currently running
this
um
actually it might be I'm not sure on
that I would have to verify
that
[Music]
um
actually it might be I'm not sure that I
would have to verify All right.
Star Wars
actually.
I'm not sure that I have to verify
the management. Oh,
>> have one more thing about landing
involvers. So, I'm looking at the budget
and
exactly
so what's in here currently is we so
that's the two that from the five that
was last year the last budget for the
seven that's currently showing
>> five to seven.
>> Okay. So it's no additional
>> brackets five or two from the five to
seven.
>> Okay.
>> And those five never left.
How many of those are filled?
» Any other questions?
Okay, let's move to um
the proposed management rates.
» Are there any questions in particular
about the reason for the conditions
of receipts
here? Now I I asked for this report just
for comparison
to look at the for us to look at dollar
amounts
» and it's going to cost us about $90,000
approximately.
>> No, sorry.
>> No, that's not it. That's just going to
go.
>> So the
So we need to this report complete.
asked complete breakdown how much it's
going to cost us 2026
over all races.
Just pull up a formula this sheet is
available
and do the delta between the two 20 256
Essentially,
it's probably located closer to 3%
increase. Um, only a few slacks.
So, doubt about four or 5% depending,
but we'll get to that information again
for you.
The $90,000
mask.
was broken up by general fund and then
water sewer
couple notes the OS commissioners they
were completing the general water sewer
funds now uh to help out with the
general fund spenders um they're just
now split funds that they just had um so
that's why you see a big jump in that so
don't be alarmed in that That's a 3%
increase uh from their rhythm sound
>> with
um the same uh thing is for the let's
see there's one
» which one
>> so I have but
there
» oh that is to uh keep it in line with uh
CS CCA raises. Uh there's some that
staff now that are receiving uh lower
salaries than uh CCA members
>> due to the last contract that was signed
by contract.
>> And these aren't new position. These are
just raises on the current position.
>> Correct.
>> And these are all management position
or exclude from CSA.
So the majority of work that you do see
raises in is to uh for the reason like I
stated the CCA increases uh management.
Uh for example, if you look at
purchasing supervisor uh if you look in
that code um uh payable clerk is
currently making more this year than um
salary,000 for that individual.
>> So we're trying to keep it in line.
That's why you see some some position
higher than 3%.
>> Okay. So this is not what I asked for. I
asked for the report to show the
management prices that is outside of
CSEA.
>> They said all management.
>> Yeah. But did you mention that CSA?
>> I'm just making compared
more than 3% comparing CSV.
>> So is that report is all management?
>> This is all management.
>> Okay. All right. So I'm going to follow
up on this because I I need to
the difference between 2025 and 2026.
This is going to help us to uh you know
with our proposal from the council.
>> Yeah, it would be sorry
and then Mr.
>> Thank you. Um, so, uh, Eric, um, when
you spoke of the administrative
assistant to keep up with the CSEA
races, are we
responsible to do that? Is there
anything or is it just so that,
you know, do we have to do that?
>> Do we have 65%.
>> No, but I I would most people would
probably stop becoming manager and stay
in the union position for the city. Uh I
think I think people get really um the
council should look at other contracts,
fire, police and other unions and really
see how much they're making. Um because
we're going to pick that it's really
going to hurt.
>> But just a question.
So listen
I see it is as I understand that you
don't want someone
to make you know correct more than their
supervisor which I think I might feel
the same way by the time I was
supervisor
>> so so um if I can continue then I'm
going to ask about all the rates that
are over 3% and on page on the first
page I had the accounting supervisor for
the supervisor at 12% supervisor rece
seats at 17, um purchasing supervis,
and the supervisor with buildings at
9:00. So, um if you just kind of like
give the direction all of those,
>> of course. Um so, the executive
secretary, uh that's for the mayor's
office that has to keep in line with the
executive secretary. That's a C member
uh in the police department.
>> Okay.
the uh sup the accounting supervisor and
supervisor for seats. They are two
essential department heads within the
city. Uh and this matches their
counterparts and other um levels of um
department heads within the city. So
within the city, right? Correct. So
these numbers are in line with other
department heads at their level.
>> What line are you talking about right
now? Who are you talking about?
>> Accounting supervisor. Supervisor overseas.
>> Oh, so both of Okay.
Mhm.
>> So if you look for example, one of their
counterparts is the assessment city
assessor.
>> Um so that'll give you an idea of why
these uh dollars increased to this
amount.
>> So when we're sorry when we're doing
that um I understand we're taking into
account their positions. Are we also
taking into account their longevity? How
long you know because
>> correctly someone could have been here
for a period of time.
>> Correct. So for these two individuals
particularly
>> both are one is 27 years and I believe
one's between 20 25 years.
>> Yeah
>> the land base.
>> I know we won't be able to like any new
positions or anything but I think that
it would be helpful if it seems like Mr.
Müer might want you to do something a
little different with this report. I
would it would also be helpful to look
at like what raises were given for these
the percentage of raises that were given
for these positions um in 2024 as well.
I think that would be a good reference
point for us.
>> Yeah, we can do that. Um that shouldn't
be a problem. Um
there do you want to see all the
management positions or just um
>> just I guess just adding another column
here in the spreadsheet that just
reflects that. So therefore we can have
like you know just like good reference
24
» and then we do big
>> comparison between 20 205 2026 2025
>> total comparison
>> no just those two years 2025 2026 let's
look at a dollar
>> okay I thought you mentioned you wanted
the total fur management salary 25 yes
so when you when you do the column. When
you insert the column, you will do the
um the delta dollar amount for each each
position and then you do a total at the
bottom.
>> Oh, I'm sorry. Sorry.
>> I think um
>> Oh, sorry. No,
>> it was Thank you. It was I think you
already clarified it or or uh Derek
clarified it that um because when during
their presentations, these folks had
been here for like 28 years. Um, so they
talked about it when we were having the
department head when they presented to
us.
>> Right. I just wanted to make sure that
we were talking about longevity of the
disposition. The
>> next guy I believe was the deputy
regard. I think Sam
said the same thing. Uh,
member
hired
management individual.
>> Supervisor buildings.
>> Um, supervisory buildings. Um that was a
recommendation
uh from the OJS commissioner the deputy
commissioner for the skill set that has
been
um and my discussion of that was on call
24/7
>> really
» but does that also mean
>> file open actually so you would be able
to do something
you say it's the Um the most agreed
thing um is the post budget and it
should be cheap
right before the general.
» So So we're going to add um 20 24.
So we can add 20 24 and then we're going
to do the difference between 2026 and
2025 in terms of dollar amount. Anything
else needed on this report? You want to
total the column
>> and then a total at the bottom of the
column. Yes.
>> Which I said 24
>> 24 25 and
>> adopted 24 adopted 25.
>> Yes. Yes.
>> And then proposed 26.
>> Correct.
>> And we just do uh comparisons between 25
and 26 in dollar amount and then
>> Okay. Do you want the water, sewer and
golf? Cuz are we just looking strictly
at general fund? everything the entire
report
» and and these are all filled, right? I
just want to Yes.
>> Yeah.
» The question I have about this um
supervisor is number
160 to 100 and there was a $3,000 for
that position.
Okay. And my other question was on the
commission of public service. I see that
it was 84% increase
your top
public service. Yes, that was I bought
on my first uh first department.
>> So that should be 3% from that. That's
fire budget. Okay.
But it was just a small typo
>> in that line. It should be 3%.
>> Yes,
>> it's on the bottom of the previous page.
I think
>> that's that's the correct amount on the
bottom of the uh first page. Uh rows up
>> that small.
Gotcha. Thank you.
Actually,
I'm sorry because now it's already gone
upstairs, but Oh, no, it doesn't. Yep.
Sorry.
» The other document that we had there to
see on yesterday, there was a
conversation between the parks.
>> Yeah. and the delinquent
tickets.
So this is the
>> two pages and
it shows where we are in terms of the
recovery effort
20,000 that I mentioned yesterday
and then the other page um they show
that the activity that
um the approach to
without standing it's not clear where
you're speaking
>> the other factor
the sent to us yesterday.
>> No, this is separate. I discussed this
yesterday, but we didn't we didn't bring
this out.
>> You're copy of this. This has to do with
a PD from um
assistant chief. Okay.
>> Brian Little
and we talk about the activity that
they're doing in terms of outstanding
ticket during the per 4hour period.
>> Mhm. and they show the revenue that
they're generating
>> which is significant. So if you were to
do our math within our welfare, we're
talking about a significant stop here.
>> So my question to get requested that the
police be here?
>> I don't see them here. Um did everybody
uh follow up?
I think I sent an out to the police uh
today. Uh
and from what the chief has stated is
that
the parking revenue is in line with
what's expected is currently the highest
been years. Uh that's the quick
statement.
>> That's interesting.
>> Uh regarding toes um this is the uh toe
increases in response to RA revenue
to raise the toe search charge and
deprive it until the contract be
renegotiated.
I I I don't think that was a question.
The question was more of central we hire
capital recovery to help us with the
collection effort
>> and when we discussed last year with the
fee they were saying that the approach
that they're going to be taking was a
more aggressive approach approach and
they're going to be using capital
recovery to help us process and the
number that was quoted was very
significant in terms of the returns. So
that's why I want to ask him where is
the shortfall of what do we need to do
as a council? How can we step in and
help what I was asking last night in
terms of what do we need to do at the
council
and to help along the process and to
kind of speed it up because yes we have
millions of dollars of spending that we
were promised to recover. Now they will
check it but the new ones.
>> You're saying that not the older takes
but
>> the old some of them are in the millions
but they're like 10 years. Okay.
>> So, people pass on
those are like
>> might not be able to
>> Yeah. less likely.
>> So, we're focusing on the millions of
dollar of the the new ones and the new
takeout stocking for kids and so I I do
remember that well some of that
conversation. So, they
essentially
told us that they'd be able to recover.
We're nowhere even near that right now.
>> That Yes. and and occur and so we need
how much are we paying?
>> Well, that's what I want to know.
>> They get percentage of what they
collect. So, we're not losing any.
So, so
>> well I I don't want us to kind of you
know hire a company and we're expecting
them to collect some if there shortfall
you need to know because this is that
we're anticipating
>> correct
>> and if we're getting shortfall and it
affect our budget year after year if
it's not working then we need to come
up.
>> Mhm. it just
but I think it's a significant line that
we need to look at and I think we need
to increase it and I think we need to
work with the police department
to have a more
high level approach of how we do with
recovery and assistant
>> and I find um
I feel like uh there was a very large
number of uncollected parking fines um
not not the revenue that we expected
versus what we actually have here.
>> Most of the reports from last year if
you look at your reports on last year it
was it was it was like over $100,000 I
think that was uncollected
>> in it's $170,000 in this.
>> Yeah, it's millions of dollars.
>> 2016
millions of dollars uncollected park
ticket.
>> Oh
fenders.
>> That's what we want to help. We you know
we're not saying that they're not doing
a good job. They're doing a good job. We
just need to um you know to step in and
see where where help is needed. Maybe we
need a new um collection um agency.
>> I don't know. But I think we need to
explore it.
>> What is our year to date? I see what we
budgeted last year. We're budgeting
30,000 more this year.
Oh,
revenue loan. It's a 2610
is what Mr.
>> Our
is 122.
>> That's all we are now.
>> Yes.
>> So, we didn't even reach maybe
>> 140.
>> We're upping it by 30,000.
>> It's actually
better do something.
>> Wait a minute. That that line 2610
though we're only 20. I'm looking at the
report that was generated on October
9th, but um we've got almost 80% of the
re we're at 80% of the budget. We still
have, you know, November and December,
most of October, November, and December.
So, wouldn't that be in line if they
continue doing it when we hit the 100%?
>> Estimated to be close, too. It's going
to be actually that number at the end of
the year. Bless you.
Well, it's it's not a line estimate
if we exceed it.
>> Oh, it's a good thing.
>> No, no, I think the goal in my hand and
I'm trying to get at is that we need to
exceed that. Not because we budgeted,
let's say for $140,000. Well, we should
only achieve $140,000.
We should achieve 1.5.4 million of all
the outstanding $10 million plus.
And when we budgeted that, did we budget
that based on what they presented their
ability to do or was that based on
conservative? I guess
>> that's what I wanted them to give us a
snapshot. Hey,
>> is that what you budgeted? Can you
budget more
>> or why did you arrive at 70,000?
Can the expectation be more than that?
H.
>> So what's in the book
on the
six on the
>> You have a copy?
>> I I do now.
>> Yeah. So if you look at there I don't
want to kind of throw those numbers out.
Where would that Where would that be
under? Would that be under parking
fines?
» This is over 69,000.
>> Yes. Would that be on the parking lines?
Next question.
» Which line?
>> You believe that would be um but if
we're going to talk about the link we
see a command statement tomorrow at the
meeting um discuss the parking and then
these maps
I'm sure person.
>> Yeah because if you look at the the
proposed 2026 um Taliban there for what
is on the slide here.
We're a million dollars up.
» This is this is real.
>> That's that's
actually
so we just need them to come in. I can't
agree. But yes, they sent this to me.
But I think the benefit for the entire
council to kind of have a better
understanding and to kind of interact
with the community because this is if we
look at these two item here, it could be
significant revenue that we can
estimate. It's all it's an estimate and
we just need to make sure that the
department did work towards um those
estimates
>> and um what what would be the
approximate overtime for three officers
for four hours?
>> Sorry,
>> what would be the approximate overtime
for three officers for four hours each 5
days a week? Any idea?
>> There's multiple
>> I know depending on rank and file,
>> right?
A lot of times don't right now
>> high ranks take the local
uh between those hours. Um just
wondering out of that $69,000 are we
giving back?
» Just wondering what it means that we
already pay him we already have it in
the budget.
>> It's already in the budget.
>> So it's cost that we already
>> absorbed right absorbed for this.
>> So this is like revenue coming in. If
for example they didn't go to do this we
still have to pay. Absolutely.
>> So this is more of a additional or new
revenue additional revenue coming.
>> Not really though, right? Because even
though it's it's budgeted for over time,
they won't have to use it
>> if they budget it. I mean use
>> Yeah. I'm just saying.
>> But I'm saying that if they're not they
generate revenue, it's not directly
coming out from the revenue. It's coming
out from
Okay. Yeah.
So, we're going to need to follow up with
the PD and that is something that we
should consider as the council and can
we consider additional revenue to be
added to those two loans.
Um the next one we asked for CDG
>> what's going on with uh DDG and in terms
of everything else in terms of uh
surplus in terms of where the money is
the revenue is being booked. So for I
know there's discussion about codes and
snap um so department
uh above and beyond functions in order
to utilize the CPC function. Um
maybe again it may be a good idea to
have those department heads in another
budget hearing meeting discuss uh as
well as have the director of development
discuss why we're not reaching our goals
and those lines.
So, can we set that up for tomorrow?
» Let's see if they're available
>> because we're not meeting in ter
if we could
>> that's like a half a million dollars
that we could take out of the
>> Y
exactly. That's actually I'm sorry.
That's
>> bring revenue. Bring
>> That's revenue. So, if we're not making
that revenue,
>> well, what I'm I don't think we're not
making a revenue.
>> We want to know where where is the
allocation?
>> Uh if we if we're not spending money,
can we bring that money back into the
city?
» I don't think so.
>> Yeah.
>> We go ahead. I thought the discussion
yesterday from council was why are those
lines at 0% usage? Uh I think it was
snap and
>> no it wasn't zero.
>> Yeah. I need the only one with zero snap
>> two specific
>> two snap code enforcement
>> 217
>> earlier I had a conversation about CDBG
funding positions in I don't touch but I
agree it was with understandable
zero
>> yes
>> so I'm looking at the the revenue here
>> 2026
>> Mhm. Mhm. And under SNAP zero under code
enforcement is 100,000 under finance is
65,000
>> and under development is 570. So that
there's only one that is zero. No
enforce
I think was enforcement and finance and
snap and code. Okay. SNAP and code. This
year SNAP doesn't have anything. But but
from last year's budget, SNAP and CO
earn zero in terms of expenditures.
>> In terms of is that expenditure or
revenue though?
>> Revenue.
>> We have drawn it down
>> from the federal government.
Okay.
>> Which I don't, you know, I don't know if
that's a a reporting piece or, you know,
does something need to happen
>> administratively to get us that money?
>> I think those are and that's what I was
trying to get at yesterday in terms of
um if we have this money and their
agency will not kind of reallocate this
money to various various um various
category within the city and bring them
in as revenue and do projects within
their within the city. I believe my my
understanding is that the CDBG has
specific guidelines um within each of
these lines on where the money can needs
to go and so I don't think you can
shuffle it. Um
>> but that's why I said
>> I so let's look at it various categories
and see if we can reallocate it within
the city and utilize that revenue.
I think for example when you look at
line 217BF
>> um
>> yes finance
>> it has to be used on on finance
>> that right do you agree
>> I agree with that and in addition to
that there I mean we have very restrict
guidelines for for the clinic and in
addition to that there's also caps
>> of how much we need to spend in each
category for it's not going to be as
easy to move it around
>> as we think it is and CDBG all comes
through um department's belt
>> oh That's our outcomes here.
>> So we would have to we have some serious
guidance on how we could do that.
>> Well, that's why we need you the
director to kind of guide us along in
terms of what is available, where is the
shortfall and what can we do
>> as a city.
>> I don't think that money for budget.
>> No, no, no. We're not taking bringing in
money.
>> This is revenue that we haven't brought
in
>> other departments if we can.
>> That's Yeah. the other departments.
>> Go ahead.
>> No, no, no. I'm just my thoughts. I I
likely remember I remember I thought
this conversation she was talking about
money um that was in other departments
from uh CDBG money that she's now
bringing back into her department
because they weren't being used.
>> Yes.
>> And I think that we're talking about the
same thing.
>> Yeah. So we can get some clarity. And
that's exactly what I asked last night
about um in terms of surplus and when we
receive those surplus we do reallocate
them to other agency can we keep those
money in house
>> and also spending within the various uh
programs and department
did it with the SNAP funding you see
that's why it zeroed out in 26 and then
increased to 570
>> and then the
>> yeah that's why I believe she increased
that line Um well then she's available
um at tomorrow for tomorrow night's
meeting.
>> Yes.
>> Thank you. And I think that's where
she's looking to get some money for our
youth employment.
>> Yes.
>> That's that's that's once the money's
available to bring in revenue and pass
it all back as you know into the various
expenditure categories. That probably
would be that behind 2170G
would be for youth if she's because I
think that's where she gets her grants
up, you know, the grants that go out to
community groups and public services
that have I think as well as it supports
some of the staffing within development.
>> Yeah. But I don't I mean my I don't know
if we're talking about that right now,
but being that we're mentioning it, I I
my thought would be that's not a line
that we can I I don't want to end up,
you know, dealing with, you know, the
possibilities of what the money's out
there. That's a line that we need to
secure funding for that we know is going
to be here. Um and that's that's why I
was going where I was going. So, but we
could talk about that when we get there.
CDG is the right approach to that as
guaranteed fund
>> and if it's a surplus we can reallocate
the money into youth and also when we
talk about youth we also have to look at
the seniors because they have zero also
>> so we have to we have to make sure that
>> we love our youth
>> we have to take care of them
>> we have to love our seniors to and take
care of them so we have to fund them to
and funded programs
>> that's perfect
money take that money fun our senior our
senior years. Take the money from the um
golf course, fund our youth. Boom. Boom.
So, we'll we'll follow make sure we have
I like this convers
with with a PD and CBD.
>> If not tomorrow, then Friday is okay.
>> But um in the early for us, they help us
a lot.
billion.
The only caveat or word of caution would
be that again remember this is money
that comes to us from the federal
government and this is the type of money
>> I'm just being
honest here that you know this this
could very much be at risk under the
present administration because this is
the type of funding that
>> uh he's not fond of in terms of the
programs that it funds on the people
that it serves. So, I just want to say
that I think we need to have it in here
um as a possible revenue source, but I
think we also have to, you know, write
letters, call and do everything we can
to advocate to make sure that we get
that funding.
>> I think it's two category
for me. We're talking about the surplus
>> agency that not utilizing the allocation
from the drawback. Absolutely. That's
what I'm talking about because there are
some agency that is not meeting up to
the expectation that we need to apply
active funding.
>> Totally.
>> So we don't want to give that up. So we
reallocate that. That's what I'm
pushing.
>> I'm just saying current one if we can
reallocate then yes but I'm looking more
primarily at the agency that is not
meeting expectations.
>> So that's what so those are guaranteed.
Um,
so we'll follow up and make sure that we
have the design to the garden back in
the earlier the better.
Um,
are there any other questions? Um, think
we have a couple questions uh about the
mortgage tax
in your packet of first
time.
Maybe you'll have this sheet. Um
>> they did an analysis for the mortgage
tax. Um currently at 388,000
uh we budgeted 1.1 million I believe for
2026 we budgeted 942,000,000.
Last year we received 894,000
um received up to 894,000.
Um so we're anticipating receiving
approximately same uh maybe a little bit
more about $900,000 probably more toward
950. Um that's uh put within the
proposed budget. Um I just wanted to
be about that so we're not inflating
some numbers.
Well, I don't think we'll wait later. I
think we had a discussion yesterday
myself
everyone. We are looking at the trend of
the the housing market and in terms of
the pricing
and you know the market is very high.
The mortgage now on almost all the
houses are higher than it will be 2
years ago. So our expectation for that
line should be higher
because of the house the sale of these.
>> That's how I was looking at I looking at
the the
house.
Is that with this one? Does that look
like
>> No, it's just on page 11
page 12 second line. We talked about
this yesterday,
>> right?
>> And yeah, we did ask about the whole
conversation was more of center around
the housing trend market and the
protection
>> based on the uh the sale price.
» So you think it should be higher than
950?
>> Yes. cuz year to date, well, this is
when I first looked at this, so I don't
know what day
>> 488534,
>> but those are paid in quarter. So those
>> Oh, that's right. You said that.
>> So we should be double. So
>> we'll make our
we are in line for close upward to a
million.
>> Okay.
You talking about revenue? Yeah, we're
talking about revenue market
>> page 12 second line.
» So, do you have a recommended number on
the end? What do we have
for
» I have a number recommended but I just
want to you know
>> consult to kind of like I don't want to
throw a number out to them like how did
you you know kind of reed them but want
to look across the board in the trend
that's happened above us the housing
market we're selling houses for
profitably we are seeing over the last
four years from 5,000 and 10,000 four
years from 5,000 and 10,000 to hundreds
That was like 11.
>> So why the dip in 2024 in the in the in
that line?
>> Okay. 824,
>> right?
>> Yeah.
>> Pretty substantial.
» Yeah.
>> And and I was going to say possibly
because like could be like the lingering
effects of maybe CO, but really actually
the housing market went crazy,
so it really shouldn't be.
I don't know. So,
who would we ask that
>> within our
» Well, no. Yeah, it's right
>> regardless.
>> Yep.
>> Let's Let's look at the future.
Got it.
>> Let's look at the future market. Look at
the future trend.
>> I'll be right.
>> Yeah. It went down by 166, we actually
» But I think to Mr. Mutar's point, if we
went back maybe to 2021, we probably
would see the
[Music]
>> we probably see the it it's going in the
trend you're saying, but I still would
like to just know why why that
basically we know what that is. But I
see what you're saying about
Okay.
We're increasing tax at the proposed
rates
slow down. So making sure that also
um and I was going to say the
conversation is continuing. It's
difficult to not talk about the next
line 309. um H
» that the casino licensing fee is only
going to give $100,000 with the
introduction of our multi- tier arena.
>> I think it's two different I think
that's two different companies but it's
going to
>> Oh, I see what you're saying. They're
going to the
>> to some degree. Well, we don't we don't
set the fees, right? Correct. That's my
question. How was that determined? Mr.
Mudar spoke about that briefly in terms
of how it's determined.
>> Is this number aligning with the
committee?
>> Yes. So these numbers um uh the 4.1 and
our sales tax are I spoke with the
county and the numbers are
» I'm sorry.
>> No, that's I'm with you.
>> That was my question. uh well they
provide us with a calculation for their sales for the sales tax um
an estimate they provided us I could
look to see what is driven by uh they
provided us um the reasoning behind it
um
>> so in more basic terms so we can
actually
adjust that ourselves
that's
>> we could recommend it
before the casino. Okay. Like help me
walk me through that.
>> Why you don't want to recommend that?
>> Um, usually we base it off the counting
numbers. Um, and there's a formula of I
don't have it on me. Um, there's a
formula uh for how it's split up.
>> Mhm.
>> And how much revenue is uh received by
the city.
>> So we so we Okay.
>> They kind of tell us.
>> Yeah. But we don't have to listen,
right? Based on like
>> we won't get it. They have to give it to
us.
>> Get a certain percentage.
>> Okay. And they they give that to us.
>> So I what I'm trying to figure out how
do we get here? Who how what level of
autonomy do we have as far as figuring
out where that number that to me is
pretty much the cuz if if something that
we don't have any
>> then nothing then we don't need to look
at that. However,
my next kind of thought about that is
even if we don't have,
you know, autonomy over how this looks,
there's nothing stopping us for from the
city perspective to go back to the
casino and say that um well, we we would
like uh
them to uh contribute more,
>> change the formula.
Well, it could be it could be done by
the state.
>> It could this one map. It could go that
way or it could be in the in the way of
a of a new uh community benefit
agreement. And I think that you know
there's there's questions that can be
asked
>> overestimated
revenue. Thank you for
>> Yeah. But to your point earlier, it was
just an estimate.
>> So, you know what I mean? So,
>> which is a good thing. But then I get to
your point the 4.1
if we exceeded that year are we going to
exceed it in 2025
but
>> nobody else can
I think um I just remember these
discussions from previous years um about
I think it is a negotiation
um with the I think it's part of the
sales tax negotiation that we have with
the county not I know sales that that's
a separate line but I think it might be
that same discussion. I mean, I'd have
to ask our commissioner, but I think
>> two separate
>> I know they're two separate separate,
but I don't know. I just I don't know that
we necessarily can drive it. I think
that the county drives it.
>> I don't have the agreement, but there's
an agreement and it's split up by
percentage.
>> Yes, that's right.
portion and there's different uh
broken up.
>> Yeah. I guess I mean my question would
be not I'm certain that there's a
formula in place but I'm saying is that
who decides that formula what level of
impact do we have to
talk about what that formula could
possibly look like? Um, and I think that
right now times like this, those are the conversations we need to have. So,
I'm saying like I'm going to figure that
out.
>> I think in terms of this budget, the um
the for deciding
>> and there's no room like between now and
November 1st to renegotiate any of that.
So,
for me, my perspective is that we got
almost 300,000 overed and then we
increase that line based on the past
year. questions, right?
>> Yes, exactly. I was trying to compare
that almost 300,000 2024. So, how would
we approach
>> I will say that I mean I listening I
agree that perhaps
I think we'd have to take a guess
>> but if we think there's the new event
center I mean if we think that people
that are going to go to the event center
would also go to the casino. I'm not
sure that I do buy that. I mean, I think
that if you think of the events that any
of us have attended at the event center,
you go you go to the event and you go
home probably. But, um, Right. Right. I
don't know. But I'm not really sure that
um there's going to be I'm not I'm just
raising it that maybe we could
guesstimate that maybe we'd get a little
bit extra because we have more people
coming into town um by virtue of the
event.
Yeah.
» No, I mean that's
>> it's conjecture.
>> Yeah, it would be totally conjecture.
So, I think that we should not mess
around with it too much.
>> As far as bed tax, sales tax, what we
get on the counter is I think that could
be more.
>> I agree too, but I think those are not
things that we negotiated.
>> Right. Right. And I guess my I'm seeking
clarity as to but some sometimes what
I've noticed is that sometimes things
are done a certain way because they've
always been done in that certain way not
necessarily because it's just a matter
of practice maybe not necessarily a
matter of policy. So I'm like those are
the things that we just have to kind of
like have be clear on. Is it something
that we have a level of
2025 we have 2,72,000
>> casino
>> 2 million
>> 72 that's so that's two quarters so it's
going to be close to 4 million
>> so yeah so you're on par with 4 million
let's say cash this year
4.1 was pretty solid
>> so bas based on the trend for first two
more than likely going to exceed your
destiny.
» I like to see us smile.
>> Um, so just to be clear, right now we're
trying to figure out ways to be
increasing our revenue, right?
>> Exactly. That's the purpose of this
discussion here.
So that pointed I mean you know as we
continue to go through this question we
can visit those those
we need to to look at not only that line
all the lines that we started yesterday
what other question we have from
yesterday
>> um so
>> okay can I can I go back for a minute on
that one so you said it was 2 million 72
>> and that's only two
>> no 2 million
that's You got to think 2 million.
>> Oh, exactly.
>> 2,ion72,000,
not 100,000.
>> Okay. Okay.
I was like, wait, there's more money on
the table.
>> For for the record, I'm still suggesting
we find a way to ask the casino for more
money in layman's terms is what I'm
saying.
That will have to be maybe a separate um
discussion, but take into consideration
the casino is filing
a grievance against your taxes.
>> But they've done it for for several
years.
>> So we have to be careful what is going
on there because if that ever happen to
get approved,
>> we'd be in trouble.
>> Yeah, exactly.
Trouble. They got to be in trouble.
pulling at the at the
>> so let's be mindful of what uh what is
happening over there and hope it doesn't
>> I'm sure we'll have to take care of it
for
>> um any other question
>> have anything
>> I think there was a comment last time
about the allowing for accessed
uh analysis uh
» Mhm.
uh you can see you'll see prior years
2014 2016 that's the back
budgeted and then the allowance for
actual this is the actual allowance for
uh unleffected taxes. So you can see
that this number historically increases
when the tax levy increases so I
wouldn't recommend that's actually below
that 2.8
» when tax levy increased look in 2023
it was 31.6 6 million.
>> Yes,
>> we 3.2 in 2024 we 2.1
>> correct
and the allowance went up
>> the allowance for factors. So when that
number goes up that means revenues
produce.
>> Mhm.
>> So you see that 3 million if you look
like 2 million.2
3 million.
>> Yeah. The negative will reduce. Yes. All
right. So, so you were indicating that
we could take the 2.8 million and bring
that number down.
>> I'm glad you did that analysis because
look at the trend for I mean 2023 31.6
3.2 negative
2024 32.1
just over $3 million. 2025 33.3 million
2.8 eight.
We're $6 million
higher in terms of um revenue.
>> Why is this the same?
We have 6 million.
>> I'm not I'm not understanding what
you're saying.
>> No, not the same. But the tax um
property tax, real property tax $9.3
million.
>> You're not looking at this. You're
looking at
>> you're looking at he's going over this
with us.
» One of the packets that that we got for
that
>> I think it's under
second.
>> I just saw it.
Yeah.
There was one of the fact that the dead
» take a look.
>> It should be behind the magic raises.
» Can I run in and make
>> Can we just make chocolate, please?
He said it. He said it.
>> Okay.
>> Yeah. I'm not really understanding it.
>> Start from the top.
>> So, um, you had a tax year 24 to 2016,
the tax levy, which would be the A1101,
the real property.
>> Um,
and you see the allowance for collected
taxes. Um there was a statement I
believe it was yesterday that we could
possibly reduce that that $2.8 million
to lower than 2 million or 1.8 million
which would then uh help our bottom line
out.
>> Mhm.
>> Um so that number at 2.8 million is
actually low. We were predicting it's
more around 3.3 million. Um so that
number is um below um the analysis. You
see where it says this is actually too
low.
>> Yeah.
>> Uh and this is just a representation to
show you exactly what our amounts on
collecting taxes were in previous years.
So I wouldn't recommend lowering that uh
number.
>> Yeah. But the reason why I'm asking for
that um to look at it because last last
year we budgeted 33.3 million in
republic tax
>> and this year we're budgeting $39.3
million. That's not $6 million
difference.
>> Wait a minute. Let me see. I'm on the
budget target of eight. Our exposure
should be reduced. So then why where are
you getting this this
8%.
Is that standard or is that something
that we try to maintain?
>> That's the lowest. So if you look in 22
M as percentage, that's the lowest
percentage.
So we took that number and times that.
>> Okay. So it's not something that is
standard. Did you just look at the
lowest one and then Okay.
>> To be cautious.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Exactly. So be cautious.
>> I I think 2.8 is I spoke with our
finance team
individual. I mentioned that you've been
here for 25 plus years. That's all the
knowledge and he says even this number
is uh low. So
Okay.
>> Yeah. But then those years we we've seen
over the years that the real property
tax has started. So, you know, it's
moving upward.
>> So, $6 million within within a year and
you're telling me your exposure to UNC
color is the same. Uh I don't think that
» the exposure I the exposure is too much.
>> You recommended to lowering that amount?
>> Yes.
>> Cuz if we are anticipating or saying
okay we're going to collect $39 million
and um you know pray to God that we
collect more than that then our exposure
should not be the same as last year this
year into next year. I think it would
help to your point Mr. We had a proposed
allowance for flooded taxes for 23 and
24.
>> Was that sorry to understand how close
the recommendations from the budget
are not at least courtesy? I think that
would help support how on spot they are
in regards to like seven.
Yeah. We did we did exceed our
collection um last year and the year
before and we are lying to exceed that
this year.
>> The real property tax
>> for real property tax 32 million and 31
million for 24 and 23 respectively.
>> It's on here. Yeah,
>> it's it's on
>> but we're getting
>> page eight
line.
» Yeah, you're seeing the actual
>> how much it be.
» I was supporting what Mr. Williams was
saying budget for 23 and 24 for
allowance of unallocated taxes. I think
would support whether John's saying I
think the formula can use some
adjustment
and then whether the kind of lean more
towards fire team saying we have an
individual saying
the adopted for allowance for collective
taxes for 230 with 3 million and for 24
um was 2.8 million.
>> No, we're talking about the next line
>> now. We're talking about real property
>> real property tax lines. How much did we
>> How much did we um we exceed the
collection?
>> So we budgeted in um
>> that's the very first one the whole
package
>> in 23 we budgeted 31 million.
>> He actually received the 31 million. Um
in 24 we budgeted uh 32 million.
>> Wait wait wait on you have 31.629
here.
>> He's ask he's estimate he's telling you
what he got by. We we we exceed by
600,000.
>> No. So, excuse me. So, 2023 adopted
revenue this year from 2024 budgeted
budget.
>> Mhm.
>> The 23 adopted revenue for real property
tax is 30,629,000.
And we nailed that right on the head for
actual revenues.
>> Exactly.
Y
>> because they know I mean that
>> that would be a formula sometimes would
happen and sometimes it doesn't. So for
24 um 32 million
>> 32 million60,000 is the adopted revenue
actual revenue is 32,136,42.
» It's not it's a large amount
>> and then okay
>> 2025 you have those. Yeah, I'm looking at the actual as well, but
we haven't finished. But
>> so about 90,000 million.
>> Yeah, you're 99.9%
on this report. So, we'll make it, but
we'll exceed it, don't you think?
>> For the adopted revenues.
>> No, for the um I'm looking at the actual
101.
>> Maybe I'm misreading it, but it looks
like you've already collected 99.9%.
Well, as of October 9th.
>> Yeah. So,
>> yeah. Yeah, it should be right.
>> Oh, so that's it. That this was the last quarter, so you won't get any more.
Gotcha. Gotcha. Gotcha. Gotcha. Gotcha.
>> People still pay late
now.
>> So 20. So 25 is going to end up at
probably exactly what you budgeted
>> pretty on target.
>> So now6
that's that's exactly relating to my
point. If we budget for that and we are
achieving our targeted estimate, then
our exposure should be should lower for
next year because we're budgeting $6
million more
than 2025.
So then why do we our exposure
is the same from 2025 into 2026.
>> So when you say 2026
collected like people who are not going
to pay Mhm.
But we anticipated this year $2.8
million of uncollected taxes were
empowered to receive that amount.
>> Mhm.
>> If you're saying that we're going to
collect $39 million,
>> then why our exposure is the same?
Because we budgeting expecting more. So
our risk should be less.
>> That's how that's how it works.
the risk would be more
we've seen we've seen the the base
effect
actually
>> did the corporation council even tell us
that I don't know because I could be
misquing but did she not say that we
were getting more taxes in that we were
getting more collection
>> yes exactly one of her more people are
coming
>> more people are coming forward to pay
the taxes and to avoid foreclosure than
what used to happen in the last couple
years people just ignore it. They don't
care. They go to foreclosure. We
foreclose on property with $500.
>> So, so I guess I'd still and I'm sorry
that I'm being a little confused.
>> You want to carry?
>> I just want to make sure. So, I just
want to follow along what you're saying
and hope that I understand it. So are
you suggesting in other words I think
that I would say that the 2026 proposed
budget of 39343
on real property taxes A101
>> is good and and we shouldn't touch that
and they definitely have a formula and
it seems like the formula is working.
He's hitting the nail on the head. But
now I think it's a separate thing that
you're using that number to then say
well then for line the next line
>> next line
>> uh 102
you think that 2850
oh
>> should be
>> less less and they're actually telling
us that they think that it's too low
that we should raise it from 2850
>> 309
Yeah, but we have seen a trend of people
paying their taxes. We we're not seeing
no dip in the collection over the last
four years.
>> It's still 12.7% of taxes.
>> So, you know, it's something that we can
revisit. So, it's you know, as property
values increase, then people are more
likely to pay their even though taxes
increase, they're more likely to pay
their taxes. So, they're not losing type
of session. You're not forclosing for
500 bucks. It's not happen.
>> Somebody said that too.
Corporation council.
>> Yes, exactly. We heard that from
corporation council yesterday that in
terms of coming in taxes, we're getting
less lesser foreclosure and then we're
going to touch on the revenue line and
the housing also because we have three uh foreclosure lined up.
So process two is
>> right
>> one is in the court, one is in the court
and another one is lining up to the to
get there. So we have to deal with three
set of foreclosure for the next year.
But we did talk about that yesterday. So
that's going to touch on my point. So
the revenue for the housing sales that's
still that trend.
» So I I still think that we we need to
reduce our um uncowments
for uncollected
>> and they think that we should raise
>> No, I I think they a trend. They're
looking at
>> that's they Yes. They think that they
think that we should hold it at the
lowest level the lowest percentage
for 2022.
But those were tough years.
And these are
>> okay
those were years that we were giving
people extension to to and taking off u
penalties and and you know giving them
time to pay their tax for 6 months and
>> yeah
corporation council almost to be
vaccines uh Miss Barash said um with
foreclosures number one which should
close out by the end of the year six or
seven properties do Do you know how many
are in two and three for next year or
can you find that out for us?
>> I can.
>> Sure. Thank you.
>> Three.
>> She said that so one is closing out this
year. One set of foreclosers and
properties in it.
>> Two cycles more coming forward in 2026.
I mean if it's 10 12 15 properties
>> more than it's more than that and then
they talking about the property in Bra
about half a million dollars. So those
will come in until 2026.
>> So
>> and then there's another property we
talk about the he said right the big one
>> the big one um up there.
>> Yes. So hopefully that they close this
year. If not that will next year. So
that's another line I wanted to touch on
in terms of revenue, the house sale. I
think we need to up that to the to the
2025 numbers.
My my question we're
hitting property taxes year over year
since 2023.
What is the impact of budgeting millions
of dollars from collected taxes? Where
does that go?
>> It's it's a it's a line of pushing
there. So kind of like in
a push for who and for what for the
>> Just in case.
though.
>> So I I try to think
I I know you're trying to get out there.
Why are we putting that? If we're going
up and we're we're collecting 100% or
exceeding 100% of yesterday, then why
are we putting that number there? And
that's the reason why I wanted to open
because I think our exposure is limited
as we move forward. The tax base is
expanding. People are paying their
taxes. The housing market is expanding.
The house value is going up as Mr.
Farley mentioned and that is no secret
across the city. We have seen um we
talked about it yesterday the price of
houses that are being sold on the market
300 250 300,000
and it was one of the point I mentioned
about the mortgage tax
that also drive that mortgage tax. So
you're so you're asking that we lower
that
>> what?
>> Yes.
>> When we lower that that goes. Okay.
>> Yes.
>> All right.
» Also then since we're touch talking
about that the the sale the home sales
right now we budgeted that three $3
million last year but this year is 4.5.
I would like to see that um kind of
remain at 4.5
because we've heard from council there's
a aggressive approach in terms of the
foreclosure there will be no lagging
like what used to happen four courts are
piled up in the office on top of each
other and they can't get them out
because of you know situations beyond
our control but I you know based on the
what we were told yesterday that those
are an aggressive approach
>> so we want
A2660
A.5
days.
>> Yes.
» So, Mr. M in our discussions, I know
we're trying to like find out.
What number are you trying to excuse me?
>> Well, it's not it's not a number. We're
discussing here. That's my suggestion in
terms of where we are. M
>> if there's a consensus then we know put
a total on everything
>> but I want to make sure that
>> and
>> I want it to be we are you know kind of
thing
>> there's a push back if you put back just
tell me but
>> yeah but I I think um you know
>> what we yesterday I'm more confident
that we we can achieve um 4 million like
4.5 million.
>> Okay.
>> But let me reframe my question. We're
trying not to at least I'm trying to
that we do not see that. So
>> Mr. told us it's Do you have an exact
number for us how much that would be
>> or two?
>> Two. Yes.
>> What the tax cap?
>> No. What is What would um in order not
to see the tax cap?
>> Yeah.
>> Approximately 6 million.
So we would
have to um reduce it by that or increase
revenue. That's so that's what I'm
trying to say. What do we what's our
goal for tonight in terms of our number
in terms of the revenue?
>> Yeah, I know. Is there a goal? Is there
a goal? Is the number we're trying to
hit?
>> We just heard it. So I'm asking
that is the goal 6 million. Do we do we
get that or do we we push for
>> I I think that that's what the that's
what
So is
Mr. Google again I'm not a financial
analyst but how you explain if there are
no property taxes if that second line
and it's for whether we meet that or not
in layman terms can you just describe
why that even exists if we continue to
hit
» claiming the y
>> good point
>> I don't have some mushroom is good, but
I was described by Mr. Barry. It's the
bank inefficiencies in the city.
>> And that and that's not really revenue
then, right?
>> No, it's not.
>> It's a loss in participating in revenue,
but it's not actually preparing for it
and that presents in the budget that
fund. So it's the city protecting itself
>> which is why
it
>> but at this point in time we we can't
over protect oursel we we need to cloud
back a little so that we can able to get
some revenue so that we can offset all
this this increase that is floating
around us.
So please not
so what I'll do is I will uh put
together more information um more
understandable for the council um
tomorrow's meeting um so everyone has
more clarification uh but you know
collecting tax and how that affects and
how we account for real property taxes
>> and I respect that individuals that
might have that lived experience might
not want to come and sit in front of us
because we're such a happy group of
people. Um, if it if it's an opportunity
to come during the day, I I will. That
means I can have that one-on-one
conversation.
>> You know, it's always awesome.
I make the time to hear that.
I'd
>> love to day possibility. Um, I'm sure um
we have all information together
meeting. Um, that does suffice and
answer your questions and look into that
for the future.
>> Thank you.
>> Yes.
I guess I just you know looking at the
history
>> I don't know
>> the history doesn't tell you nothing
that was that is the estimated
>> turn into actually but there's nothing
no movement it's a number that was
placed there as an
>> as uncollected
>> I just feel like it seems like our
experts are
>> you know recommending something and
we don't seem to have the same knowledge
Okay. So I
>> I I would be cautious of saying you know
expert
no disrespect but um but in terms of the
trend we have to look at the trend. It's
a number. It's a negative number being
placed there as an allowance for
uncollected tax.
We're now
>> but if we add it back into the budget I
mean in other words if we take it away
>> and we say okay there's 3 million of the
6 million right there.
>> 5 million. Oh yeah, because of the two
lines,
>> we're not taking
>> I mean, if we say zero in both of those
lines,
>> yes,
>> to get to the 5 million,
>> 3 million right here
>> out of the 6 million that we need,
that's 5 million.
>> Um, and then let's say, don't even fall
off the chair, but I mean, don't, you
know, then we take a million more from
the reserves, which leaves us with like
nothing, by the way, which I would not
recommend doing. I'm just saying.
There's your $6 million. But I guess to
me it's just going against
I don't know. I mean I think we would be
taking a huge risk of of doing that and
>> well that's why let's say I think that's
why we're listening. Let's be cautious
on what we do because we we as a body we
have an obligation and that's what we're
doing to go through this budget and to
make a determination of what do we
proceed with.
>> Mhm.
>> If yes they're expert out there on their
recommendation
and if the recommendation is saying this
no then we should go to the budget and
move on and negotiate nothing. It is our
job to kind of go through the lines and
make sure that we understand what is
happening.
>> Um $2.8 $8 million there negative.
If everything goes well and everything
is going to go well into the next year,
that is $2 million there set aside as a
negative. It goes back into general
fund. Now, can we afford that at this
point in time to be raising 70% taxes to
have a high negative like that? I think
we need to drop it.
I'm not saying we take the whole thing
and conserve. We we need to agree on a
certain number.
So
try so
that allowance for uncollected taxes in
previous years
you're saying has been spot on.
>> Mhm.
>> No. Right.
>> No.
>> But the uncollected taxes.
>> Yeah. Sorry, for 2024
the Obama was 3 million
20,13 and then the actual
I mean yeah
>> he's been right on in 2023 and 24 budget
allowance for collected taxes actual uh
let's say uh for the um 20 for 21.8 80
million for 22 is 2.6 million. Uh for 23
3.2 for 24 3 million.
» So he's
been right on.
» How about $6 million now to jump?
>> That's that's how I'm factoring my my
year were flat years. We have 30 31 32
33.
>> Now we're looking at um 39.
>> So you're talking about because
>> because the the
>> 6 million increase of 6 million this
year.
>> Oh, if if that was 34 million, I
wouldn't be talking about that.
>> I would I would be like, "Nope, can't
touch it."
Okay.
kind of a great informative
diagnost.
>> So what what a little concise summary
for your account
incorporate some other texts that were
adapted yesterday.
>> That's a good point.
» I think just because you raised it by
that amount doesn't mean you're going to
collect that entire
property taxes.
>> Well, we can take your house.
>> What? We'll take the house but then it
brings the u the sale.
>> Yeah. Next. So the list of rocks
properties approximately 75% of the
people redeem them. So we don't get
them. And I just wrote a summary
judgement motion for property that was
foreclosed on originally in 2021.
>> So I think it's just very fluid with how
quick the courts are and getting back to
us. But I do know we at least have two
properties that are coming back to us.
one is going to be in February and then
one is going to be in March or April.
>> Um but I can give you more specifics
talking to Maxine. I think the list is
just I would say approximately to bear
on the side of caution to say 75.8% 80%
of the people will redeem it within a
statuto period of time before we can
foreclose.
And that kind of answer the question in
terms of the um
>> taxes the real tax
we're going to we're going to reach
achieve that goal of the estimated 29
million
>> right because if if I mean there's a lot
of variables here but if we if we're not
we're just moving the goalpost depending
on the scenario then you know we're
going to be chasing our tails here
to
So, what numbers are you signed?
>> I think we should bring it to know about
$2 million or just under 2 million.
I think it's about $8900.
» Yeah.
That's my number. I'm I'm okay here.
We're we're discussing here but uh you
know we as a council will have to
deliberate on it and yes any
recommendation but you have to realize
that all the recommendation from agency
are very cautious and we as a valuable
something you have to take risk
>> and this is what this estimate is is
risk in anticipation that we're going to
achieve these numbers because we can
budget for $39 million and god forbid we
only collect $30 million. Well, but
that's what I'm saying. The numbers are
real. I mean, and and if history is
showing that it is, I I I agree with you
on that. Like, if
>> we've been collecting what we said we're
going to collect and now we're saying
that we're going to collect 39, then
>> we should the formula should reflect us
collecting 39. If not, then what? Why?
does it say 39?
>> And that's why I have no objection
against the $39.3 million.
>> Yeah. No, I I'm saying I want us to
achieve that. I want us to collect more
than that,
>> but we should be limited.
>> We should drop the allowance for unc
I'm informed with that.
>> No report.
» But I'm I'm okay. I'm not I'm fine with
that, but I'm I'm I'm okay with the
report. I'm okay to discuss that.
Mr.
>> Have you ever decreased it in the past
to any type of
>> No, because what happened is if you look
at the trend 30 million, 31 million, 32
million, 33 million, it was like a
>> couple hundred thousand 100,000. No,
within a million of each other or less,
>> right?
>> But then if you look 2025 to 2026,
>> $6 billion, it's not a million.
So I guess another question becomes
since we're not the other number how did
we arrive at 33 million
>> what what I'm sorry what' you say
>> how did we arrive that we're going to um
excuse me
how did we arrive that we're going to
have that significant increase in real
property tax
so we have a formula that essentially
give the tax value um that we input
from. It's a predeterminable preliminary
number that we received from the
assessments office.
>> Uh uh factor that in um and it's
basically a calculation that shows us so
we're looking for a certain number since
we have a gap of say 6 million.
you fill that gap to and that's how we
get the rate of it was what 1577
>> with different variables at two pilot
comes off goes on
the uh assessible values increase
variables that change the taxable rate
>> but the formula doesn't change though
this is the same formula we use now that
you use in fast cover okay the nail on
the head
>> so then exactly point.
>> So yeah, the tax levy is standard
whatever. Yes, that that's correct.
We've been using that all the years is
that whatever is recommended from the
assessor's office that's the formula is
used with those numbers and calculate
the the real property real property tax
line.
Okay. So, this part I was getting to
when I was thinking about I think when I
was thinking about wave like we use it
to chase money instead of holding
apartments within boundaries and I know
it's difficult with staffing and like
increases yearoveryear but I think
that's part of the issue.
>> What do you mean chasing chasing staff? So, you have to find the
shortfall 6 million. So went right to
that median line
>> of revenue.
>> That's a but instead of identifying
other areas to see if there were other
inefficiencies.
>> Well, I think that's
>> I think we're going to though. I mean I
think you know we still have to
>> because we have to that wasn't
identified in post budget how I'm
interpreting. I I kind of miss who did
it if you don't mind. Sorry.
» So, we're chasing dollars from a
community instead of evaluating whether
there could be more efficiencies
internally.
» Well, I feel like we're going to do that
first of all, but remember that
department heads were all asked to cut
their budgets by 20%. Um, and there were
some budgets as I listened to your
overviews
uh before our department heads
presented.
>> I think there was a budget that went up
11%. I mean, I know the police
department hit the 20% reduction. Um,
you know what I'm saying? Like it varied
like some of them were able to
>> then we looked at yearly
a lot of apartments are definitely went
down from 2025. there are driving
factors you have health insurance
retirement
so that's I mean we don't really have
>> we get those numbers so the retirements
we get from the state so it's all
contracted too so for example uh you
know the uh police department recently
got 383 so that spiked up our FRMS
numbers for retirement
>> so there's different factors at play um
department what they could do to reduce
the budgets they did uh recently. Um you
did did have the police department that
um you look at some of the lower
deadlines are
>> say not legitimate.
>> Um but that's I guess have to decide
expanding on your comment though
contracts reside with the mayor and it's
a comment that I'm willing to make as
soon as he's present. So giving him the
discretion of not being at the meeting.
Um we're accountable to what was brought
from those discussions and time and time
again the statement is give me your
vision. These are conversations I'm
having respect the outcome. That's what
we're told. So we're here based on two
outcomes in part by police.
>> Absolutely. And I I'm glad you touched
that because they hear you talk about
the police um the over the time line is
it's low but that what was presented to
us the council did that even touch that
line or even I don't hear anybody
talking about that that line. So I want
to make that very clear about what's
here and what is listening
that that number was presented to us. So
if we're saying that it's low then it's
question should be directed at the mayor
and the uh the person who created that
budget from
>> we also know that line isn't accurate.
It's not right. It's what's presented to
us but we know the function. Again the
presentation is one thing but the actual
practice is different and that's why we
need to know like what the chances are.
So if I come in and say I have this line
for overtime and then and this is and
this is true for all departments is
which is why I wanted the information as where the transfers are going. What's
happening is we're saying in line A
>> we we're budgeted $100,000 in overtime.
Um and then in line and and then but the
actuality when the year closes out we
spent $150,000
in overtime and then we go well where
did the extra $50,000 come from? Oh it
came from line C and D from these two
positions in Connecticut.
>> So the thing is if we're not looking at
the real numbers we're not having a real
conversation. So
>> we will we and we will never get the
real number because regardless of if you
were to if that line came into us with
$2 million and anybody any department
exceed that line they will go to the
other lines and where they
>> right
>> left over money and they will take that
money
>> and and substitute for that line
>> and I think that's what we heard from
the department. Yeah, that's what I'm
saying. That's why that's why it's kind
of it's not a
>> we're not starting off from
packet too for council review back
for years for the whole year for 24 and
for
maybe not something
tonight. Um, but you need to take your
time and book it.
» I guess I guess I don't know. I mean,
that's budgeting, right? I mean,
whenever you at at our jobs when we
present a department budget to someone,
you know, you be realistic, you be
conservative, you ask hopefully for
stuff that, you know, maybe you're not
going to get, and you know that at the
end, I mean, I don't know all the
accounting terms, but I mean, at the end
of the day, if if my department budget
was $200,000, I can't even remember, but
And you know, in one line, I missed it
by 20 grand, but I went over another
line by 20 grand. My bottom line is
still going to be what I projected to be
in my budget.
>> That's exactly what we're trying to get
at.
>> No, I know. That's what I'm saying.
That's budget. I mean, that is just
budgeting. It is
>> It is It is budgeting. However,
everywhere.
>> Yeah. However, we make decisions based
on the priority of the line. In other
words, we make decisions saying like,
"Oh, well, overtime is super necessary
for these reasons, right? We might say
this other line C doesn't necessarily
have that same priority as overtime, for
example." So, when we put together the
budget based on the information that's
presented to us, that's how we're making
our decisions. So we so it is I
understand for saying it it evens out
but really if we know that that line C
is available with money in it then maybe
that line C money goes someplace else so
like so we can be we just have to have
the the real numbers in front of us to
make a better informed decision. That's
what I'm saying
>> but sometimes
>> but it does affect how we prioritize and
that does affect the bottom line. Most
of the time it's salary line and someone
will retire years after 6 months
available salary and benefits. So that
line and you know some you know in that
people you know not available in that
line in each department.
>> So that money there that 6 month 8 month
whatever that time line is will go
towards as a cushion towards those. So
there is no stop of service. So there
won't be there won't be a stop of
service provided by any department in
the city because that line is not
funded.
>> That's right.
>> We're still have to pay.
>> Exactly. Regardless, there is money
always in in every department to help
push it. So you so I think it would be
to have a more genuine conversation to
say this is our cushion budget. Don't
call it space rocket line C if that's
not what it is. That's what I'm saying.
>> I I I think if we want to then we give
but then we'd be like saying we're going
to have to give another million dollars
to the police overtime budget or we're
going to have to give another million
dollars to the fire department overtime
budget. But
>> but we're saying that anyway. But we're
saying that anyway with a wink and an
eye.
>> I know. But I mean we're trying to like stay within a
certain
>> That's that's the happy to do the real
number, but then you're going to have to
have a higher tax rate than 17
something%.
>> But I just we I think I think we're
going around in the same circle here.
>> Yeah. Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> Every department they have a budget,
>> right?
>> And they have many lines that they will
not utilize on 100% in any given budget
at any given year.
>> Well, that's why we're going
>> and that's why that's why they have in
every department they have cushion. So
if you come to me and say well I I
wanted a million dollar but I only
budgeted for $850
>> then you were asked to make a reduction
in your overall budget because because
of the the situation that is in front of
us. So
people need to understand it to live
within their means and to do what they
have and if you're shortfall there will
be lines that you can go after and
recoup some money and help you keep
floating and move on.
So I'm not I'm not even worried about
someone talking about well we have a
shortfall from line or two. I agree
>> at the end of the year it all evens out.
We don't
>> well it does happen.
>> So just just accident
>> No, I mean overall the overall
>> Miss Patrick, you mentioned that that
the budget came in at 20% across all
department.
>> No, no, I didn't say that. I I said that
that's what they were asked to do and
they were the goal.
>> Oh, that was the goal to so we didn't
reduce our the tax cap.
>> But that didn't happen.
» Okay. I want to clear that because that
>> we heard that. I mean as I mean I think
you started every department head
conversation with what the
>> increase or the decrease was um in your
general what was that called the general
overview of each department.
>> So so so let's wrap up this um this this
>> I couldn't go
>> this allowance this uncollect um
allowance for uncollected. We're going
to wait till tomorrow have the report.
But I think this is a global line for us
to look at seriously in terms of the
trend from 43.3 million to 49.3 million.
That is a $6 million difference. I have
it as follows for tomorrow.
» Any any other questions, Sam? We did
cover all of that. The only thing I
didn't was the um when will the to
contract be negotiated? I know the law
department has a copy to know when
everybody um
let me ask who has
>> so
yesterday we saw in revenue line
so our to uh day 1789 in revenue the
search charge doubled for towing search
charge and it doubled for the impound
time. So my question was you know
>> what why is that like what's happening
to justify that
>> um
mentioned prior went over the u armies
uh briefly um the chief indicated that
uh new to contract would have been
negotiated
and council
>> and so and this is projected based on
that
>> the new contract
>> new contract the possibility for a
contract to the cler
>> correct
>> so when but that's your back to your
question then when are they going to
know right that was your original
question
>> but we don't know that
>> so I'd say this is sincerely the same
conversation we had with least last year
I feel very comfortable with the
hypothetical when we'll have the
discussion when we'll deal
Yes.
Currently implemented in the city
trying to forecast a conversation that
will and may happen because contract
discussions go plainly and smoothly at
all times. Right.
>> That was sarcastic people.
>> Sorry. Again, I think going off of the
assurances that we've gotten before, I I
think at some point we need to call a
state. I I I think what does it say?
Fool me once. Shame on me or listening
to to historical precedents that we want
to highlight. Um I think historically
this council has been presented with
things are going to present the way that
they are. I'm confident this will
happen. what happens when those fall in
the bowl and then we fill it with
general fund balance. I'm saying at this
point we should not continue that. If we
do not have a contract in place, we
should not be anticipating something.
If those conversations happen at least
start at least not done. think that's
improved.
>> Okay, I have to that we're anticipating
that people that we're speaking to are
going to say, "Oh, yes, I don't mind
being by this." And what if they say no?
What do we do? And I think it's
interesting how we got to double
>> that would be a question for the chief.
>> Okay, that that's that's sign double
everything.
>> So that's the question we need the
answer to. So So I I guess what are you
recommending that we
um both you Mr. Farley and Mr. Williams
recommend that we not double the amount
in terms of revenue.
>> So I think the question is the the first
question is the question for the chief
to say like you know why why doubling it
instead of increasing it why increasing
it but double I think that that's a fair
question and then the second question
would be when do we anticipate these
contract negotiations to uh start take
place? sure if they are available
tomorrow
questions.
» Okay, go ahead please.
>> Do I remember something um that we had
maybe in
executive session or somewhere
different contracts or um for this
particular line?
I don't
>> companies were being
No.
>> Okay.
>> I don't remember talking about
» we did something.
>> Oh, yeah.
>> I don't think they have
>> that.
Well,
>> yeah, but that might have
>> like don't Yeah.
>> I mean, that's why when we when they get
here, we just ask and then we'll know
like how longive session.
>> Yeah. Just asking how we got here.
>> You're right. I remember now.
» So you got a hand.
>> Not about
me.
>> M you want you had some recommendation.
>> Yeah. So I really wanted to visit the L
1081.
Our increase was um
from 24 to
25 we had you know like 136,000 I
believe and then now we're going up
300,000. But um
my concern here is that we're
continually increasing taxes on
residents and then our our our pilots
are not really increasing at that low.
So um I currently we have 154 pilots in
the county. They're not all in the city,
but we do have them. And so how do we
and by the way 3 months ago I started
asking for information about the pilots
because I knew we were going to be here
and haven't gotten everything that I
need. So it's takes some time. I think
we really need to talk about how we
anticipate revenue from the pilots. Now
we may not be able to change things and
not in time to like change the revenue
in this budget. However, I also feel
that there still warrants the fund
balance quite frankly. And so my
calculation here is going into the fund
balance how we can replenish it. I say
that pilots is the place that we should
be looking in terms of that. So um I
don't know that we can I mean I'm
waiting for all the information about
the pilots to see what's dropped off and
if we can even be putting more revenue
in here. Hopefully I'll have that for
the end of this week. But if I if I
don't I'm really pushing for it if I
don't. But we should talk about as we
have to go not below 15% but we have to
go more into the fund balance in order
to fill the gaps in this budget that how
we then replenish the fund balance and
that for me is one of the areas that we
need to do that.
>> So Mr. Mary.
>> Yeah. As it currently stands, that would
involve a conversation with the
metroplex some
>> which I think could happen between now
and budget season and I don't know if we
discuss removing or including factors to
those discussions with the council like
removing the ability to enter these
agreements
or putting in place stipulations where
they have to inform the tax assessor the
initial stage of when these are
conceptualized.
Um or we can just pause it
indefinitely.
>> Well, I I I would say pause it because
we need development. We need people to
come in and open these business. But I
agree with you. We need to revisit it.
We need
>> not the conversation
uh pilots but no
responding.
>> I I we shouldn't suggest that because uh
it will affect investment. Yes, we yes,
every municipality they do have these
programs, but I think yes, we need to
revisit it. We need to get more
involved.
>> We need to know what's happening. We
don't need to wait until every budget
and then we're seeing the numbers and
seeing how many pilots are we having.
>> Like I said, I started asking this
question a few months ago, so I wasn't
down here. And so, um, I'm going to say
that
>> I don't know if we need to pause it, but
I understand that, you know, that's what
development is to welcome development to
our city. But the whole purpose when we
started was the pilots when there was a
time when we needed really a lot of
development but as the mayor currently
states where the envy of so many places.
So are we do we still need to do pilots
at the level that we're doing them is
really a question and and how much and are our pilots extending what the
recommended time frame is. So um yes
extremely involved in the decision maker
frankly on the pilots but that's the
entire city. So we do need to have more
involvement in how this is. Um and also
I'd like to see like this is the
recommendation and so this this number
came from the assessor's office as well.
>> This was it in conversation with uh
supervisor receipts. Uh I believe there
were six to between six and nine
additions to uh the pilots. That's why
this number increased by
>> it's it's I wrote it down when we had we
asked the question
presentations I wrote down 95 that's
what that number represents I mean it's
obviously an economic development tool
it's how it's going to be did get to the
thought um and it is a metroplex um
negotiation um you know I read the book
metroplex but um you know I If you want
to have Mr. Gillan came in, he did send
an email to you that listed all the
pilots and listed information about it.
But he would be the person that you
would need to have
>> in touch with him and and just he did
send that and corresponded
>> other county too. I mean, you'd have to
talk to the county and
>> well
that yes, we'd have to talk to the
county, but um are we really getting
what we should be getting in these
pilots? I think you have to, again, I'm
not the expert, but I mean, I think
talking to them, but I mean, I think
you'd have to balance. Do we want to
continue to try to bring new businesses
into town? Um, especially, you know, as
businesses leave, as businesses grow, as
businesses of outer pilot. Um, do we
want to keep having that economic
development happening or do we want to
pause it to use the word that I mean,
you know, you know what I'm saying? We
have to it all and it's all one big
puzzle, right? It's all how does how
does what how does our education system
come into play? How does our housing
market come into play? Um you know all
of it works together in terms of how we
bring um people and and businesses to
town. Um so it's it's it's a very large
>> I I think over the years and I think we
have this over time and time again on
this council here that um
>> we need to get more involved and I
appreciate uh Mr. William bringing us
back and for discussion here you know at
this time
>> miss poor you know so um we have talked
I can remember as long as on this
council here that um we need to get more
involved because we we don't know what's
happening
and to ask for report and we're not
getting it then that's that's a no no
for us. We should be
>> we should be having those those report
accessible to us at any given time and
there should be no reason why the
council shouldn't get those reports. So
we should follow up and make sure that
reports available and shared to the
council. But I think it's I don't think uh we want to stop
investment coming but I think we need to
get we need to get a more more better
understanding of what's happening and is
it the right numbers that they're given
to these business can we get more
>> the time I mean like look at 5 years ago
versus now we're very competitive now
>> yes we are
>> 5 years ago or 10 years ago when people
were saying okay come invest we'll give
you whatever you want
>> right Now we're hot bad for investment
now. So it's two different ball game
here. So I think we need to to find out
to make sure we're getting our fair
share in terms of this pilot and to
continue it make sure that the school
and the city and everybody in the county
is getting the the the right amount of
money
>> from this from these programs.
>> Messed up.
>> Excuse me. I just want to make
clarifying points about something that
you said that we weren't getting
reports. We did get there was a group
asked and we did get a report. However,
it did not contain the information that
I received. So, we did get a
>> Oh, I'm sorry. So I I just said can you
please uh you should reply to the email
and just kind of like let you know as
>> I already done that already done that
just but I just want to make sure that
everybody understands I did ask for
something and what I've got was not the
information I was seeking and so I asked
for additional information and right now
um the assessor's office is actually
putting something together as well. She
just said it's going to take a while
because um so just for for information
sake the contracts are negotiated and
then given to the assessor. So it's not
even like we may have some say in it.
It's all done tied with a ribbon and
deliberately.
>> So that needs to change and I'm not
>> um
>> well we a council we could discuss that
and and and try to get a better
understanding of what is our
responsibility. Do we have capacity to
do any change and to kind of reinforce
it and how do we get information prior
to as you said tying the revolver?
>> So, so the I guess the point I'm trying
to make I think we're heading down that
road is that it's not just about us
getting the information after the fact.
Um it's like where are where are the
checks and balances
to because right now we're here trying
to figure out how these things impact
the city. So the city so my question
again and I know it might sound like a
basic question but I think that
sometimes we get asked those basic
questions why why don't we have why
don't we have the ability to approve
pilots or or disapprove pilots? Why is
it structured like that? I'm sure
there's a lot of reasons why, but
>> I'm sure.
>> But again, a lot of times when we look
at things how they're done, it's like,
well, that's the way we did it for the
last 10 years. And now we're looking at
a very city, a very different city right
now that we did 10 years ago. So in
order to use that same formula that
we've been using 10 years ago, makes no
sense.
>> So that's what that's what I just said.
Or maybe they are
>> 5 10 years ago.
>> Maybe they're not. Well, maybe they're
not using the same formula, but they're
still using the same decision making
formula.
>> Correct.
>> Yeah.
>> That's not giving our perspectives.
» So, how do we change that? That's the
question. Any ideas?
>> I'm next. Sorry.
>> I I was next.
>> I didn't know if you were done though.
>> Yeah, I was saying any ideas how we
change it.
>> Go ahead. Well, I I guess my suggestion
would be that you know we invite Mr.
Gillan to come to a meeting and or and
or we also could find out. I don't know
if their meetings are open. I I think
they are. In other words, we could go to
their Metroplex board meeting or anybody
could
>> um and you know ask the questions of the
Metroplex board and um you know observe
it um the way you would anything that
any of us go to to try to learn more. Um
but those would be my two suggestions
that we invite folks here to talk to us
about that maybe a special meeting or
during a committee meeting I guess. um
and or we probably could be invited or
ask if we could attend a Metroplex Board
meeting and find out a little ask some
questions at those. So those you know go
to the source.
>> Um and then I think also you'd have to
probably ask Mr. Gardner to come in from
the county because he obviously has
quite a leadership role in this process
as well. Um so
>> well the Yeah, that's
>> Do you think that he I'm sorry. Do you
think that he has a
>> I'm not sure about negotiating those
contracts?
>> I don't know if he has a leadership role
in it, but I'm just saying
>> I was going to say I think we're we're
stepping here.
>> We need to find out we we need to find
out as the body here. What is our roles
and responsibility with regards to the
pilot and then we move forward because
we're not going to go fishing for
information from XYZ. What is our roles
and responsibility as a council and then
take it from there. Maybe we have we have some rules that
>> maybe we don't know about it.
>> I So yes and
sorry
uniform. Okay. Sorry.
>> So I think the the
additional question is not just defining
what are our roles and responsibilities
as they currently exist. I guess the
question is why are our roles
responsibilities the way they ought as
it currently exists? Because
and I don't think that you know
these agreements are made somehow.
Sometimes it's like oh there's state
legislation that says this and it's like
oh that's why it's done that way. And
sometimes it's like because
we were in a tough spot and we really
needed this help but now we're just two
or three people are deciding making
these big decisions and that's not a so
it's like not only what our
responsibility is viable. So maybe
that's even something corporation
council could start to look at and say
how do we decide that
>> and and I about to say this is something
that we should be if you're passionate
about it here we should bring it as an
item on the committee meeting and
cooperation council will kind of do some
research for us and you know kind of
like okay where do we stand in terms of
this because and just to add to that the
ID we we know that the ID uh city
council is responsible for um putting
members there. How much of us know that
we have the responsibility
>> to to recommend a member to that board?
>> But I think there's a limit but I just
you know I would like to really dive
that deep
>> because it's not relable.
>> We can't do anything about it right now.
>> So um there is an organizing document
and so I appreciate you saying that we
should have a corporation council but
I'm also always of the opinion that all
of us can do our own research. So there
is a document that um an organizing
document for metroplex I can share with
all of you so that we can read through
and then be more well informed as we
continue with this budget. go um and
make sure that we're getting everything
we need. But again, my it circles back
to me for how can we increase the amount
that we're getting in pilots so that
it's it's helping our budget because
essentially what is happening without
doing that is that our residents
are absorbing more of the cost for that
as opposed to the developers who are
we're all benefiting but who are getting
the initial benefit.
So I was going to highlight that in my
opinion why this bell that Miss Ferill
has been ringing for the past few months
is sounding louder now is because out of
the many functions that we have are most
vital to the city is the budget. So I
think leveraging the conversations that
we're required to have that force a
response
is part of the calculation that we all
have to make. Um so I think um putting
out a request of having Mr. Gillan here
and in the next few days before we are
required to have a determination
presented to the city and to the mayor
to review. Um I think that is what we
have at our mercy. Um because what I've
come to find is once removed from the
budget sometimes we are given second
consideration.
» That's not a bad idea. I think we can
move forward and not drop it because
many time we discuss it and sometimes we
I don't know pick it up and move
forward.
change up
management
affect
» any comments.
>> Oh, yeah. Sorry.
I I don't I mean what's done is done
moving forward definitely we should be
getting more more money off of a pilot
contractually whatever whoever does
these pilots if we want more and more at
the role of it moving forward I think we
should look into that but as far as
having our budget proceedings I I can't
see the sense of that that
earlier so let's film that's
We can't get more pilots than today.
>> Sorry.
>> Right. Just help me out here. So
>> I can't help you understand. You told me
what you're not understand.
» So Miss Porterfield, how much more money
do you think we could get from these
pilots for this year's budget?
>> So I'm not saying that we get it this
year. I'm not saying that. What I am
saying I am saying is that we I feel
like we're going to have to go into the
fund balance
>> and if we're going to have to do that
then um then we're going to need a way
to refund that. So this to me is one. So
the reason and also the reason I asked
for the pilot report is to see like
really um deeply and you know it's it's
too late now to change anything that
well I don't know what the reason
because it's conceivable that we are um
there are pilots that were are still
getting their pilot actually their pilot
agreement has um expired. So yes, it's very possible and you know I went
to a training um about this and the
other thing is that generally pilots
generally are 10 years and we so what
I'm looking for is how long our pilots
do we have any that have expired and
they're still getting their pilot and do
we automatically get that money but I
need the report to to fix to do that and
I guess conceivably we could if that's
the case put money in this budget I
don't know but that's where
>> case in this number can change
throughout the year based on
conversations that are had absent the
council. So that's truly the relevance
of having this now and I don't think it
is unrealistic to how I'm going to deal
with percent year
>> in the next few days
ascertain the how this budget line
functions because quite honestly if we
do not understand it how can you pass a
budget
>> without a clear understanding of how
each line functions
Patrick and then go ahead
>> um yeah I think that would be good to
have him come if we condemn um over the
next couple of days um and see if
there's and maybe I don't know if our
finance people know if there's
flexibility on that number or if that's
just a number given to us and even like
you know what I said earlier
I mean I think we do need to understand
you know who is involved in in you know
maybe I said maybe Mr. Gardner is I
don't know if that's for sure or not I'm
not I don't know you see what I'm saying
like so I think having Mr. Gillan come.
No. Exactly. Exactly. So, what I'm
saying is
>> I don't know and I don't know if I if
I'm accurate. So, I agree that having
someone come in like Mr. Gillan, right,
and kind of explain the process and
>> talk to us about it would be a good
thing.
>> Understanding the pilot and how it works
is going to be beneficial to all of us,
>> right? And that's how it's a starting
point for us to say what is our roles
and responsibility and what do we do
move forward into the next year or this
budget or into the next budget. How do
we move forward?
>> Yeah.
>> I'm sorry.
>> It's one of it's one of thing that we
over years we asked we will get the
report and that's all we getting and the
numbers.
So, and I think it's important that we
recognize that even though we're dealing
with the budget one year at a time, the
implications of our budget don't fall
within the calendar year.
>> That's right.
>> So,
>> we are here today based on prior
decisions and practices. So, I think
it's completely appropriate for us to be
talking about that having that
conversation now cuz there is a
possibility cuz you don't know what you
don't know. There might be a possibility
to where there is money that can enter
in. We can increase revenue in this
budget based on that conversation. But
at least we can talk we can look towards
our future forecast to say okay because
there will be another budget process
happening at this table a year from now
and our responsibility is really to
ensure the ensure the future. This
doesn't just happen in a in a silo for
this budget. So m to Mr. Williams
appointment but it's very yellow and
miss
>> as well as I'm sorry
>> no I just wanted to make sure we were
all on the same picture
>> so between um 24 23 and 24 the actual
the pilot the difference was $75,000 to
$600
>> and
>> which way
>> so we increased by that just by $75,000
>> so it I think you know just looking
around we've had a tremendous amount of
development within that time frame. So
$75,000
and then the next time
uh it was $130,000. So
>> this time from oh I'm sorry from 20 uh
well we don't know the actual yet that
was the adopted so we in anticipating
that we would get another 30. So I don't
have the actual and we don't have all
the dates. I mean we mentioned that the
other day
>> all the year dates should be
» right. So um which I have here. So I
that's why we need to be taking those
weren't those weren't significant in my
opinion. Those weren't significant
increases given the level of development
that we have.
So for what we need to do directly if
you can help us with this report here
can kind of reach out to metroplex uh
ask for a report we should also when we
ask for the report for the pilot we
should also ask for the last two or
three years in terms of the pilot how
many was added how many dropped off and
how many renewals
will shape the numbers in a in where we
are because we may look the number up or
down but we don't know if anybody got it
if any dropped off any added any
extension and how much will release for
the tax base for the full full assess uh
tax.
>> I think that report is would be helpful.
>> I Okay. I mean I've kind of I've asked
for that but we can and I can tell you
what the um response was but we can ask
again perhaps coming from the more
>> well that's why I ask you finance
commission also to ask for that report
>> in the last 3 years including 2025
>> total pilot
>> new pilot how many was dropped off and
how many hit the regular tax base
>> actually we're on we're already over
what we did anticipate in 2025.
>> Yeah,
>> we're at 105%.
>> But I do think it's worth noting because
individuals listening to this
conversation at the table and at the
room when certain comments are made
about being stuck in considerations, I
know we cannot put individuals on the
spot, but I only want to hear what those
responses had or have not been when
those requests were submitted.
» Yep. We we can get those report and we
can reach out to them.
Michelates.
» I would recommend both.
>> Okay.
>> We have tomorrow on Friday.
>> So you be reaching out on our behalf and
>> commission.
And you also have a report to
>> I was going to say I recommend the
council and myself
>> both.
>> Yes. Okay.
» Are you going to come back to your
report?
>> I'm going to I'm going to forward the
report that that that I have that's not
everything because there's as I said
there's 154 and I'll just forward the um
report that I have which is not so for
all of you that actually look at that
while he's asking for that. We did this
electronically too what you just
>> gave
Eric speak about management uh report
perfect
council members just four points I want
to make about this
>> one is that
fulfill the request that we have here
tonight I created it from scratch I did
not I created this document from scratch
so it was done in a very very peaceful
manner. So if you do see a typo, please
don't hold me. You know,
>> I'm impressed that you're able to do
that.
>> To um the 2024
expenses, if if you look at your 2026
uh proposed budget, it excludes every
single division line goes into the
department cost. So I added all those
manually also.
>> Oh jeez.
>> Three on this second page.
Um the percentages we see 80 and 5%
respectively
on the 24 to the 25 and the 25 to the
26. Uh the comparison lines again
faculty.
Those numbers are not representative
which will go into my fourth point which
is when you look at management and
you're not getting an accurate number.
For example,
if a
management position existed in 24 and
not in 26,
>> that is going to mess around with those
percentages. Moreover, if a management
leads the management and goes into a
union job where vice versa,
the only way to compare athletes to
athletes is to look at all positions
regardless if it's management or if it's
union. So the this total line should be
taking
sand.
We'll take the science.
» Gotcha.
>> So you can see just for example, you see
the parallel to the line. Uh you would
see in 24 and 25, but it did in 26. So
numbers percentages will be um a little
different uh based on the totals
total fills in each um budget year.
I try to keep it at so much and disturb
the mission of the mom's report and
digest.
Thank you.
» Any question regarding this report?
The numbers look high but we just have
to look at the fill the positions by
maybe 80,000 79,000 position and things
like that driving your numbers up. So if
you exclude those those positions it
will drive you towards the um
the increase
you want to continue. Oh, so the other
thing that I was looking at, um, there
were cannabis excise stats which went
down.
Um, as I stated yesterday, there are,
um, we have seven in the city
and what I have attempted to determine
is when
they came and Miss Michael did provide
me with
your mom's papers. um um a list of I was
trying to determine when they came on
when they came to the city.
>> And so she provided them with her first
30-day list of
when um
when they 30 days they're going to be on
board. So
» okay. So this list more like um more
like we have um there's one dispensary
that's been there since 23
and some of these dispensaries that
they're not even open yet. Um there's
one that's been there since 24. The
people's joint opening in the 24. So, I
was trying to see if there's money that
we haven't
accounted for or when they came on
board, but it looks like we only had one
new one open in 25. All of these have
been open since 23.
» I don't think they could have opened in
23 though. I think they may have said
they wanted to, but it took a while. So,
I I need I know.
>> Yeah, I we can't figure out the exact
date that they opened and that's what we
need to know. I went on the office of
cannabis management website. I asked for
call. So I'm trying to um find out if
they actually opened in the city so we
can better determine determine rather um
what how much money we could be getting
beyond um 700,000 down from private
people in order to get your cannabis
license. People could like submit their
paperwork and it could be a while before
they ever got it. The one at the harbor
for instance submitted their paperwork
for quite some quite some time ago.
There was all the stuff legal stuff tied
up and they only recently opened. So we
need to know exactly when they open so
we can have the benefit
how much money we need to get two
months.
>> That street open.
Yeah. They apply for their store
paperwork and that's all we have but
they provide. We apply here even on the
website. It doesn't take time to actual
date. So we need to know the actual
dates that he's open and then I think we
can have a better determination of what
possible revenue um the one I mentioned
harbor um harbor side drive it they they
sent their paperwork in 23 but they
didn't open in 23
those active dates I've asked the office
of cannabis management you know any
other way we can get those
open the businesses like with the
information residing
say the codes might not be answered
>> certificate you will still give you that
information will have all that
information
>> so we can I think and I'll have that for
you by tomorrow so if we look at what
people actually open I think we should
take a look at that line and see
>> as as a matter of fact the law
department would have that information
also they want to sign off from the
certificate codes will definitely we
could find information.
>> All right. You want the list of the um I
can give you a list of the um
>> Yeah.
>> of the Yep. I'll do that.
» Go ahead, please.
>> So, just to add to that discussion, just
so everybody's I mean, the year to date
is only 302477
and some cents. So,
>> that's okay. Thank you. Thank you for
that.
>> Yep. Yep. I should have taken that note.
>> So that's 3/4
» 302.
>> There's two orders there.
>> So it should be okay. So then we might
be on track.
>> Yes,
>> we will be on track. Okay.
>> Thank you. Sorry about that.
>> So no that was I think that was it for
my um
Thank you. Um my I had a question. No,
somebody already asked about the
franchises
>> and the manage licenses.
» I do have a a question about that
certificates revenue.
» I'm sorry.
I'm just going through the ones, but
it's not going to stop.
So, I don't need to bring it back again.
Um I do want to kind of question the 20
200 2 million 300,000 in Steve cameras
with only the anticipation that someone
how was this question really answered
that we talked about how do we
communicate that number?
» I can provide you what I was given from
the police department office. Um they
based it off from my knowledge they felt
like they received in two years and it
was over $6 million. Um, so they from
what they explained to me that they were
anticipating less than $3 million a year
and they felt comfortable 2.3. Uh, maybe
this be another point to bring up and
man staff
collection.
>> You could send us the analysis like you
said whatever they sent you.
>> Uh, I don't have an analysis on me.
>> No, I mean you can send it to us.
>> They Well, I think they have it. They
never provided me. just having a verbal
conversation.
>> Okay. So, could you request that for
them and then share it out with us
couple?
>> No.
>> Okay. So, I think that was that um all
the other questions points that I had
were covered by other council members.
So I um
I see anything instrument
>> since we're there. The bus patrol safety
fines. I mean we've seen it started in
2024
and in 25 we thought we hit 600 and then
we're dropping it in 2026. So we talked
about it yesterday in terms of being
compliant,
>> right? But um how much of that is you
know true. We still have people you know
passing these buses and
>> so we are lowering the number because of
the trend of what the actual is this
year.
>> Yes. Year to date. Um,
maybe
» we're basing numbers on year to dates
and from what we received in the
previous year.
» I think that explanation makes sense as
you enforce there is a level of
compliance and I think that was in
relying on bees as continuous
regenerating lines. That's naturally
want people to adhere. You have risk
enforcement versus the balance.
>> So definitely proceed with caution.
>> No pun intended.
>> All right. Question and then I go to
>> Well, just some a consideration. So, I I
know we it seems like we're based our
numbers based on what happened in
Auburn, but I also know that Albany
um has been in a lot of litigation
around being able to enforce tickets
given by the traffic.
Um, I don't know exactly that might be
more something for corporation council
to talk about, maybe research for us a
little bit, but I think that
I'm sure, you know, if we bring in
millions, it'll certainly offset our
legal cost, but I think it's just
something to consider because I know
that there's um
people have been successful in
challenging tickets based on how the
function of how they been getting. Mhm.
» Question. It's the total.
>> Yes. Thank you. I just
>> No, just one line here for um city clerk
birth and death certificates.
>> What number is that please?
>> Uh a 25458.
» So with the trend down um from actuals
23 to 24, we've increased by over
$30,000 projected for this year. um was
wondering,
you know, it's really no words in the
city of Skipony. I know you put in to
raise the death certificates, but um
took $15, but that hasn't
we didn't do that. So, we didn't
increase. Pardon me. We didn't increase
further death fees. Oh, I thought you
were putting in but then because of the
climate with record being people being
able to obtain their records um council
would not go forward and pass
legislation because it would have to be
a home,
>> right?
>> Okay. So, I I just wonder where how
you're projecting an extra $32,000
in certificate fees.
>> We're at 81120. So yeah, look at the
actual
>> Oh, the projected
>> the actual.
» So based on the actual that's kind of
forecast into the next year.
>> Okay.
>> So
>> I think
>> so that report is that report looking at
the 10,000 is September the end of
September.
>> October. Oh yeah. Yeah. Right. That's forgetting.
>> Yeah. Yeah.
So if we
>> we should reconsider.
>> I mean maybe make it a little higher.
But
>> Mr. Party
next year.
>> I mean I think that would be like a very
small increase if you wanted to change
it from 100 to 120 or something like
that. But and also
>> it's not a line that we can. It might
look like a small amount, but it helps
offset the cost in each department to
pay for you know sort of a potent.
>> Okay, Mr. T, anything else? No
suggestion?
>> No.
>> Any questions?
>> No, I got all my questions answered.
Well, this has been very informative,
but
>> yeah,
>> my initial questions got answered.
>> Thank you.
So what do we do in terms of adding
revenue, offsetting costs, reducing the proposed um
tax increase
and also look at the waste uh proposed
waste fee because uh whatever we do we
have to it has to be driven by
increased revenue
>> and offsetting cost.
Go ahead.
We have two more meetings planned and it
sounds like we have some just
presentations to receive. I think we put
a lot of um almost getting those
individuals in speak to those issues or
concerns we have. I think we end
tomorrow's meeting of talking about
numbers. I think we can go into our
final schedule meeting on Thursday with
the intent to have
>> Friday.
I did start last year on the project.
>> Mhm.
>> I mean the kind of running it is just a
customary
um understanding just to see what
numbers look like. I think I
go ahead.
>> Well, I think Okay. I mean, I don't know
if we're done for today.
>> No, no, we're not done.
>> To answer your question, I think, you
know, we still could talk about the fund
balance.
>> Yeah. I
>> well
we should because we whatever we do will
affect it
>> up or down and it's a matter of concern
right we talk about the fundamentals but
you know what uh yes we would like to
have 15 20 million in there but um in
those days
financially
um it was the old good old days now we
don't want to site to use for pushing
like this to help offset these increase.
But then we have to be cautious of how
much do we draw from the uh from that
fund
>> just going back on balance. Uh so for
this year um we're essentially using 50%
of with approximately 12 million. Um we
have the 5.4 4 plus the 700,000
incumbances from 24 to 25. Um so there's
6.1 of unassigned fund balance. We're
anticipating 2 million currently. So
that brings that to 4.1 approximately.
Then we have we're in negotiations with
the fire department and 1037. So
whatever's negotiated with the council
approves that'll come out of fund
balance.
» Now you mentioned the restricted
Mhm.
>> Um are there anything in the restriction
that we can take back like POS and
things like that? The ones those are
like locked in. Yeah. It's locked in gas
station 54
>> but you could reserve
>> reserve
sign.
>> Mhm.
>> Be signed is the 5.4es.
Um and then I need you to list them all
restricted. Um and then we have to have
those in place.
>> Yes.
>> So we provide that
>> the POS and everything.
>> Yeah, we do. Yeah. I just want a
clarification. So you know we say
discuss the fun.
So So there So what so what is the fund
balance that we can pull from? What's that number? It seems like you
just started to cut.
>> Yeah. So,
as of now, with input of the proposed
budget 2 million, we only have 4.1 to
play with. And again, if depending what
the fire is negotiated at, we're we're
in mediation currently.
And at 10:37 their contracts at the end
of 25, end of 2025, whatever they're
negotiated at, it's directly going to
affect our fund numbers.
>> We can't even give projection based on
prior things.
>> I guess we could
>> go ahead finish off. But for example, um
just say uh for the fire department um
just say they got a 3% increase probably
600,000 maybe more.
» Well, the fire department is smaller than the police. I'm talking
about the fire department. Fire
department.
>> So you're comparing the police number.
Okay. What about
you?
CS
>> not
give or take I don't maybe or million
but it really depends on the percentages
and
>> no at the end of the day it's presented
from a council council can say no these
increases
Um the other thing that I wanted to
bring up was about the capital budget
and I know when we talked about it um
it was like well it's not something
right now we have to bond later but I
think you mentioned at the table that as
we're making these decisions we
shouldn't just be making decision that
impact us right now and this year
because we're in this tight situation.
We don't know what next year is going to
bring or the year after that's going to
bring. So how much of the things that we
um are looking at the capital budget do
we really really have to do? Um I'm
looking at um the purchase of various
equipment trucks etc and see what did we
purchase last year and how many gas for
this year and can we buy one month less
and just kind of stretch this down the
road. So I think we should also be
looking at our capital projects and
» Mr. Williams brought it up on several
recommendations and the mayor said that
it doesn't affect his budget which is
correct
>> but it affect and I we mentioned this
yesterday it affect what's going to
happen in 2027 who's paying for it the
taxpayer and we have to you know make
recommendation and put that aside pay
for this
>> the whole thing is that and echo that
>> do we really need to make all these
purchase this year I mean 2026
>> purchases can yes can we push these off
into 2027 7 2028 can they use these uh
these these vehicle these mach
are question that you know we as a body
we have to come up with and say because
this this is millions of dollars here
that's going to be added on the back of
taxpayers to pay in 2027 and beyond
this point in time adding more is is
increasing the the burden that taxpayers
So let's be cautious of what we're
doing. I mean yes we did had a
conversation yesterday about it but um
whatever we take away here I have no
impact and what we're trying to do with
the tax
>> right
>> this is separate from overall budget.
>> Go ahead.
>> Was Mr. Did you have your hand up?
>> No. Oh okay. Um, yeah. I just also want
to say I I hear what you're saying, but
I also think we need to like think about
age of vehicles because we also, you
know, would have to do it next year. I
mean, on some of these things if they
break down, if they and it also affects
our services. So, if we're looking at
certain pieces of equipment, how does
how do they affect our our paving? How
do they affect our snow plowing? How do
they affect um, you know, services that
we try to provide to our residents um,
in terms of infrastructure needs? So I
hear what you're saying it doesn't this
year's general I mean this year's um
>> yeah it has no impact on on
>> but it will
>> on the cost recovery is going to be this
is more of a long-term recovery and tax
pay if we were to say okay let's let's
go buy all the equipment we're looking
at how are we going to pay for it in
2027
very same role say we have to increase
taxes so that we can pay for all these
now and this is what we talk about is
that every department the next year or
two has to go along with getting tight
started tightening the belt and started
to look at how can we do more with less.
I know that's that's a hard people don't
like to hear that term. How can we do
more with less? I do.
>> I think the time has come for us to do
that at this point in time is, you know,
we don't have to wait
>> because if we look at 4.1 million and if
you're looking at $600,000, $250,000
of anticipated cost to where and yes,
we're going to have we're looking at
maybe potentially using some of that
money towards offset increase to to keep
the tax below what is what is proposed.
that everything is on the table
>> and and I'll just start I'll just repeat
how we can look at what we put in the
budget last year for this. I'm not just
recommending they just do away with it,
but let's look at what we I have last
year's budget for. I wrote it all down
too.
>> Um what we asked for last year and can
we you know how much how much longer can
we go? Can we go another year or two?
Um, but I think we have to take a look
at those long-term impacts that on with
it to our taxes to our budget.
I know I don't think that this year, but
eventually if you put it off, it'll
catch up.
>> Yeah. Eventually, it's going to fall in
place because we're looking at I mean,
this is not going to be forever. Things
going to get better and the tax base is
expanding. people paying taxes and think
money will be available to spend in in
the future years and and then you know
we expand and buy more in terms
even even equipment apart from the
vehicle and the things that we need to
take care of the parts and things like
that but also look at um software
hardware
stuff do we really need to change all
those things this next year or can we
just you know do parking here and and
those things are those those are those
are hard questions
And we need them to kind of make a
determination of pushing off for a year
and release the 2027
back
and let us recoup more revenue.
>> Um in terms of the um IT stuff, I don't recommend this but the way that
things change so much and people have
opportunities to get into people's
personal information, all that. I would
not recommend that we like kind of old
school fraud at this point in time. So,
let me just make that clear in terms of
when I look at the capital. I'm not I'm
not suggesting that at all.
>> I agree.
>> There have been too many breaches, you
know, I get letters all the time like
this particular company that I'm with a
breach and maybe your information
>> where where do we have to learn about
pain?
>> Yeah. And that's
>> no no we have we have no we have no
software upgrade. The machine is all
being upgraded this year because we
allocated $60,000 last to this year
budget
>> and they're they're replacing all the
equipments and softwares and things like
that. So bring them to speed with in
terms of that and and prepare themselves
for that. I think you mentioned software
that's why I said
>> well I you know across you know but I
think an it here
>> so utilities and it is different I think
that this the smart node upgrade is it
>> it is but I think it was banan that
>> it's part of his IT
>> it's just not in his right I mean I
don't think it's in I think that
>> correct me but didn't we move stuff that
might have been in his budget before
into the department or was it the other
way. We took things that were in
department budgets and put it in his
budget.
>> Not stirring the software package that
we like civic plus that separated into
different departments. So now we
consolidated into a better track.
>> Gotcha.
>> Track.
>> So I'm recommending that um
that is not really a software. That is
like equipment outside.
>> I'm not talking about civic bus. Silence
from us and all that to make sure we
have that's what I had said.
>> Okay, go ahead.
>> I have a note from from
uh smart nodes must have to promote
safety. That's what he said.
>> What what line is um it can do you
remember 91?
>> Oh, thank you.
>> Not the capital. Not the capital. Not
the capital, but Oh,
>> it's not the capital. Oh, you talked
about the
>> That's what I was just
>> so I thought, but I thought I wanted to
actually look at his
>> within his budget
>> page 28.
>> Thank you.
» So, yeah, when we talked about that and
I have notes here that we um about
mobile device management, image filters.
>> I'm not talking about any of that,
>> right?
Oh,
>> I thought you meant that that's what you
don't want to change that line. Um,
>> I was only talking about things in the
capital budget. No, I
>> I do not.
>> Mr. Larry kind of mentioned it and then
I think it took us down the road that he
wasn't even talking about, but he said
software. I'm like, no,
>> no, no, no. Darling, there's no
software.
>> I think we're agreeing
>> in our um we allocated money last year
and they are spending that money and Mr.
Uh number one I mentioned that yes he's
going to he's going to utilize all the
funding and upgrade all the machine and
as the machine upgrade it comes with new
software
>> to kind of protect us from the cyber
security and those malicious attack.
>> Mhm.
» So we need to dive deeper. we need to
dive in terms of revenue where do we where do we pull this now
the other thing is do we go into
departments and and and look at the
departments each department and kind of
come up with some recommendation
I think that's that's our next step in
terms of looking at the department and
see um in terms of feature service do we
really need all those feature service
can we come back you know I'm making
suggestion I'm not
I'm was asking, are you doing that
tonight or do you want to do that for
like Thursday night? No, what's today?
Tuesday. So, we have tomorrow morning.
>> I I would like each of each of us to
come up with something. We're not not
because we say it we're going to do it,
but it's some type of recommendation,
something to talk about and say, let's
look to the department if um and say,
okay, we need a question. We need to
bring it back to the department head. I
guess we can do that to kind of like
clarify any information in terms of
>> do you really need it?
>> What what can we what can we do better
in terms of help to reduce your
expenditure in each department?
>> So we we'd want to keep going tonight, I
think, because we'd want to have them
back tomorrow night so that we can make
a final budget decision on Friday.
» Let me hear Mr. Park and then we'll be
able to come back. So I I guess I was
thinking that so based on like you know
the recommendations is it you know that
now I think I have some more information
that I can kind of make some
recommendations can I send them to you
to say this is what I'm recommending
this is what I'm I'm recommending and
you can produce like a bud a budget
impact summary based on what I'm
presenting to you and then and then we
can so by the time we get to the table
we have we have some real numbers in
front of us.
>> Yes, you can. We could call it like a
mock bud to say okay.
>> Yeah, just just like this. This is what
I'm thinking across different
departments that are about can you just
run a scenario budget impacts of
>> if I were to do this this what's going
to this is the impact it's going to if
you were to perceive it as
>> just number by now the conservative
>> I I think that what we've done before I I mean I hate to say this but we've
done it like right now we would we would
do that and then these guys would go
upstairs or go down the hall uh and they
would come back to us they would come
back to us. We would sit no but we would
sit here and wait and then they would
come back to us with Exactly what you're
saying. It would be it would be like
council budget. I mean it would be like
revised budget based on the discussion
that but I guess what I'm saying is for
timing purposes I would think. I hate to
say this but I think we have to do that
tonight if we want to
be able to make a final budget
recommendation on Friday
>> because we're not meeting Thursday.
Unless we meet Saturday.
>> I don't anticipate in front of any
department heads between now and our
final budget. I think it's I think that
would be unrealistic without even
hearing our schedules. I like the
conversations we've had about the
capital budget, the in-depth
conversations we had about the revenue.
>> I think the notes that we all took
during presentations, I think we have to
miss to Miss Patrick's point. I think
I've been kind of afraid we haven't
identified real numbers yet. I think in
years past we've at least tried to reach
a consensus in finance so that if there
or Mr. Group is not building 15 M
schedules um even though I imagine Mr.
Eric would cheerfully want to go back
and for doing that I appreciate the
swift response on that other request. Um
I think we need to start having those
tough discussions of where do we agree
on what's been presented and then that's
my previous point going into tomorrow
with some recommendations.
We haven't had any real discussions
about numbers or where do people stand
with which you can talk a lot about
things to get started going down on what
is realistically something the council
is willing to leave for
I'm at that place where I'm going to
send you what I what I'm thinking and
then you can help me understand the
impact what that would have on the
budget and then then I get back to the
table I can say a
So just on an idea, you're going to be
sending a list of all account codes
with imposed and the adjustment.
>> Certainly
>> I I'm not also going to do that, but I I did make some some direct points in
terms of the revenue
>> in terms of the uncollect.
>> I was think I made it, you know, bring
that up to about $2 million from 2.8.
the cannabis tax I I I still up I think
that needs to go up. I I I have notes
about $300,000,
you know, give or take. The fines for
the parking, I have a question mark on
that. I wanted to kind of talk to the PD
more about that because with what we
discussed last year into this year know
when we increase the fee and the
proposal before I can attach a number in
that but the the link um parking sorry
the fines for parking we have budgeted
right now like 10,000
with the approach that they're taking
let me take that back the approach that
they're taking I think it's it's it's
going to be it's a good create a good
pathway what they're doing. But how can
we look at the numbers based on the
email that we have at those six to 9,000
>> and if we can do the math on that I
think it's going to be far higher than
910,000
and anything else that factor into that.
The delinquent parking I think we need
to revisit that in terms of the outside
collection agency and we need to have a
more aggressive approach. I think that
should go up. I'm I'm suggesting that we
pop that by $230,000.
the home sale I am recommended that we
keep that level the last this year 4.5
increase of $1.5 million and the
mortgage tax I am based in my trend um
the way how I see the housing market is
connected that we should bring that
upward 1.5 million
>> that is my recommendation doesn't mean
that you're going to take it out
>> well I want I want I want
my colleagues that kind of like said,
"John, no. Uh, we shouldn't do market
tax 1.5. We should maybe 1.2."
>> But are we waiting to do that
conversation to tomorrow night or
>> we could we can we can look at line by
line based on
>> we can revisit the revenue because based
on what we do with the revenue and if
that's feasible
that that will give us a driving force
in the numbers that we had play with.
Okay.
>> So, I'd say based on that, I found
myself more in line with your uh uh
topics of discussion and with how you
were discussing items with revenue. Just
because we're seeing projections doesn't
mean that's how we're going to vote. I
think having that representation on
paper helps us understand it better. And
we
>> and have the city staff have that as a
reference into their discussions or
building up anformational packet. I
think that helps them guide how to
better us based on what they're seeing.
So I don't know if you would write that
down
>> and give back which is what you were
saying.
>> That's what I was saying.
>> I definitely given this to to the
commissioner this evening or yes. So
this number need that's why we need to
flush it out and kind of like let them
start to look at this and say let's come
back to it and say this is how it's
working. Oh the other thing I don't I
don't have a number is parking fine but
that's budgeting 910 and I think that's
that can go up a little bit more
in a million.
So let's have we need to have a I'm not
going to put a number to that until I
have a conversation with the uh the PE
and based on the email that we have and
the numbers swooping around.
>> Yeah. Can you tell me that you were when
we were before the meeting started and
we were just looking at the memo um can
you had kind of multiplied it out?
>> Yeah. If you look at the 6 to 9,000 by 7
by you know the days and weeks a month.
Maybe we should pick a number like 7,000
which is between
>> I I picked the lowest you can Oh, six.
Okay. I I I didn't go to the highest
number.
>> And then you want to even maybe be safe
and trend that down just a little bit.
>> That's exactly doesn't mean that I'm
going to say no it's 2.1 million.
>> So 5 * 4 * 52 was what you did. Okay.
So just but I wanted to talk to them for
some of that
>> because I can we can sit here and
multiply six by by seven by by 4 by 12
>> and they may not do it every single day.
>> That's exactly so I would not doing it
seven days a week. If it's treated that
it's worth it 5 days a week
at that number that will drive it
because if I looked at my number here
>> it's a treatment not even touching
>> well let's look at it I mean look it's
an estimate we have over the years
sometimes we have high estimate we fall
short but it's not at the end of the
world it's like okay it's a projected
I'm just being conservative too. Looking
at the trend here,
the the highest one I have here is the
home sales. what I'm looking at what we
have this year into next year and based
on the conversation last night in terms
of closure
the aggressiveness from the office the
corporation council office foreclosure I
think we can achieve that
because and the reason I'm saying that
because in the past it was like we are
lagging behind the foreclosure I have
complained many times why are we noting
why are we not selling these houses and
I was like, well, we don't have the
staff. We don't have the capacity.
But now that that is not the case,
they're fully staffed and they're able
to they have the resource to move
forward with this for closure on a
timely basis.
And that's how I'm driving my my
numbers.
So I would just suggest as a matter of
process that based on some of the
information that we got here tonight, I
feel like, you know, I I do want to sit
with a little bit of this, but I I say
that we send uh finance our plus and
minuses via email, give them an
opportunity to obviously code them out
for you, you know, and then then when we
reconvene
or even before then possibly, we have
those numbers as far as budget impact
goes and therefore I think that's a
great place to start a conversation when
we can kind of go through just I'm just
my suggestion as a matter of process I
think Mr. lawyers has already done some
of that. Um, we could just kind of
refine it based on what what information
that we have figured in that that's the
best way to move forward that I think
that you got a lot of suggestion.
Uh just the one point I want to touch on
in terms of the healthare costs
that you
are those are those numbers like conform
numbers that there's no flexibility up
or down.
>> So uh that's that's probably worst case
scenario that you're looking at. Uh
our internal numbers we're looking at
approximately for the general fund for
health um over 17 million. Um so
>> but that's worst case
>> what 17 million
>> for this year for around 17 million.
That's pretty much what we're estimating
that 19 million was proposals for 2026,
but we managers to reduce that by doing
different formula
to reduce that drastically about $2
million budget of $1,700 in the 2017.
So follow
based on the recommendation from the
consultant is it a consultant using well
consultant maybe consultant for the
healthcare and health insurance uh the
discussions with um proactiating
um we got that number down
we don't know I constantly strive cost
pharmacy spend medical everything is
some of it if they don't control
um the savings proactive
driving that savings
>> and if you're not if you're not doing um
if you're not utilizing proact and you
charge an additional
>> are you I think you're talking about
maintenance prescriptions go to the
pharmacy
» um you have to do the mail order you're
doing maintenance um same availability
of counterex. So there are individuals
that are locked in stuff
more retirees maybe they like the face
to face with the pharmacy
uh we're trying to get them to go intox
want to save them money and it saves us money.
>> Yeah, it's great programs.
uh uh historically uh we can feel and I
can speak on this healthcare online we
have seen I'm not saying we're doing
this for how many we have seen couple
years that when we hear you know many
years that that line
sometime
but I'm not you that's before your time
so that's what I'm saying what I'm
saying put that directly to you but we
have seen that remember a couple years
where we we reduce that line and we
still fall short of that, you know,
exceeding the the estimate uh a few
years.
>> Well, when I just want to make sure
in terms of the the the way that it's
been calculated for 2026, I mean, do we
already know? I mean, like, will MVP be
raising the rates? I mean, do we know
all those answers? Is there a risk that
it'll be higher than Well, I mean, you
said that 19 was actually what you
>> so
>> actually thought it would be, but you
put in for 17
>> for 25 budgeted um
national.
» Well, we're definitely going to oversee
that estimates and I think you saw the
consultants numbers and where they're
from. Um
but yes we have uh we've working hard to
reduce the um percentage increases for
each renewal. Um you know Delta Dental
MP um Medicare Advantage that's been
rough.
>> So we've actually reduced that greatly.
Um
>> they're originally coding
numbers just because the environment
we're in, but we got them down to uh
they originally 60% um got down to 15.
>> Wow.
>> Um and we actually were sort of sold
into
the other plans and everything was very,
you know, very high. So 15 was pretty
solid. It's a local company we're using.
So figured stick with them at this
point. Mhm.
I mean you also don't know you know
somebody could have a cat catastrophic
I mean there could be an illness or I
mean all sorts of things also
>> transition
>> hopefully you know your retirees but
>> transition between you know another
company so that process
>> and then we have to make sure that
>> everything that we're providing the
employees is the same exact
>> coverage.
>> Mhm.
>> Then whether they be higher premiums. Um but um for now they look
pretty comfortable. You said the
formulary adjusted.
>> Um
just uh it's a tough market.
>> Yeah.
» Mr. you have missing suggested removals.
Can you put that in in a summary with a
total cost and if you can send that off
to because that can also factor into
because as we increase the revenue we
reduce so it's kind of work
and you touched on some good
recommendation maybe we need to explore
it more and kind of getting consensus on
this thing and then you also had some u
some other stuff in your proposal later
so I'm going to submit
revenue but I'm going to go more into
department so I encourage everybody make
suggestions it's not harming anything
just making life easy for us and we
explored so if we need to ask more
question hard question we can reach out
to the mayor reach out to commissioner
reach out to the department head for
them to kind of clarify any you know to
help us with the decision that we plan
to make
» should we do that perhaps through
>> I encourage everybody
decision of tomorrow.
>> Mhm.
>> So when we we're now meeting we're
meeting tomorrow.
>> Tomorrow. So tomorrow morning you please
um submit it
>> recommendation.
>> Submit it tonight. Submit it tomorrow.
>> Please come to the table. Here are the scenario that we were to do this
and then if there if there's something
that u the commissioner and the may
reach out to the department for
clarification we can get that ahead of
time. So I encourage we need to take a
more high level approach now tomorrow
into Friday. We we need to kind of like
say okay here's my number here's my
suggestion put it in writing it
so we lessen the the kind of lengthy
discussion here while we're dealing with
numbers
>> right
>> and I encourage everyone yes myself
Williams
please
suggestion
is needed
So just um point of clarification are we
asking that excuse me for Mr. um
Mr. Gil to be on Wednesday tomorrow?
>> Well, I don't know if it is
availability,
>> right? So because otherwise
there's no daylight.
>> If he if he if he's available tomorrow
and can come in here for a quick get in
and out at 5:30.
>> All right. So yeah, I don't know makes
that happen. And so I will forward you
um
the wedding sent in terms of what's
going to expire and all that and then
we'll all have that. But again, I know
it may or may not be outstanding. But
just keep in mind that I'm trying to
>> look at what we can do differently and
better and get more income in terms of
our pilots move forward.
We have a game plan. We have homework to
do. It's like school week.
Yeah. So, yes, I'm I'm going to submit
mine and get my words in. I'm going to
copy everyone and you submit your stuff.
Please, if you don't mind copy us so we
all on the same
understanding in the same level and kind
of reviewing what what is being
submitted.
I'm going to go with Max and Sean and
I'll learn the certificate
and also I'll look at the past
properties and ones have foreclosed and
presented have been redeemed and then
the ones for the next year.
» Yes. So you'll get the opening dates
that we have better
>> for the camera. Yes.
>> Yeah. It's pretty.
» Anything else?
You owe us dinner.
>> No. Um,
>> we can go now. Oh,
>> all right. Anything anything before
finance motion to recess until tomorrow
5:30.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
>> All in favor?
>> I thank you.
send