[0:00] Heat. Heat. N.

[0:01] [Music]

[0:20] Heat. Heat.

[0:25] [Music]

[0:43] Heat. Heat.

[0:46] [Music]

[1:04] Heat. Heat.

[1:05] [Music]

[1:09] [Applause]

[1:09] [Music]

[2:04] Hey.

[2:06] [Music]

[2:15] Hey.

[2:18] Heat. Heat.

[2:20] [Music]

[3:26] Heat. Heat. N.

[3:30] [Music]

[4:24] [Applause]

[4:27] Heat.

[4:30] [Music]

[4:46] Hey, Heat.

[4:47] [Music]

[4:51] Heat.

[4:54] [Music]

[5:16] Hey, Heat.

[5:19] Hey, hey, hey.

[5:21] [Music]

[6:14] Heat. Heat. Hey, Heat.

[6:17] [Music]

[6:37] Heat. Heat.

[6:40] [Music]

[7:16] Hey,

[7:20] [Music]

[7:24] hey, hey.

[7:27] [Music]

[7:39] [Applause]

[7:39] [Music]

[8:09] Heat. Hey, Heat.

[8:16] [Music]

[8:57] Heat. Heat.

[9:00] [Music]

[9:18] Hey,

[9:27] [Music]

[9:30] Heat.

[9:32] [Music]

[9:46] Heat.

[9:49] [Music]

[9:53] Heat. Heat.

[9:55] [Music]

[10:16] Hey, hey, hey.

[10:18] [Music]

[10:42] Hey, hey, hey.

[10:44] [Music]

[10:54] [Applause]

[10:54] [Music]

[11:07] Heat.

[11:10] [Music]

[11:23] Heat.

[11:28] [Music]

[11:41] Hey,

[11:43] [Music]

[11:49] hey,

[11:55] Heat. Heat.

[12:02] [Music]

[13:00] Heat. Heat.

[13:04] [Music]

[13:24] Heat. Heat.

[13:28] [Music]

[13:30] Hey, hey, hey.

[13:33] [Music]

[14:08] [Applause]

[14:14] [Music]

[15:17] Heat. Heat.

[15:19] [Music]

[16:20] Heat.

[16:25] [Music]

[16:30] Hey, hey, hey.

[16:39] [Music]

[17:11] Heat. Heat.

[17:14] [Music]

[17:18] Hey, hey, hey.

[17:19] [Music]

[17:23] [Applause]

[17:23] [Music]

[17:45] Heat. Heat. N.

[17:47] [Music]

[18:10] Hey, hey.

[18:18] [Music]

[19:01] Heat. Heat.

[19:03] [Music]

[19:10] Heat. Heat.

[19:14] [Music]

[19:30] Heat. Heat.

[19:34] [Music]

[20:21] Heat.

[20:23] [Music]

[20:38] [Applause]

[20:38] [Music]

[22:00] Hey, hey, hey.

[22:07] [Music]

[22:45] Heat. Heat.

[22:47] [Music]

[23:08] Heat. Heat.

[23:12] [Music]

[23:53] [Applause]

[23:53] [Music]

[24:07] Hey, hey, hey.

[24:09] [Music]

[25:24] Heat. Heat.

[25:28] [Music]

[25:46] Heat. Heat.

[25:49] [Music]

[26:08] Heat. Heat.

[26:09] [Music]

[26:56] Hey.

[26:58] Hey.

[26:59] [Music]

[27:08] [Applause]

[27:08] [Music]

[27:14] Heat. Heat.

[27:24] [Music]

[27:34] Heat. Heat.

[27:38] [Music]

[28:50] Hey.

[28:53] [Music]

[29:31] Heat. Heat.

[29:39] [Music]

[30:23] Hey, hey, hey.

[30:28] [Music]

[30:47] Heat. Heat.

[30:49] [Music]

[32:34] I wonder.

[32:42] [Music]

[32:55] a topic around discrimination, violence,

[32:58] racism. People feel attacked

[33:01] and operate from that capacity to

[38:49] We asked the commission of finance to

[38:51] kind of explain us in terms of the the

[38:54] process um that is required if we were

[38:56] to exceed the tax cap and he refer us to

[39:00] the law department

[39:04] for what exactly we as council if we

[39:07] were to proceed to vote on this budget

[39:10] as

[39:12] what is what it requires from the

[39:14] council to follow.

[39:16] >> Um so assistant corporation council

[39:19] Brian asked that this conversation

[39:22] happen on Wednesday when he'll be

[39:24] covering the meeting but I can tell you

[39:26] generally that

[39:28] the city council would need to pass a

[39:31] local law

[39:34] tax levy limit. We have a copy of that

[39:36] in the packet of what that would look

[39:39] like.

[39:41] Um

[39:42] There would need to be a super majority

[39:45] uh but this would have to be passed

[39:48] the local this local law

[39:50] I believe by super majority um and then

[39:54] yeah

[39:56] and then the council would also

[39:59] separately have to um

[40:03] pass the budget by supermajority. So

[40:06] five are required for vote in order to

[40:10] um in order to pass the budget with the

[40:14] tax increase.

[40:19] Go ahead.

[40:20] >> So if we to pass the budget without

[40:24] receiving the tax then it's just for

[40:29] » I'm sorry. Which packet is this? Um was

[40:32] this something that we had?

[40:33] >> This the one I just

[40:34] >> Oh get it. I think maybe when I was out

[40:37] of the room. Maybe when I was out of the

[40:38] room.

[40:40] >> Gotcha. Thank you.

[40:44] » Regarding this uh the process

[40:50] for that next

[40:58] um we can go through it in more detail.

[41:01] Um I'll tell you from a high level.

[41:04] This is uh the example of what the um

[41:10] of what the local law would look like.

[41:12] It would have to sit on the table for 7

[41:14] days just like any local law. Um so

[41:17] there's there's a process to it. Um and

[41:20] he's um he would he asked that he uh

[41:25] discuss it with you. Um but from a high

[41:27] level supermajority the council passes

[41:30] this local law. it goes through a local

[41:33] law process. Council would also need to

[41:36] again by super majority pass the budget

[41:40] uh in order to have that level of

[41:42] increase. Um it said so it said that the

[41:46] mayor can um a mayoral message of

[41:49] necessity to avoid the 7-day waiting

[41:51] period between induct

[41:54] local law. So the mayor can

[41:57] necessity

[41:59] 7-day waiting period.

[42:00] >> Correct.

[42:02] Yeah.

[42:04] So again,

[42:05] assistant corporation council O'Brien

[42:07] asked that he be able to go over this

[42:10] process with you. So I'm happy to with

[42:13] you, but he has all of the details

[42:14] because he's the one who's done all the

[42:16] research. He's fill out the work in the

[42:18] office and he's been honest.

[42:22] >> You're saying Wednesday. We're meeting

[42:24] tomorrow. Is he not available?

[42:25] >> He's not available tomorrow.

[42:30] Sorry. Yeah.

[42:32] >> But I mean if you have more questions

[42:34] you can certainly ask me.

[42:37] >> Are there any question regarding the tax

[42:39] on the requirement? Okay. The next

[42:42] question ask

[42:46] if

[42:48] this is the commission.

[42:51] If we um decide not to

[42:56] go over the tax cap, what would that

[42:59] have cost us in terms of dollar amounts

[43:02] against his budget tonight? You said

[43:05] that to me in the email.

[43:07] >> Yeah, I think so. We talked about I

[43:10] never received that email.

[43:13] We have to buy approximately five to6

[43:15] million to fun

[43:20] » give or take.

[43:24] » We have to reduce our we have to

[43:29] >> we have to reduce more like $6 million

[43:34] >> or

[43:37] they override tax either you override

[43:40] it.

[43:41] >> No, that's not what I'm asking.

[43:43] So if we have enough money, we don't

[43:45] have to worry about

[43:47] >> that. That's what I said.

[43:52] » Okay. No, I just want to leave that to

[43:54] the table. So know where we stand in

[43:55] terms of if we work through it. We're

[43:58] not going to override the tax gap. We

[43:59] need $6 million on the high end.

[44:03] All right. So we'll go into questions to

[44:06] make sure that we address all the

[44:08] questions. Then we can start with the

[44:10] first package.

[44:15] D one of the question I asked when we

[44:17] were talking briefly on events is that

[44:19] but I told you we can go tomorrow.

[44:22] What is the the insurance estimates?

[44:25] >> Um so I can find it tonight

[44:31] from

[44:34] Brown. Uh we as of September 2025

[44:41] goes through the nitty-gritty of what

[44:43] was initially anticipated.

[44:46] Um

[44:48] and as we discussed earlier my general

[44:50] high level review

[44:53] approximately $19 million for MVP um

[44:56] with our

[44:58] um and other proactive steps so we can

[45:00] spend another $17 million on the budget.

[45:04] Do you have more?

[45:09] [Music]

[45:18] » Well, sorry. Uh, can you just recap that

[45:21] what you were explaining?

[45:22] >> Yeah, of course. So, this is from our

[45:24] consultant that I work with um self

[45:27] short plan. Um we meet with her

[45:30] approximately a record to go over um the

[45:33] extensions uh what's projected. Um as

[45:36] you can see on page three it was

[45:38] expected of the 26

[45:40] million.

[45:42] Then if you continue to go through each

[45:44] page there's um showing indications of

[45:48] changes increases um for example

[45:52] loss risk of mitigation factor uh trends

[45:55] for medical and pharmacy

[45:59] and other miscellaneous

[46:01] trends as well that are added to that

[46:04] open um go into more um more detail

[46:11] premium rates

[46:13] uh premiered scenarios.

[46:17] Um but if there's any questions um

[46:19] regarding this packet, please let me

[46:21] know.

[46:41] Thank you for providing this. Um

[46:46] are there any question regarding this? I have to go through it because I can't just if I have question I email

[46:52] it to you. But if any members have any

[46:55] question um

[46:57] can be addressed now or you can follow

[46:59] up with an email to uh direct

[47:03] and see

[47:10] we did address the local law and in the

[47:12] state package there is a draft

[47:15] resolution

[47:17] that we pass tonight. We have the

[47:20] resolution here. We just need to write

[47:21] the number.

[47:23] They're looking at me.

[47:26] So the next um

[47:36] » can I ask one question? Can

[47:38] >> you just tell me what stop losses? I

[47:40] probably should know. What is stop loss

[47:42] premium?

[47:43] >> High cost claimment. We picked a number

[47:47] that limits our loss. So when they have

[47:51] a catastrophic event or medical bills

[47:53] that go

[47:55] hundreds of thousands of dollars, that

[47:58] insurance policy picks it up, limits our

[48:01] losses.

[48:04] The problem is we have some employees

[48:07] who are on maintenance drugs and so the

[48:10] stop loss policy will effectively stock

[48:14] up for one year

[48:17] going into the second year in future

[48:20] then we become liable for that whole

[48:22] amount. That's one of the factors that's

[48:24] driving up our cost for healthcare.

[48:31] on the the next page. This one here at

[48:34] the back have we can go through this in

[48:39] terms of here.

[48:44] If there's anything that um

[48:48] Mr. Williams you need to um address, let

[48:52] us know. If there question that answer,

[48:55] let us know and we can make notes and

[48:58] get answers for you.

[49:05] Go ahead, please.

[49:06] >> There was one thing I did ask.

[49:10] Um, so my specific question what was fun

[49:14] down

[49:20] before, but you give a little bit more

[49:22] detail on that. Um I don't believe from

[49:25] the research that I've done um document

[49:32] the policy that the city has council has

[49:35] to work with the commissioner finance

[49:39] other departments to

[49:40] >> city council's the policy making set the

[49:43] policy for

[49:46] balance or other

[49:49] >> but generally minister council like

[49:50] adopt them would have been one place

[49:52] long for this council came about. So I

[49:54] just that's why I was asking to get

[49:56] through policy if we need to develop

[49:58] them then that's certainly something you

[49:59] could do but generally municipalities

[50:02] adopt them but I was just asking what

[50:04] Alex was

[50:08] and um you know accent that we can

[50:11] certainly look at what the comproller

[50:12] would recommend in terms of our fund

[50:14] balance because I think frankly we may

[50:17] have to go in more into our fund balance

[50:18] than we thought we would. So what does

[50:20] you know what does the fund balance look

[50:23] like? We should take a look at that and

[50:24] >> reasonable is approximately between 15

[50:26] and 1% of the operating

[50:29] >> 15 20%.

[50:32] Um if you look at our numbers on

[50:33] assigned funds that's way

[50:36] >> well um again you know I'll look at what

[50:39] the recommend we don't have our own but

[50:40] the recommendations um

[50:43] come out of the controller's office and

[50:45] so we can take a look at that

[50:50] since we're on that page that you as

[50:52] question is follow question on the very

[50:54] same

[50:57] page

[50:58] one this not it's on the next item Gley

[51:02] 54

[51:06] M port you can complete the question so

[51:08] that we can go on to the next

[51:10] >> where you can

[51:11] >> you talk about a second attachment um

[51:13] regarding outside council

[51:16] >> and then the breakdown of the smart city

[51:18] fund and your transport as requested we

[51:21] didn't get to that as

[51:24] >> we did touch on a tax sketch so do you

[51:26] want to

[51:27] >> I mean he's provided the answer there in

[51:29] front of what expenditures. So um just

[51:33] further clarify this is what we spend

[51:36] year to date and there are no

[51:38] outstanding bills except the 8,000

[51:40] something that we have to pay to outside

[51:42] council.

[51:47] Yeah, I've

[51:49] >> So,

[51:51] yes, for the year to date as a 1020,

[51:54] there's 75,000 actual

[52:02] back year,000.

[52:04] >> I couldn't hear commissioner, could you

[52:05] repeat that?

[52:08] >> The question was the year too big for

[52:09] outside council. So, um Mr. to Google

[52:12] months about $75,685

[52:15] and about um that's expenditure to date

[52:19] and then about um 3,800 in requisitions

[52:23] meaning outstanding um bills that have

[52:26] not been paid or been work within the

[52:28] law department that has not been sent

[52:30] down to the finance to be paid.

[52:35] Um,

[52:37] does that account for

[52:40] >> record?

[52:46] » Yeah. So, I would I would defer to the

[52:48] numbers that finance has

[52:54] a billion and some of it's ongoing. That

[52:57] means you don't build it until they're

[52:58] finished doing all the work. We don't

[53:00] build

[53:01] >> they don't build us until doing some

[53:03] work. Go ahead.

[53:05] >> I outside council

[53:08] with the

[53:10] firefight engineer

[53:13] on

[53:16] that process.

[53:18] >> And we have a ballpark on this. And will

[53:20] that be complete by the end of this

[53:21] year?

[53:25] » I would hope so. I don't think so.

[53:28] >> Oh, okay.

[53:30] So, do we have where we are right now? I

[53:33] mean I know it's available hours etc. Do

[53:35] you have any ballpark of where we are

[53:36] right now

[53:38] >> in terms of

[53:40] >> yeah whether

[53:42] or whenever it's finished

[53:44] >> I don't have those numbers

[53:50] and you have to go back in executive

[53:52] session

[53:53] the details of the contract.

[53:59] » Thank you.

[54:01] also um very important.

[54:03] >> Yeah. Continue with your question.

[54:05] >> The other one was a breakdown of smart

[54:09] cities and he did show us what was aid

[54:12] um with their categories uh in time to

[54:15] have Mr. Bio kind of gave us exactly

[54:19] what they expected

[54:21] that available available. We have to do

[54:25] a deep dive

[54:29] from the company. Uh that is

[54:33] um might take some time.

[54:37] >> And so right now available

[54:41] >> um 137's available.

[54:47] » I'm not.

[54:52] So can I just interpret that? So 137

[54:56] would be is left un un uh spent

[55:02] >> correct

[55:02] >> and the other 125 126 really has been

[55:06] spent. We just haven't Yeah. Okay. Just

[55:08] wanted to

[55:10] >> million6 grants in the pipeline require

[55:13] some local funding to match it.

[55:16] >> Oh okay.

[55:18] M m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m

[55:18] matching funds with 1.5.

[55:21] There are things to support that grant.

[55:23] Yes.

[55:26] >> Yes. So we've been you know we allocated

[55:28] 2 million 17 million 18 million 19 2

[55:32] million 21 and so we spent according to

[55:36] this we spent most of it and that's what

[55:39] we had left

[55:43] that line

[55:48] and I I think my final question was

[55:50] about the process for over tag which

[55:53] barrage address and folk with the vote

[55:57] into that on Wednesday.

[56:02] » Did you understand the uh the fun

[56:05] portion of the assigned fines open?

[56:11] » Sure.

[56:17] » Um so that's on side conversation. Um I

[56:21] asked Mr. He sent it to all of us for

[56:24] what the open and poss were and um they

[56:27] find out all what he all what he

[56:29] outlined in the overview he did send

[56:31] that

[56:33] I do have a couple more questions you

[56:35] cannot prepare to answer um to answer

[56:37] them right now Mr. M has a couple

[56:39] questions about that.

[56:40] >> Okay.

[56:44] So M I have the sheet here this one the

[56:47] screen

[56:49] this has some recommendation also we

[56:51] need to put this we need to come back to

[56:54] this sheet confirm your recommendation

[56:56] don't put this away please put this on

[56:59] the side

[57:02] the next you will see the sheet regards

[57:04] of vacancies and the new fill and the

[57:07] 2020 budget I did ask for approval of

[57:10] that so that we accordingly

[57:14] for the current vacancies

[57:17] in the agenda was removed and a

[57:20] recommendation to the new phase.

[57:23] This will be on this page.

[57:26] Mhm.

[57:34] » And if you have any question ask

[57:37] more of the guidance.

[58:11] So um on a high level here we're moving

[58:13] 12 adding

[58:20] [Music]

[58:23] 89.

[58:26] >> Correct.

[58:28] >> So, six seven.

[58:30] >> But then on the bottom section here,

[58:32] vacancies. So, you have 2 4 6 eight

[58:34] vacancies.

[58:36] And then the top section we were moving

[58:38] the bottom section we are budgeting it

[58:40] into 2026

[58:42] the vacant position and then this year

[58:44] she's a new uh new position that

[58:48] proposed the first portion of the uh

[58:51] making decisions uh has been removed

[58:57] and then the bottom section has

[59:00] additions that are vacant but are still

[59:02] budgeted within

[59:04] budget.

[59:07] Go ahead. But

[59:08] >> and I just want to point out that one of

[59:09] them is already grant funded. So it's

[59:11] not

[59:14] >> that's why I asked the report for us to

[59:15] see the table say they have

[59:19] new position they position we need to

[59:22] identify what are these position

[59:26] so you

[59:29] transfer we have the sheet here.

[59:31] >> Yeah.

[59:32] >> Any question on that? So these buzzer

[59:34] transfers are just this is just year to

[59:36] date that one.

[59:38] >> So

[59:40] that

[59:49] starts off you look at the columns and

[59:52] the accounts

[59:53] that are encumbered into

[59:56] five and then this is year date

[59:59] transfers for 2025. Um, and that kind of

[1:00:12] » Are we looking at this one right now?

[1:00:14] >> Yeah.

[1:00:25] » Any question regard?

[1:00:26] >> Yes. September

[1:00:29] from both NPOS.

[1:00:32] Um

[1:00:33] >> so no it's all

[1:00:36] the transfers are separate from the

[1:00:41] for

[1:00:43] planning or

[1:00:46] the process in purchasing

[1:00:50] year usually they're enduring

[1:00:54] the next year the transfers are executed

[1:00:57] transfers within the line items

[1:01:02] So I guess I was trying to figure out

[1:01:06] how bit better understanding to how kind

[1:01:09] like money moves within departments um

[1:01:11] for like um I think what promptly gets

[1:01:14] questioned when we looking at our police

[1:01:16] overtime they were there's a significant

[1:01:20] um proposal cut from last year um and

[1:01:25] chief uh didn't seem didn't really feel

[1:01:28] like that was going to be the adequate

[1:01:31] number. Um, and I know that there's talk

[1:01:34] around that and every year we feel that

[1:01:36] we have what we need for our first

[1:01:37] responders. So, I was trying to figure

[1:01:39] out

[1:01:43] how do we

[1:01:45] find the money every year to um

[1:01:49] overtime. I want to ask you a question

[1:01:51] maybe in a different way. Well, we

[1:01:53] transfer money from one

[1:01:56] position, lack of better terms, from

[1:01:58] another. So, so I think it's kind of

[1:02:01] like I was trying to get last year's

[1:02:04] transfers like and I believe the I think

[1:02:06] I last couple years, but maybe last

[1:02:09] year's transfer so I could like we can

[1:02:11] kind of read like what the themes are on

[1:02:13] what spaces are.

[1:02:16] Now, you put some overtime here. We're

[1:02:19] over our budget overtime. said that they

[1:02:21] reach out to you and sometimes they

[1:02:23] transfer. So that was the information I

[1:02:24] was looking for

[1:02:27] but typically um

[1:02:30] transfers into salary line

[1:02:41] and over time and premium. So usually

[1:02:44] we'll find where you see for example

[1:02:48] people come in the department

[1:02:51] contract

[1:02:55] last contract

[1:02:58] within their salary and all the time

[1:02:59] lines.

[1:03:02] >> Okay. So the so the information here

[1:03:05] right now wouldn't really necessarily

[1:03:07] answer that question. Right.

[1:03:10] >> Right. Do you have to look at as much um

[1:03:14] their contracts? Um

[1:03:15] >> well I mean this again this wasn't just

[1:03:17] for police. I used police as an example.

[1:03:19] It could be for anyone in any department

[1:03:21] >> but for any for any um unions uh for any

[1:03:24] department the salary lines or lines all

[1:03:26] contractual.

[1:03:31] » Okay. So I guess I'm so we could we

[1:03:34] could circle back to that for the

[1:03:36] information I'm trying to get is what

[1:03:38] are what transfers

[1:03:41] happen

[1:03:43] within the city from from one line to

[1:03:47] another over the last couple years cuz

[1:03:49] I'm trying to identify where themes are

[1:03:51] coming because sometimes it feels like

[1:03:53] you know thinking to talk about this

[1:03:57] you know maybe there's open positions

[1:03:59] that were kind of leaving Vietnam as a

[1:04:02] way, you know, to hopefully fill them.

[1:04:04] But when they're not filled, we use that

[1:04:07] money as a fund to fund other things.

[1:04:10] And I think for me and for everyone um

[1:04:14] that's paying attention to this, I think

[1:04:16] it would it would be good to have the

[1:04:17] information. I think it provides a much

[1:04:19] clearer thing to say, hey, we're asking

[1:04:21] for this in our department. We haven't

[1:04:24] maybe used these bills in the last two to three years. We have

[1:04:29] pulled some of these open positions to

[1:04:31] fund this. That's the best information

[1:04:33] I'm looking for

[1:04:36] and that this won't provide that right

[1:04:38] now. So, we can just um we'll work

[1:04:41] together and necessary information.

[1:04:44] Thank you.

[1:04:45] >> So, do you want to follow up with

[1:04:50] » Mhm.

[1:04:51] >> So, we as

[1:04:53] finished follow make a note of it follow

[1:04:57] up. So you'll kind of go through all the

[1:04:59] things that are in the unfinished pile

[1:05:01] before we leave, right?

[1:05:03] >> Yeah, that's I'm moving. Yes, that's

[1:05:05] good. And anything that we need to

[1:05:06] follow up, we'll do. Anything that we

[1:05:07] need to complete the question and answer

[1:05:11] goes on different path. Uh Mr. Farley,

[1:05:13] you had another question regarding um

[1:05:15] you asked for report detailed

[1:05:16] information on golf course revenue that

[1:05:20] can be tracked for future capital

[1:05:21] project.

[1:05:24] No, but I but I no I didn't receive that information. So what I again what I

[1:05:30] was looking for is in the course of our

[1:05:32] conversation it seemed like course

[1:05:33] unfunded there um that uh I believe it

[1:05:37] was Mr. Rolling was saying that we're

[1:05:39] trying to get the golf course to a point

[1:05:41] where it's self-sufficient and

[1:05:42] discriminating and black. One mechanism

[1:05:44] to do that is taking um revenue and the

[1:05:48] revenue goes back into the general fund.

[1:05:51] However, when we looking at our capital

[1:05:53] project, we're borrowing that government

[1:05:55] to do to do the project, but it could be

[1:05:57] budget.

[1:05:58] >> We're not budgeting off um capital

[1:06:02] reserves.

[1:06:04] >> Okay, I help you understand that. So,

[1:06:05] >> so they they make enough money where we

[1:06:08] put into their fund balance where we

[1:06:11] don't have to borrow from any of their

[1:06:12] capitals,

[1:06:14] >> right? So, any of the capital requests

[1:06:16] that we're making, it's they're they're

[1:06:18] make we're pulling that from the funds

[1:06:20] that they're bringing in. Correct.

[1:06:22] >> Right. Okay. Yeah, that's Well, yeah.

[1:06:25] And we already capital information as

[1:06:26] far as what the revenue is.

[1:06:28] >> Yeah. So, if you if you look at the

[1:06:30] capital expenditures at the year at the

[1:06:32] end of the budget, you see that the line

[1:06:35] that says uh reserve funds captures

[1:06:40] for each section.

[1:06:41] >> Certainly. Okay. Yeah, that that was

[1:06:42] information that that was I was looking

[1:06:44] for. Thank you.

[1:06:45] >> Can I

[1:06:47] before you So, you need to follow up on

[1:06:49] this to get this report. Um, no, no, no, If the information is there, I think

[1:06:52] I can I can strap it for what we got.

[1:06:55] >> 24 are

[1:06:59] locked in the 25s. Again, that's one of

[1:07:03] the things that's very dependent on

[1:07:05] weather.

[1:07:05] >> Sure.

[1:07:06] >> So, we've run, you know, they upgrade

[1:07:09] the courses. Wonderful. Fantastic. We

[1:07:12] had a terrible spring

[1:07:14] >> and so we're still playing catchup to

[1:07:16] get to the 24 numbers and 25.

[1:07:20] >> I keep our fingers crossed that we're

[1:07:22] going to

[1:07:23] >> equal that. And if you could tell me

[1:07:25] what the weather's going to be in 26,

[1:07:27] I'll go back and modify the budget to

[1:07:30] accommodate

[1:07:32] >> I can tell you that wouldn't be here.

[1:07:35] >> But definitely uh Okay. Yeah. So what

[1:07:37] because my thought is uh for that is

[1:07:40] that if we can I mean with the variable

[1:07:42] the weather seems to be a pretty large

[1:07:44] variable um within consideration of that

[1:07:48] >> um looking at okay what would be the

[1:07:51] anticipated uh revenue I think that

[1:07:54] >> looking at that revenue again to support

[1:07:56] um the the youth services line on that's

[1:08:00] the trail I'm looking to go down that's

[1:08:02] request

[1:08:06] This is part of your

[1:08:10] followup question in terms of um in

[1:08:13] terms of the funding that you were

[1:08:14] trying

[1:08:16] at all in terms of the fee any special

[1:08:19] fee increase

[1:08:20] >> to offset the some sort of sort of

[1:08:23] mentioning back on your viewing.

[1:08:25] >> Well certainly I think but after the

[1:08:27] conversation I I was thinking a couple

[1:08:30] different things and we could look at

[1:08:32] the increase of of of service fee.

[1:08:35] think that that's doable, but also

[1:08:37] looking at the what's what's existing um

[1:08:40] and maybe uh prioritizing that money to

[1:08:43] support the youth service line

[1:08:46] >> even if we didn't.

[1:08:47] >> Um so I just wanted to say cuz I was

[1:08:49] looking at Mr. Farlay's question um that

[1:08:53] the course is fully self-sufficient. So,

[1:08:55] I just wanted to clarify that because

[1:08:57] this said that you wanted to make sure

[1:08:59] that we were able to move the course

[1:09:00] toward full self-sufficiency, but it is

[1:09:03] actually um fully self-sufficient and

[1:09:06] actually generating revenue uh for the city. And then I do have a

[1:09:10] couple of ideas that I haven't had a

[1:09:12] chance to share with you um around the

[1:09:15] $150,000 that I will share with you um

[1:09:18] that wouldn't affect this budget. That

[1:09:21] would be other requests that maybe we

[1:09:23] could make to others.

[1:09:25] um around that 150,000.

[1:09:27] >> Yeah. And I and so yeah, I look like

[1:09:30] having those conversations with you. I

[1:09:32] what I was saying is that I recognize

[1:09:35] that it is self self-sufficient. Mr.

[1:09:37] Robin was saying that the process that

[1:09:39] happens right now is is to make sure

[1:09:44] that that the golf course the golf

[1:09:46] course stays in the black and to support

[1:09:48] their own capital projects. Um and my

[1:09:52] I'm just a thought after you know we put

[1:09:55] we made quite a significant uh

[1:09:58] investment in the golf course from ARPA

[1:10:00] funds um to justify you know what could

[1:10:04] result in a re rate increase and or

[1:10:07] maybe re rep prioritizing some of that

[1:10:09] money that's existing to support the

[1:10:11] youth services line.

[1:10:15] >> Thank you Mr.

[1:10:16] >> Any other questions? So after this mark

[1:10:19] is done, Mr. Farley um

[1:10:22] >> or you just want to follow up and put

[1:10:23] >> Well, I mean I got the I got the

[1:10:25] information we'll just explore some

[1:10:26] ideas and what we can do. Thank you.

[1:10:28] >> Okay. Y

[1:10:29] >> All right. So the next document I have

[1:10:31] is work is consider

[1:10:44] behind that was um how

[1:10:49] Police

[1:10:51] condition

[1:10:56] saying that

[1:11:00] um based on this document there claims

[1:11:04] throughout the city

[1:11:06] believe that it might be with people

[1:11:09] sometimes functioning out of their

[1:11:10] immediate scope. So I think we can think

[1:11:13] back to how the medios are defined and

[1:11:17] method just with the general catch all

[1:11:19] of the certification

[1:11:24] or operating certain machinery but just

[1:11:26] because you need one you can use

[1:11:30] and see does that mean you are expected

[1:11:32] to jump in between all the expectations.

[1:11:35] So we wanted to have presentation to

[1:11:38] have a specific department that each

[1:11:40] person is attributed to um with the

[1:11:42] hopes to keep this number down or

[1:11:45] identify what's the cost because I I

[1:11:48] find it hard to believe that individual

[1:11:50] products one of our waste apparatuses

[1:11:54] day in and day out some of the um that

[1:11:58] we see which I know is an executive

[1:11:59] session seem like they are avoidable

[1:12:02] instances that due to lasting

[1:12:12] That is something that we can discuss as

[1:12:14] a console committee session and we have

[1:12:16] to do an executive session and we still

[1:12:18] do it and follow and talk about policies

[1:12:21] and things that bring in commission or

[1:12:25] GS commission to discuss further in

[1:12:27] terms of

[1:12:29] any concern

[1:12:30] >> not the policy though but how they're

[1:12:31] identify I think that has value in our

[1:12:34] discussion for budget.

[1:12:37] >> What you mean discuss put it in the

[1:12:39] budget in terms of the the expected um

[1:12:42] outcome.

[1:12:42] >> So your MO and SNAP doesn't mean you

[1:12:45] know subtle NOS like I'm using this to

[1:12:49] justify there are differences

[1:12:51] >> and even if you are pulled from one

[1:12:53] that's fair but I think understanding

[1:12:55] where you're pulling from is an

[1:12:57] important fact that to be outlined.

[1:13:00] >> Go ahead.

[1:13:01] >> Well no I just I think that Mr. Williams

[1:13:03] just clarified for me. Um, so because we

[1:13:06] do move them around as needed and I

[1:13:09] think that you just said that, right?

[1:13:11] >> Yeah. Go ahead.

[1:13:15] » Go ahead. So please, so you asked for um

[1:13:18] working

[1:13:20] did you only specifically ask for in the

[1:13:26] significant number

[1:13:29] and this is only

[1:13:41] Oh, I didn't prove that one.

[1:13:44] Next time

[1:13:46] next page, I did ask for a copy of the

[1:13:55] more of like a high level summary in

[1:13:57] terms of how many money um allocated to

[1:14:00] the city and how many is allocated for

[1:14:04] the agency. But I can do that because I

[1:14:06] will take the Excel version and um

[1:14:10] I'm going to do my own because I just

[1:14:12] want to highlight that because I know

[1:14:14] you know we already

[1:14:16] that um

[1:14:19] we awarded uh money to our friends and families. So I wanted to

[1:14:23] highlight that to make sure that when we

[1:14:25] address that just watch it to identify

[1:14:27] how much money was awarded to the city

[1:14:30] and the other agency that received the

[1:14:32] funding and to identify those so we can

[1:14:35] put that to rest.

[1:14:41] » The next report on this is a smart city.

[1:14:46] So I I as I asked about that and um and

[1:14:51] they referred to the fact that we gave

[1:14:54] information just over exactly how fun

[1:14:59] is there a follow up to this? Yeah, he

[1:15:01] said it would take some time.

[1:15:12] » How do you want broken down? How much we

[1:15:14] spend on fiber? You want access points?

[1:15:20] Well, so I'm a customer, but again,

[1:15:24] so yeah, bring it down because um I'm

[1:15:28] sure you know what I was trying to

[1:15:29] figure out. It's not but it looks like

[1:15:32] uh you're saying that we only have

[1:15:35] 137,000 left. So it's not a huge amount

[1:15:38] of money.

[1:15:39] Um

[1:15:41] but I didn't sure if it's if at this

[1:15:43] point let me think it through if it's

[1:15:45] worth it. But I know we put it we you

[1:15:47] know we had 7 million in there. I didn't

[1:15:48] realize what fent to do.

[1:15:52] The question is we're asking for your

[1:15:54] breakdown of the smart city money

[1:15:56] including what has been spent.

[1:15:58] >> How much remain any open uh purchase

[1:16:01] orders

[1:16:03] >> in 23 and 21 we spent um like over well

[1:16:08] yeah 2 million over 2 million in 21 and

[1:16:10] over 3 million in 23 and the other

[1:16:13] years.

[1:16:16] So, and I thought that by now it's we're

[1:16:18] in 25 that we were supposed to be have

[1:16:21] like wrapped this up and um gotten it

[1:16:23] done, but now we're getting more money.

[1:16:24] So, there's obviously more to be done.

[1:16:28] So, yes, that would be just how we spend

[1:16:30] it and but what um

[1:16:35] Mr. Kin said is that the new money

[1:16:37] that's coming in the 1.6 million can

[1:16:40] only be spent on smart city and nothing

[1:16:42] else. the kind of lighting that we need

[1:16:45] in the budget only

[1:16:48] >> that's going to

[1:16:51] platform primarily

[1:16:56] go

[1:17:00] » something that you can get in the

[1:17:02] private

[1:17:05] typically for accounts payable

[1:17:09] >> detailed yeah detailed documents It's a

[1:17:13] lot of documents but hundreds of pages.

[1:17:19] » So I looked specific or you get briefing

[1:17:22] from Mr. Ken on what has been spent.

[1:17:25] >> So what you so if it's spent it's spent

[1:17:28] and it was just is there anything that's

[1:17:31] encumbered but not spent in this? So

[1:17:35] open field

[1:17:37] that's what

[1:17:38] >> just this specific amount right here

[1:17:41] >> and then the available amount

[1:17:43] 37 that's what

[1:17:47] >> so I since it was a significant amount

[1:17:50] tax um

[1:17:53] there's not a lot left so I'm not sure I

[1:17:55] mean if you can get some that would be

[1:17:56] fine but it's only there's only $137

[1:17:59] there

[1:18:01] that's even available

[1:18:04] And really we're trying to see if the um

[1:18:07] 1.6 million that we're getting could

[1:18:09] have we could have gotten some of that

[1:18:11] from this back to the general fund.

[1:18:14] That's that was my

[1:18:15] >> again

[1:18:16] capital. You can't do

[1:18:18] >> I got it. I understand that was I was

[1:18:20] thinking I didn't know. So now you know

[1:18:22] I was like I figured out that we can

[1:18:24] move some of that money there.

[1:18:26] We can't we cannot

[1:18:29] move. Um

[1:18:31] maybe you can ask for what but it's it's

[1:18:34] just it's it's not a significant amount

[1:18:36] that it'll help but it won't it really

[1:18:38] won't close

[1:18:41] >> but it was you know it is kind of

[1:18:42] significant but it looks like it is for

[1:18:44] capital so because I was thinking the

[1:18:46] same thing but

[1:18:49] 137,000 not chicken food.

[1:18:52] >> No sh to your mom

[1:18:54] >> but it's all set.

[1:18:58] Don't move on. A question was asked Miss

[1:19:01] Cargo in terms of the board of zoning

[1:19:04] appeal piece for services and that was

[1:19:07] provided to us

[1:19:10] that bill from Mr. Williams.

[1:19:49] Mr. You had another question regarding

[1:19:51] code enforcement a664100

[1:19:54] code enforcement office for logic for

[1:19:56] eliminating revenue generating and

[1:19:58] compliance officer.

[1:20:01] Department of the Department of

[1:20:03] Administration of public works has been

[1:20:07] his response was their current

[1:20:12] so it's

[1:20:14] so long.

[1:20:39] There was a question here from

[1:20:41] fund balance.

[1:20:43] >> Yes. And we didn't receive

[1:20:45] a detail available.

[1:20:47] >> Yes.

[1:20:51] » 724

[1:20:55] and open purchase order.

[1:20:56] >> Yeah.

[1:20:57] >> Yes. And you're going to And then this

[1:21:00] we have this report here in terms of the

[1:21:02] last report. You're going to be so you

[1:21:05] want to

[1:21:06] >> Yeah. I have some questions. I said

[1:21:10] so there should be a followup.

[1:21:12] >> Yes.

[1:21:18] I'm sorry. Which one was that?

[1:21:19] >> This was this.

[1:21:21] >> Oh, yeah. Okay. Thank you.

[1:21:29] » Okay. Um I think that's all I have in

[1:21:32] terms of question. Are there any other

[1:21:34] questions that

[1:21:39] you have? I don't think I'm missing.

[1:21:41] That's all I have.

[1:22:00] just so

[1:22:03] we'll go back to you in terms of your um

[1:22:08] I think we answer the question and we

[1:22:10] can go through your um recommendation

[1:22:20] in terms of recommendation that we think

[1:22:23] please make notes

[1:22:35] You should have this page.

[1:22:46] [Music]

[1:23:09] So walk us for a while on this line and

[1:23:12] if we have question we can ask and then

[1:23:15] we'll move to the next

[1:23:17] So starting

[1:23:19] recommendations, but what in order

[1:23:23] to rail a lot of regiments just

[1:23:26] identifying just issues or concerns with

[1:23:29] respect

[1:23:31] to the general fund in a year that is

[1:23:35] conceivably one of the most difficult

[1:23:37] years in the state and I would

[1:23:39] absolutely agree. So I think if we are

[1:23:42] put in best position to then further

[1:23:44] evaluate us for expenses that are very

[1:23:48] much needed. I think we have to go

[1:23:50] through

[1:23:54] fully meet the request of certain

[1:23:55] apartments um and not completely forego

[1:23:58] certain expenses just due to your

[1:24:01] current. So um each vehicle that I use

[1:24:06] there is

[1:24:07] there were never I didn't zero down any

[1:24:09] recommendations. So reducing from 2 to

[1:24:11] one. Um I know for some of our

[1:24:14] recommendations we do come at different

[1:24:16] cost. There's a difference between

[1:24:18] reducing

[1:24:20] two rear packers to one is different

[1:24:24] than reducing

[1:24:26] I think 350 from two to one parks. So I

[1:24:29] know that those have different weights.

[1:24:32] Um but sincerely didn't calculate all of

[1:24:34] the recommendations that I had that fall

[1:24:37] to $2.19 million.

[1:24:40] is a large figure that can influence the

[1:24:43] difference between people who make

[1:24:44] decisions between the taxes and choosing

[1:24:48] between food and other meanings in their

[1:24:51] households. Um I would point out the

[1:24:54] last recommendation I had was in line

[1:24:57] with just how the refuse and waste

[1:25:00] charges have increased considerably for

[1:25:02] people in the city. Um that A2130 D line

[1:25:06] which

[1:25:08] what is it again?

[1:25:09] >> Uh alpha 2130 delta that refers to the

[1:25:16] >> waste outside the city. The past few

[1:25:18] years I've saw that number just rise

[1:25:22] uh considerably lower in respect to just

[1:25:24] fees increases for residents within the

[1:25:26] city. With that followed in line with

[1:25:28] the expectations for increases for

[1:25:31] people living in the city which is 32%.

[1:25:34] Increasing that to similar standards

[1:25:37] that possibility did not calculate back

[1:25:39] into my overall overall number that way

[1:25:42] by $195,000.

[1:25:46] Just showing if they're asking our

[1:25:48] residents to pay more for trash. I think

[1:25:50] it's disingenuous to give that service

[1:25:53] away for free. I know it's not free with

[1:25:57] a marginally less increase outside of

[1:26:00] the city.

[1:26:02] May contract we have a contract under

[1:26:06] deal with Scotia for that. So there's an

[1:26:08] inflationary

[1:26:10] uh proponent of that

[1:26:13] and I apologize I don't know what your

[1:26:15] contracts are but we cannot go down the

[1:26:18] path taking

[1:26:21] items that are budgeted in the capital

[1:26:23] budget and then look at putting it in

[1:26:26] the general budget items in the 26

[1:26:30] capital budget have almost no effect on

[1:26:33] 26 budget. Those are items that we would

[1:26:36] hopefully buy in 26 or going into 27.

[1:26:40] And the impact is really 27, but

[1:26:45] the message coming out saying that

[1:26:47] you're looking at taking money that we

[1:26:49] intend to borrow

[1:26:51] and that's again proposals the capital

[1:26:54] budget. You probably have to switch that

[1:26:56] to a RAN revenue anticipation note or a

[1:27:00] CAN tax

[1:27:03] anticipation note.

[1:27:14] » Our capital budget is like um a

[1:27:17] Christmas wish list, right? What we

[1:27:19] need, what we need and we always

[1:27:23] approach you. I understood we need

[1:27:25] money,

[1:27:27] >> right? And we usually borrow money

[1:27:33] to fund more those capital funds.

[1:27:36] >> Correct.

[1:27:38] >> Uh if if I may say, I mean, what the

[1:27:40] suggestion is on the table in terms of

[1:27:44] we're in a delicate position

[1:27:46] >> and we Yes, it's it's a capital. We're

[1:27:49] going to borrow money. It's not part of

[1:27:51] the budget,

[1:27:51] >> but if you don't want to borrow it, I

[1:27:53] understand that. But you cannot take

[1:27:55] that money,

[1:27:56] >> which you're saying borrow.

[1:28:00] >> It's not It's not money that we have.

[1:28:02] >> It's funny that um

[1:28:05] the message is that I know we're we're

[1:28:07] tight crunch. We need a tight no way

[1:28:10] more money. Can we put this off?

[1:28:15] >> Go ahead. Well, I can only speak um spec

[1:28:18] I did talk about the uh when I saw this,

[1:28:22] I did talk to our parks director about

[1:28:23] the first item and um just wanted to

[1:28:26] point out that the equipment that he

[1:28:30] currently is using is like 13 years old.

[1:28:32] Um and that particular truck, he also

[1:28:35] uses it to plow the snow from some of

[1:28:37] the other parks. It's not just limited

[1:28:40] to one park. So, it is how we um we use

[1:28:44] it across the across the city. So,

[1:28:46] that's 70,000 I would like to uh keep in

[1:28:50] um but I do understand what we're saying

[1:28:52] that it doesn't affect the taxes in any

[1:28:54] way, right? I mean, it's um because

[1:28:56] they're capital projects. So, um but

[1:28:59] that's the only one that I uh wanted to mention to you. And then I

[1:29:03] don't know the only other thing I would

[1:29:04] say though is the IT smart node upgrade.

[1:29:08] Um,

[1:29:09] I think that, you know, Mr. Khan, that

[1:29:13] seemed like a pretty legitimate, we kind

[1:29:16] of need it, uh, for our technology. But

[1:29:20] again, I'm not a I'm not an IT

[1:29:22] specialist, but

[1:29:25] >> so whether it becomes out of state now

[1:29:27] or the future, right? The decisions we

[1:29:29] make now, the opponents, what we do are

[1:29:32] going to say this in no way affects next

[1:29:34] year's budget thereafter. So I think we

[1:29:36] need to change our practices of how

[1:29:37] we're evaluating like these purchases

[1:29:39] moving forward. Um I would say for

[1:29:43] department heads or anyone bringing

[1:29:44] products forward, they don't they're not

[1:29:46] forced to make the decisions or

[1:29:48] calculations that we are responsible for

[1:29:50] in this room. Their focus point is how

[1:29:53] do I approve the living conditions of

[1:29:55] people in the safe? So they're going to

[1:29:56] be for everything on this list and there

[1:29:58] always is going to be justification for

[1:30:01] these things.

[1:30:02] >> If not, I would question their logically

[1:30:04] accepting it. Um

[1:30:05] >> but the responsibility we have now is

[1:30:08] what difficult decisions are we going to

[1:30:10] make because if we continue to say we

[1:30:12] can we need can't do without this thing

[1:30:15] and I would say let's just we're going

[1:30:16] to waste the time and just pass the

[1:30:18] budget.

[1:30:23] » Uh we have to understand I mean there's

[1:30:25] some money that we can borrow at some

[1:30:26] point in time we're going to have to

[1:30:28] taxpayers going to pay the next year or

[1:30:30] two. So, it's cost going to be added to

[1:30:32] the budget in a year or two. And it's

[1:30:34] like similar to home. I mean, we're

[1:30:35] tight crunch in your your own personal

[1:30:38] life and go there and buy an SUV on top

[1:30:41] of all the escalation and the price

[1:30:43] that's going on and down the road you

[1:30:45] have to pay for it. So yes, we're going

[1:30:47] to part money, but uh we need to be very

[1:30:50] careful what we do

[1:30:51] >> because if we're going to be cutting

[1:30:53] across the border, we need to make sure

[1:30:55] that we address

[1:30:57] every

[1:30:57] >> department

[1:31:00] by not making some of those capital

[1:31:02] investments to drive up the maintenance

[1:31:04] costs and other lands.

[1:31:11] » Oh, just got the individual back full

[1:31:13] time. Hopefully not.

[1:31:16] H listen,

[1:31:17] >> there was a full-time person how we were

[1:31:19] identified that was off for a

[1:31:21] considerable amount of the year that

[1:31:23] individual is now back. Some of the

[1:31:25] expectations that Mr. Lefon had with

[1:31:27] being able to work with individuals

[1:31:29] offline to help with some of those

[1:31:30] internal concerns he hasn't been able to

[1:31:33] do for much of this year. Hopefully that

[1:31:35] cost savings into next year.

[1:31:40] But the thought also is if our equipment

[1:31:43] is not getting into more accidents

[1:31:44] because we're keeping people in line

[1:31:46] with their work workflow expectations,

[1:31:49] the vehicles apparatuses will stay in

[1:31:51] good functional way.

[1:31:57] Do you want to touch on the bottom of

[1:31:58] your page?

[1:32:04] » Um 60p 1621

[1:32:07] kind of walk us through there and then

[1:32:08] we'll page and then we'll go into the

[1:32:10] other

[1:32:15] » 1621 that

[1:32:17] >> it's not these. Yeah. So the SL chart

[1:32:22] clearly the year to date uh for that

[1:32:26] line 1621 to 41 the year was 10% and

[1:32:30] going up through the year but sincerely

[1:32:36] focus here is how do we these reductions

[1:32:39] get closer in line with that unique

[1:32:41] minds.

[1:32:45] So with that just trying to every dollar

[1:32:49] is looking at your dollars.

[1:32:54] Any question on that?

[1:32:57] So move to E3120

[1:33:01] that is on edition 32.

[1:33:13] Great.

[1:33:16] 31.

[1:33:20] » I'm sorry. What page was it, Mr. M?

[1:33:24] 31.

[1:33:25] >> Thank you.

[1:33:29] » Yeah, I have administration.

[1:33:33] >> So, here it is 50% and two months left

[1:33:36] in the year.

[1:33:41] » May 31. I imagine that would be one of

[1:33:43] those lines where there are uh those

[1:33:47] transfers

[1:33:48] calculate those

[1:33:51] funds ahead of time. We can deliberately

[1:33:54] fund some other things rather than not

[1:33:55] include them and have to have a budget

[1:33:57] appropriation to include them.

[1:34:01] >> So can I just um Mr. Williams? So

[1:34:05] instead of

[1:34:08] So you want to actually

[1:34:12] 3120

[1:34:14] 402. Oh, you are you adding all three of

[1:34:17] those 402s

[1:34:19] or four? There's four of them, I'm

[1:34:20] sorry. Or is it just the plain one

[1:34:22] administration expense?

[1:34:24] >> Just the plain one.

[1:34:25] >> Gotcha. So you want that to go down by

[1:34:28] 25,000

[1:34:30] >> based on the fact that the year end date

[1:34:32] is 50%.

[1:34:34] Um, and I don't have a note on that

[1:34:36] particular one

[1:34:39] >> on what it was for.

[1:34:40] >> I would say Mr. a point there not been

[1:34:43] glaring out side of large increases or decreases in this line for it to

[1:34:48] cause like

[1:34:50] a point of comment like when they're

[1:34:52] coming to present for me and I had other

[1:34:55] questions about our overtime lines drawn

[1:34:58] from because for police and fire it's

[1:35:02] on a recent basis that the majority of

[1:35:04] those expenses come in December. So that

[1:35:06] draws me to ask why. Because if we can

[1:35:09] eliminate that or reduce it, that would

[1:35:12] make considerable savings for us. And if

[1:35:14] you're going to tell me, it's because we

[1:35:16] have a holiday in December. There are

[1:35:18] holidays and other ones that don't draw

[1:35:20] that much money. And I know I'm jumping

[1:35:22] around a little bit, but over time lines

[1:35:25] and at least confirm

[1:35:28] resident reviewing comments. Um year

[1:35:30] date one was like 1%. So you're telling

[1:35:33] me that's going to jump 99% in the month

[1:35:35] of December?

[1:35:36] >> I I hear what you're saying. So I think

[1:35:37] we I'd like to hear more of an

[1:35:39] explanation as well.

[1:35:40] >> So that wasn't one of my discuss

[1:35:42] reduction because that requires more

[1:35:44] conversation. Um but that's why I asked

[1:35:46] it.

[1:35:46] >> Yeah. No, I I

[1:35:54] asked the question around the transfers

[1:35:57] and getting that information while

[1:36:00] decision. I feel like there's probably

[1:36:02] really good justifiable reasons why some

[1:36:04] of the things are moving the way they

[1:36:05] are. We just kind of need to have a

[1:36:07] better understanding of it.

[1:36:25] Now that is

[1:36:28] >> um I just so maybe um our commissioner

[1:36:33] could just explain it might just be an

[1:36:35] accounting thing but why the spend down

[1:36:37] happens in December because I understand

[1:36:39] what Mr. Williams is saying. So

[1:36:42] >> some contractual payment

[1:36:44] >> to be here

[1:36:50] » specifically looking for 31.

[1:36:52] >> Um well there were a few aren't there a

[1:36:55] couple that go

[1:36:57] >> 3120 117. Well that's holiday. Okay.

[1:37:01] Yeah, it's dependent on the contract.

[1:37:04] Um, but I believe this one in particular

[1:37:07] was uh one of the uh members that they

[1:37:11] need to um status

[1:37:14] out.

[1:37:18] » Mhm.

[1:37:19] >> Okay.

[1:37:25] » Any other question regarding

[1:37:29] proposal?

[1:37:31] If I move to page 6

[1:37:38] 8664

[1:37:40] 100

[1:37:45] [Music]

[1:37:53] » So they lowered the

[1:37:56] proposed law enforcement officers from

[1:37:58] 12 to 10 and then One of my big comments

[1:38:00] was why would we do that? Um we're going

[1:38:02] to talk to Mr. Fency to say they were

[1:38:04] actually at five. Um I don't know how no

[1:38:08] one needs to think that they're going to

[1:38:09] hire five code enforcement officers in

[1:38:11] 2026.

[1:38:13] I'm going to push back and say some to

[1:38:16] none. Um I'm going say some but I think

[1:38:19] that also follow the question a lot of

[1:38:21] the conversations we had before this

[1:38:23] discussion about that department of

[1:38:24] itself separate conversation. So I

[1:38:27] definitely think looking to lower that

[1:38:31] number for more reasonable figure two

[1:38:35] positions away. I don't think that's

[1:38:36] hurting anyone and there's still

[1:38:38] available positions for individuals they

[1:38:41] identify themselves.

[1:38:45] » So you're suggesting lowering from 10 to

[1:38:48] a lower number

[1:38:50] >> of vegan positions. Yes. just want to

[1:38:53] close up.

[1:38:57] » I need a different color.

[1:39:00] >> It's start I I think that what it seems

[1:39:04] might be happening. And I guess what I'm

[1:39:06] my wondering is when again when we're

[1:39:08] having these vacant positions that are

[1:39:10] left in um does that become

[1:39:16] uh yeah draw source for different

[1:39:19] expenses and that's why and I'm sure

[1:39:21] that we've captured that in transfers

[1:39:23] understand like where that information

[1:39:25] happens but we'll be able to see that

[1:39:28] but that's that was the my entire uh

[1:39:32] like some of my receptions that

[1:39:36] there's most likely going to be

[1:39:37] shortfalls in our revenues uh in this

[1:39:40] year. We're probably not going to hit

[1:39:42] figures depending if you look at, you

[1:39:44] know, later days. So,

[1:39:48] that's going to be captured. Um you're

[1:39:51] not going to see any savings from these

[1:39:52] salary lines from these overtime lines.

[1:39:55] um you know depending on if we did hit

[1:39:58] 100% of these revenue numbers then yes

[1:40:01] maybe

[1:40:05] uh

[1:40:06] >> fun.

[1:40:10] So yeah, I don't think I'm missing. So

[1:40:14] my question is how much money is being

[1:40:18] left in vacant positions and then being

[1:40:21] pulled from the what would be this

[1:40:25] position that it was filled to go to a

[1:40:26] different expense? I that's the question

[1:40:28] I'm trying to figure out.

[1:40:29] >> Go in here and we look at expenditures

[1:40:33] uh try to balance everything out. So say

[1:40:36] if okay we have budgeted five something

[1:40:42] currently and our revenue expectations

[1:40:46] and our expenses are um fund balances

[1:40:49] going to be decreased.

[1:40:51] So I'm not sure if that's answering your

[1:40:53] question. So we might not see the extra

[1:40:56] funding salary and overtimes.

[1:40:59] So, so what you're saying is that when

[1:41:02] the if we don't meet our revenue that

[1:41:05] money that might be in in that position

[1:41:08] held in that line goes to our fund

[1:41:10] balance. That's what you're saying.

[1:41:13] >> So, no, if we meet our revenues meet

[1:41:15] expectations.

[1:41:16] >> Sure.

[1:41:18] >> Revenues are over expenditures

[1:41:20] >> that have to balance.

[1:41:24] >> Yeah. It still doesn't answer that

[1:41:26] question as far as well I think again I

[1:41:28] just need to get information on

[1:41:29] transfers.

[1:41:29] >> Let me see if I can try to So let's use

[1:41:32] um this department code enforcement with

[1:41:35] vacancies.

[1:41:36] >> Sure.

[1:41:36] >> So if they have to spend on on another

[1:41:39] line and if they have funding on one of

[1:41:41] those vacancies they use that money

[1:41:42] within that specific department to help

[1:41:45] offset any overrun.

[1:41:47] >> Ex Yes, that's what I'm saying.

[1:41:49] >> Yeah, I'm trying.

[1:41:50] >> Mhm.

[1:41:50] >> They do and that's happening all the

[1:41:52] time. Yes, the police department

[1:41:54] mentioned that to us. That's why they

[1:41:55] help with the overtime because they

[1:41:57] always have taken position and funding

[1:42:00] on those specific line.

[1:42:02] >> So they use that funding within that

[1:42:04] department

[1:42:05] >> to help them with over time or any

[1:42:07] additional uh related expense.

[1:42:09] >> So at given time they're shortening the

[1:42:12] in the dollar amount on your timeline

[1:42:15] >> but in other pockets they can make it up

[1:42:18] over time,

[1:42:19] >> right? But what ends up happening is

[1:42:21] that when you know to pass the budget in

[1:42:25] good faith,

[1:42:26] if we know that the trend of the last 3

[1:42:30] years is that these vacant positions are lines are being pulled from to

[1:42:36] support anything other than that

[1:42:38] position, then we should probably have

[1:42:40] like a a more realistic conversation.

[1:42:44] And I think that's kind of what Mr.

[1:42:46] Williams at least uh related to uh my

[1:42:50] inquiry around transfer because it seems

[1:42:53] like if I'm a department heading and I'm

[1:42:55] saying I need seven positions. I've only

[1:42:58] filled two in the last 3 years but I've

[1:43:01] pulled from those five bacon positions

[1:43:04] to support another budget line. Let's

[1:43:07] just reflect that and say we want the budget line to be funded this way so

[1:43:14] the numbers are are clear is what I'm

[1:43:17] saying. So that's why we need that

[1:43:19] information on on the transfers

[1:43:21] happening so we can identify any trends

[1:43:23] that we're seeing.

[1:43:26] >> Excuse me.

[1:43:29] >> Go ahead.

[1:43:29] >> So this actually goes to um a question

[1:43:32] based on what Mr.

[1:43:34] said that um because I'm looking I've

[1:43:36] been looking at revenues and how we

[1:43:37] increase them. I think we have this from

[1:43:39] both ends but um you specifically said

[1:43:43] that that maybe we would have some

[1:43:46] revenue that we're anticipating. Is

[1:43:48] there some particular revenue line that

[1:43:50] you think we may not hit or several?

[1:43:57] I believe home sales is one of them.

[1:44:03] But it's already

[1:44:08] » Okay. So, let's um let's continue with

[1:44:12] stay on track.

[1:44:24] » So, so it's fairly I mean if you look at

[1:44:26] the majority of it from the last budget

[1:44:30] overall.

[1:44:30] >> Mhm. If we were if we had a good sort of

[1:44:34] lot this money would come back to the

[1:44:35] general fund from department or

[1:44:38] shortfall they will use the funding

[1:44:40] within department of health.

[1:44:44] » Mhm.

[1:44:47] >> Um

[1:44:50] the next one is um

[1:44:55] try to find

[1:44:56] >> I think you you've missed the digit

[1:44:58] there. Is that 89 89?

[1:45:00] >> Yes. Oh, I I hope that it's

[1:45:03] I think it's 9089,

[1:45:06] I think. I wasn't sure.

[1:45:08] >> It's on the top of the second page or

[1:45:11] the back page.

[1:45:14] I couldn't really find it either.

[1:45:18] >> I didn't I didn't know who it was.

[1:45:25] » I need to come back.

[1:45:26] >> What department? What department?

[1:45:28] >> I wasn't sure.

[1:45:31] Where's my budget?

[1:45:35] >> Page 30 for 1989.

[1:45:40] >> Oh, maybe it's missing the first number.

[1:45:41] Huh?

[1:45:46] » Can you see?

[1:45:49] Yes. Yes, it is. Thank you, M.

[1:45:51] >> Oh, okay. Okay, I got it. I see it.

[1:45:56] I think they're telling us that July

[1:45:59] demolition

[1:46:03] » 1989. Okay.

[1:46:07] >> A 1989 contingency.

[1:46:11] >> Our year to date is 282,500.

[1:46:16] » What is our 28?

[1:46:17] >> 282,51.

[1:46:20] » So like 300K.

[1:46:22] >> And there's certain things you can

[1:46:23] educate around. I can't really say no

[1:46:25] where this has happened but I understand

[1:46:29] what I mean.

[1:46:31] >> Mayor how is our recovery insurance

[1:46:34] recover

[1:46:36] taken down after higher?

[1:46:41] » It's hit and miss. Some of those uh get

[1:46:45] nothing back and other ones we've been

[1:46:48] fairly successful.

[1:46:50] Is it a long drawn up process report or

[1:46:53] they just settled through the insurance

[1:46:54] company?

[1:46:56] >> It seems it's all talked to they're not

[1:47:00] when you're dealing with insurance

[1:47:02] companies, it's never quite as

[1:47:04] >> simple where you send them the bill and

[1:47:05] they send you back the check. So, it's the what the value is and what the

[1:47:12] coverage is.

[1:47:16] We some people cash insurance walk away

[1:47:19] from the property

[1:47:22] cash insurance check.

[1:47:25] >> Are we not filing a lean on that very

[1:47:27] moment?

[1:47:28] >> We are now in the past.

[1:47:32] >> And sometimes it's a little bit of lag

[1:47:33] from the event till you've identified

[1:47:36] the uh contextual policy that's

[1:47:39] provided.

[1:47:43] Any

[1:47:48] question?

[1:47:52] » Yeah, this is line we have to consider

[1:47:54] because we do have unfortunate situation

[1:47:56] with demo one and things like that. It

[1:47:57] does cost us more money now the 80. We

[1:48:00] used to pay a couple years ago 30

[1:48:02] $40,000 for demo. Now it's almost

[1:48:05] double.

[1:48:06] >> What line is are you talking?

[1:48:11] Oh, you're still

[1:48:12] >> we take out of the general fund, but the

[1:48:14] land back gets paid for. So, there's

[1:48:17] different sources there depending on the

[1:48:19] uh again the property what we're trying

[1:48:22] to accomplish.

[1:48:26] That's all. Anything else?

[1:48:29] >> I don't know.

[1:48:33] » So, we're talking about

[1:48:35] >> No, no, this is just a discussion of

[1:48:41] We're just discussing having open

[1:48:42] dialogue and you know flushing things

[1:48:45] out that people have an idea why you're

[1:48:47] making that um recommendation.

[1:48:50] And the next one here you going to the

[1:48:52] bottom of the page waiting break about

[1:48:54] union negotiations.

[1:48:56] Uh the last one is just a matter of just

[1:48:59] practice. I don't know what I've noticed

[1:49:02] in by its past is that taking into

[1:49:05] consideration

[1:49:07] um step offices not being at 100%

[1:49:10] individuals are expected to do more

[1:49:11] which is understandable. I think the

[1:49:14] worry is when we then make

[1:49:18] payroll or compensation adjustments to

[1:49:20] recognize the work that they have done,

[1:49:23] >> but those adjustments aren't further

[1:49:25] considered one of those departments

[1:49:27] funded

[1:49:29] >> to 100% or have 100% staffing. We've

[1:49:32] then inflated this position. Um, and

[1:49:36] then when we use that position as a

[1:49:37] point of reference to align other

[1:49:39] individuals in like positions, then

[1:49:41] we're now chasing these

[1:49:43] just truly

[1:49:45] um

[1:49:47] uh absorbent compensation packages that

[1:49:51] might not even reflect the work that

[1:49:52] they're actually doing at this current

[1:49:54] culture. So later on I was wanting to do

[1:49:56] a job evaluation which was not my idea.

[1:49:58] Mr. probably mentioned it last year um

[1:50:01] just to understand does the right work

[1:50:03] align with the right individual at the

[1:50:05] right department but sincerely there has

[1:50:07] to be a stop or an evaluation of how do

[1:50:10] we recognize people going above and

[1:50:12] beyond and to my respect please correct

[1:50:14] me if I'm wrong anyone else that budget

[1:50:17] line made the most sense because that is

[1:50:19] something that is only in line with this

[1:50:20] year and that we can evaluate on an

[1:50:22] annual basis but giving you that

[1:50:26] division funding would not throw a

[1:50:28] little bit to have

[1:50:30] uh having that be an expectation going

[1:50:32] forward. It's a consideration.

[1:50:37] So just along those lines perhaps in

[1:50:40] other words like I you know the stipens

[1:50:43] that some departments get but not all

[1:50:45] the departments get them and again I

[1:50:48] understand there's a big difference

[1:50:50] between

[1:50:51] public employment and private employment

[1:50:54] but you know many of us that many folks

[1:50:58] that work in private employment wouldn't

[1:51:00] necessarily get any extra money um if

[1:51:04] they were working

[1:51:07] past a certain amount of hours in a day

[1:51:09] or uh and I know some of it is

[1:51:11] contractual and and negotiated in our in

[1:51:14] our contracts here, but you know there might be an expectation where

[1:51:18] folks you know if you have a job

[1:51:20] especially a senior management job for

[1:51:23] example you have to stay until you

[1:51:25] finish the work um without necessarily

[1:51:28] getting a stipend but again that's

[1:51:30] probably different in public and go

[1:51:32] ahead

[1:51:33] >> those were put and it's developed over

[1:51:36] time. Those are put in for people who I

[1:51:40] make calls to at 2:00, 3:00, 4:00 in the

[1:51:43] morning. I expect them to answer the

[1:51:45] phone. I expect them to respond. I

[1:51:47] expect them to deal with whatever

[1:51:48] situation's in front of them. It is way

[1:51:51] far above and beyond somebody having to

[1:51:54] work a couple hours.

[1:51:55] >> Gotcha.

[1:52:07] We have to look at it on a broader

[1:52:09] picture in terms of uh we're not raising

[1:52:11] enough revenue

[1:52:13] >> and we're we're asking the taxpayers to

[1:52:16] fit the the bill so that we can increase

[1:52:20] our costs

[1:52:22] and I think it's fair working I mean

[1:52:24] going back to the private sector from

[1:52:26] the private sector if you're not

[1:52:27] bringing revenue you're not getting

[1:52:30] bonus you're not getting a raise.

[1:52:31] >> That's that's

[1:52:32] >> so we have to treat the city

[1:52:36] similar to the private sector. We bring

[1:52:38] in revenue, we return the expenditure

[1:52:41] back and for making it then we need to

[1:52:43] adjust. I mean, yes, I'm a big advocate

[1:52:45] for police and dividend raise, but at

[1:52:49] some point in time, we have to let you

[1:52:51] know

[1:52:53] does not allow for us to give you x

[1:52:57] amount to raise on a given year or we

[1:53:00] can make up in a future year as we go

[1:53:02] on. And I mean, they should understand

[1:53:04] that we are in crunch time. So, we have

[1:53:07] to crunch our numbers. Uh, it's not it's

[1:53:09] not easy thing for us to do across the

[1:53:11] board here.

[1:53:16] Well, I I want to make sure that my

[1:53:19] order is clear. It's not to align a city

[1:53:21] with like a forprofit corporation

[1:53:23] because it's not. But sincerely, I think

[1:53:26] being to put the emphasis on staff and

[1:53:29] when we don't, that has a burden on

[1:53:31] departments. But we can't absorb that

[1:53:34] into each individual staff and to

[1:53:36] appease individuals

[1:53:38] >> because when we look at it collectively,

[1:53:40] >> that is also part of the reason why

[1:53:42] we're here.

[1:53:43] >> Not 100%. But we're looking at the

[1:53:46] details of how we ensure next year's

[1:53:48] budget is not as bad. Otherwise, there's

[1:53:51] pretty all hand down moment.

[1:53:57] Then go back to the conversation that we

[1:53:59] have with Miss Carr where she had she

[1:54:01] was requesting a pretty reasonable pot

[1:54:05] of money that that was going to be

[1:54:06] considered for overtime. In the course

[1:54:08] of that conversation, what she said was

[1:54:10] that her team is working um and and

[1:54:14] based on the the need that they are

[1:54:17] flexing their time. So, in other words,

[1:54:19] if they have to present to us and

[1:54:21] they're they're staying late doing a

[1:54:23] presentation for us or we're out in the

[1:54:24] community doing something, then instead

[1:54:26] of their work day maybe starting at 8:00

[1:54:28] when you got the birthday starting at

[1:54:30] 10:00.

[1:54:30] >> So, and I think that when we were

[1:54:32] considering um compensation packages

[1:54:35] last year, um a lot of the conversation

[1:54:38] was we want to get people to a point to

[1:54:41] where obviously um we're compensating

[1:54:44] them fairly for the work that we're

[1:54:45] doing.

[1:54:46] I mean, I think that there's I don't

[1:54:49] think this has to be one one extreme or

[1:54:51] the other. Maybe there's a scenario in

[1:54:53] which we create a collective um

[1:54:57] uh I'm using this term stipen that is spread across the board and we

[1:55:05] know that we only going to use these in

[1:55:07] those most very extreme circumstances

[1:55:10] that the major mayor is talking about.

[1:55:12] And then

[1:55:13] for other departments, the expectation

[1:55:16] would be for people to um to flex their

[1:55:20] time and or you know and and

[1:55:23] understanding that the raises that are

[1:55:26] given that have been given in our

[1:55:27] subsequent years really should reflect

[1:55:30] the value of the position that they're

[1:55:31] doing cuz if that's not the case then

[1:55:33] how what was the formula and I think

[1:55:36] this goes to Mr. lawyers for us a little

[1:55:37] bit as the decided to give those um

[1:55:40] favorable races to begin with.

[1:55:57] Um this der would you mind give us a

[1:56:00] report in terms of the management prices

[1:56:04] >> the total cost.

[1:56:06] >> Did I uh did I

[1:56:08] >> no you can get it

[1:56:18] » we'll move to the next page and you have

[1:56:20] some questions there.

[1:56:23] >> Uh all those are provided answers. All

[1:56:26] >> uh these are the questions. I appreciate

[1:56:28] this.

[1:56:29] >> Perfect. Perfect. Improvements on

[1:56:32] initiatives.

[1:56:33] >> Um want to address that because it's

[1:56:36] part of

[1:56:38] >> Yes. No. So the garbage we had to

[1:56:41] address garbage. I know there were

[1:56:43] comments at the last city council

[1:56:45] meeting um by a collective body that

[1:56:47] voted that legislation through. I do not

[1:56:49] think it fall, you know, I do not think

[1:56:51] it does not fall on any one of us

[1:56:53] singularly. Um but sincerely the bulk

[1:56:56] items that needs to be revisited but um

[1:57:00] there was a revenue lines talking about

[1:57:02] evaluation of revenue lines that did not

[1:57:04] meet. There was one for trash for half a

[1:57:08] million dollars. I remember vividly a

[1:57:12] discussion of how can we anticipate that

[1:57:14] revenue

[1:57:16] prior to see legislation passed and the

[1:57:19] mayor was very in the fact that that

[1:57:22] money was going to be here. There was

[1:57:23] not no need to really can't those

[1:57:25] conversations at this present juncture

[1:57:28] but I don't know whether we buy garbage

[1:57:31] cans which was one of the

[1:57:32] recommendations from this tutorial with

[1:57:34] bar funds we don't have funds if we are

[1:57:36] not going to agree on a bag limit if we

[1:57:38] are not going to agree on a

[1:57:42] standard for devices

[1:57:44] we have to do something but if nothing

[1:57:46] more than to limit the workers comp

[1:57:48] claims which I imagine in part are are

[1:57:50] due to the fact that this is unregulated

[1:57:52] Again, this is not anything that's going

[1:57:54] to solve the $6 million gap, but it's

[1:57:56] going to lower that uh the threshold of

[1:58:00] getting larger in ways that pass.

[1:58:05] Um, I know we talk about contracts, we

[1:58:07] need to look at u best and worst case

[1:58:10] offers. Every city I've looked at, there

[1:58:12] have been positive returns from putting

[1:58:14] out like garbage cans. I know the term

[1:58:17] investment right now is not something

[1:58:19] that is being seen

[1:58:23] well, but regardless, we sincerely have

[1:58:25] to identify a better path forward. And

[1:58:28] the plans are just one of justifications

[1:58:30] of why we need to figure this out sooner

[1:58:31] than later.

[1:58:38] Uh the next one, updating codes. I did a

[1:58:41] brief list. I I referenced the state's

[1:58:44] website. um

[1:58:46] different schools of thought just

[1:58:48] evaluating just how we can improve

[1:58:50] things moving forward. Um we have to

[1:58:53] incentivize people getting permits um

[1:58:57] otherwise they're not going to or

[1:58:59] they're just going to wait for the

[1:59:00] nights or they're going to wait for

[1:59:01] weekends. That is not something that is

[1:59:02] a a secret that is apparent um and not

[1:59:07] the fact that we only have five home

[1:59:09] officers. So, uh,

[1:59:12] the list of approvement providers, um,

[1:59:15] it looked like it was just updated for

[1:59:17] electricians and it seemed like it's

[1:59:19] pretty outdated. Um, I think as a city

[1:59:21] we can have a good list and a bad list.

[1:59:24] Um, uh, just these are individuals that

[1:59:27] uphold the standards of our work. These

[1:59:29] are the ones that we think we should

[1:59:31] value because they meet the the

[1:59:33] considerations from our codes

[1:59:36] department. Um and they should be thrown

[1:59:38] at a higher pedestal. Um but also there

[1:59:41] is an opportunity to let everything work

[1:59:44] assignments

[1:59:46] driving around at night or driving

[1:59:48] around on the weekends more. I know um

[1:59:51] highlighted that that is done. I think

[1:59:53] there's improved room for generating

[1:59:56] growth on those driving lines um if not

[1:59:59] just to hold compliance to a standard

[2:00:03] because it is zero for weekends and that

[2:00:05] is scary.

[2:00:07] Um

[2:00:09] and part of the concern the conversation

[2:00:11] we had earlier was uh talking about um

[2:00:14] prejudices.

[2:00:16] If we are not proactively

[2:00:19] uh identifying households that are not

[2:00:21] providing permits,

[2:00:23] then the only people that are getting

[2:00:25] responded to are the ones that are

[2:00:26] getting calls for complaints,

[2:00:30] which by standard could be very uh

[2:00:32] disproportionate to impact one community

[2:00:35] or the other.

[2:00:37] I think part of point of wanting to look

[2:00:41] at the terms, not talk about executive

[2:00:43] session conversations. I think that's a

[2:00:45] way we can ensure there's no bias. We

[2:00:48] treat every neighborhood fairly because

[2:00:50] we spend equal time in each

[2:00:51] neighborhood.

[2:00:54] Um

[2:00:56] I talked a lot about the NEO positions

[2:00:58] reflecting their department assignments

[2:01:01] and then just the job evaluation was

[2:01:02] just understanding

[2:01:04] not how do we lower your um compensation

[2:01:09] but how do we streamline the task and

[2:01:11] responsibilities expected for your

[2:01:12] position. And we were just talking about

[2:01:14] the secio a lot. When you have an

[2:01:17] individual that's been here for that

[2:01:18] long um leave naturally they have a lot

[2:01:21] of hats but then on their exit out who

[2:01:23] wears those hats

[2:01:25] >> and then now that those hats are being

[2:01:28] designated to other people how do you

[2:01:29] compensate them for wearing those hats

[2:01:30] and then it's that circular

[2:01:32] conversation.

[2:01:36] to to add to that I mean we have been on

[2:01:38] this country for a very long time to

[2:01:42] kind of remind everyone we have been

[2:01:44] talking about succession plan as long as

[2:01:48] we have been on this counsel myself each

[2:01:51] department and we have every time

[2:01:54] the department sick to keep asking

[2:01:59] and um you know it's something that we

[2:02:01] encourage in all department to have that

[2:02:04] training had somebody ready to take

[2:02:06] over.

[2:02:08] But um it's not going to happen all the

[2:02:09] time. You know, sometimes, you know, you

[2:02:11] just hope hope for the best.

[2:02:19] What I ask you to do, if you don't mind,

[2:02:21] uh to go back to the sheet, can you

[2:02:23] attach the dollar amount just for

[2:02:25] reference sake and

[2:02:28] have it for us?

[2:02:41] And you you have some uh you can

[2:02:42] continue to bottom on the sheet if you

[2:02:44] don't mind.

[2:02:46] >> Uh I think 16 was uh

[2:02:51] being giving the signal.

[2:02:53] >> It is it's utilities administration fee

[2:02:56] for services to add that $500 back.

[2:03:00] the two NEO positions. Uh the

[2:03:03] conversations that I've had with uh Mr.

[2:03:06] Anderson and also the emails he sent in

[2:03:09] to us wanted to ensure that that um

[2:03:12] position line supports the training

[2:03:15] program we put in place that is on where

[2:03:18] we continue to train individuals for

[2:03:20] positions that don't exist really train

[2:03:23] people to leave the city which I think

[2:03:25] is counterproductive. so we can make the

[2:03:26] acquisitions available or move the

[2:03:29] program and start trying to train people

[2:03:30] out of the city.

[2:03:32] >> Um

[2:03:34] the $150,000

[2:03:35] there was one individual that came and

[2:03:37] spoke at city council and just talked

[2:03:38] about preventative measures the city

[2:03:41] need to take but also as Mr. Farley

[2:03:43] always highlights this is an investment

[2:03:45] into our community and to our youth. Uh

[2:03:48] so I don't want to see a uh partial increase in the golf fees but

[2:03:55] then also seeing the city to take a

[2:03:56] stronger position. He was Mr. Carl was

[2:03:59] talks about intentionality. I think the

[2:04:00] city needs to intentionally put in place

[2:04:02] for them to fund this position and I

[2:04:05] think we can put that burden onto CBG

[2:04:09] CDBG funds uh which organizations we

[2:04:12] have to find that within the state are

[2:04:15] youth matter and according to the

[2:04:17] proposed budget they don't that's not

[2:04:20] available all the youth wants removed

[2:04:24] um replacing the uh seasonal labor order

[2:04:29] physicians an A8161

[2:04:31] 100.

[2:04:35] One of the questions I had was what is

[2:04:37] their um hourly wage? It was told to us

[2:04:40] that it was uh $1,750 plus $2 when

[2:04:45] they're any waste when in all reality

[2:04:47] it's $1,550 plus 2 hours and I know that is a contracted wage.

[2:04:55] you are not paying me seven hours to do

[2:04:58] that work expectation and waste and the

[2:05:00] fact that we have people that are doing

[2:05:01] it is a testament to their desire and and confidence in doing that work

[2:05:08] which often people turn their nose up

[2:05:09] that shocking shocking if we're talking

[2:05:12] about education these are some of the

[2:05:14] positions that are most underfunded in

[2:05:16] our city and those contract and do that

[2:05:19] with a smile and to the best of their

[2:05:21] abilities and people are turning their

[2:05:22] nose back then you need to be ashamed of

[2:05:24] yourself if you're doing that right now.

[2:05:26] So part of the conversation was

[2:05:31] taking half of the a lotment for the

[2:05:32] seasonal labor loader positions and I

[2:05:34] don't know bring in two full-time staff

[2:05:36] members where your wage is a little more

[2:05:38] livable especially after we to expect

[2:05:40] them to eat this tax savings. I do not

[2:05:42] think that is something that is a

[2:05:44] difficult ask.

[2:05:46] And I think the last item, the A8686 was

[2:05:50] just another recommendation from the

[2:05:52] department head of I miss my toys.

[2:06:16] So this was

[2:06:18] put in half seasonal lab motor

[2:06:22] >> that probably just happened and convert

[2:06:26] I don't know if it does it cleanly but

[2:06:28] we with benefits it could roughly equate

[2:06:32] to half

[2:06:37] » I'm not looking Any

[2:06:44] other questions?

[2:06:55] I I have some question regarding the

[2:06:59] gosp

[2:07:24] page

[2:07:26] >> revenue.

[2:07:36] » Just a clarification on the allowance

[2:07:38] for uncollected tax.

[2:07:42] Which line?

[2:07:46] » Oh, I see it.

[2:07:47] >> 0

[2:07:52] question and if we we're proposing an

[2:07:56] increase in

[2:07:58] real property tax collection and should

[2:08:00] we anticipate lowering the uncollected

[2:08:02] taxes or is there a reason why we have

[2:08:05] it the same as budgeted last year? Um

[2:08:09] well based off your dates um feel

[2:08:12] comfortable it's a certain number

[2:08:18] of last year.

[2:08:20] >> Yeah but we anticipating of you know

[2:08:22] collecting

[2:08:24] higher number from this year until next

[2:08:26] year. So I'm thinking that maybe

[2:08:29] something that we would consider

[2:08:31] lowering that number

[2:08:33] because our exposure is not that

[2:08:36] high.

[2:08:38] on this.

[2:08:39] >> Well, there's two ways to look at it. If

[2:08:40] you

[2:08:43] raise taxes and the number stays the

[2:08:46] same percentage wise, we would increase

[2:08:49] it. It's looking if we're going to do

[2:08:54] more

[2:08:56] collection.

[2:09:00] Derek's done the analysis, which I'm

[2:09:03] comfortable with putting out there,

[2:09:05] doing the foreclosures, other things.

[2:09:08] values for properties are it's an area

[2:09:12] how do we get people to

[2:09:15] pay the taxes

[2:09:17] >> well we have seen a trend I mean people

[2:09:19] are paying taxes that's why we exceed

[2:09:21] our

[2:09:23] uh estimates over the last two years we

[2:09:27] exceed our

[2:09:29] estimates

[2:09:31] property tax collection

[2:09:33] >> two years ago I think we did last year

[2:09:36] was closer drive the estimate.

[2:09:41] » So the trend is because people buying

[2:09:42] houses, the the property values

[2:09:44] increasing, taxes are on paper paying

[2:09:47] and we're selling these houses as fast

[2:09:48] as we can, putting them back on the tax

[2:09:50] rules. So I'm still looking at that

[2:09:54] $2.8 million

[2:09:58] for something for us to consider. Yeah,

[2:10:01] because uh you know

[2:10:06] » raising it.

[2:10:08] >> No, dropping it

[2:10:12] as we collect more taxes the or should

[2:10:15] go down.

[2:10:16] >> But uh we it's something for us. So that

[2:10:19] only

[2:10:21] >> the next one I wanted to talk about is

[2:10:22] the Canada's um excite tax. Mhm.

[2:10:27] >> Do we know how many um stores we have?

[2:10:32] >> Seven.

[2:10:33] >> We may know.

[2:10:34] >> I know.

[2:10:35] >> Seven.

[2:10:38] >> We found them on the state website's

[2:10:41] nine, but two of them central

[2:10:48] » seven. So when we when we started we

[2:10:50] started with one store in sky and we

[2:10:54] see our tax collection was but it was

[2:10:58] the first store in the region. So

[2:11:00] Minneapolis now

[2:11:03] pretty much every municipality has it.

[2:11:06] So I mean with seven seven store in

[2:11:08] Skynct or five store in Skenctity

[2:11:12] $700,000

[2:11:14] >> but the trend the revenue per store has

[2:11:17] dropped as opposed to what that first

[2:11:19] store was.

[2:11:22] >> Don't think we have a breakdown of what

[2:11:23] the revenue was

[2:11:26] added right there.

[2:11:31] » And do we get those quarterly quarterly?

[2:11:34] Uh so the gun

[2:11:42] sometimes

[2:11:45] replay

[2:11:48] asking for the report.

[2:11:51] >> Did somebody ask for a report on this

[2:11:53] fine?

[2:11:54] >> I was asking Well, we're going to find

[2:11:56] the

[2:11:59] >> I have it if you want it.

[2:12:02] gave us. It's uh it was $32,477

[2:12:10] » 302477.38.

[2:12:14] Um which means that that at this year to

[2:12:17] date it was 35.6%.

[2:12:20] >> That's half a year.

[2:12:21] >> Yeah. What's the date of your report?

[2:12:23] This is October 9th.

[2:12:33] [Music]

[2:12:35] But

[2:12:37] if you double that,

[2:12:40] >> okay, then we'd be then we'd be okay.

[2:12:43] >> Well, we'd be okay. So, I know that we

[2:12:47] have seven stores currently, but at what

[2:12:49] point in 2025 will those stores open?

[2:12:51] That becomes question two because if

[2:12:54] they we didn't start 2025 and I don't

[2:12:57] think we did that means that there's

[2:13:00] going to be more revenue because then in

[2:13:02] 2026 we'll have a full year

[2:13:06] and the one at the harbor I'm sure I

[2:13:08] know didn't know wasn't open in January

[2:13:10] um crank kids you know they come through

[2:13:12] the cliff office taking this so the one

[2:13:15] on crank I don't open in January so if

[2:13:19] we're calculating

[2:13:21] calculate when the store's open, how

[2:13:22] much we have. But if we're going in for

[2:13:24] a full year next year, we should be

[2:13:26] looking at that.

[2:13:33] » I just think that different

[2:13:34] municipalities in um just brought sales

[2:13:38] away from

[2:13:40] it may have, but we know what we have

[2:13:42] here. So, we can look at what we have.

[2:13:44] So, I'm not not the ones that open.

[2:13:46] There may be something but we know that

[2:13:48] there are seven right now that open

[2:14:00] the next one I have franchises I mean I

[2:14:04] see $8,000.

[2:14:06] Is there a reason why we dropping that

[2:14:09] money?

[2:14:11] It's something about technology

[2:14:20] spectrum.

[2:14:25] That's the uh I believe

[2:14:28] >> the I'm sorry the what

[2:14:34] » I guess

[2:14:36] 35,000 50,000 what's the whole franchise agreement the higher

[2:14:44] level

[2:14:45] you know some of it is people are giving

[2:14:48] away

[2:14:52] » stream

[2:14:55] M

[2:14:58] >> a lot of that revenue was based on

[2:15:01] cable

[2:15:03] >> and not internet.

[2:15:18] » Okay.

[2:15:25] The the next question I have on revenue

[2:15:27] is delinquent on parking fee.

[2:15:31] I know last year we had discussion with

[2:15:35] the police department and raising this

[2:15:37] fee and then we also touch on those

[2:15:40] outstanding building department tickets

[2:15:43] that we hire outside um collection

[2:15:46] agency

[2:15:48] additional discussion with police

[2:15:49] department. Yeah, I um

[2:15:54] I'm a little concerned that this is only

[2:15:56] $170,000 budget dividend for 2026. I

[2:15:59] thought we were going to be more

[2:16:01] aggressive towards

[2:16:03] here like a couple million dollars that

[2:16:06] they were going to do after I know we're

[2:16:07] not going to get a long but you know try

[2:16:11] to push as far as we can

[2:16:15] parking tickets.

[2:16:17] Which line is

[2:16:18] >> this is a A2610

[2:16:21] M delend parking fine. Those were like

[2:16:24] the old

[2:16:25] 8 million $10 million that people don't

[2:16:28] exist anymore. They were like some newer

[2:16:30] ones that they could say you know we can

[2:16:32] take a chance to go China mail ticket

[2:16:35] and say been hit by

[2:16:39] >> doing those

[2:16:41] I had not seen the most recent revenue

[2:16:45] >> year to date. I think it's like 120

[2:16:50] » 26.

[2:16:52] Well, I have to add all these different

[2:16:56] there's 26 10 a

[2:16:59] M.

[2:17:03] » Some of them like one of them

[2:17:06] is pretty close to reaching it,

[2:17:10] you know, full year.

[2:17:19] Yeah, actually a couple of them are

[2:17:21] >> Yeah, the recovery effort um year to

[2:17:23] date is 122

[2:17:27] >> 122,57.25

[2:17:31] um

[2:17:40] do we need to revisit this effort and

[2:17:42] see what's

[2:17:44] Maybe it could be help.

[2:17:48] What can we do?

[2:17:50] Is the agency that this this recovery

[2:17:53] agency is not

[2:17:56] living up to their expectation? Do we

[2:17:58] need to move on to someone else?

[2:18:02] [Music]

[2:18:04] >> Yeah. When we were talking last year

[2:18:06] about fee, increasing the fee, it was

[2:18:08] one of the the big ticket item

[2:18:19] on a little disappointed.

[2:18:23] Maybe we need to ramp up the effort with

[2:18:25] these billing and quite effective.

[2:18:30] I mean we've been discuss

[2:18:48] the the next item I have a question with

[2:18:50] revenue speed sign and um this is the

[2:18:52] camera on the

[2:18:55] budgeting $23 million um I think actual

[2:19:00] what is our actual police here?

[2:19:06] » I think there's activity going on the

[2:19:08] cameras

[2:19:12] here and there's the bus patrols.

[2:19:14] >> Yes. So the speed cameras

[2:19:16] >> on the buses

[2:19:18] >> they revenue that's coming in.

[2:19:20] >> That's the bus patrol safety fines.

[2:19:22] >> What is that?

[2:19:23] >> Bus patrol patrol safety

[2:19:25] >> 26N which was banned. It's it's it's

[2:19:29] year to date um 243 47.

[2:19:38] » So we're at 40.

[2:19:39] >> Yeah. Sorry.

[2:19:41] >> We're dropping by I mean estimated

[2:19:44] 200,000 miles. So we're thinking that

[2:19:47] based on trend is going to is going to

[2:19:49] lower.

[2:19:50] >> All right.

[2:19:53] >> That's what's happen when you do the

[2:19:54] enforcement.

[2:19:56] blacks.

[2:19:57] >> That's what I think it is too.

[2:19:59] >> That's what I wrote as my note that it

[2:20:00] probably was about increased

[2:20:01] enforcement.

[2:20:04] >> One would hope.

[2:20:07] >> My next question on revenue is the um

[2:20:10] sale of houses.

[2:20:12] >> Let's say we budget 4.5. We're budgeting

[2:20:17] 563 million.

[2:20:20] >> Yeah.

[2:20:22] don't think we can do better in that in

[2:20:24] terms of ramping up sales and achieving

[2:20:26] a higher number of

[2:20:27] >> assuming more people are going to pay

[2:20:28] their taxes. So, we're going to be doing

[2:20:30] less foreclosure.

[2:20:31] >> Well, we do have we're going to have

[2:20:32] some foreclosures.

[2:20:33] >> There's

[2:20:35] >> but the ability to make money on the

[2:20:36] foreclosures is less because that

[2:20:39] federal court case and the change in

[2:20:42] state law.

[2:20:44] Uh the other component where I budgeted

[2:20:47] last year were some of those big ticket

[2:20:52] items that are still out there floating

[2:20:54] that we're hoping to close still this

[2:20:57] year. It's going to be 40

[2:21:00] property sale.

[2:21:07] But if you don't close those sales in

[2:21:09] 2025, we're making a little bit 26. We

[2:21:12] anticipate that it doesn't happen in

[2:21:14] 2025 and budget those those high tickets

[2:21:17] on

[2:21:20] >> kind of like discussion of revenue

[2:21:24] 40

[2:21:26] subject to some litigation.

[2:21:28] I

[2:21:30] feel more confident that that will get

[2:21:32] budgeted in the 25 numbers. That other

[2:21:36] property Roderdam has lifted their

[2:21:41] uh moratorium on solar deployments.

[2:21:45] That's what was going to go in there.

[2:21:47] Mhm.

[2:21:47] >> And uh

[2:21:50] the and the company had the purchase

[2:21:52] offer on I think it's been

[2:21:55] uh less than aggressive in terms of

[2:21:57] closing. I don't know if you've heard

[2:21:59] anything recently on it.

[2:22:02] >> Well, not recently, but we talked about it um

[2:22:10] a while ago

[2:22:12] with it. Do you want me to reach out to

[2:22:14] them? Well, there was the moratorum was

[2:22:18] still in place, right?

[2:22:19] >> And they lifted the moratorum. They

[2:22:21] still have a permanent process now that

[2:22:25] is more restrictive.

[2:22:28] So yeah, we haven't reached out. We

[2:22:29] should reach out to see if they're

[2:22:31] interested or see if there's some other

[2:22:33] option for that track.

[2:22:37] >> Yeah, this potential revenue that we can

[2:22:39] estimate until 2026

[2:22:42] uh help us with this budget. That's a major concern for me because

[2:22:47] yesterday I'm going to have the plan

[2:22:49] foreclosure but I think it's big enough

[2:22:52] but you know getting ready and turning

[2:22:54] them over and expand our tax base at the

[2:22:57] same time selling them and uh making

[2:22:59] some money

[2:23:02] any questions

[2:23:04] >> I just want to say I wouldn't like over

[2:23:08] extend the amount that uh you imagine

[2:23:11] will come in through foreclosures

[2:23:14] like at one point during my time had

[2:23:17] three foreclosures running at the same

[2:23:19] time. Um some of that was because uh

[2:23:24] things were stalled during co

[2:23:26] uh and so then one of them was still

[2:23:29] going the city couldn't couldn't

[2:23:32] foreclose on them at the time and so

[2:23:34] time passed as well while they weren't

[2:23:36] foreclosed on and so there's a lot more

[2:23:38] taxes and interest due on some of those

[2:23:40] properties that had just sat for a while

[2:23:43] because of the moratorum during co so

[2:23:47] that's not going to be the case going

[2:23:48] forward we're going

[2:23:50] like we just keep running each year and

[2:23:54] um all that cleanup work um some of it

[2:23:57] was started prior to mine uh corporation council's

[2:24:03] office it's just not going to exist

[2:24:05] anymore the amount if anything will

[2:24:08] probably you know like mayor said it may

[2:24:11] actually down from last year I guess the

[2:24:13] number

[2:24:15] >> so presently in the court you have a set

[2:24:18] Do you have it set up for closure in the

[2:24:20] court system?

[2:24:22] >> Right now we have one pending and then

[2:24:26] one that's we're probably going to be

[2:24:29] done with pretty soon.

[2:24:31] >> What do you mean the whole court

[2:24:33] judgement?

[2:24:34] >> Yeah, we did the default judgment

[2:24:35] already. So we just have to file the

[2:24:36] motion for summary judgement and that

[2:24:38] will be for the rest of the properties

[2:24:40] in that particular foreclosure. So then

[2:24:42] we have another one that we started um

[2:24:47] recently or earlier this year we filed

[2:24:49] the list. So we've been waiting for

[2:24:51] title reports that's just about done. So

[2:24:54] then we're going to we're going to start

[2:24:55] with the redemption periods and

[2:24:57] eventually we go we go for the judgments

[2:25:01] but the amount due because there's not

[2:25:04] that cleanup anymore properties that

[2:25:06] were lingering through co isn't going to

[2:25:10] be as much because it'll just be a few

[2:25:12] years back instead of some of those

[2:25:14] properties you know five six years it go

[2:25:20] another time you know like when is your

[2:25:21] next uh

[2:25:23] Um so at this point we are going to

[2:25:27] probably in the next month or so we will

[2:25:30] uh we'll file we'll send out the uh

[2:25:33] commencements the notice of commencement

[2:25:35] that begin you start with the list you

[2:25:38] do title reports and then you send out

[2:25:40] the notice of commencement that sets the

[2:25:43] period for redemption. So that'll be you

[2:25:46] have to give 6 months by law you still

[2:25:48] leave me 3 months so that's also

[2:25:49] extending the time. So now they now the

[2:25:52] uh people will get 6 months and then

[2:25:55] from there we would then anyone who

[2:25:57] hasn't paying and a lot of people are

[2:25:59] paying right now um because values have

[2:26:03] gone up most likely uh that I assume

[2:26:06] that's why a lot of people are paying in

[2:26:07] the redemption period which wasn't the

[2:26:10] case to my understanding in the past.

[2:26:12] There'll be so much equity you'll lose

[2:26:14] if they don't want to lose it. And then

[2:26:15] you see all these people trying to

[2:26:17] remain late because the the equity but

[2:26:21] in the end

[2:26:23] the revenue is going to be what it was

[2:26:25] probably.

[2:26:27] >> So I'm looking at the estimator here not picking you on anything but uh one

[2:26:32] two three we talk about one through the

[2:26:35] court another one is filing anticipating

[2:26:38] another one. Do you think that we can

[2:26:40] achieve all three of that foreclosure by

[2:26:42] the end of next year?

[2:26:44] >> So, right now there's two. They're worth

[2:26:46] it. At one point it is going. Now there

[2:26:48] was two, but though one of them we're

[2:26:52] going to wrap up the motion might just

[2:26:53] have to review it. That one we already

[2:26:56] did the default. So we just have to make

[2:26:58] the summary judgement. There's like six

[2:26:59] or seven properties, not a lot of

[2:27:00] properties that that's it for that one.

[2:27:03] So then we just have the one that's

[2:27:05] coming up. We we're only going to have

[2:27:06] one at this point. Mhm.

[2:27:09] >> Does that answer your question?

[2:27:10] >> One one set

[2:27:12] >> one foreclosure.

[2:27:14] >> It has to be on the list unless you do

[2:27:17] >> um but certainly

[2:27:19] you you have you can you have to

[2:27:21] forclose at certain time periods. So

[2:27:23] that's why multiple especi multiple

[2:27:25] going especially because of time

[2:27:27] constraints because of I inherited one

[2:27:30] and then others it just took time.

[2:27:32] >> So are we still waiting on three years

[2:27:34] or are we the two years starting?

[2:27:37] Um, it's in the city code. I I think

[2:27:40] it's either I think it's three years,

[2:27:43] >> you know, Derek. I think it's three

[2:27:44] years.

[2:27:45] >> Residential is different than

[2:27:46] commercial.

[2:27:47] >> Yeah, residential is three. Commercial

[2:27:48] is two.

[2:27:49] >> Yes.

[2:27:50] >> Um, and anything that's at the time

[2:27:54] that's ready soal ready for, you know,

[2:27:57] we include on the list.

[2:28:01] >> No, I'm trying to guess like

[2:28:05] an exact number. We don't

[2:28:06] >> I'm going to say okay one to two in the

[2:28:09] courts another one is filing we can

[2:28:10] achieve all of that until 202

[2:28:14] one of them wrapped up the second one is

[2:28:16] almost wrapped up

[2:28:17] >> and then the third one is basically at

[2:28:19] the beginning

[2:28:20] >> so all all those foreclosure will be

[2:28:24] into 20 potential 2026 sales

[2:28:28] >> yes

[2:28:32] » I'm asking my question because I'm

[2:28:34] looking at that that estim

[2:28:37] some of those likely in the 27.

[2:28:40] >> Yeah, that's true.

[2:28:43] >> All right, that's something for us to u

[2:28:45] to look at and to

[2:28:48] I'm highlighting those kind of stuff um

[2:28:51] that we can we can talk about in terms

[2:28:53] of revenue.

[2:28:56] The other um the one I have is on the

[2:28:59] mortgage tax and the reason why I flag

[2:29:01] on that property value which is going up

[2:29:05] mortgage is going to be higher.

[2:29:07] It's not like before we sell out to

[2:29:09] $50,000 and we're going to get $500

[2:29:12] mortgage back.

[2:29:13] >> The numbers are pretty much high now. So

[2:29:17] based on that trend I'm looking at I

[2:29:19] think we can reconsider that number

[2:29:21] based on the house

[2:29:24] >> sale that is on page 12 second line

[2:29:28] 83005

[2:29:30] mortgage tax it is something a friend

[2:29:32] across and screen is fortunate with the

[2:29:35] house for sale

[2:29:38] and people buying and buying at a higher

[2:29:41] and you know competitive price of a

[2:29:43] building driving up the taxes says the

[2:29:47] mortgage facts

[2:29:55] » and a trend in interest rates going to

[2:29:57] continue down in the near future.

[2:30:00] >> Near future.

[2:30:02] >> So

[2:30:05] I don't know if it's going to drop

[2:30:06] enough so you're going to see

[2:30:08] refinancing

[2:30:09] but you will see some revenue for that.

[2:30:13] >> Yes. So if you want to review it, we're

[2:30:15] more than that.

[2:30:16] >> Yeah, I can say because I was looking at

[2:30:17] the trend in terms of the salivity. I

[2:30:20] looked at the the report coming in a lot

[2:30:22] of a lot of houses are being 300,000ish

[2:30:26] >> more than that. So with that particular

[2:30:28] mortgage obviously the mortgage tax is

[2:30:31] going up.

[2:30:32] >> Yeah. So something that beneficial to

[2:30:35] us. So that's a line making um frequency

[2:30:39] that I think that I'm already

[2:30:42] and that's it. That's what I have for

[2:30:45] revenue. I mean anybody else have um go

[2:30:48] ahead please question revenue. Um do we

[2:30:51] increase our total search charge like

[2:30:53] the fees for people that we do that

[2:30:56] >> what line? Um A1789

[2:31:00] page 9.

[2:31:06] » Well, yeah, right now I'm just looking

[2:31:08] at the sign

[2:31:14] contract agreements and renegotiating.

[2:31:18] >> Okay. That based on the contract, not

[2:31:21] based on what it cost.

[2:31:27] So, so the circuit is going to be fast

[2:31:28] for long. Is that

[2:31:30] >> Well, yeah. I'm just It's doubling.

[2:31:32] >> It's It's doubling. That's pretty

[2:31:34] significant. Um,

[2:31:37] and I was just wondering why that is.

[2:31:39] You're saying that we're renegotiating

[2:31:41] to contract right now.

[2:31:44] >> Not right now. That's what the police

[2:31:46] department is looking to do future

[2:31:52] » in the future. 26

[2:31:57] When would that happen in 26? Because I

[2:31:59] mean it's a double bid when contract

[2:32:02] negotiated.

[2:32:04] Do you know when that negotiation

[2:32:06] happened?

[2:32:07] >> I don't know that timeline.

[2:32:08] >> Could you give us that information?

[2:32:11] >> That would be chief

[2:32:14] >> chief or chief clifford to come back

[2:32:19] to give you the theory behind that

[2:32:21] number.

[2:32:22] I mean or you know I don't know if they

[2:32:25] could they could just shoot an email too

[2:32:26] if they want to not have to

[2:32:31] » I'm sure they look forward to

[2:32:34] any time to spend time with us

[2:32:37] looking for company

[2:32:42] would like to discuss the details of

[2:32:43] contract negotiations related to the

[2:32:46] agreement we could go into executive

[2:32:49] >> okay

[2:32:53] Sorry.

[2:32:57] » In the morning. So if you have any legal

[2:32:59] questions, I can answer that.

[2:33:02] >> Yes.

[2:33:04] >> One more.

[2:33:05] >> Next question I have is CDBG revenue.

[2:33:07] >> Me too. That was going to be my

[2:33:08] favorite.

[2:33:08] >> How how do we get comfortable with CD CD

[2:33:12] CDP revenue?

[2:33:15] Does it always have to be outside of the

[2:33:18] budget inside

[2:33:22] or unlock? It's a separate grant that

[2:33:24] comes in and there's two aspects of it.

[2:33:26] What do we use internally for city

[2:33:29] operations and what do we award to

[2:33:32] community groups, other projects or

[2:33:35] other vendors?

[2:33:39] » Some of this

[2:33:41] >> Yeah. Yeah. Page 10 page 10. Yes. But

[2:33:44] that's all that is um

[2:33:47] >> accounted for here. That's all the

[2:33:49] revenue whatever the city received.

[2:33:51] >> Yeah. That align with sports development

[2:33:55] staff.

[2:33:56] >> Yeah. SNAP finance development for

[2:34:00] >> revenue lines and then one is completely

[2:34:03] removed this year.

[2:34:05] >> I think it was we had budgeted last

[2:34:07] year. estimates. Sorry, estimated last

[2:34:08] year was

[2:34:10] some of that's new to clean out uh

[2:34:14] foreclosures

[2:34:16] and

[2:34:19] the departments did not cross build it.

[2:34:21] So, there's surplus in that account. So,

[2:34:23] we're looking for the round of

[2:34:24] foreclosure to use that to

[2:34:28] clean out the houses

[2:34:31] and

[2:34:32] Alison's going to put together

[2:34:36] some more contractors that would benefit

[2:34:40] from that.

[2:34:43] >> So, the cleaning up these properties,

[2:34:46] it would be um contracted out.

[2:34:49] Yeah, it's a good people.

[2:34:53] They don't know our new garbage fees and

[2:34:54] they don't want the stickers and they

[2:34:57] leave a lot of stuff in the houses. So,

[2:34:59] we have to clean them out.

[2:35:04] » Some days to make the house more

[2:35:06] attractive. Unfortunately, under the

[2:35:08] rules we work under, they will sell for

[2:35:11] more, but we won't necessarily reap the

[2:35:14] benefits of it.

[2:35:16] Well, and this is going back to our

[2:35:18] discussion over the years in terms of

[2:35:22] documenting all across and that is still

[2:35:25] being tracked across

[2:35:27] >> police, fire,

[2:35:30] >> os,

[2:35:31] department.

[2:35:34] So I mean it is something that we talk

[2:35:36] about in terms of tracking our cost. So

[2:35:39] sometimes I'm kind of like worried about

[2:35:41] if we can track the cost and the time

[2:35:43] that we have spent through all the work

[2:35:45] associated with this battery life. I

[2:35:47] think we might break even if someone to

[2:35:50] know to come and say well we have x

[2:35:52] amount of money but I hope that that is

[2:35:54] tracked and preserved

[2:35:57] for future

[2:35:58] >> doing a very good job because I want to

[2:36:00] get every dollar we can out of the

[2:36:02] sales.

[2:36:03] >> Exactly. And because we do not want to

[2:36:05] give back,

[2:36:07] >> our hearing date is zero on both those

[2:36:08] lines on a safe.

[2:36:13] » Well, I was wondering about that also.

[2:36:15] Um,

[2:36:16] >> why is that?

[2:36:20] » That would be development question. Why

[2:36:22] it's not being drawn down?

[2:36:27] » Can you can you find it for us, please?

[2:36:29] Wasn't

[2:36:29] >> as a followup question.

[2:36:31] >> Wasn't this and I'm could be wrong.

[2:36:34] Wasn't this like in a different

[2:36:35] department at one point?

[2:36:37] >> Maybe this is movable to development.

[2:36:39] No,

[2:36:40] >> no, this this is always

[2:36:42] >> No, not okay.

[2:36:44] >> The money

[2:36:46] but different department like finance

[2:36:48] gets paid some staff.

[2:36:51] >> Sure.

[2:36:53] >> Yeah. Yeah. Okay.

[2:36:58] is that real.

[2:37:04] » Thank you.

[2:37:05] >> Mayor, we currently have someone who's

[2:37:07] uh we consult to to give us the

[2:37:11] estimate. Is that still on?

[2:37:14] >> Estimate is for

[2:37:16] >> to to list the property.

[2:37:18] So, it is still done in house

[2:37:23] outside the county director.

[2:37:29] You're still on the homes thing.

[2:37:30] >> Yeah.

[2:37:31] >> Instead of CDBG.

[2:37:32] >> CDBG. Yeah. CDBG.

[2:37:36] >> Yeah. Cuz that's if we don't get that

[2:37:38] revenue.

[2:37:40] >> I thought it was something before us in

[2:37:42] terms of um hiring someone to help us

[2:37:45] with estimating some

[2:37:48] different things. Yeah.

[2:37:51] >> Then put something out.

[2:37:54] Okay. Okay.

[2:38:01] » Okay.

[2:38:04] All right.

[2:38:06] I'm looking at everybody there. So, I'm

[2:38:09] going to I think we should the

[2:38:13] >> one last simple question. No, go ahead.

[2:38:15] There's one last general question around

[2:38:18] >> I see like like so

[2:38:21] kind in line with the CBG money. It's

[2:38:23] like I see the grants showing up like

[2:38:26] for like the police

[2:38:28] >> but um in other So are all of our grants

[2:38:32] reported are we reporting all our grants

[2:38:34] as revenue or is it just we're putting

[2:38:37] grants as revenues that we can like use

[2:38:39] and pull down funds to fund a position?

[2:38:41] Like I'm just wondering like is there a

[2:38:44] distinction that's being made and like

[2:38:46] where would some of that other grant

[2:38:48] money cuz I know that there's more grant

[2:38:50] money coming into the city than this and

[2:38:52] what this reflects.

[2:38:54] >> Um I think it's a majority though it

[2:38:57] depends. Um you see there's new grants

[2:39:00] that the police are showing within

[2:39:03] Strive. So there's some that may trickle

[2:39:06] in that are not reported in here but

[2:39:09] they come in throughout the year.

[2:39:12] >> Mhm.

[2:39:12] >> Um so they might not be shown within the

[2:39:15] post budget.

[2:39:17] >> So I mean most of those are

[2:39:19] unless you have a specific question on

[2:39:22] those are kind of the reoccurring ones.

[2:39:24] When we get a new grant it's yes we want

[2:39:27] to get it but it's not like

[2:39:29] >> it's all revenue. There's an expense

[2:39:32] associated with it. So you're going to

[2:39:34] lose the incoming money to pay for

[2:39:36] something.

[2:39:37] >> Certainly.

[2:39:38] >> And that's, you know,

[2:39:41] we apply for a lot of grants. They can't

[2:39:43] accept a grant until we go back to the

[2:39:45] city council and uh make a budget

[2:39:48] amendment to

[2:39:50] formally take it.

[2:39:52] >> I guess let me direct

[2:39:54] that. Is that are you confident that all

[2:39:57] the grants that we're receiving are

[2:39:59] showing the mass revenue in this report?

[2:40:01] That's a side of the question.

[2:40:04] >> Pretty confident and discussion with the

[2:40:06] police department. Very confident as

[2:40:08] well on the grass.

[2:40:10] >> I wasn't just talking about the police

[2:40:11] department.

[2:40:13] >> Um so Mr. I did ask for and they did

[2:40:16] send and I thought we all had it that

[2:40:19] asking for all the grants that they had

[2:40:21] um and how much it would go into 25

[2:40:25] would go into 26. And generally

[2:40:27] speaking, when they um send when they

[2:40:29] present sort of the grant before

[2:40:31] submission is going to go to staffing.

[2:40:34] So I think that's where a lot of it

[2:40:35] shows up. Um I guess we can get the

[2:40:37] breakdown. I know we have every time we

[2:40:39] get grant, but if you want a breakdown

[2:40:41] of how much like actually goes into

[2:40:43] staffing and then goes into this budget

[2:40:45] or other places in the budget. Is that

[2:40:47] what you're asking? No, I guess a more a

[2:40:51] broader question around like how are we

[2:40:53] making the distinction of what shows up

[2:40:54] in grand funding as revenue or not. So

[2:40:58] that's what I was trying to figure out

[2:40:59] here. Yeah. And that question bigger

[2:41:02] money,

[2:41:05] you know, the big chunks of money. So it

[2:41:08] also goes to what you determine to do

[2:41:12] with the fund balance is most of those

[2:41:15] grants there's none of them just give us

[2:41:18] the money

[2:41:19] >> right we have to

[2:41:21] >> expend the money and then get reimbursed

[2:41:25] >> most of the state government some of the

[2:41:27] federal

[2:41:30] [Music]

[2:41:37] Sorry.

[2:41:40] Are we anticipating any surplus on from

[2:41:44] CDP?

[2:41:47] » What else?

[2:41:48] >> I know that's that's a lot.

[2:41:51] >> I hope everybody looks up to exactly

[2:41:53] what the contract is. The reality is

[2:41:57] it's always a little bit of variance

[2:41:59] there where one's a little under the

[2:42:03] one's a little bit over.

[2:42:05] But do you have specifics or

[2:42:08] >> No, it was just a broad statement

[2:42:09] interpret. I was just looking at if this

[2:42:12] can be put into maybe stop stop and

[2:42:17] remember in those categories there's

[2:42:20] caps in terms of the public service and

[2:42:22] other things. So if

[2:42:25] There is a grant in one of the lines.

[2:42:29] More than likely, we have to been

[2:42:32] expended on a similar type of program

[2:42:35] either within that agency or a similar

[2:42:38] agency

[2:42:42] like youth programs for example.

[2:42:46] social because revenue revenue is what's

[2:42:49] going to drive

[2:42:50] >> everything here and if we can address

[2:42:53] all the all the expenditure but if we

[2:42:55] don't address the revenue we're nowhere

[2:42:58] so one has to learn us out the other

[2:43:02] thing I want to talk about this I had a

[2:43:05] conversation I was asking a question to

[2:43:06] the

[2:43:08] in terms of the aggressive approach and

[2:43:11] amusing officers and less speed time 3

[2:43:14] to 7. They're kind of doing the what

[2:43:17] they call the license plate readers

[2:43:18] scanning people without standing parking

[2:43:20] ticket or people in the parking wrong

[2:43:23] side and things like that in the morning

[2:43:25] now when they rush for a call and

[2:43:28] they've been generating some pretty good

[2:43:31] 6 to9 $69,000 for 4 hour detail with

[2:43:36] three and three offices working.

[2:43:38] >> Yes.

[2:43:38] >> So I have to commend them for this. And

[2:43:41] >> that's some of the technology the other

[2:43:45] >> this was shared to this was shared to

[2:43:47] everyone.

[2:43:47] >> No

[2:43:48] >> I did I don't think so.

[2:43:51] >> I don't think so.

[2:43:52] >> I am going to share it. Um we can bring in stuff to talk about

[2:43:58] the uh the recovery

[2:44:01] either tomorrow or Wednesday

[2:44:05] just

[2:44:08] to kind of give us a brief on where it

[2:44:10] stands on what uh what different

[2:44:12] approach we can take in terms of this

[2:44:14] recovery. But um I have to say that I

[2:44:17] mean additional revenue is coming in

[2:44:18] there really. So you multiply this

[2:44:20] $69,000 survey for 6 days a week over

[2:44:25] 365 days. So we have to look at what

[2:44:29] they're doing here in terms of the line

[2:44:31] for the

[2:44:33] >> the fines parking.

[2:44:35] >> So that is something here we have

[2:44:36] $900,000 budgeted there. I mean and they

[2:44:39] continue by this aggressive approach. So

[2:44:41] the people who are not paying their ticket which which we are doing

[2:44:45] here in I think we should look at the

[2:44:48] numbers

[2:44:50] uh adjust

[2:44:54] » I'm just always pretty cautious about

[2:44:56] you know I don't want to over um

[2:44:59] estimate revenue.

[2:45:00] >> Well it's an estimate.

[2:45:02] of hoping that we can

[2:45:04] achieve it and that's what that's what

[2:45:06] >> that one sounds really reasonable

[2:45:07] >> but anyone that you want to review more

[2:45:09] happy review it some of these estimates

[2:45:12] were put in

[2:45:14] >> in June July so we have

[2:45:19] >> 60 days more information terms of

[2:45:21] collections and some of them hopefully

[2:45:24] they're all going up for revenue times

[2:45:26] that's not always the case

[2:45:28] >> we always hope it's an estimate how many

[2:45:31] adjustable D we achieve it. Um if we

[2:45:33] don't achieve it then we make amends and

[2:45:35] then we move things around in the

[2:45:37] future.

[2:45:38] >> I think we just each department has to

[2:45:41] continue to drive that to you know

[2:45:45] revenue

[2:45:46] police department uh is doing it

[2:45:51] expand more in terms of collection

[2:45:52] across the board.

[2:45:57] Any other questions?

[2:46:01] See none, we can reconvene tomorrow 5:30

[2:46:05] right here room 1.

[2:46:10] So the expectations for tomorrow's

[2:46:12] meeting is that finally like announce

[2:46:16] and start to put figures in place.

[2:46:20] a few more meetings and we have that

[2:46:22] meeting

[2:46:25] tomorrow. I'll adjust some things from

[2:46:29] here.

[2:46:32] Sorry.

[2:46:34] >> Will we do that?

[2:46:35] >> I encourage everyone please come to the

[2:46:39] table. There's nothing.

[2:46:41] Ask questions, make suggestion. We we

[2:46:45] need to to identify revenue and how we

[2:46:48] can outset the cost as we look to be

[2:46:52] flexible and achieve something. The goal

[2:46:55] is to to have a budget this week. So

[2:46:58] let's just come to the table. Let's be

[2:47:00] flexible as well and ask question.

[2:47:02] Please reach out to the mayor.

[2:47:04] Reach out to me and let's have your

[2:47:07] question. Have your subject on the

[2:47:09] table.

[2:47:12] open to recess 5:30 tomorrow afternoon.

[2:47:15] >> So much.

[2:47:16] >> All in favor? I thank you.

[2:47:31] » Hey, this was

[2:47:35] scary.

[2:47:51] I I can't because it was sent

[2:47:56] to

[2:48:00] Can I give you this back?

[2:48:02] >> Thank you very much.

[2:48:11] What? Oh,

[2:54:42] Hey, hey.

[2:54:48] hey.

[2:54:49] [Music]

2026 Schenectady City Budget Meeting, October 20, 2025

Transcript