[0:05] give you a really good reading.
[0:11] » Hey, how's that trailer been sitting in
front of your restaurant? The one that
[0:15] » day before yesterday,
>> the the whole chassis fell off of it.
[0:18] It's just sitting there. I guess he came
back and checked on it the other day.
[0:22] Think he's going to get it out of there.
>> Okay.
[0:23] » Yeah. It's kind of a weird It's a weird
story.
[0:26] » Yeah.
>> Yeah. I was
[0:28] » No, it fell off right there. I noticed
that tonight, yesterday he ran into his
[0:31] restroom and said, "Is everything okay?"
And he goes, "Not really." [laughter]
[0:36] » So,
[0:40] call the meeting order for Tuesday,
September 1st, 2026.
[0:45] The I'm sorry.
>> No, 2026. Oh.
[0:51] » Uh, as you see, Councilman U
Constanescu is not here tonight. So,
[0:59] we'll just go ahead and proceed with the
normal business. Uh, and do I have an
[1:04] approval of the agenda? A motion for the
approval of the agenda.
[1:09] » A motion to
>> do I have a second to approve the
[1:12] agenda?
>> I have a second.
[1:13] » Second.
>> All in favor say I.
[1:15] » I.
>> All post say nay. Passes. Next thing we
[1:19] move to is to the consent agenda. Uh,
for the matter of expediency, I won't go
[1:24] through every list like what I normally
do. Uh, since the council has viewed
[1:29] that, do I have a motion for approval on
a consent agenda?
[1:33] » Can I add just a couple?
>> Sure.
[1:35] » Um, for the marching festival for Baker,
that uh application was mailed in. I
[1:42] have emailed him for a map because uh
that's really important for PD and um
[1:48] public works and we I I can't get a hold
of them. So, it's pending that we get
[1:52] that map of what street they're wanting
closed off.
[1:55] » Okay. And then on number four, um,
everything's approved except for at this
[2:00] point we can't do a background check on
the applicants, uh, because the record
[2:04] management system is down. So, as soon
as that's done, we will go ahead and do
[2:08] the background check.
>> Very good. Thank you.
[2:12] Do I have a motion for a quick question?
So, does our approval of that is it
[2:18] going to be dependent on the street day?
>> It's pending.
[2:21] » What's pending? the map. I
>> understand, but we can't. Are we going
[2:26] to improve a pending? My question is we
approve a [clears throat] pending
[2:30] street. Can they pick a street that we
wouldn't want them?
[2:32] » Well, okay. So, they usually it is uh is
that
[2:35] » Dearborn? It's Dearborn.
>> Dear,
[2:37] » right?
>> Fremont. So, usually it's Fremont from
[2:40] the stadium down to Third Street. The
last year they wanted further and we
[2:46] denied that.
>> This is for the first home game.
[2:49] » No, this is for the marching band
festival.
[2:51] » Oh, okay. I'm sorry. I was thinking
something else.
[2:52] » No, no. Um, so as long as as long as
that's what they're requesting.
[2:57] » So why don't we just approve that?
>> Okay.
[3:00] » If we're not going to approve anything
else, if they requested it,
[3:04] » we just don't know what street that this
is very vague on what street they're
[3:08] wanting. [laughter]
>> I say we've approved what they did last
[3:10] year and if it doesn't work to come
back.
[3:14] » Fremont.
>> Be specific.
[3:15] » Fremont from the stadium to third.
>> And that's what we're approving. Okay.
[3:20] » That's feel bad. the amendment to the
consent agenda, her consent. Yeah. Or to
[3:25] the application. So,
>> all right. Everyone good with that? Do I
[3:30] have a a motion
to accept the consent agenda as
[3:34] modified?
>> I move that we accept the consent agenda
[3:40] with the modification that we have
conditionally approved for last year's
[3:45] map for the marching band festival. Um
and if it deviates, we'll have to come
[3:50] back.
>> Very good. Thank you.
[3:53] » Second it.
>> All in favor say I.
[3:56] » All oppose say nay. Passed. Now we move
to the public comment section where we
[4:02] allow members of our community public
and the comm public to come up and
[4:06] possibly make a comment. You can feel
free to approach the podium. If you do
[4:11] come up and comment, I ask you provide
your name and your address.
[4:15] » My name is Rebecca McMillan. 1102
Dearborn Street.
[4:20] Mayor and city council, after working on
the Save the Lake project since the
[4:26] night of November 5th, 2024,
I understand what a difficult job you
[4:31] have had trying to listen to so many
views that the people of Baldwin City
[4:36] have about everything. I also know that
the problems of not having the money to
[4:41] meet everyone's needs and dreams of our
community.
[4:44] It was a good experience for us as a
committee to work with city council Jay
[4:50] and
Julie and we learned so much that way.
[4:55] Our committee has worked hard at the
lake putting in hundreds of hours of
[4:59] actual labor. We have been reopening the
trails, repairing the signage,
[5:04] rebuilding the foot bridges, and
rediscovering the staircase built in the
[5:08] 1930s by the WPA. No one had seen it for
years.
[5:13] We tried to apply for grants. We were
not able to get a grant this spring from
[5:17] Douglas County without either the
Baldwin City's partial funding or
[5:20] matching funds of some kind. That's when
we started our donation fundraiser and
[5:26] now have a little over 15,000.
Committee member Kenny Nihoff has worked
[5:32] very hard and has officially been
awarded this grant to fix the spillway
[5:37] from the Kansas Department of Wildlife
and Parks. It's a CFAP grant and we met
[5:44] at the lake with the biologists last
Friday to talk about how this will
[5:48] happen.
And please, many city residents are
[5:52] behind us and we need Baldwin City to
put whatever they can into the Baldwin
[5:56] City Park budget to help us fix the
spillway. It is for the maintenance of
[6:01] their community lake. We need the city
to do their part. Mowing is excellent.
[6:07] They always do this and it looks
wonderful, but it will not repair the
[6:11] spillway.
That part should be under the
[6:14] maintenance of this city park. It is the
treasure of many acres of mature timber
[6:20] and grassland surrounding the lake. And
the disc golf course was originally put
[6:24] there in collabor collaboration with the
community development program which
[6:29] included Baker University. I just found
that out this week. It was kind of old
[6:32] news, but it was 2014 that they did that
in collaboration with them. The lake is
[6:38] a treasure for our f future generations.
It may be the one thing that stands out
[6:44] and makes our community more unique than
other small towns. Thank you for
[6:49] listening to me again and again and
again. Thank you.
[6:54] » Thank you, Beggy. Thank you, everyone.
>> Yes. Thanks, everyone. and
[6:57] [clears throat] Councilman Jay sitting
down there to go through the lead the
[7:02] committees and everything else. Jay
King, very good. Thank you. Do I have
[7:05] anyone else would care to make a
comment?
[7:09] I take that as a no. So the public
comment section for this uh uh
[7:13] opportunity is closed. Uh we move to E.
We really have no special reports or
[7:18] presentations. Uh we move to F which is
old business of which there is none. Now
[7:23] we move to G, new business. uh this is
the thing that we've been working for at
[7:28] least for me the last three to four
months in this uh budgetary issue. So
[7:34] I'm asking everyone please understand uh
everyone does a budget different. I have
[7:39] been through numerous budgets. Please
bear with me as we move through this. Uh
[7:44] so what I want to do is the first thing
on our new business is uh the hearing to
[7:49] exceed revenue neutral. Uh, and um,
since I have asked for that, I am going
[7:56] to open up the floor to the public to go
through and make any comments they feel
[8:01] like they might want to make.
[8:07] Seeing none, we'll move on. Move on
then, please. Uh, I am going to
[8:12] introduce resolution 2026
hyphen 10 hyphen exceeding revenue
[8:18] neutral. Uh and uh what I want to do is
I'm going to actually introduce that
[8:25] resolution and I'm going to open the
matter for the council for discussion at
[8:29] [clears throat] this time.
[8:37] Do I have any
>> I'm sorry, sir.
[8:41] » Yeah. Go ahead.
>> I just want to tell you the impact of
[8:45] adhering to the RNR would do to your
budget. um your proposed
[8:53] uh the mill we're proposing for this
year uh if you were to not go with that
[8:59] and go with RNR, it would be a negative
$286,000
[9:03] to your uh mostly to your general fund.
Uh if you were to go with RNR, it would
[9:08] be $323,000 less than what you adopted
last year and it would be $352,000
[9:14] less than what you adopted in 2025. Now,
those are based on current year
[9:18] valuation. So, it's not quite a true
apples to apples comparison. But when
[9:21] you take into account your valuation
versus the mill levies you applied in
[9:25] those particular years, that's the
impact it would have. It would virtually
[9:28] wipe out all of the general fund fund
balance that you've managed to build up
[9:32] over the last couple of years or that
we've managed to maintain anyway going
[9:35] into going into next year. So, I just
wanted to point that out. Thank you.
[9:40] » Very good. Thank you. And that was Matt
Wolf with Baker Tilly.
[9:46] Sorry,
>> Matt Long.
[9:49] » Matt Long. Matt Wolf. I called you a
different name. Matt Long. My apologies.
[9:54] » A long apology. Okay.
>> You got to do it back.
[9:57] » That's right. Come back up here and do
it again. Thank you. Uh, so no really
[10:02] discussion from the council.
>> Um, so yeah, there's discussion. Um, so
[10:07] exceeding revenue neutral, we were
exceeding by how much?
[10:12] is
>> you want to step back up to the podium
[10:15] please. Matt Long
>> L A WN
[10:19] » lawn lawn
>> like that dead thing in the front of
[10:21] your house right now if you don't have
mind.
[10:23] » Thank you.
>> Okay. Versus so as compared to what we
[10:26] are proposing this year which is still a
6 mil less than what you adopted last
[10:30] year. It is still a it would be a loss
of $286,000.
[10:35] » So the current proposal is is less of a
mill. It's it's a mil decrease as
[10:39] compared to last year
>> compared to what you adopted last year.
[10:42] It is a mill decrease. We adopted last
year with an error being made in that
[10:48] essentially [clears throat] we forgot to
inflate the uh dollar amount of what we
[10:54] adopted because we had to. So what ended
up happening is when you have an RNR or
[11:00] a u
not RNR um excuse me um NRP program like
[11:07] you do uh neighbor revitalization the
way it works is they pay their full
[11:11] amount of taxes and they get rebated a
certain portion. Well last year we did
[11:14] not include the amount of the rebate on
the revenue side. It was included on the
[11:18] expenditure side not the revenue side.
So the amount you levied we paid a
[11:22] refund on money that never got paid. So
that's why we're we're putting that back
[11:27] in this year. And so we're still getting
a
[11:30] it it still ends up being about 06 mil
decrease over what you adopted last year
[11:35] even though the actual amount that was
build to people was lower because we
[11:39] essentially they got they they got a
rebate for not taxes that didn't get
[11:43] paid
>> as it averaged out. That's what
[11:46] happened.
>> So this is to fix that error.
[11:48] » This is to fix that error. Correct.
>> We are not exceeding the the mill levy.
[11:52] » No. compared to last year.
>> Mill levy you adopted last year was I'm
[11:56] sorry. Give me one moment here. I've got
a uh
[12:01] I'm used to using a mouse, not a
um
[12:08] millia adopted last year total was
42.890.
[12:13] The mill levy we're requesting this year
is 42.269. So it's technically about a
[12:17] point just over a 6 uh reduction in
adopted mill levy versus this year
[12:23] versus last year.
Um most of that is
[12:28] uh I mean most of that change is coming
out of the general fund and it's it you
[12:32] know it's not nothing but it's we still
we as we've shown you we still think we
[12:36] can achieve a very close to
uh you know your 15% reserve target next
[12:43] year with this mill levy and other other
revenue coming in as well. But we think
[12:50] that you'll be able to achieve that with
the mill levy we've proposed.
[13:02] But the point of this exercise is to
show you how much I mean you you would
[13:06] wipe it out. You you would go negative
in general fund I I believe without if
[13:10] if you if you adopt the the RNR rate
which is 37.4. [clears throat and cough]
[13:27] questions. Just just a we we're using a
lot of acronyms. We're saying a lot of
[13:32] words. Uh just want to put it out there
real clearly that that the proposed
[13:36] budget your property taxes will not
increase. They will go slightly down
[13:41] » on the municipal side.
>> And I can't talk about other taxing
[13:44] agencies, but
Yeah. For the portion you pay to your
[13:47] city taxes that you were you would
requesting that we are staff is
[13:52] requesting that you adopt a budget that
is about 6 mills lower than what you
[13:56] adopted last year.
>> So let's restate that because the mills
[14:00] is only a part of what your tax bill is
made on. So the property tax went up 5%.
[14:06] Yeah. So even with Right. Right. Sorry.
>> So so be careful. I mean we get mill
[14:10] concerned confused with what you
actually
[14:12] » right right yeah
>> it's going up based on the assessed
[14:16] valuation going up
>> right but that's every year
[14:18] » the point is it's going up less than it
would have
[14:21] » correct
>> had we increase the mill levy
[14:23] » right so the point of the RNR is to is
to intentionally lower the amount of tax
[14:30] paid and received to the dollar amount
that was that was uh levied the prior
[14:37] year. So the whole point of this is just
the basically that what that shows is
[14:42] between 4.890 and 37.447 mills that is
the diff that's the impact that
[14:47] valuation increase had overall for the
city. Now, it's not going to hit not not
[14:51] everybody's house went up by that much,
but citywide the total valuation
[14:57] increased by
for about five and a half mills versus
[15:03] um
versus versus last year overall. Now, it
[15:08] doesn't mean it's like I said, doesn't
mean it's going to hit everybody, but
[15:10] yes, the tax calculation is rate times
base. So if your base went up because of
[15:14] uh because of appreciation and value,
then even a lower rate is you're going
[15:19] to pay more than you did the prior year.
>> Right,
[15:25] » Matt, when you're talking these totals,
I'm just looking at the summary page. Um
[15:31] uh you know, it's got the actual tax
rate from 26 with a total I mean the
[15:35] different general debt service libraries
in there. Um,
[15:43] and so it's got the totals down at the
bottom. So when you're Are you speaking
[15:47] of totals as far as
>> Yeah. So the the to the amount you
[15:52] actually adopted last year, and I can
produce the certificate if you want to
[15:54] look at it. The amount you actually
adopted last year was 42.890 mills
[15:57] total. That, like I said, because it did
not have the RNR rebate included in that
[16:02] that it it the county artificially
lowered it.
[16:04] » The amount of revenue you're receiving
>> got as to what is showing on the actual
[16:07] tax on the the actual that's what it
automatically brought it down to is that
[16:10] actual tax amount.
>> Um
[16:14] okay,
that's that was my question.
[16:17] » Yeah.
[16:23] » But be I'm not saying we're doing
anything wrong here, but um if you do
[16:27] have a motion or anybody wants to make a
motion to exceed the RNR, we still need
[16:33] to have budget hearing discussions in
the regular budget hearing. So Okay.
[16:38] Yeah, good point. We're probably getting
into that next hearing. [clears throat]
[16:41] This I think this resolution is just to
exceed
[16:46] » Yeah. Revenue.
>> Revenue neutral.
[16:50] The next one is by how much?
>> Right.
[16:58] » Right. Doesn't mean we have to.
>> So, okay.
[17:04] » When will that do we know when that
hearing is going to be?
[17:06] » Right. Right.
>> Oh. Oh. Oh, yeah. Okay. Yes.
[17:09] » I'm snatched.
>> Okay.
[17:11] » Was like I'm slightly confused, but now
it makes sense.
[17:14] » Okay. Thank you.
>> So, just so we're clear, a yes vote is
[17:17] to exceed revenue neutral and no vote
would be not to.
[17:21] » Yes.
[17:30] has everyone had an opportunity to go
through and kind of look at it and make
[17:33] a decision to go ahead and uh
>> just to be clear um
[17:39] because and I know I'm getting into the
weeds on it, but because of the the the
[17:43] library uh error that occurred that we
now have to there would be no way that
[17:47] we could go less than revenue neutral
because we have to have the pass through
[17:52] from them. I
>> mean, you could it just come out of the
[17:55] budget somewhere else,
>> but it's a pass through. I mean, it's it
[17:58] shouldn't come out of our budget at all,
>> but it was a shortfall,
[18:01] » right?
>> So, you either pay the shortfall back
[18:04] out of your budget or you you pass it
through with with higher mill rate.
[18:15] » We understand that.
But if you wanted to make them [snorts]
[18:20] whole, uh, yes, it would have to come
out of your budget. I mean, there's no
[18:24] there's no way to get around RNR because
of that. You still have the authority to
[18:28] set the levy. So, it's still
>> okay.
[18:29] » Up to you.
[18:41] » So, real quick with the library. So, the
library is good with what you presented
[18:45] in
working with Matt the resolution of the
[18:49] shortfall last year.
>> Yes. Okay.
[18:52] » Included in the budget that I
>> That's what I thought. Okay.
[18:56] » Okay. Just want to make sure.
[19:06] » That's all I had. No, they're kind of I
don't want to push everyone if they
[19:10] don't want to to kind of move this
along, but are we discussion complete?
[19:16] » If so, I'll move that we pass resolution
number 2026-10
[19:21] um to with the ability to exceed the
revenue neutral rate.
[19:26] » A second.
>> Okay, have a motion [clears throat] and
[19:29] a second. I will now call for a roll
call vote on resolution 2026 hyphen 10.
[19:35] I'll start to my left and move to my
right. Council Lordson,
[19:39] » yes.
>> Councilman Vendibal,
[19:42] » yes.
>> Council Lynch,
[19:44] » yes.
>> Council King,
[19:46] » no. Motion passed.
[19:51] Next thing we move to is resolution
2026,
[19:56] uh, the hearing for the budget,
the 2027 budget. And I will now open to
[20:03] the public for the hearing for the 27
budget. Again, this is an opportunity
[20:07] from anyone from the public to step up
and voice their concerns or maybe
[20:11] questions they might have. Much like our
previous open form, I asked if you
[20:15] approach the pro podium, you please
provide your name and address.
[20:27] » Yeah. My name is Jim Breitman. I live at
50510th Street. sitting through this,
[20:32] [sighs and gasps]
you mentioned that you were speaking a
[20:35] lot of acronyms. I had no idea who this
person is. I have no idea what was just
[20:39] said. It was just all code.
I don't know how you expect us to have
[20:45] any comments if we don't know what
you're talking about.
[20:51] I mean, could we make this a little bit
clearer? What's what's RNR?
[20:55] » Revenue neutral rate.
>> Okay.
[20:59] And if I understood correctly, there
were some monies that were collected
[21:04] that were rebated
last year and that's what caused some of
[21:09] the problems. Is that correct?
>> I
[21:14] Scott the library.
>> That's what that's what I'm saying. This
[21:17] is
>> you know and I I think you you bring up
[21:20] a valid point. Uh Matt Lawn, can I have
you address this gentleman's concerns?
[21:26] Yeah. So, I'll I'll just start with what
what revenue neutral rate is. Revenue
[21:29] neutral rate is a rate uh a tax rate
that if the council were to levy that it
[21:36] would not it would essentially it would
collect the same amount of the same
[21:40] dollar amount of tax as they collected
last year. So, let's assume for the
[21:43] prior year they collected $100
>> um and but they charged a 1% rate. Well,
[21:48] let's say they kept a 1% rate but the
value of the house went up to $105. So,
[21:53] they're going to collect $5. they would
collect $5 more just keeping the same
[21:56] flat rate. But because they
intentionally lowered the amount of
[22:01] their rate to offset the uh increase in
valuation would have generated.
[22:11] » Yeah. Well, okay. But okay. So,
>> podium.
[22:16] » So, NRP is a neighbor neighborhood
revitalization program. And what that
[22:20] means is that um qualifying properties
in that are eligible to get a rebate on
[22:27] a portion of their tax. Uh essentially
what the I'm I'm going to speak very
[22:32] broad terms here, but essentially any
improvements they make to their home
[22:35] that would have increased the value, uh
they get that portion of the value
[22:39] rebated in in the amount of tax they
paid. So let's say you know your your
[22:43] house is worth $100,000, but the work
you put into it doubles that value. you
[22:47] would only pay value and I'm using
extreme situation here that's not so
[22:51] basically what happened is uh normally
when you are going when when you're
[22:55] filling out the budget form you need to
anticipate the amount that you're going
[22:59] to rebate when you adopt the budget and
last year that the the amount that was
[23:03] going to be rebated was taken into
account for budget adoption but the
[23:07] amount that was uh they didn't we didn't
do the offset on the revenue side of
[23:11] that. So normally what you would do is
you would figure out what that amount
[23:14] that you're going to rebate is and you
would add that to the amount of tax
[23:18] you're going to levy so that you have
that much more that can be paid back
[23:21] when you pay those rebates rather than
not charge not having it included in the
[23:26] the levy in the first place. So that's
what happened. There's different kinds
[23:29] of these economic development programs
that are, you know, meant for homeowners
[23:33] to increase or to, you know, encourage
uh, you know, investment in their homes
[23:38] so they can, you know, get get more
value out of it, which, you know, on one
[23:41] side is going to generate more value for
the cities. But again, it's going to
[23:43] also, you know, the natural impact of,
you know, improving, uh, you know,
[23:48] neighborhoods and residents like that,
you know, helps, you know, beautify the
[23:53] the the city and helps, you know, spur
more development. So different ones work
[23:59] different ways. Like we were talking I
was we probably also heard us talking
[24:02] about the RHID which is a a rural
housing incentive district program which
[24:07] is through the state that is a similar
program in that you know you are um it
[24:14] it takes into account the increased
value of a home based on some kind of
[24:18] economic incentive or economic
development program. But the way that
[24:21] one works is that the before the city
gets notified of what their increase in
[24:26] valuation is, the increase in valuation
that would have applied to that property
[24:30] is automatically taken off first. So it
doesn't get calculated with taxes the
[24:34] same way that NRP does.
>> So what percentage of the property
[24:39] within that local density is taxing has
some sort of a rebate attached to it?
[24:43] And can the average person
>> there? It's it the way the program
[24:48] works. It it that's very specific on who
can who qualifies for it. It usually has
[24:52] to do I I'm not the right person to ask
about inter I'm not very
[24:56] » so so usually so I can answer some of
that questions is is usually a lot of
[25:00] times it's it's a it's a new
construction. If they built a new house
[25:04] that would automatically qualify. If
they, let's say you added on to your
[25:08] house and you increased your value 10%
or greater, then you could get it on
[25:14] that 10% or greater that it added value.
>> How's the person supposed to know this?
[25:21] » Well, um,
>> you fill out your building permit
[25:23] » when like as far as like building
permits
[25:26] » then
>> was that the contractors fill out the
[25:29] permits?
>> Not necessarily. A lot of times, I would
[25:32] say probably eight out of 10 people that
fill out permits here in town are are
[25:36] actually are homeowners from from from
my experience. Um there is there's some
[25:41] stuff on the website um you know that
used to be we used to do a lot of NRP
[25:47] but now it's really gone into RID where
it's the rural housing incentive
[25:51] district. It's
>> my concern is this. If you're giving
[25:56] rebates to the people that are building
the new $300,000 plus houses, where's
[26:02] the burden of that lost revenue falling?
It's falling on the people who are
[26:06] living in the older houses in town and
among many of us are on fixed incomes.
[26:20] And I'll also jump in with Russ here. If
you're building in the RID, if you're
[26:25] one of the developments that's a RID
project, you can't get the NRP.
[26:29] » Yeah. So, cuz because with RID, the RID,
like say for a subdivision, if they if
[26:33] they put in the subdivision, the RID, it
goes back to the developer. Um, which
[26:39] that helps cover the cost for, you know,
the infrastructure and, you know, for
[26:42] the roads, utilities, and those kinds of
things.
[26:50] » I'm new to town here. been here a couple
years. One of the main concerns I've
[26:54] heard over the years is the good old boy
network that was in place before where
[26:59] if you were connected, you could get
your house, you get these things built
[27:04] and you get a test.
>> Well, I you know, I think some of those
[27:09] things and the only thing I can address
about that is just the rumors, a lot of
[27:14] it. Uh I I
>> No, no, no. I understand I understand
[27:18] what you're saying because you know I've
been I've had people voice those rumors
[27:21] to me and say hey here you know you and
I discuss this uh and u you know I can
[27:27] assure you at least coming into this I I
can see nothing like that taking place
[27:33] now. We still have some programs out
here to encourage growth and try to
[27:38] attract building. And let me explain
why. Cuz like you, I'm like, how are we
[27:42] how are we going to benefit from this
when the builders are getting all the
[27:46] brakes and you and I, cuz I'm like you,
I'm not getting kind of red program or
[27:50] anything. I haven't made an improvement
on the house. But the goal is not for
[27:55] today. It's for 5 years down the road
when all this new construction starts
[28:00] paying those taxes, starts paying
utilities because we get that benefit
[28:04] while they're there. That's we're trying
to look forward down the road. Uh and
[28:10] and you know to answer your question
about well how's the person know this? I
[28:14] I understand uh believe me I really do
but sometimes that's one of those things
[28:18] you just kind of have to get out and
research see what's out there talk to a
[28:21] builder see what they say or you know
call city hall and go are there any
[28:26] programs that I can get a break on
trying to improve my house my windows or
[28:31] or whatever. And I know that's not going
to make you happy. You know what I'm
[28:34] saying? I'm just trying to explain a
little bit.
[28:36] » My point also is you're looking to the
future. If I'm looking at what looks to
[28:41] me to be
on mine roughly
[28:47] a 19.1% proposed tax, that's going to
double my property tax every 3.7 years.
[28:56] » What number are you reading?
>> Top there. It says the proposed tax
[29:00] exceeding the 2025 tax.
>> Is that county?
[29:06] » That's city.
body.
[29:15] » So they're not
>> you want to step up to nobody can hear.
[29:19] » Okay. So this is this this notice goes
out when you uh notify the county that
[29:24] you are going to exceed RNR. And what
they do is when they send out this
[29:27] notice, they put in the maximum amount
of that you allow yourself to adopt
[29:32] above RNR. you for you guys that was
um
[29:38] » yeah Baldwin's on the
>> at the top there. So for you guys that
[29:41] was 45.4 mills. The mills we're
proposing is 42
[29:46] uh 468 I believe. I I don't have my
>> Yeah, they just send out the most
[29:50] extreme scenario I guess. So again,
they're not they're not actually going
[29:55] to adopt that amount, but they let you
they they're required to uh you know,
[30:00] should they're required to notify the
county of something if they plan to go
[30:03] above
>> that automatic reduction in mills. So we
[30:06] they built in because it was it's it you
have to you have to report that by July
[30:10] 20th at the latest to the county. And so
because we were still working out what
[30:15] exactly the mill levy was going to need
to be to accomplish what they need to
[30:18] accomplish this year, we put in that
number to give them room to do it. And
[30:22] that's that's not an uncommon practice.
A lot of times with this uh the notice
[30:27] that was sent out again, I mean uh the
notice that Russ actually sent out this
[30:31] that they approved to send out for this
hearing actually included a higher mill
[30:36] levy also than what we're proposing they
adopt tonight.
[30:39] » Right. With that and with that
understanding, again, I'm assuming that
[30:43] the council is looking at this and and
considering when you're compounding
[30:47] these increases, how frequently that's
going to double because for the people
[30:51] who are on fixed incomes, that's an
important issue because the same thing's
[30:55] happening with insurance on the homes.
And I think what you're going to have
[30:57] happen is you're going to have the
potential here for
[31:02] not to be for retired people not be able
to stay here because they can't afford
[31:05] it.
>> Yeah.
[31:09] Well, you know, and the other thing I
can just tell you, and it might not seem
[31:13] like it,
and I'm sure to the public it doesn't,
[31:17] that they say, "Well, the council and
the mayor just sets up here and doesn't
[31:20] try to consider the average person
within this community and tax rates and
[31:25] things going up." But I can assure you,
and I'm sincere, every single one of
[31:28] these people up here really look at this
and try to do the best they can to keep
[31:34] everything where we can to make the city
manageable and livable. Uh, and I know
[31:40] doesn't matter to you, doesn't matter to
me, but I just talked to a friend up in
[31:44] Synica today who's been up there now for
5 years. She goes, "Can your council
[31:48] come up here? We've got hit twice again
on mill levies and are talking about
[31:51] doing another one." Uh, so it's and it's
always Yeah, that's the neighbor. But
[31:56] I'm just letting you know we really try
very hard. At least since I've been
[31:58] here, it's everyone's tried hard.
>> No, and I'm not going to dispute that
[32:02] you're not. I just wanted those concerns
and also I just wanted to
[32:06] » sitting in the audience. It just it felt
like a good old boy club because I
[32:10] didn't understand a thing.
>> That that's on me.
[32:13] » No, that's why that's I always try to
explain it a couple more times
[32:16] afterwards cuz I'm like nobody's unders
made a comment. I worked at state
[32:21] government and I'm I'm equally as
[clears throat] guilty of it when we
[32:23] would get
>> Yeah,
[32:24] » it's the acronyms, man. Yeah,
>> back and that's what I was asking.
[32:28] » No, I appreciate it. I I agree.
>> And thank Hey, thank you for stepping up
[32:32] and asking. It's very nice of you.
[32:37] » Oh, and to answer your first question,
I'm sorry. This is Matt Baker Tilly is
[32:41] the finance uh group that we uh they
advise uh the committee as well as the
[32:46] council on budget decisions. They
they're the ones who um externally
[32:50] manage our budget. And this is Matt
Lawn.
[32:52] » I wasn't sure if he was you're
accountant or exactly.
[32:56] » So I'm I'm a certified public finance
officer, meaning that I've gone through
[33:00] the training by the government finance
officer association. I was the finance
[33:03] director for the city of Goddard, west
of Witchah for 13 years. Uh joined Baker
[33:07] Tilly a couple years ago and I do
financial advising for municipalities.
[33:11] Oh, you're 13. Okay. Yeah.
[clears throat]
[33:14] » Thank you. Any
other questions on the hearing? Public
[33:20] hearing have an opportunity to come up
and say something.
[33:28] Hi there, Jeff Flory, 215 Highway 56.
>> [sighs and gasps]
[33:34] » I know you guys have a really tough job
and take this very serious, but looking
[33:40] over the figures here, I just have one
question
[33:45] on the
the totals. The 2026 was 18 million
[33:53] and we're jumping to 21.8 million for
proposed 2027.
[34:00] So, where is that 3.8 million increase
going? That would be my question.
[34:12] » So, Matt, you may help us here with
those totals.
[34:15] » That's right off of your page 18 out of
your information packet.
[34:20] » So, you know, this also shows electric
utility, water utility. So, so
[34:25] » you you're looking at the summer
expenditures. Yeah.
[34:31] Yeah. So this is uh this is actually um
yeah you you do have the more accurate
[34:37] one the the updated one based on the
actual mill levy. So the increase is
[34:42] this 21 number right here is not a
budget for expenditures. It's a budget
[34:46] for expenditure authority. What that
means is this is the amount that they
[34:50] are approving to that they give
themselves the opportunity to spend. But
[34:54] when we're developing these budgets, we
are also building in their reserve fund
[34:59] balance as a
uh [laughter]
[35:02] essentially they're they're budgeting
their fund balance as an expenditure. So
[35:06] if they wanted to, they could they could
spend down to zero dollars for the next
[35:12] year.
>> Didn't we do that last year too or a
[35:14] year before?
>> This is this is what they anticipate
[35:16] they will actually spend this year.
>> Yeah. This is what they actually spent
[35:20] last year and this is what they will
this is includes
[35:23] » so they only spent 17 million then last
year
[35:27] » right but again that is not a number
that they plan to spend that is the that
[35:31] is the legal authority of what they
could spend but the and the reason you
[35:36] do that is because if they did not uh
budget the that amount of fund balance
[35:42] in their budget it would automatically
reduce the amount they can levy. So
[35:47] » and Isn't that the whole purpose of a
budget? So you don't overspend.
[35:52] » Yes. And this is but like I said that's
that's what I said that's that's the
[35:57] limit on what they can spend.
>> Okay.
[35:59] » That includes that. So that is enough to
operate the city plus if they
[36:03] [clears throat] plus it includes the
amount of their
[36:06] » um essentially of their their cash that
they'll have at the end of the year
[36:10] going into next year. If they needed to
in an emergency situation they could
[36:13] spend up to that much. So it's all and
this is the way that every city and
[36:17] every county operates is the way the
state forms work. The whole per the
[36:22] purpose of the of the budget process is
a to give yourself the legal authority
[36:27] to spend but also the process is to
determine what your tax uh what the tax
[36:34] will be and so and just based on the way
the formulas work for the state form
[36:37] that's how they do it. So, it's not
actually a budget to go above the uh to
[36:44] spend an additional $3 million. That
includes a lot of carryover fund
[36:47] balance. For instance, if you look here
on the I'm going to bring this up so
[36:51] everybody can see it. If you look
>> I think one of the confusing parts are
[36:55] there.
>> There's no there's no easy way to
[36:57] explain this.
>> You're not looking at if you're looking
[36:59] at the state form.
>> They're mixing
[37:02] um sales tax and utility rate revenue
with the whole mill levy. So that's
[37:09] everything. So we've been talking mil
levy for the general fund and all a
[37:13] sudden this thing shows the max
authority on sales tax revenue expected
[37:18] and and and utilities which a separate
budget in this includes everything the
[37:23] city is legally allowed to spend for
over multiple funds and but and the way
[37:28] fund accounting works is that there's
different rules for each type of
[37:31] government operation. So the general
fund uh you know that's where your tax
[37:35] money is received and that's where it's
either spent for certain services like
[37:39] police, fire or it gets transferred out
to other services that use a certain
[37:43] amount of money. Uh debt service that is
where they make their debt payments from
[37:47] money that they're already obligated to
pay back that they levy a debt for that
[37:50] that gets paid from there. Uh the
library that is a pass through to where
[37:54] they levy on behalf of the library and
the library receives those funds for
[37:57] their operations. uh cemetery operates
similarly and then you've got all these
[38:02] utility funds farther down here like
water wastewater just guesstimates.
[38:08] » Yes.
>> So So every budget's a guesstimate.
[38:12] » Yeah.
>> We don't know to the dollar amount what
[38:14] they're going to spend.
>> Well that that was my question when you
[38:17] see that
>> 3.8 million.
[38:21] » But again I would I would I would
reiterate it's not it's not that they
[38:24] are going to spend that. It's that's the
uh essentially the bottom line of what
[38:28] the legal process for budgeting allows
them to uh legally spend if they had to.
[38:34] » Jeff did today answer your question for
the most part.
[38:40] Anyone else?
[38:44] » 27.
>> I'm sorry, Jeff. Did that answer your
[38:47] question? Okay. Thank you, sir. Uh, I
seeing no one else that wants to
[38:51] approach, I'm going to go ahead and
close the public hearing and ask that I
[38:56] go through and introduce resolution 2026
hip-h
[39:00] which authorized the city to approve the
2027 budget. Now turn over to council
[39:05] for discussion.
[39:09] So, I guess I'm interested in um
understanding, Councilman King, you
[39:16] know, where your suggestion would be to
um get back to revenue neutral in a
[39:23] budget.
>> Well, I just basically was thinking like
[39:29] I don't know what we're going to do with
mill levies, if you guys are going to if
[39:32] we're potentially raise them or not. And
I don't didn't want to do one or the
[39:37] other. So I
I voted no.
[39:45] » Okay. But you do realize
>> I do.
[39:47] » Revenue neutral would have been about
[clears throat] 5% y
[39:50] » less than what we've been talking about
in the budget.
[39:52] » Yep.
>> Okay. And at the when we uh voted
[39:58] two months ago to even exceed revenue
neutral, uh I kind of if if you go back
[40:04] and watch, I was pausing then and and I
uh and I I voted with you guys to say
[40:10] yes to exceed revenue neutral to have
the possibility of it. And it just I it
[40:16] didn't sit well with me. And so I'm just
correcting my vote from earlier this
[40:23] year. That's all.
>> Don't get me wrong, I would support a
[40:25] revenue neutral if we could find a way
to
[40:27] » I mean, you got to have a plan to do it.
>> Yep.
[40:31] » Um and I would be all over on board with
it. You know, that's why we went through
[40:34] that exercise and you saw how difficult
it was.
[40:36] » I know.
>> Um and I didn't since there was much
[40:39] appetite from anybody to do that level
of cuts, which is what it would require
[40:44] to get to this revenue revenue control.
So,
[40:47] » just wanted some clarification. Maybe
you had something that you were
[40:51] » No, I mean I I I mean I think I it you
know it goes back to me saying we could
[40:58] sell the building to maybe help with
that a little bit.
[41:00] » Yeah.
>> And still still valid
[41:02] » and we could next year but obviously I
don't want to do that while there's
[41:06] tenants in there.
>> So I get that part but um
[41:11] » yeah.
>> So do I want to would I want to cut 5%
[41:15] to what we you know when we did the
exercise? No. because there was things
[41:18] in there we need. But
um with the off with the off chance that
[41:24] we may increase mill levies cuz I mean I
haven't talked to anyone about the
[41:28] increases. I'm that that's why I voted
no. So I appreciate that. That's that
[41:34] that's that makes sense, you know, and I
guess the conversation needs to be what
[41:39] we're proposing is not a mill levy
increase in this budget. Correct.
[41:43] » Right. No mill levy increase. But even
though that's the plan, I mean if
[41:48] » and once we pass that
>> Well, I know I know once we pass it, but
[41:51] I'm saying if you three wanted to say,
"Hey, we let tonight Russ we want to do
[41:57] a mill levy increase,
>> right?"
[41:58] » Then
>> so I mean absolutely right.
[42:02] » I don't know cuz I I don't talk to you
guys about how we're voting.
[42:04] » No, no, I get it. So is that's why we're
having this discussion. if we if anybody
[42:09] supports a mill levy increase, we need
to have that conversation.
[42:12] » Yeah.
>> And understand why and maybe change some
[42:15] minds or not. But that's
>> that's really the conversation is you
[42:19] have good ideas like I didn't think
about that. Let's you know, jump on
[42:22] board. So
>> yeah,
[42:24] » I'm I'm not for raising the mill.
>> I do not want to raise the mill levy.
[42:29] » So you won't hear that recommendation
from me.
[42:32] » Okay. Well, I mean,
>> but now we're at the point we can talk
[42:35] about it. So
>> yeah,
[42:37] » and that's what kind of makes it tricky
is obviously we don't want to talk we
[42:40] can't talk about it behind closed doors,
>> right?
[42:42] » Cuz then that's colluding. But when it's
this is the only opportunity for us to
[42:46] all talk about it,
>> it you know that's what makes it pretty
[42:51] difficult
>> because we only have a short amount of
[42:54] time to talk rather than sit down and
you know really discuss it. So,
[43:04] so I guess the only other things I had
from last time we talked about budget
[43:08] that we're making some decisions were
left open around the chamber and the
[43:12] maple.
Correct, Russ? You had all of the cuts
[43:19] loaded in
>> all the cut all the budget.
[43:21] » Yeah, all the cuts are still loaded in
this budget. So, I know there's
[43:24] discussion around
splitting that up and reducing the cuts
[43:29] this year. What are your thoughts on
that?
[43:31] » I mean, the I guess my thought is is
that if if you do want to switch that
[43:35] up, then where are you going to take it
from?
[43:37] » It comes out of reserve.
>> So, it would have to potentially come
[43:40] out of reserve or you would have to cut
something that's already already in
[43:45] there. So,
>> well, you know, I I in my kind of again
[43:50] simplistic view and people go, "Yeah,
he's real simplistic and I understand it
[43:52] and I get that." But, you know, the way
I see this budget, we've kind of
[43:56] basically went through cut and rated
everything we could possibly do to get
[44:01] to the budget that we have and that if
we want to go through and start taking
[44:05] away and increasing, we're gonna have,
as Council Lord said, we're gonna have
[44:09] to do something somewhere else. We just
can't, you know, and I know again me
[44:14] come back being the doomsayer. I'm
telling you right now, Topeka is going
[44:18] to pass that 3% cap. I'm telling you,
it's there. They're going to do it this
[44:23] time. And I think we need to be prepared
because Jay, I was one of the ones to
[44:27] sit here and go, I want to go mail right
now because we need to be prepared not
[44:32] just for this year, but going into 2027,
2028, we need some momentum to carry us
[44:40] in. And it's uncomfortable, but it's
just I I think we're better prepared if
[44:46] we did that. But with the with the
budget we've come out with now, I go
[44:51] with what you all want. I I'm good with
it. Personally, I don't I'm like you
[44:56] all. I don't want to raise a mill, but
there's going to be some point we are
[44:59] going to have to. Our backs are going to
be against the wall.
[45:02] » I don't know that that's accurate. I I
We had such a strange year where
[45:06] assessed value was so down. That's why
we're in this math problem here. And I I
[45:11] just wonder if it's going to if it's
going to average out somewhere in the
[45:15] middle there and we won't have as as I
don't I don't know that it's as
[45:18] inevitable as we're thinking. And we
don't know exactly what if it's going to
[45:22] be a 3% cap or what until they go back
to the state house in January and do it.
[45:29] But
um I mean but even if Corey though if
[45:33] the property taxes next year come in at
a higher rate, we still wouldn't it
[45:38] doesn't matter because it would just be
3%. So, but but Scott, that is why I
[45:43] voted no because not that I knew the
mayor was going to say that he would
[45:47] like to do a mill, but just in case
someone
[45:51] » did suggest it,
>> you know that.
[45:54] » So,
>> it's got it.
[45:55] » It's 3%
ex in addition to your previous year's
[46:01] budget.
>> It's 3%. Um I think the growth doesn't
[46:05] count in that, right? So, if we add
property rooftops, million taxion
[46:14] » regardless of
>> no 30,000 30,000
[46:18] » the tax base.
>> It's not a percentage of the mill levy.
[46:20] It's a percentage of
>> the property tax but we can't couldn't
[46:24] also raise mills because we've already
done the 3% because the 3%'s always been
[46:28] on the property
>> percentage of the property tax.
[46:30] » It's both correct.
>> So it depends on what they decide it
[46:33] that I mean I I will tell you this. It
depends on what they what was proposed
[46:38] was a 3% cap
>> on revenue period
[46:47] » if you you know collect sales tax all
day whatever you have you get. But for
[46:52] specific for real real property tax if
you levy a million dollars last year you
[46:56] can only levy $1 million $30,000 this
year. Even if your value
[47:03] » number number of propert not even the
val you know just the number of
[47:06] » the property tax based on growth
>> the the one that that this year that
[47:11] » sustainable anybody that knows anything
>> that's why the governor vetoed it
[47:15] » like that doesn't work anybody
>> the legislature has been doing this for
[47:19] as long as I
>> I cannot they had the they had the tax
[47:22] lids they had the uh RNR they had you
know various ways to try to you know
[47:28] limit the amount that cities with their
home rules power to levy taxes. We're
[47:31] allowed to levy and so now they've it's
likely they will have the political
[47:36] power to get it passed next year.
>> Well, I sincerely hope Jay and everyone
[47:41] Cory can look at me and go, "See, I told
you so it didn't pass." And I'm sincere
[47:44] about that. I really am on that 3%. No,
it'd be great.
[47:47] » Agree with So, I agree that something's
coming because I mean, I've talked to
[47:50] people and
>> I get it. But,
[47:54] » yeah,
>> until we know what it is, I don't know
[47:56] how we can fight it
>> and do what's best. Yeah, I agree with
[48:00] that to
>> because what if you know say we you did
[48:04] want to raise the mill and then they
come back and then they don't it doesn't
[48:10] pass for some some reason or it's not at
3% he gets it to 5% or 6%. Well then
[48:18] that's more in line with
what our increase usually is. So, just
[48:25] to be clear, the way it the way it would
have worked had it passed this year is
[48:28] you would still be able to levy whatever
you want to. You just have to go to a
[48:31] vote if the dollar amount is going to be
above 3% more than the prior year. So,
[48:35] » yeah,
>> a vote
[48:37] » by the city the
holdition
[48:41] of 5% or something
>> um would
[48:44] » Yeah, it's a very low threshold for what
the petition would require for a vote.
[48:48] So, it's something like uh I want to say
it was like 5% of the average of the
[48:54] prior number of voters in the prior
election or some something similar to
[48:58] that.
>> You'd have to do that right before the
[49:00] primary so you don't spend every
community be spending 40 grand on an
[49:02] election.
>> And that's another thing that they
[49:04] that's
>> you have to move the schedule.
[49:05] » That's another one of the reasons it
failed was or the the governor vetoed at
[49:09] least with what she said was because
they didn't put that timing into
[49:12] account. It would not have worked this
year. It's important
[49:15] » and that's that's my big question with
it because you get your count the
[49:18] assessed valuation from the county say
mid June say
[49:21] » you have a month
>> so but to get stuff on the ballot you've
[49:25] got to have it 60 to 90 days ahead of
time so the primary election that would
[49:29] take place in August you wouldn't be
able to hit so right
[49:32] » you would have to hit the November
election
[49:35] » guessing that's by design
>> well and so so there's there's a whole
[49:39] bunch of
>> so does the county get capped in the
[49:42] school district and
>> well And so that's that's the other
[49:45] question.
>> Are we still doing a valuation? What's
[49:48] the point if it's just a cap?
>> Well, so the I don't think it was going
[49:51] to hit the whatever number of mills
schools are automatically allowed for
[49:55] » 20. Yeah.
>> 20 I think. Yeah.
[49:57] » Oh,
>> it would have applied to
[50:00] » would have applied to counties. It would
have applied to uh you know the other
[50:03] other taxing districts as well. So
>> let let me ask you this then going back
[50:07] to the question gentleman answered
earlier. boil this down to the public so
[50:11] they understand because really as Jay
said, we we're just kind of dealing in
[50:15] hypotheticals right now. We really are
just guessing uh and look and and
[50:20] talking back and forth as the budget
stands right now for the community,
[50:24] throwing acronyms out and stuff. What
are I mean, what are we looking at?
[50:27] » Let me let me put it this way. I think
most people can understand this. the
[50:31] when we talk about the need to increase
uh you know taxes we're talking about
[50:35] the need because we have increased costs
you know and we call that typically we
[50:39] call that inflation if it's just
everything you're doing year in year out
[50:42] is becoming more expensive is we call it
inflation the metric that we use for
[50:46] tracking inflation for our everyday
lives is a consumer price index we call
[50:50] it the CPI and it's basically it's the
average increase in cost of average
[50:55] household's goods and stuff that you and
I buy every day for uh municipal
[51:00] governments. We use something called the
municipal cost index and it tracks a
[51:03] different set of you know regularly used
items that governments use. It's more
[51:08] things in the line of gravel and other
you know materials for road improvements
[51:13] and you know parts that you will be
using and fuel you'll be using for your
[51:18] various operations like your electric
utility, your water and sewer utilities.
[51:21] That's the kind of those are the kinds
of things that it's tracking. Uh you
[51:25] know, a pretty good calcul a pretty good
estimate for what you're going to need
[51:30] to spend next year for especially when
it came to materials was always going to
[51:33] be well it's going to be about 3%
because that's what the municipal cost
[51:36] index told us it was going to be. That's
the amount that inflation is growing
[51:39] year to year is about 3% somewhere
between two and a half to three
[51:42] depending on how the economy is doing
whatever. Well, this year it's over
[51:45] almost 6% through August, which means
that if you are in an environment where
[51:51] you're going to see 6% growth in all
your costs every year and the county is
[51:54] only going to let you levy an additional
3% a year for general fund operations. I
[52:00] mean, not over it's not all of your
general fund operations. And you know,
[52:02] if sales tax is continuing to, you know,
grow, then great. But, you know, your
[52:08] mill levy essentially pays for your
police department is basically what it
[52:10] pays for. If you wanted to split out
what every cost within your general fund
[52:14] gets paid for the the mil what amount of
uh property tax you get basically pays
[52:19] for PD that's essentially what it pays
for. So you're going to see, you know,
[52:24] that's where you're going to feel the
biggest pinch is those type of general
[52:27] fund operations are going to have to
operate with less every year that
[52:30] they're going to have to delay
maintenance on vehicles and delay
[52:34] purchasing new vehicles and delay
maintenance on equipment and purchasing
[52:37] new equipment and other every everything
else that they do that they regularly
[52:40] spend money on. So
>> means lack of morale because you're not
[52:44] being able to compete with other police
departments for pay and benefits, etc.
[52:49] So thank you.
[53:04] other questions, concerns,
discussion.
[53:10] Being clear, we are not raising a mill.
We are not raising a mill. Just so
[53:15] everyone's clear about that.
We're not increasing a mill.
[53:20] We're taking what we have and trying to
work with what we got
[53:33] anyone
[sighs and gasps]
[53:35] this time. Now I might uh ask for a
[sighs]
[53:40] I'm going to introduce a resolution
202611
[53:43] which authorizes the city to approve the
budget. Matter's been open for
[53:47] discussion. Is there a motion to approve
resolution 2026-1
[53:52] 11
[53:58] » with no mill increases
>> with no mill increases.
[54:02] » It goes down a little bit.
>> That's coming.
[54:06] » I'm sorry. Sir,
>> could you could you please include the
[54:09] language in that motion to adopt a mill
levy not to exceed 42.268 mills?
[54:16] » Yeah. Okay. And I'm sorry, sir. Read it
to me again.
[54:19] » 40.
>> Okay. Thank you.
[54:21] » Mill levy not to exceed 40 exceed 42.268
mills.
[54:25] » All right. That's to include that the
mill levy not exceed 42.268
[54:30] mills. Yes. Correct. Thank you.
[54:36] » Yeah.
I'll make that motion to not raise the
[54:40] millivy
and adopt the budget.
[54:44] » And adopt the budget. Do I have a
second?
[54:47] » Second it.
>> All in favor say I.
[54:49] » I. It'll be roll call.
>> Oh, roll call.
[54:51] » Yeah. I'm sorry. You're right. Thank
you. I'm going to start with the right
[54:54] this time. Uh, Councilman King,
>> yes.
[54:58] » Councilman WZ,
>> yes.
[55:00] » Council Venimal,
>> yes.
[55:02] » Council Lordson,
>> yes.
[55:04] » Motion passed by roll call.
The 2026 hyphen 11 2027 budgets adopted.
[55:12] Now we'll go on to an easier thing.
That's a council appointment to
[55:15] interview board for open library
position.
[55:18] Who wants to do that?
>> So, just want to kind of give you an
[55:21] update. The uh one of the individuals
that we appointed earlier uh this year
[55:26] has has resigned from from the library
board. Um so, we need to interview again
[55:33] for to fill that position. So, we need
one of the members um from the council
[55:38] uh to set on that interview um
committee.
[55:44] volunteers.
I did it last time [laughter]
[55:49] and I'll I'll be more than happy to do
it again. I mean, it was it was it
[55:53] wasn't painful or anything. It was nice
to hear their stories. So, if if no one
[56:00] wants to do it, I'll do it. I mean, so
appreciate it.
[56:06] » Okay.
>> Getting good at it. Well, Councilman
[56:09] King, I guess you're it. [laughter]
Thank you for stepping up, sir. It's
[56:12] much appreciated.
>> Thanks, Jay.
[56:14] » Thanks, J.
>> Okay, now we're going to go to the
[56:17] council and committee reports, budget
and finance. Scott,
[56:21] » uh, yeah, let me pull up. Let's see
here.
[56:26] So, we went through the July year-to-
date financials with Baker Tilly. Um,
[56:31] just looked at, you know, utility wise,
where we're at, get an idea of where we
[56:38] expect to end the year.
in with the reserve and that's all based
[56:43] on how much of the utilities used etc.
So it's it's definitely a rough
[56:48] estimate. So we kind of got a happy
year's worth of view. Um you know and
[56:53] and just right now and we've talked
about this before. I mean the electric
[56:56] fund looks like it's in good shape
because of the changes we made
[56:59] previously. waters, you know, right
projected again, it's half a year away
[57:06] projected to get real close to fund
policy at reserve and then it's
[57:11] wastewater that's, you know, well behind
um policy on the reserve. So, um, when
[57:18] we go [clears throat] through the, uh,
when we go through the, um, budget for
[57:23] the utilities, we're going to have to
look hard at rates to try to figure out
[57:26] where we want to get the reserve back,
how quickly,
[57:30] you know, a three-year recovery, etc.
would kind of drive a projected rate
[57:35] increase over three years as opposed to
trying to get it all back in a year. So,
[57:39] those will be the conversations we'll
have
[57:42] um, as we go forward. But that was the
pretty much um took up the entire
[57:48] agenda.
[57:52] » Real quick on that cuz in sorry
>> do we need to meet
[57:55] » Go ahead.
>> We we I think the last when we were in
[57:59] that meeting we had talked about um if
you guys had done a smoke test
[58:04] » Oh yes, you did bring that up.
>> Yeah,
[58:05] » I think that was
>> for the waste water. Yeah, I mean they
[58:09] they have and they've identified
identified some some areas, but you
[58:13] know, at the end of the day, um you
know, it comes back to having some
[58:18] capital capital to do these projects.
>> Yeah,
[58:21] » it it's one thing we we're identifying
places, but we still got to fix them.
[58:25] And you know, this past week, we did a
repair inhouse for one of our major
[58:31] intersectors between Third and Fourth
Street, between Chapel and Dearbornne.
[58:35] Um there's a huge project that we did
actually in house where we only hired
[58:40] out a loader guy to to do the work. So
um that you know that saved the the city
[58:47] a vast amount of money to do that. It
took us a little bit longer than it
[58:51] would a normal crew hiring somebody out
but um you know they did a great job. Um
[58:56] they got that area fixed. um with that
intersector, you know, there's a a mass
[59:00] amount of flow from north of 56 and east
of uh Sixth Street flows all through
[59:08] that that intersector. So on its way to
the plant. So um it was it was in dire
[59:15] need that we had to had to address it.
So
[59:19] » Okay. Thank you. You're going to have a
meeting. You need one?
[59:24] » No.
>> Okay. No meeting. Okay. Thank you. Let
[59:26] me The next reg regularly scheduled one
would be two weeks from this Friday.
[59:34] » It would be the 11th.
>> It would be
[59:36] » no 18th.
>> Be the
[59:39] be the 18th.
Um I'm sorry. Yeah. Be 18th. Um at 9:00
[59:47] second floor city hall.
>> Thank you. Community development Corey.
[59:51] » Uh we did meet um didn't have any real
agenda items. just kind of had some
[59:54] general discussions about some of the uh
possible upcoming projects. Um
[1:00:01] um prior prior business. Um
we will be meeting the
[1:00:08] third Monday
of this month which is
[1:00:16] uh the 21st.
No, it's the 28th. 4:00 second floor
[1:00:23] city hall.
That's the fourth Monday.
[1:00:26] » Uh, no, Monday was the 31st.
>> No, but the 7th, 14th, 21st, 28th.
[1:00:31] » One, two. Yeah. No, it's 21st. We used
to meet. So, here's the deal. We used to
[1:00:37] meet on the fourth Monday and then there
were a couple uh of the fourth Mondays
[1:00:42] that fell on some holiday type thing.
And then when we kind of switched over
[1:00:45] the 21st so um or for the 3rd. So, I in
my calendar it still says 28th, but
[1:00:51] there's another one for the 21st. So, we
will stick with what we've been doing on
[1:00:54] the 21st, the 3rd Monday of September
at 4:00.
[1:01:00] » Thank you. Public safety Jay,
>> uh, we have not met and we are scheduled
[1:01:06] to meet September 24th at 9:00
in the second floor, city hall. Okay.
[1:01:12] » Did you get the email from the lady in
regards to the animal control?
[1:01:17] » Yeah.
>> Okay. Thank you.
[1:01:18] » Yep. It'll be on our said be your guys'
thing. will be what we talk.
[1:01:22] » Thank you, Jay.
>> Things we talk about.
[1:01:24] » Uh, let's see. Do you want to mention
anything about public works, Jay? Um,
[1:01:29] Julie, I can't remember. We haven't met
since the last meeting. Okay.
[1:01:33] » So, and she hasn't text me. She always
keeps me in line on that one when we're
[1:01:38] going.
>> So, so that meeting is going to be um
[1:01:41] Thursday, September 10th at public works
at 9:00 a.m.
[1:01:45] » Okay.
Thank you. Jay, do you have anything
[1:01:50] else you want to add or N?
>> Thanks.
[1:01:53] » Anything with strategic planning, Scott?
>> Nope.
[1:01:55] » Okay.
>> Jay, anything on the lake?
[1:01:58] » Uh, the lake committee will meet on
September 15th at 6:00 in the executive
[1:02:03] room here uh before our scheduled city
council meeting. So, got a lot of news
[1:02:10] to talk about and so it's actually good
news. So, we'll keep hammering away and
[1:02:18] hopefully at the after we meet it on the
15th, um I believe the plan is for uh
[1:02:24] the count the late committee to maybe
come that meeting and kind of give more
[1:02:30] details. So,
>> good. Thank you, sir.
[1:02:34] » Mhm.
>> City administrator, anything
[1:02:38] » legal?
>> Nope. Nothing. to the clerk.
[1:02:44] Council mayor comments.
Two quick things. Am Amra Packard's
[1:02:49] going to start joining us on the finance
committee here in a couple weeks to sit
[1:02:53] in with us to kind of get an idea. My
belief and the reason I'm doing that
[1:02:59] kind of gives a second in command kind
of redundancy in case Russ was kidnapped
[1:03:03] by a flying saucer on the west side of
town, never to be seen again. We can
[1:03:07] fall back on camera. She'll know what's
going on. Uh, I just think it's it's
[1:03:12] kind of good redundancy and leadership.
Uh, then my only other closing comments
[1:03:16] is real quickly, thanks to the fire
department for last week and being
[1:03:21] during the third Friday and spraying the
kids. That was a very nice
[1:03:27] communityoriented deal. I events
[1:03:37] like that. The kids were having a blast.
Fire department was got their test their
[1:03:41] equipment out. It was good. Thank you,
fire department. I appreciate it. And I
[1:03:45] want to thank each one of the council
members tonight for their hard work on
[1:03:48] this budget. Again, I know it was tough.
Uh setting up here is a lot different
[1:03:53] sometimes than sitting out there. And I
appreciate everyone's hard work and
[1:03:56] dedication. Thank you. Do I have a
motion to adjurnn?
[1:04:04] » Our jourer is not here. [laughter]
>> Our adjourer
[1:04:08] I move we adjourn. Second
>> second.
[1:04:11] » I'm sorry. Sure.
>> No. No question. Pencil.
[1:04:16] » No.
>> Well, can you do it after the meeting?
[1:04:21] » Can you do it I mean after the meeting?
Can we
[1:04:24] » probably want to hear it?
>> What's that?
[1:04:26] » Public comment time's over. Jerry, we're
getting ready to adjourn the meeting.
[1:04:31] » I'm out of I'm out of the box, so I
guess I can talk, right?
[1:04:34] » Second the motion. [laughter]
>> All right. Meeting adjourned.
[1:04:39] Man,
>> we didn't technically adjourn.