1 00:00:06,480 --> 00:00:13,679 Okay, welcome everybody. We'll begin this evening with an executive session 2 00:00:11,599 --> 00:00:19,000 uh to discuss with legal council pending or potential litigation pursuant to 3 00:00:16,000 --> 00:00:19,000 RCW4230.110 4 00:00:20,080 --> 00:00:29,039 subsection 1 paragraph I. Executive sessions are closed to the public 5 00:00:26,080 --> 00:00:35,680 pursuant to state law. We will convene into executive session at 5:51 6 00:00:33,440 --> 00:00:41,680 for about 10 minutes and we expect to return to council chambers at 6 p.m. We 7 00:00:39,040 --> 00:00:48,640 invite city manager Pingle, HR Director Westman, and city attorney 8 00:00:45,600 --> 00:00:54,520 Schaefer. Thank you, to join the executive session. After the executive 9 00:00:50,719 --> 00:00:54,520 session, the council will 10 00:06:31,120 --> 00:06:39,520 and the council has reconvened. Um, the council did not take any action while in 11 00:06:36,479 --> 00:06:44,800 executive session. We're going to go into our study session 12 00:06:42,400 --> 00:06:44,800 about FS. 13 00:08:55,680 --> 00:09:00,920 Chris, can you hear us? >> We are still recording. So, 14 00:09:01,680 --> 00:09:08,000 » can't hear you. Hold on. >> IT person to figure out. 15 00:09:06,399 --> 00:09:11,880 » We'll get it figured out. >> You can hear us obviously. 16 00:09:20,640 --> 00:09:23,959 Try again. 17 00:09:25,760 --> 00:09:34,760 » Yes, we can barely hear you. So, >> that's good. 18 00:09:31,440 --> 00:09:34,760 » Now try. 19 00:09:35,360 --> 00:09:38,360 Oh, 20 00:09:40,480 --> 00:09:43,800 now go. 21 00:10:24,959 --> 00:10:29,079 It's still just coming out of here. 22 00:10:32,800 --> 00:10:36,040 Go again. 23 00:10:37,519 --> 00:10:41,560 » How well can you guys hear that? 24 00:10:41,600 --> 00:10:46,800 » I mean, I can hear, but it's not very loud 25 00:10:44,399 --> 00:10:49,800 » because it's coming through the machine. Um, 26 00:10:50,160 --> 00:10:58,880 » did you try all of them? >> I did. Um, 27 00:10:55,680 --> 00:10:58,880 » try again. 28 00:11:03,920 --> 00:11:10,079 Try again. >> I think he's just talking. Um, 29 00:11:08,560 --> 00:11:13,240 » it's only this is the only one that it goes through. 30 00:11:20,560 --> 00:11:23,560 » Yeah. 31 00:11:24,640 --> 00:11:28,800 » We can hear him through. Is it Is it going through the TV or is it going 32 00:11:28,240 --> 00:11:30,079 through the >> It's going through. 33 00:11:29,279 --> 00:11:35,000 » It's going through there. >> Yeah. 34 00:11:32,000 --> 00:11:35,000 » Um 35 00:11:35,839 --> 00:11:38,839 » Well, 36 00:11:40,959 --> 00:11:46,480 it's I don't know. I don't know. >> Yeah. Try. 37 00:11:45,120 --> 00:11:50,240 » It randomly works and it randomly doesn't. 38 00:11:49,360 --> 00:11:53,800 » Yes. >> Yeah, it's the same. 39 00:11:55,440 --> 00:12:01,760 Yeah, it's something with the mic in and the mic out. The audio. Yeah. 40 00:12:00,079 --> 00:12:06,639 » And which one you choose? >> It's something there. That's what it 41 00:12:05,839 --> 00:12:11,519 » change this one. >> I would just mess with all of them 42 00:12:08,560 --> 00:12:14,839 because I'm no way. >> Now go. 43 00:12:15,920 --> 00:12:20,920 » Same. Now go. 44 00:12:22,000 --> 00:12:25,399 That's not it. 45 00:12:25,440 --> 00:12:28,760 There we go. 46 00:12:31,440 --> 00:12:35,880 That's the only one that gets him. 47 00:12:38,800 --> 00:12:48,560 So, we can try your best to put that mic down by the speaker that's by your leg 48 00:12:45,040 --> 00:12:52,079 or we can I don't know call them on the phone and put that on speaker. Sure. 49 00:12:50,000 --> 00:12:54,800 It's one of those things that I don't know. 50 00:12:53,040 --> 00:13:00,680 » That might be easier. I'm going to call you. 51 00:12:57,680 --> 00:13:00,680 » Okay. 52 00:13:11,760 --> 00:13:19,440 » Hello. >> Talk some more. 53 00:13:16,639 --> 00:13:25,399 » Hello. Hello. It's gonna have to do. 54 00:13:22,399 --> 00:13:25,399 » All right. 55 00:13:31,760 --> 00:13:35,880 » As long as you can hear me. Okay. 56 00:13:37,839 --> 00:13:43,160 » What's that? >> He just said, "As long as you can hear 57 00:13:39,920 --> 00:13:43,160 me." Okay. 58 00:13:46,800 --> 00:13:50,839 » They pick up. I can. 59 00:13:59,440 --> 00:14:05,279 » All right. >> Okay. 60 00:14:02,320 --> 00:14:12,800 Well, we um are going to have a study session about fiscal sustainability. 61 00:14:09,120 --> 00:14:18,399 Um let the record show that all council members are present except for council 62 00:14:15,360 --> 00:14:23,440 member Berford. Um, city manager Pingle, are you 63 00:14:21,040 --> 00:14:29,279 starting us off? >> Thank you, Mayor. Um 64 00:14:26,800 --> 00:14:36,480 so as we talked about at the retreat and and since um we want to talk through 65 00:14:33,839 --> 00:14:44,240 potential options um as far as the fiscal sustainability model goes. Um 66 00:14:40,720 --> 00:14:50,000 we are super happy to consider um other expenditure reduction options 67 00:14:47,600 --> 00:14:56,480 if there are suggestions for those. we've implemented what we've put up in 68 00:14:52,639 --> 00:15:02,800 the past um as far as um things that are significant. Um and so we do uh we have 69 00:15:01,199 --> 00:15:09,519 been looking generally at revenue options um potential timing for those 70 00:15:05,199 --> 00:15:15,360 and what those look like. Um and so uh the other thing that we talked about 71 00:15:11,120 --> 00:15:19,120 at the retreat um and that um staff was um asked to provide is um a 72 00:15:17,760 --> 00:15:24,560 recommendation on a fiscal sustainability task force. And so in the 73 00:15:20,959 --> 00:15:31,040 packet was a draft charter. Um what what would be wonderful to get out of today's 74 00:15:26,959 --> 00:15:36,560 study session is um working the the council working through potential 75 00:15:32,480 --> 00:15:44,720 options um in an effort to provide some direction to that fiscal sustainability 76 00:15:40,639 --> 00:15:48,959 task force. Um if if we like the draft, I think that that's something that's 77 00:15:46,079 --> 00:15:54,399 easy to um put on the regular meeting, add it to the agenda and and adopt it. 78 00:15:52,639 --> 00:16:00,000 Um, if there are changes that you want to the draft charter, we can bring it 79 00:15:56,320 --> 00:16:06,000 back to a future meeting. Um, but what I would love to get out of the session is 80 00:16:02,160 --> 00:16:13,839 to walk through options. Um and um in an effort to dial up that task 81 00:16:10,480 --> 00:16:20,399 force, um it it's much more difficult to get some to get what we want out of the 82 00:16:16,880 --> 00:16:24,240 task force um if we're just um 83 00:16:22,560 --> 00:16:32,079 putting people on a task force and giving them um you know telling them go, 84 00:16:30,079 --> 00:16:36,480 but they're going blindly if if they don't know what where the council stands 85 00:16:34,240 --> 00:16:40,000 or what the council's preference is or direction is. Um it's much more 86 00:16:38,399 --> 00:16:46,000 difficult to get out of that task force what we want. Um and so what I would how 87 00:16:43,680 --> 00:16:52,560 however the discussion goes, I would love us to be moving towards some some 88 00:16:49,440 --> 00:16:57,600 direction um so that that task force can be put together and have 89 00:16:55,199 --> 00:17:02,720 a direction to go in from the council as they get together and and try to provide 90 00:17:00,399 --> 00:17:08,079 um help to the council and in looking through these options. 91 00:17:05,839 --> 00:17:12,400 » Thank you. Um, so we'll just kind of we we had a 92 00:17:10,480 --> 00:17:19,520 discussion about this at our retreat which was a good start. Um, 93 00:17:16,880 --> 00:17:26,319 does anyone have any clarifying questions from that 94 00:17:22,319 --> 00:17:32,679 discussion to start with or we can I'm just welcome to open the discussion. 95 00:17:29,039 --> 00:17:32,679 Council member Jacobs 96 00:17:32,720 --> 00:17:44,400 » just had one question. Um, so I looked at the population for 200 or 97 00:17:39,919 --> 00:17:48,000 the estimated population for 2027. Um, 98 00:17:46,000 --> 00:17:54,440 do we have any idea how many actual households encompass the 14,000 99 00:17:51,440 --> 00:17:54,440 residents? 100 00:17:55,039 --> 00:18:02,160 » Um, I can get a better number. I don't have that right off the top of my head, 101 00:17:58,640 --> 00:18:05,160 but we're in the the 3,3500 range. 102 00:18:06,640 --> 00:18:14,200 Does that answer your question? >> Yeah. 103 00:18:11,200 --> 00:18:14,200 » Okay. 104 00:18:14,880 --> 00:18:20,320 » Can I ask why you're asking that question so I can understand where 105 00:18:19,120 --> 00:18:24,240 you're coming from? >> Yeah. No, I was just uh playing around 106 00:18:22,080 --> 00:18:32,559 with the numbers and using 4% as a starting point 107 00:18:28,320 --> 00:18:38,320 of the utility tax dividing that by the residents. I was just trying to get a 108 00:18:34,320 --> 00:18:42,320 handle on households which might be interpreted a little better than saying 109 00:18:40,320 --> 00:18:46,799 each person the tax would burden would be on each 110 00:18:44,640 --> 00:18:52,080 person versus the household. That that was the reason for that. 111 00:18:47,919 --> 00:18:56,240 » Okay. Yeah, that makes sense. Thank you. So, um, 112 00:18:54,720 --> 00:19:01,919 feel free to raise your hand if you have anything to to say, but, um, just to get 113 00:18:58,880 --> 00:19:07,440 the conversation going, I, um, and I'd ask, um, Chris to jump on, 114 00:19:05,760 --> 00:19:14,400 um, I don't want to speak for him, but, I really did like, um, during the 115 00:19:10,480 --> 00:19:19,280 retreat discussion, um, the 116 00:19:16,400 --> 00:19:24,559 he put out a I think an attainable goal of of 117 00:19:21,600 --> 00:19:28,559 being above that red line, that um kind of minimum fund balance for the general 118 00:19:26,720 --> 00:19:33,840 fund, but you know, at least through I I 119 00:19:30,400 --> 00:19:40,160 believe you said 2032 at the retreat um Chris, but um 120 00:19:37,520 --> 00:19:43,720 this the graphs we're looking at only go through 2030. 121 00:19:45,200 --> 00:19:52,160 » Yeah. So, I'm going to jump in here real quick. Um yeah, I was just looking at um 122 00:19:50,080 --> 00:19:58,720 the and let me know if you can't hear me very well, but uh I was just looking at 123 00:19:54,000 --> 00:20:05,120 that red line um out to 2030, which is what shows on our uh which 124 00:20:01,120 --> 00:20:12,559 shows on the on the um sustainability work sustainability worksheet. So yeah, 125 00:20:09,280 --> 00:20:18,720 that was I mean I think that from my standpoint my opinion is obviously we 126 00:20:14,880 --> 00:20:22,720 can't I don't think we can flatten it completely. I think it is I think it's 127 00:20:20,880 --> 00:20:30,159 going to have to move toward the red line over the next um five you know four 128 00:20:27,679 --> 00:20:36,000 uh starting in 2027 the next four fiscal years. Um, so 129 00:20:33,760 --> 00:20:42,880 that's where I am on that on this. And I think uh and and um and I'd be 130 00:20:39,200 --> 00:20:46,480 interested to hear um what other people saw as they as they went through the 131 00:20:45,039 --> 00:20:53,360 worksheet and tried some different scenarios. But um just being above the 132 00:20:49,600 --> 00:20:58,200 line at 2030 um just was was my go was my personal goal in analyzing this data. 133 00:21:00,240 --> 00:21:09,039 I do have one other question or one question. Um, what was the growth rate 134 00:21:06,640 --> 00:21:12,240 on expenditures that was used in the projections? Do you have an idea the 135 00:21:11,200 --> 00:21:16,559 average growth rate? >> So, I don't have an average growth rate 136 00:21:14,080 --> 00:21:21,760 because it was the projections are put together with the line item budget and 137 00:21:19,280 --> 00:21:25,600 projecting out each line item and so every line item is treated separately. 138 00:21:23,840 --> 00:21:29,520 So there's line items that stay fairly constant and so we kept those fairly 139 00:21:27,360 --> 00:21:37,520 constant and there's line items that go up naturally and so we grew salaries and 140 00:21:34,000 --> 00:21:42,799 benefits according to how we have a step chart and we have um and have generally 141 00:21:41,280 --> 00:21:48,720 provided a cost of living adjustment. And so we we escalated those line items 142 00:21:46,000 --> 00:21:53,919 accordingly and then anything that has a regular escalator we use that. And so 143 00:21:51,280 --> 00:21:57,919 not every line item was treated the same. We tried to project out based on 144 00:21:56,240 --> 00:22:04,480 what that line item's been doing, the history of it, and how it might grow. 145 00:22:01,360 --> 00:22:08,799 » So, but there would be like an overall um percentage that's probably remained 146 00:22:06,720 --> 00:22:13,280 somewhat constant year after year, wouldn't it? Or did it vary? not because 147 00:22:11,039 --> 00:22:16,640 most of our outside of the things that naturally increase 148 00:22:15,120 --> 00:22:21,840 » um there's we've reduced a lot of 149 00:22:19,440 --> 00:22:25,440 expenditures over the last three years and so there's not like if if we were 150 00:22:23,919 --> 00:22:27,760 going to trend that we would be trending backwards which we're not going to do 151 00:22:27,360 --> 00:22:30,720 that >> right 152 00:22:28,320 --> 00:22:35,760 » um and so we've tried to just we didn't keep things artificially low we tried to 153 00:22:33,520 --> 00:22:40,880 keep things at a okay we're this is a constant that we can um feel confident 154 00:22:38,559 --> 00:22:45,840 with in the projection And then those things with escalators, we tried to 155 00:22:42,640 --> 00:22:50,640 escalate them um sufficiently without creating a whole bunch of fluff. And so, 156 00:22:48,559 --> 00:22:54,240 you know, public safety increases, salary and benefits, insurance cost 157 00:22:52,400 --> 00:22:59,200 increases, those things we tried to keep on a on a on a trending increase. And 158 00:22:56,960 --> 00:23:04,559 they're all a little bit different. Um, but most of the bulk of line items are 159 00:23:02,559 --> 00:23:10,400 fairly constant or we've really tried to reduce um, and lean those out over the 160 00:23:08,320 --> 00:23:15,360 last few years. And so there's not like a a trend to follow and so we tried to 161 00:23:13,520 --> 00:23:18,880 just keep those safe without making them fluffy. 162 00:23:16,159 --> 00:23:23,520 » Okay. Thank you for the explanation to the manager. 163 00:23:20,960 --> 00:23:27,240 » Thank you. Uh, can we go to the model utility tax tab? 164 00:23:29,360 --> 00:23:34,000 Yeah. Where where do you want to go with it? There's six of them. 165 00:23:32,080 --> 00:23:37,520 » Uh I was I was just curious in the model utility text. Um 166 00:23:36,240 --> 00:23:38,799 » it's old. >> It's old. 167 00:23:38,240 --> 00:23:41,600 » Yeah. >> So it's not relevant to anything we're 168 00:23:40,080 --> 00:23:47,440 discussing. Okay. I was going to ask if we could uh stratify based on different 169 00:23:44,640 --> 00:23:52,960 utilities. Um and that's an option for us if we were interested in utility tax. 170 00:23:49,760 --> 00:23:57,360 » Um yeah, we can do that but not tonight. We haven't used that 171 00:23:55,200 --> 00:24:02,400 tab at least in the last three and a half years. 172 00:23:58,640 --> 00:24:08,320 » Yeah. So I I think um I was interested looking at so do we need to 173 00:24:05,600 --> 00:24:13,360 do we need to escalate or lower everything at a uniform rate or can we 174 00:24:10,880 --> 00:24:16,320 have you know say 4% for one thing and and 2% for another. 175 00:24:14,559 --> 00:24:20,720 » So you can absolutely implement a utility tax that way. Um, and I would 176 00:24:18,880 --> 00:24:24,559 imagine we could update that tab to do that. We haven't looked at it that way 177 00:24:22,720 --> 00:24:27,039 and so we haven't prepared to do that. >> Yeah. 178 00:24:24,960 --> 00:24:31,679 » But if the council implemented a utility tax, you could you could have different 179 00:24:29,679 --> 00:24:35,279 tax rates for different utilities. >> Yeah. Okay. Yeah. I appreciate that. 180 00:24:33,039 --> 00:24:40,000 Sorry. And I apologize for not flying ahead of time. I was interested in that. 181 00:24:36,720 --> 00:24:43,679 The um to for staff to prepare. I think I'd be interested in having a 182 00:24:41,039 --> 00:24:49,440 conversation if we're looking at that about uh a higher rate for the more 183 00:24:46,880 --> 00:24:53,200 energy intensive things. I know there's certain things like I believe uh 184 00:24:51,120 --> 00:24:55,679 telecommunications on there. I'd be interested in lowering that one because 185 00:24:54,640 --> 00:25:01,840 I don't think that's as energy intensive. cable TV I was curious about 186 00:24:58,640 --> 00:25:05,360 given the um I feel like a lot of folks stream things nowadays and I feel like 187 00:25:03,360 --> 00:25:11,120 that would go generally into electric and I know ju me speaking as a Gen Z 188 00:25:08,880 --> 00:25:16,159 person I know like none of my friends have cable TV so I think it might kind 189 00:25:13,440 --> 00:25:21,760 of unfairly target older folks potentially um so I was interested in 190 00:25:19,279 --> 00:25:28,400 looking at what is most energy intensive and then maybe putting a higher weight 191 00:25:24,159 --> 00:25:34,640 on that and Then personally I was I was um if we're talking about sort of things 192 00:25:31,440 --> 00:25:41,120 we're looking at the um I'd be interested in some combination of that 193 00:25:36,960 --> 00:25:47,039 uh public uh.1% public safety sales tax uh transportation benefit district and 194 00:25:44,240 --> 00:25:51,120 sort of uh taking a holistic approach to adding all that. So if you wouldn't mind 195 00:25:48,320 --> 00:25:54,640 turning on is the the new tenant space is that currently on or is that off? 196 00:25:53,039 --> 00:25:58,400 » It's it's currently off. I can turn that on. 197 00:25:54,880 --> 00:26:04,279 » Yeah. We turn that on and then turn on um transportation 198 00:26:00,559 --> 00:26:04,279 benefit district tabs. 199 00:26:05,760 --> 00:26:10,360 Uh public safety sales tax.1%. 200 00:26:13,440 --> 00:26:20,320 Then the utility tax would be some level of I guess it wouldn't be the flat rates 201 00:26:18,880 --> 00:26:24,320 show on the screen if we're talking about the energy intensive approach, but 202 00:26:22,240 --> 00:26:27,320 you could just do 3% I guess for for example. 203 00:26:28,480 --> 00:26:36,960 So, I think when I look at this, the uh public safety sales tax and 204 00:26:34,640 --> 00:26:40,559 transportation benefit district, well, transportation benefit district uh goes 205 00:26:39,120 --> 00:26:44,159 to more folks that are potentially financially able given that it' be based 206 00:26:42,480 --> 00:26:47,360 on vehicles that you own, right? I want to make sure that uh young folks that 207 00:26:46,159 --> 00:26:51,200 are renting, I want to make sure that older folks on a fixed income are, you 208 00:26:50,000 --> 00:26:54,400 know, those are the people I'm thinking about the most when we're looking at 209 00:26:52,400 --> 00:26:59,360 revenue options. Um 0.1% public safety sales tax. I think 210 00:26:57,360 --> 00:27:03,600 that's you know a small amount and that is something that uh could be more 211 00:27:01,039 --> 00:27:10,400 uniform and then if we're looking at utility tax too and then you know 212 00:27:06,559 --> 00:27:14,559 putting the sort of uh energy intensive options higher that could be folks have 213 00:27:12,240 --> 00:27:18,080 some agency and also as a you know when we're looking at how we reduce our 214 00:27:15,679 --> 00:27:23,039 carbon footprint as well. I think um that could be a potential approach. I'd 215 00:27:20,880 --> 00:27:28,200 love to hear what other other folks have too, but just to get the ball rolling. 216 00:27:31,600 --> 00:27:39,360 » Oh, I I um I too was approaching this from uh trying to look at a variety of 217 00:27:37,679 --> 00:27:43,360 different revenue streams because they are going to vary from year to year and 218 00:27:41,039 --> 00:27:49,760 I think it's best to have um kind of a broad approach to solving this 219 00:27:44,880 --> 00:27:56,480 situation. So I um turned on the utility tax at um 3% 220 00:27:53,840 --> 00:28:02,640 transportation benefit district tabs as well. Um also the public safety sales 221 00:28:00,480 --> 00:28:09,200 tax but in addition a public safety levy. I think um bringing something 222 00:28:05,440 --> 00:28:15,360 forth to the people um from the public safety standpoint um a levy could be um 223 00:28:13,200 --> 00:28:20,840 could be a very smart move on our part and then the use of REIT for street 224 00:28:17,120 --> 00:28:20,840 maintenance and preservation 225 00:28:21,760 --> 00:28:28,240 and that got let's see 226 00:28:25,440 --> 00:28:32,559 » so that adds so the current adds the rate for street maintenance is there a 227 00:28:30,640 --> 00:28:37,520 level of public safety levy you'd want to include 228 00:28:33,440 --> 00:28:43,039 Um I just started with the uh10 10 cents per thousand. Yeah. 229 00:28:41,520 --> 00:28:49,360 » So that that's that scenario >> and it got us really really close. 230 00:28:46,960 --> 00:28:53,039 We could um we could bump up a different Oh, go ahead. 231 00:28:50,000 --> 00:28:59,520 » Oh, I was just going to say so based on what the way Mayor Sherlock introduced 232 00:28:56,480 --> 00:29:06,320 kind of the goal that council member Seenor talked about at the retreat. Um 233 00:29:02,399 --> 00:29:12,399 if so if that's a if that's the goal and and maybe it's not. Um really what we 234 00:29:09,840 --> 00:29:17,279 want to look at as far as the charts is not the top one but this middle one. And 235 00:29:15,039 --> 00:29:24,960 so the middle one shows ending fund balance. Um and then the red line is the 236 00:29:20,640 --> 00:29:31,360 required reserve. And so, Council Member Vil Seenor's stated goal was to 237 00:29:29,120 --> 00:29:38,399 stay uh above the red through 32, not 238 00:29:36,320 --> 00:29:47,279 necessarily above, and that's the red line, the 17%. Um, and not necessarily 239 00:29:43,760 --> 00:29:52,080 um solve it forever. And so, I just want to restate that. So 240 00:29:50,080 --> 00:29:56,960 as far as the charts go and what and as far as scenarios and what their impact 241 00:29:53,840 --> 00:30:00,799 that was um anyway I just wanted to have you focused on the right thing. So the 242 00:29:58,320 --> 00:30:06,159 top one is revenues versus expenditures in each 243 00:30:02,640 --> 00:30:11,919 given year. Um the bottom one or the middle the middle one the one with the 244 00:30:08,640 --> 00:30:17,760 ending fund balance and 17% reserve would speak more to that goal that was 245 00:30:14,480 --> 00:30:23,440 talked about. Does that make sense? But I was also going 246 00:30:19,760 --> 00:30:26,640 » was um solving the deficit issue um as you can see up above. 247 00:30:26,320 --> 00:30:31,919 » Yeah. >> I I I also feel more comfortable than 248 00:30:29,520 --> 00:30:35,200 just having 17% reserve having more robust reserves. But again, this comes 249 00:30:33,520 --> 00:30:39,600 from my personal bias being a financial planner where I wanted to see a little 250 00:30:36,799 --> 00:30:44,399 bit more cushion and the fact that um you know, cities come up against very 251 00:30:41,440 --> 00:30:48,240 unexpected events. Um, I would hate to see us run into a situation where um, 252 00:30:46,720 --> 00:30:52,200 we're having to borrow money to cover those unexpected expenses. 253 00:30:52,399 --> 00:30:56,799 » Yeah, thanks for sharing that. >> Chime in here real quick. 254 00:30:54,960 --> 00:31:02,080 » Go ahead. >> Thanks. Um, to uh, Council Member 255 00:30:59,440 --> 00:31:06,320 Blakeley's point though, I think it's I think it's it's nice to know that we 256 00:31:03,919 --> 00:31:11,200 could flatten it, right? I mean that's I mean her her uh her 257 00:31:09,039 --> 00:31:13,360 suggestions would flatten would flatten the line essentially. 258 00:31:12,799 --> 00:31:16,559 » Yep. >> Which is which is great to know and I 259 00:31:15,279 --> 00:31:22,159 think that's an important thing to keep in mind that you know we do have the 260 00:31:19,360 --> 00:31:30,640 ability to flatten it. Now I think from my perspective it is how far do we how 261 00:31:26,720 --> 00:31:35,600 close do we want to get you know you know can we do this in a way that that 262 00:31:32,960 --> 00:31:41,600 that gets us a little closer to the line before we flatten it. I think that might 263 00:31:38,000 --> 00:31:49,440 be that might be my point. Um, in terms of we could fix it today, sure. But from 264 00:31:45,679 --> 00:31:54,000 a from a from a from a you know what what can we what 265 00:31:51,919 --> 00:32:00,559 can we ask of the residents in Newcastle like how much can we ask them to do now? 266 00:31:57,039 --> 00:32:04,559 So, if we did it in if we got a little closer to the line before we flattened, 267 00:32:02,320 --> 00:32:08,640 I think maybe that's something that uh something to consider. 268 00:32:06,720 --> 00:32:14,640 um you know as we go forward here, right? 269 00:32:11,519 --> 00:32:18,880 » Yeah, Chris, you had mentioned I can probably play with it depending on where 270 00:32:17,360 --> 00:32:25,360 the where we want the conversation to go, but um Chris, you had you had 271 00:32:22,000 --> 00:32:29,120 mentioned um possibly looking at different implementation years for 272 00:32:27,600 --> 00:32:32,720 different things. Is that something that we want to try to play with? 273 00:32:31,039 --> 00:32:36,880 » Yeah, and I think that's an important things. Um, so 274 00:32:34,960 --> 00:32:39,679 » I can probably be nimble enough to do that in meeting. 275 00:32:38,000 --> 00:32:43,760 » Yeah. And that's Yeah. And that's and that's and again to to council member 276 00:32:42,000 --> 00:32:49,039 Blakeley's point, we can flatten this now, but I don't know if it's the right 277 00:32:46,240 --> 00:32:55,440 thing to flatten now. I think we could we could work ourselves a little closer 278 00:32:51,279 --> 00:32:58,559 to the 17% reserve number if and and then I mean, if we want to talk about 279 00:32:57,360 --> 00:33:05,279 that number, that's a whole different conversation. But if we wanted to get 280 00:33:00,320 --> 00:33:09,200 ourselves closer to 20% or maybe, you know, 281 00:33:07,039 --> 00:33:14,000 if we're comfortable being closer to the line before we flatten it, I think that 282 00:33:11,760 --> 00:33:18,080 would be that would that would make me more comfortable 283 00:33:16,000 --> 00:33:24,720 uh in terms of our in terms of how we how we look at this. 284 00:33:20,960 --> 00:33:27,760 Does everybody understand what, by the way, during study sessions, we 285 00:33:26,240 --> 00:33:32,559 can just use first names if everyone's okay with that, but does everyone 286 00:33:30,480 --> 00:33:39,360 understand what Chris is saying as far as flattening the line and 287 00:33:36,080 --> 00:33:42,799 um getting close to the line? Okay. 288 00:33:41,039 --> 00:33:47,039 Did you want to say something, Andy? >> I've looked at the numbers maybe a 289 00:33:45,279 --> 00:33:52,559 little differently. I started out with the 4% utility tax when I was playing 290 00:33:49,600 --> 00:34:00,159 around with the numbers because I think to Karen's point, sorry, Councilwoman 291 00:33:55,840 --> 00:34:03,200 Blakeley Frost um Frost Blakeley, sorry. Um 292 00:34:01,279 --> 00:34:11,599 » just don't call me Kevin. Yeah, I think if we can build up some reserve going 293 00:34:05,360 --> 00:34:17,359 into future years, um it might not be so stressful trying to figure out how to 294 00:34:14,159 --> 00:34:21,839 get to the point where we're um either flat 295 00:34:19,440 --> 00:34:26,960 um and not having any having to spend any money on the reserve side. Uh, I 296 00:34:25,359 --> 00:34:32,000 don't know if that makes sense to start at the 4 percent or work into the 4%, 297 00:34:29,599 --> 00:34:40,040 but we seem to be somewhere between the three and 4% utility tax as a starting 298 00:34:35,599 --> 00:34:40,040 point, it sounds like. 299 00:34:40,480 --> 00:34:48,720 » Yeah, go ahead, Karen. >> I had one other question. Uh, did this 300 00:34:46,079 --> 00:34:53,679 modeling also take into the fact that whatever additional reserves we're able 301 00:34:50,399 --> 00:34:58,880 to generate, we'll make money on? Did it did you factor that in like 3% or as 302 00:34:56,720 --> 00:35:05,359 we've been investing the cash reserves? >> Right. So it doesn't so so it plays out 303 00:35:03,280 --> 00:35:08,920 um investment income. >> It does. 304 00:35:05,920 --> 00:35:08,920 » Yeah. 305 00:35:09,520 --> 00:35:16,240 » So I think it's a good point to talk about reserves. Um 306 00:35:14,640 --> 00:35:20,480 um Scott, do you mind just turning everything off and just so we can see 307 00:35:18,480 --> 00:35:23,480 where we're at right now? Um, 308 00:35:24,240 --> 00:35:28,040 thank you. So, 309 00:35:29,760 --> 00:35:38,720 we have quite a bit of reserves right now. And I think the question is that 310 00:35:36,720 --> 00:35:46,960 between what Chris is saying and kind of what um Karen and Andy are saying is are 311 00:35:43,040 --> 00:35:52,440 we as a council willing to use some of that reserve 312 00:35:52,480 --> 00:36:01,760 for a little bit of time and maybe either 313 00:35:58,320 --> 00:36:09,920 do less now or wait till future years to do some things. but have a plan to do it 314 00:36:05,359 --> 00:36:15,280 or as as I'm hearing from you too is to keep those reserves 315 00:36:12,640 --> 00:36:22,400 because of whatever reasoning you know and I think that's something that this 316 00:36:17,760 --> 00:36:27,760 is for me this conversation like city manager said is really to have on 317 00:36:25,520 --> 00:36:32,000 record for this hopefully this task force that I personally I'll just say 318 00:36:29,839 --> 00:36:40,079 right out the gate I'm really supportive of the task force um for them to be able 319 00:36:35,839 --> 00:36:44,480 to look back to this discussion and understand 320 00:36:42,160 --> 00:36:50,240 cuz where we're at as a council because I you know they can recommend 321 00:36:47,599 --> 00:36:55,200 whatever they want to but in the end it it is the council's decision to act on 322 00:36:52,320 --> 00:37:01,040 anything and I think it is helpful to say as we're doing you know what we're 323 00:36:59,839 --> 00:37:05,839 comfortable with. So, I really appreciate you guys saying that because 324 00:37:02,640 --> 00:37:10,720 I think I'm more on um with Chris where I'm a I'm a little 325 00:37:08,880 --> 00:37:13,839 more comfortable not spending at all, not going all the way down to the red 326 00:37:12,240 --> 00:37:20,200 because I I do think it is worth having a conversation about where that that 327 00:37:15,920 --> 00:37:20,200 line is. Um 328 00:37:20,400 --> 00:37:30,400 personally, I feel like government takes in taxes from all of 329 00:37:26,240 --> 00:37:35,440 us. we should invest that money into our community pretty quickly. I know that 330 00:37:33,520 --> 00:37:39,200 there are emergency situations and we can talk through that. I don't know what 331 00:37:37,359 --> 00:37:44,720 that number is right now. We have to have that discussion separately. And I 332 00:37:41,280 --> 00:37:50,400 think that um I'll be honest, I think what we have in 333 00:37:46,400 --> 00:37:53,440 reserves is quite a lot right now. >> Yeah. Can that's just where I'm at. 334 00:37:51,680 --> 00:37:59,040 » Can I give some context to that just briefly? So, at the end of 2026, 335 00:37:56,960 --> 00:38:03,920 we'll have the the ending fund balance in the general fund will be the highest 336 00:38:01,520 --> 00:38:10,320 it's ever been. That's true today. That was that's been true for a few years. 337 00:38:08,160 --> 00:38:15,119 Um, we'll we'll be over 8 million this year 338 00:38:12,880 --> 00:38:19,680 in ending fund balance. That's a super positive thing. Um, and so that but that 339 00:38:18,160 --> 00:38:24,640 ending fund balance has been building for several years significantly as as 340 00:38:22,400 --> 00:38:30,240 the city has tried to tighten its belt a little bit over the last few years and 341 00:38:27,680 --> 00:38:35,640 um and so that it's worth have keeping that as part of the conversation I would 342 00:38:32,320 --> 00:38:35,640 I would recommend. 343 00:38:36,640 --> 00:38:46,880 So my question then is um it sounds like we're trying to get to a number 344 00:38:42,720 --> 00:38:52,880 uh on the um on the fund balance that everybody's comfortable with. Is it 5 345 00:38:49,839 --> 00:39:00,839 million? Is it 3 million? Whatever that number might be. I think that's going to 346 00:38:55,599 --> 00:39:00,839 be important to figure out before we 347 00:39:01,760 --> 00:39:11,599 I mean to me I have no idea what's going to happen in 2030 2029. 348 00:39:08,640 --> 00:39:17,920 Uh I hope we're all still here to figure that out. But um it strikes me that the 349 00:39:14,960 --> 00:39:26,240 more money we have in the bank today, the less issue there might be in 2029 or 350 00:39:22,560 --> 00:39:33,520 2030 with some of the things that could happen by then with the city. Um but I 351 00:39:31,200 --> 00:39:39,280 think at some point we have to decide what we're comfortable with leaving in 352 00:39:35,200 --> 00:39:45,200 the reserve and make a decision on that because that will impact everything 353 00:39:40,800 --> 00:39:50,760 else. that we do or talk about or give to the um panel to discuss 354 00:39:55,200 --> 00:40:00,720 » anyone. >> I I would say that that's I think that's 355 00:39:58,880 --> 00:40:09,839 a um I think that's a doable thing. So, 356 00:40:06,000 --> 00:40:16,320 um, if if 17% reserve is not the number, we needed to figure out what that number 357 00:40:11,359 --> 00:40:19,920 is. Um, and I I don't think, um, while it's hard to think in 358 00:40:17,920 --> 00:40:23,680 percentages, I think that's the way that you need to 359 00:40:21,680 --> 00:40:29,280 think about the reserve. So, right now, we have about a $13 million general 360 00:40:25,839 --> 00:40:36,000 fund. Um, and we're and we're at about $8 million in general fund fund balance. 361 00:40:33,119 --> 00:40:41,040 That's that's a a healthy dose of the total general fund, but the general fund 362 00:40:38,640 --> 00:40:48,880 expenditures are going to expand over time. Um, and so that as that $8 million 363 00:40:46,960 --> 00:40:53,680 diminishes, you got to think about it in the 364 00:40:50,160 --> 00:40:59,040 percent, you know, $8 million out of 15 million is a smaller percentage. If 365 00:40:55,440 --> 00:41:02,480 you're $5 million out of 15 is a much smaller percentage. And so you want to I 366 00:41:01,119 --> 00:41:05,839 don't know that you want a dollar amount to keep in reserves because that 367 00:41:03,920 --> 00:41:09,040 percentage is always going to change. You want to make sure you're comfortable 368 00:41:07,200 --> 00:41:14,400 with the percentage and fund balance that you have um per general fund 369 00:41:12,240 --> 00:41:20,520 expenditures because that's going to change as you move forward down the 370 00:41:16,319 --> 00:41:20,520 line. And so 371 00:41:22,480 --> 00:41:31,599 and so if if 17% is the number, great. How close to 17% are you willing 372 00:41:29,359 --> 00:41:35,760 to get before we have some kind of an adjustment that takes it back the other 373 00:41:33,280 --> 00:41:39,920 way? If 25%'s the number, okay, how close to 25 are we a bit going to get 374 00:41:38,000 --> 00:41:45,440 before we have to do something to make it go back the other way? 375 00:41:43,280 --> 00:41:50,640 » Uh just another comment again, the the financial planner here. Um, I remember 376 00:41:48,800 --> 00:41:54,640 the days of cities going through recessions and um, having to really 377 00:41:53,040 --> 00:41:58,960 tighten the belt and we have a lot of municipalities right now that are in 378 00:41:56,720 --> 00:42:04,400 tough shape and we're very fortunate to to be in uh, such a flush position. So 379 00:42:02,240 --> 00:42:07,920 again, my comments are always coming from that framework is that I want to 380 00:42:06,160 --> 00:42:12,960 make sure that we have enough in reserves that we're able to weather 381 00:42:09,359 --> 00:42:19,200 those storms um without having to to um be too lean or having to take out loans 382 00:42:15,839 --> 00:42:23,599 or other dire u situations because recessions do happen and unusual things 383 00:42:21,359 --> 00:42:28,000 happen and we just need to to plan for them and we need to remember that that 384 00:42:25,760 --> 00:42:33,280 money that we we have set aside it's not just sitting idle. will be making money 385 00:42:29,760 --> 00:42:37,119 for us. So, or money for the city. >> That's a good point. Tom, did you have 386 00:42:35,520 --> 00:42:40,960 anything to add? Haven't heard from you yet. 387 00:42:39,359 --> 00:42:49,760 » Well, we were at 25% u and scale back to 17% 388 00:42:45,920 --> 00:42:54,800 since uh I've been on the council. U we were we were some time ago thought that 389 00:42:52,400 --> 00:43:00,319 we needed the 25%. And I think that caused us to look at we 390 00:42:57,680 --> 00:43:06,960 need to maybe have a utilities tax because we we can't get uh down close to 391 00:43:03,920 --> 00:43:12,560 that 25%. And then since then we've changed it to 392 00:43:09,040 --> 00:43:18,079 the 17%. And I think sometimes we look at the reserve and say that's not real 393 00:43:15,920 --> 00:43:23,119 money. We can't spend that money. Well, yes we can. It's what we have it for is 394 00:43:20,240 --> 00:43:27,680 to spend it if we need it. Um, you know, I've heard some people on the council 395 00:43:24,960 --> 00:43:31,040 say in past is, "We're not a bank. We shouldn't have money in the bank." Well, 396 00:43:29,359 --> 00:43:36,800 yes, we have to have money in the bank because we have staff that we have to 397 00:43:33,599 --> 00:43:42,480 pay and sometimes we don't have our tax coming in to cover that. So, you can't 398 00:43:39,440 --> 00:43:46,640 just all of a sudden say everything is u even. you know, we get our tax in a 399 00:43:44,560 --> 00:43:51,359 couple of times a year. And um we've been very fortunate to be uh in as good 400 00:43:49,040 --> 00:43:56,000 a shape as we're in. It's if you look around us and you see the other cities 401 00:43:53,119 --> 00:44:02,640 that are struggling, we're not at that point yet. And whenever and 20 we were 402 00:44:00,240 --> 00:44:07,520 talking about a utilities tax and a couple of says we need to wait because 403 00:44:05,200 --> 00:44:13,520 uh if we wait two years, we we can see that we won't really need a a utilities 404 00:44:10,079 --> 00:44:18,160 tax for a couple of years. and uh but we went ahead and went after it but didn't 405 00:44:15,520 --> 00:44:26,480 get it. So, here we are. We're still in better shape than we thought we would 406 00:44:19,839 --> 00:44:31,440 be. So, I uh I don't know uh how we we guesstimate exactly what we're going to 407 00:44:28,319 --> 00:44:36,800 do. You know, the this year is a kind of a prime example. We could have had a a 408 00:44:34,720 --> 00:44:42,720 two week snowfall and we could have spent a lot of money on cleanup. uh we 409 00:44:40,160 --> 00:44:48,640 didn't have and so we don't know where we're going or or what's going to what's 410 00:44:44,880 --> 00:44:54,240 likely to happen. So um granted we need to be sure that we're 411 00:44:51,680 --> 00:45:00,800 able to take care of the the place. We need to have money to pay people and 412 00:44:56,640 --> 00:45:05,920 we've got plenty right now. Uh we're better off than what people projected we 413 00:45:02,800 --> 00:45:13,119 would be by now. So I don't know how we project it. We have to find a bunch more 414 00:45:10,240 --> 00:45:17,760 in order to keep things going. We as long as that if we keep control of the 415 00:45:16,160 --> 00:45:22,640 expenses and watch what we're doing, uh we 416 00:45:19,760 --> 00:45:27,839 shouldn't have a a real big problem of of getting through this. You know, we 417 00:45:24,480 --> 00:45:33,800 wound up last year with uh probably what $100,000 at uh to the good 418 00:45:34,079 --> 00:45:42,800 » for 2025 we're we're a little over a million to 419 00:45:39,599 --> 00:45:46,640 the good, but that was, you know, 2025 was one of the biggest development 420 00:45:44,079 --> 00:45:50,240 revenue years we've had. So that was >> well, you know, we didn't have some 421 00:45:47,920 --> 00:45:52,880 development revenue for quite a few years there. So, 422 00:45:51,200 --> 00:45:56,880 » yep. And so, and that's a lot of factors, but 423 00:45:54,400 --> 00:46:03,680 » found money. No, that was onetime money because we had a one-time loss. We had a 424 00:46:01,359 --> 00:46:06,160 time of u we didn't have much development going on. 425 00:46:05,359 --> 00:46:11,200 » Okay. >> It's not probably too far in the future 426 00:46:08,960 --> 00:46:14,480 that we may not have much development going on because we're running out of 427 00:46:13,280 --> 00:46:18,160 places to develop. >> That's right. 428 00:46:15,280 --> 00:46:21,920 » So, that would be a concern that we need to have. Yeah. 429 00:46:19,599 --> 00:46:30,280 » And to some extent that's played out in the in the forecast as far as 430 00:46:24,000 --> 00:46:30,280 development revenue diminishing. Um, so 431 00:46:32,160 --> 00:46:40,079 » maybe I'm missing something, but we got a problem going into 20127 432 00:46:38,079 --> 00:46:44,960 and somehow we need to figure out, are we going to spend the money out of our 433 00:46:41,760 --> 00:46:51,920 investment to not have a problem next year? or are we going to look at what 434 00:46:48,319 --> 00:47:00,079 our options are to keep the money where it's at growing in case we need it as we 435 00:46:56,000 --> 00:47:04,960 get into the next few years. Um, we're not going to be in good shape next year. 436 00:47:02,480 --> 00:47:09,440 I mean, the numbers play that out. So, we either got to figure out if we're 437 00:47:06,880 --> 00:47:14,640 going to spend investment money to make it right 438 00:47:11,119 --> 00:47:18,520 or do something about it now going into the next four years. 439 00:47:19,119 --> 00:47:27,680 » Yeah. I think u I think I'll share my frustration since I've been on the 440 00:47:24,640 --> 00:47:32,880 council. It feels like we've always just looked at the year we're in and maybe 441 00:47:30,160 --> 00:47:38,040 the next year. And for me that 442 00:47:38,160 --> 00:47:46,720 doesn't uh feel reassuring. 443 00:47:44,079 --> 00:47:54,680 Um, I think looking at a six-year forecast like we're looking at here or 444 00:47:50,240 --> 00:47:54,680 fiveyear, I guess, um, 445 00:47:55,280 --> 00:48:05,040 I I think that that's how we should be planning our budgets and revenue 446 00:48:02,400 --> 00:48:08,040 sources. I think it's important to at least 447 00:48:08,960 --> 00:48:20,000 know that we're we're going to be able to pay our bills 5 years out. That seems 448 00:48:15,119 --> 00:48:25,839 reasonable to me. Um, so I personally am in favor of 449 00:48:23,119 --> 00:48:33,599 through this task force coming up with a plan 450 00:48:28,319 --> 00:48:39,200 that likely will be some new revenue um 451 00:48:35,119 --> 00:48:45,119 to be able to look at that second graph with the blue bars 452 00:48:41,440 --> 00:48:50,800 um and have it I I It sounds like I'm hearing 453 00:48:48,400 --> 00:48:55,200 from a few council members 454 00:48:53,599 --> 00:49:00,480 they would want to be well above that red line and that's that's good 455 00:48:56,480 --> 00:49:06,079 information to to know. Um I'm not opposed to that. I think I'd 456 00:49:03,440 --> 00:49:11,599 probably be maybe maybe I'm more comfortable getting a little closer. 457 00:49:09,040 --> 00:49:17,680 I'll just you know just in honesty. But if everyone is really feeling like we 458 00:49:15,520 --> 00:49:22,800 should be we should have a healthy reserve, I I would be I think that's a 459 00:49:20,640 --> 00:49:28,240 discussion we have and I'm I'm definitely willing to listen to that 460 00:49:24,640 --> 00:49:34,079 discussion and understand where everyone would feel comfortable. 461 00:49:30,720 --> 00:49:41,599 Um I'm not comfortable with just waiting to see what happens next 462 00:49:37,440 --> 00:49:47,520 year. I I personally I think we need to do something and I really think that 463 00:49:44,240 --> 00:49:54,000 having a a task force established um and getting a really a a a wide range 464 00:49:51,119 --> 00:50:01,599 of people on that task force with differing opinions to really um look at 465 00:49:58,319 --> 00:50:05,599 what we're dealing with and understand the forecasting. Like Karen's asking 466 00:50:04,000 --> 00:50:12,000 great questions. What is in the forecast? we should know that to make 467 00:50:08,480 --> 00:50:16,960 these decisions. And so really allowing that group to ask those questions and 468 00:50:14,640 --> 00:50:22,160 dive in uh to Paul's point, you know, maybe it's 469 00:50:20,319 --> 00:50:30,480 even more nuanced with the utilities tax. Um how do we get to a place where 470 00:50:26,640 --> 00:50:34,640 we're all comfortable with the five-year outlook? 471 00:50:32,240 --> 00:50:39,680 And I think to Chris's point, I would support 472 00:50:37,280 --> 00:50:46,079 getting to where we're comfortable with the least amount of added revenue as 473 00:50:42,240 --> 00:50:51,119 possible just because from my you know six plus years on council I have heard 474 00:50:48,400 --> 00:50:56,880 from our community that it is important to not 475 00:50:53,280 --> 00:51:02,000 ask for too much and I I really take that deeply into account. We shouldn't 476 00:50:59,839 --> 00:51:06,640 just do it just because we can. I I agree with that. So I think taking the 477 00:51:04,079 --> 00:51:11,599 time to really look at everything, look at all the 478 00:51:08,640 --> 00:51:15,359 options, understand the why and the reasoning behind and where people are 479 00:51:13,200 --> 00:51:21,280 comfortable or not comfortable in why. That's what needs to happen so that we 480 00:51:17,119 --> 00:51:25,040 can hopefully come to a a place where everyone maybe not 481 00:51:23,200 --> 00:51:29,760 everyone gets everything they want, but we're all at least comfortable that 482 00:51:27,119 --> 00:51:34,880 knowing that we're putting this this council in this moment is putting this 483 00:51:31,520 --> 00:51:39,839 city in the best place that's reasonable for us to to to do. And for me, that's 484 00:51:37,920 --> 00:51:43,359 looking 5 years out and saying, "Okay, we're all comfortable with that 485 00:51:41,040 --> 00:51:48,480 projection. We feel like we're putting the city, we're leaving the city in a 486 00:51:45,119 --> 00:51:54,000 place that um is sustainable at least for that time period because that's what 487 00:51:50,960 --> 00:52:00,800 we were all elected to do for that time period. 488 00:51:56,720 --> 00:52:05,680 We've got about 11 minutes. Um but anyone can I don't have the last word. 489 00:52:04,079 --> 00:52:10,640 Go ahead. Did you want to speak? Uh Paul, did I see your hand? 490 00:52:08,079 --> 00:52:15,680 » Sure. I think Yeah. Yeah, I mean candidly I've looked 491 00:52:11,920 --> 00:52:20,000 at this same Excel sheet for four years going on five now. I think uh very 492 00:52:18,720 --> 00:52:23,680 little has changed, right? We've talked about revenue options. We've looked at 493 00:52:22,000 --> 00:52:29,119 different things. You know, we've added some expenditure reduction options, 494 00:52:25,680 --> 00:52:33,920 right? Tenant space, REIT. Um I think 495 00:52:31,680 --> 00:52:41,200 it's it's been it's felt like talking in circles on it for for quite a while. I 496 00:52:36,319 --> 00:52:44,079 think what it sounds like, you know, not coming to any decisions 497 00:52:42,720 --> 00:52:48,720 tonight. I think what it sounds like is we all there's a consensus that we don't 498 00:52:46,720 --> 00:52:52,559 want to be operating at a deficit and that we 499 00:52:50,640 --> 00:52:56,319 want some level of reserve. the specific amount we can figure out. But I think 500 00:52:54,480 --> 00:53:00,800 there's a general feeling that like we need to 501 00:52:58,160 --> 00:53:06,400 diversify our revenue and we want to take a longer 502 00:53:02,559 --> 00:53:09,599 term holistic approach than yeartoear and I think I've I've heard that 503 00:53:07,680 --> 00:53:14,079 hammered on sort of again and again and I I think I want to you know get moving 504 00:53:12,160 --> 00:53:17,440 towards the action action part and the action stage because these things take 505 00:53:16,079 --> 00:53:22,800 time to implement. they take time to engage with. 506 00:53:19,280 --> 00:53:27,440 And I think what I what I'm like I think it's very clear the approach 507 00:53:24,800 --> 00:53:30,319 that we'd like to take is we've had these conversations early. We've had 508 00:53:28,640 --> 00:53:33,680 these conversations often. We have council members still in their first, 509 00:53:32,079 --> 00:53:37,200 you know, barely in their second quarter of council service deeply having these 510 00:53:35,359 --> 00:53:42,000 conversations on budget uh to their credit. And it sounds like the approach 511 00:53:39,920 --> 00:53:46,319 is moving forward with a task force that would have members of the community to 512 00:53:44,079 --> 00:53:50,079 study it independently as well before we move forward with that action. Right? I 513 00:53:48,400 --> 00:53:57,920 have actions I'm comfortable taking with a little bit more study. But if we marry 514 00:53:54,000 --> 00:54:03,520 the idea of uh action with some more community input as well and engagement 515 00:53:59,920 --> 00:54:06,960 on that process, um yeah, I would like to take action at some point this year 516 00:54:05,119 --> 00:54:12,400 or some point early next year. uh because I don't want to wait to plan for 517 00:54:10,319 --> 00:54:18,240 the long term and I don't want to uh yeah I I don't the prospect of operating 518 00:54:15,200 --> 00:54:24,240 at a you know 1.5 million def close to 1.5 million deficit in 2027 that's not a 519 00:54:20,800 --> 00:54:28,319 sustainable practice. So I'm like I think I've talked in cir like 520 00:54:26,640 --> 00:54:31,680 we've talked in circles with this Excel sheet for so long that literally parts 521 00:54:29,760 --> 00:54:36,400 of it are not updated from 2022. like that is if that does not elucidate that, 522 00:54:33,359 --> 00:54:40,640 I don't I don't know what does. But the um 523 00:54:38,720 --> 00:54:43,119 yeah, I'd like to move start moving forward with action. I feel like I've 524 00:54:41,760 --> 00:54:46,720 beat on the same drum over and over again for for quite a while. So, let's 525 00:54:45,280 --> 00:54:53,520 get the task force going. Let's make start making this happen and stop um you 526 00:54:50,160 --> 00:54:58,000 know, stop living in the theoretical side. start actually practically doing 527 00:54:55,520 --> 00:55:03,680 something and having the um confidence and sort of um 528 00:55:01,839 --> 00:55:10,119 you know doing what our jobs are quite honestly to go and figure out how to run 529 00:55:05,520 --> 00:55:10,119 the city in a in a sustainable way. 530 00:55:10,480 --> 00:55:16,960 » Well, to look back just a little bit a couple years ago, uh the finance 531 00:55:15,119 --> 00:55:21,359 committee felt sorry for the city manager and having to put a budget 532 00:55:18,559 --> 00:55:26,559 together and decided that we ought to get a little more revenue. So, we got 533 00:55:23,440 --> 00:55:33,880 the admissions tax going and we've added that to it, you know, and that obviously 534 00:55:29,440 --> 00:55:33,880 helped quite a bit, did it not? 535 00:55:34,240 --> 00:55:39,520 » It helped. 330,000 worth. 536 00:55:37,280 --> 00:55:43,640 » Yeah. We were guessing it'd be 250 $250,000. 537 00:55:40,640 --> 00:55:43,640 » Yep. 538 00:55:46,480 --> 00:55:53,280 Maybe I'm mistaken, but I haven't heard the criteria that Scott's looking for to 539 00:55:51,440 --> 00:55:58,640 get started with the task force. Isn't that what we were talking about 540 00:55:55,440 --> 00:56:03,240 originally? Some framework to give them the opportunity as a starting point. 541 00:56:04,400 --> 00:56:12,160 » I think we ha I think we have having this discussion and being able to hear 542 00:56:09,119 --> 00:56:16,160 where everyone's at. It was that part of that goal. 543 00:56:13,440 --> 00:56:22,960 Um, I think before our time is up on this, I would like to 544 00:56:20,559 --> 00:56:28,720 understand how people feel about this. Um, in your packet, 545 00:56:25,760 --> 00:56:35,839 there's a draft charter for our task force. Did anyone have any 546 00:56:33,359 --> 00:56:41,160 Do we like that? Do we have any things we would want to change? 547 00:56:38,160 --> 00:56:41,160 um 548 00:56:41,839 --> 00:56:49,280 would love to hear thoughts on that. Personally, I I think it looks good, but 549 00:56:47,280 --> 00:56:54,240 I'm would love to hear what others think. 550 00:56:51,440 --> 00:56:57,240 » How do will that task force be determined? 551 00:56:59,760 --> 00:57:08,240 I I see the criteria, but my question is, is that a 552 00:57:06,319 --> 00:57:13,200 is somebody going to apply for the task force? Are we going to put it out to the 553 00:57:10,400 --> 00:57:18,079 public and how many people and so on and so forth? 554 00:57:15,200 --> 00:57:26,079 » Yeah, I think so. in here. And now it's it's up for debate, but um in here 555 00:57:23,119 --> 00:57:30,000 in this draft, it's suggesting it would consist of five to eight members 556 00:57:28,400 --> 00:57:37,040 appointed by the mayor with confirmation by the city council. I personally would 557 00:57:32,640 --> 00:57:43,440 um I see that as similar process as our like commissions where people we'd have 558 00:57:38,720 --> 00:57:48,240 an application period um and then as the mayor I would appoint but then 559 00:57:45,119 --> 00:57:52,000 that the council would have to confirm those appointments. Does that answer 560 00:57:50,160 --> 00:57:57,359 your question? >> Okay. 561 00:57:54,079 --> 00:58:00,960 Does anyone have any issues with this draft task force? 562 00:58:00,400 --> 00:58:08,319 Go ahead. >> I uh not issues just a suggestion that 563 00:58:04,799 --> 00:58:14,720 perhaps a start date be added so that that like a um that it would be formed 564 00:58:11,839 --> 00:58:18,880 say by June 1st um and then come back with the first recommendations by such 565 00:58:16,559 --> 00:58:22,720 and such a date so that we could review. To everyone's point, it sounds like we 566 00:58:20,799 --> 00:58:26,079 don't want to kick the can down the curve any longer down the road, 567 00:58:24,240 --> 00:58:31,040 whatever. We want to actually um initiate some action. And so I think by 568 00:58:28,400 --> 00:58:34,400 having a timetable built into this then we're more likely to get pull the 569 00:58:32,640 --> 00:58:37,880 trigger on something towards the latter part of this year. 570 00:58:38,240 --> 00:58:45,119 » Um can I suggest that we make that so if 571 00:58:42,480 --> 00:58:50,480 the count we want to adopt the task force by council vote 572 00:58:48,079 --> 00:58:54,240 I would suggest that we make those dates a part of the motion. I don't know that 573 00:58:52,880 --> 00:58:58,000 they necessarily need to be in the charter just because that would depend 574 00:58:55,839 --> 00:59:03,200 on okay when are we bringing them back to be confirmed and all those things. Um 575 00:59:00,559 --> 00:59:07,119 and so whether it's tonight or whether it's maybe we add those dates when we 576 00:59:05,359 --> 00:59:16,640 make the when we have the confirmations of those um just so that we're um 577 00:59:14,240 --> 00:59:19,680 I think we're always going to be with the with the charter itself. I think 578 00:59:18,319 --> 00:59:23,520 we're going to be dealing with a moving target until we get applications out and 579 00:59:21,839 --> 00:59:28,400 have when they're going to do we're going to confirm them on May 19th or we 580 00:59:25,599 --> 00:59:33,359 can confirm them on June 2nd. I I wouldn't want to put the dates in the 581 00:59:29,760 --> 00:59:37,119 charter just because it'll be a we don't have the process for it in the 582 00:59:35,599 --> 00:59:40,000 charter. Does that make sense? >> So you're suggesting the motion not in 583 00:59:39,200 --> 00:59:46,480 the charter, >> right? or either in the motion to 584 00:59:42,160 --> 00:59:52,400 approve the task force itself or maybe even when we confirm as we confirm 585 00:59:49,359 --> 00:59:58,160 members of the task force will say okay the start date is June 1st and the 586 00:59:55,040 --> 01:00:04,480 recommendations are due by the you know second meeting in August or the 587 01:00:01,280 --> 01:00:08,880 by January or January whatever we decide but 588 01:00:05,040 --> 01:00:14,240 » does that make sense so just to clarify we it's not in uh notice for us to make 589 01:00:12,240 --> 01:00:22,640 any motions during this study session. But if um if the council wants to add an 590 01:00:20,079 --> 01:00:27,839 agenda item to our regular meeting during agenda approval 591 01:00:24,960 --> 01:00:34,400 to um establish this task force, then we could add that 592 01:00:30,799 --> 01:00:40,079 um then and then discuss and and potentially take action. 593 01:00:37,839 --> 01:00:46,040 Any other thoughts? Uh Chris, we haven't heard from you for a while. Do you have 594 01:00:41,359 --> 01:00:46,040 any thoughts on the task force charter? 595 01:00:47,280 --> 01:00:52,480 » Great. >> Yeah. So, as far as the task force goes, 596 01:00:50,240 --> 01:00:56,640 I think that um I like I like the charter. I like I mean I like the scope 597 01:00:54,319 --> 01:01:04,400 of work. I think it makes perfect sense. Um I was trying to in my mind just sort 598 01:01:00,240 --> 01:01:10,319 of clarify the the budget calendar for this year. Um, 599 01:01:07,920 --> 01:01:15,760 city manager Pingle, do you have do you have a sense for those dates when when 600 01:01:12,160 --> 01:01:20,000 when those first drafts are due um from your from the budget from your 601 01:01:18,240 --> 01:01:25,440 desk? >> Yeah, I mean the budget calendar um 602 01:01:22,799 --> 01:01:33,280 generally goes along the same lines each year. We we plan on we want to have um 603 01:01:30,559 --> 01:01:37,200 we we post a preliminary budget by the last Friday 604 01:01:35,520 --> 01:01:41,040 in September. >> Okay. 605 01:01:37,680 --> 01:01:44,000 » So that we're prepared to have those uh budget study sessions starting in 606 01:01:42,799 --> 01:01:52,079 October. >> Right. So any so any work that a formed 607 01:01:48,400 --> 01:01:59,280 task force we'd want to give them at the very least I would think three months. 608 01:01:55,760 --> 01:02:05,359 So that would mean that would give them July, August and then September. So 609 01:02:02,720 --> 01:02:09,599 depend I mean if that if that task force is going to meet on a monthly basis that 610 01:02:08,000 --> 01:02:16,720 would give them three meetings is that enough? um is that um I mean these are 611 01:02:13,760 --> 01:02:21,680 these are these going through my mind in that you know what small adjustments can 612 01:02:19,040 --> 01:02:30,000 we make as a council uh for the 27 budget and then take into 613 01:02:25,920 --> 01:02:36,799 consideration larger changes for a 28 budget. So again, not I mean we do have 614 01:02:33,839 --> 01:02:42,160 some room to glide down a little bit. If you look at the you know if we look at 615 01:02:38,799 --> 01:02:49,680 the if we look at it it's you know 2027 looks like ending balance is 7 and a 616 01:02:45,040 --> 01:02:56,480 half then six at the end of 2028. Uh and then you know at that point you 617 01:02:52,799 --> 01:03:01,760 know if we give the task force some time more than three meetings in 618 01:03:00,000 --> 01:03:06,799 2026 and trying to come up with something for 2027. 619 01:03:03,760 --> 01:03:11,119 I'm comfortable going to 2028, making maybe a small adjustment outside 620 01:03:08,880 --> 01:03:17,359 the task force for us as a city council to make a decision on, and then leave a 621 01:03:14,319 --> 01:03:25,520 larger decision um for debate amongst the task force and a recommendation for 622 01:03:19,599 --> 01:03:31,760 a 28 budget. That would give that group a lot more time um more than three 623 01:03:28,880 --> 01:03:35,440 meetings. It would give them perhaps a year and three meetings, right? that 624 01:03:33,280 --> 01:03:41,839 would give them maybe a dozen meetings. So, um that's that's how I feel about 625 01:03:38,480 --> 01:03:47,280 it. I think that forming it um relatively quickly is fine, but I don't 626 01:03:44,720 --> 01:03:55,640 I I wouldn't expect a recommend a fully formed recommendation from a task force 627 01:03:50,640 --> 01:03:55,640 for a 2027 budget. 628 01:03:58,400 --> 01:04:07,520 » Go ahead. >> Just a comment. My my concern about that 629 01:04:03,839 --> 01:04:12,319 would be if we go into 2027, something's going to happen and all of a 630 01:04:09,119 --> 01:04:18,720 sudden we're into 2028 or or whatever. I'm not suggesting that they have to do 631 01:04:14,400 --> 01:04:23,520 their job in 3 months, but um the longer we prolong this, the harder it's going 632 01:04:21,200 --> 01:04:28,480 to be to get it done, especially going into 2027 633 01:04:25,599 --> 01:04:33,680 for the 2028 budget. We're already now two years out from where we need to be. 634 01:04:31,440 --> 01:04:39,119 So that would just be my concern with prolonging it 635 01:04:36,319 --> 01:04:44,559 » and and if so what I what was in the draft um as far as timeline was that 636 01:04:42,400 --> 01:04:49,920 they would operate for they would operate for approximately 6 months. If 637 01:04:46,640 --> 01:04:52,960 we want to do something different um we can certainly have that discussion and 638 01:04:51,440 --> 01:04:58,799 and we don't necessarily have to 639 01:04:56,000 --> 01:05:03,119 approve this at this meeting. um if if if we're not ready to and we want to 640 01:05:00,640 --> 01:05:12,200 discuss that timeline more as far as how they how they operate. I I agree with 641 01:05:06,079 --> 01:05:12,200 Chris that 3 months is quick. Um 642 01:05:13,440 --> 01:05:21,839 I I would also add though that implementing new revenue 643 01:05:19,359 --> 01:05:28,480 doesn't have to be at the same time as adopting a budget. you can because it it 644 01:05:26,400 --> 01:05:34,559 takes time to do things. I mean, it's ideal to do it that way, but it's not 645 01:05:31,760 --> 01:05:40,960 you don't have to have enacted the new revenue. 646 01:05:39,200 --> 01:05:46,400 We can always do budget adjustments, I guess, is what I'm saying. And so 647 01:05:43,839 --> 01:05:49,760 we can because it also if we're if we're looking at anything that's going to go 648 01:05:47,680 --> 01:05:53,520 to the ballot that's going to take quite a bit of time 649 01:05:52,400 --> 01:06:00,559 because you have to go through that process. Um so I would personally feel 650 01:05:57,599 --> 01:06:04,880 more comfortable with splitting the difference a little bit 651 01:06:02,000 --> 01:06:10,960 and giving that giving Apple time not rushing. But I I agree. I think we can 652 01:06:08,240 --> 01:06:16,720 hash out the timeline later. I think it's really more of do we 653 01:06:13,359 --> 01:06:21,839 like the idea of this task force and do we want to establish that as kind of our 654 01:06:20,000 --> 01:06:27,720 next step. >> To me that's the question that we're 655 01:06:23,760 --> 01:06:27,720 we're facing right now. 656 01:06:28,400 --> 01:06:38,000 » So okay I do um agree that this is a good step to take. Um uh not only is it 657 01:06:35,440 --> 01:06:44,240 um very helpful to get additional information from um the citizens but um 658 01:06:41,760 --> 01:06:48,640 other experts out uh in our community that uh we perhaps haven't engaged 659 01:06:46,160 --> 01:06:53,760 before. So I would say moving forward with that and then working perhaps in 660 01:06:50,720 --> 01:06:59,039 the next meeting on a timeline makes sense so we have time to noodle this and 661 01:06:55,760 --> 01:07:07,119 think because we could also um task them with coming up with um some 662 01:07:02,960 --> 01:07:12,799 modest income um uh increase that we could implement for 2027 and then a more 663 01:07:09,760 --> 01:07:16,720 comprehensive package um for the 2028 budget because I agree three months is 664 01:07:14,319 --> 01:07:21,599 not enough time. Um, one last comment regarding reserves. Again, in my world, 665 01:07:19,039 --> 01:07:26,319 financial planning hat, we typically ask people to have three to six months in 666 01:07:23,599 --> 01:07:32,480 reserves. Um, because too many unexpected things occur and um, your 667 01:07:29,440 --> 01:07:35,760 budget gets blown. So, all right, we're we're over time. I'll I'll shut up now. 668 01:07:34,240 --> 01:07:38,319 » No, you're good. >> Okay. 669 01:07:36,160 --> 01:07:44,160 » Can I summarize what I think our marching orders are? Um, so we'll I'll 670 01:07:41,280 --> 01:07:49,599 we'll plan on bringing back a discussion item for the Feb or for the April 21st 671 01:07:46,640 --> 01:07:55,280 meeting so that we can hash out a timeline any any at least initial 672 01:07:52,640 --> 01:08:00,240 marching orders for the task force and have it on for action so that the 673 01:07:57,200 --> 01:08:05,839 council can hash that out and then take the action if you're ready to do that. 674 01:08:04,160 --> 01:08:09,359 » Does that uh does anyone have any opposition to that instead? So, you're 675 01:08:08,079 --> 01:08:13,440 you're suggesting instead of adding something to the agenda tonight, 676 01:08:11,920 --> 01:08:18,319 um taking some time and bringing it to the next meeting. 677 01:08:15,359 --> 01:08:22,000 That makes sense. Sounds like I've got all head nods, including Chris. Thank 678 01:08:20,239 --> 01:08:29,359 you. Okay. Well, thank you everybody. That was really a great discussion. I 679 01:08:24,560 --> 01:08:35,040 appreciate everyone uh participating. Um, I know we are over when we norm over 680 01:08:32,159 --> 01:08:40,560 time when we normally start, but um I'm going to ask for about let's uh let's 681 01:08:38,400 --> 01:08:45,600 start the regular meeting at 7:10 so we have time to get on um Council Member 682 01:08:43,279 --> 01:08:49,520 Brford on Zoom and maybe have a little quick bio break. Thank you.