1
00:00:00,719 --> 00:00:07,600
Thank you, Mrs. Ames. Uh, and Mrs.
Patrick,

2
00:00:05,600 --> 00:00:12,320
Mr. Barnhart has been to council
meetings repeatedly. And again, I would

3
00:00:10,480 --> 00:00:15,599
like to ask council president to
consider assigning this to committee to

4
00:00:14,240 --> 00:00:19,920
look into the cell phone because when we
did it last year, our answer basically

5
00:00:18,080 --> 00:00:23,600
was we were waiting on the state to do
something. And the state still hasn't

6
00:00:21,680 --> 00:00:27,119
done anything. And I don't know about
you, but I come within an inch of

7
00:00:25,600 --> 00:00:31,279
getting hit almost every time I go out
to take a drive. Now, the the cell

8
00:00:28,960 --> 00:00:34,399
phones are really a problem in the city
and I think it's something we should

9
00:00:32,399 --> 00:00:37,680
look into. I know after the whole red
light thing, you don't want to do

10
00:00:35,840 --> 00:00:42,480
something like this, but I think he's
got a very legitimate point. You know,

11
00:00:39,760 --> 00:00:46,719
it's a danger. Okay. Very good. Thank
you,

12
00:00:44,399 --> 00:00:52,719
Mr. Sharp. Thank you, President Arnold.
Uh, I'd like to address the statement by

13
00:00:50,320 --> 00:00:58,399
Mr. Spentagle about Jane Moss and the
parking. Uh when I first became elected

14
00:00:56,399 --> 00:01:03,440
council, I had several people come up to
me concerned about parking issues

15
00:01:00,079 --> 00:01:07,439
downtown. So I took it upon myself to
ask the mayor to be allowed to ride

16
00:01:05,680 --> 00:01:12,159
along with Jane and shadow her for a
day. And I was allowed to do that. And

17
00:01:10,320 --> 00:01:16,159
uh wow,
real appreciation for what she does.

18
00:01:13,840 --> 00:01:21,360
She's uh she's got way too much to do.
There's a lot of issues there. So I I

19
00:01:19,920 --> 00:01:26,640
think there's some I think it needs
reviewed. So, I asked for a review on it

20
00:01:23,920 --> 00:01:31,680
and the mayor had a set up a meeting for
me and him and uh Chief Moore and Jane

21
00:01:30,159 --> 00:01:36,159
Moss.
And the meeting uh the mayor wasn't able

22
00:01:34,799 --> 00:01:41,680
to make it, but Matt Allen was and
Matt's very informed on on that topic.

23
00:01:39,119 --> 00:01:45,560
Matt and Chief both had a lot of good
ideas, good understand.

24
00:01:45,920 --> 00:01:50,119
However, nothing came out of that.

25
00:01:51,600 --> 00:01:59,640
would like to see on that
group. I think poss

26
00:02:12,879 --> 00:02:17,760
to something there and I think we should
form a committee on that too and I'd be

27
00:02:15,920 --> 00:02:22,720
willing to serve on and work on both
those committees. Okay. Very good. Thank

28
00:02:20,800 --> 00:02:27,440
you.
Any other old vis?

29
00:02:25,120 --> 00:02:31,040
Thank you, President Arnard. Um, I tell
you, I never been so popular over the

30
00:02:29,120 --> 00:02:36,959
past week. Um, I know the weather's
good. Uh, kids games, neighbors, grocery

31
00:02:34,080 --> 00:02:40,720
store, everywhere I went, don't raise
their water rates. Okay, number one

32
00:02:39,040 --> 00:02:45,360
topic. I didn't hear anyone mentioning
to raise the rates. And so with that,

33
00:02:43,680 --> 00:02:50,400
um, obviously being the head of the
finance committee, you know, I really

34
00:02:47,040 --> 00:02:54,720
haven't seen the numbers, okay? And so I
I'd appreciate maybe, you know, I don't

35
00:02:52,879 --> 00:03:01,440
know what the rush is this evening to
pass, but can we can we possibly have a

36
00:02:58,160 --> 00:03:05,360
utilities committee review uh this week
or next before the next council meeting?

37
00:03:03,599 --> 00:03:08,720
Because if I understand correctly, we we
really don't have to act upon this

38
00:03:06,640 --> 00:03:13,760
tonight. There's no deadlines pending on
any of these legislation items so that

39
00:03:11,360 --> 00:03:17,760
we can basically ask the questions
around, you know, the financial pieces

40
00:03:15,920 --> 00:03:23,360
of it.
I can't Patrick, sure. Uh, which the

41
00:03:22,080 --> 00:03:27,760
recommendation of the rate review
committee was to not raise the rates

42
00:03:25,440 --> 00:03:32,319
until we get the cost allocation study.
We have to decide one way or another by

43
00:03:30,080 --> 00:03:36,000
April, beginning of April. So, this is
just not to do anything until we get the

44
00:03:34,159 --> 00:03:42,000
study.
And could we possibly then delay the

45
00:03:38,640 --> 00:03:47,519
three read uh waving of uh item number
four on the study at least to make sure

46
00:03:44,319 --> 00:03:51,760
that we're covering everything answer
everyone's questions in regards to

47
00:03:49,040 --> 00:03:55,200
spending $10,000 for this study. And and
the reason I bring that up is because

48
00:03:53,840 --> 00:03:59,680
we're we're going to base this study
based on a current way we do things,

49
00:03:57,840 --> 00:04:03,120
right? and and that may not be how we
actually process water bills, for

50
00:04:01,439 --> 00:04:07,120
example, in the future. And when I think
of that, I think of a and gas. You

51
00:04:05,760 --> 00:04:10,879
actually don't even go into either one
of those facilities to turn your water

52
00:04:08,400 --> 00:04:14,799
or turn your utilities on and off. So, I
I don't I don't really want to make sure

53
00:04:12,080 --> 00:04:17,440
that we have a a study done on our
current processes that doesn't

54
00:04:16,000 --> 00:04:21,440
incorporate maybe the way we do it in
the future. That's kind of what my

55
00:04:18,720 --> 00:04:26,639
concern is. if I could just have a a
time to spend on the numbers because

56
00:04:24,240 --> 00:04:30,880
what I understand is there's 850,000
been charged over the last five years

57
00:04:28,639 --> 00:04:34,400
and now all of a sudden back to the
general fund all of a sudden that goes

58
00:04:32,320 --> 00:04:41,040
up to 1.4 million, which I understand
that's a concern. That's 66% increase.

59
00:04:37,600 --> 00:04:44,800
Have we asked the question of why? We
haven't even asked why that went up 66%.

60
00:04:43,440 --> 00:04:48,960
And I don't feel that I've got, you
know, enough information to really go

61
00:04:47,360 --> 00:04:52,000
forward the study just yet. Like I said,
we just need maybe a review session.

62
00:04:50,400 --> 00:04:56,560
That's what I'm asking for. The reason
I've asked for this is to justify the

63
00:04:54,400 --> 00:05:00,400
numbers. This study will justify what
can and can't be taken out of utilities

64
00:04:58,400 --> 00:05:03,360
and put back into the general fund. And
until we do the study, we can't

65
00:05:01,919 --> 00:05:08,880
determine whether or not we need to do
anything with the rates.

66
00:05:06,320 --> 00:05:12,560
I don't need a study to know. I guess
I'm looking from an angle of I don't

67
00:05:10,639 --> 00:05:17,680
need a study to basically determine. I
need to know why did we charge 1.4

68
00:05:14,960 --> 00:05:22,080
million period. I don't know how what
numbers made up the 1.4 struggle. And

69
00:05:20,400 --> 00:05:28,479
that's the reason I've asked for that.
It used to be 857,000

70
00:05:24,720 --> 00:05:31,440
and it went up to 1.39 million. And I I
want justification and that's the way to

71
00:05:30,000 --> 00:05:36,639
do it. And this is something the state
auditor will accept as, you know,

72
00:05:34,800 --> 00:05:39,680
concrete evidence. I don't I don't want
to dwell on it too much, but I I think

73
00:05:38,400 --> 00:05:43,360
that that's something we can ask it
ourselves internally, right? We we

74
00:05:41,120 --> 00:05:49,680
created the number. Well, no, that's the
problem. We didn't who did the previous

75
00:05:45,600 --> 00:05:54,639
auditor did and Mr. Spaggle, he's looked
at it and I won't I'll let him address

76
00:05:51,840 --> 00:06:00,400
it. Um,
do you have anything to add?

77
00:05:58,000 --> 00:06:04,000
If uh
if I understand your question, it's how

78
00:06:02,560 --> 00:06:09,360
did the how did we come up with the
number the 1.4 million? I don't have an

79
00:06:06,479 --> 00:06:16,080
answer. I can't answer that question. It
was from 2009 to 2010

80
00:06:13,759 --> 00:06:21,120
the reimbursement cap was raised
significantly and that was a decision

81
00:06:18,400 --> 00:06:27,280
that was made pretty recently. It was
made in December of 2009 right before I

82
00:06:24,160 --> 00:06:33,280
started. I I have no idea what
theification is for that and

83
00:06:31,039 --> 00:06:33,280
I

84
00:07:46,400 --> 00:07:52,479
one from 2003 which doesn't take into
account that the billing was no longer

85
00:07:50,400 --> 00:07:55,919
done down in the auditor's office. It's
done upstairs. I mean, there's, you

86
00:07:54,160 --> 00:08:00,560
know, some basic changes to the way we
do business that aren't taken into

87
00:07:57,759 --> 00:08:04,400
account with the old study.
And that's the reason for the new the

88
00:08:02,400 --> 00:08:08,560
need for the new study. And you can also
use that study for grants. And again,

89
00:08:07,120 --> 00:08:12,560
it's justification for the state
auditor.

90
00:08:10,960 --> 00:08:17,280
And I guess I'd like to comment on what
you stated earlier is that there's no

91
00:08:15,280 --> 00:08:21,199
guarantee that we won't back pay anyway.
Right. If this study comes back and it

92
00:08:18,960 --> 00:08:23,759
says we were overcharging,
just because we're doing it doesn't mean

93
00:08:22,400 --> 00:08:27,039
we're going to not have to back pay.
That That's correct. Right. I I don't

94
00:08:25,440 --> 00:08:33,440
think there's any guarantee of anything
with the results of the study.

95
00:08:30,319 --> 00:08:38,719
I my only point was I I don't think that
I mean I'm I'm just I'm kind of new

96
00:08:35,599 --> 00:08:42,560
here, but I don't I don't agree with the
the proposition that we should just do

97
00:08:40,640 --> 00:08:46,399
nothing.
Even if it's been done wrong, I think it

98
00:08:44,240 --> 00:08:50,880
needs to be corrected
or or we need evidence one way or

99
00:08:48,160 --> 00:08:55,839
another.
That's my that's my point of view. I

100
00:08:53,760 --> 00:08:59,360
guess I'm just asking for another I I
don't see we have April 1st is our

101
00:08:57,760 --> 00:09:02,959
deadline.
We have another council meeting between

102
00:09:00,959 --> 00:09:07,120
here and there. And I just would like to
have a utilities review meeting so that

103
00:09:04,720 --> 00:09:11,920
we can address this particular item in
detail to make sure we can dot all our

104
00:09:10,320 --> 00:09:15,760
eyes cross all of our tees to know that
we actually truly need to spend 10,000

105
00:09:13,920 --> 00:09:20,399
on this study and that we've looked at
it internally as well. That's my take on

106
00:09:18,399 --> 00:09:24,560
it. And if it's so busy you need to pass
it tonight, then I probably will not uh

107
00:09:22,560 --> 00:09:32,320
be voting for that. That's just make
that clear. Actually $7,000. Correct. It

108
00:09:28,320 --> 00:09:32,320
the cost will be 7,000. Yes.