWING COST ASSOCIATED WITH JUST LIVING.
I THINK THAT WHAT WE HAVE PROPOSED HERE IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN ALL LIVE WITH.
WE'VE TALKED A LOT ABOUT IT AS A CITY MANAGEMENT TEAM AND THINK THAT WE'RE PROBABLY COMFORTABLE ON THIS.
WE UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S CONSTRAINTS, AND WE DON'T OF COURSE, WE ALL WOULD LOVE TO DO AS MUCH AS WE CAN FOR EVERYONE, BUT I THINK THAT THIS IS OUR BEST IDEAS GIVEN THE CONSTRAINTS OF WHAT OUR BUDGET FUNDS.
I DO HAVE CONCERNS ON IF WE WANT TO TRY TO PUT SOME OF THESE OPTIONS BACK IN AND NOT DO THE STREET MAINTENANCE FEE WE NEED DIRECTION ON BECAUSE HONESTLY, IT'S MOST LIKELY GOING TO HAVE TO COME OUT OF RAISES, BECAUSE THOSE ARE THE BIGGEST NUMBERS THAT WE'RE WORKING WITH THAT ARE ONGOING EXPENSES, AND SO WE WOULD NEED SOME DIRECTION ON IF WE WANTED TO DO ONGOING MONEY FOR SENIORS OR FOR OVERTIME OR FOR PAY STUDY, WE WOULD NEED TO KNOW WHICH OF THE RAISES YOU WANTED THAT TO COME OUT OF BECAUSE THOSE ARE OUR BIGGEST NEW ONGOING COSTS THAT WE WOULD HAVE IN THE BUDGET.
>> YEAH, WE'RE EVENTUALLY GOING TO NEED TO ADDRESS THE POSITIONS THAT ARE BELOW MARKET.
THAT'S GOING TO NEED TO COME AT SOME POINT AS MY RECOMMENDATION, WHETHER IT'S THIS YEAR, NEXT YEAR, FOLLOWING YEAR.
WE HAVE POSITIONS THAT ARE CLEARLY BELOW MARKET, AND THOSE ARE MY ONES THAT I'M MOST AT RISK OF LOSING TO THE MARKET ITSELF, SO THAT'S SOMETHING WE WILL NEED TO ADDRESS.
BUT AGAIN, IN ORDER TO KEEP THIS BUDGET BALANCE, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING THAT WE WILL HAVE TO JUST GO WITHOUT THIS YEAR.
>> I THINK THE MAYOR, WHEN HE WAS DOING HIS PROPOSAL, ONE THING I THINK HE WAS PROPOSING, IF I WRITE IS PUTTING THE MILLION DOLLARS BACK IN FOR THE OVERTIME?
>> I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS OVERTIME IS A TRICKY THING.
BUT TO PUT THAT MILLION DOLLARS BACK IN, WE'VE GOT TO TAKE IT FROM RAISES FOR SOMEWHERE ELSE, BUT IT IS A TRICKY THING OF, WE KNOW WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THE OVERTIME, BUT WE DON'T BUDGET IT, BUT OKAY, WE'RE GOING TO GET IT.
WE ARE TAKING THAT'S A REAL COST THAT WE KNOW THAT WE'RE GOING TO ENCOUNTER THAT WE ARE TAKEN OUT OF THE BUDGET.
I KNOW THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU'RE TRYING YOU HAVE TOUGH DECISIONS TO MAKE AND YOU'RE HAVING TO BECAUSE YOU PUT TOGETHER A BUDGET TAKE A LITTLE BIT OF RISK ON SOME AREAS THAT WE'RE JUST GOING TO HAVE TO MANAGE IF SOMETHING CHANGES OR WE WALK THROUGH THAT.
>> YEAH, I WOULD AGREE ON THE OVERTIME.
I THINK IT'S A GREAT PLANNING.
BUT WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT REALLY CUTTING AND LOOKING AT WHAT WE CAN GIVE UP, AND I THINK WE'RE GOING TO EXPERIENCE THAT OVERTIME ANYWAY, AND IF WE HAVE THOSE DIFFERENT REVENUES, WE'RE PROPOSING CONSERVATIVE, THAT IF THAT DOESN'T GIVE YOU A TON OF HEARTBURN, LAURA IF THAT'S GONE, WE'VE GOT THAT EXTRA MILLION FOR SALARY INCREASES AND THAT KIND OF THING.
WE'RE MORE THAN LIKELY WE CAN MAKE UP THAT OVERTIME.
WE'RE GOING TO FIND THAT THE ONE MILLIONS AT GREAT, BUT THAT'S IF WE HAVE ENOUGH.
>> ESSENTIALLY WHAT IT WOULD BE DOING IS REDUCING YOUR FUTURE ONE TIME CAPITAL SPENDING THAT YOU WOULD HAVE AVAILABLE.
>> BECAUSE WE KNOW OUR DEPARTMENTS IN REALITY, ARE GOING TO UNDERSPEND THEIR BUDGETS, EXCEPT FOR POTENTIALLY OUR PUBLIC SAFETY AREAS, AND SO THOSE DEPARTMENTS HAVE TO OFFSET WHAT PUBLIC SAFETY IS SPENDING.
IF WE HELP MAKE PUBLIC SAFETY MORE WHOLE, THAT ALLOWS MORE ONE TIME SAVINGS AT THE END OF THE YEAR FROM THE OTHER DEPARTMENTS TO GO TOWARDS CAPITAL.
MY OPINION IS I THINK WE ALL FEEL THAT IT IS MORE IMPORTANT TO TRY TO PUT THAT MONEY TOWARDS RAISES, AND JUST SQUEEZE THE CAPITAL A LITTLE BIT MORE IN THE FUTURE.
>> GREAT. DON, I HAD A QUESTION, FOLLOW UP ON THAT.
LAST YEAR IN THE BUDGET, WE SAW OVERTIME WAS EXCEEDED THE ALLOWANCE.
IS THAT TYPICALLY OR IS THAT HOW WE SEE IT, MAYOR, THAT EVERY YEAR THAT OVERTIME IS A LITTLE HIGH.
HISTORICALLY, IT CONTINUES TO CREEP UP RIGHT.
>> I ALWAYS THOUGHT IT BALANCED WITH UNFILLED POSITIONS.
LIKE I THOUGHT WE OF PUBLIC SAFETY.
>> UNFILLED POSITIONS AND OTHER DEPARTMENTS.
>> IN OTHER DEPARTMENTS. PUBLIC SAFETY SPENDS WHAT THEY NEED TO DO THEIR JOB BASED ON RESPONSIVENESS, LIKE, NOT EXACTLY A THROTTLE THAT THEY CAN ADJUST, BUT JUST DEPENDS ON WHAT'S TAKING PLACE.
[02:45:02]
>> WE'RE SETTING A CAP, WHAT WE EXPECT IN THE BUDGET, BUT TYPICALLY IT GOES OVER IN THAT SPACE.
>> YES, AND WE'RE HOPING AS WE FILL MORE AND MORE OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY POSITIONS, WE'RE GOING TO SEE THAT OVERSPENDING IN THE OVERTIME REDUCING SOME, NOT GETTING ALL THE WAY THERE, BUT REDUCING SOME, AND THEN IN A YEAR WHERE WE HAVE SUFFICIENT FUNDING, WE WILL RECOMMEND THAT COUNCIL PUT SOME MORE MONEY TOWARDS THEIR OVERTIME.
>> DON, WHAT YOU WERE SAYING IS TAKE THE MILLION OUT OR LEAVE THE MILLION IN?
>> TAKE IT OUT. MAYOR SAID THAT WAS ONE OF THE PRIORITIES, BUT I THINK IF WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO MAKE THAT UP BY THE END OF THE YEAR.
I THINK WE CAN TAKE THAT OUT AND FREE UP SOME MORE SPACE FOR THE RACE.
>> I WAS JUST CURIOUS. I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT I DO SUPPORT THAT.
>> CAN WE GO BACK JUST A LITTLE BIT HERE? IF I LOOK AT YOUR BUDGET BOOK, LIKE, PAGE 14, NOT THAT YOU NEED TO FLIP TO IT, BUT I'M LOOKING AT ACTUAL'S IN 23 24, JUST GENERAL FUND, AND ACTUAL'S WERE 245.5.
PAGE 14 IN THE BUDGET BOOK, LISTS THOSE ACTUAL'S ON EXPENDITURES.
LAURA, AM I SEEING THAT THAT THAT IS THE BUDGET OF THE 245.
>> FIVE, AND IF YOU LOOK, SO IF YOU WANT TO GET TO PAGE 14, AND IT'LL SHOW YOU EXPENDITURES, ACTUAL 21, 22, 23, 24, 25.
WE WENT FROM 230, 231, 245, SO I JUST WANT TO GO BACK AND MAKE SURE I'M UNDERSTANDING WHERE WE INCREASED POLICE FIRE, AND WE GREW THIS.
BUT THEN WE ALSO LOST LIKE, WE HAD MOVED 4 MILLION INTO THE GENERAL FUND THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO MOVE IN ANYMORE, SO JUST A QUICK RECAP, WE WERE AT 245.5, BUT THEN IN THE BUDGET FOR 24, 25, WE ACTUALLY THINK WE'RE GOING TO SPEND 275.5, A DIFFERENCE OF 30 MILLION.
THAT DIFFERENCE HAS BEEN ACTUALIZED, AND CAN YOU HELP ME GO BACK THROUGH THAT REAL QUICK? BECAUSE I CAN'T HELP BUT THINKING THERE'S EFFICIENCIES IN THERE THAT WE'RE MISSING, BECAUSE IF I GO BACK TO POLICE FIRE AND RAISES, I THOUGHT THERE WERE AROUND 12 MILLION, 13 MILLION TOTAL.
IT WAS ALL BUILT IN IN MY GENERAL FUND ONGOING BUDGET? NONE OF THAT WAS COMING OUT AS A LOSS, LIKE, WE'RE NOT OVER BUDGET.
WE DID SOME RATE PAY STUFF ON 1.5 OR 1.8 MILLION FOR TRASH CANS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
>> BUT DID WE INCREASE THE TOTAL BUDGET 30 MILLION LAST YEAR, AND WE'VE NOW ACTUALIZED THAT? IF SO, DO YOU REMEMBER WHERE THOSE BREAK DOWN?
>> THE BIGGEST PORTION OF IT, AS YOU MENTIONED, WAS IN THE PAY RAISES THAT WERE APPROVED INTO THE CURRENT YEAR? WE ALSO INCREASE OUR ONE TIME CAPITAL FUNDING BY $5 MILLION, SO THAT WAS FIVE MILLION OF IT.
>> NOW, THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY, SO THE 245 TO THE 275, YOU COULD SEE THAT MUCH OF A CHANGE JUST IN CAPITAL, ONE-TIME EXPENDITURES? BECAUSE I'M TRYING TO ISOLATE THESE ONGOING MONIES THAT I'M TRYING TO FIND.
>> IF YOU'LL GO TO PAGE 22, YOU'LL SEE TOWARDS THE BOTTOM, THERE'S A 92130 GENERAL CONSTRUCTION ACCOUNT.
WE HAD 5.8 MILLION THAT THAT WAS PAID IN '23/'24, AND IT MOVED UP TO 10.5 MILLION.
>> CAN WE JUST THAT WAS FIVE DOWN? IS THAT THE EASIEST PLACE TO JUST GO FIND $5 MILLION?
>> THAT'S THE CURRENT YEAR'S BUDGET.
[OVERLAPPING] ARE YOU ASKING TO AMEND THE BUDGET?
>> YEAH, WELL, I THINK IF I'M LOOKING AT PRIORITIZING A TMRS COLA BECAUSE I HAVE A SHORT WINDOW HERE, CAN I AMEND MY GENERAL CONSTRUCTION BUDGET DOWN FROM 10 MILLION TO FIVE MILLION?
WE'RE NOT GUARANTEED THAT MONEY EVERY SINGLE YEAR, SO WE WOULD NOT RECOMMEND PUTTING THAT TOWARDS TMRS, BECAUSE TMRS IS ONGOING.
>> I KNOW IT'S HARD TO KEEP THAT ONE TIME FUNDING SPLIT APART.
IN THAT, WHEN I'M TRYING TO GO BACK TO THE 245, DO YOU HAPPEN TO HAVE A NUMBER THAT ISOLATES OUT OF THAT 275 ACTUAL IN THE CURRENT YEAR? HOW MUCH OF THAT IS ONE TIME FUNDING?
>> I DON'T HAVE THAT RIGHT IN FRONT OF ME, BUT I COULD CERTAINLY WORK ON THAT.
>> BUT YOU THINK THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS ROUGHLY FIVE MILLION IN THE ONE TIME FUNDING FROM THE ACTUALS OF 23?
>> WELL, I BELIEVE THAT WAS THE BULK OF THE ONE TIME FUNDING CHANGE.
[OVERLAPPING] OF COURSE, THE THREE MILLION IN THE COUNCIL WORKING BUDGET, SO THAT'S EIGHT MILLION.
>> IT NORMALLY ADDS UP, AND WE DO THIS IN OUR HOUSEHOLD BUDGET.
LIKE YOU'RE LIKE, MAN, I KNOW I HAD $100 BILL IN MY POCKET.
[02:50:02]
IF I TRY TO REMEMBER WHAT I BOUGHT AND ALL THE MONEY'S GONE, LIKE, IT DOES ADD UP, BUT IT'S HARD TO REMEMBER.WHAT DID WE BUY IN CURRENT YEAR? WAS IT 12 MILLION IN RAISES?
>> I'LL HAVE TO PULL THAT UP. I DON'T HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF ME.
>> ALL I'M ASKING TO GET COMFORTABLE WITH IS, THE OVERALL BUDGET WENT UP, AND THEN, OF COURSE, WE HAD THIS $15 MILLION SWING, WHICH WAS DIFFICULT TO CENTER ON.
NOW I FEEL LIKE WE'VE GOTTEN BACK TO CENTER HERE TO WHERE WE'RE BACK TO, 275 PLUS THE ADDITIONAL ASKS.
IF COUNCIL JUST SAID, WE THINK WE'RE SPENDING 275 WITH EVERYTHING LIKE WE'VE GOT IT, WE'RE WANTING $9 MILLION WORTH OF ADDITIONAL STUFF.
OUR BUDGETS NOW 284 IN GENERAL FUND, AND OUR REVENUES ARE 269.
>> THERE WAS ABOUT 24 MILLION INCREASES IN YOUR PERSONNEL SPENDING, SO BETWEEN SALARIES AND RAISES AND THEN THE TMRS COLA.
YOU CAN SEE THAT ON PAGE 14 IN YOUR BUDGET ON THE TOTAL 41,000 PERSONNEL LINE ITEM.
THAT WAS 24 IF I'M DOING MY MATH RIGHT, A DIFFERENT FROM 170-146, WE'LL SAY.
THEN YOUR OTHER BIG CHANGES, WAS YOUR COUNCIL WORKING BUDGET OF SIX MILLION.
WE DID NOT HAVE THAT THE YEAR BEFORE.
PART OF IT WAS ONE TIME, PART OF IT WAS ONGOING, SO THAT SIX MILLION.
THERE WAS AN ADDITIONAL $5 MILLION IN ONE TIME CAPITAL SPENDING.
IN ADDITION THOSE WERE YOUR BIG CHANGES.
>> CAN I ASK THOUGH, BECAUSE THAT SIX MILLION ON COUNCIL BUDGET WAS SAVINGS THAT WE IDENTIFIED IT WITHIN THE GIVEN RATES.
WE DIDN'T COME AND INCREASE A RATE IN ORDER TO GROW THAT SIX MILLION THAT WE KEEP DEDUCTING.
NOW, I KNOW WE'VE SPENT THAT MONEY, FOR EXAMPLE, LIKE THE WOMEN'S CLINIC CONTINUING TO GO ON.
BUT YOU WENT BACK AND YOU BUILT IN THE BUDGET A LINE ITEM TO CAPTURE THOSE INCREASED REVENUES.
>> WELL, PART OF IT WAS THE WATER, AND SEWER, AND DRAINAGE INTEREST COMING OVER.
>> WE JUST TAKE THAT OUT. THERE'S FOUR MILLION THAT'S GONE.
>> BUT YOU WERE ASKING THE CHANGE ON EXPENDITURES, AND NOW YOU'RE ASKING FOR CHANGES ON REVENUES?
>> BECAUSE THE CHANGE ON EXPENDITURES IS RAISES TMRS, COUNCIL WORKING BUDGET, AND THE ONE TIME CAPITAL CHANGE ARE YOUR BIGGEST COMPONENTS OF YOUR CHANGE IN CURRENT YOUR BUDGET VERSUS PRIOR YOUR SPENDING.
>> IF I JUST ADD IT UP BASED ON THESE REPORTS THAT ARE HERE IN FRONT OF ME, IT'S, 6+5 APPROXIMATELY 35 MILLION.
>> THAT BREAKS DOWN TO HOW MUCH? TMRS WAS LESS THAN TWO MILLION TO GET FROM 30-50, OR MAYBE IT WAS SAY TWO, AND THEN RAISES WAS HOW MUCH?
>> [OVERLAPPING] I'VE GO THAT LAURA. 8.8 WAS PUBLIC SAFETY, 2.5 FOR CIVILIANS.
>> 8.8, 2.5, 10 MILLION. WE GOT 10 MILLION.
WE'RE AT 12. WHAT WAS THE OTHER ONE? I'M SORRY? [OVERLAPPING]
>> WE ADDED THE BRIDGE, 50,000, JULY 5TH EVENT, 125,000.
WE HAD THE NEW IN TALI A ZONE.
>> THEN YOU WOULD HAVE TO GO AND CAPTURE WHATEVER WE ADDED OUT OF THE THREE MILLION FROM COUNCIL'S WORKING BUDGET AND ONGOING.
BUT THEN THE OTHER THREE MILLION, WHICH WAS ONE TIME SPEND, I THOUGHT WE WERE JUST SPENDING THAT OUT OF RESERVE.
EVEN IF I DON'T LOOK AT THE ONE TIME SPEND, I JUST LOOK AT THE ONGOING MONIES, I'M RIGHT AROUND 13 MILLION.
>> I'M SORRY, I'M NOT FOLLOWING YOUR MATH.
>> TO GO BACK, TMRS I ROUNDED TO TWO MILLION, THAT'S ONGOING MONIES.
ALL OF THE RAISES FOR PUBLIC SAFETY WAS 8.8, AND THEN THE REST OF THE RAISES TO STAFF GOT US UP TO ROUGHLY 10.
>> NO, THE RAISES IN TOTAL CAME TO $11.3 MILLION.
>> THAT'S A MISTAKE, SO NOT 10 MILLION FOR EVERYTHING, 11.3 PLUS THE TWO PLUS THE OTHER LITTLE ITEMS THAT YOU HAVE.
I SAY LITTLE, BUT JUST SMALLER VALUE AMOUNTS.
>> THIRTEEN PLUS A $6 MILLION WORKING BUDGET PLUS A $5 MILLION INCREASED CAPITAL SPENDING, WE'RE AT ABOUT 2.5.
BUT I'D HAVE TO GO THROUGH AND ANALYZE THE CHANGE FROM ONE YEAR TO THE NEXT BASED ON LAST YEAR'S.
>> RIGHT. ALL I'M DRIVING AT IS JUST THE ONGOING MONEY.
WE WERE AT 13.3 PLUS THE 5 MILLION WAS FOR WHAT AGAIN?
[02:55:02]
>> IT WAS FOR ONE TIME CAPITAL SPENDING.
THEN IF WE GO FROM THE 13.3 PLUS THE COUNCIL WORKING BUDGET, WE INVESTED THREE MILLION OF THAT THAT'S [OVERLAPPING] PLANNING, I'M COMING BACK.
I'M REALLY AT 16.3 MILLION IN TOTAL INCREASES. RIGHT?
>> ON THOSE ITEMS. I'M TRYING NOT TO CONSIDER THE ONE TIME BUDGET OR ONE TIME EXPENDITURES JUST BECAUSE WE HAVE A RESERVE AND IT HAS TO BALANCE ITSELF.
NOW, I GET ON YOUR BUDGET PROPOSAL.
THIS HAS TO BALANCE, AND IT WILL, BUT THAT ONE TIME MONIES COULD CONSIDER OTHER MONIES JUST IN THE ONGOING EXPENDITURES, 16.3 MILLION THAT WE'VE GOT THERE FROM ONE YEAR TO THE NEXT.
IN MY HEAD, THIS IS WHERE WE WERE, WE SPENT 245.
WE ADDED $16 MILLION WORTH OF EXPENDITURES.
NOW, EVEN IF WE SPENT 275, SOME OF THAT WAS ONE TIME SPIN THAT WAS IN THE CURRENT YEAR WILL BE, SO AM I CLOSER TO THE 260, IF I DON'T BUILD BACK IN THOSE ONE TIME SPINS, MEANING, I CAN I REMOVE THE GENERAL CONSTRUCTION BUDGET DOWN AND THEN CONTINUE TO HAVE MONIES THAT I CAN PUSH INTO NEEDED RAISES AND COMPENSATION?
>> NO. YOU CANNOT MOVE MONEY OUT OF ONE TIME CAPITAL SPENDING INTO RAISES.
>> ALL I'M DOING IS SEPARATING A BUDGET THAT IS A OVERALL WORKING BUDGET AND SEPARATING THE ONE TIME SPENTS ON THE TOP OF THAT BUDGET.
IF WE JUST REMOVE IT DOWN SO WE CAN SEE WHAT THE ACTUAL WORKING BUDGET IS, THOSE ITEMS THAT ARE NEEDING TO GO IN THAT WORKING BUDGET DO FACTOR, RIGHT?
>> I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT WORKING BUDGET ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?
>> THE WORKING BUDGET IS THE TOTAL REVENUES ON THE OPERATING INCOME.
THEN YOU'VE GOT GRANT INCOME THAT'S PRETTY DEPENDABLE, BUT THEN YOUR TRANSFERS FROM OTHER FUNDS, YOU'RE TREATING AS ONE TIME EXPENDITURES.
>> IF YOU LOOK AT OUR CHANGES IN OUR REVENUES, WE HAD ABOUT 6.7 MILLION IN INCREASED ONGOING REVENUE.
YOUR TMRS AND YOUR RAISES FOR YOUR EMPLOYEES, THAT WOULD COVER THE BULK OF THAT.
>> I LIKE THAT. WE'RE LOOKING AT COUNCIL, $9 MILLION WORTH OF EXPENDITURES THAT WE NEED TO COME UP WITH, THAT WE'RE SAYING WE WANT THEM TO GO AND IMPLEMENT.
BUT THEN DO WE HAVE 6.7 MILLION TO PUT TOWARDS THAT NINE MILLION?
>> WHAT NINE MILLION ARE YOU REFERRING TO?
>> WELL, THE RECOMMENDED INCREASES, THE TMRS, THE 2% MERIT, THE APD, THE FIRE, IF WE TAKE THE OVERTIME OFF.
>> BECAUSE ALL I'M SAYING IS WE'VE RAN A BUDGET THAT'S VERY GOOD.
WE'VE ADDED THESE POTENTIALS, BUT THEN WE HAVE INCREASES IN REVENUES.
>> THOSE AMOUNTS ARE WHAT YOU CAN AFFORD WITH THE REVENUE INCREASES THAT ARE THERE.
IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO CHANGE AND PUT IN LET'S SAY, OVERTIME, YOU'LL NEED TO FIND ONE OF THOSE RECURRING EXPENSES TO DIRECT US TO LOWER.
THEN IT'S ALL BALANCED AT THIS POINT WITHIN WHAT WE HAVE.
THERE'S NO ADDITIONAL MONEY SITTING OUT THERE FOR YOU ALL TO REALLOCATE.
YOU CAN TAKE THE AMOUNTS THAT ARE RECOMMENDED HERE AND CHANGE THEM.
THAT'S FINE. WE CAN ABSOLUTELY DO THAT FOR YOU ALL.
BUT WHAT IS HERE IS WHAT YOU CAN AFFORD.
IF YOU WANT TO INCREASE A RECURRING, WE WILL NEED TO KNOW WHICH RECURRING YOU WANT US TO DECREASE.
IF YOU WANT TO INCREASE A ONE TIME FUNDING, WE'LL NEED TO KNOW WHICH ONE TIME FUNDING YOU WANT US TO DECREASE.
IT'S ALL ALREADY LAID OUT AND BUILT IN WITH WHAT YOU CAN AFFORD WITH THE REVENUE STREAMS AS THEY'RE PRESENTED.
>> I DON'T WANT TO GET ANYBODY CONFUSED OR MORE SO THAN I HAVE, THERE IS A WAY.
YOU CAN DO THIS, YOU PROBABLY ALREADY DO.
THERE IS A WAY TO ESTABLISH WHAT YOUR ONGOING EXPENDITURES ARE AND SEPARATE OUT THE ONE TIME EXPENDITURES.
>> THAT'S DETAILED ON THAT CASH FLOW PAGE.
>> IT'S ALREADY IN THERE. WHAT'S THAT AMOUNT AFTER YOU TAKE THOSE OUT?
>> LET'S SEE HERE. YOUR TOTAL EXPENDITURES ARE 272.5 MILLION DOLLAR, AS IT AGAIN, LET ME PUT SOMETHING OUT THAT I FIGURED YOU ALL WOULD PROBABLY WANT TO TALK ABOUT.
IF YOU WERE TO BRING THE ENTIRE STREET DEPARTMENT BACK IN, YOUR ONGOING EXPENSES ARE GOING TO BE 267 MILLION AND YOUR ONE TIME EXPENDITURES WOULD BE ABOUT 6.4 MILLION.
>> THAT'S GREAT. THAT'S WHAT I'M DRIVING AT, 267 ONGOING.
>> HOW MUCH IS ONE TIME? >> 6.4 MILLION.
>> TOTAL BUDGET WE NEED TO ACHIEVE IS 274.
>> JUST UNDER 274 MILLION WOULD BE YOUR TOTAL AND THAT IS WHAT IS BUILT
[03:00:05]
IN THE COLUMN ON THIS PAGE WITH THE BLUE AND ORANGE.THAT'S WHAT'S BUILT IN THE, "NO STREET MAINTENANCE" COLUMN. THAT AMOUNT.
>> WE'RE WORKING FROM 274 MILLION TOTAL ACHIEVABLE THAT WE'RE GOING FOR, THEN WE HAVE TO ADD ON THAT ONGOING RIGHT NOW.
THAT 267, DOES IT INCLUDE ANY OF THESE ITEMS? IT DOES, RIGHT?
>> THE ONE THAT YOU'RE RECOMMENDING?
>> ALL WE WOULD NEED TO DO IS JUST FIGURE OUT WHAT WE ARE THINKING THAT'S CHANGED FROM WHAT YOU'RE RECOMMENDING.
>> THE CIVILIANS 2%, COUNCILMAN TIPS, RIGHT THERE, THAT 1.2, HE'S JUST SAYING THAT HE WOULD THINK THAT WOULD BE MERIT.
THE POLICE SWORN, I HAD BUMPED THAT UP.
MY REQUEST WOULD BE ANOTHER MILLION THERE.
FIRE SWORN WOULD BE ANOTHER 800.
AS WE COME DOWN THROUGH THERE.
>> WHERE WOULD YOU LIKE US TO TAKE THOSE FROM?
[LAUGHTER] YOU I'D START TAKING IT FROM THE $270 MILLION WORTH OF REVENUES.
IF WE TAKE THE REVENUES THAT YOU HAVE LISTED, YOUR TOTAL REVENUES EXPECTED ARE 270, PLUS, YOU JUST IDENTIFIED ON THIS OTHER PAGE UP HERE AT THE TOP, WE NOW HAVE AN INCREASE OF WHAT?
>> THOSE ARE ALREADY SUPPORTING THOSE COSTS THAT ARE BILLED THERE.
>> YOU ALREADY BUMPED UP THE INCREASE INTEREST AND EVERYTHING?
>> THIS 269 CHANGE OVER HERE ON THIS CASH FLOW SHEET?
>> YES. IT CHANGES UP TO 271.1 MILLION.
>> 271.1. HERE WE'RE CLARIFYING THINGS.
WE'RE NOW LOOKING AT A TOTAL REVENUE PER YEAR NUMBERS OF 271 AND A TOTAL EXPENDITURE WITH YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS OF 274?
>> WE REALLY ONLY HAVE A $3 MILLION DIFFERENCE UNLESS WE WANTED TO MOVE ANY OF YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS.
>> YES YOU CAN DO THAT. >> LET'S SAY WE WANTED TO MOVE POLICE AND FIRE 3-5, SO NOW WE GOT TO FIND ANOTHER MILLION DOLLAR?
>> YES. YOU'VE GOT IT PERFECT.
>> COUNCIL, ARE WE ALL THERE ON THAT PAGE? IS THAT CLEAR?
>> I THINK SO. BUT, I THINK PULLING OUT TO THE BIGGER PICTURE, BECAUSE I THINK WE WERE ALMOST ACROSS THE FINISH LINE, WHAT I'M HEARING IS THE PRIORITY IS COMPENSATION FOR OUR EMPLOYEES.
THAT'S THE TOP PRIORITY AND THE COLA, THOSE ARE OUR TWO TOP PRIORITIES.
THERE'S A COUPLE OF ANCILLARY THINGS THAT WE WANT TO LOOK AT, SUCH AS SENIORS AND WHAT THAT COULD LOOK LIKE AND WHAT WE MIGHT WANT TO DO, ANIMAL MANAGEMENT.
BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, THAT SEEMS TO BE THE GUIDANCE THAT WE'RE GIVING THEM IS COLA, COMPENSATE OUR EMPLOYEES, PROBABLY PRIORITIZING ON THE EXISTING EMPLOYEES.
THEN LOOKING AT THESE JUST THE TWO OTHER, LOWER BUDGET THINGS WITH ANIMAL MANAGEMENT AND SENIORS AS WHAT THAT COULD LOOK LIKE AND WHAT A POSSIBILITY WOULD BE.
LESS ANYBODY ELSE HAS GOT SOMETHING DIFFERENT.
>> I SUPPORT. I UNDERSTAND THIS.
I WAS TRACKING WITH YOU PRETTY GOOD.
BUT I SEE WHERE WE ARE IN THE DEFICIT.
BUT JUST LIKE LESS SAID, GET THE EMPLOYEES TAKEN CARE OF, AND LET'S GO FROM THERE.
>> COUNCILMAN, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANT TO ADD? LAURA, I KNOW IT'S NOT THIS SIMPLE, BUT, LIKE, AT THE END OF THIS PAGE, YOU GET DOWN TO A TARGETED RESERVE.
IF WE JUST TOLD YOU TO GO AND DO THIS, YOU WOULD BE $5 MILLION UNDER YOUR RESERVE THIS YEAR, AND THEN THAT WOULD CONTINUE TO GET WORSE YEAR OVER YEAR.
>> NO, SIR. WE WOULD BE $2 MILLION UNDER OUR RESERVE FOR THE YEAR.
IF YOU'LL BEAR WITH ME, I'M EMAILING STEPHANIE A SHEET THAT SHE CAN PULL UP REAL QUICK, SO YOU CAN SEE THE UPDATED CASH FLOW BASED ON WHAT THE FIRST COLUMN OF THE PROPOSED CHANGES HAVE BUILT IN THERE.
>> LAURA, IS THE TARGETED RESERVES, JUST BASICALLY TWO MILLION UNDER THE TARGET RESERVES, WHAT DO WE HAVE ON DEBT COVENANTS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT ON THAT TARGET RESERVE? IS THERE ANY ISSUES ON THAT?
>> NO. I THINK AS LONG AS WE'RE CLOSE TO OUR TARGET RESERVES, THAT WE ARE RATED EACH YEAR BY STANDARD & POOR'S WHEN WE START ISSUING DEBT, AND THEY DO LOOK AT THAT.
AS LONG AS WE'RE MAINTAINING THE RESERVE CLOSE TO WHERE OUR TARGET RESERVES ARE, THEY HAVE RATED US FAVORABLY IN THAT AREA OF IT.
[03:05:03]
>> HOW MUCH ROOM DO WE HAVE ON TARGETED RESERVES? DO WE HAVE ANOTHER TWO MILLION?
>> I WOULD SAY MORE THAN A FEW MILLION. YES.
>> WE HAVE ANOTHER TWO MILLION? [OVERLAPPING]
>> I DON'T KNOW THAT I WOULD RECOMMEND MISSING IT BY ANOTHER TWO MILLION.
I THINK THAT'S GETTING [OVERLAPPING]
>> WE'RE ALREADY MISSING IT BY TWO BEFORE THIS ADDS.
>> I'M JUST ASKING, WHAT AMOUNT MORE COULD WE MISS IT AND HAVE ROOM? I UNDERSTAND BAD DEBT RESERVES.
I UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE THAT [OVERLAPPING]
>> YOU'LL HAVE TO MAKE UP POTENTIALLY IN THIS NEXT YEAR.
IT'S GOING TO PUT YOU A LITTLE BIT FURTHER BEHIND POTENTIALLY NEXT YEAR WHEN WE'RE SITTING IN THESE SEATS, GOING THERE.
>> YOUR RECOMMENDATION IS NOT TO TOUCH IT ANYMORE.
THIS IS THE MAX. THERE'S NO WIGGLE ROOM HERE AT ALL.
>> I WOULD RECOMMEND NOT GOING ANY FURTHER THAN THIS.
ACTUALLY, THIS IS DEFINITELY PUSHING THE LIMIT, IN MY OPINION.
>> SO WE SHOULD USE THAT FOR MORE RAINY DAY IF SOMETHING CAME UP, IF WE HAD TO PUSH IT IF WE HAD ANOTHER TWO MILLION?
>> THANK YOU. THAT'S WHAT I NEED TO HEAR.
>> THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.
STEPHANIE HAS UP HERE ON THE SCREEN.
MAYOR, THIS IS WHAT THE CASH FLOWS WOULD LOOK LIKE.
>> YES, UPDATED. THERE'S THAT 271 MILLION THAT WE HAD TALKED ABOUT.
THAT WOULD BE THE ADDITIONAL ABOUT 11.2 MILLION IN REVENUE INCREASES.
THIS IS WITH BRINGING YOUR ENTIRE STREET OPERATIONS BACK INTO YOUR GENERAL FUND.
THEN STEPHANIE FIELD SCROLL DOWN.
YOU'LL SEE YOUR OPERATING BUDGET REQUESTS ARE NOW AT 258, AND WE WERE AT 252 PRIOR TO BRINGING THE STREET OPERATIONS BACK IN.
THEN AS YOU KEEP SCROLLING DOWN, YOUR TOTAL EXPENDITURES WOULD BE THAT 273.9, HITTING RESERVES OF ABOUT 50.7 MILLION.
ONGOING EXPENDITURES WOULD BE ABOUT 267 MILLION, AND SO OUR RESERVE WOULD STILL BE AROUND THAT 52.7 MILLION AND WE'D BE CLOSE.
>> CAN YOU GO BACK UP TO THE GENERAL CONSTRUCTION LINE? WE LOWERED THAT TO FIVE MILLION?
>> ON THIS PAGE, AS A REMINDER, WE HAD RECOMMENDED CUTTING OUT THE MUNICIPAL COURT CIP PROJECT.
>> THAT'S FOUR MILLION. >> THAT'S WHAT THAT CHANGES.
>> BUT NOW THAT MONEY THAT'S FREED UP IN THERE CAN GO TOWARDS ONGOING EXPENDITURES OR IT STILL STAYS THE SAME?
>> IT WAS HELPING WITH RESERVES A LITTLE BIT, TOO, YES.
>> WELL, NO, SOME OF IT WAS ONGOING OR WILL BE.
LET'S SEE HERE. LET ME GET THAT PAGE BACK IN FRONT OF ME, SORRY.
IF YOU LOOK AT YOUR TOTAL, ONGOING REVENUES, YOU'RE AT 271, AND YOUR TRANSFERS FROM YOUR OTHER FUNDS, RECURRING PART OF THAT IS ONE TIME.
I THINK IT'S ABOUT, I DON'T HAVE THAT NUMBER OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, ABOUT EIGHT MILLION OR SO.
YOUR NET ONGOING REVENUES ARE JUST SLIGHTLY LOWER THAN YOUR NET OPERATING EXPENDITURES IN THIS SCENARIO, BUT THEY'RE VERY CLOSE.
>> THAT'S WHAT I WAS DRIVING AT ON A REALLY LONG WAY AROUND THE MOUNTAIN EARLIER.
I HOPE THAT CLEARS IT UP FOR EVERYONE BECAUSE I WAS JUST TRYING TO GET TO THAT 267 ONGOING VERSUS THE 6.41 TIME.
BUT NOW THAT'S CHANGED, WELL, WE'RE JUST CLOSER BECAUSE YOUR REVENUES ARE CLOSER.
BUT WHAT WE DID, EARLIER, WE HAD 10 MILLION DOWN HERE IN GENERAL CONSTRUCTION, ALMOST, AND WE LOWERED THAT DOWN TO FIVE MILLION TO FREE UP IN ORDER TO BALANCE THE BUDGET.
>> NOW, COULD WE LOOK, AND I'M NOT GETTING US IN A LONG DISCUSSION BECAUSE IT'S ALMOST TIME TO WRAP UP AND GET DIRECTION.
BUT COULD WE LOOK FOR EXISTING MONIES THAT MAYBE ARE ON THE CIP PROJECTS THAT WE'VE IDENTIFIED THAT COULD BE GENERAL FUND DIRECTIVES AND USE ANY OF THAT MONEY TO MAYBE TAKE CARE OF THE GENERAL CONSTRUCTION STUFF, WHICH IS CIP?
>> ALL I'M SAYING IS THERE MAY BE MONIES THAT WE CAN IDENTIFY OUT THERE.
IF YOU THINK BACK TO THE PAGE YOU GOT EMAILED GUYS EARLIER, THERE'S 119 MILLION LISTED AS OUTSTANDING CIP THAT'S NOT BORROWED MONIES, AND WE KNOW WE HAVE THAT.
NOW, ALL 119 MILLION MAY VERY WELL BE EXACTLY WHERE THE MONEY NEEDS TO GO.
WE WOULD WANT TO KNOW HOW MUCH OF THAT'S CONTRACTED AND ALREADY OUT THE DOOR VERSUS HOW MUCH OF IT'S SITTING AND POTENTIAL SAVINGS.
[03:10:02]
MR. DANFORTH RAN A FANTASTIC PROJECT HERE AND REALIZED A COUPLE MILLION DOLLAR WORTH OF SAVINGS.WOULD WE BE BENEFITED TO GO AND DIG THROUGH THAT 119, PULL THOSE CONTRACTS, IDENTIFY THOSE FUNDS, BECAUSE OTHERWISE, WE JUST TOOK OFF THE MUNICIPAL COURT DEAL HERE, BUT IF WE BALANCE BUDGET, WE GIVE RAISES.
I KNOW IT'S LESS THAN WAS THE ASK, BUT CAN WE STILL CONTINUE TO LOOK FOR THOSE NEW PROJECTS OR PUT THOSE PROJECTS BACK IN THE TIMELINE?
>> ABSOLUTELY. AS THE COUNCIL IS AWARE, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT MR. HARTMAN IS WORKING ON IS GOING THROUGH ALL OF OUR OUTSTANDING CIPS AND THE NUMBER YOU REFERENCED THERE.
WE'RE TRYING TO IDENTIFY WHICH ONES ARE WATER AND SEWER, WHICH ONE IS DRAINAGE, WHICH ONE IS GENERAL FUNDS, SO AND SO FORTH.
WHICH ONES ARE UNDER CONTRACT? WHICH ONES ARE NOT? WHICH ONES ARE COMPLETED? WE'RE MOVING THOSE FUNDS BACK TO BACK TO RESERVE.
IN FACT, AT YOUR LAST COUNCIL MEETING, WE BROUGHT A FEW ITEMS TO YOU THAT WE HAD FREED UP.
YES, OUR PLAN IS TO, AND MAYOR STANLEY AND COUNCIL TIPPS AND I DISCUSSED THIS YESTERDAY.
ONE THING WE COULD DO IS IF WE IDENTIFY ANY PROJECTS THAT A PRIOR COUNCIL HAD APPROVED BUT HAVE NOT YET BEGAN, HENCE THERE'S BEEN NO MONEY SPENT, I COULD STOP THAT AND BRING THAT PROJECT BACK TO YOU.
YOU CAN SAY, SAY IT'S $1,000,000.
IT WAS GOING TO GO TOWARDS WESTERN AND WHATEVER.
YOU CAN SAY, COUNCIL, WE'VE ACTUALLY NOT SPENT ANY MONEY ON THIS.
THIS GOES BACK THREE YEARS AGO.
WE'D LIKE TO PROCEED WITH THIS PROJECT, OR WE'D LIKE TO BE RE-DIVERTED BACK TO SOMETHING ELSE.
THAT'S COMING OVER THE NEXT SEVERAL MONTHS.
IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY IMPACT YOUR BUDGET HERE.
BUT KNOWING YOU HAVE A COUPLE OF PROJECTS, WE CAN KEEP BRING THOSE BACK TO YOU OVER THE NEXT SIX, 12 MONTHS AS WE KEEP OUR PROJECT HERE TO IDENTIFY THOSE.
>> COUNCIL, IS THAT WHAT WE'RE WANTING? BECAUSE I'D LOVE TO SEE THOSE COME BACK ONE AT A TIME LISTED, NOT ONE AT A TIME, BUT, ITEMIZED, I GUESS, AS MANY OF THEM AS WE CAN GO GATHER.
THEN AS AN EXAMPLE TO FLOAT AN IDEA, I KNOW OSAGE STREET HAS BEEN SOMETHING WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO GET TO FOR A LONG TIME.
A LARGE PART OF THE DAMAGE TO THAT ROAD IS THE WATER AND SEWER THAT WAS REDONE OVER THERE.
IF WE HAVE MONEY SITTING THERE IN THIS CIP, WE IDENTIFY THOSE, AND THEN WE START PUSHING FOR THAT.
ANOTHER EXAMPLE WOULD BE, LET'S SAY IT'S WATER AND SEWER AGAIN, MAYBE A BULK OF THAT WOULD BE, THERE'S GOING TO BE AN ROI ON SOME THINGS THAT WE COULD GO SPEND.
IT'S ONE THING TO CALCULATE LIKE, WELL, LET'S REPLACE AN OLD LINE BECAUSE WE'RE AFRAID OF A MAIN BREAK, AND BALANCE THAT WITH, WELL, LET'S RUN A MAIN LINE EXTENSION ON I40 WEST AND CREATE A RETAIL ZONE OR WHATEVER WE WOULD HAVE IN ORDER TO GROW THAT SALES TAX.
WHAT WE WOULD HOPE FOR IS, SOME OF THOSE MONIES THAT MAY HAVE BEEN PRIORITIZED THAT AREN'T PRIORITIZED ANYMORE OR MAY HAVE BEEN REALIZED AS SAVINGS, WE COULD REINVEST THEM AROUND THE CITY IN ORDER TO REALLY START SEEING THOSE SALES TAXES GROW AND DEVELOPMENT, ESPECIALLY WITH EVERYTHING THAT'S MOVING THIS DIRECTION.
YOU GO THE OTHER SIDE OF I40 EAST, YOU'RE ALREADY SEEING INDIVIDUALS READY TO BUILD ALL SORTS OF HOTELS AND OTHER THINGS THAT'S GOING TO HIT OUR HOT TAX, AND THEN CASHIN AND HER TEAM, I THINK DON TIPPS SAID IS 7X.
FOR WHEN YOU PUT A DOLLAR IN HER HAND, SHE USUALLY RETURNS SEVEN.
THE MORE OF THAT, COUNCIL, THAT WE GET BACK, THE MORE THAT WE GET TO DIRECT, POTENTIALLY, THE BETTER ROI WE WOULD HAVE 2, 03, 4 YEARS FROM NOW.
IS ANYBODY WANT TO REDIRECT THAT? OTHERWISE, I THINK THAT'S A REALLY GOOD PATH.
>> I THINK IT SHOULD BE A STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE THAT WE'RE CLOSING THESE PROJECTS OUT AS QUICK AS POSSIBLE, AND WE UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT DOLLAR IS.
BUT IF WE CLOSE OUT THESE PROJECTS, CAN THAT CIP GO BACK INTO THE GENERAL FUND OR DOES IT STAY IN THE CIP?
>> IT DEPENDS ON WHICH FUND IT CAME FROM.
WATER AND SEWER SAVES AND WATER AND SEWER, GENERAL SAVES IN GENERAL, BUT YES, THE STANDING ORDER RIGHT NOW IS, IF A PROJECT IS CLOSED OUT, IF THERE'S ANY REMAINING FUNDS, IT GOES BACK TO THE RESERVE OF THE FUND THAT IT CAME FROM.
>> HOW MUCH OF THE CIP COULD BE IN GENERAL FUND?
>> FLOYD, CAN YOU SPEAK TO THAT?
>> THE QUESTION WAS, HOW MUCH OF THE CIP COULD POTENTIALLY, I DON'T WANT A DOLLAR AMOUNT, A PERCENTAGE AMOUNT OF WHAT CIP COULD GO TO THIS.
>> I THINK LAURA HAS THAT IN FRONT OF HER.
>> I'M SORRY. A GENERAL FUND, AND I'D HAVE TO LOOK AND SEE HOW MUCH WAS BOND PROCEEDS, BUT IT'S PROBABLY, MAYBE 10-15% OF THAT.
MAYBE, I'M JUST GUESTIMATING THAT.
>> LET ME MAKE SURE THE GENERAL FUND WOULD BE AROUND 15%.
YOU WOULD THINK THE REST OF IT WOULD BE MAJORITY WATER SEWER AND OTHER ITEMS.
>> AIRPORT WOULD HAVE A SIGNIFICANT PERCENTAGE.
WATER AND SEWER IS GOING TO HAVE THE MOST, YES.
>> DRAINAGE YOU'LL HAVE THE LEAST.
>> BUT THIS IS ONLY DOLLARS NOT SPENT, THAT HAD BEEN ALLOCATED TO PROJECTS.
[03:15:01]
>> SO THERE COULD BE A MILLION, TWO MILLION DOLLARS.
>> THEY'VE ALL BEEN ALLOCATED TO PROJECTS. THEY JUST HAVEN'T BEEN SPENT.
>> COULD BE 15 MILLION ON THE GENERAL FUND SALE, 10% OF 120 MILLION, BECAUSE NOT ONLY DO YOU HAVE THAT 119 MILLION.
YOU'VE GOT ANOTHER BOND PROCEEDS OF 167 MILLION WHEN YOU FACTOR IN THOSE COA ORGANIZATIONS.
>> THAT WAS AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 2020.
>> WE'VE HAD HUGE PROJECTS GOING ON SINCE THEN.
>> NOW, MAYBE DOWN TO 120, BUT WE'VE GOT BORROWED MONIES THAT'S ALREADY GOING OUT.
THESE ARE MONIES THAT AREN'T BORROWED.
>> THAT'S CORRECT. THESE WERE CASH FUNDED CAPITAL PROJECTS.
>> REMEMBER, TOO, THE PERCENTAGE OF PROJECTS THAT'S ACTUALLY NOT EVEN STARTED YET IS EVEN SMALLER THAN THAT.
MOST OF THESE PROJECTS HAVE STARTED.
THEY'RE IN DESIGN OR GETTING READY FOR BID.
IF 119, MOST OF THAT, MY UNDERSTANDING IS IT'S ALREADY IN MOTION ALREADY.
>> I'M SORRY. IS IT SAFE TO SAY THAT AT LEAST 95% OF THESE DOLLAR, 98% OF THESE DOLLARS HAVE BEEN ALLOCATED AND ARE BEING SPENT?
>> WELL, EVERYTHING'S BEEN ALLOCATED, AND SO 100% HAS BEEN ALLOCATED.
THERE'S NOTHING NOT SEEING AN UNALLOCATED AMOUNT.
BUT I DON'T HAVE A PERCENTAGE AS TO HOW MUCH IS ACTUALLY TIED TO PROJECT THAT'S NOT STARTED YET.
IT'S PRETTY SMALL. TALKING TO FLOOR THIS MORNING, IT'S PRETTY SMALL MOUNT OF WATER AND SEWER.
>> I CAN GO INTO MORE WITH MORE TIME, AND WE DON'T HAVE THAT TODAY.
OBVIOUSLY, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THIS DISCUSSION.
BUT THE WORD I'M GOING TO USE IS COMMITTED.
WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE CIP AND YOU LOOK AT PROJECTS, WHAT IS THE LEVEL OF COMMITMENT OF THOSE FUNDS IN THE PROGRESSION OF THAT PROJECT? THE BEST EXAMPLE I CAN GIVE YOU, THERE IS A $4,000,000 SEWER LINE CONNECTED TO THE LIFT STATION 32 PROJECT ON SOUTH OSAGE, AND THAT IS IDENTIFIED IN THE MASTER PLAN FROM AN OVERLOADED LINE THAT GOES BACK TO THE NORTHEAST THAT SERVES ALL THE WAY UP TO THE PRISON.
THAT PROJECT IS FUNDED IN THE CIP.
IT CAN'T MOVE FORWARD TODAY BECAUSE THE LIFT STATION 32 PROJECT IS NOT FINISHED.
IT IS SITTING THERE, AND SO THAT'S THE DISCUSSION.
THAT'S THE TYPE OF PROJECT THAT WE WOULD BRING FORWARD BACK TO YOU AND SAY, HERE'S THIS $4,000,000 LINE.
WE PROJECT RIGHT NOW THAT TWO YEARS FROM NOW, WE CAN START ON THAT.
DO YOU WANT TO TAKE THAT FUND AND DO SOMETHING EARLIER AND RE-PRIORITIZE THAT THROUGH STAFF? THAT'S THE DISCUSSION THAT YOU WOULD HAVE.
THERE ARE A COUPLE OF PROJECTS IN THE GENERAL FUND THAT WOULD APPLY THAT AWAY.
THERE'S 5-6 PROJECTS IN THE WASTEWATER SEWER SYSTEM THAT APPLY THAT AWAY.
THE REMAINDER OF THEM IS YOU HAVE 90% SET OF PLANS.
YOU HAVE AMI THAT'S 75% DONE, AND REMEMBER, AMI IS $22 MILLION PROJECT, SO YOU HAVE FIVE MILLION OF THAT NOT SPENT, BUT IT'S COMMITTED.
THAT'S WHY I USED THE WORD COMMITTED.
YOU TAKE A NORTHEAST INTERCEPTOR, A $70 MILLION.
BUT COMMITMENT ALSO MEANS THAT I'VE DESIGNED A PROJECT SUCH AS THE PRODUCER OWN BEEF WATER LINE FOR EXPANSION OF THAT.
THERE'S 3.7 MILLION SETTING THERE READY FOR CONSTRUCTION, BUT YOU HAVE TO HAVE THAT TO BRING THE AWARD.
>> I THINK WE WOULD DEFINITELY AGREE WITH YOU.
WE'RE NOT GOING TO PULL BACK ON THINGS THAT YOU'VE INVESTED AND COMMITTED IN.
I THINK IT WOULD BE MORE LIKE, WELL, WE THOUGHT THIS WAS A NEED.
OWNER CAME, RIGHT OF WAYS WEREN'T SIGNED.
WE ENDED UP BUILDING A LIFT STATION THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO UTILIZE BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE OWNER PARTICIPATION.
THAT WOULD BE AN IDENTIFIED FOUR MILLION WHERE NOW WE WANT TO BRING THAT FULL THING BACK, AND I WOULD HOPE YOU WOULD HELP US LOOK AT ROIS ON THAT.
IN IDENTIFYING ALL THAT, I THINK WE'RE ALL SAYING THE SAME THING.
>> WE ARE, AND CAN I ADD SOMETHING TO THAT? AS YOU GOT TO THINK OUTSIDE OF THE CIP AS WELL.
WE HAVE IDENTIFIED, JUST LIKE I'LL GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE, WATER AND SEWER OR DRAINAGE, EITHER ONE.
WE HAVE IDENTIFIED LIST OF PROJECTS THAT ARE NOT IN THE CIP, FOR EXAMPLE, WATER AND SEWER THAT ARE WELL OVER 200 MILLION THAT DID NOT MAKE THE CIP.
THEN YOU'VE GOT DRAINAGE PROJECTS IDENTIFIED IN THE MASTER PLAN THAT ARE OVER 200 MILLION THAT HAVE NOT MADE THE CIP YET.
IT'S NOT LIKE WE HAVE PROJECTS THAT WE'RE JUST WAITING TO COME UP WITH SOME IDEAS.
WE ALREADY KNOW WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE.
THEY JUST HAVEN'T BEEN FUNDED YET.
THAT MAKE SENSE? IT'S OUTSIDE OF THE CIP.
>> THE TWO BIGGEST PROJECTS THAT WERE ON THAT LIST THAT WERE ASSOCIATED WITH GENERAL FUND DOLLARS, AND AGAIN, THIS WAS A SEPTEMBER 30, 2024.
IT WAS THE CITY HALL PROJECT BECAUSE IT WAS STILL BEING COMPLETED.
WE ARE STILL MAKING SOME OF THE LARGE BIG PAYMENTS, AND THEN YOUR FIRE STATION 14 PROJECT.
THAT'S A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT'S SITTING OUT THERE THAT WE ARE IN DESIGN, AND [OVERLAPPING].
>> PROBABLY ABOUT 30 DAYS OUT FROM BREAKING GROUND.
>> THERE YOU GO. THAT MONEY WILL START MOVING VERY QUICKLY.
[03:20:03]
SOMETHING THEN TO KEEP IN MIND, THESE NUMBERS ARE SNAPSHOTS IN TIME, AND THEN THEY DO CONSTANTLY MOVE FROM ONE DAY TO THE NEXT.>> I LOVE THE RECAP, BECAUSE IT IS NICE TO HEAR.
A LOT OF WHAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT, FLOYD, IS IN THAT 167 MILLION.
THEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THE OTHER CIP OF 119 MILLION, AND WHATEVER THE PERCENTAGE IS, WHATEVER COMES BACK, BE VERY HELPFUL FOR COUNCIL STAFF TO MOVE THIS FORWARD.
MAYBE WE'RE TIGHT ON OUR DAY-TO-DAY OPERATIONS BUDGET, BUT THEN WE'RE STILL LOOKING AT A LOT OF SUCCESS IN WHAT COUNCIL HAS FUNDED AND PREVIOUS COUNCILS HAVE FUNDED THAT'S GOING TO GET TO GO INTO THE PUBLIC.
I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS PUSHING THOSE MONIES BACK INTO THE STREETS, WATER SEWER.
THEN TO RECAP THIS AND GET US MOVING ON WITH OUR DAY, WE NOW HAVE THESE NUMBERS HERE.
STEPHANIE, CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE REVISED PROPOSED BUDGET? COUNCIL, YOU'VE GOT AN OPPORTUNITY, AND I'M GOING TO DIRECT THIS TO CITY MANAGER.
GIVE ME YOUR TIME FRAME AND WHAT YOU'RE THINKING.
AT THIS POINT IN TIME, WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ON A STREET UTILITY.
WE ARE WANTING TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ON, IS IT $1 MILLION PAY INCREASE FOR LEVELING UP UNDERPAID POSITIONS, OR IS IT A ZERO? OR IS IT 2.2? IS IT A 5% PAY INCREASE FOR POLICE AND FIRE, OR IS IT 2%, RIGHT? THOSE THINGS RIGHT THERE, WHAT WOULD BE YOUR TIME FRAME IN GIVING US A LITTLE BIT OF TIME TO RE-DIGEST THIS PAGE NOW THAT WE'VE GOT IT UPDATED? I THINK WE'VE COME A LONG WAY.
KNOWING THAT THE STREET DEPARTMENT IS IN THAT 273 NOW, WHEN DO WE WANT TO BRING THIS BACK? THEN, COUNCIL, YOU WOULD THEN HAVE ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO SAY, I'VE BEEN THINKING ABOUT THIS, AND THIS OVER HERE IS $1 MILLION IDEA.
COUNCIL MEMBER REED AND PRESCOTT.
WE'RE HOPING YOU BRING THOSE MILLION DOLLAR IDEAS.
AS A REMINDER, WE PUSHED COUNCIL'S CONSIDERATION OF THE NOT TO EXCEED TAX RATE FROM THIS PAST TUESDAY TO AUGUST 26.
WE REALLY NEED DIRECTION ON THAT BY AUGUST 26, AND THEN WE WILL HAVE TO START DOING OUR PUBLIC HEARING NOTICES FOR WE HAVE TO DO TWO MEETINGS IN SEPTEMBER TO APPROVE THE BUDGET.
WELL, BUT WE CAN CALL SPECIAL MEETINGS.
THAT IS PERFECTLY FINE, BUT WE'VE GOT TO SET THE NOT TO EXCEED TAX RATE.
THINK WE'RE STILL COMFORTABLE, BUT IF WE WERE GOING TO GO TO OUR PUBLIC AND SAY, LOOK, WE WANT TO CREATE SOMETHING HERE.
WE NEED MORE MONEYS, STREETS, FIRE, WHATEVER.
WE WOULD HAVE WHAT AUGUST 18 WOULD BE OUR DEADLINE TO CALL AN ELECTION.
WE DON'T. WE HAVE TO [INAUDIBLE] HOW DO THAT.
THEN NOT TO EXCEED RATE WOULD ONLY BE FACTORED IF ANYBODY ON COUNCIL THOUGHT WE COULD BRING THAT $0.43 DOWN.
OTHERWISE, I THINK THAT IS WHAT WE'RE PREPARED TO.
WE WOULD RECOMMEND ALWAYS SETTING THE NOT TO EXCEED RATE AD AT THE IT AT THE HIGHEST, WHICH IS THE VOTER APPROVAL TAX RATE, WHICH IS THAT 43.07.
THAT'S GOING TO BE ON THE 26? YES, SIR.
DO YOU NEED ANYTHING BACK FROM COUNCIL HERE NEXT WEEK, OR DO YOU WANT TO WAIT? WHAT WOULD YOU WHAT DO YOU NEED? BECAUSE WE HAVE TO START PREPARING PUBLIC HEARING NOTICES AND ALL THAT BASED ON WHAT YOUR BUDGET NUMBERS ARE.
WE HAVE TO START POSTING THOSE TO BE IN THE STATE LAW REQUIREMENTS AT THE VERY FIRST OF SEPTEMBER.
WE NEED TO START GETTING SOME FINAL DECISIONS.
COUNCIL CAN YOU CAN MAKE CHANGES UP UNTIL THE LAST DAY THAT YOU APPROVE THE BUDGET, WHICH IS IN SEPTEMBER. THAT'S PERFECTLY FINE.
WE JUST NEED TO KNOW WE CAN TAKE IT AS IT'S FILED RIGHT NOW AND START DOING ALL OF OUR PUBLIC HEARING NOTICES, BUT IF YOU WANT US TO MAKE CHANGES BEFORE WE START POSTING ALL OF THAT, WE NEED TO KNOW PROBABLY NEXT WEEK WOULD BE IDEAL.
COULD ALSO DO JUST TO BRIDGE THAT IS OBVIOUSLY, THE NO STREET MAINTENANCE FEE, THAT COLUMN.
I'M GETTING A SENSE FROM THE COUNCIL AT A MINIMUM, YOU'RE IN AGREEMENT WITH THE ITEMS THAT HAVE BEEN POSING THAT COLUMN THERE.
THERE'S TALK ABOUT MAYBE ADDING A LITTLE BIT MORE HERE AND THERE, MAYBE ANOTHER MILLION FOR PLEA AND SO FORTH.
BUT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE NOT LOOKING AT GOING BELOW 3%.
YOU'RE NOT LOOKING AT GOING BELOW 2%.
YOU'RE NOT LOOKING AT GOING BELOW THE CL.
IT SOUNDS LIKE WE COULD GET STARTED WITH THAT COLUMN AND START THE PROCESS.
YOU CAN THEN NEXT WEEK COME BACK AND SAY, WE WANT TO ADD THIS OR SUBTRACT THAT, BUT THAT AT LEAST GIVES LAURA AND HER TEAM AN ABILITY TO START GETTING DOCUMENTS TOGETHER FOR THOSE POSTINGS.
WHAT I'M GO SO FAR TODAY, IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT COLUMN IS A REASONABLY CONSENSUS WISE ACCEPTABLE ROUTE TO GO AT THIS POINT HERE.
I DO WANT TO WEIGH IN ON THAT A LITTLE BIT.
[03:25:01]
I'VE HEARD THE TMRS AT THE TOP IS AGREEABLE.I HAVEN'T HEARD THAT THE PAY STUDY IS TOTALLY OFF OF THE TABLE.
YOU COULD COME BACK AND SAY, GUYS, IF I HAD 500,000 HERE, I COULD GREATLY HELP THE ORGANIZATION.
MAYBE THAT'S A CONSIDERATION FOR YOU TO MAKE THERE.
THE COLA MERIT, WHAT I HEARD WAS COUNCILMAN TIPS SAY HE WANTED TO DO MERIT ONLY.
THEN I ALSO HEARD IN PREVIOUS DISCUSSIONS THAT IF WE DID A 2% MERIT, WE ACTUALLY WERE GIVING 3% MERIT AT TIMES BECAUSE WE WOULD REALIZE SOME OF THAT SAVINGS IN THE DEPARTMENT BECAUSE NOT EVERYBODY GETS A MERIT RAISE.
SOMETIMES WE HIRE AND IT DOESN'T WORK OUT AND THEY LEAVE.
COULD WE DO A 2% MERIT ONLY, COUNCIL, AND BUILD THAT NUMBER IN? THEN COUNCILMAN TIPS, DID YOU WANT TO MODIFY THAT? NO, I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT, THE MAYOR'S POINT, WE DISCUSSED IT A LITTLE BIT.
WHAT DO YOU SEE IN THAT WHEN YOU BECAUSE NOT EVERYBODY ACHIEVES THE MERIT RACE.
THE ONES THAT DON'T, YOU CAPTURE THAT BACK.
IT'S A NUMBER THAT'S GOING TO VARY, LAURA. HOW DO YOU FIGURE THAT? NORMALLY, THE WAY IT WORKS ON OUR MERIT SCORING, IT'S A BELL CURVE.
LIKE IN THIS PAST YEAR, WE HAD A 2% MERIT.
THE MAJORITY OF THE CIVILIANS GOT A 1.5% INCREASE.
THERE WAS A SMALLER AMOUNT THAT GOT A 1% OR NOTHING, AND THERE WAS A SMALLER AMOUNT THAT GOT THE 2%.
YES, OVERALL, YOU'RE CAPTURING SOME SAVINGS.
WE DID HAVE SOME INDIVIDUAL REQUESTS TO DO A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN 2% THAT WAS APPROVED BY OUR CITY MANAGER JUST TO HELP THOSE HIGH PERFORMERS THROUGH A LITTLE BIT OF THAT SAVINGS. THAT'S HOW [INAUDIBLE] THAT WAS UP TO 5%. THAT'S WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE.
THAT'S WHAT I'D LIKE TO SEE IN THE ORGANIZATION IS JUST REWARD THOSE HARD WORKERS BECAUSE WE DEFINITELY HAVE A LOT OF THEM, AND I THINK THEY NEED TO BE REWARDED.
OPTION. THIS ONLY APPLIES TO CIVILIANS.
POLICE AND FIRE, MAYOR IS NOT AN OPTION.
I AM STILL PUSHING FOR THE 5% ON THE POLICE AND THE 4% ON THE FIRE.
THAT'LL INCREASE ANOTHER MILLION EIGHT.
WHERE WOULD YOU LIKE US TO TAKE THAT FROM? WELL, I AM ASKING FOR YOU TO RUN THIS TICKET AND SHOW IT.
THE ONLY PLACE THAT I COULD LOOK AT WOULD BE TO LOOK AT ONGOING EXPENDITURES NOW THAT WE'VE BROKEN THAT OUT A LITTLE BIT BETTER FROM ONE TIME EXPENSES.
IF IT ENDS UP AT THE BOTTOM OF OUR BUDGET THAT WE'RE $5 MILLION UNDER ON OUR TARGET RESERVES, AND WE COULD GO BACK THROUGH OUR FINANCIALS, IF WE ALLEVIATE ANY RESERVE FEES OVER THERE THAT WE'RE COMFORTABLE.
THEY'RE ALREADY GENERAL FUND RESERVES.
IF WE FOUND THOSE, WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING THAT WE COULD CONSIDER MOVING FORWARD OR SHOULD WE NOT EVEN CONSIDER THAT? I THINK AT THIS POINT HERE, WE'VE REACHED A GOOD POINT HERE WHERE WE NEED TO GET A GOOD CONSENSUS FROM THE COUNCIL BEFORE WE MAKE THAT CHANGE BECAUSE I THINK IT COULD BE A WORTHY EFFORT, BUT BEFORE WE GO AND START DIGGING DEEPER INTO EXPENSES, IF THAT'S A SITUATION THE COUNCIL AS A BODY LIKE US TO GO, WE CAN DO THAT.
I JUST THINK I WISH THERE WAS, LIKE, MONEY JUST HANGING AROUND, BUT I THINK WE'VE BEEN THROUGH THIS.
IF I SAW SOMETHING THAT SAID, WOW, THERE'S REALLY A POT OF GOLD OUT THERE.
I WOULD SAY, LET'S GO DIG INTO IT.
BUT AT THIS POINT, I JUST DON'T REALLY SEE I THINK COUNCIL IS AT A GOOD POINT.
YES, I WOULD LOVE TO DO AS MUCH RAISES AS WE ARE, BUT I THINK COLUMN 1 IS A GOOD CONSENSUS WITH WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT.
IF YOU CAN FIND ANYTHING AND COME BACK, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
BUT I JUST DON'T SEE THE NECESSARY TO SPEND AN INORDINATE AMOUNT OF STAFF TIME ON SOMETHING THAT I JUST DON'T SEE IT EVEN BEING THE POSSIBILITY OUT THERE.
THE ONLY OTHER PLACE TO TAKE IT FROM WOULD BE IT CHARGES, WHICH IS THERE 800,000 THAT YOU'RE RECOMMENDING THERE? NO, IT WOULD BE THE 800 MINUS THE 600 SO IT WOULD BE 200,000.
YEAH, AND THAT'S BARELY EVEN [INAUDIBLE] REALLY, COLUMN 1 AND THEN THE REALLY THE ONLY THING WOULD BE, AND IT MIGHT BE AN EFFORT THAT DOESN'T PAN OUT.
BUT ONCE AGAIN, I THINK IN LOOKING THROUGH ALL THESE CIPS AND DOUBLE CHECKING THOSE FINANCIALS, WE'RE GOING TO HELP OURSELVES ON GETTING AS MUCH OF THAT MONEY INTO THESE CAPITAL PROJECTS.
AS WE LOOK BACK, IF WE FIND ANYTHING THAT WOULD BE ADDITIONAL RESERVES THAT ARE ALREADY IN THE GENERAL FUND, THEN POTENTIALLY THAT COULD HELP.
BUT FOR THE MOST PART, I THINK, WE AS A COUNCIL ARE DOING OUR BEST, AND THEN I WANT TO GIVE COUNCIL A WEEK OR SO TO BRING ANY MILLION DOLLAR IDEAS THAT WE MAY HAVE,
[03:30:03]
BUT I DON'T HAVE ONE TODAY.I JUST WANT TO REITERATE THAT I THINK THE PAY STUDY, BEFORE WE RAISE ANY OF THESE THAT ARE ON THERE RIGHT NOW, THE PAY STUDY HAS TO BE LOOKED AT.
WE REALLY HAVE TO MAKE SURE BECAUSE WE ARE GOING TO HAVE HUGE HEADWINDS IF WE DON'T GET EVERYBODY SOME KIND OF A RAISE.
DOES THAT GIVE YOU TIME TO COME BACK WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF I NEED 500,000 TO PHASE INTO THIS OR I NEED A MILLION, WHATEVER IT WOULD BE? I THINK IF THE CONSENSUS OF COUNCIL IS FOR US TO GO LOOK FOR SOME ADDITIONAL PIECES, WE CAN TRY TO COMB THROUGH AND SEE IF WE CAN COME UP WITH IDEAS.
BUT IF THE CONSENSUS OF COUNCIL IS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT FIRST COLUMN WE CAN CERTAINLY DO THAT TOO.
JUST SAY STILL GOES TO THE QUESTION.
IF WE WANT TO PUT THAT IN, 2.2, WHAT DO WE TAKE OUT? I THINK THAT COMES DOWN TO A PRINCIPLE IN BUSINESS THAT SAYS, WE'RE GOING TO DO MORE WITH FEWER PEOPLE BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO PAY THOSE FEWER PEOPLE MORE.
I THINK THAT COMES TO THOSE DEPARTMENTS SAYING, LOOK, I DO HAVE FIVE FTES AVAILABLE, AND THEY'RE CONSTANTLY IN AND OUT.
MY TURNOVER IS HIGH. IF I COULD LOSE THREE OF THOSE AND GET MY PAY INCREASES FOR THE GUYS THAT I'M KEEPING, THAT'S WHAT I HEAR DAVID DRIVING AT.
BUT THE 2.2 MILLION IN YOUR GENERAL FUND, THE BULK OF THOSE VACANT POSITIONS ARE GOING TO BE LIKE IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND I WOULDN'T IMAGINE COUNCIL'S WANTING TO UNFUND THOSE POSITIONS.
WE UNDERSTAND THE HALF OF IT, A LITTLE OVER HALF OF THAT.
BUT WE'RE ONLY LOOKING AT $1 MILLION AND IT'S A 500.
I THOUGHT YOU JUST SAID 2.2 MILLION.
NO. I'VE SAID 500,000, 750 MILLION.
I DON'T KNOW WHERE HE WANTS. I LIKE PHASING IN THE PROGRAM.
YEAH. THAT'S IF HE PRIORITIZES.
I GUESS THAT I HEAR MAYOR SAYING IS IF THERE'S SOME WITH A SERIOUS DISCREPANCY THAT YOU'RE LIKE, I THINK THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT THAT AT LEAST IF WE'RE GOING TO TAKE NOT THE WHOLE THING, BUT WE JUST TAKE THE ONES THAT ARE PRIORITY, THEN THAT'S UP TO YOU TO SAY, HEY, THESE, WE REALLY DO NEED TO MAKE UP SOME GROUND.
BUT AGAIN, I AGREE IT COMES BACK TO FORCE QUESTIONS LIKE, WHERE DO YOU WANT TO TAKE IT FROM? NOW, NOT TO SAY WE'RE GOING TO SCRUB AND WE'RE GOING TO DO WHAT WE CAN, I HOPE EVERYBODY SEES OUT THERE THAT, THE PREVIOUS COUNCIL AND THIS COUNCIL HAS DONE EVERYTHING WE CAN TO SCRUB THIS BUDGET, AND PUT IT BACK ON YOU GUYS.
YOU ALL HAVE DONE A GREAT JOB, AND WE'LL CONTINUE TO DO SO.
BUT AT SOME POINT, THERE'S JUST THE MONEY JUST ISN'T THERE, ESPECIALLY IF FOR LOOKING AT WHATEVER WE PHASE IN THERE, IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE HIGH RAISES FOR POLICE AND FIRE, THAT'S WHAT AN ADDITIONAL WAS IT 1.7, SOMETHING LIKE THAT? I THINK 1.7 FOR THE ADDITIONAL RATIO.
1.7, IF YOU GO 500 WITH HERE, WE'RE AT 2.3, NOW WE'RE LOOKING AT 2.3 RECURRING THAT WE GOT TO FIND, AND THAT'S ONE OF THE TIGHTEST SPOTS THAT WE GOT IS THE RECURRING. THESE ARE THE BIG SAT.
ALSO, PRIOR TO US EVEN FILING THE PROPOSED BUDGET, WE ALREADY ELIMINATED, I THINK IT WAS $3 MILLION IN ADDITIONAL REQUESTS THAT THE DEPARTMENTS NEEDED.
NTES? NO. WELL, PART OF THEY WERE REQUESTS JUST TO KEEP UP WITH THE SERVICES THAT THEY'RE DOING NOW, WHETHER IT'S POSITIONS.
I KNOW OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT HAD REQUESTED SOME DRONE OPERATIONS THAT THEY THOUGHT COULD REALLY POSSIBLY HELP LONG TERM, MAYBE WITH SOME OF THEIR MINIMUM STAFFING NEEDS AND OVERTIME, SOME OF THOSE THINGS, WE COULDN'T AFFORD IT.
WE'VE ALREADY SCRUBBED THESE BUDGETS VERY, VERY HARD, AND WE'VE ALREADY ELIMINATED A LOT.
THEN WE'VE JUST CUT ANOTHER 1.2 MILLION OUT IN ADDITIONAL SUPPLEMENTAL REQUESTS THAT THEY ASKED.
NOW WE'RE UP TO ABOUT FOUR MILLION THAT HAS BEEN CUT THAT DEPARTMENTS ARE SAYING, WE NEED THIS TO KEEP OPERATING.
YOU'VE ALREADY FORCED THE ORGANIZATION TO BE AS EFFICIENT AS POSSIBLE. I HEAR YOU SAYING.
YES. GRAYSON HAS GIVEN SOME REALLY GOOD DIRECTION.
HE SAT DOWN AND SCRUBBED THROUGH BUDGETS WITH DEPARTMENTS.
I THINK BACK TO THE STREET MAINTENANCE. THIS IS WHERE WE'VE GOT TO BE.
BEFORE WE LOOK AT ANYTHING ELSE, WE'VE GOT TO BE AS TIGHT AS WE CAN BE BEFORE WE START LOOKING AT OTHERS JUST TO MAKE EVERYBODY COMFORTABLE.
I'M NOT SAYING THAT ALL THESE ASKS WERE JUST TO MAKE PEOPLE COMFORTABLE, WE STILL WANT TO PROVIDE AN EXCELLENT SERVICE FOR ALL OF OUR CITIZENS, BUT I THINK Y'ALL DOING A GREAT JOB OF DRILLING DOWN AND THEN THE QUESTIONS AND THE CRAZY MAP THAT WE CRAZY OVER HERE.
[OVERLAPPING] YEAH, BUT WE GET THERE. I THINK IT'S ALL GOOD.
I THINK WHAT I HEAR MAYOR SAYING IS, LET'S JUST SEE IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE AND THEN BRING BACK AND SEE WHERE WE ARE. THERE MIGHT NOT BE ANYTHING.
WELL I THINK TO BE FAIR TO THEM, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY HAVE GOOD DIRECTION.
YES. NOW THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.
THERE'S A MISSING VACANCY RIGHT HERE, ARE WE JUST WELL, GO BACK AND FIGURE IT OUT YOURSELF AND THEY FIGURE OUT SOMETHING AND COME BACK TO US AND WE SAY, NO.
I THINK WE'VE DONE A GOOD JOB OF LINING OUT PRIORITIES.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT, DO YOU GUYS FEEL LIKE YOU HAVE THE DIRECTION TO MOVE FORWARD WITH WHAT COUNCIL WANTS TO DO? ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? WHAT QUESTIONS DO WE STILL NEED TO ANSWER TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAVE THE DIRECTION?
[03:35:02]
AS LAURA SAID, WE'VE ALREADY SCRUBBED THE BUDGET VERY CLEAN, SO YOU CAN PLUS AND MINUS ALL DAY LONG BETWEEN HERE AND NEXT BUDGET CYCLE.WE KNOW OCTOBER 1, WE'RE GOING TO BE WRONG.
THIS IS HOW THE PROCESS IS. YOU CAN ADD A MILLION HERE, TAKE A MILLION THERE.
IS THIS HOW THE PROCESS WORKS, AND SO I FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH THE FIRST COLUMN.
I THINK I HAVE GOOD DIRECTION THEN WITH THE FIRST COLUMN AS IT'S WRITTEN.
AT LEAST THEN PRIOR TODAY, WE'VE ALREADY WORKED THE NUMBERS.
WE'VE ALREADY WORKED THE PROCESS. WE KNOW WE CAN MAKE THE FIRST COLUMN WORK.
BUT I WOULD NEED SOME DIRECTION ABOUT ZERO IN OR SOME OF THAT DON'T TOUCH THIS OR DON'T TOUCH THAT TO HELP ME IF WE'RE LOOKING AT ADDING SOME MORE TO PLEASE OR EVEN A PAY STUDY OR SO FORTH.
ONLY QUESTION I WOULD HAVE IS YOU FEEL CONFIDENT THAT IF YOU'RE ASKING THOSE DIRECTORS TO COME TO YOU WITH EFFICIENCIES IN ORDER TO GET PAY RAISES IN THOSE DEPARTMENTS.
YOU DON'T HAVE ANY. THEY DO THAT ON A REGULAR BASE. I'LL SAY.
YES. IF THAT'S DONE, THEN MY CONSIDERATION WOULD BE, LIKE YOU SCRUB THE BUDGET ALREADY.
WE SCRUB THE RESERVES JUST TO MAKE SURE WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING THERE THAT WOULD MAKE US MORE COMFORTABLE IN OUR BOTTOM LINE, WHAT WE NEED TO HIT THAT TARGET AT.
IF WE DON'T HAVE IT THERE, THEN IT'S INTEREST INCOME.
ARE THOSE RAISES NEEDED ENOUGH TO BE JUSTIFIED WITH TAKING A LITTLE BIT OF INTEREST INCOME OUT OF DRAINAGE OR SEWER AND WATER AND WE WERE COMFORTABLE DOING IT LAST YEAR.
I UNDERSTAND, WE'RE NOT COMFORTABLE DOING IT THIS YEAR WITH CIRCUMSTANTIALLY THINGS.
WE WERE NOT COMFORTABLE DOING IT LAST YEAR.
YOU DIDN'T RECOMMEND IT, WE WERE COMFORTABLE.
Y'ALL WERE COMFORTABLE. WE WERE NOT.
I'M STILL COMFORTABLE, AND FEELING LIKE OUR PATH FORWARD IS TO KEEP UP WITH TRYING TO GET THINGS FROM THE M&O SIDE OVER TO THE INS TO FREE UP SOME OF THOSE BETTER PURCHASES.
A FIRE TRUCK DIDN'T COST $1.8 FIVE YEARS AGO.
THESE ARE LEGITIMATE THINGS WHERE WE'RE GOING TO BORROW THAT FIRE TRUCK MONEY.
IN DOING ALL THAT, SOME OF THE PROJECTS THAT ARE CONSTRUCTION RELATED, INFRASTRUCTURE AND GROWTH AROUND TOWN, I THINK GIVES US A LITTLE MORE COMFORT TO DEPEND ON THAT INTEREST INCOME.
HOWEVER, I DON'T THINK I'VE GOT TWO OTHERS THAT SUPPORT IT.
I'M NOT GIVING YOU A SOLUTION.
I'M JUST GIVING YOU SOMETHING TO WEIGH AGAINST IF YOU FELT LIKE THOSE PAY RAISES WERE THAT IMPORTANT.
>> CAN YOU GUYS GET A MILLION DOLLARS IN THE PAY STUDY? CAN YOU SCRUB IT A DOWN, TO GET A MILLION DOLLARS IN THE PAY STUDY, 1% MORE FOR POLICE, 1% MORE FOR FIRE, AND 500,000 FOR THE SENIORS? CAN WE FIND IT?
>> NO. I CAN LOOK, BUT I CAN'T WORK MIRACLES.
>> WE CAN'T GO COST RECOVERY ON AREAS?
>> WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH AREAS TO DO COST RECOVERY.
>> HOW MUCH DO YOU WANT TO TAKE AND PUT IT IN THE PAY STUDY?
>> I WANT TO PUT A MILLION DOLLARS IN THE PAY STUDY.
>> THEN WE JUST GIVE A MILLION DOLLARS LESS RAISES WHERE WE CAN.
>> THOSE ARE THE OPTIONS WE'RE LOOKING AT.
>> THERE'S JUST NOT THAT MUCH MONEY OUT THERE, BUT I THINK IF WE'RE GOING TO COME UP WITH A WISH, I THINK WHAT THEY'VE GOT TO HAVE IS AT LEAST SOME GUIDANCE OF, WE WANT TO DO THIS.
>> THAT'S THE GUIDANCE. CAN WE FIND THAT?
>> WE CAN LOOK, BUT WE'RE NOT GOING TO FIND ALL OF IT.
>> IT'S ALL ON THIS PAGE IF THERE'S SOMETHING TO FIND. MAYBE THERE'S SOMETHING ELSE.
>> BUT YOUR VARIABLE HERE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FINDING IS IN THOSE EXISTING RATES.
WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS IF I CHARGE MORE FOR A GOLF BALL [OVERLAPPING]
>> I LOVE THE GOLF CALL ANALOGY.
>> IF I CHARGE MORE FOR A TRASH CAN PICK UP, SO ON, OUR COMMERCIAL SIDE, IF WE IDENTIFY, WE'RE STILL BELOW MARKET, WHAT YOU GUYS HAD SAID IS, DON'T INCREASE A RATE IN THAT DEPARTMENT AND NOT KEEP IT IN THAT DEPARTMENT, BUT WHAT WE MAY BE SAYING IS, IF YOU HAVE THESE NEEDS THAT ARE TRYING TO BALANCE OUT PAY DIFFERENTIALS, THEN THAT MIGHT BE THE ONLY MECHANISM.
OF COURSE, WE WERE LOOKING AT A STREET FEE NOT TOO LONG AGO AS THIS RECOMMENDATION, LET'S JUST PUT IT ON PEOPLE'S WATER BILL.
I'M WAY MORE APPROACHABLE AND AGREEABLE TO, INSTEAD OF PAYING $22 FOR MY TRASH, PAYING 24.
DOES THAT HELP YOU TO THAT EXTENT?
>> MY QUESTION, AND IF THE ANSWER IS NO, IT'S NO, I THINK THIS IS FANTASTIC, WHICH YOU GUYS HAVE DELIVERED, AND IT'S BEEN VERY CLEAR AND I UNDERSTAND IT, HOW COULD WE GET THERE? WE'RE IN THE LAST MINUTE OF THE FOURTH QUARTER.
>> WE COULD LOOK AT THE VECTOR FEE AGAIN.
WE'VE GIVEN YOU OUT-OF-THE-BOX IDEAS WITH THE VECTOR FEE, THE STREET MAINTENANCE FEE, ADJUSTING THE SOLID WASTE FEE SOME MORE.
I JUST DON'T KNOW, AT THIS POINT, IF Y'ALL DON'T LIKE THOSE IDEAS, THEN WE MOST LIKELY WON'T BE ABLE TO AFFORD THIS.
>> CAN WE JUST GO BACK ONE MORE TIME AND ASK ALL THE DEPARTMENT HEADS, WE NEED A 2% SO WE CAN GET TO THIS SPOT. CAN WE JUST TRIM IT?
[03:40:03]
I I'M NEW. DON'T LOOK AT ME LIKE THIS, ANDREW, I SEE YOU LOOKING AT ME.THAT'S HOW I WOULD DO IT IN MY BUSINESS.
I WOULD GO BACK TO ALL MY DEPARTMENT HEADS AND SAY, HEY, WE GOT TO TRIM IT DOWN ONE LAST TIME. I'M JUST PICKING ON YOU, ANDREW.
>> THAT'S YOUR ONE MORE QUESTION, IT'S ONE LAST TIME.
>> MAYBE THIS IS GOING TO BE THE CASE HERE.
I HAVE QUESTION, THOUGH, ON THE VECTOR. WHERE ARE WE ON THE VECTOR?
>> WE TOOK IT OUT BASED ON THE FACT THAT COUNCIL HAD GIVEN DIRECTION.
THEY DIDN'T WANT TO ADD ANYTHING NEW TO THE WATER BILLS.
THE VECTOR FEE WOULD GO ON TO THE WATER BILL, AS IS THE SOLID WASTE FEE, AS IS THE DRAINAGE FEE, AS WOULD BE THE STREET MAINTENANCE FEE.
WE HAD MOVED THAT OUT, AND THAT'S ACTUALLY HURTING YOUR GENERAL FUND BY ABOUT 500,000.
YOU COULD 500,000 IF WE PAY VECTOR FEE LINE.
>> THAT'S MOSQUITO CONTROL YEAR-ROUND.
>> FIFTY CENTS PER MONTH PER WATER BILL.
>> YOU GO BACK TO WHEN WE'RE TALKING PAY RAISES, YOU'RE ALSO TALKING SENIOR SERVICES.
YOU WANT TO FUND $500,000 IN SENIOR SERVICES.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO A 50 CENT VECTOR FEE AND CREATE A NEW ITEM.
IT WOULD COST RECOVER, BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE ASKING YOU TO DO.
WE CAN INCREASE OUR SOLID WASTE COLLECTION BY FIFTY CENTS.
IT WOULDN'T EVEN BE THAT. IT WOULD HAVE TO BE LESS THAN THAT
>> IT WOULD HAVE TO CO-RELATE TO SOLID WASTE CHANGES AS WELL.
>> WHATEVER THAT WOULD BE. A NICKEL TO FIFTY CENTS, WHATEVER THAT IS.
IT WOULD BE MORE DIGESTIBLE, I THINK, AND THIS IS JUST ME WEIGHING IN, RATHER THAN TRYING TO CREATE A STREET UTILITY, I WOULD LOOK AT THOSE VARIABLES THAT YOU COULD POTENTIALLY PUSH, BUT ONLY IN THE GIVEN MARKET, IT'S WHATEVER THE MARKET WILL BEAR.
ON THE COMMERCIAL SIDE, I'M NOT SAYING WE HAVE MARKET THERE, BUT WE DID LAST YEAR, SO HAVE WE CAUGHT UP? I KNOW WE'RE JUST TALKING AROUND IT.
HAVE WE GIVEN ENOUGH DIRECTION TO YOU GUYS FOR YOU TO BRING YOUR FINAL RECOMMENDATION?
>> IS IT THE CONSENSUS OF COUNCIL FOR US TO GO LOOK TO SEE IF WE CAN FIND A MILLION FOR A PAY STUDY, 1% ADDITIONAL INCREASE FOR FIRE, 1% ADDITIONAL INCREASE FOR POLICE, AND 500,000 FOR SENIOR CITIZENS, OR IS THERE SOMETHING ELSE? I'VE HEARD THAT FROM ONE. I'VE HEARD PARTS FROM OTHERS, BUT, WHAT IS THE CONSENSUS THAT WE'RE TASKED TO GO? I AM NOT GUARANTEEING WE CAN FIND THIS
>> MY OPINION IS WHAT IS IN THIS COLUMN 1, I'M FINE WITH? YOU DO? WITH THE DIRECTION FROM COUNCILMAN PRESCOTT, THAT TO RESTORE PART OF THE PAY STUDY, THAT WE DO GO BACK AND LOOK AND SEE HOW MUCH WE CAN POTENTIALLY TRIM WITHOUT HARMING SERVICES OR ANYTHING SIGNIFICANTLY.
WHAT I'M HEARING IS IT SEEMS, AT LEAST FOR ME, COLUMN 1 IS GOOD FOR ME EXCEPT THE PAY STUDY TO GO BACK AND SEE IF WE CAN FUND PART OF IT.
>> I DO SUPPORT THE 1% FOR FIRE AND 1% FOR POLICE IF YOU CAN FIND IT.
IF IT'S NOT THERE, IT'S NOT THERE.
THAT'S GONG TO BE MORE THAN A MILLION DOLLARS TO DO.
>> I RECOGNIZE THAT, BUT LET'S LOOK ONE LAST TIME.
LET'S REALLY PUT IT THROUGH THE COMB.
>> HERE'S A QUESTION AND JUST SEE IF IT'S PALATABLE AT ALL, AND IF IT MEANS ANY BIG SAVINGS. I DON'T KNOW.
WE HAVEN'T SEEN THE RESULT OF THE PAY STUDY, BUT I WOULD GUESS THAT THE MAJORITY OF IT IS GOING TO BE THE LOWER LEVEL EMPLOYEES, LIKE, DIRECTORS AND BELOW.
WHAT IF WE LOOKED AT AN INCREASE FOR EMPLOYEES FROM THAT LEVEL BELOW EXCLUDED MAYBE DIRECTORS AND ABOVE>? BECAUSE I FEEL THAT THAT'S WHERE IT'S MOST NEEDED, AND NO DIFFERENT IN POLICE AND FIRE.
IT'S THE PEOPLE IN THE LOWER LEVELS, I THINK, THAT WE'RE AT RISK OF LOSING.
IS THAT ENOUGH OF A SAVINGS TO MAYBE SPREAD IT OUT DIFFERENTLY?
>> IT JUST COMES DOWN TO FINDING THE MONEY TO DO THAT.
>> WE NEED TO FIND THE MONEY TO DO IT.
I'M TALKING ABOUT SAVING MONEY.
CAP THE RAISES TO ONLY THOSE CERTAIN PEOPLE.
THAT'S GOING TO FREE UP SOME MONEY.
>> THE PROBLEM WITH YOUR POLICE AND FIRE, WHICH, AGAIN, IS GOING TO BE THE BULK OF THIS IS YOU CAN'T DO MORE FOR THE LOWER RANKS AND LESS FOR THE HIGHER RANKS BECAUSE THEY'RE ON STEPS.
THEY'RE SPREAD PROPORTIONALLY OUT, AND THEY STEP EACH YEAR AND IT WOULD COMPRESS IT.
>> WHAT ABOUT CITY? THE CIVILIANS.
>> ON CIVILIANS? IT COULD CREATE COMPRESSION.
WE'D HAVE TO DO A LOT OF ANALYSIS ON IT.
>> 3% WOULD CREATE COMPRESSION? THREE OR 4%?
>> YEAH. YOUR CIVILIANS ARE VERY TIGHT.
>> WHAT I HEAR ALL SAYING IS THAT'S NOT AN OPTION.
CERTAINLY NOT ON THE SWORN SIDE, BUT EVEN ON THE CIVILIAN SIDE.
>> I DON'T WANT TO TASK Y'ALL WITH ANYTHING THAT'S LIKE, LISTEN, THIS IS A WASTE OF TIME. THEN DON'T DO IT.
I'M NOT GOING TO ASK YOU TO WASTE YOUR TIME, BUT IF YOU'RE LIKE, THAT'S A POSSIBILITY, WE COULD FREE THIS UP AND THEN FREE UP ANOTHER PERCENTAGE JUST BY KEEPING
[03:45:02]
THAT TOP TIER OUT OF A TWO OR A 3% RAISE, THAT MEANS MORE FOR THE LOWER LEVEL, WHICH, I THINK, IS MORE WHERE WE NEED TO BE, BUT IF THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE, DON'T DO IT.>> I APPRECIATE THAT. WE WILL DISCUSS THAT INTERNALLY.
WE CAN RUN SOME NUMBERS AND LOOK AND SEE WHAT THAT POTENTIALLY COULD DO.
WE'RE OPEN TO IDEAS. WE DEFINITELY ARE.
WE'RE WILLING TO LOOK AT ANYTHING THAT WE LEGALLY CAN DO OR THAT WILL NOT DETRIMENTALLY HURT THE ORGANIZATION.
IF I ADDED THIS UP CORRECTLY, A MILLION OR LESS FOR PAY STUDY, BUT LET'S JUST SAY A MILLION, IT WOULD BE ABOUT A 1.1 MILLION INCREASE FOR ADDITIONAL INCREASE FOR POLICE AND FIRE AND 500,000 FOR SENIORS.
WE'RE TRYING TO FIND MAYBE ANOTHER 2.6 SOMEWHERE.
>> I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT YOU.
FOR THE SENIORS, I GO BACK WITH LESS OF SAYING I THINK OUR BUDGET WAS 109. IS THAT WHERE WE WERE?
>> IT WAS 109. I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S BEEN COMMUNICATED OF WHAT SERVICES ARE EVEN AVAILABLE BECAUSE I THINK WE ARE ALL SHOCKED UP HERE THAT WE SPEND THAT MUCH ON SENIORS.
I DON'T THINK ANYBODY UP HERE WAS AWARE OF THAT.
I THINK THE COMMUNICATION SIDE WOULD BE, LET'S FIGURE OUT, AND I KNOW THAT IN A BUDGET THING, BUT BEFORE WE START ADDING MORE, ARE WE BEING SMART WITH THIS 109?
>> I JUST THINK WHERE WE ARE AT THE BUDGET RIGHT NOW, TO ME, THE PRIORITY IS COMPENSATING OUR EMPLOYEES, BUT WHAT I HEAR IS, GO BACK AND SAVE AS MUCH AS YOU CAN.
WHENEVER THEY COME BACK AND FIND OUT HOW MUCH SAVINGS IT IS, I WOULD STILL PERHAPS LIKE TO HAVE A DISCUSSION, IF WE CAN, OF WHERE WE'RE GOING TO ROLL THIS OUT FROM PAY STUDY TO RAISES. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE?
>> IF WE FIND FUNDING TO PARTIALLY FUND PAY STUDY [OVERLAPPING]
>> BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO COME BACK. IF YOU CAN'T FIND THE 2.7, WE JUST CAN'T AUTOMATICALLY SAY, WE WANT TO BUMP IT UP TO THREE AND FOUR.
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO COME BACK AND FIGURE OUT HOW TO ALLOCATE THAT, CORRECT?
>> OUR NEXT STEPS ARE GOING TO BE DEPENDENT ON HOW MUCH MONEY THAT YOU FIND.
>> THAT'S NOT OUT THERE. BECAUSE IF WE'RE LOOKING AT RAISES, DO WE WANT TO TAKE ALL THAT EXTRA AND JUST GIVE IT TO THE PAY STUDY AND THE POLICE AND FIRE AND NOT USE ANY OF THAT FOUND MONEY FOR CIVILIANS? I JUST THINK THAT WILL BE A DISCUSSION I'D LIKE TO HAVE BEFORE WE FINALLY DETERMINE HOW WE'RE GOING TO ALLOCATE THAT MONEY.
WE MAY SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT? POLICE AND FIRE, WE NEED TO GET THEM.
CIVILIANS, THEY WON'T GET ANY PART OF THAT, OR WE'RE GOING TO DISTRIBUTE IT EQUALLY, BUT I THINK THE GOAL IS, WE'RE GOING TO FIND AS MUCH MONEY AS WE CAN, AND WHEN WE GET IT, IT LOOKS LIKE THESE FOUR AREAS ARE WHERE WE'LL DETERMINE HOW WE'LL SPREAD IT BACK OUT.
>> I KNOW COUNCILMAN SIMPSON IS DRIVING HOME THE POINT, AND I WANT EVERYBODY TO HEAR IT.
WE HAVE PULLED BACK AND FORTH ON THIS TUG OF WAR THROUGH DIFFERENT BUDGET MEETINGS AND THROWN ALL SORTS OF IDEAS AND EVEN GONE THROUGH DIFFERENT FEELINGS OF SHOULD HAVE THIS OR SHOULD HAVE THAT? NONE OF THAT MATTERS.
WHAT MATTERS IS THAT YOU HEAR BOTH THE CITIZENS OF THE COMMUNITY AND THE STAFF, THAT, THIS COUNCIL AND THIS STAFF BELIEVES THAT OUR NUMBER 1 PRIORITY ARE PEOPLE.
WE'VE COMMUNICATED FOR TWO SOLID YEARS HOW MUCH WE LOVE AND APPRECIATE OUR LOCAL HEROES, AND AT THE SAME TIME, TRIED TO COMMUNICATE, MAN, THAT LOCAL HERO IS THAT GUY WHO'S GOT HIS HAND DOWN IN THAT FREEZING WATER AT 2:00 IN THE MORNING FROM PUBLIC WORKS AND HE'S FIXING MY PROBLEM IN THE ALLEY WHILE I SLEEP SO THAT I HAVE A HOT SHOWER IN THE MORNING.
WE'RE NOT DIFFERENTIATING, EVEN THOUGH WE KNOW WHAT WE SAW WHEN WE GOT HERE WAS A PRIORITIZATION OF THAT PUBLIC SAFETY NEED.
ONCE AGAIN, I HOPE YOU GUYS CAN HEAR IT.
THE PRIORITY IS THE PEOPLE, AND IF WE CAN PAY OUR PEOPLE MORE BECAUSE OF EFFICIENCIES, YOU GUYS ARE TRYING TO HELP US DO THAT, AND AS LONG AS UPPER MANAGEMENT IS HELPING, THEN WE HAVE OUR EFFICIENCIES.
PAST THAT POINT, I THINK WE GO AND SCRUB EVERYTHING WE CAN, AND IT'LL HAVE TO BE OUR BEST WHEN YOU BRING IT BACK.
I WOULD SAY, MR. PATH, I THINK THAT THIS IS MASSIVE IMPROVEMENT FROM WHERE I WAS SITTING LAST TIME, AND I SEE A LOT OF WORK IN THIS, AND WE'VE COVERED A TON OF GROUND HERE TODAY AS A COUNCIL THAT COULD HAVE BEEN PRETTY ROCKY GROUND, AND SO VERY THANKFUL FOR THE DISCUSSION, VERY THANKFUL FOR THE PROFESSIONALISM.
WE'VE GOT TWO YEARS OF GOOD IN FRONT OF US.
WE'RE NOT SITTING HERE IN A DEFICIT WHERE WE'VE GOT THIS MASSIVE SHORTFALL, AND YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT LAYING PEOPLE OFF,
[03:50:01]
BUT THAT'S WHAT PEOPLE HEARD LAST WEEK.AT THIS POINT, WE'VE GOT A HEALTHY ORGANIZATION.
WE MAY EVEN HAVE SOME HEALTHY MONEY SITTING OVER HERE THAT WE CAN PRIORITIZE AGAIN AND PUSH INTO THE COMMUNITY OVER THE NEXT TWO YEARS.
THEN WE'VE COME A LONG WAY TODAY BY 12:40.
WE ONLY HAVE A LITTLE BIT FURTHER LEFT TO GO IN BRINGING SOMETHING BACK TO YOU.
DO YOU NEED A MEETING NEXT WEEK? WHAT IS AVAILABILITY?
>> WHAT IS Y'ALL'S AVAILABILITY?
>> NOT AVAILABLE AT ALL. I CAN ZOOM IN, BUT I'M NOT AVAILABLE.
>> I'M OUT THURSDAY AND FRIDAY.
>> WHAT'S THE WEEK AFTER? IS THAT OUR 26TH MEETING?
>> IF YOU BRING IT BACK TO 26TH, THEN WE CANNIBALIZE SOME OF THAT GENERAL MEETING WITH THIS TOPIC.
THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS WE DO EVERY YEAR.
WE WOULD BE PREPARED TO MOVE ON THE MAX RATE ON THE 26TH.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'RE COMFORTABLE WITH NOW.
WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO BRING BACK A PRESENTATION WITH THESE LAST FEW IDEAS? IT MAY JUST BE A SHORT PRESENTATION OF, GUYS, WE'VE TRIED, AND WE'VE SCRUBBED, AND THIS IS IT.
THIS IS GOOD AS IT GETS, BUT IF NOT, THEN YOU WOULD BRING BACK A FEW KEY ITEMS THAT WE MAY COULD LEVERAGE, BUT OUTSIDE OF THAT, WOULD YOU BE READY TO GO ON THE 26TH?
>> NO MEETING NEXT WEEK? DOES ANY OF COUNCIL NEED ANY ONE ON ONE TIME OR ANYTHING THAT THEY'RE NOT COMFORTABLE WITH? BECAUSE WHAT WE'RE REALLY ASKING YOU TO DO IS YOU'VE WALKED THROUGH A TON OF STUFF THAT YOU'VE HAD TO FIGURE OUT, DIGEST, LEARN, GENERAL FUND M&O VERSUS I&S, WHATEVER.
THEN YOU'RE GOING TO SHOW UP ON TUESDAY, AND IT'S A DONE DEAL.
THERE'S PLENTY OF MOVEMENT THAT HAPPENS REAL QUICK AFTER THAT.
WE CAN'T AFFORD TO GO BACKWARDS ON TUESDAY.
DO I HAVE ANY COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT NEED ANYTHING FURTHER OVER THIS NEXT WEEK, JUST WITH STAFF, NOT A GROUP MEETING, BUT ANY TIME WITH STAFF?
>> I'LL BE MEETING WITH STAFF ON MONDAY, SO I'M GOOD THERE.
>> OF COURSE, OBVIOUSLY, IF YOU DON'T THINK OF ANYTHING TODAY, BUT YOU THINK OF SOME TOMORROW, OF COURSE, LET ME KNOW, WE'LL PRIORITIZE THAT.
>> ONE THING ON THE BUDGET. ARE WE GOING TO HAVE A SEPARATE BUDGET MEETING TO FINISH THIS UP, OR WOULD IT BE PART OF THE COUNCIL MEETING?
>> BELIEVE WE CAN DO IT PART OF THE GENERAL MEETING.
WHILE WE THINK IT'S GOING TO BE EASY CONVERSATION, I COULD ENVISION IT GOING ON FOR MORE THAN JUST 20 MINUTES.
I WOULD JUST THROW OUT, I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE EXEC THAT DAY, BUT MAYBE NOT HAMSTRINGING AT THAT, SO WE'RE SPENDING ALL THIS TIME AND THERE'S OTHER BUSINESS AND STAFF PEOPLE HERE, SO IT MIGHT BE JUST SOMETHING TO CONSIDER.
>> WE COULD START AT ONE O'CLOCK.
>> I THINK MAYBE WE START AT 12:00 DO LUNCH AND GIVE YOU THE OPPORTUNITY FOR AN EXEC.
BECAUSE IF YOU HAVE SOMETHING WHERE, GUYS, IT'S GOT TO HAPPEN OR ELSE, WE'RE GOING TO MISS SOMETHING.
BECAUSE I EVEN KNOW Y'ALL CLEANED UP A DEAL IN P&Z.
I THOUGHT IT HAD TO COME, BUT IF THERE'S SOMETHING ELSE OUT THERE, WE COULD START AT 12:00 WITH A LUNCH IN THE BACK.
NOW, IF WE DON'T HAVE ANY EXEC, THEN I THINK WE START AT 1:00.
>> IF NOT, THEN THAT WOULD BE JUST WHATEVER THE EXEC IS AND THEN RIGHT INTO THE GENERAL MEETING AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
>> IS THAT NOTICEABLE IF WE JUST SAY THE MEETING IS GOING TO START WHENEVER?
>> NO, YOU CAN'T START BEFORE.
WE WOULD START THE MEETING AT 1:00 AND WE'D BE LATE TO OUR OWN MEETING, DEPENDING ON HOW WE GOT OUT OF EXEC.
>> WE'LL SEND OUT PROPER NOTICE.
>> I STAY OUT OF OPERATIONS AND NOTICES, DON.
I DON'T KNOW WHY YOU DIRECTED THAT TO ME.
>> IF I PROMISE NOT TO BRING UP RESERVES OR INTERDEPARTMENTAL TRANSFERS LESS ON THAT TUESDAY, THEN THERE'S A GOOD CHANCE WE WON'T GET HUNG UP IN THE WEEDS.
ANYTHING FURTHER FROM STAFF? WE'RE READY TO GO.
GOOD WORKING MEETING. APPRECIATE EVERYBODY FOR BEING HERE. MOTION AND A SECOND.
>> HERE ADJOURNED. THANK Y'ALL.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.