[0:00] Thank you, Mrs. Ames. Uh, and Mrs.
Patrick,
[0:05] Mr. Barnhart has been to council
meetings repeatedly. And again, I would
[0:10] like to ask council president to
consider assigning this to committee to
[0:14] look into the cell phone because when we
did it last year, our answer basically
[0:18] was we were waiting on the state to do
something. And the state still hasn't
[0:21] done anything. And I don't know about
you, but I come within an inch of
[0:25] getting hit almost every time I go out
to take a drive. Now, the the cell
[0:28] phones are really a problem in the city
and I think it's something we should
[0:32] look into. I know after the whole red
light thing, you don't want to do
[0:35] something like this, but I think he's
got a very legitimate point. You know,
[0:39] it's a danger. Okay. Very good. Thank
you,
[0:44] Mr. Sharp. Thank you, President Arnold.
Uh, I'd like to address the statement by
[0:50] Mr. Spentagle about Jane Moss and the
parking. Uh when I first became elected
[0:56] council, I had several people come up to
me concerned about parking issues
[1:00] downtown. So I took it upon myself to
ask the mayor to be allowed to ride
[1:05] along with Jane and shadow her for a
day. And I was allowed to do that. And
[1:10] uh wow,
real appreciation for what she does.
[1:13] She's uh she's got way too much to do.
There's a lot of issues there. So I I
[1:19] think there's some I think it needs
reviewed. So, I asked for a review on it
[1:23] and the mayor had a set up a meeting for
me and him and uh Chief Moore and Jane
[1:30] Moss.
And the meeting uh the mayor wasn't able
[1:34] to make it, but Matt Allen was and
Matt's very informed on on that topic.
[1:39] Matt and Chief both had a lot of good
ideas, good understand.
[1:45] However, nothing came out of that.
[1:51] would like to see on that
group. I think poss
[2:12] to something there and I think we should
form a committee on that too and I'd be
[2:15] willing to serve on and work on both
those committees. Okay. Very good. Thank
[2:20] you.
Any other old vis?
[2:25] Thank you, President Arnard. Um, I tell
you, I never been so popular over the
[2:29] past week. Um, I know the weather's
good. Uh, kids games, neighbors, grocery
[2:34] store, everywhere I went, don't raise
their water rates. Okay, number one
[2:39] topic. I didn't hear anyone mentioning
to raise the rates. And so with that,
[2:43] um, obviously being the head of the
finance committee, you know, I really
[2:47] haven't seen the numbers, okay? And so I
I'd appreciate maybe, you know, I don't
[2:52] know what the rush is this evening to
pass, but can we can we possibly have a
[2:58] utilities committee review uh this week
or next before the next council meeting?
[3:03] Because if I understand correctly, we we
really don't have to act upon this
[3:06] tonight. There's no deadlines pending on
any of these legislation items so that
[3:11] we can basically ask the questions
around, you know, the financial pieces
[3:15] of it.
I can't Patrick, sure. Uh, which the
[3:22] recommendation of the rate review
committee was to not raise the rates
[3:25] until we get the cost allocation study.
We have to decide one way or another by
[3:30] April, beginning of April. So, this is
just not to do anything until we get the
[3:34] study.
And could we possibly then delay the
[3:38] three read uh waving of uh item number
four on the study at least to make sure
[3:44] that we're covering everything answer
everyone's questions in regards to
[3:49] spending $10,000 for this study. And and
the reason I bring that up is because
[3:53] we're we're going to base this study
based on a current way we do things,
[3:57] right? and and that may not be how we
actually process water bills, for
[4:01] example, in the future. And when I think
of that, I think of a and gas. You
[4:05] actually don't even go into either one
of those facilities to turn your water
[4:08] or turn your utilities on and off. So, I
I don't I don't really want to make sure
[4:12] that we have a a study done on our
current processes that doesn't
[4:16] incorporate maybe the way we do it in
the future. That's kind of what my
[4:18] concern is. if I could just have a a
time to spend on the numbers because
[4:24] what I understand is there's 850,000
been charged over the last five years
[4:28] and now all of a sudden back to the
general fund all of a sudden that goes
[4:32] up to 1.4 million, which I understand
that's a concern. That's 66% increase.
[4:37] Have we asked the question of why? We
haven't even asked why that went up 66%.
[4:43] And I don't feel that I've got, you
know, enough information to really go
[4:47] forward the study just yet. Like I said,
we just need maybe a review session.
[4:50] That's what I'm asking for. The reason
I've asked for this is to justify the
[4:54] numbers. This study will justify what
can and can't be taken out of utilities
[4:58] and put back into the general fund. And
until we do the study, we can't
[5:01] determine whether or not we need to do
anything with the rates.
[5:06] I don't need a study to know. I guess
I'm looking from an angle of I don't
[5:10] need a study to basically determine. I
need to know why did we charge 1.4
[5:14] million period. I don't know how what
numbers made up the 1.4 struggle. And
[5:20] that's the reason I've asked for that.
It used to be 857,000
[5:24] and it went up to 1.39 million. And I I
want justification and that's the way to
[5:30] do it. And this is something the state
auditor will accept as, you know,
[5:34] concrete evidence. I don't I don't want
to dwell on it too much, but I I think
[5:38] that that's something we can ask it
ourselves internally, right? We we
[5:41] created the number. Well, no, that's the
problem. We didn't who did the previous
[5:45] auditor did and Mr. Spaggle, he's looked
at it and I won't I'll let him address
[5:51] it. Um,
do you have anything to add?
[5:58] If uh
if I understand your question, it's how
[6:02] did the how did we come up with the
number the 1.4 million? I don't have an
[6:06] answer. I can't answer that question. It
was from 2009 to 2010
[6:13] the reimbursement cap was raised
significantly and that was a decision
[6:18] that was made pretty recently. It was
made in December of 2009 right before I
[6:24] started. I I have no idea what
theification is for that and
[6:31] I
[7:46] one from 2003 which doesn't take into
account that the billing was no longer
[7:50] done down in the auditor's office. It's
done upstairs. I mean, there's, you
[7:54] know, some basic changes to the way we
do business that aren't taken into
[7:57] account with the old study.
And that's the reason for the new the
[8:02] need for the new study. And you can also
use that study for grants. And again,
[8:07] it's justification for the state
auditor.
[8:10] And I guess I'd like to comment on what
you stated earlier is that there's no
[8:15] guarantee that we won't back pay anyway.
Right. If this study comes back and it
[8:18] says we were overcharging,
just because we're doing it doesn't mean
[8:22] we're going to not have to back pay.
That That's correct. Right. I I don't
[8:25] think there's any guarantee of anything
with the results of the study.
[8:30] I my only point was I I don't think that
I mean I'm I'm just I'm kind of new
[8:35] here, but I don't I don't agree with the
the proposition that we should just do
[8:40] nothing.
Even if it's been done wrong, I think it
[8:44] needs to be corrected
or or we need evidence one way or
[8:48] another.
That's my that's my point of view. I
[8:53] guess I'm just asking for another I I
don't see we have April 1st is our
[8:57] deadline.
We have another council meeting between
[9:00] here and there. And I just would like to
have a utilities review meeting so that
[9:04] we can address this particular item in
detail to make sure we can dot all our
[9:10] eyes cross all of our tees to know that
we actually truly need to spend 10,000
[9:13] on this study and that we've looked at
it internally as well. That's my take on
[9:18] it. And if it's so busy you need to pass
it tonight, then I probably will not uh
[9:22] be voting for that. That's just make
that clear. Actually $7,000. Correct. It
[9:28] the cost will be 7,000. Yes.