and I just
left Friday
[Music]
yes so to conclude with the um
discussion with the youth
program and also the um the revenue line
of the delinquent violation fee in terms
of increasing the
revenue when we left off uh last Friday
u in terms of um
there are two two um two
recommendations so you should have on um
one was updated um late Friday by dere
you should have that
um that
version and this version
here showing the um adjustment to
um salary line
um you not
have Sam can we make
cop that one this copy here should have
six
items and then this one here is the
course recommendation that we went
through Friday
and the entire council is an agreement
for this one here this one here we did
uh at the recomend uh Chang it to what
was
recommended and five ccil member are in
agreement part as we hold this until we
can continue discussion Monday on the
you program
line and here we are in terms of
discussing that discussing the um the
revenue on the delinquent um parking
violation and then there's one item I
want to add in terms of the mayor's um
salary
increase and to discuss that so we'll go back and the started discussion
and not go back in detail but just you
know continue we left off in terms of
the you service and the the Hot Topic is
funding source yeah some of us um is not
in agreement in terms of taking that
whatever is been recommended out of the
general Reserve
and we're asking to hold that and wait
until the ARA reallocation and to then
look at that at that point in
time so the recommendation was on the
table by majority was to keep it at 150
as is and then revisit
it so I'm opening for discussion on
that okay well being it that was my
recommendation Mr chairman so so I would
think that so
I think that the council is seems to be
in agreeance around increasing that on
youth budget line uh I guess
the topic of the discussion is whether
it comes out of the general front we
wait until we retrieve some of the arpa
money and go that route and
I'm
reluctantly okay with the latter I guess
what I would need from the council from
each member of the council would be that
we could agree that the first $150
$150,000 of ARA funds that that um comes
back into the city um we would uh that
would be the first use of it um and I
guess if I could get that um commitment
from Council Members then I would feel
more
comfortable go ahead please do you mean
um after we take care of four items that already in our operating
budget because yeah no I appreciate that point of clarity yeah because
that's already within our operating
budget so so yes I
would yes as as we have mentioned
majority of us have mentioned on Friday
I don't think there's any issue funding
this line it's an important line that we
need to fund and expand as we go out
years to come so I think there across
the table Friday was there was an
agreement to revisit that
once the arle is back with us on use and
funds and that should happen in the next
couple weeks sure yeah so what I again
what I'm saying is just that the first
150 um should be prioritized for this
line and if that if I could get the
council members to agree to that then I
don't see any reason
why I couldn't agree with
that go ahead please yep
I'm go ahead please I I don't have a
problem with that I me as I said we all
agree that it's I know that you had
concerns about now versus that but that
when that happens and before the end of
the year um I would certainly support
that I'm in agreement with
it I'm going agreement with it I am I'm
on board as I state to Friday I'm on
board with it because it's service we
need to provide and
expand I'm on board for revisiting it
and again you know I want to add to it
um I can't say that I guarantee when that money comes back to the first
$150,000 can it be appropriated to this
when maybe we might have an emergency or
coming up I'm in favor of putting that
money there but I I I don't want to say
right now that you know I would
guarantee that that would happen on my
part yes so we'll we'll revisit that at
that point in time so we'll put that on
until then funding increase of funding
on that line yeah I'm just saying I just
I appreciate that Mr actually I do
appreciate but you're saying I just
don't want it you know I I hope that you
know we we just honor our words here
that's
all so have that Mark as something to to
look at when we are addressing the on
fun that has going come back to us the
other I just remember that you also
mentioned um the director of development
um there was an agreement across um five
of us to increase that to
8% and then some of the discussion that
was Central Friday was in terms of the salary for the director of
development against the principal
planner they seems to be close to each
other I think it you were pointing that
out so do you want to address that
because that was one of thing that you
also WR I just remember that
as um yeah Mr Williams the first we
already clarifi it was 8% or 5% yeah Mr
Farley had brought up some point I just
want clarification on that so and I'll
try to keep this as brief as I possibly
can I just think that um but I have to
give some context I'm of the thought
number one that
if we're going to as a counsel and it
seems like we're going to um seems like
what we're doing is visit you know
trying to delve into you know what's
appropriate pay for people and what do
we if we're going to do it then I think
that we need to do it in a more uniform
way which seems like we're talking about
the market research happening which will
assist in that um
so but I also just kind of want to say
that if we're how we're getting to the
decisions that we're getting thus far I
don't think that it's been I I don't
think that it's really been um
consistent and or Equitable however you
know with a commitment to revisit that
um and you know I could I could I could
see myself getting there I think that um
the request was for
15% and I think that there was council
members were are saying that they were
okay with 8% and and then for the
principal planner um it was 5% I think
just a couple things we just need to
keep in mind again is that if we're
going to do it I don't even know that's something that we should be
touching anyway I think that I I it
probably be better if it was just 3%
across the board for everyone until we
get this uh market research done but
being that we
um having the conversation I just I
think that you know that we should honor
at least get closer
to uh what the what the request was and
I don't know how much of a impact that
will be on overall budget seems to be
pretty minimum to be at like a a 10% um
and I don't know what the original Asos
for the a principal planner but I Al I
also want to make sure that we that
there's
some daylight an appropriate amount of a
space between their salaries but
considering their uh the service here as well here's a
service this is why I think it's
something that we it's a slippery slope
that we're on if we're going to do it
but I just want to make sure if we do it with integrity and and
Equitable as we can and I don't think
that that's happened th far however I'd
like to see it get up to 10 and 18 and
I'll be
good Mr Mo again go ahead please um do
we what was the salary that we landed on
then for the planning
officer she um 89 oh it's on 9 75 yes
and the bottom on the
top do you have it or you I don't have I
must have the wrong one of those so
8975 let's um s do you have a copy there
I didn't get a copy of that so I mean I
can give you this copy it just doesn't
have the columns cross the top you have
to line it up yeah that's what
I'm that's fine can we make a two copies
please and this one has
wait a second I do have I'm sorry I
it I have sorry I was just using the one
that I had
my I'm
all thank
[Music]
you so the other thing Mr Harley you
know we we recommend that the study be
done so I mean we can also wait on that
at a point in time to make any move we
see thank and then we look at the study
and then um you know someone with a
recommendation what do we do going
forward I understand the mayor in that
thought I just think that we can't act
as if we're not taking action now so we
there is an action that we're taking now
and that action um needs to be um fair
and Equitable and you know based on what
was presented as to the justifications
for the other increases in pay that
we've seen um that argument can be made
um for multiple other people's uh
positions and out of those that came
forward most certainly those are to be
made so I
do agree that we should make informed
decisions based on the market research
that we'll get but if we're going to
take an action now then we should be
doing our best to make sure that our
actions are as um fair and Equitable and
consistent um based on the people who've
came
forward Mr yeah please Mr fr so I
understand concerns and um I had similar
concerns but when I looked back at what
the um adop salary was in 24 for these
two positions we're talking about the
director of development and the
principal plan the amount between those
two is just a little bit over
$1,000 what we would thought to hear
that's increased by like three times
that so that that part of it them being
Clos we've actually increased the amount
between the two so I just want to make
sure that that that's clear so that and
that honestly I think that it was um I
want to say it was no it was actually
Derek who kind of brought that to our
attention last time it wasn't it would
be a concern of mine but initially it
wasn't so he brought that um and I so I
was like that's something obviously we
need to pay attention to but that really
only addresses I would say probably the
smaller part of kind of
the unintentional in equable and Inc
consistent
practice but I also think that once the
study is out it will
address these uh these
differences I I don't have the numbers
in front of me I couldn't find my sheet
but the um no no no not that sheet um
the uh principal planner when um the the
amount of the increase was proposed and
they had done some research themselves
it was anywhere from some 25,000 to
152,000 so I I mean you know who are we
to decide when the study does come in
are they worthy of the 100,000 120 152
so again again I think it's a slippery
kind of slope that that we're on that
we're going there and as I stated before
nobody references sour levels that are
lower than
theirs that's I said I don't have that
she in front of me it's right here oh
was so it was well it was 76,500 to 1527
so yeah but then the average is well the
average what I'm saying take into
account benefit absolutely and general
compliance with other aspects of the
city that up yeah and then the study
comes out before us they will address
they will they will point us directly to
what the recommendation yeah and and as
I mentioned before you know the deficit
we're facing increasing taxes I'm not in
favor of the the pay increases but
that's
me well let me be specific on that city
has a residency requirement these
employees was not in compliance with
that it's not in compliance with it now
how do you want me to enforce
that explain that a little further for
he doesn't live in the city it's
required to live in the
city I wasn't that she that position
doesn't live I think more than one
individual right I know I've tried to
enforce that you know the council in any
respects has looked
under go ahead please uh is that the
only individual that would I'm going to
just say it's not the only that's not
the only individual that we're
considering reasons for who Des reside
in the city and we're aware of that and
you
know however it happen so um I just want
to make sure that we considering that that is not the only
person that that it applies
to and since we on that topic The
Residency board um should be you
know reactivate that
board word that board it's not
functioning at this point in time so can
we need to get that board up and and
running and if it's the challenge has
been to find someone who actually
because of the what it consists of
finding someone who really wants to be a
member that's been my challenge me to
say that to be on the board so that's
been the challenge I think we need to
look deeper and just get that board and
the appointment is from you and the
mayor 60% of the members are appointed
by the city council president the mayor
The Corporation Council are their
designate and then three members
appointed by the city council president
so we know that one count was council
member that um actually who actually
brought forth Mr thank you who going to
be and the other um would have to come
they have to be a member of the city's
staff so I think we need to look at it
and get the board up and running put it
on the agenda and let's discuss it at
some point in time try to get the word
out here and get
members we can address U these concerns
so as we're addressing this we're bring
this in this discussion so where are we
in terms of moving power but any any
more adjustments
go ahead please so I'm I'm you know
based on what was recommended you know
I'm not comfortable with
um the large very large discrepancy of
you
know the uh suggested um percentage of
raises I'm I mean I'm not there um I'd
like to see us move the needle on a
little bit I know that being that I
committed to
do you need some
clarity no just not
sure sure I was just trying to make sure
that
anyar so yeah I I think that that's um
I'd like to see us get
um closer to some s of a consistent
um uh increase if were if the increase
were based on the information that was
shared at this table if there's out
other out side factors that wasn't
shared in this table then there's
clearly no way that I could make a
determination based on that but based on
what was shared here at this table I'd
like to see us be a little more fair and
Equitable on what we're doing and you
know
literally three times percentage raise
um for um some people who came forward
or and then some people and
then onethird of that for others I don't
think that's I I haven't seen the
justification from that being shared
here and I know that there was talks
about um an anticipation um of of Mr
far's
retirement um and I think at that point
you know then we can of course we have
to I think we have to cross that bridge
when we get to it I don't know that we
do that now and anticipation for that
and I just feel that I'm just not there
so I'd like to see us
get a little more uh closer to what was
originally
asked what other council member thinking
about this position be specific to the
director of development because that's
the one we're focusing on oh there that
and then there's the principal planner
as well but yeah I mean I guess I want
to go back to um I think we were having
an open discussion the other the other
night and I think we were trying to come
to some compromises but I do think also
um looking at it with the yellow
highlight on it um I mean I think we we
also could look back to what the mayor's
propos was um which might be the
more in other words that was consistent
except for the one
position um so I don't know so the
mayor's propos was right here okay so
that was the percentage was it's three
well uh um there 3% except for that one
and what's that one which was what
actually I was saying the other evening
what you're saying before I decided that
I would be have I would consider
compromising to these I actually was
still sticking with the down okay yeah
on that I
would I'm I don't even know how
that yeah I I I don't I I couldn't get
there from 3% for every other position
and then 51%
I mean that to me that's outrageous
actually to
me what what um go ahead please sorry I
going say the reason for that is because
he was only at 80,000 which was well
below the position right position was no that I
completely that's why it seems like
whated that's right we're looking
forward get to hire somebody when we
that was the case yeah so but he was
that position was below well Below based
on
what was
Max
okaying because when the mayor did his
3% or 4% the prior year he didn't
complain about it that's why was well
sure I'm not I'm my argue my argument is
not that it's wasn't well below or below
or that's not what I'm saying what I'm
saying well Below based on what what you
deter what uh Deputy Commissioners make
or or Deputy controllers make in this
area I'm talking about even the small
cities that as you see in the paper
today the uh controller from the town of
this un this unit was hired today at I
think 142,000 you know we're talking a
place where 12,000 people a budget a
budget of less than 20 million you know
right you know we're talking 100 you
know between the general Capital
whatever we're talking over $200 million
budget that's
B6 so right so I'm again really really
simply I'm not saying that it wasn't
below I'm saying that if we delve into
this then we have to make the same
considerations for other um positions so
did we look at what
the surrounding municipalities do for
positions that's comparable um to the
other positions CU I did and in fact in Albany there's
uh the structure is a little different
but it's more
of it's almost two
positions um for what for what uh what
we're talking about here so again I
don't think that the position um is I I
want us to be able to pay people uh uh
and keep people here that's exactly what
I'm saying all I'm saying is yes and we
should be able we should be doing that
for everyone who came forward on that
same ruler using that same metric if not
then we have things like a 3% for you
and 51% for you and that to me is
absolutely outrageous I can't
even imagine that so that's what I'm
saying
so now that we moved
closer I'd like to see us move closer I think that's the reason why I I I
discuss about doing a study to address
these um these variances and we're going
to get to that and we're going to
address it and then come back for
discussion at that point in time I think
when we discussed on Friday is that
majority of the council um you know
decide to move forward with a compromise
because some were asking 15% some are
asking 5% and then they end up uh with
to being to being eight one being five
and the four and the three with the
small
am and to leave the the mission at
$100,000 recommend because it's market
across the we were able to address that
when we one of our hearing and we decide
to move forward on that I would just ask
a broad question are there support to
increase the director of development
from what was a recommendation from
Friday Beyond 8%
we we need to move forward with this
conversation not prong so I just
commented on that statement I originally
proposed 10% and 15% and as the
conversations continued I think that's
when the compromise came I just very
plainly want to not undo the work and
extensive conversation we had on Friday
do I concede to the fact that I accept
this is not perfect and this is us being
responsive to the individuals that came
before us um which I very much stand on
is one of our primary principles um
however I can accept that in the future
a better compromise or better solution
for all the city management staff is
having this Market valuation and I think
based with that understanding in mind I
can at least speak for myself having
that information it'll be prudent upon
myself to act on it and I hope that's
where the rest of the council is I know
that as we take into consideration like
how that impacts our budget line again
this is not something you're giving to
the city staff as I said before it is
what they owed based on their talents
and experience and I think it is our
responsibility to make sure that that's
reflected in their paychecks but doing
that uh uh holistically rather than as
people come and present themselves I
think that's how we fix it so again we
talked about this a lot I appreciate
everyone's opinions and sentiments but
to your point we have to move forward
yes go ahead please and I just want to
point out that when we're talking about
salaries uh there's you know everybody's
not equal in terms of because when you
look at those salaries there's entry
level there's mean there's meeting and
then there's experience so when we're
talking about that we have to also take
those factors into consideration um so
having said that I'm I'm comfortable
with what we um you know because I took
a lot of time to look into this so I'm
comfortable uh what we came up with on
Friday go ahead please yeah so so again
appreciate the work that everyone does
for the city um but I thought we were
considering the position not the amount
of time that was a position that someone
was in a position because one of the
positions someone's only been in a few
months does have experience or a year or
something so so again it's a position
not
the individual or the time that someone
has in that position so just I just want
to be clear that's not I just said
nothing about time I'm talking about
experience and I'm not talking about
time I never said time so just clear
I've never
said so if if we are concerned about the
impact of the budget and we're saying
that we're going to do a map Market uh
some market research to inform our
decisions wouldn't wouldn't our best
action be to give everybody um the same
3% across the board until we get that
information and then
move can I just get clarification so um
you're saying everyone everyone like
we're not we're not pulling anyone out
of that every single employee gets 3%
remember what we're considering here we
take off the table not do not
that's what I'm saying I'm saying that
if we're going to do if we're going to
if if if what the feedback I'm hearing
is from my council members is hey let's
move forward with what we have and then
wait for the market um research to be
done and I'm saying okay if we're going
to wait for the market research to be
done then we shouldn't be taking any
action that could be um unfair and
inequitable until we get set information
but if we're but if we're going to take
an action and that action is has um some
people getting uh three three times
matter raay as other people based on
only solely based on what was presented
here um and what Mr far says around a
market then we need to make that same
consideration for everyone that came
through or we are absolutely being
unfair and inequitable and I'm not
comfortable with that I would be willing
to if we were if if council members were
willing to um uh move the needle to we
to us get a little bit further in that
direction which I think would have
pretty minimum um impact uh to things
and I I I just in this in
the space of of of getting through this
and making a very huge compromise I
would do that but as it stands right now
I can't I can't see myself getting there
you guys can do what you want though
yeah I think there was a lot of
compromise but I didn't have to agree
with Mr Williams a lot of compromise
there it was not that something we
wanted to do and you know we we can't
prolong this we we have to come as I
stated Friday we have to come to a
conclusion at some point in time and the
conclusion is this
evening I
umly say that we discuss this Friday at
L 3 hours you just want to revisit that
position it doesn't seems that there is
going to be any movement here at this
point in time so I says you know let's
stick with what was recommended Friday
and let's move forward and we'll address
that when we do the market
study and come back to us and we can
make an adjustment to any variance up or
down
that's so
see will just stick to what we had in
terms of that Friday and I just want to
go through this for summary in terms of
the first recommendation I think
everyone is in agreement with this
recommendation only item I I ask for is
to uh increase the delinquent um parking
um violation to 60,000 80,000 so and
then put that money back into
contingency line how much I did 60 to
80,000
for paring violation and to take that
added revenue and place that into
contingency L to bring that to Upward of
300,000 I think that's doable because
when we were discussing the fee increase
they are aggressive approach to to to go
after this revenue and I think they're
doing a good job they in you know going
after working with the agency and
they're putting resource behind that so
I don't feel that um yes they have 6,000
in that line I think we can double
almost double that and we'll achieve
it I just want to remind everyone that
we also agreed that line 189 1989 499a
that which is the senior center yes that
is that isn't here as far recommendation
all right 4, yes okay thank
you yeah sorry yeah 40,000 on Friday yes okay um I did ask I thought um to
get some totals of how much we've
collected so far in the uh
parking the last time we with numbers I
got from a Brian was like
$20,000,000 the first couple weeks when
it started but I wonder how much the new
what the um what the the date date on it
was 30 60 90 days 120 days you know what this company thinks how far they're
going to get back and what anticipation
might be
of you know dat it
try to recall I think they were they
were going to get six months and older
or something like that yes I'm trying to
recall the conversation that we had when
we yes so it's about that and the reason
I'm confident that they they can do more
Revenue but they were very conservative
because they're rolling it now and they
were like okay we never approach this we
don't know what we're getting yourself
in but the feedback and the the response
as being what they were looking for yes
and they're but it's it's a lot of work
you need to get done abely to to do it
and I think that adding that Revenue
it's not going anywhere sorry it's
adding the revenue and keeping it in
contingency line to help with these um
fires and unforeseen um additional
expense against the
city that is my recommendation on that
to increase it by um to bring it to
300,000 so that will be $80,000 plus
$880,000 right now it's 220,000
contingency
L parking
funds 20,000 that's 240 you're saying
right no we're bringing the contingency
line to 300,000 back to 300,000 okay and
we're adding
80,000 okay so the parking delinquent
parking
,000 parking 8 8 Z it's going from 6 are
you going to add 80 you're going to go
from 60 to 140 yes oh okay I thought
joh can you just tell me the line please
oh revenue revenue line yeah 20
a261 m m like Mar because when the
adjustment was done against this here
because
um Anthony has Anthony took out the
money against the police on the fire
over time and we were like no not don't
do that and then you went and took it
out against the contingency but then
they there's there is you know room to
increase the revenue on one line and and
bring it back into the contingency okay
so the uh inqu parking now is gone from
60,000 to 140 that's correct and your
contingency is going up to
300,000 so he an in and out go ahead Mr
I distinctly remember that you wanted to
double yeah I was looking at the top one
here 240 but then I realized there's
another contingency draw down here so
the first one was 240,000 balance but
then there was another 20,000 that came
out to to reduce it by another
20,000 now we're going to put it back to
300,000 and 140,000 140,000
yes are there any any other discuss on
that any um
okay so we did we did I did U do strong
on this and everybody is okay and five
indiv um council member are okay with
this um we'll just go to um before we
wrap up we'll go to um when we were
discussing the public hearing budget May
Mr chairman um last week when I sent the
communication around increasing the
youth uh budget line I also um requested
that we talk about um that we uh fund
anti-racism training for city employees
that was in that email Friday we
neglected to get there so I wanted to
make sure that we
didn't CL over
that you want to fund that for the city
employee or for the police department
back the bud so but so my thought was
that it should be funded for city
employees including the police actually
go ahead please I think that um what we
did I don't know was it two years ago I
can't remember but again through our MVP
I believe that the HR department was
able to bring in some anti-racism
training for no cost to all city
employees wasn't that remember I think
you and I you and I went to that I do
remember um so I I guess I would rather
see if we could try to do the no cost
thing again through HR oh that's what we
did right as I I don't know
[Music]
hold on I can't I'm I'm lost what you
say we have other programs that we have
through HR department work SP is one
of go through and basically
take antidiscrimination
anti-racism
I know so I was saying um I agree we
should fund the budget line and if we
have someone to come to do anti-racism
training for free then let's do that
that's of course but in
the I don't think that it's something
that we can just like hope that we can
find for free I think that we have to
prioritize that um as a you know
institutionally but it was part of the
health the health MVP program not
MVP
Insurance Prov and they provided free of
cost so why we can tap into that again
and see that that's there because if we
were to if we were to put a cost to this
what is the
cost so I well I think that um it was
funded on the police line prior but but
I so I would say to at least just um get
back get back to where we were um and I
think that there's a there's a there
might be um some distinctions that have
to be made behind discrimination
policies and training and anti-racism um
training um so they might have to make
those distinct those distinctions for
the council members um I think that
especially uh since um George Floyd's
murder and um you know things that we'
that we've witnessed we've institutions
have start to not honor their commitment
to be anti-racist because you know
there's no longer the social political
Capital associated with and I really
want to make sure that the people of the
city of concy know that that's not our
position so I would say that we should
fund that line and indeed if we can find
a service to to do for free Let's Do It
um did anyone here at the council go to
the anti-racism um training that as
council members yes um it was through
our insurance yes yes company I think it
was just council president Porterfield
and myself that attended is that right
that's correct okay oh cuz I cuz I
thought that that training was anti- uh
discrimination no this one was
anti-racism anti-discrimination is
definitely different than anti-racism
mhm yeah I think we it was anti-racism
training that was taking I don't know
that that was the
case let me say this I did you worked
with Mar book remember we had so many
dates I'm not let's just be clear yeah
counil I didn't I did not book that
training all right let's not talk please
I not book that training we were looking
for trainers outside of that and we
could not get a consensus on Council
Members with the date to attend that
training that was how that happened and
then um I'm assuming that the mayor gave
a director to HR to bring somebody in
and that is what happen Okay so I did
attend the training and um I've attended
multiple trainers that met including one
by the police department and I have to
say uh that one in in my opinion was
left
wanting I think it needs to be really
much more intense it was very limited
time that was spent on it so um I don't
necessarily recommend I don't n I'm
going to take out necessarily I do not
recommend that we use that same process
I recommend that we use some because the
with our insurance companies like they
say they bring somebody in who does it
all the time that was not my takeaway
from that training and so um although I
went to a training with the police
department once and I was it was much
more intense training I thought was
great down right down zone five I don't
know who that who they brought in to do
that but there was a it was very
distinct and what they were willing to
address and how they were going to
address it and it was also much more
interactive which to me is a better way
to have takeaways from training this
training wasn't it was more they asked
for interaction but there really wasn't
a lot however that one was structured
that was very interactive and there was
a lot more that people took away and
conversations happened amongst people
that were the training so the one the
police department did was much better I
can say that and I'm not talking about
this recent one I'm talking about one
maybe two years ago own five so uh so uh
I I don't I don't remember any other
council member going to that one but you
may have yeah I came to the police one
um so I apologize for that but so if
we're going to do it then then we're
going to do it and we're going to just
not do it so that we check the box say
we did do it we should if we're going to
we should really invest in it and get an
organization or individual or a company
or whatever we're doing who really does
it on a regular basis and we can really
derive something
from
that's go ahead so if I remember
correctly that training that the council
president was talking about was actually
an implicit bias training was the
language that we use um it wasn't an
anti-racism training um though they do
cover similar topic are there's key
distinctions um the same way that we
would say like workplace violence is one
training but sexual harassment in the
workplace is a different training even
though the two overlap there there are
some key distinctions um and and through
those conversations I was strongly
suggesting that we look at anti-racism
training as a Council body because our
biggest you know Duty as a council
member is to really is to oversee the
allocation of funds and if we're not
careful we can start to perpetuate some
of those inequities and institutional
racism through through our lens even
though that's not our intention we all
capable of doing that so I think
especially um in in light of recent
discussions that's something that we
should really be looking at and and and
doing something and making sure that it
is exactly that not something to check a
box or something else that will kind of
touch on it but doesn't really deal with
it and so no to everyone's um
clarification we have not have any
anti-racism training for sees employees
of
connected besides the police office
there go ahead besides what the police
office there for that one okay U so what
is your in terms of all the various
trainings what is your position on thei
training as opposed to anti-racism
so um I think that depending on you know
we can get I don't want to get too much
into this semantics but and so just for
now you know for distinction here for
people uh Dei training Dei is diversity
equity and inclusion okay diversity
Equity inclusion diversity is something
that exists we all are diversity is not
something that we do we just are
everyone's diverse in very multiple ways
Equity is making sure that we're
allocating resources to what people's
needs um and inclusion is just that
inclusive space um anti-racism training
is really looking at the Historical um
disp arities that have happened in
institutions such as a city hall such
you know we're not exempt from that um
by any means even through our best
efforts myself included we often
perpetuate some of those um inequities
and racist policies so that's why
there's a clear distinction
and that's why I would say that we need
to go under anti-racism
chain if we were toach a dollar amount
what are you looking at um I don't what was the police
uh what was it funded at it wasn't it's
not yeah I think cuz I think they do it
like they don't do it annually was the
first put the
budgeted
23 to pay for it in
24 looking to do it every two
years that's what that's what um AC told
us during his presentation that they
were going to do it next year you
know yeah they do they do it every two
years which
is and that's for the police it's not
for so so hold on please let's let's okay I'm sorry you you were
speaking Mr no I was just trying to U
answer there's nothing on that line so
that's I'm we don't have anything in our
budget plan to show so we need to attach
a number it was what 50,000 50,000 why
would I would just that but to the
mayor's Point
um you know I think the
mayor yeah
50,000 that's for 120 individuals maybe
28,800 spent this year L 20,800 corre
anti-racism training line okay say
20,000 and that's for the
PD
20 so that's just you pay by the person
is that what why you're
saying line just total I'm assuming it's
encumbered from previous year oh
okaying in fact don't have the numbers
here but it's lying
83120
4
2 yeah we don't have for
back
22000 I mean there's you know there an
inservice training line I mean maybe that just got charged to a
different line I don't know but he said
it wasn't going to happen in
2025 he said he did it January
24 go ahead please but I what I hear
from Mr Farley saying is that every
other year he you feel sufficient well
we do so I think like most places
there's um annual trainings that happen
um and sometimes we uh do I'm just
talking about like other institutions
that I've been a part of we do like um
universal precautions uh workplace
violence sexual harassment those
trainings happen annually um so I would
say the best practice would be to
incorporate that training for our all
cities employees an annually and I think
that to my knowledge that would uh
$20,000 would absolutely cover that um I wouldn't even suggest that that that
we needed to make uh such an investment
I would say we could be really safe
about doing that with half
that in 2023 was adopted
$60,000 see see what I mean like how we
went like from like oh this is really
important to us and then things cha off
and but I will say though to uh to the mayor and and police chief's
credit the training we went to was very
good I think that the police training
has to be a little different cuz it has
to be a little more specific um so I
think that there is a niche thing there
which why needs to happen where there's
a more broader training that for all
city employees and of course City
Council Members all right so if we if we
were to attach a number here for 30,000
be something 50,000 we need a number so
we can move forward and let's let's go
around the table and ask if that we have
the support for it go ahead please well
I was just going to say I mean I think
our HR department does does do regular
trainings for all the city employees I
know they've done sexual harassment we
do a lot of cyber security so I think we
need to look overall training the
training budget I mean it doesn't and I
think that M to Mr Farley's Point put
some money into the police budget
separate maybe but I
mean you see what I'm saying like I
think we I think you touch a good point
because May those training are mandatory
that rolls out every year for all
especially sexual harassment and workpl
violence yes so those those training at
there and employee must complete the
choice they have they must complete his
mandatory
SS so let's put a number there let's you
know address it and see where we where
we are in terms of support and let's
move forward I'm fine with putting money
into it I would like to put money into
it but I just don't know where in the
budget it would go It Go HR in training
or you see what I'm saying so I don't
really need to make that I don't need to
be a part of that I mean it's really
it's an it's an HR it's an HR kind of
thing yes go ahead please so an HR line
1430 406 in service training is that
what currently covers it it's
$15,000 oh so there is $15,000 there but
maybe that's for a auto training yeah
that all of the training but but again I
think that I'm sure that um you can hear
but I mean I know that some of the
trainings that they offer through HR are
part of what we I think get through
either through some insurance I don't I
don't let me so maybe they're free no
they're not free but you know we're
paying for it in another way go ahead
and in 2023 our actual expenses on that
line was 29,5
76 so I guess we we allocated in 2022 I
mean excuse me 2022 was 1,400 in 2023 it
would have like double so we'd have to
figure out what happened there and then
in 2024 our adopted budget was 15,000 at
on this line um do you know what our
what we paid out so far
1430 406 this is under HR and service
train 1430 406
of the
old the
original if there $15,000 currently on
that line budgeted 2025 right and
nothing was spent in 2024 go ahead
please service training is is training
for uh the members in the in the staff
only yeah okay so nothing's been spent
so far on that line so where's the other
training coming from
go ahead please so it's say compromise
because I think part of the response is
just because you can do something
doesn't mean you are the best person to
do that um and I think also we look at
like comparative advantages versus
absolute advantages so I think if we
have this budget line I do agree that HR
would be the best entity to capture this
uh within City Hall but I think we need
to give them the proper tools and
resources if we're trying to use aign
that hasn't been used previous year so I
think as a compromise we could look to
send them to a train and trainer type
course um or look at segmenting and
taking a portion of this money and
attributing it to order recommending
trying to find an in-house or not an
in-house like a training uh entity with
a part of that line of
$155,000 or two
recommendations go ahead please I don't
think the is nearly enough to do that if
we're going to do that Mr Farley is
saying that 15 15,000 is just for the
staff and HR and that's
it excuse me Mr
Ferrari no you know what this was for
the 15 for the FL RIS that was for the
FL RIS where the groups that we had come
here to do the train for us
what the companies called f risk they were they were part of the
companies that came in and did some of
the training for us for all employees
you mean for all employees
yeah we Haven haven't spent the D yet
yes that's because I think it's because
of get an annual cost not not even not
only that I think the Bill's going to
come up but uh the problem is too is we
had an influx with Excuse me with the
persons in
El Mr T I'm just saying I I you know
just in the police budget alone and if
we want training for everyone and that's
28,000 for staff plus police to say
maybe 150 people and how many employees
are there so I mean to to to get an
appropriate amount on that line it would
have to be I would thinking excess of
$100,000 just thing so then add a
nauseum if you're going to add something
to the so if we're going to put number
on it which we have to where is that
number going to come from and that needs
to be the next answer from
someone okay so so I I would say that if
we funded the line uh previously
at 60,000 yeah so then I I I would say
that and in in my limited scope I mean I
do know a lot about this in different
organizations that do it but I will say
that's limited um to some degree I would
say that I think that we could
accomplish that with a budget line of
$115,000 I think that you could have two
trainings um and yeah just talking
racism let him finish please but
understand you're saying or 5 well no
I'm saying five I'm talking about just
anti-racism okay yeah you should be able
to add that um for
$155,000 I think that you be able to do
for the anti-racism training 50,000 yes
sir and where would you suest take it
out from
General you like to increase revenue or
take it out to General take it out
General funds that's what I would
say go ahead please you can also reduce
the contingency by 15,000 there you go
the mayor had two emergency demo U this
week last week into this week 40,000 45
43 45,000 that's 100,000 right there the
second CL that he calls us to make sure
we have enough money
to okay go ahead have a question so with
those emergency demos are the insurance
company reimbursing us at any level we
try and get 100% sometimes we're lucky
sometimes we're not uh again the method
I use
is there all these State rules and stuff
it's the fire chief takes control of the
scene fire chief takes control of the
scene has absolute control any other
regulations is put to the side I do not
let the fire chief release the scene
until the building is demolished and
nobody's challenged that they come in
and talk about asbest and contamination
and other things those things are all
good but I'm not going to let the
building sit there for years and that's
what happens to other
communities so that costs more money I
have to have firefighters which staff
that scene time and a half this last
one uh which is still being evaluated we
also treated as a potential crime scene
so police officers also staff it so that
becomes time and a half so you can run
up several
thousand very easily there and some of
those costs we don't get reimbursed for
even though we try to
get reimbursed well Al I mean if they
have insurance on insurance they don't
have insurance on the building sometimes
they don't have insurance or the
building is under insured yes so it's
the city is at at risk most all the time
somebody go ahead yeah I would just
caution us not even though I don't think
that's the intention here that I don't
we don't want to frame it um for the
larger public that it's you know know
anti-racism training or uh you know
supplying our our contingency fund
that's not I don't want to to have I
think that there's a false Choice here
thank you the contingency appreciate you
Mr thank you for that so 15,000 15,000
is been recommended by Mr Harley to add
to the anti-racism
training go ahead i' like to make a
point I like to ask a question first of
all are you when you say 15,000 is this
for the entire city incl police fire and
every city employee so no I believe that
the police already have um money in
their budget to do that they do it every
other year they don't they won't do it
won't be anything in 25 25 budget doing
it 24 we'll do it 25 then in 26 we will
and the reality with that is just there
are some training that has to occur
every year and then there's some that is
done on a uh
longer time plan and this seems to be
one of those that fits in so that we can
you know balance the amount of time that
we have the amount of service or paying
him overtime to do training yeah U Mr
Mayor I I again I witnessed the training
on the one time and it was a very good
Training I you know I definitely could
tell that it was vetted what I'm saying
is that um their training is specific to the police um and I think so and it
does need to be so I'm not saying to
really necessarily change anything as
far as what they have going on I'm
saying that if we put $115,000 in the
budget we could offer um I'm sure that
we could find a vendor to offer those
trainings um maybe two trainings um and
or maybe two or three trainings for that
number and then obviously police and
fire and everyone City polies will be
welcome to attend uh set trainings but I
think that that that' be a place to
start again we're not going you know
we're not in a position to operate off
our wish list I just think that this is
something that's that should be a
priority it's part of our expressed
values and what we have expressed to the
public I think that we need to honor
that I apologize I don't know what we do
like in ogs so like with office staff
here can schedule okay you're going to
come in here for a day for 4 hours
whatever it is with people the waste
collection I still have to do the full
day's work so we have to and I not quite
sure how we do some of that so budget
some of those trains they done online
different things for and that's worker
safety some of the equipment that can uh
do it but that would actually have a
bigger impact in terms of the budget or
have to pay you know everybody overtime
to do the training MH okay so so there
is $15,000 against us so I mean against
us flying anti-racism TR 15,000 being
suggested do we have um support for this
yes yes yeah so before answer do we
incorporate that reduction in uh line A1
1989 499a the senior center program
because we could just attribute $115,000
from that we already took that out
already we brought it down to 40,000
right great was it already incorporated
into the budget CU I know we kind of
Sprint it out on Friday yeah was not
adjusted look at
that no that came out of um that came
out of contingency there was no Mone for
Sen program 300,000 contingency 60,000
to part0 and then at the bottom of the
page they took another 20,000 bring it
to two party so that's why I suggest to up that up back to 300,000 so we do
not have it you will have to come out
from Dem Reserve so if we were willing
to spend out contingency for the C
can't we just spend a compl for this
very important training
great do that I thought that's what we
were
doing I don't have an objection on that
15,000 out of that I will make it 285
25 still positive
yes I know I saw like broken record on
the oper money but I don't we don't have
any
$846 know I mean when we take some money
back
yeah all right what what is the support
for
this support support support support okay supp 20 yeah $15,000 I
[Music]
support
alliz this we'll have to move this out
to committee and have time to clear it
out so we have on we all on the same
page of the recommended changes last
when we were um discussing raises and I
was discussing with the mayor why no why
the May didn't put in any raises and
then there are certain regulation in
terms of that and then our follow
transition is that may I would like to
see um what is in the in the law the
city CH and I ask Miss bar to look at
how we how come up with a recommendation
how do we proceed in terms of the May is
and what's in the city Char and I know
you submit some documents us last Friday
and today would you like to kind of walk
us through as to where we are what what
we need to
do just make sure we're clear what my
position is I came in here as mayor had
uh difficult Financial Times first cycle
didn't ask for anything and my uh
compensation is still probably $35
$40,000 less than my
predecessor uh the overall
package uh going back full 5 years ago
what the charter says is that the May
will be given pay raises equal to other
management employees I had that number
calculated I forget it was 14,000 or
16,000 the council rejected that and
gave me 4%
raise this cycle I didn't put anything
in because the law is quite clear and
you're talented group here you've gone
over every line
uh nothing's been left unchallenged or
unanalyzed and so last year you gave
every management employee arrays except
me uh so I can take a hint on that and
really what I'm looking to do is you
can't give pay raises during the term
but I got to clear it up for other
individuals to be sitting in the seat
and so really looking to litigate it
would like it to be so the members of
the council are liable for that that
wasn't paid to me but it'll make sure
that in future councils and Mayors
people are going to live up to what the
code is or the Char if you don't like
that you have the ability to change it
you haven't done that and so you know
I'm open to discussions but I'm
generally not happy with the way the
council's proceeded on
that the other question is
that can official salary within their t
salary increase salary increase sorry
thank
you and I think that was part of one of
the U documents that it says that
elected official are not supposed to
receive salary increase within the term
so how do we go about if we were to get
that management raised to an individual
how would that apply four positions were
raised as of January 1st of this year
and three remain at the lower level
because you're in the mid portion return
the power to fix and determine salaries
compensation and benefits of all city
employees officers the city council
shall determine and
establish great one the annual
budget
uh you can't get that's the
spage the middle
turn but then there's a section all the
way down to page uh
um four four four
yes um section
F I'm
ask
Miss obri so can I explain this in terms
of you're saying that okay you can
receive this salary inre between your T
but then this part
here w what the position is I've taken
is the salary should be adjusted every
four years every four years right so my
term was up before I put in for a race
the council rejected that and this time
a year ago I didn't put anything in
because I know the council's
so detailed in their analysis that they
would do what is fair and Equitable and
live up to the Charter but you didn't
just just for you know regarding a
little bit of Charter his history the
references that are being made here as
far as the the the strong Mater law came
into went to a referendum in
78 and that was the strong
mayor
referendum
and in that and you've been given copies
of yes section 90 of the on page 352 of
the the code of the minute it says the
administrative and executive powers the
administrative and executive powers of
the city including the power appointment
of officers and employees are vested in
the elected mayor with the executive
powers he shall receive such
compensation be fixed by by the councel
by ordinance or by law so that's was
approved by the voters back back in back
in the day in
78 so then the following year city
council passed the local law and it
said it said um local law number four is is amended okay as amended the
section 90 has amended by number for the
base
salary the we're talking about the base
salary so in
78 the city counts the the what goes to
before the voters is saying the
compensation is going to be set by the
city council for the mayor the following
year in 1979 the council passes a local
law that says the base salary for the
mayor is set at
26,100 a year beginning January 1 198
okay so it's set set a base and then it
goes on to say any salary adjustment
granted from time to appointed officers and employees
not covered by a collective bargaining
agreement is to apply to the salary of
the mayor so so that's if you read the
two
together this the council sets the in
the first year they they set the set the
salary and then the second year they
pass a local law that says here's the
base and from time to time when you're
when they adjustments to other
management employees the man the mayor
will get adjustments so it makes sense
it's saying the salary if you're giving
raises to other employees management
employees then by operation of that
local law that would apply to the mayor
as well so it's anticipating
that
um you from time to time appointed
officers not covered by the comple is to
apply to the salary
so it anticipates that from time to time
that may be somebody's
turn you know maybe somebody's term so
because it has carved that out saying
that how that can be done so you can
make the argument that it's be done from
time to time and the idea was I
think that there's the base from time to
time that salary will go up as
management people get so that was the
base from which started now over the
years has that happened
no no and so that that's where you know
that's where we are that that
Norm yeah but there there hasn't been
that normal progression that if you look
at okay if you're giving management
employees a 3% raise just throwing under
out um the mayor will get a 3% ra
management is getting a
5% then management confidential
employees would that would include the
mayor um but that apparently you know
has not done it's been the salary has
been sporadically increased over the
years but you know going back to that
time period you read the two set those
two local laws together you get you get
it and it's the reason why I'm bringing
it up for discussion we need to address
it and you know we need to find a
pathway to address this and so this
continue to
happen go ahead please but but I think
it's important to address the comment
the Mayors speaking to like the morality
or efficacy of our decisions I can only
speak for myself and know do countless
professional and personal experiences
it's always said do not assume um I know
coming into the city council uh I'm in
my third
year under my understanding as a
legislator within the city it is my
responsibility to present my opinions in
a fair and objective manner consistently
I would say it is the expectation from
myself onto the Corporation Council to
let me know if I can or can't do what
I'm recommending and I would say based
under that understanding we were
collaboratively to make sure that we are
supporting the residents of our
community I would say if at any point in
time we weren't doing that or or
proceeding in a consistent manner I
would think it would be I'm not pointing
at you Mr BR you recently joined us or
you Mr O'Brien I would say if we are
doing something or acting out of good
conscious I can already hear Mr Farley's
comment of two things can be right so so
two things can be true two things can be
true sorry sorry sorry uh I've been
saying it more recently from my employer
it's give each other Grace and I think
as we're having this conversation right
now I can uh say that I haven't looked
at the stagnancy with a raised eyebrow
as I see other salary lines increasing
um however taking the mayor's proposed
budget as the mayor's proposed budget I
looked at it as as it was presented so
as it's been informed to us that this is
an issue that we need to correct let's
continue this conversation so back to
coration
council what do we need to do what
recommendation that you need to this
Council that we move in the right
direction you can May the
race I ask for it
3%
most yeah that's what that's what the
general prob the
at% I don't want to go ahead and then so
I just want to be clear mayor are you
saying that the prior mayor made more
than you compensation was more I don't
take the retirement don't take the
health care sold the mayor's car pay for
my own cell phone don't incur any of
those other expenses that my
predecessors
have Miss
Patrick I was wondering um because I
don't think that we've given the mayor a
raise since I've been Council couple
years well a couple of years ago four
year five years yeah all
that
was
forgot 19 what
2019
1998
question what do we need to do 3% but
does does that mean that it may have
come January course he's entitled to
this 3% or that's that's not that's not
the level of equity that that intent in
the code says it's the position cannot
get a raise
midterm well that that's because that's
it's a it's a conflict in in in in in in
the law and the code but there's there's
controller's opinion for that that we
haven't taken a deep dive and this is
just something we've taken a look at so
in
which this sort of this sort of uh
automatic pay raise if you will puru to
the local law is is okay even though
it's in the middle of the
term so
because but we have to look at in detail
that that
opinion because it's anticipating that
if you read if you're reading the that
the four corners of that local law it
anticipates that during the course of
somebody's term it's going to be going
up
yes so if there's
you controllers opinion and they're not
recent controllers opinions that have to
take a look at but um and I thought some
of those were based on we use the
example
like
longevity so that every city employee
gets a bonus at five years 10 years if
that is in normal salary structure in
the mayor is in 10 years sorry get that
and it happens to be in midterm
it's applicable yeah
so I'm trying to how how can we move
forward in terms of addressing all that
apply a salary
increase and the mayor's entit January
1st based on the that recommendation
there that's only appli to the mayor but
not any other elected
official there there's there's also you
the municipal home rule La you know
section 24 that says that you can do a a
pay raise you for I think that was last
year council members got pay raise but
the the pay raise wasn't affected until
45 days after the period that somebody
could submit a a a petition which is
referred to as a permissive referendum
in other words somebody somebody would
have to go out and collect signatures or
a group of people would have to go out
and collect a few a bunch of signatures
to satisfy the
requirement but that was not what was
used last year as pay raise took effect
the beginning of their new
term the law wasn't in fact December
21st ter effect January
1st that's the other rule law section 24
deals with Miss referendums somebody's
getting a pay increase in the middle of
their time but can we address that by
amending the city um
Charter so would that be a
recommendation from the Department to
address that to go for to going forward
every year just not have to you know
pile up only wa four years or does it
happen every January 1st or then elected
city council member in the
future it's up to the council it's up to
the council to to to push that
amendments okay go ahead please so I
it's kind of awkward I guess to ask
somebody if their boss deserve a raise
so but I guess so if we're I'm wondering
like what we would what metric we would
use because like again like so we have
some people that are getting 5% other
people are getting
25% um and some of that justification
was as long as somebody worked here but
then but that to the mayor's point I
believe that the long longevity is
already built into a person to
managements is it not to all management
employees except May oh okay so that's
probably that's what I mean that's
probably something that we should some
people said that it does apply to the
mar just never take because it doesn't specifically exclude the mayor
okay so that's what we got um Friday
that's what that was a factor when we
were talking about the principal planner
position you're saying around um for
years of service but it seems like
longevity already calculated in that so
that's just another thing that we have
to well the longevities carried in a
separate
line okay in their
budget do you have any idea what other
Mayors in the area
make not
enough the right you have
any makes
Troy what would be your recommendation
from the Law Department
on
as um our
recation would be uh to back the last
time the mayor had a raise um the
finance department would have to do that
and look at the amount that management
was increased each year since sun and
take a look at that number see what it
comes
to go
retroactive yeah yeah one at a time yeah
please
question would it would he get a raise
every fourth year of his election or
every year every fourth year every
fourth year so so it me the fourth year
if we got 4% he wouldn't like say for four years it's four four four four
yes he wouldn't get 16% yes he would get
16% oh okay that's what I put in for
five years ago and the council rejected
it was the number was considered to be
too big even though You' given it to
everybody else
so that would be the
recommendation
recation so so Anthony is it possible
that you can U or dere work up that
number for us and come back to us did a
research we're going to need it tonight
from 2019 yes was that the last was the
last phas that
2019 my position would be that that was
inadequate and didn't
comply far back you
2019 would that be a recommendation of
2019 all the way to
20124 so the mayor's saying that that's
he doesn't feel that's sufficient even
every four if we went every four years
at whatever percentage with it I think
it was mostly four during those years
for the management but you're saying um
based on the last the last increase was
not adequate you feel that that would
not be adequate
correct and I'm really looking going
forward the council can convince me of
some way that's going to ensure was ever
sitting on the council and sitting in
this position that it'll be addressed
yeah these numbers just so that's why
I'm kind of asking if we can just go
back and just do a calculation from 2019
to 2024 and let's come up with a number
and then bring it for discussion and
move forward you know thank you I look
forward how can be address this I mean
if you go back to the last increase in
2000 yes you know they were back and
forth on the council like remember that
you know it was it was a challenge to to
get uh members to approve it and it was
not easy at that time in
2019 go ahead so there it's my
understanding that sometimes like um
some some management positions they'll
be uh ra like raises will be built in on
different lines sometimes and like it
might not be as a parent when you're
looking at it like so someone can be
manager here and then like their raise
could be a percentage um and then it
could be like a 0 five over here in a
different space is that is that true
talking about certain
positions Char different funds I'm not
going to get into any oh no I'm just
asking for clarity from
myself to be there so it's clear yeah I
know but I'm asking Derek a question
though so I can so I can make a informed
decision like so could you give me like
an example of like like the police
commissioner charged out of police and
fire so there two lines poon is charged
out of water
sewer operating fund so sometimes we've
done that based on the
workload don't we do that with Masons
too like during the summer the Masons
they get more money according to the
contract during the summer yeah it comes
out of a different fun so it's matching
up what the actual work that is that
they're doing okay so so it wouldn't be
like a manager like we say okay everyone
gets a A 3% raise um that would be a 3%
of their
total so it's not like a 3% raise in
this line or anything added in another
line that couldn't be the case right
okay so go ahead please I was going to
say for the sake of asking it the mayor
said that the current rate was
inadequate to save some time and
additional L work to have inadequate
number Mr I haven't calcul we did the
calculations up 219 that was I put that
in the budget Council rejected I wasn't
remember that budget you have to
remember so so here the recommendation
is go go and make a finance P yes but
let's look at 19 20 21 22 23 24 and come
up with a number and then we'll move
forward and move this budget out tonight
it's going to happen tonight sorry I'm confused because I thought the mayor
said every four years not every year but
we have to address all these years that
was not accounted for yeah so yes and
then we need to move forward whatever
that number is wa so you're saying when
it comes to every the fourth year mayor
that you're the three years that
preceded it they should calculate into
the
that okay I just want to make sure
question where where would that money
come
from what what where would that money
come from do you have any suggestions
chair on where that money would come
from General General Reserve where
salary salary line that money comes out
for
salary come from comes
out General
Reserve take yesal sorry so can we get
those numbers please okay we start right
now yeah thank you yes from 2019 so
we're saying that comes out of the fund
balance yes oh so now yall all ready to
take money out the fund balance again
okay all right
going on here no we asked where
like supped to come from
sucy and nobody has any objection that
right I think it's because we're
correcting an inequity that this
happened
e e
sa
trees want one I don't need it Sean you
have one
Sean you need to go through it and I'll
take it I'll take it go through this yes
you exra here I
[Music]
Cofe remember my kid
[Music]
very beautiful
kids they look like the
mother so what you have before you is is
a list of all the changes on one
sheet and you also include the um the
capital the adjustment that capital
there some movements on the capital
side and the first two sheet is the
um council's
um
change Anthony just want to highlight
that I like which
part okay let's start from the beginning
I'm going to do uh going to do with
expenses first the first is the city
clerk salary uh which the May of
proposed budget was
8235 um we raised the fee by$
4,41 and then again we added the 5,000
for the register and it brings her up to
92376 uh the depy
regist is because she's not because the
city Kirk is doing the regar is going to
be reduced by 5,000 to 4
47462 and the Sten which was 8,000 in
the budget is going to be reduced to
3,000 which is uh for the uh city clerk
our senior center program ARA is going
to be increased uh by 40,000 as we
requested uh we have the AOG grade uh uh
for M MOA with csca
for
8,348
uh Maxine that's for
your the record access person okay then
we increased the uh the public safety
Foundation from 5,000 to 25,000 so
that's the other 25
2,000 we are adding in the
anti-ra racism
training from 0 to
15,000 uh and then we have the uh
development raises we have the director
of development going up 4,000 272 to 92
281 the zoning officer is going up 657
to
67,500 you have the principal planner uh
going up 1697 to 8975 and on the back of
the Cent page we have the home
coordinator going from uh
69821 to
70,000 uh we have the uh Deputy
Commissioner which was in the Mar's
budget at 12803 to 100,000 so reduces by
20, 803 and then uh we have the mayor
salary going from 1, 568 to 118
849 how do we get those right and uh how
do we get that we're uh we're reducing
we're increasing the we parking finance
by 80,000 and at the same time uh we're
also reducing the appropriated fund out
by
$1600 so we still which is good yes and
that equals the
78324 equal
78,000
24 um want to go to water yes go ahead
something the water uh what we did we
took there's not going to be any rental
of that property because of the shape
the building's in so we we just
subtracted the 5,000 out of Revenue and
we took that 5,000 out of expenses of
light p and gas so it's - 5 -5 on each
side
last but not least is the Capal projects
uh which reduces borrowing by
25,000 as you can see
[Music]
questions go ahead please s timately no
adjustments to the contingency
line there's no adjustments to the concy
line stays at 300,000 which is a
proposed in the
budget but I thought there was some
movement along that line that be
reflected on
this there was no move because we we
didn't touch it we're not changing we're
not
changing they fig you fig Senior Center
40,000 coming out of the linkoln parking
the 15,000 is coming out of the LOL
parking the May salary is coming out of
the linoln parking and the rest is
coming to the reduction of of salary
of finance that so so we just added what
essentially what 35 75,000 8,324 to the
buget but we added that we took it from
we just added it into projected money
from the parking
correct I thought we just added to
delinquent parking prior to this didn't
we do that to
add no 60 added 80 okay so that's a
revenue and we we offset it by the
expenses okay right so what I'm saying
is that Friday
I think uh Mr Mudan was suggesting that
we increase delinquent
parking which no right but we increased
it how much 80,000 no that's all
together that's including tonight no 60
plus 80 140 okay so no just tonight we
just increased it he discussed it and
actually said 6 Friday and then 80 today
so we didn't do it on Friday discussed
it in I don't believe it's reflected
here oh okay it's not reflected here not
the 60 because this is what we got now
so is that all the money that we think
that we can get out of the link partner
cuz if there's more money over there
then could we just if it seems like
it's that's the money pot that's a yeah
I I think that's a good number for the
first
year they're pushing it you know we're
really trying to get them going you know
M we're contacting the company almost
every day no yeah no I'm saying this is
seems kind
of all right so how much
the
addition the projected increase in so
you used yes I used
everything and and I I used the
difference I reduced our appropriated F
balance and the use of it instead of
using you know you know 594 65 we're
going to use 5946
any other
[Music]
question all right seeing n so I'm going
to ask for the move in motion for the
budget ordinance for 2025 can I just
make a statement before we do that
please it's not a question but it's a
statement go ahead so I just first I
want to say thank you everyone for this
process I there was a very this thus far
has been a lot smoother been managed a
lot better than um uh my last year's
experience so I want to thank all the
council members for that um including
our chair I think that uh you handled
this uh well this year um but with that
I just want to say that me personally
due to the fact that you know I didn't
get the UN unanimous um commitment from
the council from some members I did but
not unanimous commitment to increase
that youth uh line via
and I think that there's some some
inequitable
um formulas um that we're getting to
where we're at I that's I I can't
support the budget that's my position
quite frankly I don't think the mayor is
going to either but that's just my guess
so but I do think that the process was
done in good faith and I appreciate you
guys time for doing that just the
finance no I understand that I know that
I know I know the process I'm just
saying okay yeah so the motion U for the
budget ordinance for 2025 operating and
capital budget as
amended motion is on the Flor second all in favor
I thank you
everyone we're going to vote on Monday business finance
Mr chairman just for for the council
members we will G we'll get a draft
ordinance to you by no later than
Thursday so you can look at it Thursday
at the latest Wednesday hopefully and
we'll be working a lot arm work with the
finance department to go through the
numbers and and and you know look at the
numbers and put them into the ordinance
and as you know the Amendments will be
attached to the proposed budget and
that's all part of the so will go on the
before you next Monday so that's just
some housekeeping way ahead for you
all um Mr M should we do a stra pole to
see
because because if it's not going to
pass maybe we should be having meetings
before I I think we we did that Friday I
mean oh okay we did that Friday okay we
can do it back again um no okay we can
do it back before we close okay
ex okay no we don't need to do it again
that's my
now any other business will find a
motion
to Second all in favor thank
you
[Music]
thank
what oh these
[Music]
only
have to come
[Music]
back
that's
e e