[0:00] - Centre Region Parks and Recreation manages 56 municipal

[0:04] and regional parks.

[0:05] These beautiful parks offer amenities such as sports fields,

[0:08] rentable, picnic, pavilions, playgrounds, bike

[0:11] and walking trails and recreation facilities.

[0:14] Take some time to find your park

[0:15] and spend some time outdoors.

[0:17] Visit crpr.org for a list of park locations and amenities

[0:23] - You are watching CNET Center County's Government

[0:26] and Educational Access Network.

[0:32] - Good morning and welcome all.

[0:34] We'll be called to order this September 17th, 2026 regular

[0:37] meeting in the Centre Region Council

[0:39] of Governments Finance Committee to order.

[0:42] We've already proven that Mr. Heller can hear and be heard.

[0:46] Outside of that, the other members are in the room.

[0:50] Open the floor for public comments on for anything,

[0:53] not on today's agenda, hearing or seeing none.

[0:58] Do any committee members

[1:00] or staff have any potential new agenda items?

[1:04] Hearing nor seeing none, we move the Consent Agenda, which

[1:08] for today consists simply of the August voucher reports

[1:12] and financial statements.

[1:14] Any questions? Corrections for those?

[1:16] If not, I would accept a motion to approve. Move.

[1:20] Move to approve. We have a motion? Do we have a second?

[1:22] Second. We have a second. Any further discussion?

[1:27] Call the question. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye.

[1:30] Aye. Aye. All those opposed the same sign. Motion carries.

[1:36] Update local and regional economic impacts.

[1:38] Anything for today, Mr. Direct?

[1:40] - The Fed just raised interest rates against the

[1:45] administration's request, which is not a great sign for

[1:50] the economy as a whole.

[1:53] Inflation continues to be a problem for us and drive costs.

[1:58] Electricity costs are still going up. Thankfully for us.

[2:00] We're in a contract for the next three years now,

[2:04] but we are also continuing

[2:08] to see rising fuel costs across the board, which

[2:13] for the most part will affect Sean's operation over in fire

[2:17] as diesel is incredibly expensive

[2:21] and some for Jim with parks maintenance.

[2:26] Those are the biggest things affecting us. Right.

[2:30] - Questions for the director? Okay,

[2:35] we'll continue to monitor that going forward.

[2:38] We are on to the 2027 COG operating budget proposals.

[2:44] Which are you taking the lead on this? I can start.

[2:47] Okay, awesome. Just an introduction. Thank you.

[2:49] - So the way

[2:50] that I wrote this out in the agenda was into three

[2:54] separate sections or conversations.

[2:57] The first one being if there are any residual comments

[3:01] or concerns that you have regarding the budget presentations

[3:04] that we've already seen, anything that you've seen

[3:08] that you just might want to discuss or for us to consider.

[3:11] The second part being probably the meat of this meeting,

[3:14] which is the strategic guide review

[3:17] and the items that you would like to include

[3:21] or strike both the Executive Director

[3:24] and the agency directors.

[3:25] We met this week, we compared notes

[3:28] and we've got a lot of feedback for you.

[3:32] We have justifications for the items

[3:34] that we feel are necessary.

[3:37] So looking forward to those conversations with you.

[3:40] And then the third piece would be

[3:43] introducing the fund balance policy replenishment.

[3:46] As we've discussed in the past

[3:48] where you had requested an analysis for a five year view

[3:52] of what that would look like.

[3:54] There are not all fund balances require

[3:57] attention at this time.

[3:59] So that's the good news.

[4:01] And then just how we address this going forward with our use

[4:06] of fund balance

[4:08] and our policy, which now has a minimum required reserve.

[4:14] So we can have that. What you have in front of you, I did

[4:17] as many printouts as possible just in case our technology

[4:20] gets a little fussy.

[4:22] But you have the sig e printout,

[4:25] you have the fund balance replenishment printout.

[4:28] I also gave you a copy of the guideline.

[4:30] We've talked about that and what that means really topically

[4:35] with regard to how some of these other things will change.

[4:38] And then finally, I also put down on the table for you, just

[4:42] for your reference, the table a standard percentages

[4:46] and the table a modified just for reference that is not open

[4:50] for discussion, but as we discuss how your shares may shift,

[4:54] I thought it would be useful for you to be able

[4:56] to put your finger on that.

[4:57] I know it's hard when you're sharing the screen to go back

[5:00] and forth between multiple views.

[5:02] So, so you've got the paper in front of you as needed.

[5:06] So the first, the first thing would be

[5:08] if there are any final discussions on previously presented

[5:13] budgets, the floor is open.

[5:15] And if there are none, if you are comfortable

[5:17] with the budget as it stands right now without any SIG Z,

[5:21] we can move into the Sig Z discussion.

[5:25] - Okay. How I think we're gonna attack this

[5:29] is we're gonna have pretty much as Kimberly's laid out,

[5:32] we'll have motions at each step to try to keep it separate.

[5:37] So we're gonna look at the as is budget

[5:40] and finance committee is being asked to endorse that.

[5:46] Am I? Yes. And forward that on to the executive committee.

[5:50] The SIG C staff is asking us to make yay nays.

[5:55] The whole way down through that will ultimately impact the,

[6:00] the final number as well as the fund balance policy.

[6:04] We'll go through that yay nay.

[6:07] And that will impact the final number.

[6:09] But let's start with

[6:10] what we've been presented to this point.

[6:15] - Yeah, I just, the comment I made to you earlier, I,

[6:18] I told Rich that I was thinking this morning,

[6:21] when we do the park budget every year,

[6:25] somebody from the authority ought to be here.

[6:27] You know, because,

[6:29] because here it is, you know, we beat up on, on Christie

[6:31] and the people and and, and then they've gotta go back

[6:34] and try to, you know, talk to those people.

[6:36] But I think we should have somebody from Parks Authority,

[6:38] either the chair, vice chair, whatever,

[6:40] sitting there hearing the same thing

[6:43] that Christie and them are hearing.

[6:44] Because I think that's where we seem

[6:46] to get a disconnect in, in that thing.

[6:49] And every year we, it gets more

[6:51] and more contentious every year.

[6:53] So I think somebody from the authority needs to sit here

[6:56] and hear what we're saying as the

[6:58] bankers, whatever you want to call it.

[7:00] So that's just a comment I think for going forward.

[7:03] I do believe that's something we need

[7:04] to do in next year's process.

[7:08] - Any comments on that? Did you have something on that?

[7:12] - No. Yes. Not on that, but something else.

[7:14] - Oh, for the only thing I would offer, I have for my

[7:17] after action that the authority also has to have their,

[7:21] it has to have a budget.

[7:22] Yeah. And have the visibility and transparency.

[7:25] It's an entity and it needs to have that.

[7:28] And we, with the transition, we didn't,

[7:32] we got less than last year actually on the

[7:35] authority budget and everything.

[7:36] So it should be a goal of ours to get that.

[7:40] If it's gonna be an existing entity, that it'd be treated,

[7:44] which is in in sync with the library district

[7:48] and CCMPO

[7:49] and you know, things that are part of another thing,

[7:51] but they're their own thing.

[7:54] And give it the respect that, the authority, the respect

[7:57] that it should earn as well. Other comments?

[8:02] - So my comment is on the process, just

[8:06] to understand it, we are first going to go through

[8:09] the budget

[8:12] or we are starting with the XI is my understanding.

[8:16] - First we're gonna talk about the status quo baseline

[8:19] budget, which is what was presented to us

[8:22] over the past three days.

[8:25] - Okay. - And we're gonna make sure we're in

[8:27] agreement with that.

[8:29] Then we're gonna go to the SIG C

[8:30] because if we have discrepancies,

[8:33] disagreements on the baseline budget,

[8:36] that may impact the discussions on SIG C.

[8:39] - Correct. And then we are going to go to fund balance

[8:42] - Conversation - Finally.

[8:43] Yes.

[8:45] - So, which I think is gonna be a very quick discussion

[8:48] after 10 plus years of work,

[8:51] I think this year's discussion is gonna be

[8:53] kind of short on that one.

[8:55] - So what I'm wondering is,

[8:58] even though the fund balance discussion is coming at the end

[9:01] as we are going through it, would you be able

[9:04] to provide us a snapshot of here's

[9:06] how the fund balances look right now

[9:08] after the budgets, here's how it looks after six.

[9:11] And by,

[9:13] by the time we decide six succeed's all, you know, finalized.

[9:16] And then we take a,

[9:18] and the reason I'm asking this is our approach

[9:20] to the fund balance might actually impact some

[9:24] of our other decisions of what we decide to fund or not.

[9:30] For example, in the fund balance discussion,

[9:32] there's a suggestion that hey, we have excess in, you know,

[9:36] we have more than the minimum fund balance in some

[9:39] of the funds, right?

[9:40] What are we going to do with that?

[9:42] Like there's this excess right now without six C

[9:46] and what are we going to do with that?

[9:47] And so I was a little bit unclear on are we going

[9:51] to apply the five year timeline to all the funds,

[9:55] even the ones where we have excess.

[9:57] Like are we only going to keep the one fifth portion

[10:01] of the minimum in all the funds

[10:03] and use all the rest to fund what we need?

[10:06] It can reduce municipal shares.

[10:08] Or are we,

[10:10] if there are funds in which we already have the minimum fund

[10:13] balance available this year, are we going

[10:16] to say we've achieved it now

[10:18] we only have to achieve the rest.

[10:19] Does that make sense? Like it's two different approaches.

[10:24] And so I know we are going to do that at the end,

[10:26] but I felt as I was looking at that, that might impact some

[10:31] of our decisions too.

[10:33] So I didn't know how we wanted to organize it.

[10:38] - Okay. - Does that make sense or

[10:40] - No, I understand where you're headed,

[10:42] but I don't think that we have the level of information

[10:45] that you're seeking to make those decisions.

[10:48] Right. The only thing if we get into the SIG e staff may

[10:54] indicate we could pay, we're con contemplating paying

[10:58] for this via a combination of municipal contributions

[11:02] or fund balance or all municipal contributions

[11:06] or anything along those lines.

[11:09] But it's not gonna change the status quo budget.

[11:14] But it may impact our thoughts on the SIG C if it's a

[11:18] onetime thing and we're using onetime money.

[11:22] - And so one question was,

[11:24] and again it depends on what sig e items we approve

[11:27] because it might be moot,

[11:28] we might have nothing left right in that bucket.

[11:30] We might say we have an XS in admin

[11:34] just just throwing that out.

[11:35] But we've approved the SIG e item, you know,

[11:38] and now we have none.

[11:40] But it could be that it reduces on, if we make the decision

[11:44] that every, every fund back fund is only going to be funded

[11:49] one fifth, we are not funding the whole thing.

[11:52] It might reduce municipal shares.

[11:55] - It might potentially, it, it might just a reminder

[11:58] that we're only dealing with unassigned.

[12:01] Yes. And that's a very small number. Yes.

[12:03] So I, I don't think it's,

[12:05] my personal take is it's not gonna move the needle enough

[12:09] for some of the discussions we're about to have.

[12:11] Okay. So that's, any other, any other alibis?

[12:16] I think Matt has Matt, please. Thank you.

[12:19] - Yeah, thank you for that. And my comment was

[12:22] actually initially around what Frank had stated

[12:24] and you know, having spoken folks on the Parks Authority

[12:27] and other places and know other elected officials,

[12:30] it seems like there is a, the need

[12:32] for a much larger conversation, not just in finance,

[12:35] but there's this acknowledgement

[12:36] or my words that Oh yeah,

[12:39] we know it's kind of the way it is.

[12:40] Municipalities make changes

[12:41] and it just kind of forces COG to do things differently.

[12:44] It costs more money. Yeah. We'll wait for a new process.

[12:48] And I really don't think that's the right answer

[12:50] or I should say, I think that points us to the right answer,

[12:53] which is we have to work on

[12:54] how these groups more collaborative,

[12:56] including finance work together so that we are not pulling

[13:00] parks in a thousand different directions,

[13:03] giving them whiplash and everything else,

[13:04] but really there to support right size and all of that.

[13:08] So whatever conversation needs to happen outside

[13:10] of just finance, I'm happy again to support.

[13:13] And I think we need to have that

[13:15] related to the fund balance.

[13:17] I was, you know, prepared to do kind of previously

[13:20] what we had done, or at least in my mind, kind of

[13:23] the approach we were gonna take, which is the,

[13:24] the slow increase.

[13:26] So I was prepared to go ahead and,

[13:29] and move forward with that when we

[13:30] do get to the conversation.

[13:32] Also, just a final note, I will have

[13:33] to hop off here at about nine 15 for an external meeting.

[13:37] I apologize about that. And, but Mr.

[13:39] Grady will be taking over and he and I have met

[13:43] and he is in full syn

[13:44] and will be carrying the voice of Ferguson for the time

[13:47] that I'm out of this meeting. Thank you.

[13:50] - Very good. Thank you. Any others?

[13:53] - Oh, I apologize Mr.

[13:56] And for everybody I will be looking off screen

[13:58] 'cause this is where my big monitor is, so that's

[14:00] what I'm looking at, not at the camera. So thank you.

[14:04] - You're bragging about having a big monitor, aren't you?

[14:06] Okay. I have one

[14:12] set of comments, or just to make us all aware, I brought

[14:15] to the Executive Director

[14:17] and finance director's attention this morning.

[14:20] So as a survivor of this process

[14:24] for a year or two, I have a couple tools that,

[14:29] that I've built over the years

[14:31] to help me digest this and everything.

[14:33] And one of them takes all the individual funds and,

[14:36] and takes all the data that has been presented

[14:39] to us over the past three days

[14:42] after I pull it from the presentations

[14:44] and put it into the analysis

[14:47] and everything and going through it.

[14:51] Incredible job to the dollar with the exception

[14:55] of two, two of our funds.

[14:59] And that would be Fire Operating and Fire Capital.

[15:03] If you look at the 2026 summary budget

[15:07] of municipal shares

[15:09] and compare it to

[15:10] what was presented over the past three days,

[15:13] there's a variance on those two items.

[15:16] What I believe, and I, the initial take it has to do with

[15:21] how the Penn State

[15:22] and Benner Township contributions are being treated.

[15:27] Previously, as we talked during Mr.

[15:30] Kaufman's presentation, there was some off out

[15:34] of the accounting software adjustments done,

[15:38] whereas this year we're moving to,

[15:41] you've got a revenue side, you've got an expense side and,

[15:44] and everything like that.

[15:46] So with that, it didn't, it captured it a little different

[15:52] in what was presented than what was in the summary budget.

[15:55] And it's about a, about a half million dollars

[15:58] I think is the, the number or whatever.

[16:02] So we need to be cognizant of that.

[16:04] And I think the, and I offer, what I did,

[16:07] the way I approached it was I pulled the municipal

[16:13] shares out of the comprehensive fund summary,

[16:19] and I believe Penn State is being included in

[16:21] those currently.

[16:23] And they are, that is not consistent with the rest

[16:27] of the budget in that Penn State's not a articles

[16:30] of agreement or a municipal share contributor to this.

[16:35] So we may want to look at that

[16:37] before we push the summary budget forward.

[16:39] Look at how the Penn State

[16:42] and Benner share contributions

[16:46] or miscellaneous revenue, whichever, you know,

[16:49] those are the two that really drew to my attention

[16:53] and everything so that we're cons,

[16:55] we're setting the stage for going forward.

[16:57] So we want to be consistent with that.

[16:59] I'd already brought forward Better Township is not a ice

[17:04] signature articles of agreement participant.

[17:07] So they're really a funding,

[17:08] they're a separate funding source versus municipal shares.

[17:14] So I just wanted to bring that to the attention

[17:17] because it impacted some analysis

[17:22] elsewhere for me and, and everything.

[17:26] And the Executive Director is hammering numbers right now

[17:30] to, to make sure I didn't make a, a mistake in,

[17:35] in working down through it.

[17:38] So that, that was my only thing on the,

[17:43] the presented budgets is

[17:47] that there's a little discrepancy in

[17:51] the previous year numbers and the current year numbers

[17:53] and how we're approaching those.

[18:03] And I don't know how that answer's gonna go,

[18:04] but any concerns, is the committee

[18:09] comfortable endorsing the status quo,

[18:14] baseline budget as it is currently?

[18:18] And this, we'll just do this straw poll, Mr. Heller

[18:22] - Oh, straw poll.

[18:23] I was just gonna say yes. And I would ask too,

[18:24] as we do this, if there are things that we need

[18:26] to be seeing, you know, remotely,

[18:28] if those items could be shared here,

[18:30] if we are pointing things out like discrepancies, et cetera.

[18:32] So I just wanted to circle back

[18:33] - On that too.

[18:34] Yeah, the, I was only able to provide, provide this,

[18:38] - You're in my hand, Matt, so I can't put

[18:42] that up on screen for you.

[18:44] But I, the, the basics of it show that

[18:49] in the, it, it is going to be the issue of

[18:53] where Penn State's

[18:55] and better townships, where our revenue from Penn State

[18:59] and better are located in the budget.

[19:02] Because right now they're showing up in a line

[19:05] that looks like municipal shares.

[19:08] So the shares total minus what we know

[19:14] as those contracted revenues

[19:18] equal out to the number that we have been using

[19:21] as municipal shares.

[19:24] So we're good. We're in a good spot. Good.

[19:27] Better we can show that better moving forward so

[19:31] that this does not become a point of confusion,

[19:33] but I'm comfortable with the numbers

[19:35] that I gave you all on Tuesday

[19:38] that those are reflected properly.

[19:40] - Great. Excellent. Excellent. Please,

[19:45] - I can just add to what the Executive Director just said,

[19:50] we can check the actual mapping

[19:54] of the Penn State number

[19:55] because it could be rolling up into the fiscal shares.

[19:58] It's, even though we're calling it contracted revenue, so

[20:01] that's the first thing that we'll do when we go back

[20:03] and address this right, is just make sure

[20:05] that clear gov is mapping this correctly

[20:07] and maybe not isolating it as it should.

[20:09] - Yeah. So that makes it appear there's 480,000

[20:14] extra municipal contributions in,

[20:18] in the way it was presented to us.

[20:21] So again, we're setting the stage for going forward

[20:25] and very happy to hear

[20:26] that the executive director's been able to confirm

[20:31] that we're still, all the numbers are good.

[20:33] I outside, again, outside of those numbers for

[20:37] such a transition to have all that come out

[20:41] that well was kudos, you know, well done.

[20:44] But when we move it forward, there's a potential

[20:49] of it to look a little funny.

[20:52] So we wanna make sure we get

[20:55] that. Okay. So directly

[20:58] - Answer your question from Pat

[20:59] and we're we'll support the baseline.

[21:01] - Okay. Thank you Harris. Harris,

[21:03] - I won't support anything until I see the final numbers.

[21:06] Okay. Because I get, it's about, it's about

[21:08] what my colleagues are gonna approve.

[21:10] - I gotcha. - Or, yeah,

[21:13] so I didn't understand the word indoors,

[21:15] but I have no questions as presented, so,

[21:18] okay. We are moving forward.

[21:20] - Okay. - I, yeah.

[21:25] Okay. The word endorse is a little questionable, but yes.

[21:29] I'm like, are we, are we okay going forward? Yes.

[21:32] Yes. Without question.

[21:34] - I I was gonna say at some point you're going

[21:36] to need to do that today.

[21:37] - Yes, yes. So once we see everything

[21:40] - Right, but this is before any of that other stuff.

[21:43] - Yeah, no questions. Okay. It's a good starting point.

[21:45] How about after we have three unanimous on

[21:47] - That? No, no.

[21:49] - Okay. I don't, I can keep my,

[21:51] are you gonna be the dis descending vote?

[21:52] - Sure. Just becau just outta the principal

[21:54] - Just because There you go.

[21:55] Yeah.

[21:57] - Okay. So Executive Director, the total

[22:02] increase in municipal shares for 2027

[22:07] represents what percentage?

[22:10] - That is approximately 6.15%.

[22:14] - Okay. And acknowledging that that varies, the impact to

[22:19] that varies by municipality based on the changes in the data

[22:23] points of the, the various formulas.

[22:27] - But just

[22:28] because there are new people, excuse me, in the room,

[22:32] that is a, a very rough estimate

[22:35] because what I'm trying to do to help as transparent

[22:39] as possible is take away Sean's big truck

[22:44] for this year, which is, you know, a million

[22:47] and a half dollar purchase in 26.

[22:51] So I am taking that off the top from these

[22:56] considerations so that you get a truer picture

[23:00] of a normal operation for the 26th year.

[23:04] If we looked at a true 26 to 27 budget comparison,

[23:10] this is a decrease.

[23:12] But it is your shares that I'm trying to get to

[23:15] and it shares themselves be 6.15.

[23:19] - Right. I have a question to that. Hold,

[23:22] - Hold on one sec please.

[23:24] So you're, when you talk about the firetruck,

[23:27] the firetruck wasn't paid for, was paid for last year,

[23:31] but it was contributed to for many years.

[23:34] - Yes. - So that doesn't

[23:36] - Move - The administrative share. Trying

[23:37] - To separate the conversation from the budget increase

[23:41] and the shares increase.

[23:42] Your shares increase is 6.15%. Yeah.

[23:46] The budget would essentially be a decrease.

[23:52] And if we take the firetruck out,

[23:54] then it is a very minimal increase overall.

[23:57] But your shares are going up because of use of upon balance.

[24:01] - And, and that's a great point.

[24:03] Again, another one for the

[24:05] after action, we need

[24:07] to do a better job telling the expenditure side

[24:12] of the budget, not just solely be focused on

[24:16] the municipal sheriff.

[24:17] It's the one that impacts us the most. I get it.

[24:19] But we have a duty fiduciary duty

[24:23] to all the numbers, whether it changes

[24:26] municipal shares or not.

[24:28] And so that's, and

[24:29] and there's a great story

[24:31] to tell if the expenditure budget is decreasing

[24:36] in particular the operating accounts as opposed

[24:39] to the capital accounts, that that's a good story

[24:42] that we should be telling because we

[24:44] get beat up all the time that cogs spending too much money

[24:47] and all this kind of stuff.

[24:49] So that's a story that,

[24:51] that the Executive Director is gonna

[24:52] be working towards telling.

[24:54] So your follow, yeah.

[24:56] - So I know that you did a little analysis in the Borough

[25:00] and we did see a decrease in the, in the budgets,

[25:04] but the operating part of it actually did increase, right.

[25:08] Because there are operating increases

[25:10] and so I, I think we got a 14.4% increase in operating

[25:14] and the decreases really coming from all the capital

[25:18] that we, we are, you know, making different choices.

[25:21] Am I right in understanding that?

[25:22] Because that's what our numbers are showing here,

[25:27] - Say 40% increase - In 14, 14, 14, 14, 14.

[25:30] Yeah. No, not 40. Sorry.

[25:32] Oh, that 14 in operating hard to, hard to justify, right?

[25:37] Yes. So I think there's an increase in operating,

[25:42] but there's been decisions made on the capital part.

[25:45] - Yeah. And with, with that increase to operating,

[25:50] another part that you have remember is that a new

[25:54] captain was brought online in the fire department.

[25:58] Those always get budgeted as six months for the first budget

[26:02] and then for a full year right after that.

[26:05] So a very large component

[26:07] of an operating increase gets tied into

[26:10] that full year operation of that, of a new person.

[26:13] - And I think the pools operating right,

[26:15] like the pool's contribution

[26:17] that we are making this year is a big change.

[26:20] Yes.

[26:22] - Yes. That is a big, okay,

[26:29] so we're starting at a baseline that we appear

[26:34] to agree with

[26:36] and now we're moving into the six C discussions.

[26:42] So how we're gonna tackle this one

[26:48] is, your guess is as good as mine, but we'll do our best.

[26:54] We'll just, Mr.

[26:57] Director, do you want to start at the, do you want someone

[27:00] to start at the top and mark down,

[27:03] or did you, did you have a kind of attack?

[27:06] - I, I wanted to add just a couple pieces of context

[27:10] before we move through

[27:12] and then as you move through, I will also state whether

[27:15] or not this is something that as a staff we are going

[27:19] to recommend that you pull completely.

[27:22] But there are two important pieces

[27:27] for the co building capital side.

[27:30] We currently

[27:31] have all my numbers here.

[27:38] I believe it was 47,000

[27:45] in funds that were listed as,

[27:53] it wasn't commit was it committed to?

[27:55] Assigned. Assigned. Sorry. They were listed as assigned.

[27:59] These are projects that we are no longer going to pursue.

[28:02] Okay. In the renovation

[28:06] of the admin suites, Eric had a number of wishes

[28:11] and plans that I am not following through with.

[28:14] And so we have saved some money there that is still in

[28:17] that assigned category.

[28:19] And so I would recommend that that 47,000,

[28:23] $47,467 be placed

[28:29] towards at least two of those COG building capital

[28:34] projects, which would essentially take care

[28:38] of the fire panel

[28:39] and the firewall with a little bit despair towards the

[28:44] sprinklers if needed.

[28:45] Order HPAC.

[28:47] The other piece is a decision to make

[28:52] for the whole group, but I will recommend this.

[28:55] We are about ready to move forward with the trailered

[29:01] bathrooms for Hess Field.

[29:03] We've been set up with GSA to be able

[29:08] to purchase off the federal contract agenda's,

[29:11] been doing work throughout the year in gathering prices from

[29:14] manufacturers around the country.

[29:16] And we believe that between the site improvements

[29:20] and the units themselves, we can do the project

[29:23] for about $300,000.

[29:25] Does that same right Jim?

[29:28] Approximately for the pad

[29:29] and the units that we need, that would leave us

[29:34] with $200,000 that had been set aside previously

[29:38] for these bathrooms that could be applied towards parks

[29:42] capital projects.

[29:44] Okay. From that, that again is a choice for you all to make,

[29:51] but is a suggestion that I would have as a way

[29:55] to help offset some of these costs.

[29:59] - So what's, what are you saying

[30:00] that what's the number 200, how

[30:03] - Much $200,000 is what we would have in assigned funds

[30:09] - That you can, that put towards some of the parks and

[30:12] - Offered put towards something else

[30:15] that there's a $500,000 pot assigned towards

[30:20] the bathrooms at Hess Field.

[30:22] If we move forward now with the trailer restrooms,

[30:26] we can put in pads, run the utilities

[30:30] and purchase the units that we need for approximately 300

[30:36] if we free up the other 200.

[30:38] Now that can go towards other parks capital projects.

[30:42] - And to also put that into perspective for 2027

[30:48] there, the, what was presented was a, a municipal share

[30:54] of $3,301.

[30:57] So it's, you know, it's, I'm just gonna offer

[31:01] that opportunities like that should look first at

[31:06] offsetting municipal shares

[31:09] and then be looked at for adding

[31:13] new stuff, just as a thought.

[31:16] - So the way I'm seeing these two opportunities are

[31:20] that an unassigned fund balance,

[31:23] I mean an assigned fund balance is kind

[31:24] of moving towards unassigned, right?

[31:26] We have this money available,

[31:28] but since the general forum has assigned these is they're a

[31:33] process to be followed.

[31:35] How do we move it to pay for one thing versus another thing?

[31:39] - You can assign that through the budget process. Okay.

[31:42] - Okay. The budget process is the process to,

[31:45] - Right.

[31:46] So that just, you know, I, I have a table here of the amount

[31:49] of unassigned fund balance that exists in admin

[31:52] and, you know, what's the minimum and all that.

[31:54] So right now, for example, I'm, I am looking at this as

[31:59] whatever amount I had plus 47,000 is now kind of unassigned

[32:05] fund balance in admin

[32:07] and whatever we had in regional parks plus 200,000

[32:12] from Hess is now unassigned in a sense.

[32:15] Yes. Thank you.

[32:18] - Could could be if you choose that.

[32:20] - Yes. I'm just thinking of it as this is kind

[32:23] of available, it's flexible.

[32:26] We can assign it to some Yeah. Not to fund balance.

[32:30] - Well, to a degree, yeah,

[32:32] because the, the, the construction

[32:35] of various fund balances.

[32:38] Some everybody's in, some are only in Yes.

[32:40] All that kind of stuff Makes sense. So you have

[32:41] to be careful about makes sense

[32:43] where you are using somebody else's money. Good

[32:45] - Point.

[32:46] Okay. Yes. I have a question.

[32:48] I do believe that when we put that money aside,

[32:51] it was 600,000.

[32:52] This is several years ago for permanent bathroom.

[32:55] It has to be. So where is this 500,000 coming from?

[33:00] - So I, I'm working off of memory this,

[33:03] - It was 600,000 in there for per

[33:05] - That there was lighting, there was a, there are two pieces

[33:08] to the Hess component.

[33:09] There's a lighting component

[33:10] and then there are the bathrooms.

[33:12] Right. And it comes to about 1.1 million, I believe the, so,

[33:15] - So what my question is that 500 is not the

[33:17] 600 that was put away.

[33:19] - Correct. Two - Separate. Okay.

[33:20] That's, that's my question. Okay.

[33:23] - Plus, so we're - Right in the ballpark about

[33:25] 500,000 for the bathrooms.

[33:27] Yes. Just for clarification,

[33:29] - I, I am comfortable with least saying we could

[33:33] move $200,000 to the unassigned

[33:36] - And, and I would offer that, that this is intended

[33:39] as an interim step.

[33:42] We still are gonna need money

[33:43] to get towards the permanent step.

[33:45] And so I'm very comfortable with you taking,

[33:47] potentially taking less to continue

[33:50] to move that all forward.

[33:52] - But, and, and just for FYI,

[33:56] when we did our, the new

[34:01] - Capital - Improvement cap, no, the planning

[34:05] and we did the planning model, which we met the other night,

[34:08] the two areas we identified as future

[34:13] sewer facilities with Shingle town

[34:14] because of the nature of that community.

[34:17] And so I will tell you going forward, it will be easy

[34:22] for Harris to support that if we ever do put sewer down

[34:25] - There.

[34:26] Good, good.

[34:29] That question Mr. Haller?

[34:33] - Yes. Thank you for that. To the earlier point here,

[34:36] I would be a fan of, of course of using that 47,000 for the,

[34:39] the COD building area as well as the 200,000

[34:43] to Rich your point, the idea of, you know,

[34:46] offsetting the municipal shares first

[34:48] and then looking at other things.

[34:50] I appreciate that anytime that we've, you know,

[34:53] approved money or that the cos received money from the

[34:55] municipalities, I don't want

[34:57] to see it sitting there just essentially wasting away.

[35:00] And I think this is a good way of going ahead

[35:01] and saying, Hey, we can use that to offset some of this now.

[35:04] So I appreciate that would be in support of it.

[35:07] And I will drop off here in about a

[35:09] minute or so. So thank you.

[35:10] - Great. Just similar as I offered for Parks capital

[35:15] for building capital, there is no ask

[35:17] for municipal shares in 27,

[35:20] so there's no offset available there.

[35:26] Okay. So is that the only use of

[35:32] or adjustment to fund balance? We

[35:35] - Do not have a lot of spare fund balance

[35:38] to use on, on these things.

[35:40] So those, those are the two areas I wanted to cover first.

[35:42] - Great. Okay.

[35:45] So we'll start down through the sig C.

[35:48] Did you want to go in the order

[35:50] of the printouts that you provided us?

[35:52] And I'm, yes.

[35:56] - I believe if I recall last year the, the committee

[36:02] identified items that they were truly

[36:07] opposed to, if that's an appropriate word, that,

[36:10] that there was a consensus to not fund.

[36:13] And then we went through the list of everything

[36:16] that was up for discussion.

[36:19] I will introduce again the conversation

[36:21] that we had earlier this week where some

[36:24] of these items may already be tabled.

[36:28] I it would, we, we'll get those as as we go. Okay. Real

[36:32] - Simple. We

[36:34] - Night, okay the order, these are in no particular order.

[36:37] I took these directly out of the six Z book.

[36:40] So they are in the order

[36:42] that they were presented in the book

[36:43] itself earlier this year.

[36:45] And that is the printout that you're looking at.

[36:46] So the way the table is designed,

[36:49] we've got the clear gov expenditure, this is the best

[36:53] that I could do, particularly for personnel.

[36:56] I had to do some math there to get to

[36:59] what the current operating budget is.

[37:01] Then there is the request, the sig e impact,

[37:04] which is coming off of the tables

[37:06] that were presented in the SIG e.

[37:09] And then I just did a little bit of an

[37:11] what would the updated budget look like.

[37:13] I think that column is secondary to some

[37:15] of the other conversation

[37:17] because for example, if you were to approve both

[37:20] of the parks capital items,

[37:22] those updated budget numbers are individual,

[37:24] but we'd be able to do the math

[37:25] to show what that would look like.

[37:28] The ranking was a request.

[37:30] We've got the COG ranking

[37:32] and then we've got the agency ranking,

[37:34] which might help you determine how, what, what is,

[37:37] what is the priority for you

[37:39] and then what the rest of the table is.

[37:41] It just shows, I don't have the label on every green row,

[37:45] but they are in the order of the blue box Borough College,

[37:49] Ferguson, half Moon, Harris Patton,

[37:52] all the way the total municipal shares tied

[37:54] to the CIG e request.

[37:56] And then if there is a potential ongoing expense

[37:59] that's reflected in the column there.

[38:01] But I believe that in the past the conversation has been

[38:06] do we want it, can we afford it?

[38:08] And then what would it look like if my municipality

[38:11] committed to that particular item?

[38:13] There is a rollup sheet that's another tab in the workbook.

[38:18] It's not entirely linked yet,

[38:19] but I would be able to put that together very quickly

[38:22] following what items you agree to or don't really need.

[38:27] Right now, the table links to the entire sig e column

[38:31] in municipal shares

[38:32] because not everything is using municipal shares,

[38:35] fire cap fire being one of them.

[38:38] But the update to that is just me

[38:40] fixing a couple of quick links.

[38:42] - Chair. - Yes.

[38:45] - I don't know about others,

[38:47] but it would actually help me if we knew

[38:49] what is off the table.

[38:50] Like just quickly, like what is being removed, just

[38:54] to get a sense of are there any big numbers elsewhere being

[38:59] taken off before we go down the list.

[39:04] - Can staff support that or is that like more, is that a

[39:07] - It is more difficult, but okay, I,

[39:11] because we were just going

[39:12] to do a quick run through to see if,

[39:15] - Let's have a consensus, which way do we want,

[39:19] do you want 'em up front or can we go

[39:21] as, can we clean as we go?

[39:23] - I, I like to just do the, the run

[39:24] through like Ben's saying first we won't, we don't have

[39:26] to make a decision on it, but at least we can hear people

[39:28] - Thoughts little bit.

[39:29] We don't have to make a decision.

[39:31] - Okay. So systematically go from there.

[39:33] To your point, how we did last year isn't gonna,

[39:37] we've changed so much.

[39:39] So this is my umpteenth reinvention

[39:43] of the final day of the budget session

[39:46] and we'll get through it.

[39:49] So with that,

[39:51] let's just go into the parks operating capital.

[39:54] Are there any that are off the table at this time

[39:58] - For parks operating?

[39:59] That would just be the janitorial position

[40:02] and this point I would leave that in which,

[40:06] - Which is the janitorial - Position maintenance full-time.

[40:09] Is that the, they're leaving that the first line. Are

[40:11] - You saying you're leaving that in or taking out?

[40:13] Leaving that one in. Okay.

[40:15] - And and that is the maintenance full-time position

[40:17] that we're seeing the first line, correct.

[40:18] - 30 2007 46. Okay. Is that, and

[40:22] - Then what would it be next year?

[40:25] - I mean it's on, - It would be the salary,

[40:30] the salary of that person. It would be,

[40:32] - So we're gonna add 60,000

[40:34] right away to next year's budget.

[40:37] - Next year's, next year's budget.

[40:38] The 2027 budget actually sees relief in the fact

[40:43] that this person is coming on at a

[40:47] Q2, April one.

[40:48] So it's a 75% salary

[40:52] and that person would be doing the janitorial,

[40:55] which the contract has averaged for all the locations

[40:59] that are impacted between 44 and 47 or $48,000.

[41:04] And that would include the adult center, the admin office

[41:07] for parks, and then both of the pools.

[41:10] - How much money will be saving, in other words, if you,

[41:13] if if what we're paying now for janitorial

[41:15] - Services, so this is the net impact number, which is, so

[41:19] that takes out what you're already,

[41:20] - It eliminates approximately 44,000 in

[41:23] contracted cleaning expenses.

[41:25] Yes. And if we add the bathrooms to Hess, we also have

[41:28] to clean the bathrooms at Hess.

[41:30] - So I is it right to say that next year

[41:36] the impact this year the salary is

[41:40] 76,000 approximately in April, approximately.

[41:43] And so next year it's about 101,000 for the whole year

[41:47] and you would subtract 44,000 from it

[41:50] - For 27.

[41:51] Right? Because otherwise Christie would have to

[41:54] renegotiate a contract for 27.

[41:57] Yes. And instead of that, we bring this person on

[42:00] maybe the first or second week of April,

[42:02] we have them for the year.

[42:04] So we actually have savings of her not having

[42:08] to renew a contract in order to get all

[42:11] of these facilities cleaned going forward.

[42:13] This person is full-time staff

[42:16] - And you have the 44,000 savings,

[42:18] but it would cost us maybe around 60 from next year.

[42:21] - Right. Which is, if you look at the SIG e, that's that 69.

[42:25] But we can't in perpetuity say that we have

[42:28] a savings ongoing based on the contract being terminated At

[42:32] some point, this person is a staff expense

[42:35] and they're going to have all of the related wage expenses,

[42:39] you know, attached to that.

[42:40] The biggest benefit is in the first year of not having

[42:43] to renew the contract

[42:45] and bringing someone on who's able to do the work.

[42:47] - But what I, it says on here it's almost, it's 90,

[42:51] almost 99,000 ongoing.

[42:53] - Yes. That is the, that is the true cost

[42:56] of this person's salary, FICA potential benefits

[43:01] and everything that's attached to the fringe.

[43:04] So we believe that

[43:05] that is really the true ongoing cost once we get past

[43:11] the year without the contract

[43:13] - And then you subtract off maybe 32 from

[43:15] what you were doing for contract, you're

[43:17] - Also never paying that $44,000 cleaning contract. Yes.

[43:20] - Right. So that would be subtracted from the 99,000

[43:24] - Essentially.

[43:25] But we're saying that for transparency's sake,

[43:27] we're recognizing this is the true cost of this employee

[43:30] and it will eventually get wrapped up.

[43:31] We don't expect everyone to remember years from now

[43:36] that we once upon a time had a $44,000 cleaning cost.

[43:39] - I understand. But that, but but still the net, all this,

[43:42] - The - Net would be close to 60,000.

[43:44] Yes. Per year. That's what we're in.

[43:47] - Yes. In 2028 going forward it, you can't factor

[43:52] how much the contract might have went up

[43:54] and then we know the wages

[43:56] and benefits will probably go up and they

[43:58] - Are, while we're sending them towards janitorial,

[44:01] they will be doing more than just janitorial work.

[44:03] Jim has plenty of work that we need

[44:06] to get done. Well they be cutting her

[44:08] - Ass. So

[44:13] - If needed, - I mean Pat, how when with the,

[44:17] when we submitted this with supporting a part-time.

[44:20] So from our point of view we do not support this. Okay.

[44:24] - Okay. Going back to the original question,

[44:31] we're seeing four items there.

[44:33] Are any of those being pulled by staff?

[44:37] Any of the four showing right there?

[44:39] Are any of those being pulled by staff?

[44:42] - You have, - We have the maintenance full-time,

[44:45] we have the recreation software, we have the portable lift

[44:48] and we have the Silverado crew cab,

[44:51] - The rec software, the portable lift

[44:55] and the cab would all

[44:59] be going forward.

[45:02] So all of those items would move forward.

[45:06] The portable lift and the crew cap at least could,

[45:11] and the initial cost of rec software

[45:14] could be taken out of the $200,000 in fund balance.

[45:20] - Okay. So just going forward,

[45:25] we're gonna go each green block section

[45:29] staff is gonna tell us what they're pulling

[45:31] before we even talk about it and then we're gonna come back

[45:35] and talk about what's remaining.

[45:38] So for Parks operating

[45:40] and Capital, we have four staff is requesting

[45:43] that all four proceed forward.

[45:46] So we will start with the park specialist.

[45:49] We heard from the patent that was a no. Am I, am I correct?

[45:54] Correct. Harris,

[45:56] - Harris would, would, would we'll say no until we hear

[46:00] that we're gonna do this.

[46:03] COG wise, COG whole wide, we do it all.

[46:06] We, we have, we have janitorial for this building.

[46:10] You have the library, you know, we pay all these agencies

[46:12] and there's a little bit more money than 44,000.

[46:16] If, if we're gonna do this, which we've been asking to do

[46:18] for I don't know how many years, I would be in favor if,

[46:22] if we're gonna include it in all COG, if not come back

[46:26] and you can include it with all COG.

[46:28] - Okay. So that at this time is a no.

[46:31] - Yes. - Borough.

[46:32] - The Borough was a yes on this considering the offset

[46:36] of janitorial costs

[46:38] and it looks like the need for this across bunks.

[46:42] - Okay. Ferguson? Yes. Okay.

[46:51] Hmm. College, college has currently has this as a No.

[46:56] So at this point it's not moving forward.

[46:59] Now the only thing I'll offer is that was

[47:02] before the discussion of three 200,000 assigned.

[47:07] Now this is the maintenance is a operating fund

[47:12] expense, not a capital fund.

[47:14] So it could be funded by an inner fund

[47:17] transfer from capital to

[47:19] - Operating.

[47:20] I would not recommend that

[47:22] because I do not wish to put

[47:25] one time funds into ongoing account.

[47:27] Sounds good. Because that just gets us

[47:28] right back to where we we are. Right.

[47:30] - But it is an option. - It it's

[47:32] - An option.

[47:33] It's a bad option. Yes, but it is an option. An option.

[47:36] It's there. Okay.

[47:37] Running down the fund balance

[47:39] so far last year was a, it was an option.

[47:42] Okay. Alright.

[47:44] So I'm hearing that one half moons

[47:49] is not involved in this one.

[47:52] So we're looking at it sound like a three, two, no. Okay.

[47:58] Recreation software

[48:01] or Yes, Harris.

[48:05] Yes. But we would like to see how much money we're saving.

[48:08] Okay. Yes, yes.

[48:11] College is a yes,

[48:12] but I will further stipulate that it comes from the

[48:16] 200 K unassigned assigned.

[48:19] That's also ongoing. Somewhat.

[48:21] - Yes. There, there's this purchase then ongoing

[48:25] process as well.

[48:28] - And I'm comfortable with in the following years,

[48:33] taking on the operational expense.

[48:35] But the initial,

[48:38] - The initial out of this Yeah.

[48:40] - Is what I'm offering.

[48:44] Which could you offer what those two numbers are?

[48:48] The initial and then the, and the ongoing.

[48:53] - Gotta get into the bigger book. It

[48:56] - Says the ongoing 13, 13, 13,000.

[48:59] Yeah, it's less, it's less than the initial.

[49:01] There's an implementation upfront.

[49:02] Implementation fees, what is it?

[49:05] We don't have the initial number though that I'm not seeing.

[49:08] 22 78 2 2 7. That looks like a net impact number.

[49:12] So there's no offset. I'm just confirming.

[49:15] Oh, for, for I'm confirming that there's, you know,

[49:18] we're not saving something somewhere else or

[49:24] - Current direct software is 15,400 annually proposed.

[49:28] 2027 pricing includes setup training in the mobile app at a

[49:31] total first year cost of 38,180.

[49:35] Beginning in 2028.

[49:37] The estimated ongoing annual software cost is approximately

[49:40] $13,060.

[49:43] So it will cost less than the 15 four

[49:47] for our current software system

[49:52] and they build an 3% inflationary

[49:55] increase into that.

[49:59] - So I would offer again, can we fund the initial

[50:03] via inter fund transfer from Parks Capital didn't

[50:06] - Save money - Going forward.

[50:08] Yes. Is that agreeable for the committee? Yes.

[50:12] Staff understanding that one. Okay. Good.

[50:16] Portable lift Pat?

[50:21] Yes. Yes. Harris We're neutral on that one.

[50:25] I'm sorry Todd, I don't think I got got you on that last one

[50:28] - Or Yes, I, I go how did we get from 38 to 22?

[50:36] - The, the offset? - Oh, because you're getting out

[50:38] - Because we're - Getting rid of one

[50:40] - System.

[50:41] An annual amount. Yeah. I'm

[50:43] - Gonna, I'm gonna fix this.

[50:44] So Port Beli

[50:47] - Good?

[50:48] - Yes, yes. Pat? Yes. Harriss Yes. Yes.

[50:53] College, yes. Silverado crew

[50:57] cab, the Borough,

[51:03] - The borough's a yes.

[51:04] But the comment was are there ways to look at

[51:09] lesser, you know, expensive you were there

[51:12] and you know, just looking at options to get it as cheaply

[51:16] as possible, whether not new.

[51:18] What are the other options? I will

[51:20] - Ring up the same thing every time we come to this,

[51:22] which is that, how long did your last truck last Jim?

[51:26] - It's a 15-year-old vehicle.

[51:30] - We take care of everything that we get. And so

[51:34] - Your current truck is 15 years old?

[51:38] Replace in this way. I'm sorry.

[51:40] Yes, it

[51:46] - Eric.

[51:47] Okay,

[51:48] - We will, we'll show you after we really answer a Toyota.

[51:52] - Okay. Patent.

[51:54] - We have the this kind of as a yes,

[51:56] but also potential defer.

[51:57] But now that I'm hearing maybe we could move

[52:00] over money from the other.

[52:01] Would we'd be a a from a weak Yes. To a stronger yes.

[52:06] - Okay. Ferguson,

[52:10] - They wanted to know whether it can be pushed a year

[52:13] and we want to know what the year.

[52:14] So we have a year also kind of a No.

[52:18] - Okay, that's fine. Not - Kind of, no, no.

[52:21] - Even though I don't, I have a comment Mr.

[52:23] - Chair. Is it a fuzzy if it's a fuzzy No,

[52:26] - Sorry to, I just didn't want you to skip Please.

[52:28] But I, I believe

[52:29] that the potential ongoing should at least have some monies

[52:32] in there because even though it's a new vehicle,

[52:33] you're still gonna have maintenance.

[52:37] - We will have less maintenance on this on a new truck than

[52:40] we will on the currently 14-year-old truck.

[52:45] - Correct. But they're still ongoing

[52:48] - There. It's less,

[52:49] - It it's replacing a vehicle.

[52:51] So there's already expense for that vehicle. Okay. Yes.

[52:53] You're indicating that that potential is,

[52:56] it's actually might be a yes. Think

[52:57] - This would be a savings in - Our maintenance.

[52:59] It might, but you're worst casing it at zero. Yes.

[53:03] Okay, great.

[53:05] So college was, is a yes and

[53:09] but I would condition that on use of the

[53:13] previously assigned funds so as not

[53:16] to increase municipal shares.

[53:18] Yes. One time thing. One time thing

[53:20] for a one time thing works greatly.

[53:23] Okay. Hey congrats.

[53:25] We made it through one category, pools, capital,

[53:29] and this one's gonna be in light

[53:32] of the pools operating number

[53:36] may Interesting discussion.

[53:38] Any of those to be poll staff indicating poll

[53:41] before we even start

[53:43] - We'll pull everything but the splash pad resurfacing.

[53:48] - Okay, that's 55,000 can see it.

[53:53] - Everything but the splash pad. Okay.

[53:56] - Yes, I, I know I mentioned when I came around

[53:59] to the municipalities that Todd would be doing inspections

[54:01] at the end of the season to see what condition everything

[54:05] was in and everything has survived another year.

[54:12] So we will move forward next year.

[54:15] You'll likely see these requests again next year.

[54:19] They're going to all have to be replaced at some point,

[54:22] but considering the already

[54:27] large increase, we will do our best to get

[54:30] through another year with that.

[54:32] However, the splash pad resurfacing, we think really needs

[54:35] to be done before that causes more damage

[54:38] to the underlying surface.

[54:41] - Makes sense. Okay. Round the morning Ferguson

[54:47] - We're a yes.

[54:48] 'cause it's a repair, basically

[54:52] - Patented. Turn

[54:53] - This into a yes from a defer

[54:55] because of pulling the other ones.

[54:57] - So excellent. - Yeah, we're, I'm a yes, but I,

[55:00] but going forward when these things come back,

[55:02] if we're gonna add features

[55:04] or update features, we should see

[55:06] some increase in the rates.

[55:08] Something that the park and rec or

[55:10] or authority, whoever needs

[55:12] to put some skin in the game, so to speak

[55:16] - Per Yes.

[55:18] Okay. College is a yes.

[55:22] I I would ask, couldn't we do inter fund from parks capital

[55:27] to pools, capital to, yes.

[55:30] - The formula is the same across the board for all of these.

[55:32] So we could make a transfer. Okay,

[55:35] - So, so I just, so I'm tra

[55:38] so we had 200,000 unassigned.

[55:40] We had, I'm seeing 89 5

[55:46] committed the two parks, capital items.

[55:48] Could you confirm the number

[55:51] for the initial, for the software?

[55:53] Is it 15,000 or what is the,

[55:58] - Or is 30 The software - Implementation total,

[56:01] - Total increase for this year would be $22,780.

[56:06] - Is that operational or installation?

[56:12] - That is a combination.

[56:14] - I'm looking for the installation number.

[56:17] That's what we should fund out of one time stuff 38, 180.

[56:22] Is that the, the, that's

[56:24] - The operational cost for implementation training

[56:26] and that's before netting out the current software

[56:30] - Expense.

[56:31] Okay, very good. Thank you. So I'm just trying to keep,

[56:33] so we, we've committed 90,000, 40,000

[56:38] and now 55,000.

[56:39] So that pots about it. Great.

[56:45] If there's support, do you want municipal sheriffs to go up

[56:48] or do we want to use the, the now unassigned a portion

[56:52] of the now undersigned 200,000,

[56:55] which would reflect an interfund transfer from

[56:58] parks capital to pools capital

[57:01] - Offer that - I, I think at the end of the day,

[57:06] the municipal share increase is

[57:08] what we're all gonna be sitting in front of our colleagues

[57:10] and what's gonna pass or fail this budget.

[57:13] So I, I would, I would defer that comment

[57:16] or whether we do it from there

[57:18] or there until we get to the end

[57:19] and say that's that's the number we're gonna approve

[57:23] and let Ben decide where he wants to move.

[57:26] 'cause if we move it this year,

[57:28] next year there could be something else

[57:29] and we're moving it again or, or we're replenishing it.

[57:32] So I'd rather wait till the end to make those

[57:35] - Decisions.

[57:36] And you're gonna remember every step of the way. Sure.

[57:37] We're gonna take over, but I don't

[57:39] - Care about the - Step.

[57:40] So going, going through

[57:45] the big thing, we're doing one time stuff

[57:46] with one time stuff and, and everything.

[57:49] And the other part, we, we had a conversation at one point

[57:52] you start defer maintenance, you,

[57:55] you actually increase your costs.

[57:56] Yeah. So that, that's why that one

[58:00] to college is very important that, you know,

[58:02] it's only gonna cost more later.

[58:03] So the ability to do it with already

[58:07] invested funds from the municipalities to get that done

[58:11] and to get it off of the repair maintenance side

[58:15] is an important one for us.

[58:16] So it sounded like we have a Yes for,

[58:19] for the splash pad.

[58:21] Thank you. Regional parks only one item.

[58:26] I assume you're not pulling not that's a safety issue.

[58:29] Yeah, I agree. Okay.

[58:33] This is a $15,000 commitment again as the director

[58:37] and the agency director shared this,

[58:39] this is a safety concern Borough?

[58:44] Yes. Harris? Yes. Patton. Yes.

[58:49] - Yes. - Ferguson, yes. College is a yes as well.

[58:53] Do we have any,

[58:55] - Do we still have money left in that I'm looking,

[58:57] - I'm looking, - You use it so quickly.

[59:01] - I'm looking - The, the,

[59:03] the dirty net says if you put $15,000 into,

[59:11] I'm sorry, into your

[59:15] normal or no, I'm sorry.

[59:16] We need if, if we're not going to use

[59:22] any of that money going into

[59:28] the personnel component

[59:32] for the potential of a janitor, but the janitor was a no.

[59:35] Right. Currently then you are at,

[59:39] - Yeah, so I have, I have 200,000 minus

[59:44] 89 5 minus 38 minus 55.

[59:49] If my math is, if my calculator isn't failing,

[59:51] that's 1 8, 2, 3, 1.

[59:53] And we're asking 15 for this.

[59:55] So should be and that one Okay. 2000.

[59:59] So that would be, yeah so

[1:00:00] that would be a inter fund transfer from Parks Capital

[1:00:05] to regional parks.

[1:00:07] Is that everybody comfortable with that? Yes. Okay.

[1:00:12] That POT'S gone.

[1:00:15] - I'm just gonna say this 500,000 pot for,

[1:00:20] hes lives within Regional Parks Capital

[1:00:23] - Right now anyway.

[1:00:24] Oh, okay. So it's actually, okay.

[1:00:27] So staff will inter fund transfer as needed to

[1:00:31] support what we just said.

[1:00:33] - Just a real quick history is there was two,

[1:00:40] a big chunk of that 295,000 was transferred from Parks

[1:00:45] Capital last year over regional parks grants

[1:00:49] - To meet that.

[1:00:50] So, okay, great, great. We

[1:00:53] - Don't need to transfer the 15 is what I'm

[1:00:55] - Hearing.

[1:00:56] The 15 we don't,

[1:00:57] but the other one now we actually have

[1:00:59] to move some inter fund from regional parks back

[1:01:02] to Parks Capital and also to Pools capital.

[1:01:07] Okay, great. Thank Carrie. Thank you. Okay.

[1:01:11] Planning and MPO, anything to be scratched

[1:01:13] before we start talking?

[1:01:17] - I believe the MPO consultant is being taken off.

[1:01:23] Gimme one second

[1:01:24] to that section.

[1:01:29] They, I believe did a review of the

[1:01:34] requests that had been submitted

[1:01:36] or since this request was submitted.

[1:01:38] Staff has determined that there are no shovel-ready projects

[1:01:40] that meet current discretionary grant opportunities

[1:01:43] and additional federal funding programs are not anticipated

[1:01:46] until after federal transportation reauthorization.

[1:01:51] 'cause existing funds are sufficient

[1:01:53] to support grant development activities through next year.

[1:01:55] CRPA recommends withdrawing this request.

[1:01:59] - Okay. - That's the NPO

[1:02:01] - Consult PO consult. The 5,000,

[1:02:03] - The third item, 33rd bullet item

[1:02:05] - 5,000 53 5 60.

[1:02:07] - Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Is

[1:02:11] - That a postponement or just a poll?

[1:02:13] Entirely.

[1:02:15] - That's poll for this year.

[1:02:17] They'll have to reexamine once they see what the feds do

[1:02:21] with grant programs

[1:02:23] and what, if any shovel-ready projects get brought

[1:02:26] to them in the county next year. Okay.

[1:02:28] - Okay. So we're left with two items.

[1:02:31] They are the planning consultant with a 27

[1:02:35] net impact of 50,000 Ferguson.

[1:02:40] - Yes. - Pat? Yes, Harris? Yes.

[1:02:46] Yes, yes.

[1:02:50] Next one is bike traffic counters with a net impact

[1:02:53] of 29,008 15 Borough.

[1:02:59] Yes. Harris? No. Patton.

[1:03:03] Yes. Ferguson,

[1:03:05] - We have a question.

[1:03:06] Can they, how often would they be

[1:03:09] utilized or can they be rented?

[1:03:10] Because I looked up some things I don't know anything about.

[1:03:13] Is there, you know, are gonna sit in a closet somewhere

[1:03:16] - Or - Is that a good,

[1:03:21] - Jim, are you able to answer that question?

[1:03:29] - I can take a shot at answering it. Yes.

[1:03:35] So there is not a set schedule. It would be on demand.

[1:03:39] There would be times when the counters are not used.

[1:03:43] But what we are trying to do with this

[1:03:46] is meet several needs.

[1:03:49] One is to establish some sort of annual counting program

[1:03:54] for some of the existing trails

[1:03:58] and other bike facilities.

[1:04:02] We also realize that some of our partners,

[1:04:04] like the Borough would like to start doing seasonal accounts

[1:04:08] so that they can assess how much the traffic

[1:04:11] and the usage varies over different

[1:04:14] time periods of the year.

[1:04:16] If you know,

[1:04:18] if you're seeing more traffic when the students are here,

[1:04:20] or more traffic over the summer when people

[1:04:24] find the weather more agreeable to it.

[1:04:26] So while there's not a set schedule, the idea is

[1:04:30] that we would want to have access to this over the,

[1:04:34] the full year's time period.

[1:04:36] And when we looked at comparing this to a contract

[1:04:42] to, to procure these services from a vendor,

[1:04:47] we found that the, for the cost that we're asking

[1:04:52] that would get us through maybe one, one

[1:04:54] and a half single instances of counts, you know,

[1:04:58] one year's worth of data.

[1:05:00] And what we're looking at here is being able to go out

[1:05:03] and do several locations on an annual basis

[1:05:07] and some locations several times a year.

[1:05:11] And then in addition on an as needed basis,

[1:05:14] especially in the outlying area, do some one-off counts

[1:05:18] to try and establish existing use patterns

[1:05:21] where they feel they need a facility

[1:05:23] and they're trying to put together a proposal for a trail so

[1:05:26] that they've got that data to support applications.

[1:05:29] So there would be times when the, the counters are unused,

[1:05:34] but we anticipate a pretty robust use usage program

[1:05:38] and we've also determined that, that this approach

[1:05:42] gives us much more capacity than working

[1:05:45] with a sub consultant for the same amount of funding.

[1:05:51] - Okay. Ferguson, does that help

[1:05:54] - Me - Or no, but

[1:05:56] - You're, no.

[1:05:57] Okay. My apologies to Tammy for that on the last one.

[1:06:01] I don't think I we're, we're good?

[1:06:03] Yeah, we're good on the first one. Yep.

[1:06:04] So now the second one. We're good. You're good on that.

[1:06:07] Okay. College is actually a no.

[1:06:11] So that one's a three. Three.

[1:06:14] So that fails. So

[1:06:19] - Does that mean we revisit it or something?

[1:06:21] - It's a, unless one of the three no votes is gonna change.

[1:06:26] - My other question is, shouldn't the,

[1:06:28] if the Borough wants the information, shouldn't they rent it

[1:06:31] or acquire the

[1:06:33] liking? I'm

[1:06:37] - Not sure.

[1:06:38] I'm only gonna offer, I understand that it's a tool,

[1:06:41] it's act, it's a tool similar to the planning consultant.

[1:06:44] You know, we've had good success in return on investment

[1:06:48] when we've been able to aggressively go after this stuff.

[1:06:53] But I, my counsel voted no. So

[1:06:57] - Yeah, - So at

[1:07:01] that point a three three it would fail.

[1:07:07] - It just gotten a little windfall, changed their mind.

[1:07:12] - Alright. Administration COG building if I,

[1:07:17] the, what is being pulled?

[1:07:20] The HVAC sea replacement or is everything going forward?

[1:07:23] Everything moving forward with that.

[1:07:26] With the unsign of over 40. A little over 47,000 bucks. Yes.

[1:07:31] Okay. So we're just start at the top

[1:07:33] and come down through,

[1:07:38] we have a fire sprinklers of $18,000.

[1:07:43] Half moon

[1:07:45] - Sprinklers. Yes. Okay.

[1:07:47] - Ferguson? - Yes.

[1:07:49] - Yes. - Harris, I'm sorry.

[1:07:52] - No, you're good though.

[1:07:57] That was a yes. Yes. Oh, I apologize. Alright.

[1:07:59] - Yes, - College is a yes as well.

[1:08:03] Next item is a firewall,

[1:08:07] 30,477 net impact Borough.

[1:08:13] - Yes. And I think there's an

[1:08:14] - Ongoing of 8,000, correct?

[1:08:17] Yes,

[1:08:19] - Yes.

[1:08:20] Harris

[1:08:21] - Strong? Yes.

[1:08:22] - Strong? Yes. Okay. Ferguson? - Yes.

[1:08:25] - Halfman? Yes. College is yes as well.

[1:08:30] HVAC replacement.

[1:08:31] 87,000 Half Moon. Yes.

[1:08:37] Ferguson

[1:08:40] - We're a no.

[1:08:41] We don't know if it can be re repaired when it breaks

[1:08:43] or I can't remember what

[1:08:46] - The, okay. Patent.

[1:08:48] - Yes. Harris,

[1:08:50] - Yes or yes.

[1:08:52] And college is a yes as well. Next is a fire alarm panel.

[1:08:58] 13,500 net Impact Borough.

[1:09:03] - Yes. - Harris?

[1:09:05] - Yes. - Patton. Yes. Ferguson. Yes. Kaman? Yes.

[1:09:11] And college is also a Yes. Okay.

[1:09:16] Off page one folks. Good job.

[1:09:22] We're going to fire operating and capital.

[1:09:27] Any, what's being pulled by staff before we start talking?

[1:09:32] - Special - Ops trailer is being pulled

[1:09:35] in the truck upgrade.

[1:09:38] So the two remaining are captain of training

[1:09:41] and past Township work.

[1:09:44] Okay. Excellent. Alright.

[1:09:48] So afternoon's not in this, Harris is not in this.

[1:09:53] So our first item is captain, a training captain.

[1:09:58] The net 27 net impact is set 61,430.

[1:10:03] The ongoing is a little over 124,000.

[1:10:09] We start with Ferguson.

[1:10:13] - We're a yes. But the question is,

[1:10:17] if they're starting in the middle of year with a,

[1:10:20] could we potentially have a different fire director?

[1:10:22] Is it, if they're not hired, can it be,

[1:10:26] do we have to pay for it?

[1:10:27] We could put it at our budget, but do we have to pay

[1:10:29] for it until what?

[1:10:31] Or can we wait until it happens? 'cause

[1:10:35] - Can your shares be delayed

[1:10:37] until the second half of the year

[1:10:39] - For that additional amount?

[1:10:41] - Just a question. - I assume we could probably do that.

[1:10:46] It's a little more work on finance,

[1:10:47] but it would just be, you would see the total

[1:10:52] increase in the second half of the year,

[1:10:55] which would give you a break early in the year

[1:10:59] instead of paying for it in four installments.

[1:11:03] Whatever you paid for the total of two,

[1:11:06] - Six instead of 12 - Six,

[1:11:08] - It would all be six.

[1:11:11] Just a question. The case it doesn't happen is

[1:11:13] what I, you know,

[1:11:17] - The opposite being, if we funded it for the two

[1:11:20] and it's not gonna happen, they, we stop.

[1:11:22] Okay. Could be another way of approaching.

[1:11:24] Yes, we could do that. The, and and you're a great example.

[1:11:30] You know, when you came on board you had different thinking

[1:11:34] and now you're gonna be here,

[1:11:35] but the fire director may have different thinking in there.

[1:11:39] So that does afford the space to, it's

[1:11:42] - Not a deal breaker, it's a question.

[1:11:43] Yep. That we've done other things where we gave money

[1:11:46] for this project that it didn't happen.

[1:11:49] - Yeah. Might be in there waiting the next year

[1:11:52] to get credited back for it, right?

[1:11:54] Yes, absolutely.

[1:11:55] No, but I think, I don't know. Okay.

[1:12:00] - Nobody else is concerned. Patent

[1:12:02] - Patent, yes. Borough.

[1:12:05] - So the Borough was a yes on this,

[1:12:09] but I just wanted to check.

[1:12:11] There was this discussion when we had the budget

[1:12:13] that we are having a new fire director coming up

[1:12:16] and whether this is a position we can defer to 2020, just

[1:12:20] to let that person weigh in on the strategy.

[1:12:24] And so I'd just like some feedback on that.

[1:12:26] We are anyway hiring this person middle of the year.

[1:12:29] And you know, what, what do,

[1:12:31] what do, what do you think, Sean?

[1:12:33] Just get a sense of that idea.

[1:12:36] - So I just in terms of running, you know,

[1:12:38] why this position's there, why it's important, the,

[1:12:41] the five year plan was developed in order to create the,

[1:12:43] the foundation to support volunteers.

[1:12:47] I'll just give you a rundown.

[1:12:48] So the, the volunteers right now in terms of their

[1:12:52] captain's positions, there are five two are vacant

[1:12:57] because we do not have staff certified

[1:13:00] or that have want the, want the responsibility

[1:13:04] of taking those positions.

[1:13:05] So that puts that burden onto staff to do the training

[1:13:09] and other things that are required of those positions.

[1:13:11] Right now, the training cap

[1:13:13] or the special ops captain

[1:13:14] that was hired last year is running the full engine academy

[1:13:18] so that, that takes them

[1:13:20] away from their other duties in order to run those programs.

[1:13:25] And the one vacancy is in our health and safety program.

[1:13:28] And, and so I have a $96,000 grant

[1:13:31] that's not getting administered

[1:13:33] because the fact is I don't have enough time

[1:13:36] or staff to put into

[1:13:39] securing the appropriate information

[1:13:42] to get that grant going.

[1:13:43] Now I have one more year to do that, so I hope to have

[1:13:45] that launched before I leave in December.

[1:13:48] But that being said, we have vacancies,

[1:13:53] we have, you know, senior members of our,

[1:13:56] of our captain's core.

[1:13:58] And when I say seniors, they've been around a long time.

[1:14:01] Individuals who are 60 plus years old.

[1:14:03] This is not a old man's game. Uhuh.

[1:14:06] And I'm not trying to point out that anybody's not capable,

[1:14:10] but as we age out, we're not able to do some of the things.

[1:14:13] So out of the five captain's positions,

[1:14:18] there's only one person who's a young person

[1:14:21] in that, in that group.

[1:14:23] And I'm just forecasting that we need that position in order

[1:14:27] to make sure that we're able to keep the volunteer staff.

[1:14:31] If you don't keep the volunteer staff

[1:14:32] and keep them properly trained, you're gonna end up

[1:14:35] with a lot, a lot more career staff supplementing the,

[1:14:39] the volunteers on the fire trucks.

[1:14:40] - Yeah. So I think that helped me.

[1:14:42] You know, I just wanted to hear that sense of

[1:14:44] what are fire departments about?

[1:14:46] I think this is a core function. Yeah.

[1:14:48] So it's a Yes. We don't, yeah,

[1:14:50] - I'm, and just to go back to, you know,

[1:14:52] when the new fire director takes over,

[1:14:54] they may have a different set of opinions

[1:14:56] and that's gonna be obviously something

[1:14:58] that's gonna have to be tackled.

[1:15:00] When I came on board, there was a deputy director's position

[1:15:02] and I felt that these other positions were more important

[1:15:04] and I pulled that, if you recall,

[1:15:06] those that have been around.

[1:15:07] So that's something you have to address

[1:15:10] and I, I agree with Ferguson

[1:15:11] and the fact that, you know, this may be a,

[1:15:14] a budget amendment or something in the future

[1:15:15] that needs to be addressed

[1:15:18] - So that we, we can address. Okay.

[1:15:20] - Yeah. You can address that as you want.

[1:15:22] You know, if you wanted to be creative on the front end

[1:15:25] or do something later on, if you take it out,

[1:15:27] you could do a budget amendment halfway

[1:15:29] through the year and add it in.

[1:15:31] That's a little bit harder, you know, that's a bad Right.

[1:15:35] That's a bad thing to do.

[1:15:36] - So, okay, so Borough is a yes

[1:15:40] - That goes into that.

[1:15:41] That's an option. Yeah.

[1:15:42] Not a good option, but it's an option.

[1:15:45] College supported that we would appreciate if,

[1:15:49] if we get in the middle of the year

[1:15:51] and there's a change of thinking that, that that funding

[1:15:54] that we not contribute towards that. Yeah.

[1:15:57] - It could be reduced or

[1:16:01] - Yeah, we could do it that way

[1:16:04] is just a reduction rather than if we decide not to do it.

[1:16:11] - Okay. Does does

[1:16:13] that one approve? Yeah, I'm sorry, go ahead.

[1:16:14] - The other ones that are pulled off, does that do anything

[1:16:16] with our capital contributions or they just deferred to

[1:16:21] - Capital contributions for fire are always

[1:16:24] the same amount plus 8%.

[1:16:27] So it is a growing fund to take care of things.

[1:16:30] We are pre-funding all of the large purposes that come.

[1:16:33] So that doesn't affect, it's just a matter of,

[1:16:37] - Oh, work inside that this year parameter

[1:16:40] to see what you can purchase.

[1:16:41] Okay. But it's not build on what you're buying. Got it.

[1:16:44] - Right. Just - I didn't know that.

[1:16:46] - Right. Just as, just for information, the municipal share

[1:16:52] budgeted for 2027

[1:16:54] is $754,000.

[1:16:59] So we, we are contributing

[1:17:00] to this would be potentially additional and everything.

[1:17:06] Okay. The next one is the patent roof

[1:17:11] 27 net impact of $125,000.

[1:17:17] I don't, I think burrow's up first.

[1:17:20] - Yes, - Harris. Oh, I'm sorry you're out patent.

[1:17:26] - Yes. - Ferguson. Yes. College is actually a no.

[1:17:32] And I would offer,

[1:17:36] that's a facilities decision we put forward

[1:17:39] that we have different standards

[1:17:41] for the different facilities and, and everything

[1:17:43] and we feel that needs to get figured out

[1:17:46] before we go bring more money

[1:17:50] to somebody else's property.

[1:17:54] But that pa what I heard is that passed

[1:17:56] with college being the, the sold?

[1:17:58] No. Okay.

[1:18:02] Library capital, we have two items, any

[1:18:05] of those to be pulled.

[1:18:06] - So these are essentially being

[1:18:10] pulled through.

[1:18:13] Lisa and her team's work

[1:18:14] with corporate sponsorship hopefully

[1:18:17] for the outreach vehicle.

[1:18:19] And when it comes to the exhaust pit, we would simply ask

[1:18:22] that the $25,000 contribution

[1:18:26] that was made in 26 for the roof project,

[1:18:30] which the foundation

[1:18:31] and the grant fully covered, that $25,000 gets moved over

[1:18:35] to help offset costs for the pip,

[1:18:37] which the foundation will then cover the rest of.

[1:18:41] - That's great. So for our action, we need

[1:18:44] to unsign some money and then reassign it to this.

[1:18:47] Yes. Is everybody clear on what we're doing there?

[1:18:50] And then the foundation is picking up the

[1:18:53] dates, is that correct? That's

[1:18:54] - Correct.

[1:18:55] - Excellent. So no, no new shares,

[1:18:57] no new municipal shares out of that.

[1:18:59] But both items are gonna happen.

[1:19:02] - Both items will still happen. Okay.

[1:19:07] I'm sure they would appreciate it if everybody remembers

[1:19:09] that they pulled these things in the future

[1:19:12] when their, when their need comes

[1:19:13] - Up.

[1:19:14] Nah. Excellent.

[1:19:19] Good work. Nice job Foundation and library staff.

[1:19:24] Code Administration. We have two items, either

[1:19:26] of those being pulled.

[1:19:28] - Neither is being - Pulled. Okay.

[1:19:31] The first one is a fire life and safety inspector.

[1:19:35] A hundred A 27 impact

[1:19:38] of 1 47 94.

[1:19:40] Ongoing of almost

[1:19:42] 161,000 Half Moon.

[1:19:49] - Yes. - Okay. Per Yes.

[1:19:52] - Yes. - Eric? Yes. Bur

[1:19:55] - Yes.

[1:19:56] One request that we had was that,

[1:20:00] and this is from the point of view of, you know,

[1:20:02] affordable housing and all of that with code just to begin

[1:20:05] to understand the, the, the, the permit structure,

[1:20:10] the fee structure, like how do these operating costs

[1:20:12] impact all of that.

[1:20:14] So that's for the future, but we are a yes for the position.

[1:20:16] - Okay. I think the co director got into that a little bit

[1:20:20] where I got, it's gonna be,

[1:20:21] there was some savings in one place plus new revenue from

[1:20:25] all the bed or Yeah.

[1:20:27] Stuff coming online. So it'll

[1:20:29] - Anticipate probably housing

[1:20:34] fee adjustment, but that's normal for us.

[1:20:36] For cost of living.

[1:20:40] - You estimate how much that would be for

[1:20:43] - The year.

[1:20:44] That estimate right now is gonna be $3

[1:20:46] for a rental housing permit fee.

[1:20:48] So it would go from 52 to 55

[1:20:51] for the Centre Region Code administration's share each

[1:20:55] municipalities does a tack on, on top of that.

[1:20:58] And so their tack ons vary. Okay.

[1:21:00] - Thank you. Okay.

[1:21:06] - I will offer college's was a no,

[1:21:09] but personally I under I understand that.

[1:21:14] I'm happy to see that that's moving forward.

[1:21:17] Next one is an inspection crawler of $6,000 earned.

[1:21:22] Yes. Eric? No.

[1:21:24] - Yes. - Burton

[1:21:26] - Yes.

[1:21:27] - A - Yes.

[1:21:29] - And that was also a college.

[1:21:32] No, but again, I understand that.

[1:21:36] So that's a, that's a good note there. Okay.

[1:21:40] Refuse that stays,

[1:21:44] that item moves forward, continues to move forward,

[1:21:47] - That one moves forward

[1:21:48] and that comes from their existing fund balance.

[1:21:54] - Still a decision point

[1:22:00] half a moon,

[1:22:03] - Sorry, which one are we on?

[1:22:04] Refuse

[1:22:07] - You waste drop off - Food waste drop off.

[1:22:11] 14,000 net impact 18,000 ongoing.

[1:22:15] - Let look. That, let me look. Take a look here. Okay, sure.

[1:22:17] Sorry. You can move on. I'll,

[1:22:19] - I'll come back.

[1:22:20] Okay. Ferguson? Yes. Patton. Yes. Harris. Yes.

[1:22:24] Bur yes. Colleges

[1:22:30] - I'll say yes.

[1:22:31] - Okay, it's done. Yeah,

[1:22:32] - It's done.

[1:22:33] We're moving forward. Didn't matter.

[1:22:34] We're moving forward. It didn't matter.

[1:22:36] - Okay. Any others?

[1:22:41] Nice job. Nice job. 10 o'clock.

[1:22:44] Would you bet that, okay,

[1:22:49] so do we have something that

[1:22:53] shows the impact of those?

[1:22:56] Do we have anything live to show the impact

[1:22:58] of the yeses and nos?

[1:23:00] - No, we don't have a mechanism to do that,

[1:23:03] but it's on my list.

[1:23:05] Okay. To do that so that next year we have something similar

[1:23:09] to the menu where we can add it to a bottom line,

[1:23:13] but we don't have that in this meeting.

[1:23:15] - Okay. - Just everybody understands clear up.

[1:23:19] The one component that we have not fully integrated yet,

[1:23:24] actually probably too composed, we haven't fully integrated,

[1:23:26] but there is a capital module.

[1:23:29] We just need to kind of adjust their capital module

[1:23:33] for the kind of on off switch like they have in the

[1:23:36] personnel side that will allow decisions to flow up through

[1:23:40] so that we can get a cast look at these studies.

[1:23:44] - Alright, well then I am going just for the

[1:23:48] - Mr.

[1:23:49] Chair. Yes. Or Ben and Kimberly.

[1:23:52] Are we going to have table B

[1:23:58] under this new clear go.

[1:24:01] Are are you planning on not doing that?

[1:24:05] Do you know what I'm talking about?

[1:24:07] The table that shows everybody's municipal shares Yeah.

[1:24:12] - Compares it to previous year.

[1:24:13] - It compares the last year and

[1:24:17] - Yes, we do be able to do it - Offline.

[1:24:20] Be able to, right. I realize it won't be

[1:24:24] in, in clear Go.

[1:24:26] But are you planning It'll

[1:24:27] - Show up in the budget book it, but we,

[1:24:30] but we have to go back, do it in Excel first

[1:24:33] and then drop the spreadsheet into the narrative box

[1:24:38] in clear Go. Okay. It's,

[1:24:41] - It is a very, yes, a very good toll for the five driver.

[1:24:45] Yes it is.

[1:24:48] - These are important, like that important

[1:24:53] but clear Go is great,

[1:24:55] but there are plenty of things that we have to drop in.

[1:24:59] - I I understand there's a lot of changes being made.

[1:25:02] I was just, you know, if you weren't gonna do it,

[1:25:05] I was gonna do one on my own is what I was going to say.

[1:25:10] But there's no sense me doing it on my own.

[1:25:12] If you're doing it for everybody,

[1:25:14] they don't have to do it now.

[1:25:15] You can do it. Yeah, you can do it. Just charge him a fee.

[1:25:20] Yeah, yeah. Well that's right.

[1:25:22] I'll, I'll send you a monthly invoice.

[1:25:26] - Well - I know the guy that created that spreadsheet

[1:25:28] and so he used it this morning to come to the discussions

[1:25:31] that we just had.

[1:25:33] So I, I concur that it

[1:25:35] - Has value. I figured.

[1:25:37] - Yeah. So I'm gonna walk down through

[1:25:40] and make sure that we

[1:25:43] and staff have everything as intended.

[1:25:47] So starting up in parks, operating in capital,

[1:25:52] the park specialist position was a No,

[1:25:55] the recreation software was a Yes.

[1:25:58] With the, the implementation side of that coming out

[1:26:01] of formally assigned fund balance,

[1:26:06] the portable lift was a yes.

[1:26:09] Again, coming out of formally assigned

[1:26:14] the Silverado Crew cab was a yes coming out

[1:26:17] of formally assigned under pool's capital.

[1:26:21] The splash pad was a yes.

[1:26:24] Again coming out of formally assigned fund balance.

[1:26:29] The regional parks has soft belt netting was a yes coming

[1:26:34] out of formally assigned the planning.

[1:26:39] And MPO the planning consultant was a

[1:26:44] Yes, the bike traffic counters was a no.

[1:26:49] And the MPO consultant was pulled by staff moving

[1:26:54] to the administration COG building All

[1:26:59] four items were Yes.

[1:27:03] With being offset by

[1:27:07] just over 47,000 formally assigned fund balance

[1:27:14] under fire operating and capital.

[1:27:18] The captain training was a yes with a caveat that

[1:27:23] of potential adjustment based on the new fire director.

[1:27:28] The truck upgrade was pulled, the patent roof

[1:27:32] was a yes.

[1:27:36] And the special ops trailer was pulled

[1:27:40] under Library Capital.

[1:27:42] Both items move forward.

[1:27:43] However, no municipal impact thanks

[1:27:48] to our friends in the foundation

[1:27:50] and previous savings of projects Code Administration.

[1:27:56] Both items were Yes.

[1:28:00] And refuse the food waste drop off was a yes.

[1:28:05] Does that reflect the committee's understanding

[1:28:08] of what we just did?

[1:28:10] - Yes. I have a question, this is just for me

[1:28:14] to understand policy where we,

[1:28:16] where we have the three three, is that typical

[1:28:19] that when it's a three three we just say it's a no?

[1:28:23] Do we have any process to,

[1:28:25] to break a tie just in COG in general

[1:28:30] - That's kind of a Roberts that would require a motion

[1:28:34] to approve and

[1:28:35] that motion would fail on a three, three vote.

[1:28:38] - Okay. Because I was thinking three

[1:28:40] wanted, you know, do you know what

[1:28:42] - I mean? I,

[1:28:42] - I do equal, but we went with the, we are not funding it.

[1:28:45] Which makes sense because it's an impact. Yeah.

[1:28:48] But it, yeah. Just to question

[1:28:51] - I was going to bring up, I know that the,

[1:28:54] the park staff one would appreciate the opportunity

[1:28:56] to go back and revisit the

[1:28:59] janitor's position that was turned out.

[1:29:00] I don't know if Jim would like to know.

[1:29:02] Last year when we took the straw poll, anything

[1:29:06] that had no votes on it, we went back

[1:29:08] and talked about a little bit more.

[1:29:11] But now that you've had a full go to see

[1:29:13] what everybody is supporting, there is at least a request

[1:29:17] that they be able to speak to that issue.

[1:29:21] - I, I obviously have no problem with that.

[1:29:23] It isn't gonna change my vote.

[1:29:25] 'cause that's what my board said.

[1:29:27] A reminder that all of us have an opportunity

[1:29:29] to opine back in later.

[1:29:31] Oh, with the, with

[1:29:32] - The meetings.

[1:29:33] - Yeah. Yeah. And

[1:29:35] and staff will probably make it their cases for that.

[1:29:40] The budget isn't, we're pushing forward a recommendation

[1:29:43] and an endorsement of the baseline budget

[1:29:48] and recommendations on the 60 items and stuff.

[1:29:50] But if you would like to make any kind

[1:29:52] of presentation here now that's fine.

[1:29:54] - Christie, would you like to speak to the snail?

[1:29:58] - Yes. Yes.

[1:30:08] - So one of the main reasons that we requested,

[1:30:14] One of the main reasons we requested this position wasn't

[1:30:17] just kind of a savings, not necessarily a savings,

[1:30:22] but it's more of a wash between the janitorial contract, was

[1:30:25] that Jim is in dire need of

[1:30:29] staffing within his division.

[1:30:31] We have had skate park added, which potentially is going

[1:30:36] to have restrooms funded here soon in the future,

[1:30:39] which is additional work that falls to maintenance.

[1:30:42] Cleaning restrooms is something

[1:30:43] that is just a small portion of this position.

[1:30:47] We looked at roughly five to 10%

[1:30:49] of their week would be spent cleaning facilities.

[1:30:52] The rest of that is Jim's time to use them out in the field

[1:30:56] to be able to do projects, to be able to move the fields.

[1:30:59] He can tell you the parks are not up to the standards

[1:31:02] that we'd like right now.

[1:31:03] And a big part of that is

[1:31:05] because we don't have the staffing to support it.

[1:31:08] So from Parks

[1:31:10] and recreations operational standpoint,

[1:31:12] this is a major operational need with the addition

[1:31:15] of the facilities, the addition of the pump pump track

[1:31:18] and Patton Township, other amenities, other phases of parks

[1:31:22] that are coming on board here in the near future

[1:31:24] that are gonna hit us pretty hard, pretty quick.

[1:31:27] So this is something that isn't reactionary,

[1:31:31] it's something we're trying to get ahead of

[1:31:33] and trying to make sure that we have the staffing

[1:31:35] needs in place.

[1:31:37] Jim, did you wanna add anything to that?

[1:31:42] - Sure. The only, - The only thing I would add is,

[1:31:45] you know, we've talked about it

[1:31:46] during the budget hearings about staffing and everything.

[1:31:49] This is a way for us to add a staffing member to this.

[1:31:53] They're gonna take on the D duties that war paid for out

[1:31:57] of a contracted service.

[1:31:59] But I will see probably 50%

[1:32:03] of this person is what we're thinking to help out with some

[1:32:06] of the park stuff you asked during this one about,

[1:32:09] would that person be mowing?

[1:32:10] Here's a good possibility. Yes, they could do that as well.

[1:32:14] We, we've gonna stretch that person as thin as we can to do

[1:32:19] as many jobs as we can

[1:32:23] - And for what, for what we're paying out

[1:32:25] of the cleaning contract.

[1:32:26] So we're roughly around that 40, $43,000 a year.

[1:32:30] We're only getting a small portion of cleaning

[1:32:33] hours out of that contract.

[1:32:34] So it's a, a pretty big cost.

[1:32:38] And our contract right now reflects a potential 5%

[1:32:41] inflation each year.

[1:32:44] So we're looking at increased costs.

[1:32:46] We don't know what those increased cleaning costs could be

[1:32:48] in the future, but it's something that we were trying

[1:32:51] to think about as we were putting that proposal together

[1:32:53] to give you a little bit more transparency behind

[1:32:56] how we ran the numbers, how we figured out

[1:32:58] to justify whether

[1:32:59] or not this position was something that

[1:33:02] will be a dire need within our division.

[1:33:04] So just wanted to say that appreciate the time

[1:33:07] and being able to, you know, share our thoughts

[1:33:10] and perspective on those numbers.

[1:33:13] - No, great point. I have a question. Go ahead.

[1:33:16] - So when I, when I listen to how you're going to use this,

[1:33:19] this new employee, I feel that,

[1:33:22] are you saying there will be other savings which would've

[1:33:25] come from, you know, hiring some part-time workers?

[1:33:28] Or are you saying there's just this need, there's not

[1:33:33] like do you foresee additional savings

[1:33:35] by using this individual

[1:33:37] where you would use part-time workers?

[1:33:39] So the savings would actually be 44,000 plus something else?

[1:33:44] - Potentially, yes. Potentially. Yes. Yeah,

[1:33:47] - I was wondering that's something you can provide us as we,

[1:33:49] you know, maybe when we go to our municipalities or Yeah,

[1:33:53] because you, if you wanted to bring this back

[1:33:54] or just give us information on that too.

[1:33:57] - You've seen in the operating budget

[1:33:59] how we have not been able to fill the seasonal positions

[1:34:02] and this is something that we could potentially look

[1:34:04] to eliminate a few of those seasonal positions

[1:34:07] to help offset the increased cost here. Exactly.

[1:34:10] - If you could do something like that so

[1:34:11] that the numbers worked out, then I think

[1:34:14] that patent would be more amenable to it.

[1:34:17] 'cause we were already amendable to a part-time position.

[1:34:19] But the concern is this is a ongoing expense. Correct.

[1:34:22] Right. We tend not to lay off in, in local government

[1:34:26] and so we want to, we want to proceed very thoughtfully

[1:34:31] because of the long-term commitment.

[1:34:34] - Yeah, I can appreciate

[1:34:35] - That.

[1:34:36] And we have done that in the past.

[1:34:37] We have taken some of the seasonal positions.

[1:34:39] When I first started here we had over 20 seasonal positions

[1:34:42] and we have taken some of those positions

[1:34:44] and created a full-time position on out of those

[1:34:47] and eliminated those positions from the

[1:34:49] - Seasonal works.

[1:34:50] So we could maybe work through those numbers.

[1:34:51] - Yeah, I believe, Ben, do you remember,

[1:34:56] I think it was four seasonal, we can figure out the math,

[1:35:00] but I believe it was roughly four seasonal employees

[1:35:02] to help offset.

[1:35:04] I believe that's the case for full time.

[1:35:06] Yeah, for full time. Yeah.

[1:35:09] Jim, can you step off to the side just a little bit?

[1:35:11] No, it looks like you're about to be a ator. Yeah.

[1:35:14] The, the red dots on your head. Oh, thank you.

[1:35:17] I was seeing that

[1:35:24] step one way or the other.

[1:35:25] You're right in the line of fire.

[1:35:28] Just consider you topic.

[1:35:38] I don't think we wanna eliminate Jim

[1:35:43] - Harris. Mr.

[1:35:44] - Chair. I, I,

[1:35:45] - I misunderstood this when we were voting,

[1:35:47] I was looking more for cleaning bathrooms in the

[1:35:50] buildings and whatnot.

[1:35:52] And that's what I thought it's primary use.

[1:35:53] I did ask about cutting grass,

[1:35:55] which I thought would be when they had time.

[1:35:57] But from the description I just got that's,

[1:35:59] this is a position that we need

[1:36:02] because I was pretty vocal that said we need

[1:36:04] to take better care of our parks.

[1:36:06] Yeah. Because that's a visible thing to our constituents.

[1:36:08] So I think Harris would change our vote to yes on

[1:36:11] - This.

[1:36:12] That's excellent. I can't change colleges,

[1:36:16] although I absolutely at the meeting would be saying, Hey,

[1:36:20] let's think about changing this.

[1:36:22] But if just if agreeable,

[1:36:25] I'm gonna go around the horn one more time.

[1:36:27] Would that Go ahead before you go

[1:36:28] - Around the horn one more time, Mr.

[1:36:30] Chair, will you be amenable to

[1:36:35] going back to the status quo budget

[1:36:38] and relooking at your part-time,

[1:36:44] your part-time positions

[1:36:46] and reevaluating whether you can remove some of those

[1:36:50] to get the additional savings above the 44,000?

[1:36:54] I think my big thing is, is

[1:36:58] I am in favor

[1:36:59] of replacing maintenance contracts with employees.

[1:37:03] But I would like it to be closer to a savings that,

[1:37:08] you know, right here we're talking about something

[1:37:11] that goes from 44,000 plus 5%.

[1:37:15] So let's say 50,000 for it being generous, that was

[1:37:20] to a hundred thousand.

[1:37:21] That's doubling the cost.

[1:37:25] I'd like in my prior lives

[1:37:29] before I was reincarnated the local government, I'd like it

[1:37:33] to be closer to savings than,

[1:37:38] than doubling the cost.

[1:37:40] So if you could re-look at your, and,

[1:37:43] and get some savings in part-time, certainly

[1:37:48] and I, I deferred to my board member,

[1:37:50] but certainly I would support in that.

[1:37:53] - No, that's great. That's a great, a great comment.

[1:37:55] There may be an opportunity to, to, with the approval

[1:38:00] of this to pull some seasonals

[1:38:02] or seasonal money to help offset that going forward.

[1:38:07] So Mr. Chairman Yes please.

[1:38:10] - Even though half one doesn't have a stake in this,

[1:38:12] but you know, you, you guys are using the term savings

[1:38:16] of money, but it's not really, it's a reallocation.

[1:38:19] Correct. So I just wanna make sure that we're clear on that

[1:38:22] and, and I agree that moving it

[1:38:27] to a full-time per person is probably much more

[1:38:31] easily filled rather than a part-time seasonal position.

[1:38:34] So I just wanna make sure that we're not really saving,

[1:38:36] we're just locating money.

[1:38:41] And then some food for thought is,

[1:38:43] I know you've been working on this

[1:38:44] and we've been asking it for a couple years now in terms

[1:38:47] of programs

[1:38:49] and use of programs costs, true costs of, of all that stuff.

[1:38:52] And I know you're working on that. What's the,

[1:38:54] what's the timeline in terms of us seeing that

[1:38:57] - We have a revenue enhancement plan that's going

[1:38:59] to the authority this afternoon, 12 o'clock to review that.

[1:39:03] That's all of our breakdown

[1:39:04] of the cost recovery information information from the

[1:39:07] baseline day that we have from 2025.

[1:39:09] So in 20 27, 20 27, you'll start

[1:39:13] to see a little bit more historical information

[1:39:16] as we pull that forward.

[1:39:17] So with, you can look at

[1:39:19] that packet right now if you wanna see what that looks like.

[1:39:21] And it can give you an idea of where we're at

[1:39:23] for each program area for cost recovery.

[1:39:26] - Okay. We're getting close to seeing that. That's all.

[1:39:28] It's okay. And then food for thought

[1:39:30] and I don't know, you know, if this is more of a,

[1:39:33] a bend thing or not, but you know, when, it's great

[1:39:36] that we have, and this is bigger picture not necessarily

[1:39:39] today, but when, when there are, is land donated for parks,

[1:39:45] is there any requirement

[1:39:47] or say there's, you know, a monies given for a skate park

[1:39:50] or you know, whatever, when we have new, new park entities,

[1:39:54] whether it be land or, or,

[1:39:55] or products for our parks, is there an entity that

[1:40:00] if you're gonna donate this, that you also are required

[1:40:03] to set up a maintenance fund?

[1:40:05] - No, not currently.

[1:40:07] Which is one thing we're working through right now

[1:40:09] through parks governance

[1:40:10] with a maintenance management agreement.

[1:40:12] Okay. And that would drive a little bit of the, the backings

[1:40:17] of that and what that's gonna look like,

[1:40:19] which is gonna drive more discussions about when we accept

[1:40:22] land, what is the associated cost with accepting that land.

[1:40:26] Correct. And shared costs

[1:40:28] that CRPR is also incurring in addition to the municipality.

[1:40:32] 'cause right now that's not transparent.

[1:40:34] It's scratch math numbers from our maintenance crew logging

[1:40:38] how much time they put into the parks.

[1:40:40] Right. But right now we don't have a mechanism

[1:40:42] for when municipalities turn something over

[1:40:45] and put something new in how CRPR responds to

[1:40:48] that from an operational standpoint, this position is one

[1:40:51] of those responses to that.

[1:40:54] - But there was no mechanism

[1:40:55] or is no mechanism in place right now for that.

[1:40:57] Okay. 'cause it's, it's, it's great

[1:40:59] to have land in things donated,

[1:41:02] but the reality is is like you said on the backside,

[1:41:04] it costs us a lot.

[1:41:06] And so hence we have such a large budget here because Yeah.

[1:41:10] Building new parks and getting things up to par to

[1:41:13] and maintaining them is a huge expense.

[1:41:16] And so yes, I can give you my chunk

[1:41:18] of land, not my problem anymore.

[1:41:20] Yeah. You know, and so we need to re-look at that. So

[1:41:23] - Yeah, I just to muddy the water a bit on that, the,

[1:41:28] the complicating factor is that some

[1:41:30] of our municipalities were built out early

[1:41:33] and had their parks early

[1:41:34] where others are in their growth phase.

[1:41:38] And so it's a kind of a governance question of

[1:41:42] can you ask somebody who's now catching up to

[1:41:47] have to go through a stricter process than those

[1:41:51] who were built out first.

[1:41:54] However, from the Parks Persec perspective,

[1:41:58] we would simply like some kind of process on the acceptance

[1:42:03] that the maintenance piece be considered.

[1:42:06] So that if we are being required

[1:42:09] to take on more parks property, the Jim's staff

[1:42:14] is being taken into consideration

[1:42:16] and his equipment in that process

[1:42:19] because we have had a lot of acreage

[1:42:23] added in over the last 15, 20 years with one new employee.

[1:42:28] - Right, right. Total. Right, right.

[1:42:31] And if you've got a family trust that donates land again,

[1:42:34] you know, there's, there should be a maintenance

[1:42:36] consideration or at least some pot of money for

[1:42:38] that maintenance consideration

[1:42:40] because it's a huge expense we take on. Right.

[1:42:43] - The land isn't a problem,

[1:42:44] it's when we do something with that.

[1:42:45] - Exactly. Exactly.

[1:42:47] - They start things, the all starts rolling downhill.

[1:42:50] And so throw another hat on Parks governance.

[1:42:53] We'll be talking about the acceptance of New Park land

[1:42:56] because beyond gifting stuff,

[1:42:59] our Ordinance requires developers to

[1:43:02] put land into Parkland.

[1:43:05] Now should that expense flow straight across

[1:43:10] to the COG and in which we're all of us are subsidizing

[1:43:16] the cost of that new park.

[1:43:18] And those are the discussions that are coming up

[1:43:20] that hadn't, hadn't happened in a long time.

[1:43:23] Yeah. So that's, that's, that's coming

[1:43:25] with the work of that. Go ahead.

[1:43:28] - Just a quick comment,

[1:43:30] I was just looking at Parks operating budget

[1:43:33] and there's facilities and maintenance under that section.

[1:43:36] You have salaries and wages part-time.

[1:43:40] I'm assuming that's where you might see an

[1:43:42] offset with this position.

[1:43:43] Yes. And you have 175,000 approximately allocated.

[1:43:48] So just knowing, you know, what the savings might be there,

[1:43:52] if you could provide that to all of us as this makes it way

[1:43:56] through the process and provide

[1:43:57] that correction, that would be great.

[1:44:01] - Okay. So I'm gonna go back.

[1:44:03] Excuse through Oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead. Go ahead, go ahead.

[1:44:06] - You were talking about the, when somebody donates it,

[1:44:11] I can honestly tell you from working with this type

[1:44:13] of system for years, that works great for a while,

[1:44:16] but you better plan on it coming

[1:44:18] because family members either lose interest, move away,

[1:44:22] you know, go broke, whatever you want to save,

[1:44:24] and then that money's gonna go away eventually.

[1:44:27] So even though they might ease the pain for a while,

[1:44:31] that usually isn't a long term fix.

[1:44:33] Right.

[1:44:36] - Another analogy would be homeowners association

[1:44:39] and detention basins. Oh yeah,

[1:44:41] - We got one of those. Yeah,

[1:44:43] - Exactly.

[1:44:44] So again, I'm going to go back to this item.

[1:44:48] It is the, in the parks operating for a park specialist

[1:44:53] beyond janitorial, a net impact

[1:44:57] of 32 746

[1:45:00] and 27 ongoing of 98,988.

[1:45:05] I I'm gonna start this one.

[1:45:08] I still have to say no,

[1:45:10] but I would encourage looking

[1:45:15] as we discussed about reallocating some seasonal money

[1:45:19] to this to offset the, the final expense

[1:45:23] bur burrow Yes. Hair.

[1:45:25] - Yes. - Patent is, we're we're the same.

[1:45:27] You're still a no comment. Yep. Yeah. Okay.

[1:45:30] But with that caveat that you understand. Yeah. Curtis, yes.

[1:45:34] It, it now passes three to two. Well done.

[1:45:38] Love it when the process comes. Yeah, you'll still do

[1:45:40] - That though.

[1:45:42] - I'll - Be willing to do the same on the bike counters.

[1:45:45] Just give them a chance.

[1:45:46] - Sure. Yeah. Is that the

[1:45:49] - 'cause we have the three three, the bike counters.

[1:45:52] - Okay. That's fine. Did you wanna make

[1:45:55] a pitch for the bike counters?

[1:45:57] Jim? Do you wish to? He already did. Yeah. I thought he did.

[1:46:00] They already, we have, we have nothing to add.

[1:46:02] - Jim and Ann are the bike specialists, so

[1:46:07] - So it is a three three

[1:46:08] and I'm basing that assessment for that to move forward.

[1:46:11] We would need a motion on a second.

[1:46:14] You're welcome to make the motion and get a second

[1:46:16] and we can take an official vote on it if,

[1:46:18] if you would prefer.

[1:46:20] - Okay. So the motion would look like I moved

[1:46:25] to fund the bike counters Sure.

[1:46:27] In the 2027.

[1:46:30] - Yeah. - Seven. I'm like, are we seven or eight?

[1:46:32] 20, 27 budget of the COG. Is that

[1:46:36] - Yes.

[1:46:37] Sufficient. Yeah, we have a motion. Second.

[1:46:39] Do we have, and we have a second. Any further discussion?

[1:46:44] - I'd just like to, to point out the thing that

[1:46:50] appealed to the Borough was the data

[1:46:52] that we would get from the bike counters

[1:46:55] and the ability then to use that for funding of proposals.

[1:47:00] And we are, we are trying

[1:47:01] to be this bike friendly community.

[1:47:03] You know, we have a network of bike paths, we have a lot

[1:47:05] of money invested in creating that network.

[1:47:08] And so that's where the positive of it was for us.

[1:47:13] So we, we, you know,

[1:47:16] if the vote is still the way it is, we will see

[1:47:19] how we can maybe, you know, bring back

[1:47:23] suggestions or support.

[1:47:24] But that's what I would offer.

[1:47:28] - I would only offer, there was a suggestion the Borough

[1:47:30] could buy those bike counters

[1:47:32] and we could rent 'em off of you.

[1:47:33] I heard that. I that so any further discussion,

[1:47:38] - Oh my God.

[1:47:39] It's gonna become, it's going to become a two four now,

[1:47:41] you know, like with

[1:47:43] - That Sion.

[1:47:44] Okay. Okay. Any, anything else? I,

[1:47:48] - I can mostly just echo what LY said,

[1:47:51] but it just seems like we spend such an extraordinary amount

[1:47:54] of money for cars

[1:47:56] and this seems like a relatively small amount of money.

[1:47:59] So that puts us in a position so that we can go

[1:48:02] after funding because there is funding, you know, I mean,

[1:48:06] and, and, and the trend varies how much funding there is

[1:48:11] for, you know, more pedestrian

[1:48:13] and bike friendly community versus the cars.

[1:48:17] But we wanna take opportunities when we can

[1:48:18] and this just seems like a fairly small investment

[1:48:21] to business in ourselves.

[1:48:22] Well,

[1:48:24] - I do not disagree.

[1:48:25] Did the director has some,

[1:48:27] - The only thing I would have is

[1:48:28] for College Township specifically,

[1:48:30] are you working off of the list?

[1:48:32] Adam has originally provided

[1:48:34] - Yeah.

[1:48:36] - For your yes and no comments. Yes.

[1:48:37] Because I don't know if you remember your board actually

[1:48:41] voted to overturn Adam's recommendation Okay.

[1:48:43] On that one. On bike counters. Okay.

[1:48:47] - No, I don't recall that. But

[1:48:49] - That, that was the one item that they,

[1:48:52] that you all decided to go against Adam's

[1:48:54] recommendations from my notes. That was Nope,

[1:48:58] - That's fine.

[1:48:59] - So college - I I, that that is up to,

[1:49:03] - I was gonna say no, I, I've already stake

[1:49:06] and I don't have the minutes and so

[1:49:08] - I know how college does their Yeah, theirs and

[1:49:12] - It just stuck out since - I was at all

[1:49:14] of the meetings. Just wanted to,

[1:49:17] - Yep.

[1:49:18] Thank you. Bring that up. Thank you.

[1:49:21] I'm gonna call the question all those in favor

[1:49:23] please say aye.

[1:49:25] - Aye. Aye. - All those opposed same sign. Aye aye

[1:49:29] - Aye.

[1:49:30] - Yeah. So that's 3 3, 3. Okay. Motion.

[1:49:36] - Yeah, we need a king. - Oh, Matt's back with

[1:49:40] - Us. You could add

[1:49:44] - That's kind of what the COG is joint.

[1:49:47] Perfect. Yeah. Okay.

[1:49:49] So that takes the second item

[1:49:57] and we're on to fund balance Paul replenishment

[1:50:00] and I think that Executive Director has something

[1:50:03] to share.

[1:50:07] - My recommendation is that

[1:50:13] the municipalities take this year to catch up

[1:50:18] on the use of fund balance from the past

[1:50:22] and to not contribute more

[1:50:26] to the fund balances in this year.

[1:50:31] COG has enough cash to make it through.

[1:50:34] And as I look at us as an organization,

[1:50:37] I don't look at any one agency

[1:50:39] where one might be at a zero balance in another

[1:50:43] is flushed for those kinds of emergency situations.

[1:50:48] We know that our municipalities are backing us.

[1:50:51] If an emergency does happen, we can get

[1:50:55] through most emergencies with the cumulative fund balance

[1:50:59] that we already have.

[1:51:02] It is brought up over and over again.

[1:51:04] That code has plenty of money in their fund balance,

[1:51:07] especially for new construction.

[1:51:10] We can use the cash in an emergency basis

[1:51:13] until other arrangements can be made.

[1:51:16] So at least for this year, bless you, excuse me.

[1:51:20] Moving forward, it's my recommendation that for the sake

[1:51:24] of your own budgets, that you do not move forward

[1:51:27] with trying to implement more of that fund balance policy

[1:51:32] that can be taken up next year when we have reset the level,

[1:51:37] as has been discussed on catching up on your regular

[1:51:41] municipal shares, paying for general operations.

[1:51:46] And as long as my team continues to do their job

[1:51:49] and minimizes the overall growth

[1:51:54] of the total expenditures,

[1:51:57] then it will become easier in those future years for you

[1:52:00] to address the fund balance issues.

[1:52:07] - It's a great,

[1:52:12] Helpful situation there.

[1:52:15] The other thing I would offer, and we, it came out

[1:52:17] during the review sessions, is

[1:52:20] we've made great strides in moving the transparency

[1:52:25] of fund balance forward on everything.

[1:52:28] But we still have some work to do to go in knowing

[1:52:31] what the buckets of money look like, what they're intended

[1:52:34] for and all that good kind of stuff.

[1:52:36] And we don't have that yet,

[1:52:38] but we do have a fund balance policy, which is, you know,

[1:52:41] and it was mid year-ish that it got implemented too.

[1:52:45] So that, that makes it tough on staff and us and everything.

[1:52:48] And one of the

[1:52:50] after actions would be we need to, you know, one

[1:52:53] of the example, we didn't get a reconciliation report of

[1:52:58] the fund balances

[1:52:59] that we started talking about under replenishment

[1:53:02] and the one and the final numbers which came out

[1:53:05] of the audit just to know that, you know, how we did

[1:53:09] and everything so that it feels like there's more data along

[1:53:13] with the overall reset that we use

[1:53:16] so much fun balance in the past couple years

[1:53:19] and that we've established this as the reset year for,

[1:53:23] for fund balance and everything.

[1:53:25] So with that said, we can go

[1:53:29] as far into this

[1:53:32] and I would offer one more thing what the,

[1:53:35] what staff did at the beginning of identifying things

[1:53:39] that could be unassigned so that then we could use

[1:53:43] that money elsewhere.

[1:53:44] Incredibly helpful. Thank you.

[1:53:46] And that's definitely a sustain going forward.

[1:53:50] So what do we want to talk about?

[1:53:53] We've heard the executive director's recommendation.

[1:53:57] Any thoughts or comments on this please, pat

[1:53:59] - From Patton Township, we support that we have a little,

[1:54:03] a significantly bigger slice

[1:54:05] of the high this year that we have to digest.

[1:54:08] So this is a, you know, we have already fun pressure on us,

[1:54:13] so, and given the fact that the director said that they're,

[1:54:16] they're comfortable moving without the adding

[1:54:20] to the fund balance right.

[1:54:21] This or implementing the process

[1:54:23] for next year. We definitely support

[1:54:25] - That.

[1:54:26] Excellent. Other comments, thoughts Harris?

[1:54:29] - Yeah, I, I have mixed feelings on this.

[1:54:31] I mean, we kicked the can

[1:54:33] or kicked the can down the street for many years

[1:54:35] to get the fund balance policy.

[1:54:37] Now we're basically saying let's keep, keep kicking the can

[1:54:39] for a little bit till till we start putting money in.

[1:54:42] I I, I understand fund balances is, you know, they're great

[1:54:45] but there are, they are recommendations,

[1:54:47] they are guidelines, you know, so we do have the power

[1:54:50] to say we're putting more in or less in

[1:54:52] or increasing it, decreasing it, whatever.

[1:54:54] But that being said, as I look at the number, even though

[1:54:59] from a Harris standpoint, we're, we're really strapped

[1:55:02] for budget and I don't want to put any more out than I have

[1:55:06] to, but when I'm looking at $2,800 is our thing

[1:55:09] to keep this, to get this started and moving forward.

[1:55:14] I think, I think my answer would be,

[1:55:16] it would depend on the overall.

[1:55:17] If, if, if the overall is, is palatable

[1:55:21] and you know, we can add another $2,800 somewhere,

[1:55:24] then I would be for this,

[1:55:26] let's start, let's start this process.

[1:55:28] 'cause like I said, we've kicked a can

[1:55:29] down the road a lot of years.

[1:55:32] So that's, that's just my, my feeling.

[1:55:33] So I'm like, yeah, let's do it. No, let's not do it.

[1:55:36] So I I I think that it's gonna depend on the overall,

[1:55:40] but I would be, I would be more apt to see it

[1:55:42] - Start and stop.

[1:55:46] Okay. So I am,

[1:55:51] I'm a little bit with, I have some questions maybe,

[1:55:55] but the way I was looking at this right now, when we say

[1:55:59] that we are not going to start following policy where we,

[1:56:03] let's say even if we take a five year replen replenishment

[1:56:07] plan, when we say we are not going to do this,

[1:56:11] are we just saying that we won't maybe fund fire protection

[1:56:16] MPO where there is a, you know, where, where we have

[1:56:21] to fund, but we are going to le lead the surplus in.

[1:56:26] So for example, in parks operating,

[1:56:29] we right now have a surplus according to this

[1:56:32] of 124,000.

[1:56:36] This surplus is over the minimum we are supposed to keep.

[1:56:40] Am I right? Like over the minimum?

[1:56:43] But it is, if we said that the minimum is only one fifth

[1:56:49] of the minimum we should keep, which is what we are trying

[1:56:52] to reach in fire protection.

[1:56:55] - So every, every agent,

[1:56:59] every fund is going to be in a different place.

[1:57:01] Yes. Right. Now my suggestion is that for those agencies

[1:57:05] where we are already funded above the 20% level Yeah.

[1:57:10] That you don't touch them.

[1:57:12] If you're looking at your total fund balance policy

[1:57:15] as your bucket of water, yes.

[1:57:17] I'm suggesting that you repair the holes in the bucket this

[1:57:20] year, which is what you're doing

[1:57:23] by not using operating fund balance

[1:57:28] to spend anything you take this year

[1:57:30] to fix your leaky bucket

[1:57:32] because you've been losing water every year in future years,

[1:57:37] you can start to fill the bucket knowing

[1:57:39] that you're not going to be losing

[1:57:42] any more water from that bucket.

[1:57:44] - So what if, what if the other way is it possible

[1:57:48] to get all our funds at 20% so

[1:57:52] that means we'll actually have excess money

[1:57:54] because there are some

[1:57:56] where we have reached a hundred percent Right.

[1:57:58] Would it, what would the,

[1:58:00] what would the municipal shares look like if every every

[1:58:04] fund went to the 20% minimum?

[1:58:07] - That - Would be, does that make sense?

[1:58:08] Because there's excess unassigned in parks

[1:58:12] and excess unassigned in,

[1:58:15] - Except that's a, that's a lot more math right now

[1:58:18] because each of these agency funds work

[1:58:21] into different formulas.

[1:58:22] Okay. And so we would have to undo expenses

[1:58:26] and shares for this group that reapply it

[1:58:29] for this group again, for this group, take it down

[1:58:32] and this group add it back in.

[1:58:33] Right. I just from an operational standpoint,

[1:58:37] it is much easier to say cash wise

[1:58:42] COG is fine and can support each other through the year on

[1:58:47] that fund balance side.

[1:58:49] Knowing that on the book side of things, we can make

[1:58:54] that up in future years.

[1:58:57] - So, so right now we have an excess

[1:59:01] in parks operating according to this.

[1:59:03] I mean these numbers might change

[1:59:05] because of what we've added, right?

[1:59:08] Maybe we'll have nothing like these

[1:59:11] numbers may not even be real.

[1:59:12] Am I, I mean, may not be accurate.

[1:59:15] - And that's the area parks operating

[1:59:18] specifically is the area one

[1:59:19] where we will look at help if there's any way we can help

[1:59:23] address the Q1 request that was there,

[1:59:25] but also for the autonomous mower technology

[1:59:30] and other staffing plans that I mentioned.

[1:59:32] I believe that was last Thursday that we are working on

[1:59:35] it will have in place for you at next year.

[1:59:38] By the time we get here, we expect to use some

[1:59:43] of those funds to help offset additional future

[1:59:46] costs that you would see.

[1:59:49] - So there are only, am I right in thinking there are only

[1:59:52] three funds which are in the red?

[1:59:55] Like we don't have the minimum, correct?

[1:59:59] - Yes. - And if we chose to,

[2:00:07] - If you want to give us more

[2:00:08] money, I'm not going to say no.

[2:00:10] I I am, I am trying

[2:00:15] keep your finance directors sane

[2:00:18] and your managers sane at the same time

[2:00:20] because I know that this is going

[2:00:22] to be a hit. What's that? And

[2:00:24] - We appreciate - That.

[2:00:29] - So - I, I won't say no to taking more of your money,

[2:00:32] but I, I am saying we, we will definitely be able

[2:00:36] to survive another year without that.

[2:00:38] - What would COG feel if we went across

[2:00:41] all the fund balances?

[2:00:43] The ones where you are at a hundred percent

[2:00:45] and we only funded 20% of everything.

[2:00:48] What would happen? Because that's a savings

[2:00:51] for municipalities, right?

[2:00:53] I know it's math, but it means we are implementing fund fund

[2:00:58] balance policy from today,

[2:00:59] but it's going to be a 20%, the excess is all going to be

[2:01:03] used towards expenses.

[2:01:08] No. What does, what do finance directors see,

[2:01:10] what do my colleagues hear about that approach?

[2:01:15] Are we going to like, you know,

[2:01:16] not fund COG enough? It's going be terrible.

[2:01:19] - Are you saying that, that to take the balances

[2:01:22] that are over and move stuff to the ones

[2:01:24] that are under, is that what you're

[2:01:25] - Asking?

[2:01:26] I'm saying that there are some funds which are

[2:01:29] over a hundred percent.

[2:01:30] We've reached the minimum per policy

[2:01:33] and we only fund every balance at to 20%.

[2:01:37] So we are releasing a

[2:01:39] - Lot more money.

[2:01:40] It might be prudent, it might be terrible.

[2:01:41] The only thing I, because we don't have the bucket

[2:01:43] of safety, the only thing I,

[2:01:44] and Ben you might answer this question,

[2:01:46] I I'm not sure we're allowed to move between certain funds.

[2:01:50] We can't take from one fund

[2:01:51] and put, we don't, we don't take it all.

[2:01:52] - We would have to lower your shares use fund balance.

[2:01:58] Yes. And then increase your share in another area.

[2:02:02] We'll know that Mr. Heller's had his hand raised, sorry,

[2:02:05] he's stuck in the upper corner.

[2:02:10] Are you finished with your thought there? Yes. Okay, Mr.

[2:02:12] Heller,

[2:02:14] - Thank you for that.

[2:02:15] And I appreciate the recognition.

[2:02:17] I, I'll say it this way, I think philosophically what Mr.

[2:02:21] Harden is saying

[2:02:23] and you know, about kicking the can is from my standpoint,

[2:02:26] it's not that one of my favorite books I keep

[2:02:28] it next to me is right here.

[2:02:29] It's not gonna come in methodological pragmatism,

[2:02:32] very dry book, very dry.

[2:02:35] However, it really, this is the idea of finance,

[2:02:38] to me it's about being pragmatic

[2:02:40] with the methods you choose to use.

[2:02:42] And this year, what the Executive Director is proposing I

[2:02:46] think makes a lot of sense for me.

[2:02:48] It's not kicking the can, it's being thoughtful about, look,

[2:02:50] we're going to hit you up hard here right now

[2:02:53] because the fund balance is increasing, et cetera.

[2:02:56] You're going to get, see that in your municipalities.

[2:02:59] Let's not put two things on you at once.

[2:03:02] Instead, move this to the next year.

[2:03:04] Be thoughtful about how we want to spread this out.

[2:03:07] And I rely on the, the recommendation of

[2:03:12] the Executive Director

[2:03:13] and the folks that know this stuff inside and out.

[2:03:15] If I, and if I'm hearing correctly, I'm hearing, hey look,

[2:03:19] yes, we're assuming a little bit more risk here,

[2:03:22] but we'll be able to go ahead

[2:03:23] and internally manage this should something arise.

[2:03:26] That's what I'm hearing from the Executive Director today,

[2:03:29] which is why I'm okay with going

[2:03:31] around the monopoly board another time hoping we don't land

[2:03:34] on any huge expenditures

[2:03:36] and you know, just saying, yeah, we're not going

[2:03:38] to put an investment in this right now.

[2:03:40] But to Mr. Frank's earlier comment too,

[2:03:42] that we've done a lot of good work in really synthesizing

[2:03:45] and solidifying the approach to managing fund balance.

[2:03:48] And that should be the thing that we say, yes, we've done

[2:03:52] that well and now we're being thoughtful about

[2:03:54] how we want to apply it.

[2:03:55] So that's where I stand right now.

[2:03:57] And I would not be in favor of really funding anything

[2:03:59] beyond, you know, at, at this point.

[2:04:03] Again, I would si I would agree

[2:04:05] with the Executive Director in this

[2:04:07] - Thank you.

[2:04:08] Afternoon. You think to add,

[2:04:10] - You think you're doing, I mean I agree with,

[2:04:11] with Ben's thoughts.

[2:04:13] I I do proceed with caution

[2:04:17] about kicking the can down the road.

[2:04:19] I'm still a little, we weary of that.

[2:04:22] And I also think about, you know, we

[2:04:27] reduced municipal funding last year using fund balance.

[2:04:32] We're gonna hold off this year.

[2:04:34] You know, I just wanna make sure that

[2:04:36] two years down the road all of this savings isn't forgotten

[2:04:39] and we have to hit municipalities with an increase

[2:04:42] and they're like, whoa, wait a minute.

[2:04:43] This is a change. You know?

[2:04:45] And so I get, I get a little worried about that.

[2:04:47] I'm also trying to be,

[2:04:49] to use Matt's words pragmatic about things.

[2:04:51] So like it's, it's, to me right now,

[2:04:53] it's kind of a double-edged sword.

[2:04:54] I'm not sure which way to go.

[2:04:57] - We've got a couple conflicted.

[2:04:59] - Yeah. Okay. Yeah, I feel a little conflicted.

[2:05:04] - I I'm right there with you. I,

[2:05:06] - Because I don't know what that question mark is.

[2:05:08] Sure. You know, we know it's there,

[2:05:10] but I'm like, what is that answer?

[2:05:12] I, until we get there, we're not gonna know. So it's,

[2:05:17] - I I'm always leery about kicking the can down the road.

[2:05:22] My opinion that started 10, 12 years ago.

[2:05:26] So from my standpoint, I'm willing to wait

[2:05:31] the year, another year to get the

[2:05:36] better information, to make better informed decisions.

[2:05:41] If there was a cashflow concern

[2:05:45] then it would be a different standpoint.

[2:05:47] I, looking at these, again, having done this

[2:05:51] in this format for a number of years, I concur

[2:05:55] with the Executive Director

[2:05:57] that we're in an okay spot at this moment

[2:06:00] and this is a great time for a reset on all this.

[2:06:05] And then move forward.

[2:06:07] I kind of look at like when you decide to go digital,

[2:06:11] all digital, you start, you pick a date and you scan forward

[2:06:15] and then you pick up as you go back.

[2:06:18] And that's what this kind of feels like to me,

[2:06:20] that we're being smart with our fund balance moving forward

[2:06:23] and then we're gonna use the next year as an opportunity to,

[2:06:27] to look back and make that even more transparent and,

[2:06:32] and making sure that we know what all those numbers are

[2:06:36] before we go adding to them or taking away from them

[2:06:40] or anything like that.

[2:06:41] That's my concern is that

[2:06:44] although we've made tremendous strides in, in knowing

[2:06:48] what our fund balances are

[2:06:50] and the broad stroke comparisons of unassigned committed,

[2:06:56] assigned restricted, all that kind of stuff,

[2:06:58] we still have some work to do and

[2:07:01] before we go making, committing dollars to those,

[2:07:06] especially in light

[2:07:07] of the potential total increase this year

[2:07:10] to our municipalities, I

[2:07:13] absolutely support the executive director's recommendation.

[2:07:16] So, so we can have at this point,

[2:07:20] we could have a motion to either implement

[2:07:24] or not implement.

[2:07:26] - I have a quick clarifying question. Yep.

[2:07:28] And so I, I am completely okay with what you're proposing

[2:07:33] for not funding, you know, the, the,

[2:07:37] the slight red amounts that we have for a few funds.

[2:07:41] But what we are doing with the, the approach we are going

[2:07:45] to now is we are actually implementing our fund balance

[2:07:49] policy for 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

[2:07:54] funds in the first year.

[2:07:56] We are not funding it over five years.

[2:08:00] So we are actually as a group making the decision

[2:08:03] that we are reaching our goal of the fund balance minimum

[2:08:08] for parks operating, em, planning for all of those.

[2:08:13] We are doing it in the first year.

[2:08:14] And when we had gone through a fund balance policy,

[2:08:17] we had said, are we going to reach these in one year,

[2:08:21] two years, three years, five years?

[2:08:22] Like we had that idea.

[2:08:24] So is this committee saying then that

[2:08:26] for those six funds we are actually committing

[2:08:29] to reach the fund balance minimum in the first year And we

[2:08:33] do not want the phased approach

[2:08:36] but for the funds where we have not

[2:08:39] yet achieved it, we are just waiting.

[2:08:41] Right. We are going to do it next

[2:08:42] year, but we are pretty close.

[2:08:44] It's not a huge amount.

[2:08:46] But are we then with this decision of

[2:08:50] we are actually making the decision to meet the fund balance

[2:08:54] for those six funds in the first year.

[2:08:56] And that, I don't know that we have discussed

[2:08:59] and what the implications of that are.

[2:09:01] If we, if we choose not to reach it in the first year

[2:09:04] and if we say, hey, this is something we want

[2:09:06] to do it in two years, I would like

[2:09:07] to know the risks of that.

[2:09:09] Like are we not leaving COG with enough money?

[2:09:12] You know, I would love to have that analysis on staff

[2:09:15] because, but that's what we are doing for these six months.

[2:09:18] We are reach, we are, we are committing,

[2:09:23] you know, less than one fifth

[2:09:24] or less than one third if that's what

[2:09:27] we are committing more than that

[2:09:29] and say we are, we are just reaching it in year one.

[2:09:32] Just thoughts from everyone.

[2:09:34] - Sure. That's a perspective.

[2:09:36] The other is that we're not doing anything with any of them

[2:09:39] is the overriding You could, but

[2:09:42] - Here - You could def facto back into, into those yet

[2:09:47] - Are we not doing anything with the surplus?

[2:09:49] My thought was the surplus is going back into the budget.

[2:09:52] Right? The surplus over the minimum is

[2:09:56] going back into the budget.

[2:09:58] - So if, if we have surplus above

[2:10:02] the 100% fund balance level Yes.

[2:10:07] Surplus of non

[2:10:11] assigned assigned fund balance.

[2:10:14] Yes. Then we would use that

[2:10:17] to offset your shares in the future.

[2:10:19] Yes. Yes. After we have had them audited Yes.

[2:10:23] To confirm that we are at that stage, yes.

[2:10:27] - But they are being used.

[2:10:29] So if this committee said we are going to

[2:10:33] reach our minimum fund balance, we would like

[2:10:36] to reach the minimum fund balance for every fund

[2:10:39] after three years, over three years, we would have more in

[2:10:43] that surplus Right.

[2:10:46] To, we would have more in every fund

[2:10:50] that is accept that, ah, this is really difficult

[2:10:53] to explain, but do you know what I mean?

[2:10:55] Are we going reach 100 this year

[2:10:57] or 100% this year or in three years?

[2:10:59] - If I had to guess staff would use this same

[2:11:02] methodology next year.

[2:11:04] If the unassigned balance was greater than the minimum

[2:11:07] balance, whatever extra there would be applied to

[2:11:11] reduced municipal shares for next year

[2:11:13] - And we make the policy decision of three years

[2:11:16] or whatever next year, then are, are we gonna make

[2:11:19] that decision next year of how human we are gonna reach?

[2:11:23] - If I might Yes, I would.

[2:11:26] I I am taking a we are looking at the same problem

[2:11:31] just from two different perspectives.

[2:11:32] Yeah. You are looking at it from a fund level perspective

[2:11:35] where I'm looking at it from an organizational perspective.

[2:11:39] Okay. Organizationally, we are meeting

[2:11:45] your goal of having at least 20% funded

[2:11:48] in the first year Yes.

[2:11:49] Of the overall fund balances.

[2:11:51] We just aren't doing it necessarily at the fund level

[2:11:55] across the board.

[2:11:57] And so I'm looking at the totality

[2:11:59] of the organization saying you are at a good first step

[2:12:04] for reaching your overall goal.

[2:12:07] It's just a matter of you don't have

[2:12:10] to fill up the same buck,

[2:12:13] the same small bucket every year.

[2:12:15] You don't have to fill, put a little bit into everything.

[2:12:20] You could fill several things at once

[2:12:22] and then next year you fill a couple more

[2:12:25] and then the following year you fill a couple more to reach

[2:12:28] that a hundred percent goal overall.

[2:12:32] And that's just the difference of looking at us as a,

[2:12:35] I'm looking at the corporate budget versus looking at,

[2:12:40] you know, the company budget

[2:12:45] and, and it's both are fair ways to, to look at it,

[2:12:49] but I would argue that you are meeting your

[2:12:51] goal for this year.

[2:12:56] - I I would actually offer we're doing a even better

[2:12:59] because we're getting a six out of nine Yes.

[2:13:02] In the, you know what I mean? So we can deal

[2:13:04] with other things in the future, which I'm sure we will.

[2:13:07] - Yes. Just a quick thing here, if you remember,

[2:13:12] it hasn't been that long ago when we had

[2:13:14] to use fund balances, the balance, everything and,

[2:13:18] and everybody was all worked not the fund balances seem

[2:13:21] to kind of grow a little bit each year.

[2:13:23] So every year we're, we're going a little now what I'm going

[2:13:26] to do is I'm gonna make a motion

[2:13:27] that this committee's gonna have

[2:13:28] to make every year going forward.

[2:13:30] 'cause we've already implemented our,

[2:13:33] our fund balance policy.

[2:13:34] It's, it's been voted on, it is implemented.

[2:13:37] So my motion would be that the finance committee recommend

[2:13:41] to the executive committee that we do not

[2:13:46] put any funds in the fund

[2:13:50] balance is this year.

[2:13:52] - Okay. In - Other words, we're, we're, we're not,

[2:13:54] we're gonna do what Ben said.

[2:13:55] We're not gonna add any funds Okay.

[2:13:57] To the fund balance. And that's my motion.

[2:13:59] - Okay. - I have a motion. Do I have a second? Second.

[2:14:02] We have a second Further discussion.

[2:14:09] All the question. All those in favor please say aye. Aye.

[2:14:12] Aye. All those opposed, same sign?

[2:14:15] - No, - Let the record show. Okay.

[2:14:21] So if I'm tracking correctly, we are at a point

[2:14:26] to make a potential motion

[2:14:28] that the finance committee endorse the 2027 COG operating

[2:14:32] budget with any and all revisions approved

[2:14:35] during this discussion

[2:14:37] and direct COG staff to prepare the transmittal

[2:14:40] and summary budget at the earliest opportunity

[2:14:42] for consideration by the executive committee

[2:14:45] to recommend distribution to the member municipalities

[2:14:50] - Chair.

[2:14:51] Yeah, that's, that is good.

[2:14:52] But I, I don't like the word endorse. Okay.

[2:14:55] 'cause all of us sitting around here have voted yes

[2:14:57] and no on certain items.

[2:14:59] Okay. So we don't necessarily all endorse

[2:15:01] a hundred percent of this thing.

[2:15:02] - However, submit. So I would say committee, we do

[2:15:05] - Submit, I would say submit.

[2:15:06] - However, as a committee

[2:15:08] - We do.

[2:15:09] I know as a committee we do,

[2:15:09] but I would, I would sooner have that word as submit

[2:15:12] that is not nearly as strong as endorse

[2:15:18] - Thoughts.

[2:15:19] - This - Is Matt. I'd like to make the motion

[2:15:20] - As read.

[2:15:22] - Thank you. - I'll

[2:15:24] - Second that.

[2:15:25] Thank you. Do we need to vote on that?

[2:15:30] - On which, - As as your potential amendment

[2:15:32] to the motion on the, the floor. I

[2:15:34] - Just made my comments.

[2:15:36] - Okay. Alright,

[2:15:39] well then if you're not doing it in the formal of a formal,

[2:15:41] then we have a motion and we have a second on the floor.

[2:15:46] Any further discussion?

[2:15:50] All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye.

[2:15:53] All those opposed? Same sign.

[2:15:55] - Aye. - Let the record show. Well done folks.

[2:16:00] - All done. - What's gonna follow?

[2:16:05] I, I think it's been clear that all

[2:16:07] of you're gonna be incredibly critical pieces to your peers

[2:16:11] and the information that you share with them

[2:16:14] and the perspectives that you share with them is going to

[2:16:19] go a long way towards the final approval

[2:16:22] of the summary budget.

[2:16:26] Continuing on October Finance committee date confirmation

[2:16:29] and comments on the operating budget, Ms. MacMullan.

[2:16:32] - So to, to move forward, what this item

[2:16:37] is discussing is what happens next?

[2:16:42] The summary budget will be prepared over the next

[2:16:47] few days, taking into consideration everything

[2:16:51] that was discussed today.

[2:16:53] So the process for that is, first

[2:16:55] the personnel budget gets updated

[2:16:58] with the positions that were approved.

[2:17:00] That gets sent into clear gov operating budget.

[2:17:05] The capital items

[2:17:07] and the other expenses that were approved

[2:17:10] through the SIG e get added to the budget.

[2:17:13] The operating budget then becomes the new normal,

[2:17:16] if you will, the next level of the budget.

[2:17:20] That expenditure

[2:17:21] and revenue detail moves to the fund balance

[2:17:26] and municipal share analysis.

[2:17:28] The municipal shares are part of

[2:17:32] the clear gov revenue streams.

[2:17:34] So those items get imported or entered directly.

[2:17:39] The fund balance and clear gov lives in a separate place.

[2:17:42] So what we'll do is we will have

[2:17:46] an offline analysis for that.

[2:17:48] But what clear gov does show are it, it's got a place

[2:17:52] where we can show in total the different buckets

[2:17:55] of unassigned, restricted, committed, et cetera.

[2:17:59] We have an action item to discuss with clear gov.

[2:18:02] It's if it's possible

[2:18:03] to actually provide even more detail within that.

[2:18:06] But what we do know is that we will have that visibility

[2:18:09] to see what the different types of

[2:18:12] items are living in each individual fund balance.

[2:18:17] The next meeting of this committee is October 22nd.

[2:18:21] That is consistent with last year where we met

[2:18:25] after the budget was distributed to the municipalities

[2:18:30] and that goes out through the executive committee.

[2:18:35] And then there is about a four

[2:18:36] or five week window

[2:18:38] that the municipalities review the budget

[2:18:41] and with your guidance of course.

[2:18:45] And then the budget is either adopted or not.

[2:18:49] We've received a letter in the past from each of you

[2:18:51] that says the budget would be incorporated occasionally.

[2:18:55] There are a few notes for us

[2:18:57] to just take into consideration.

[2:19:00] Many of them become the action items

[2:19:01] for the following budget for the following year.

[2:19:04] I included in this item a list of what I could get online

[2:19:07] of your meetings.

[2:19:09] So I guess a couple of the questions that we have.

[2:19:13] One is the timeline suitable that the

[2:19:17] municipal comments are,

[2:19:19] or letter of approval is directed back

[2:19:21] to the Executive Director by the end

[2:19:23] of the day on October 21.

[2:19:25] So that this committee has those comments

[2:19:27] and letters to review on October 22nd.

[2:19:31] And then secondly, if you perceive a desire

[2:19:36] or need for COG to be represented at any

[2:19:40] of your forthcoming budget meetings

[2:19:42] or regularly scheduled meetings.

[2:19:44] Those are my two requests in this item.

[2:19:47] And then there is a motion with regards to the comments

[2:19:51] and discussion for October 22nd.

[2:19:55] - I could just add whole small pieces

[2:19:58] for housekeeping on this.

[2:20:00] Due to the ICMA schedule this year, which

[2:20:05] got pushed back towards the end of October.

[2:20:10] This used to be a September conference.

[2:20:14] I will be traveling for part of this.

[2:20:17] So based on this schedule that we have,

[2:20:20] Penn Township is the only one that I cannot make it to.

[2:20:24] But Kim I believe could be available for that one

[2:20:29] of your municipal meetings when you are

[2:20:33] submitting your letter.

[2:20:34] That deadline, I would appreciate it if you copied Kim and

[2:20:38] or Scott onto that.

[2:20:40] Since I will be in California at the time.

[2:20:45] I will not make it back in time

[2:20:47] for your next committee meeting.

[2:20:49] That is that I can only get a red eye so I don't land here

[2:20:54] before your meeting.

[2:20:56] But I, as long as there are no travel delays, I will be able

[2:20:59] to make it to exec, which follows the finance

[2:21:02] meeting on that day.

[2:21:04] But I wanted to make sure that you all knew in advance

[2:21:09] where we would be, where I would be.

[2:21:14] - Very good questions, comments.

[2:21:22] - So the meeting would be 22nd. The

[2:21:24] - Next one?

[2:21:25] Correct. Okay. Okay.

[2:21:28] I'll get, okay. Yep.

[2:21:31] We're trying to, you know, this falls along

[2:21:34] with this schedule with you published earlier

[2:21:36] in the year and everything.

[2:21:39] My only comment would be, I believe we should put in here

[2:21:44] what our goal is for general forum approval.

[2:21:48] And I believe that is at the November meeting

[2:21:52] or October meeting.

[2:21:56] - It could be the October meeting

[2:21:57] because we will have, this committee will have met,

[2:22:00] the executive committee will have met, I believe

[2:22:03] that follows right after this meeting on the 22nd.

[2:22:07] And we could certainly do that at the end of October.

[2:22:10] I think that's what we did last year

[2:22:13] because you are in your budget cycle then.

[2:22:18] And then I believe the October motion was

[2:22:22] that we had an expectation that the budget be adopted by you

[2:22:27] by December 31st.

[2:22:28] - Yeah, that's a requirement.

[2:22:29] But, so our goal if, if you would appease me is

[2:22:34] to add one sentence.

[2:22:35] The committee and staff's goal is for potential approval

[2:22:39] of the 2027 summary budget at the October general forum.

[2:22:44] Just simple statements so everybody knows

[2:22:47] where we're headed, where we're leaning

[2:22:48] into and everything like that.

[2:22:50] Time is of the essence. All that good stuff.

[2:22:52] So I'll just read the,

[2:22:56] that the finance committee recommends

[2:22:58] that the executive committee recommend the general forum,

[2:23:00] the submission of municipal comments on the 2027 COG

[2:23:04] operating budget to the COG Executive Director

[2:23:07] by 5:00 PM October 21st, 2026

[2:23:11] for distribution two

[2:23:12] and discussion by the finance committee on

[2:23:14] October 22nd, 2026.

[2:23:18] The committee and staff's goal is for potential

[2:23:23] approval of the 2027 summary budget at the

[2:23:26] October, 2026 general form meeting.

[2:23:31] Anybody comfortable making that motion?

[2:23:33] - I, I'll move Mr. - Heller. Mr. Heller,

[2:23:38] - I'm sorry.

[2:23:39] Did somebody make the motion? Oh,

[2:23:40] - I just did, yes.

[2:23:42] - Yeah, I'll second it then.

[2:23:44] - Very good, thank you. Any other discussions?

[2:23:47] - If I may keep my hand up there

[2:23:49] - Please, please. You have discussion.

[2:23:51] - I just wanna say again, thank you to to COG

[2:23:54] and I know in the past there's always been very good

[2:23:56] relationships with the managers trying to figure out

[2:23:58] what meeting will work for them.

[2:24:00] So again, I look forward to that discussion

[2:24:03] and I think this will work just fine.

[2:24:05] So thank you.

[2:24:07] - Excellent. Any further discussion?

[2:24:11] Call the call the question.

[2:24:13] All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye.

[2:24:16] All those opposed, same sign.

[2:24:19] Motion carries other business.

[2:24:23] Does staff have any of the matters of record they wish

[2:24:26] to draw to the committee's attention? Not this

[2:24:31] - Matter of record, but this first opportunity that I can

[2:24:36] announce that COG was granted an LSA grant

[2:24:41] of $200,000 for the EV charging for

[2:24:47] the COG parking lot.

[2:24:48] It's half of what I asked for.

[2:24:51] But thanks to Gray Star's contribution

[2:24:54] to the Code Administration, we should be able to get

[2:24:57] that project done.

[2:24:59] So we will likely ask for a budget amendment next year.

[2:25:04] 'cause we are not going to upset the apple cart right

[2:25:07] now and change all of that.

[2:25:10] But we are very thankful that that was approved

[2:25:16] and that we can move forward with a project that has been

[2:25:19] on the books for a number of years now

[2:25:26] - Is isn't it?

[2:25:28] Does any intent?

[2:25:29] There was recently announcement of a grant window.

[2:25:35] We had some Harrisburg folks and whatnot in,

[2:25:39] and I think that that is ends in March.

[2:25:42] Any intent to go towards that

[2:25:44] - For the additional LSA funds

[2:25:46] - Or It's a totally, I think it was through,

[2:25:52] I just know from my county planning petition,

[2:25:54] had we just discussed it,

[2:25:56] - COG is not eligible for everything

[2:25:57] that the municipalities are. Okay.

[2:25:59] - I didn't know of that one.

[2:26:01] - This is the first year we've been eligible for LSA. Yeah.

[2:26:05] Through the OG group.

[2:26:07] We have been advocating to get COGS added to more

[2:26:11] of the enabling legislation

[2:26:13] to allow us to put in for more grants.

[2:26:15] But as it is, we are fairly restricted on

[2:26:19] what we can apply for.

[2:26:20] - Awesome. Okay.

[2:26:25] That's great news.

[2:26:29] Calendar reference links.

[2:26:31] Anything else for the good of the order?

[2:26:34] If not, I'd accept a motion to adju. I'll move.

[2:26:38] We are Adjourn. Thank you so much. Thanks everybody.

[2:27:13] - You are watching CNET Center County's Government

[2:27:16] and Educational Access Network.

[2:27:22] - Are you looking to stay active

[2:27:24] and healthy in the comfort of your own home?

[2:27:27] CNET has a variety of exercise programs designed

[2:27:30] to help you stay fit and increase strength and flexibility.

[2:27:34] Strength training. Moving freely

[2:27:36] and zesty chair exercises all work on improving flexibility,

[2:27:40] ease of movement, and core body strength.

[2:27:44] Gentle Yoga is a specifically designed yoga program

[2:27:46] that is easy on the joints and easy for beginners.

[2:27:51] Chair yoga has been created for those with limited mobility.

[2:27:54] C net's, exercise programs,

[2:27:56] air several times each week on channel 98 CETV.

[2:28:01] For specific airing times, please visit CNET one.org

[2:28:05] and click on CNET schedules

[2:28:07] or call CNET at (814) 238-5031.

[2:28:12] Nothing good on tv.

[2:28:15] You are just not watching the right channels.

9/17/26 Centre Region COG - Budget Work Session #4

Agenda

Transcript