[0:06] Okay.
[0:09] » I'd like to call to order the 2026 27
[0:12] budget committee and the urban renewal
[0:15] agency budget committee meetings to
[0:17] order at 5:30.
[0:19] Uh roll call. All counselors are
[0:23] present. Council President Miller is
[0:26] online virtually. everyone else here.
[0:29] I'm joined tonight by our budget
[0:30] committee members Michelle Brown, Beth
[0:32] Rysky, Teresa Keller, Sandy Wig, and
[0:36] Joel Hogan.
[0:38] Um,
[0:40] should I go over the staff that is here?
[0:42] All department heads are here.
[0:47] Um,
[0:50] moving forward, we need to nominate a
[0:52] budget committee chair.
[0:54] Anybody want to make a nomination?
[0:56] Anybody interested in running tonight's
[0:58] meeting?
[1:03] Can't be. Oh, not one of them, but it
[1:05] can't be me.
[1:07] >> Nominate Joe.
[1:10] >> Motion to nominate
[1:12] with Joel.
[1:13] >> Joel.
[1:14] >> Joe.
[1:15] >> Mayor Joe.
[1:16] >> Is there a second?
[1:18] >> Second.
[1:19] All those in favor say by saying
[1:21] I.
[1:22] >> I.
[1:22] >> Opposed.
[1:25] Um, okay. Moving on. Uh, tonight, you
[1:28] know, looking at last year's minutes,
[1:31] um, okay, we were able to conclude at
[1:33] 8:36
[1:35] and urban renewal then at 8:46. Rita,
[1:42] um,
[1:44] we did my four year, three other years.
[1:46] We've done this all in one night, but we
[1:48] really stuck on task and went through
[1:51] this very quickly and people provided
[1:53] questions ahead of time and hopefully we
[1:55] can do that again tonight. Um,
[1:59] so if there's items in here that we
[2:01] don't need to speak a bunch about, we'll
[2:03] keep moving on. Uh, but tonight we'd
[2:05] like to answer all your questions and
[2:08] make a recommendation to council with
[2:10] any changes. Um and then council will
[2:13] discuss at our next few meetings before
[2:15] we vote officially on accepting the
[2:17] budget. But uh looking for an approval
[2:19] of uh the minutes from May 12th, 2025.
[2:24] » So move
[2:26] makes a motion to approve when it
[2:29] minutes from May 12th, 2025. Second
[2:32] >> second.
[2:34] Uh all any discussion seems none all in
[2:38] favor say by saying I. I
[2:48] » Okay, moving on. We are now up to the uh
[2:52] received the budget message. City
[2:54] manager Ben Bergener with message.
[2:57] >> Thank you, Chair Bakus.
[3:00] As citizens of Scapus, Mayor Bakus, city
[3:03] council members, and the budget
[3:04] committee members, it is my pleasure to
[3:06] present to you the city of Scapus's
[3:08] proposed budget for fiscal year 2027.
[3:11] This year's budget allocates funding to
[3:12] accomplish many ongoing and new city
[3:14] projects, regular operations, and many
[3:16] of the city council's adopted
[3:18] priorities. Fisc fiscal year 2026 saw
[3:21] many accomplishments as the city of
[3:22] council and staff work through large
[3:24] projects and continue to facilitate
[3:25] important conversations internally and
[3:28] with the public regarding the direction
[3:29] and future of scapoos. One of the major
[3:32] ongoing conversations has been centered
[3:33] on the future of law enforcement in
[3:35] scapuse. Two years ago, after
[3:37] considering the varying options and
[3:38] after listening to the public, it was
[3:40] determined that the city will continue
[3:41] to focus on building an appropriately
[3:43] staffed and trained internal law
[3:45] enforcement team as opposed to
[3:47] contracting out the service to another
[3:48] agency. To succeed in this goal and to
[3:51] attract a competitive professional law
[3:52] enforcement team, the city council and
[3:54] city staff have been reviewing service
[3:56] levels and law enforcement in the
[3:58] community, re viewed union contracts,
[4:00] and did a deep dive into the general
[4:01] fund to better understand what is needed
[4:03] in the police department, where the city
[4:05] can reduce expenditures, and where the
[4:06] city can increase resources to create a
[4:09] more sustainable budget to accommodate
[4:10] the desired law enforcement service
[4:12] levels in Scapus for years to come. The
[4:15] city also continues conversations around
[4:16] parks to plan for and provide increasing
[4:19] park amenities, access, maintenance, and
[4:23] programming. Both the police and parks
[4:25] departments rely entirely on the general
[4:27] fund for their resources to provide
[4:28] these valuable services. Major concern
[4:31] for cities across Oregon continues to be
[4:33] the long-foreseen issues created by
[4:34] measures 5 and 50 that restrict property
[4:36] tax rates from increasing since the
[4:39] 1990s, compresses property tax in
[4:41] certain circumstances, and restricts a
[4:43] property's assessed value from growing
[4:44] at the same rate as real market values.
[4:47] Due to measure 5 and 50, cities across
[4:49] the state have had to look for
[4:50] alternative methods to supplement
[4:52] funding for these important services and
[4:53] other general fund services as resources
[4:56] have not been able to keep up with the
[4:57] increased expenses. Scapuse has been
[5:00] conservative in its budgeting, has had
[5:02] consistent new growth in the city, and
[5:04] has been successful in getting grants
[5:05] for different projects, which has
[5:07] allowed the city to weather the storm
[5:09] longer than most cities in the state,
[5:10] and has built a healthy fund balance in
[5:12] the general fund of just over $6
[5:13] million.
[5:15] Over the past several years, it has
[5:16] become apparent that these issues, the
[5:18] issues of measure 5 and 50 are quickly
[5:20] catching up with the city of Scapuse.
[5:22] The property taxes and the city brings
[5:24] in that the city brings in each year no
[5:26] longer cover the cost of law enforcement
[5:27] personnel at the current levels of
[5:29] service desired. This is important to
[5:31] recognize because anything spent beyond
[5:33] property taxes and associated police
[5:35] revenues on police operations takes away
[5:37] from the other services the city
[5:39] currently provides or would like to
[5:40] provide with other general fund
[5:42] resources. For example, park amenities,
[5:44] maintenance, economic development
[5:46] grants, recreation program, events, etc.
[5:49] The general fund continues to face an
[5:51] operational deficit. This means that
[5:52] even if the city doesn't allocate
[5:54] resources for projects, capital
[5:55] expenditures, and other variable
[5:57] expenditures, the city will still chip
[5:59] away at the fund balance each year for
[6:01] regular operations and will eventually
[6:03] deplete the general fund. This will
[6:04] happen more quickly when projects,
[6:06] capital expenditures, and other variable
[6:08] expenditures not covered by grants or
[6:10] other funding sources are planned and
[6:12] budgeted for. The story of the general
[6:14] fund is not completely bleak. There
[6:16] continues to be new growth and
[6:18] opportunities coming to Scapuse that
[6:19] will continue to offset some of this
[6:20] deficit. And there are funding
[6:22] strategies utilized by other Oregon
[6:23] communities that the city of Scapuse has
[6:25] not implemented to date that will
[6:27] increase the sustainability of the
[6:28] general fund. The city council's goal
[6:30] too of their annual priorities is focus
[6:32] on sustainable finances for these and
[6:34] other services. The city will continue
[6:36] to discuss and monitor the general fund
[6:38] closely and work through the varying
[6:40] different different strategies to
[6:41] provide additional sustainable funding
[6:43] mechanisms for the long-term prosperity
[6:45] of Scapus. An effort to avoid reducing
[6:47] important services with as minimal
[6:49] fiscal impact on the community as
[6:50] possible. The city has continued to
[6:53] utilize grants to multiply the impact of
[6:55] city funds, reduce impact on the budget,
[6:57] and bring new amenities to the city.
[6:59] Over the past two years, the city
[7:00] pursued over $3 million worth of grants
[7:02] and donations for park projects. These
[7:04] through these efforts, the city received
[7:06] award donation uh award notifications
[7:08] for $1,366,500
[7:12] in grant funds and a generous donation
[7:14] of 1.91 acres for parkland. As the city
[7:17] moves forward with the final designs of
[7:18] these construct and construction, the
[7:21] community will receive will have
[7:23] received over $4 million in park
[7:24] improvements which let with less than
[7:26] half of the cost coming from the city
[7:28] reserves. The grants described above
[7:30] associated park projects and the
[7:31] potential land purchase are the most
[7:33] notable changes in the general funds
[7:35] budget from fiscal year 2026. As noted
[7:37] earlier, these planned projects will
[7:39] reduce the general funds reserves since
[7:40] they are beyond the operational deficit
[7:42] already causing reductions. While this
[7:44] year will show a notable decrease in
[7:46] general fund reserves, these are
[7:48] one-time projects and the near-term
[7:49] future fiscal periods will not reflect
[7:51] an equivalent reduction without the city
[7:53] planning for and approving additional
[7:54] projects. Outside of the general fund,
[7:57] you will notice the city's funds are
[7:58] healthy and not facing concerning
[8:00] operational deficits. Any spending that
[8:02] utilizes fund reserves is due to planned
[8:04] projects or capital expenditures, most
[8:06] of which are being paid for through
[8:07] grants, loans, or other outside funding
[8:10] sources. Major ongoing projects are the
[8:12] Keys Reservoir, wastewater plant
[8:14] improvements, Miller B, the salt well,
[8:16] and the 50-year plan. Additionally, the
[8:18] city has budgeted for the design and
[8:20] construction of important sidewalk,
[8:21] storm water, and street improvements.
[8:23] The overall fiscal year 2027 budget is
[8:25] proposed to be less than the fiscal year
[8:27] 2026 budget, largely due to wrapping up
[8:29] se several large system improvements in
[8:31] our water and sewer departments. The
[8:33] city's full-time equivalent for staff
[8:34] will increase a few positions to 43.5
[8:37] full-time equivalents, two of which are
[8:39] supported by grants and/or outside
[8:41] contributions. These additional
[8:42] positions will bring additional economic
[8:44] development support, public safety, and
[8:46] park and recreational opportunities. The
[8:48] city has also budgeted for 3% cost of
[8:50] living adjustment. Scapuse has a bright
[8:53] future both fiscally and with the many
[8:55] exciting projects, programming, and
[8:56] amenities planned for or are already
[8:59] underway that will further enhance the
[9:01] sustainability and livability of this
[9:03] wonderful community. I would like to
[9:05] thank financial director Carol Halner
[9:07] and and the city department heads, the
[9:10] city council, and the budget committee
[9:11] for their tireless work already done and
[9:14] the work that will continue to be done
[9:15] in preparing for and implementing the
[9:16] fiscal year 2027 budget for the city of
[9:18] Scapuse. Sincerely Benjamin Berner, city
[9:21] manager
[9:26] questions that can move forward.
[9:29] >> Okay. Um there's any questions on tab
[9:32] four, five, six,
[9:37] » Mr. Mayor.
[9:38] >> Yes,
[9:38] >> I do have a question on tab two. going
[9:41] back um I think we need I think we need
[9:45] to add something into the history on
[9:47] page four in 196
[9:50] uh where it says which was incorporated
[9:53] in 1921
[9:55] after that
[9:57] in 1925
[10:00] um the city was one of 25 founding
[10:02] members of William Gordon cities so
[10:05] that's not you know the fact that we
[10:07] were have a death population at that
[10:09] time was about 800 people Yeah. Yeah. We
[10:11] were one of those 25 founders of the
[10:13] League of Golden Cities and of which uh
[10:16] mayor I mean manager Gner received a a
[10:20] noteworthy plot for that big big meeting
[10:23] in the title.
[10:24] >> Where where was that? Um
[10:26] >> page four halfway down right after
[10:29] Stampoo was incorporated in 1921.
[10:32] >> Yeah. Right before the fire in 1930, we
[10:35] were one of the founding members of the
[10:36] League of Organiz
[10:40] So we got ourselves mayor manager
[10:42] Bernard received a 100redy year flat
[10:46] for that number of the event. Anyway, I
[10:49] think we
[10:53] » uh council president Miller.
[10:56] >> Yeah, going forward. Um, if you guys can
[10:58] refer to uh the pages by page number
[11:00] instead of sections, um, that would be
[11:03] very helpful for me because I'm looking
[11:04] at the digital copy that does not have
[11:07] the tabs.
[11:10] >> So, as every page just keeps going to
[11:12] the line. Okay.
[11:14] >> Thank you.
[11:15] >> You're welcome.
[11:16] >> I should have sent the list.
[11:17] >> Okay. So, um, as we make that, I I
[11:20] agree. I I'm with adding that as a
[11:22] founding member of League of Oregon
[11:23] Cities
[11:25] with them daily. Um, we had the budget
[11:29] message, a little bit about Scapoo. Our
[11:32] financial policies, no changes to that.
[11:35] Our policies, we've stuck with the same.
[11:39] >> It's virtually the same. We took out I
[11:42] took out a few things that we just are
[11:43] not doing anymore because basically it
[11:46] was in the investment policy
[11:49] >> something
[11:50] ago. We went through and developed this
[11:52] as our policy kind of.
[11:54] >> Yeah.
[11:54] >> And that where is that conservative
[11:56] policies kind of built into this
[11:59] >> change it maybe at some time we can
[12:02] review if needed.
[12:04] Um
[12:06] then tab six, page 35 is your general
[12:10] all funds combined summary citywide
[12:12] financial overview.
[12:20] Um
[12:22] I'm going to move on to in our budget
[12:24] public hearing state revenue sharing.
[12:26] This is where we get funding from the
[12:29] state um for various things. I think it
[12:32] includes property taxes, everything,
[12:34] right? Or is it just the syntax stuff?
[12:37] Is it
[12:38] >> It's just the syntax stuff. The um the
[12:41] cigarette tax, the liquor tax, marijuana
[12:44] tax, revenue sharing tax.
[12:47] >> Does anybody have a reason um to not
[12:50] accept recommend accepting those to the
[12:53] council? I think that's just a
[12:55] formality. So, I would entertain a
[12:58] motion to accept state revenue sharing.
[13:02] Santiago move to accept
[13:06] pay revenue sharing. Um it's a public
[13:09] hearing. Do I need to open a public
[13:12] hearing? See if there's anybody else
[13:14] from the public that wishes to discuss.
[13:17] Being none, we'll close the public
[13:19] hearing and then I accept the motion by
[13:22] councelor Santiago to accept state
[13:24] revenue sharing. Any second?
[13:28] >> Second. Any
[13:31] more discussion?
[13:32] Seeing none, all those in favor state by
[13:34] saying I.
[13:36] >> I.
[13:37] >> Opposed?
[13:39] Motion carried.
[13:42] >> Any changes to our summary personnel
[13:45] services page 40, section 7.
[13:49] >> If we could go back actually page 38.
[13:52] >> Yeah.
[13:52] >> Uh, and section six. It looks like we're
[13:55] maybe missing a row of digits in the
[13:59] upper part. Total expenditure tenure
[14:02] history.
[14:04] I get cuts off there.
[14:05] >> I'm sorry. I didn't quite hear you. I'm
[14:07] sorry.
[14:08] >> Oh, okay. I'll fix that. Um I know the
[14:13] mayor mentioned something about that.
[14:15] I'll fix that for the final budget. I'll
[14:18] fix that chart. You'll find that
[14:20] sometimes on those tenure charts,
[14:22] they're almost too big to fit on the
[14:24] page. I should probably screenshot them
[14:26] instead of putting them in as tables,
[14:28] but okay.
[14:29] >> We'll have a couple others if we see
[14:31] them know them.
[14:35] We're missing a digit.
[14:38] >> Okay, that we're good for six. Moving on
[14:40] to summary personal services page 40.
[14:43] You said there's no changes.
[14:53] kind of briefly looking through.
[14:57] » Well, my question I did have I guess is
[15:00] where is Sierra listed? What position is
[15:03] that?
[15:03] >> Yeah, she's the economic development
[15:05] specialist.
[15:06] >> So, on page 42
[15:08] development specialist is one of the new
[15:10] FPE,
[15:11] >> right? Another one is a school resource
[15:13] officer. We got confirmation from the
[15:16] school that they put aside some money
[15:17] for that as well. Um that's they'll be
[15:20] discussed a little bit later.
[15:21] >> Okay.
[15:22] >> Those are the two grant funded
[15:23] positions.
[15:24] >> When you mentioned a couple new FTE,
[15:26] those are the ones you're referring to
[15:28] and we'll get into those on how they're
[15:30] funded and
[15:34] council president Miller.
[15:38] >> Thank you, Mayor. So, I'm looking at
[15:40] page 42, which is the list of or it's
[15:44] the city of Scapu's compensation
[15:45] schedule with the different
[15:46] classifications listed. So, I just want
[15:49] to clarify because in the opening budget
[15:51] message, it said that there were just a
[15:52] couple of positions.
[15:54] Um, so it looks like from what I can
[15:56] glean from this page though that there's
[15:59] an additional there's addition of an
[16:01] associate planner SRO economic
[16:04] development specialists and then it
[16:06] looks like um, city manager if you can
[16:09] clarify this too and maybe now is not
[16:12] the time but it looks like there's
[16:13] potentially classification changes with
[16:15] the utility parks workers to utility
[16:17] worker
[16:19] >> there. There was like I can do it. Okay.
[16:23] >> Yeah, we did make a change um in the
[16:26] middle of this budget year to you know
[16:28] agreed with the union that we split up
[16:32] utility parks workers and utility
[16:34] workers because they really are very
[16:36] different jobs. The utility workers
[16:38] still work in the parks but they're
[16:40] classified and have a different wage
[16:42] scale. So that's why you see the utility
[16:45] workers down at the bottom. And Dave, do
[16:47] you want to say anything more to that if
[16:49] you I think that kind of explains it.
[16:51] So,
[16:51] >> no, I'm I'm just seeing this, too. Um,
[16:55] >> that's right. They don't get these
[16:56] pages, I guess. Well,
[16:58] >> but
[16:58] >> Okay.
[16:59] >> Yeah. So, it's basically reclassifying
[17:01] existing personnel we have.
[17:04] >> Okay. Thank Thank you for that. So, for
[17:06] the record, can we please just get a
[17:08] clarification straight uh
[17:09] straightforward statement about which
[17:11] positions are being added for this
[17:13] fiscal year?
[17:14] We do show four uh 39.5 43.5.
[17:19] So
[17:20] >> right there is the um school resource
[17:23] officer, there's an additional patrol
[17:24] officer, there is the um yeah, economic
[17:30] development specialist and we added a
[17:33] parks
[17:35] um position.
[17:38] >> Okay.
[17:40] >> So the parks pos so what are what are
[17:42] the two that are funded by grants? the
[17:43] economic development specialist and then
[17:45] are we referring to
[17:46] >> resource officer?
[17:48] >> Okay. All right. So, the the others are
[17:50] coming out of general fund then,
[17:53] >> right? The patrol officer is based off
[17:54] of funding. That's not a we're not
[17:56] something we're hiring right off the
[17:57] bat, but due to our conversations, it's
[18:00] just put in the budget, but it's not
[18:01] something that's out for hire at this
[18:03] time. It's a it's a placeholder
[18:06] >> um depending on what we're able to
[18:07] figure out with the um potential funding
[18:10] strategies.
[18:11] Um and then the parks one was an
[18:13] adjustment of a well there's like I said
[18:16] there's a couple classifications so it's
[18:18] kind of mixed in there a little bit. Um
[18:20] they were already having utility workers
[18:22] come over and help with parks and we
[18:23] just kind of shore that up to um
[18:26] actually make it a parks position as
[18:27] opposed to a hybrid position.
[18:30] >> But there is one additional parks
[18:32] utility work somewhere in those numbers.
[18:34] There's one additional
[18:35] >> there are there are mistakes that we
[18:37] we've had utility threes through this
[18:40] whole time span. So there's there's
[18:42] errors here.
[18:43] >> Yeah. My my
[18:44] >> that's why it's catching me off guard
[18:45] because this isn't right. There's
[18:46] >> the 43.5 is correct. The new one going
[18:50] forward.
[18:51] >> The number is correct. And Dave I last
[18:54] week we didn't kept on to go through it
[18:56] because I don't know who's a one two and
[18:58] a three. Our records I use the records
[19:00] we have in spring in the system.
[19:03] So,
[19:04] >> by the adoption of this, we can get it
[19:05] correct.
[19:05] >> We'll fix it. We'll fix it on the on the
[19:07] pilot. I'll send it out to you.
[19:09] >> We'll get through it as we get to the
[19:10] budget. As far as you know, there's no
[19:12] additional workers in our
[19:16] >> public work. No.
[19:18] >> So, the one definitely economic
[19:19] development specialist, a patrol officer
[19:22] that would take our normal 12 to 13 and
[19:25] the SRO would then take it to 14.
[19:28] >> No, the SRO was included. Uh well, yeah.
[19:31] Did we go to 14 on that for this year? I
[19:33] don't remember say 13 14.
[19:35] >> Yeah. So, I went to 14 as a budgeted
[19:37] number.
[19:38] >> The the one thing for public works I
[19:39] will note though is that there are
[19:41] classification classification changes.
[19:43] The treatment leads is a new position,
[19:45] but those were promotions within. So, we
[19:47] didn't add bodies, but we did reclassify
[19:49] and restructure.
[19:54] » Do we just curious, do we know what the
[19:55] net effect is on these changes? Is it um
[19:59] is it less of a cost or does it go up a
[20:02] little bit because it looks like the as
[20:04] pointed out already the wage scale looks
[20:06] like it starts out a little bit higher
[20:09] >> for public works it's a wash I can't
[20:11] speak to any other department
[20:13] >> okay thank you
[20:14] >> with the retirement of Daryl and the
[20:16] restructuring it evened out
[20:18] >> okay thank you Dave
[20:22] » uh Councelor Miller I'll point out on
[20:25] page 35 it does look like personnel is
[20:28] up about $600,000
[20:31] for this year. So, if you're looking at
[20:33] overall personnel costs
[20:40] and we'll get into those as we go
[20:42] through each department. Um, okay. Well,
[20:46] we we'll start tab 8 page 43 general
[20:50] fund. Carol, are you taking on general
[20:53] fund?
[20:54] >> Yes.
[20:54] >> Information. Go ahead. So, and I can go through this as much or as little as
[21:00] you want me to. Obviously, the general
[21:02] fund has not changed. It still has, you
[21:05] know, the departments that you're
[21:06] looking at up here, the administration,
[21:09] police, planning, municipal court, and
[21:11] parks and grounds.
[21:12] >> I definitely focus on really any changes
[21:14] you see changes. Okay.
[21:15] >> Anything that you think stands out if
[21:18] anybody has any questions?
[21:19] >> Some of the big things you'll see are on
[21:21] page 44, uh, which has the whole general
[21:24] fund. I have not done this in the past
[21:26] but I wanted you to be able to see the
[21:27] revenues and expenses al together when
[21:30] they're split out in the next sections.
[21:33] Um the you know that you will notice
[21:37] that you know the there is some
[21:39] additional intergovernmental revenue
[21:41] which we can talk about in a few minutes
[21:43] here. Uh the big changes you'll see is
[21:46] administration has got a bump in the
[21:49] expenses and that's partly due to uh
[21:52] purchase of property that Ben can talk
[21:55] about and if he wants to um the police
[22:00] are pretty much they're not that much.
[22:02] It's a couple hundred thousand. Of
[22:03] course that adds a school resource
[22:05] officer and I don't have a list in the
[22:08] revenues of how much revenue that is
[22:10] because it just got approved. So, it's
[22:12] kind of brand new uh to us. So, so that
[22:16] because a police officer ends up costing
[22:18] us approximately $160,000
[22:20] with wages and benefits and that's, you
[22:24] know, half of that's paid by the school,
[22:26] then obviously that's a good resource
[22:29] for us, but um but that does increase
[22:32] it. The increase in parks and grounds is
[22:34] really the uh spending the money we got
[22:36] from the grants that we got this last
[22:39] year and we'll get that as we spend it.
[22:43] Um
[22:44] and there is a the 3% bump every and
[22:48] keep in mind that everything that we
[22:50] have to spy also is going up too and
[22:53] sometimes they aren't limited to the 3%
[22:56] that we get as our increase in taxes.
[22:59] So, um, planning is really it's down
[23:03] from last year because we did not buy
[23:05] the building that we we talked about
[23:07] last year and got approved last year.
[23:10] Um, the and the non-EP departmental
[23:13] transfers that did go up, but that's a
[23:16] transfer to go from the general fund to
[23:20] the new fund
[23:23] 17 you'll see in your book for the uh
[23:26] the Columbia Business Alliance. Now that
[23:29] is money that doesn't come out of the
[23:32] general fund. It's money we have
[23:34] received this year because when we put
[23:38] the new fund in or when we got we took
[23:40] over the agency you know the first of
[23:42] the year we ended up getting money in
[23:46] from St. Helens and from a grant and you
[23:50] I'm sure Lori will talk more about that
[23:52] but we had to collect it into the
[23:55] general fund. We couldn't put it in a
[23:57] separate fund because then we couldn't
[23:59] spend it and pay for our employee who's
[24:02] now being funded in the general fund,
[24:04] but we'll move entirely over to the new
[24:07] fund next year. So, I'm sorry that was
[24:10] probably way more complicated than you
[24:12] wanted it to be. But it's the transfer.
[24:15] We have to transfer the money. It's
[24:16] whatever money we have left over. It's
[24:19] no money out of the general fund. It's
[24:22] money that we have received this year.
[24:25] and have not spent this year, that'll go
[24:29] over to the new fund and become their
[24:32] beginning fund balance.
[24:34] So, you'll see that estimate over on
[24:36] their side, too.
[24:41] Hopefully, that made some sort of sense.
[24:43] So, okay,
[24:44] >> Carol, on page 44, I think you got a
[24:47] two.
[24:48] >> I'm sorry.
[24:49] >> On page 44, I think you got a typo or
[24:52] two.
[24:54] uh third line down uh swim pool res
[24:57] should be reserved I think.
[24:59] >> Yes.
[25:01] >> And then the the figure 48,331
[25:04] is is uh not the same as later on where
[25:07] it talks about transferring $9,800 into
[25:10] the
[25:11] >> Oh, okay. You're talking about the 98 to
[25:14] $97,000.
[25:16] Yeah. The this is totally separate. the
[25:19] swim pool reserve in a a part of getting
[25:22] rid of the pool fund which we're going
[25:24] to spend about 10 seconds on um is part
[25:29] of that is there is money and I had to
[25:32] work with the auditors over the last
[25:33] couple of years there's money that is
[25:36] restricted and we cannot spend it on
[25:40] anything except for a pool. So that is
[25:44] that $48,000.
[25:46] We actually took that to make it more
[25:48] transparent this year because in the
[25:51] past it was just sitting in a holding
[25:53] account uh really doing nothing and it
[25:56] had never been recognized as revenue or
[26:00] anything in the in our books. So we made
[26:04] that much more transparent this year and
[26:06] you'll see this now pretty much forever.
[26:09] you know, we're trying to figure out the
[26:10] best way to present it in the budget,
[26:13] but that money is going to stay there.
[26:16] It's money we cannot spend. So, it
[26:19] basically is like a restricted
[26:20] >> still a little bit murky because back in
[26:23] 2020 when we bought the Buxom property,
[26:25] we leveraged the pool uh to purchase
[26:28] that
[26:29] >> and so
[26:30] >> part of it part of it
[26:31] >> and so so that that's where that that
[26:33] gets kind of muddy.
[26:34] >> Oh, yeah. Yeah. because we now my
[26:36] understanding and I was not here then
[26:38] but my understanding is we spent when we
[26:40] bought Grehorn that we spent the money
[26:43] we could out of that pool fund and
[26:47] bought that but there has always been
[26:49] this 40 $48,000
[26:52] that was restricted so we could not
[26:54] spend the
[26:56] >> footnote I agree yeah yeah
[26:59] >> I think those were donations that were
[27:01] stipulated we could never be spent on
[27:02] anything else but
[27:04] >> yeah I'll I can put note on there.
[27:07] >> And reminder, everybody speak in the
[27:09] microphone so we can record it here.
[27:12] >> I have a question.
[27:13] >> Councelor Santiago,
[27:14] >> can uh Carol, can you just uh tell us
[27:16] what exactly is a non-dump departmental
[27:19] transfer?
[27:20] I know it's cut off, but it's transfer.
[27:22] >> Okay. A non-dep departmental transfer.
[27:25] We have two. And actually, that's in in
[27:27] another section back here
[27:29] >> that um that I was going to talk about
[27:31] those because they're listed
[27:33] specifically in uh section
[27:36] >> 14 or whatever it is. Um and those are
[27:40] one is the transfer to Watts House. We
[27:44] have a $10,000 transfer to Watts house
[27:47] >> and we have the 97,000 or whatever it
[27:50] turns out to be
[27:51] >> 919
[27:51] >> 90 uh to 91,700
[27:55] and it's not going to end up being that.
[27:57] I don't know what it's going to be
[27:59] because we can't predict right now how
[28:01] much that's going to be. It'll be
[28:02] whatever's left over. Well, we predicted
[28:04] it but we may have predicted it wrong.
[28:07] >> Sure.
[28:07] >> That will go towards our economic
[28:09] development group.
[28:10] >> The economic development fund.
[28:11] >> Okay. That's what those are.
[28:13] >> And it's titled non-EP departmental
[28:15] because it's not coming from a specific
[28:16] department. It's just a general fund
[28:18] because it's not the police or the
[28:19] administration or anybody send spending
[28:21] money over to that fund. It's just a
[28:24] nonpart
[28:25] >> that could be spent.
[28:28] >> It's being it's just being transferred.
[28:30] It's money that was in the general fund
[28:31] is being transferred over, but it's
[28:32] titled weird just because of where it's
[28:34] coming from. Not that it's not going to
[28:36] a different department.
[28:37] >> Okay. Thank And we did something similar
[28:39] this year with lots house when we, you
[28:41] know, um, did work over there last year.
[28:44] So,
[28:48] okay. And revenues really did not change
[28:51] that much. There's not much to talk
[28:52] about. Uh, the if anybody has any
[28:56] questions, let me know.
[28:56] >> Do you expect any of the new houses to
[28:58] be on this year's tax?
[29:00] >> We do not. That doesn't mean they won't,
[29:02] but there may be one or two, but I bet
[29:04] there's not because they have to
[29:05] basically be completed
[29:07] There are a few in Dutch Canyon being
[29:09] lived in right now. Few.
[29:11] >> You may have a few of those.
[29:13] >> There may be a few, but I I know that
[29:16] from what I've heard there won't be
[29:18] many.
[29:18] >> I believe the cut off is January.
[29:20] >> Yeah.
[29:20] >> Before it will hit the tax roll this
[29:22] year. That doesn't come out till
[29:23] October. So,
[29:25] >> so
[29:26] >> it's quite a delay.
[29:27] >> So, the tax increase is mostly the 3%
[29:30] that we can kind of count on. That's
[29:32] about it.
[29:32] >> That's about it right now. That's about
[29:34] it. Now, on page 47, you'll see
[29:38] intergovernmental revenue and there is a
[29:41] the park grant the balance and then it
[29:44] goes down because we didn't get it or
[29:45] didn't didn't spend it. So, and then it
[29:48] comes back up. So, that's basically the
[29:50] park grants. So, that's why that has
[29:53] gotten higher.
[29:55] And
[29:57] >> so, the $1 million grab horn grant we
[29:59] bud put in last year, but we didn't
[30:00] spend it. So, we moved over to this
[30:01] year.
[30:02] >> Yeah. And maybe the playground grant is
[30:05] probably in there as well spent this
[30:07] year.
[30:08] >> Yeah, we'll receive it because that
[30:10] those grants we get as we receive the as
[30:12] we do the work. So since we hadn't
[30:14] started those projects, we did not
[30:17] receive any of that money. So that's why
[30:19] it b that bounces.
[30:22] There's not anything else that really
[30:23] bounced much. Um the charges for service
[30:25] did bounce a few years ago, but uh that was because we did some accounting
[30:30] changes.
[30:34] and transfers are going down in the
[30:37] general fund and the reason for that is
[30:39] Ben is really working on the on making
[30:42] things more transparent. So we're
[30:44] instead of in the old days there were
[30:46] lots of transfers that were transferred
[30:49] to the general fund and then the general
[30:51] fund paid for things like for things
[30:53] like software you know it's very
[30:55] expensive and the if you transfer the
[30:58] money it comes out of the other funds
[31:00] but you can't really see where it goes.
[31:03] Now, we actually are taking those
[31:05] expenses and splitting them up as we get
[31:08] the bills. So, they're in the individual
[31:11] funds budgets. So, their budgets have
[31:14] gone up and the general fund has gone
[31:16] down because we're not paying to all of
[31:19] those and we're not receiving the money
[31:20] for it. So,
[31:22] >> we have the one time in 25 a big kind of
[31:24] kick in the property tax with Cascade
[31:26] Tissues. We had a clawback on some
[31:28] property tax maybe 500,000 or so.
[31:31] >> It was about 500,000. That's why that
[31:32] one was higher a one time thing
[31:34] enterprise. Yeah.
[31:36] >> Yeah.
[31:43] » But yeah, we'll dig into these further
[31:45] with each department as well.
[31:46] >> Yeah.
[31:47] >> Any more questions this on the general
[31:49] fund expenditures or we get into each
[31:52] individual department?
[31:54] I I do have a question on page 43 um
[31:57] about the $850,000 to an unappropriated
[32:01] ending fund balance funds cannot be
[32:03] utilized during upcoming fiscal year. Is
[32:05] that going to be covered
[32:07] at a in a later chapter here or can you
[32:10] share a little more information? Is that
[32:11] money that's pre-committed to something
[32:13] else in 27 and 28?
[32:18] » Are you looking at the budget note? It's
[32:19] asking about the 850 un
[32:21] >> unappropriated funds for
[32:24] >> unappropriated. We just don't have it
[32:26] appropriated towards anything else. It's
[32:27] basically saying we will not be spending
[32:28] that money this year.
[32:30] >> Sorry. Yeah.
[32:30] >> For future years,
[32:31] >> but it's not pre-committed to something
[32:32] else.
[32:32] >> No, it's just we didn't have in our
[32:34] budget spend. You could say it's saving
[32:36] for a future year. It's saving for the
[32:38] first part of the year so that we have,
[32:39] you know, funds to pay for the different
[32:41] services we have until taxes come in.
[32:43] But it's just it's money that's set
[32:44] aside for pretty much next year, not to
[32:46] be spent this upcoming fiscal year.
[32:48] >> My apologies. I guess that comes so
[32:50] logically to me because it's it's kind
[32:52] of since we don't get taxes until
[32:54] November, you know, generally we try and
[32:57] leave a couple of months worth of uh
[33:01] money in the general fund so that we've
[33:04] got money to pay until the tax money
[33:06] starts coming in in November. So yeah,
[33:10] that cannot be spent this year at all.
[33:12] It's it's locked in. So I apologize.
[33:16] pulling it out of savings and putting it
[33:17] back in your checking account.
[33:19] >> Okay.
[33:24] » Um can I ask a question following that that um so when you set it aside
[33:31] where do you put it to to increase
[33:35] interest? Well, the mini the money sits
[33:37] in our our LGIP where we where we do
[33:41] pretty much all our investing at this
[33:43] point is we use the local government
[33:45] investment pool state resource and they
[33:50] store it. Their interest has been
[33:52] actually very good. It's been over 4%
[33:57] invested.
[33:57] >> Yeah, it's been very good interest and so it sits there and collects money
[34:01] right every month. safely, not high risk
[34:04] from funding, but
[34:05] >> right.
[34:06] >> I hope.
[34:08] >> Okay, moving on to section nine and
[34:12] administration department page 51.
[34:15] >> That's still me. Sorry about that. So,
[34:19] >> anything any highlights or changes or
[34:21] things you think are not?
[34:24] >> There really is not much. Um, you know,
[34:26] we don't have, you know, we do have, uh,
[34:29] the one project with, you know, we don't
[34:32] plan on having doing any building uh or
[34:35] capital projects. Uh, there isn't
[34:38] anything that's really out of the
[34:39] ordinary. Our budget is higher because
[34:42] there is a $700,000
[34:45] land purchase in there,
[34:47] >> right? As discussed with the council,
[34:49] that will be purchased in July. As soon
[34:51] as that closes, we bring that forward.
[34:53] So it's it's more earmarked to until the
[34:55] deal is finalized. Um but that would be
[34:58] that price range that we're looking in.
[35:04] » So that is that is the bump in that
[35:06] particular budget.
[35:08] >> And again the FTE I mean it's just um
[35:11] the assistant to city manager planner
[35:13] NJ's position you kind of change a
[35:15] little bit of where get the funds come
[35:17] from. Yes, he's paid this year mostly
[35:20] out of piss.
[35:22] >> Um,
[35:23] >> right. The idea was moving it more
[35:24] towards recreation type things. So, it'
[35:26] be more out of administration compared
[35:27] to where it was before. So, that gave a
[35:29] little bump there.
[35:36] people where it says insurance. Why
[35:39] change?
[35:46] » Insurance has gotten very very
[35:49] expensive.
[35:50] >> This goes way down.
[35:52] This goes to those transfers we were
[35:53] talking about earlier where they used to
[35:56] put transfer from every department into
[35:57] the general fund and then we did one
[35:59] lump sum payment for insurance but now
[36:01] those specific insurance car uh costs
[36:04] per fund per department are spread out
[36:06] so we actually know what it costs for
[36:07] that department not just the total by
[36:09] itself. So it's more like thinking of
[36:11] each of these as individual businesses.
[36:13] How much does it cost to provide
[36:14] insurance in the water department? It
[36:16] will be in their fund as opposed to all
[36:18] in one lump sum here instead. So that's
[36:20] why it reduced here. But those will go
[36:22] up in you'll see that in each individual
[36:24] fund those numbers will have increased
[36:26] >> because we actually made that change you
[36:28] know last year you can see it went from
[36:30] like $320,000
[36:32] to 18,000 and that's I can see that that
[36:35] yeah I should have highlighted and
[36:37] pointed that out because it used to be
[36:40] but that's is what the insurance and
[36:42] that's liability and property insurance
[36:44] with the city doesn't include health
[36:46] insurance. That's just liability and
[36:48] property insurance uh for the city and
[36:52] the general fund was paying all that and
[36:54] then doing transfers to to cover it. So
[36:59] yeah, good catch. I should have pointed
[37:01] that out.
[37:09] » Any other questions for administration?
[37:12] >> I have a question real quick.
[37:13] >> Yes, councelor President. Go ahead. So
[37:15] in regards to associating the insurance
[37:17] premiums to specific departments, are we
[37:19] doing the same thing with legal and
[37:21] those other professional services?
[37:23] >> Yes, we are.
[37:24] >> Okay.
[37:24] >> Yeah. Legal and software, everything.
[37:27] You know, we're everything we can. I
[37:29] think we may still have couple little
[37:31] ones left, but anything that we can
[37:33] easily
[37:35] charge out to the department. The things
[37:38] we are not doing are are like um council
[37:41] expenses
[37:43] um and
[37:45] um you know little bit bank fees, couple
[37:48] of things that are small and just be
[37:51] more wieldy to make those changes. I
[37:53] think we've got three things that we're
[37:55] actually having the departments transfer
[37:57] us the money for.
[37:58] >> Question there though. I don't see any
[38:00] legal fees in administration. So
[38:03] >> well it's in it's in contractual. So you
[38:05] don't have the um
[38:06] >> contract.
[38:08] >> Yeah, the there is a line.
[38:11] >> Yes, contractual professionals. All and
[38:13] that that includes a lot of things.
[38:14] >> That's the C school district that
[38:17] >> Okay, that is the um
[38:20] >> construction.
[38:21] >> Yeah, the construction excise tax.
[38:23] That's something that when somebody
[38:25] builds a house, you know, single family
[38:27] home, I believe it's only single family
[38:29] homes that there is money that they have
[38:32] to pay towards that. It is a straight
[38:34] pass through. If we get the money, we
[38:36] pay it through to the school district
[38:38] the end of the year. If we don't get if
[38:41] they we don't get any through the
[38:42] building permits, uh we don't pay them
[38:45] anything. So, you know, there is some
[38:47] this year that we will be paying, but
[38:49] that's a that is a straight pastor. It's
[38:51] not revenue or expenses really for the
[38:54] general fund.
[38:59] » Okay. So, looks like
[39:02] very it's lower than last year minus the
[39:05] potential purchase
[39:08] down. Okay,
[39:11] good. Uh, police department.
[39:17] » No pressure.
[39:17] >> Any questions?
[39:18] >> Chief,
[39:20] >> such a small subject,
[39:23] >> small percentage.
[39:24] >> All right. Thank you very much. Um, Mr.
[39:26] chair also my fellow staff members also
[39:29] budget committee too as well before I
[39:31] begin Mr. Mayor Mr. Chair, may I hand
[39:33] out some documentation? Is that okay?
[39:35] >> I will.
[39:39] » I'm going to pass it out.
[39:43] >> So, uh, good afternoon everybody. Uh,
[39:44] thank you very much for being here. Um,
[39:46] look forward to entertaining questions
[39:47] you might have about your police
[39:48] department. Uh, just a couple of big
[39:50] things that you'll see in our budget
[39:51] that I would like to highlight. Um, some
[39:53] of the big things are going to be the
[39:55] potential proposal of a drug detection
[39:56] K-9 program. Um that's going to be
[39:59] associated uh document you're being
[40:01] handed up about right now by our chair.
[40:05] Also to adding
[40:08] >> Thanks also adding a um detective
[40:11] position and also the additional uh
[40:14] procurement of officer survival and for
[40:17] um equipment such as body armor and
[40:19] things that are ple rows. Uh currently
[40:21] right now we have 11 officers altogether
[40:24] um to include myself uh three sergeants
[40:26] which takes one s one position takes
[40:28] place of lieutenant and also seven
[40:30] patrol officers out of seven patrol
[40:31] officers three are actively in training
[40:34] um right now. So with that being said um
[40:39] the what I just hand out right there is
[40:40] just for the drug detection K9 program
[40:42] to answer a couple questions which I'll
[40:43] love to entertain. Uh this is probably
[40:46] one of the biggest thing that'll be new
[40:47] to the police department and this kind
[40:49] of comes from almost two years of um
[40:51] going back and forth with this to see
[40:53] what will best benefit our community and
[40:54] some of the things that could possibly
[40:56] benefit such as um just getting drugs
[40:59] out of community. Uh, Highway 30 is a
[41:02] big inter uh, interstate uh, sorry,
[41:05] state route that's used to transfer
[41:07] drugs and stuff obviously throughout our
[41:09] county and also to Washington state and
[41:11] just being more um, able to help uh,
[41:14] prevent hopefully overdose and things
[41:16] are happening in our community as Keptus
[41:17] County grows. Uh, there on the right
[41:19] side, if you look at the document, if I
[41:21] put your attention to that, these are
[41:23] some of the initial costs for that. Um,
[41:26] the dog itself will cost roughly 14,000,
[41:29] but I also cruise $100 worth of
[41:31] training. That's a onetime cost for us.
[41:33] Um, and the food itself is just
[41:36] estimated to be roughly about 1 $1,800
[41:38] uh for the for Emily and just going down
[41:41] there. Things such as um aids to help
[41:43] train the dog on drug and such that
[41:45] nature. Uh, but we have tried to reduce
[41:47] cost with the police department. But a
[41:49] couple things um one we had a a car that
[41:52] was donated by our partners at the
[41:53] police department which was great um
[41:55] cost in the city I believe maybe at the
[41:57] most a dollar alltogether that'll be
[41:59] used for position if approved and we
[42:01] also have potential resources where we
[42:04] can have the food be donated from a
[42:06] local store um Wilco and I collect
[42:10] information from um Oregon Association
[42:13] of K9 Police officers to get more
[42:14] information about how we can reduce the
[42:16] cost and annual costs and this what I
[42:18] have Here you look at the very bottom of
[42:19] it estimated more than likely it's going
[42:22] to be roughly 4,675 annually after
[42:25] initial startup cost and I said $7,000
[42:28] the high end that will include any
[42:30] possible in unanticipated additional
[42:32] resources equipment and also um veterary
[42:35] bills that might happen but annually I
[42:38] talked to some partners here in Columbia
[42:39] County it's about $300 a month for
[42:42] annual check for the veterary um cost
[42:45] for that. So moving on, also SRO
[42:48] position. It was already talked about
[42:50] this school. We haven't had anything
[42:51] official yet, but we had a conversation.
[42:54] I guess just out of curiosity.
[42:55] >> Yes.
[42:56] >> Where where is the dog housed off duty?
[42:59] >> I'll be housed with an officer who's
[43:01] Yes, sir. Awesome.
[43:02] >> Great question. So yeah, I'll hand any
[43:04] questions on that and I'll continue to
[43:05] move on.
[43:06] >> Well, yeah. Before I mean, um, are we
[43:09] able to This is obviously the first time
[43:12] we've kind of looked at this part of it.
[43:14] Is there a way that if we, you know, you
[43:16] okay the budget, but then we discuss
[43:18] this at a later time and learn more
[43:20] about it, uh, or if we recommended the
[43:24] council tonight to accept this budget,
[43:26] is this approved? You know, and then the
[43:28] council then would also approve. Um,
[43:31] >> so this is not in there. Is that where
[43:34] >> this is in the budget?
[43:35] >> Yes, it's been it's in the budget,
[43:37] ma'am. This just I mean, it's not
[43:40] $1,500,000.
[43:41] estimate about 28,000 but the initial
[43:45] cost plus the reoccurring is 27 28,000
[43:49] >> for the first year. Yeah.
[43:50] >> Yeah. First year.
[43:51] >> Council President Miller.
[43:54] >> Thank you. Um, mayor, I do uh have
[43:56] basically the same question that you
[43:58] just raised is if we do do a conditional
[44:00] approval um on the budget, if we could
[44:03] caveat because I think there is a lot
[44:06] more discussion to be had on this um
[44:09] that we do have more discussion on it
[44:11] before we do a full approval on it. The
[44:14] reason is is because council has spent a
[44:16] lot of time over the last several years
[44:18] trying to focus on patrol coverage and
[44:20] get our service levels related to patrol
[44:22] up. And I don't know at this point if
[44:24] this really
[44:26] complements that effort um with the
[44:28] training that can kines take uh with my
[44:30] experience I they take a ton of uh
[44:33] training and that will take um again
[44:36] this is what I want to learn about is
[44:37] how much it'll take an officer off of
[44:40] patrol and going outside of our area for
[44:44] training activities for that canine. The
[44:46] other issue, just putting on the record
[44:48] really quick, is that um when an officer
[44:51] or handler leaves a department for
[44:53] whatever reason or they're on vacation,
[44:56] um St. Helens had the same issue. It
[44:59] creates a burden for somebody else that
[45:01] didn't want a dog. And when you have a
[45:03] small workforce, um you of course reduce
[45:06] the number of people that are willing or
[45:07] qualified to be able to be a canine
[45:09] handler. So, I think that we do need to
[45:12] hear a little bit more about this. Um, I
[45:15] support it. I just don't know that if
[45:17] now's the time. And so I would like to
[45:19] hear more from Chief Blan before we give
[45:21] final approval on this budget item.
[45:25] Um, the other thing that I'll add too is
[45:26] that there's a lot going on for a small
[45:28] department. Um, I didn't know that we
[45:30] were adding a detective. So, you know,
[45:32] that's a new program. Um, I would like
[45:35] to hear how that's going to impact um,
[45:37] the patrol coverage. Um, but also we're
[45:39] adding the SRO program, too. and now we
[45:41] want to add a a canine program within
[45:43] the same physical year. That's a lot. Um
[45:46] so I would just ask that we we can give
[45:49] conditional approval if that's what the
[45:50] majority decides but I think there needs
[45:53] to be further conversation on this.
[45:55] Thank you.
[45:57] >> Uh thank you very much and for the
[45:59] information counselor. So just quick um
[46:02] u more information. So particularly for
[46:04] the detective position and also the K9,
[46:06] this is already going to be internally
[46:08] additional assignments from patrol
[46:10] officers currently in our ranks. Um so
[46:12] it's not additional new FTE uh when it
[46:15] comes down to it. So the K9 position if
[46:17] approved by the council and budget
[46:18] committee will still be part of patrol
[46:20] and still be responding for call for
[46:22] services. But council Miller is correct.
[46:24] There is certain requirements that we
[46:26] have to name sufficiency for that. As
[46:28] for detective position, um that will be
[46:32] uh once again part of one of patrol
[46:34] officer additional duties. Um that will
[46:36] be set aside once we get to our patrol
[46:38] coverage levels. Um but my priority as a
[46:42] chief is still make sure we have patrol
[46:43] officers responding to call for services
[46:45] um during the times we currently have
[46:47] right now as a priority and as we
[46:49] continue to move through and and
[46:51] backfill people uh to put those people
[46:54] out and make sure we maintain that level
[46:56] of coverage. and SRO position two once
[46:59] again that's going to be assigned to the
[47:00] schools um during the school year um but
[47:04] they'll be asset that will come back to
[47:05] the patrol level during the summer time
[47:07] with schools out so that'll help
[47:09] facilitate that too as well so that's
[47:11] kind of the quick down and dirty of how
[47:14] looking for going forward sir thank you
[47:17] chief and I I want to make clear that I
[47:19] support you and I support these efforts
[47:21] um I I just want to make sure that we're
[47:23] doing our due diligence we're having the
[47:24] right conversations about these things
[47:26] it can have a a really significant
[47:28] impact. So, uh, thank you for your
[47:30] comments. I appreciate it.
[47:32] >> But, but yes, councelor President
[47:33] Miller, to your to your answer your
[47:35] question, if we approved it in the
[47:36] budget does not mean that we have to go
[47:37] forward at this time. It just places it
[47:39] in the budget so we are allowed to go
[47:40] forward when if and when we go forward
[47:42] with that. Without that, it makes it
[47:44] hard to go forward with it. If we do
[47:46] decide to go with it, um, it's much
[47:48] easier to plan to spend as opposed to
[47:50] having to do it after the budget is
[47:51] adopted.
[47:53] >> Okay. Thank you.
[47:54] >> Correct me if I'm wrong. Um, and if if
[47:58] it is approved it, uh, would you be able
[48:02] just to implement without running it
[48:04] through city council? Again,
[48:05] >> I I wouldn't implement it if there was
[48:08] discussion requested by the council
[48:10] before we did that. That would not be a
[48:12] wise move on my part. So,
[48:15] >> and I will say that for our police
[48:16] department, this is going to be
[48:17] community thing and it really that's
[48:19] what it comes back to. So, I like the
[48:21] community be board. Um this will be the
[48:24] first asset I think in Columbia County.
[48:25] Other two dogs that are in the county
[48:27] are apprehension dogs. Um one that
[48:29] tracks down criminals who want to run or
[48:33] people who are post arrest. This will be
[48:35] focused on um drug detection getting out
[48:38] of our community and also with the
[48:41] hopeful goal too to also help CL County
[48:43] Sheriff's Office by um doing additional
[48:45] checks or contraband within their jail
[48:47] system. So, um I think it'll have a very
[48:49] positive impact for the whole entire
[48:50] community just computers if uh deployed
[48:53] correctly. But appreciate you're looking
[48:56] at this and I said I'm I'm glad for the
[48:58] communication and dialogue.
[49:00] >> This is probably a good time for us to
[49:01] talk about, you know, we'd like to also
[49:03] add $400,000
[49:06] just under that. I know it's terrible
[49:08] time to ask, right? But uh it's 399 or
[49:11] whatever um for if we get the grant for
[49:16] radios, we're gonna need to spend it.
[49:18] And that was not now buying new radios.
[49:22] >> Right. Yeah. I'll give I'll give a
[49:23] little context. So just over the last
[49:24] week after we submitted these budget
[49:26] documents, uh we were notified of a
[49:28] grant that council president Miller is
[49:30] working with chief and um fellow a some
[49:34] other agencies to get some additional
[49:36] ratings radios and other things. So, we
[49:37] were notified last week that we're on
[49:40] the top of the list. There's some things
[49:41] that we still need to move forward with,
[49:44] but with that, we didn't have it in the
[49:45] budget plan for a number. Um, since we
[49:48] got that, we we can add it in this
[49:50] meeting. We couldn't add it in the next
[49:52] council meeting. So, um, once again,
[49:54] it's a lot easier to get it in the
[49:55] budget ahead of time. It would be a
[49:57] grant with associated expense, so it
[49:59] doesn't really change anything we're
[50:01] doing with our general fund monies. is
[50:04] just adding it to the budget.
[50:07] >> So, we'll be adding $400,000 worth of
[50:10] >> revenue and $400,000 worth of capital
[50:14] expense.
[50:15] >> So, it's basically
[50:17] >> there's a couple other agencies that get
[50:19] part of that as well
[50:20] >> or the 400 isn't just Scapoo.
[50:23] >> I'm pretty sure that the money would
[50:25] come to Scapus and then we would
[50:27] distribute the resources out. So, it
[50:30] would have to come here and then it
[50:31] would be it I don't know the specifics.
[50:33] It'd be best just to plan for that and
[50:34] if it end up less that'd be great. We
[50:36] just want to make sure it's easy.
[50:38] >> It's two other cities Reneer and
[50:40] Columbia City
[50:41] >> right
[50:41] >> organizations. Ultimately 399 will come
[50:44] in and then go out. Um
[50:48] but you're going to put it in here then?
[50:50] >> We'd like to add it as Yeah, we'd like
[50:51] to add that. So, and that will come out.
[50:54] I'll send out new sheets and everything
[50:56] for people.
[50:56] >> All right. So that be added 400,000
[50:58] expense, 400,000 in revenue and it just
[51:00] be a wash
[51:02] because it would be a
[51:03] >> nothing out of from mud additional
[51:08] >> mill council. Was there any match on our
[51:10] side that was required? I didn't see.
[51:11] >> No, there's there's no match and this is
[51:13] a re reimbursement grant too. So, we
[51:15] will we will write the first check and
[51:17] then they basically we submit the
[51:18] invoices to Oregon Criminal Justice
[51:20] Commission and they reimburse us fully
[51:22] for the expenses up to the allowed
[51:25] amount which is uh right now pending at
[51:27] 399,84.
[51:31] Um and they they do that within 30 days.
[51:34] >> That's you know congratulations. That's
[51:36] a really good grant to get us new if
[51:38] even if it's 200,000 for us. I mean
[51:40] that's we'll go buy $200,000 worth.
[51:43] That's great. Yeah,
[51:49] » but you don't have anywhere on here
[51:52] radios already in
[51:55] >> because I didn't know anything about it
[51:56] until like yesterday like today.
[52:01] >> Yeah. And we wouldn't have been able to
[52:02] do this in this, you know, physical year
[52:05] or anything to do with replacement
[52:06] radios without this grant. So now that
[52:09] we were notified that we are place
[52:11] number one right now, um now it now it
[52:14] is an issue to put in there.
[52:22] » And so we keep talking about level of
[52:24] service with the police department.
[52:25] We're going to continue to talk about
[52:27] that as we go on the next couple months.
[52:29] So, you know, as a budget, we've got
[52:32] placeholders in here and looking at this
[52:34] funding and I agree with what you have
[52:36] in here. forward and um but we're going
[52:40] to continue to talk about funding other
[52:42] funding sources for the police that we
[52:45] have. Okay,
[52:47] >> Carol, I have a quick question. I don't
[52:48] see fuel code 206 being used for police.
[52:51] How are they tracking their fuel?
[52:53] >> That's under um vehicle maintenance. I
[52:56] believe for us, Dave, but it's in
[53:00] he
[53:01] >> approves it every month.
[53:02] >> Yeah, it's in there. Trust me. Check it.
[53:07] You want to increase that a little with
[53:09] um
[53:11] gas.
[53:15] » Good thing we have a
[53:20] » electric bikes for patrol. We're going
[53:24] >> I like that.
[53:25] >> Okay. Any more questions?
[53:29] >> In a minute.
[53:33] Moving on to parks department page 57.
[53:39] » Ready?
[53:41] >> That' be me.
[53:42] >> Uh thank you chair. Uh council budget
[53:45] committee. Um talking some parks right
[53:48] now. Um go ahead and start off with the
[53:50] operational budget of 3,777,238
[53:56] $230.
[53:58] Of that personnel, $414,500.
[54:03] Materials and services, $249,35
[54:08] with $2,925
[54:12] for transfers. Uh capital outlay uh
[54:15] $3,110,500
[54:19] as mentioned in the uh budget message
[54:22] and by the chair. Mr. Mayor, uh, three
[54:25] of these line items for this has grant
[54:28] or grant driven. Uh, one is the one that
[54:32] we budgeted for last year. The Smith
[54:34] Road Veterans Park extension um is in
[54:37] there. We received a grant for an ADA
[54:41] playground for Veterans Park. Um, that
[54:46] one uh just went through the RFPs. We
[54:49] received b some bids and we awarded uh
[54:52] Burke to do the constructing which
[54:55] should happen in the next fiscal year.
[54:58] Um the third one is the bridge from
[55:00] veterans to comely. We received a 50%
[55:04] total cost grant for that. Um so um that
[55:09] includes the design for that bridge as
[55:12] well. Uh $100,000 for miscellaneous park
[55:16] improvements. This is just for things
[55:18] that uh either staff and or council uh
[55:22] recommends and they go through council
[55:24] process throughout the year that can
[55:25] come up and then just equipment grades
[55:28] um for any type of emergencies that come
[55:31] up uh throughout the year.
[55:35] » Does that 100,000 cover like the disc
[55:38] golf covers a disc golf? Um if meer
[55:42] property um I know there's some
[55:43] municipal code issues with that but
[55:46] that's what that stuff's allocated for.
[55:47] >> You did ask about that
[55:51] when will we start building the park?
[55:53] >> Yeah, we had a very clear discussion
[55:55] when that all transpired that u the EJ
[55:58] Smith parcel would be developed first
[55:59] and a few other things that were already
[56:01] in the queue. So he he is aware that
[56:03] it'd be a couple years out but
[56:10] I have a question. Are we looking at
[56:12] some of the development codes though
[56:13] that may lower the bar for some of the
[56:15] infrastructure and upgrades that are
[56:17] necessary when city parks are being
[56:18] developed?
[56:21] >> We don't have any proposed changes at
[56:24] this time. Um
[56:28] the snag we were running into was well
[56:30] number one typically you know you'd do
[56:32] frontage improvements at the time of
[56:34] development. That would be a really
[56:37] heavy lift for this project when you
[56:39] know the intent really is initially to
[56:43] um try and get it up and running and
[56:45] usable. Uh putting in a small kind of
[56:48] parking lot area, but like our code does
[56:50] require that parking lots are paved. Um
[56:55] uh the other thing was potentially doing
[56:58] just like a portaotty initially until we
[57:01] have funding to do a full standalone
[57:03] structure. um our code kind of really uh
[57:08] the municipal code in terms of
[57:09] portaotties is more about like for
[57:11] events or for shortterm use not for
[57:15] long-term use. Um and so my thought
[57:18] really on that one was just for that
[57:21] particular issue. It would be a pretty
[57:23] quick fix to kind of clarify it could be
[57:26] used for uh underutilized parks or or
[57:31] spaces like that. But I it's it's
[57:33] something to look at for sure. Um but
[57:36] it's not been I we're 50-year plan is
[57:40] top top to get through right now.
[57:42] >> Yeah, I was going to say we have had
[57:43] discussions about it. It's just trying
[57:45] to get these
[57:46] >> backlog of 50-year plan updates done
[57:48] before she can move to the next set of
[57:50] updates we'd like to get moving on. So
[57:53] >> So it's not the intent to package all of
[57:55] the changes into one effort. So this
[57:59] wouldn't be
[57:59] >> um Yeah. and those were held for three
[58:02] years and so that's coming forward as
[58:04] one package. I did count we are touching
[58:08] and amending 36 chapters out of 54 of
[58:11] the development code. It's a huge
[58:14] undertaking. So we we've got to get that
[58:16] done first. Uh we have talked about some
[58:18] interim type stuff we could do to get
[58:20] something going at that park. But um
[58:22] again to to Dave's point like we have
[58:25] grant funding that has deadlines. We're
[58:27] trying to get that work done uh first
[58:30] knowing we would love to use that parcel
[58:32] because it's treated and beautiful. So,
[58:35] >> are you able to build trails in there?
[58:38] Bark dust trails without a parking lot.
[58:43] >> You know, you you can, but our biggest
[58:45] concern right now is some sort of a
[58:46] restroom.
[58:47] >> If if people are there too long, they're
[58:50] going to have needs and then if you
[58:52] don't have facilities,
[58:53] >> we're going to have things we don't
[58:54] want. So,
[58:55] >> are we okay having the porta potty at
[58:57] Chapman Landing because it's county prop
[58:59] county?
[58:59] >> That's right.
[59:00] >> It meets the zoning requirements, I
[59:01] guess.
[59:02] >> Yeah.
[59:05] » So, yeah, we'll continue to look at that
[59:06] is in the discussions.
[59:08] >> Okay. Thanks.
[59:11] >> I have a question for Doug. Um, under
[59:14] the, uh, 242 dues, fees, and
[59:17] subscriptions.
[59:18] Um, I know it's only 10,000, but it is
[59:21] three times what it was last year. Um
[59:24] what what are the dues and descriptions
[59:27] and fees? Why not? You
[59:29] >> want me to take that?
[59:29] >> Yeah, that's that's a part of the money
[59:32] coming out of
[59:35] >> the general fund to the individual funds
[59:39] administration stuff. Uh y'all that has
[59:42] come
[59:44] >> Spring Brook there's there's that's a
[59:46] big thing the software.
[59:47] >> So it's not an increase. It's coming
[59:48] some used to go in,
[59:50] >> right?
[59:51] >> Yeah.
[59:52] >> And so it went to other other things
[59:54] >> and insurance wasn't in there in the
[59:56] past. You know, it's always got the
[59:58] insurance also is a big cost that went
[1:00:01] down to the individual departments just
[1:00:03] for transparency sake. So,
[1:00:05] >> okay, thank you.
[1:00:10] » Hey, great jobs with parks. Again, we're
[1:00:12] talking level of service there. So, as
[1:00:15] we can find additional funding sources,
[1:00:17] we'll be able to adjust and
[1:00:22] build some more park.
[1:00:24] Um, municipal court department page 61.
[1:00:28] >> There's not a lot to say about municipal
[1:00:30] court. I told the chief I wouldn't make
[1:00:32] him do this because because court really
[1:00:34] kind of falls more on administration.
[1:00:37] It's, you know, we hope we always hope
[1:00:39] we get $100,000 worth of um of revenue
[1:00:43] from fines. Never happens, but you know,
[1:00:47] it hasn't, at least since I've been
[1:00:48] here. So, you can kind of see that, you
[1:00:50] know, we budget for it, uh, but it's not
[1:00:53] there. They do, the court does pay for
[1:00:57] half an employee plus a little bit of
[1:00:59] administration.
[1:01:00] And, you know, they have, you know,
[1:01:03] costs they have to pay money through.
[1:01:05] that's what their materials and services
[1:01:07] is. They have to pay money through to
[1:01:09] the state and so they're collecting
[1:01:11] money for other things. Really, there
[1:01:13] isn't a lot that's changed. Obviously,
[1:01:16] we've got attorney fees. That's the big
[1:01:18] cost for municipal court is the is the
[1:01:21] judge and the attorneys, the defense
[1:01:24] attorney and the our prosecuting
[1:01:26] attorney. That's the big cost for court.
[1:01:29] Well, it looks like the payroll costs
[1:01:32] went from 54,000 about in 2425 up to
[1:01:37] 133,000.
[1:01:39] >> Is that another one of these transfers
[1:01:41] from general?
[1:01:41] >> Transfers from partly. Yeah. Okay. Yeah.
[1:01:44] Good. Now, they're in the general fund.
[1:01:45] So, if we get money from court or part
[1:01:48] of our salaries go to court, we try to
[1:01:51] we tried to take part of everything. I
[1:01:53] don't think the general man that bend
[1:01:56] has um had anything going to court in
[1:02:00] the past. So, we're trying to make these
[1:02:02] kind of even them out to where things
[1:02:05] seem to fit. So,
[1:02:07] >> does the does the code enforcement come
[1:02:10] in here at all? That's fees for
[1:02:13] speeding, tickets, those type of things.
[1:02:14] >> They're they're entirely, you know,
[1:02:16] unless they unless he writes a ticket
[1:02:17] and we get revenue from it, but I I
[1:02:20] don't think he's been they've been doing
[1:02:21] things that way. So, yes, we have code of force of
[1:02:27] violation. There have been tickets going
[1:02:29] through the process of describing so
[1:02:31] that would come
[1:02:33] >> that's a good thing. So
[1:02:35] >> I didn't realize that. So
[1:02:37] >> obviously our first thing is to enforce
[1:02:39] and to communicate and get them to
[1:02:42] change and do stuff but ultimately there
[1:02:45] violations.
[1:02:47] Okay.
[1:02:49] Um we good. Moving on. Number 13, page
[1:02:53] 64, planning department.
[1:02:56] >> Planning department.
[1:02:57] >> Yes. Yes. Thank you, mayor. So, let's
[1:03:01] see. Um, no very big changes this year,
[1:03:06] but you'll see overall from uh the 20 uh
[1:03:10] 2025 to 2026 to this next year um the
[1:03:14] total expenditures have dropped roughly
[1:03:16] in half. Again, that's reflective of um
[1:03:20] the fact that we did not purchase the
[1:03:22] building on East Columbia. Um aside from
[1:03:25] that, uh we don't have any big changes.
[1:03:28] Uh this year we will be focusing on
[1:03:33] uh completion of the 50-year plan.
[1:03:36] Um I will also serve on the project
[1:03:38] management team for the transportation
[1:03:41] system plan update and the Scapoost to
[1:03:43] St. Helen's trail project as well as
[1:03:46] supporting the entrepreneurship programs
[1:03:48] we'll be talking about at the new
[1:03:50] economic development fund in a little
[1:03:52] bit. Um we will be let's see we can go
[1:03:57] through here. The budget amount from the
[1:03:59] general fund department is 958,216.
[1:04:04] We anticipate revenue of 113,000 this
[1:04:07] year. Uh personnel services costs are
[1:04:10] budgeted at 628605.
[1:04:13] Material and services costs are
[1:04:15] estimated at 28336
[1:04:19] and capital outlay is budgeted at
[1:04:21] 43,650,000
[1:04:24] and there will be a transfer to the
[1:04:26] administration department at 2925
[1:04:30] for the completion of the 50-year plan.
[1:04:33] Um, I did include 15,000 um in
[1:04:37] contingency in case um I there there is
[1:04:41] no way to know as we're heading into
[1:04:43] adoption hearings how many um hearings
[1:04:46] that's going to take. Um it's a complete
[1:04:50] unknown. So we have estimates of what we
[1:04:54] um think that could look like. Um but we
[1:04:58] don't know. So I figured it would be
[1:04:59] best to put a little contingency in
[1:05:01] there in case we need it. Of course,
[1:05:03] we'd come back to council um to make
[1:05:05] that change if we needed to.
[1:05:07] >> What is your rough guesstimate of when
[1:05:09] will those start monthly?
[1:05:12] >> So, no um they are going to start the
[1:05:16] planning commission hearing is um going
[1:05:19] to be scheduled for June 25th.
[1:05:23] Council, if everything goes well,
[1:05:25] council's hearing would be scheduled for
[1:05:27] July 20th.
[1:05:30] It's going to be a very large large
[1:05:33] binder for you all. I apologize ahead of
[1:05:36] time. Um working on putting those staff
[1:05:39] reports together um through this month
[1:05:42] and June.
[1:05:45] So yeah, happy to answer any questions.
[1:05:48] Um, again I did notice the dues went up
[1:05:51] like had to go back in and look and
[1:05:53] again that's just the stuff being parsed
[1:05:55] out to the individual departments.
[1:05:58] >> On this you skip 2526
[1:06:03] » from 23.
[1:06:04] >> Yes, I will fix that. There's also a um an error in your copy
[1:06:09] for the uh community development
[1:06:11] director. Those wages are wrong. So, but
[1:06:14] I will fix that update right here.
[1:06:16] >> Yeah.
[1:06:18] um
[1:06:18] >> do I get for copying stuff?
[1:06:20] >> Yeah, I mean aside from that, I'm seeing
[1:06:23] health insurance jumped quite a bit. Um
[1:06:27] again, that's just across the board, but
[1:06:30] generally speaking, costs are pretty
[1:06:32] similar to what they've been in the
[1:06:33] past,
[1:06:36] >> yes.
[1:06:36] >> Yeah, I I would like to see a line item
[1:06:38] for a comprehensive waterf study
[1:06:41] eventually because we need that.
[1:06:43] >> I think that actually would come from
[1:06:45] storm water fund. Yeah.
[1:06:54] » Okay. Moving on.
[1:06:56] >> Number 14.
[1:06:57] >> A quick question. Um, in terms of the revenue, the planning, development
[1:07:02] fees, and the infrastructure inspection
[1:07:03] and planning fees. Um, so we're
[1:07:05] anticipating that to be lower this year.
[1:07:08] Why would that be?
[1:07:10] Um, it's always interesting for us to
[1:07:13] kind of sit down, put our heads together
[1:07:14] at CDC and figure out what projects we
[1:07:18] think will actually write their check in
[1:07:21] this upcoming fiscal year. Uh, it's
[1:07:24] really hard when they kind of span
[1:07:26] years. We're not sure exactly when
[1:07:27] they're going to go, but based on what
[1:07:30] we're seeing, we we there's not a lot
[1:07:32] kind of in the pipeline coming through.
[1:07:35] So we do expect revenues for this
[1:07:37] upcoming fiscal year will be lower than
[1:07:40] they have been um say in the last um few
[1:07:43] years just because we're not seeing the
[1:07:45] projects like coming in. Uh there was a
[1:07:48] lot of housing the last few years so it
[1:07:51] was kind of up for infrastructure
[1:07:52] inspection fees.
[1:07:53] >> So those all three are already done
[1:07:55] through the
[1:07:56] >> Yeah. So they've already made their
[1:07:58] payments. That's correct. So, I we it
[1:08:01] very well could be higher than this, but
[1:08:03] um we're just not seeing stuff that's
[1:08:05] like definitely going to go next year.
[1:08:08] >> Okay. Great. And then in terms of the
[1:08:10] 50-year plan, uh so you'll be kind of
[1:08:13] making the case to the county if there
[1:08:15] were to be an appeal at all and that
[1:08:17] caused incurred more consultation fees
[1:08:20] and that when would that come? Like do
[1:08:22] we need to be accounting potentially for
[1:08:24] any sort of
[1:08:25] >> That's a good point. I mean, I do not
[1:08:26] have any type of I mean, I do have a
[1:08:29] healthy, you know, kind of amount for
[1:08:32] attorney fees um that I just carry
[1:08:35] normally. Well, it's I'm carrying more
[1:08:36] than I would typically just because of
[1:08:38] we're going through this process.
[1:08:41] >> Um, but it would come out of a
[1:08:43] contractual professional line item
[1:08:46] should we have to, you know, spend more
[1:08:49] on attorney's fees going through that
[1:08:51] process.
[1:08:52] Um, that's where it would come out of.
[1:08:55] But I I have not kind of patted the
[1:08:57] budget, if you will, to account for
[1:08:59] that.
[1:08:59] >> Okay.
[1:09:00] >> The UGB expansion should not be very
[1:09:03] contentious. Um I mean, it's all it's
[1:09:06] not farm forest land. It's
[1:09:07] straightforward. It's residential. It's
[1:09:10] um so I don't anticipate that, but you
[1:09:14] never know.
[1:09:15] >> Okay.
[1:09:17] But if there was an extreme event, our general fund does have a $1.1
[1:09:21] million contingency in there. So, we
[1:09:23] could pull and and make that happen if
[1:09:25] needed for
[1:09:27] um any unforeseen big event.
[1:09:30] >> Okay.
[1:09:33] Now, on to 14, right? U general
[1:09:38] fund non-EP departmental page 67.
[1:09:41] >> Kind of already discussed a lot of this.
[1:09:44] Um you know this is basically things
[1:09:46] that don't fit into any of the standard
[1:09:49] departments you know so it includes
[1:09:50] those couple of transfers one to
[1:09:52] economic development agency and to the
[1:09:55] Watts house for their porch for their
[1:09:58] porch work and then the contingency and
[1:10:00] the other prepared fund balance you are
[1:10:03] both in here in this line and then we
[1:10:05] also put the swim reserve here because
[1:10:08] it's still there you add it in you got
[1:10:10] to take it back out so
[1:10:12] >> and that transfer to economic public
[1:10:14] development agency is basically funded
[1:10:16] by a grant coming.
[1:10:18] >> Yes. Yeah. That's not city money.
[1:10:23] » Get more into that, I'm sure.
[1:10:26] >> Okay.
[1:10:28] >> Um number 15, page 68, law enforcement
[1:10:31] assessment.
[1:10:33] >> Okay. I told Chief I do this one, too.
[1:10:35] So, okay. Um, this this fund was set up
[1:10:39] to basically
[1:10:42] track funds that come through ticket
[1:10:45] revenue and are transferred to the law
[1:10:48] enforcement fund so that the police have
[1:10:51] money to help pay for some of their uh,
[1:10:55] you know, things that that they do on a
[1:10:58] regular basis like doughnut day and
[1:11:00] national night out and um, Earth Day,
[1:11:03] you know, and that fund has not had a
[1:11:06] lot money because we haven't had a lot
[1:11:07] of ticket revenue. So that you know
[1:11:10] there is a certain amount of ticket
[1:11:12] revenue that's assigned that's that's
[1:11:14] earmarked for this law enforcement
[1:11:18] criminal justice fees and police fees.
[1:11:20] And the idea originally was that they
[1:11:23] would be able to buy cars and stuff with
[1:11:25] this. It's never been that way for at
[1:11:27] least as long as I can see. So, it's
[1:11:29] just kind of there as as funds that is
[1:11:32] are available without hitting the
[1:11:34] regular police budget, you know, to do
[1:11:37] these events that that the chief works
[1:11:40] so hard on, you know, always cooks,
[1:11:43] right? So, but he can talk you can talk
[1:11:45] more about that. But then we noticed
[1:11:47] that like Ben caught me and he says,
[1:11:49] "Okay, you're spending more money than
[1:11:51] you're getting in and so you're so
[1:11:53] obviously you can see the reserves going
[1:11:55] down. So, we're probably have to talk to
[1:11:57] Timmy Sue and say, you know, we have to
[1:11:59] kind of back off a little bit on what
[1:12:00] we're spending. But, you know, because
[1:12:03] this is basically this is the amount of
[1:12:06] money they've got and and they can't go
[1:12:09] over that for the year. So,
[1:12:11] >> typically though, like like Earth Day,
[1:12:13] all the food was donated.
[1:12:15] >> So, this pays for sal you know pays some
[1:12:18] salary.
[1:12:19] >> It does not pay any salary
[1:12:21] for but there are trinkets and stuff.
[1:12:24] having us.
[1:12:25] >> So just the same thing like when the
[1:12:26] city council has it or your booths just
[1:12:28] those little gifts we get out to our
[1:12:30] community which stickers and stuff like
[1:12:32] that. So those type of things.
[1:12:35] >> So
[1:12:38] Council President Miller
[1:12:40] >> Carol, do you um happen to know what
[1:12:43] this fund looked like prior to 2324?
[1:12:47] >> I could send you a his Well, see I have
[1:12:49] a 10ear history in here. Um,
[1:12:55] let's see. I got it down to back to 1516
[1:12:59] and it really is I don't have the
[1:13:01] revenue back there. Um, I can get you
[1:13:04] the revenue for the for that amount. I
[1:13:06] can get you the 10-year revenue if you'd
[1:13:08] like.
[1:13:09] >> Great. And you can see the cash
[1:13:10] carryover though starting back in 156
[1:13:12] has been going down steadily over the
[1:13:13] last 10 10 years.
[1:13:15] >> Okay. So, the
[1:13:17] >> the trends over the last maybe 10 years
[1:13:20] with this fund. Thank you.
[1:13:25] » Okay, moving on. Was house page 70
[1:13:29] >> 16.
[1:13:34] » Well, that'll be me.
[1:13:35] >> Is that Is that
[1:13:38] going to take this one?
[1:13:38] >> I'll take this one. Yeah. uh Watts House
[1:13:42] uh total uh working capital carryover is
[1:13:46] $24,45
[1:13:48] with uh again as mentioned $10,000 of a
[1:13:53] transfer uh and $900 of interest will
[1:13:56] bring it to $35,35
[1:13:59] for the year. Um pretty much for this fund uh as mentioned is a new
[1:14:05] railing for the house um coming out of
[1:14:08] capital outlay and then uh typical
[1:14:10] maintenance and organ
[1:14:13] um from the materials and services.
[1:14:17] Pretty straightforward.
[1:14:18] >> Yeah.
[1:14:23] » Question
[1:14:25] moving on.
[1:14:27] You say the mayor should live where you
[1:14:29] want them.
[1:14:33] As long as you get along with the
[1:14:35] Grinch.
[1:14:35] >> Yeah. Wow. That might change.
[1:14:38] >> Um, number 17, egg fund, page 61, page
[1:14:43] 73,
[1:14:45] >> and I'm going to talk for about two
[1:14:47] minutes on this, right? um peg fee fund
[1:14:50] was something that Comcast was paying us
[1:14:53] special funds
[1:14:55] in addition to their franchise fees up
[1:14:58] until the end of 2025.
[1:15:01] So we haven't gotten anything since
[1:15:04] their report for 2025 and they don't
[1:15:07] it's not in their new franchise
[1:15:09] agreement so there will be going away.
[1:15:12] This did pay for the website, you know,
[1:15:16] it paid for, you know, basically
[1:15:18] communication things. So, uh, that is no
[1:15:23] longer there. We're basically running it
[1:15:25] down and probably spending the rest of
[1:15:28] the money this year and it's going to go
[1:15:30] away and become like the swimming pool
[1:15:32] fund. You know, it'll eventually drop
[1:15:34] off. I got to keep it on for three
[1:15:36] years. So, so it just was not negotiated
[1:15:41] out and you know we're going to spend
[1:15:42] the money and the plan is to spend it
[1:15:44] all this year and I suspect that will
[1:15:47] happen this fiscal year to
[1:15:49] >> keep it going. They require like a
[1:15:51] channel you had to do your own public
[1:15:54] channel spend so much time on TV and we
[1:15:58] don't have that
[1:16:00] >> the funds to do that. So, and it wasn't
[1:16:02] going to fund it all. Yeah. you know.
[1:16:04] So,
[1:16:06] >> number 18, page 75, building fund 13.
[1:16:12] » All righty. So, let's see. The building
[1:16:14] department estimated uh estimates around
[1:16:17] 50 new home permits could be issued this
[1:16:19] year. In addition, we anticipate one new
[1:16:22] commercial building will be issued a
[1:16:24] permit to begin construction. That would
[1:16:26] be the new WAN branch.
[1:16:29] The building fund begins the year with
[1:16:30] the starting position of 135,968.
[1:16:35] Permit revenue and miscellaneous fees
[1:16:36] are anticipated to be 286,000.
[1:16:40] Total fund resources are expected to be
[1:16:42] 421,968.
[1:16:46] Personnel service costs are budgeted at
[1:16:49] 114,500.
[1:16:51] Materials and services are estimated at
[1:16:53] 244,441.
[1:16:57] and there will be a transfer to the
[1:16:59] general fund of 2,925.
[1:17:03] And then that does leave us with a
[1:17:05] contingency of $60,12.
[1:17:10] Um this fund is separate from the
[1:17:12] general fund. It is self sustaining
[1:17:15] usually. Uh a few years back there was a
[1:17:18] transfer from the general fund to cover
[1:17:20] it, but there has been quite a bit of uh
[1:17:22] permanent permit revenue the last few
[1:17:25] years from uh the subdivisions under
[1:17:27] construction
[1:17:28] >> and they paid us back
[1:17:30] >> and we paid back.
[1:17:30] >> I want you to know the building fund
[1:17:32] paid the general fund back
[1:17:33] >> right
[1:17:34] >> last year
[1:17:36] >> with interest.
[1:17:37] >> No interest
[1:17:39] >> um
[1:17:39] >> other than had interest of them paying
[1:17:41] us back. The storage units is that
[1:17:44] development have permits and stuff. Are
[1:17:46] we anticipating
[1:17:48] new storage unit?
[1:17:49] >> We anticipated that it would be this
[1:17:51] fiscal year.
[1:17:52] >> All the permit stuff was last year.
[1:17:57] >> And um I hope our office administrator
[1:18:00] and city manager don't start with a
[1:18:02] negative salary.
[1:18:05] >> I mean,
[1:18:06] >> yeah. Oh, whoops.
[1:18:11] Thank you.
[1:18:12] >> So then yeah, keep it.
[1:18:15] >> I worked so hard on all of the numbers.
[1:18:18] >> I know
[1:18:18] >> to make sure everything matched and the
[1:18:20] rest of it
[1:18:22] >> personnel suffered. I'm sorry.
[1:18:23] >> Test us to see if we're
[1:18:28] » okay. Um on to the brand new one. Tab
[1:18:32] 19, economic development fund 17, page
[1:18:34] 78.
[1:18:37] Okay.
[1:18:39] So, the economic development department
[1:18:41] is a newly formed uh department within
[1:18:44] the city of Scapus which implements the
[1:18:47] Colombia business alliance CBA for short
[1:18:51] that is housed within uh the community
[1:18:53] development center. So, the CBA is
[1:18:56] serving as a communitywide
[1:18:58] um well, I should say a countywide
[1:19:02] uh business community um uh gosh, I
[1:19:07] really messed that one up. Um is
[1:19:10] dedicated to strengthening Columbia
[1:19:11] County's existing business ecosystem as
[1:19:14] well as recognizing and supporting
[1:19:16] entrepreneurs.
[1:19:18] So for this year, um the four focus
[1:19:21] areas are serving as Columbia County's
[1:19:25] business resource hub, providing
[1:19:27] accessible business education, business
[1:19:30] ecosystem development, business
[1:19:32] promotion, and implementation of
[1:19:35] billocal campaigns. So I'll just um
[1:19:40] pause. There were some questions
[1:19:41] submitted um kind of just more to get an
[1:19:45] understanding of funding for this um for
[1:19:47] this new department.
[1:19:49] So, uh, with the dissolution of Columbia
[1:19:53] Economic Team, uh, there were some
[1:19:55] programs that were, uh, essentially
[1:19:58] going to go away in the community unless
[1:20:01] there was a way to, uh, have someone
[1:20:04] house those grants and really combine
[1:20:08] um, two of them particularly together in
[1:20:10] order to fund one full-time position uh,
[1:20:14] in its entirety. So, uh, what
[1:20:17] transferred to the city is the Ford
[1:20:19] Family Foundation Grow Grant. Um, that
[1:20:24] is a $100,000 max grant amount. Um, and
[1:20:28] we had transferred to us $93,598.
[1:20:33] Um, that grow grant actually is um the
[1:20:39] city or the city of St. Helens is the
[1:20:41] grant recipient. The city of St. Helens
[1:20:45] contracted with Scapus in order to
[1:20:48] implement uh and run that program. Uh
[1:20:52] this does between the Ford Family
[1:20:55] Foundation grant and then the other
[1:20:57] grant that transferred to us was a
[1:20:59] business Oregon um rural opportunities
[1:21:02] initiative grant. Between those two are
[1:21:06] is what is funding the new position
[1:21:08] economic development specialist.
[1:21:11] The business Oregon ROI grant was for
[1:21:14] 105,000.
[1:21:16] Um, and
[1:21:19] I guess back to the Ford family
[1:21:21] foundation, let me uh answer the
[1:21:23] remaining questions. There is no match.
[1:21:26] Uh, there is no match for either of the
[1:21:28] grants.
[1:21:29] The uh Ford Family Foundation Grow Grant
[1:21:33] is runs on a calendar year. This current
[1:21:37] grant will run through the end of uh
[1:21:41] this calendar year, so till December
[1:21:44] 2026.
[1:21:46] Uh the city can apply for two additional
[1:21:50] rounds of that grant at 100,000 each. So
[1:21:53] for 2027 and 2028,
[1:21:57] the key deliverables for that grant, uh
[1:22:00] one-on-one navigation support. So that's
[1:22:04] connecting business owners or
[1:22:05] entrepreneurs to resources within the uh
[1:22:09] greater community. Leadership team
[1:22:12] engagement
[1:22:13] co-starter programming. This is uh boot
[1:22:17] camps for new business owners or for
[1:22:20] people wanting to start a business. Uh
[1:22:23] we have our first co-starter boot camp
[1:22:26] coming up on May 29th and 30th. This
[1:22:30] also funds uh the munch and learn
[1:22:32] classes that uh Sierra will be putting
[1:22:35] on throughout the county. Uh this adds
[1:22:39] one more resource corner to a local
[1:22:41] library. Uh Scapus is the target this
[1:22:44] year. It essentially purchases books
[1:22:46] around entrepreneurship, starting a
[1:22:49] business, business support and outfits
[1:22:52] sort of a little area in each of the um
[1:22:55] community libraries.
[1:22:57] also a small business appreciation
[1:22:59] event. Um that is tomorrow morning
[1:23:03] actually at the John Gum building. So
[1:23:05] hopefully you saw that uh advertisement
[1:23:08] in the community and signed up if you'd
[1:23:10] like to be there.
[1:23:12] And then the business Oregon grant that
[1:23:16] again uh 105,000 that goes from um
[1:23:20] January through the following June. So
[1:23:23] it's roughly 18 months. we can apply for
[1:23:26] three more rounds of that. Uh we are
[1:23:30] currently in stage two uh of the cycle.
[1:23:34] Uh it's meant to be reallocated and and
[1:23:38] re-uped. As long as you're doing good
[1:23:40] projects and business sees the work
[1:23:43] you're doing, they do like these to
[1:23:45] continue on. Stage two, we can ask for
[1:23:49] between 70 and 120,000.
[1:23:52] Um there is one more round of that and
[1:23:55] then stage three which is really
[1:23:56] capitalizing on all the work you've done
[1:23:58] in the first few stages uh you can ask
[1:24:01] for between 100,000 and 175,000
[1:24:05] again there's two more rounds of that
[1:24:07] which would take us out through June of
[1:24:09] 2023
[1:24:11] for that third round the key
[1:24:14] >> 23
[1:24:15] >> 2033 sorry yes 10 years off
[1:24:18] >> uh the key deliverables for that project
[1:24:21] is the BRE project continuence. That's
[1:24:24] the business retention and expansion
[1:24:27] project. The focus areas which were
[1:24:30] identified by uh the business
[1:24:34] uh community a few years back during a
[1:24:36] series of interviews that we did uh
[1:24:39] workforce development, regulatory
[1:24:41] clarity, communication and
[1:24:43] revitalization. So, uh, Sierra and I
[1:24:46] will be, um, convening groups around
[1:24:49] those topics and, uh, moving those
[1:24:52] projects forward. It also pays for
[1:24:56] hiring a consultant to map the regular,
[1:24:59] uh, local regulatory process and that's
[1:25:01] part of the regulations action team. Um,
[1:25:05] again, there's been um
[1:25:09] some questions about sort of the
[1:25:11] capacity to to run this by one person,
[1:25:15] but what I'll say to that is that Sierra
[1:25:18] was running or um very much involved in
[1:25:21] mo most of these projects before. So,
[1:25:24] this is really a continuation
[1:25:26] of the work she's done in the past.
[1:25:28] There's also additional funding that
[1:25:30] comes in um to this uh department from
[1:25:35] contributions from other local um
[1:25:38] governments and agencies.
[1:25:41] And so that additional funding um you
[1:25:45] know once that starts coming in could
[1:25:47] also cover uh the one-on-one business
[1:25:50] coaching which is a small business
[1:25:52] resource center was offering before. Um
[1:25:56] the grants do not cover that. There was
[1:25:58] a USDA grant that was covering that work
[1:26:02] before. Um that being a federal grant,
[1:26:05] it was not transferable to the city. So
[1:26:09] for now, uh the one-on-one business
[1:26:13] coaching is not funded. There are
[1:26:14] resources available um um through some
[1:26:19] of the chambers for some of that work,
[1:26:21] but we really would like to bring that
[1:26:23] back locally. Um, and so as we get, you
[1:26:28] know, sort of those contributions from
[1:26:30] agencies and local businesses, um, the one-on-one business coaching is as a
[1:26:37] contract work that we would, um, we have
[1:26:39] certain folks who did that work before.
[1:26:42] We would like to contract with them
[1:26:44] again. Um, they are still in the
[1:26:46] community and available. So, um, that
[1:26:48] that's something where if the money
[1:26:50] comes in, we'll spend it and we'll hire
[1:26:52] and pay those contractors to do that
[1:26:54] work. If the money does not come in,
[1:26:56] then we'll wait. So, um, but again, this
[1:27:01] is money separate from um general fund
[1:27:05] or city of Scapus money. These are grant
[1:27:08] funds. This is going to be run as a um
[1:27:12] self- sustaining department essentially.
[1:27:16] So like the funds that we get from the
[1:27:18] other cities or agencies is that under
[1:27:21] the economic development revenue
[1:27:23] >> correct that's correct
[1:27:24] >> and grow fund which is the for
[1:27:27] foundation
[1:27:28] >> will you have to I think they've already
[1:27:31] applied before second round and it so we
[1:27:34] would hope that when they apply we'll
[1:27:35] say Helen's applied in next year
[1:27:38] >> again and we would subcontract for them
[1:27:41] or going forward we apply.
[1:27:43] >> That's a good question.
[1:27:44] >> It could go either way. We yeah, we've
[1:27:46] talked with St. Helens and and the Ford
[1:27:48] family foundation and when it comes down
[1:27:50] to the relication, it's just going to be
[1:27:51] whatever's best for the Ford family
[1:27:52] foundation. Uh but either city, I mean,
[1:27:55] we're all working together on this. This
[1:27:56] is a a countywide, so we we meet
[1:27:59] regularly with the other city managers,
[1:28:01] administrators, the the PUB, and there
[1:28:04] there's a lot of coordination that goes
[1:28:06] along this and a lot of people involved.
[1:28:07] But um yeah, whatever is most beneficial
[1:28:11] for the application process, the the
[1:28:12] route will go on once it comes around to
[1:28:14] that.
[1:28:15] >> I think it's all good because before I
[1:28:16] think too the grow is really focused
[1:28:18] more St. Helen, right?
[1:28:19] >> Now it opens up to the whole county.
[1:28:21] Councel President Miller.
[1:28:23] >> Uh thank you. I just have a quick uh
[1:28:25] clarification for Lori. Lori, when you
[1:28:27] said that there's um no match, do you
[1:28:29] mean that the grant doesn't require a
[1:28:31] match or we don't have the match?
[1:28:33] >> No. No, there's no grant match required.
[1:28:37] Okay, great. Thank you. And then I think
[1:28:39] the last part of the conversation there
[1:28:41] in the room kind of uh clarified my next
[1:28:43] question, but just to throw it out
[1:28:44] there, when we apply for the grants to
[1:28:47] fund this economic development program
[1:28:50] um that we're discussing right now, are
[1:28:52] we is all are all the other cities
[1:28:55] collaborating and in that grant
[1:28:58] application saying this is going to
[1:28:59] benefit all the cities and and that is
[1:29:01] perhaps a consideration on us getting
[1:29:03] those grants?
[1:29:05] Yeah, for sure, Tyler. Um, and and just
[1:29:08] by the nature of the work that I had
[1:29:10] mentioned, um, or the deliverables for
[1:29:13] each grant, it it is to build that
[1:29:15] ecosystem across the county. This is a
[1:29:18] countywide effort. So absolutely
[1:29:21] >> what where I'm going with this is trying
[1:29:23] to connect the dots in between those
[1:29:24] different uh municipalities
[1:29:26] contributions to this program and
[1:29:29] basically establishing here on the
[1:29:31] record that our success with obtaining
[1:29:34] those grants to fund this program is
[1:29:36] because all of those other
[1:29:37] municipalities are contributing to that
[1:29:39] grant application.
[1:29:41] >> Right. And I would also add to the
[1:29:43] success of this program is contingent on
[1:29:45] us providing a service that they want to
[1:29:47] continue with in the future as well. Um,
[1:29:49] so we we'd have it's a shared
[1:29:51] responsibility to both collaborate both
[1:29:53] ways with our partners and for them to
[1:29:54] work with us to provide a service that
[1:29:56] benefits both Scapus and the county in a
[1:29:58] way that we want to continue and and
[1:30:00] they want to continue to contribute.
[1:30:02] >> To clarify, Tyler, I I'm not sure to
[1:30:05] what extent the other communities were
[1:30:08] like um uh part of the grant application
[1:30:12] so much as they probably wrote letters
[1:30:15] of support towards that grant. Um, but I
[1:30:18] don't know that they were co-licants.
[1:30:20] Just full transparency.
[1:30:22] >> Okay. Let me ask in a different way
[1:30:23] then. So, if we were to apply and run,
[1:30:26] so right now the way this is designed is
[1:30:28] to help other areas outside of Scapuse,
[1:30:33] could we apply for that grant and have
[1:30:34] that position focused 100% on Scapus or
[1:30:37] do you think that that wouldn't work
[1:30:39] because the success of getting those
[1:30:41] grants is based on us helping all the
[1:30:43] other neighboring cities?
[1:30:46] >> Yeah. What are they? My my my thing is what Sorry, Ben. What are they
[1:30:50] contributing
[1:30:52] >> um to this and do we anticipate getting
[1:30:55] anything from those other municipalities
[1:30:57] that we're assisting?
[1:31:00] >> Couple things there. Um first of all,
[1:31:03] the grant funding can do all of these
[1:31:06] all of this work and the deliverables I
[1:31:08] just mentioned without contributions
[1:31:10] from the cities. What the contributions
[1:31:13] from the cities add to the pot, if you
[1:31:17] will, is is that we could then do this
[1:31:20] one-on-one
[1:31:22] um business coaching and could put on
[1:31:25] potentially, you know, additional
[1:31:26] trainings beyond the grant-f funded
[1:31:28] trainings for uh different business
[1:31:31] resource um trainings. So,
[1:31:35] the grant funding covers Sierra 100% and
[1:31:38] covers um and covers these deliverables,
[1:31:40] but there are additional services we
[1:31:42] would like to be able to offer like the
[1:31:44] one-on-one business coaching. That does
[1:31:46] not happen unless we get those
[1:31:48] additional contributions.
[1:31:50] in terms of ci could we apply for these
[1:31:54] grants and keep that money inhouse just
[1:31:57] to serve scapus. My sense is that the
[1:31:59] way and and uh you know full
[1:32:02] transparency I'm still coming up to
[1:32:04] speed on these grants. uh I didn't write
[1:32:07] them so I don't know all the rules and
[1:32:09] regulations but based on what I'm seeing
[1:32:12] and kind of what the mission and the
[1:32:14] things I'm learning is that it it really
[1:32:17] is focused on this business ecosystem
[1:32:21] building and I don't know that Scapus by
[1:32:24] itself would lend to kind of the lens
[1:32:27] that they're you know what the way that
[1:32:29] they're seeing this and approaching it
[1:32:31] and and Ben I don't know if you have
[1:32:33] more to add to that. Yeah, I would say
[1:32:35] that the grants were initially given for
[1:32:37] business Oregon because it was
[1:32:39] benefiting the county as a so the ROI
[1:32:42] was a countywide initiative and it's for
[1:32:44] the ecosystem. The the grow greater
[1:32:46] grant was originally for St. Helens and
[1:32:48] went to St. Helens greater St. Helens
[1:32:50] area and then our proposal was to make
[1:32:52] it countywide. uh these specific grants,
[1:32:56] yeah, we're I would say it would be
[1:32:58] pretty hard to refocus those back to
[1:33:00] Scapus only um because of how they were
[1:33:04] initiated and grow is actually a very
[1:33:05] specific program that is not everywhere.
[1:33:08] There's only three or four other
[1:33:09] communities in the state and it's for
[1:33:11] similar things. So the fact that we when
[1:33:13] advocated for these was with the
[1:33:15] position that we would be offering it
[1:33:17] both in Scapus and the rest of the
[1:33:18] county and that also um to that point is
[1:33:22] the future beyond the grants. They do
[1:33:24] have a limit on those grants if we want
[1:33:26] to continue having these economic
[1:33:27] development services. It is important
[1:33:29] that we build those relationships with
[1:33:31] our county partners so that we can still
[1:33:32] have a funding source to keep this this
[1:33:35] department going. uh without that it
[1:33:38] doesn't just take away from the county
[1:33:39] but it takes away from scapus as well
[1:33:40] because we wouldn't be receiving it
[1:33:42] either.
[1:33:43] >> Thank you. Yeah, I just want to capture
[1:33:44] the contribution
[1:33:46] >> that those other municipalities are
[1:33:48] giving through basically an indirect uh
[1:33:51] method.
[1:33:52] >> Can I um I'm I'm been hearing they are
[1:33:56] and they will. So I'm just just clarify
[1:34:00] the when the agencies and departments
[1:34:02] and PUB and all that they were
[1:34:04] contributing or fund even Scapus was
[1:34:07] giving money to CCT are they you're
[1:34:11] currently collecting the funds that CCT
[1:34:14] was collecting from these public
[1:34:16] agencies or you're thinking they will
[1:34:19] >> it is budgeted to we've had
[1:34:20] conversations with the counties and
[1:34:22] other partners not all of them are going
[1:34:24] to come across and we've anticipated as
[1:34:26] such But um some of those because CCT
[1:34:29] also served uh business recruitment
[1:34:32] which we're not doing countywide. So
[1:34:34] there are some that have more of a focus
[1:34:36] on that. Um but contribution came from
[1:34:38] cities that came from businesses. It
[1:34:39] came from um PUB and other there's a lot
[1:34:42] of resources or sources it came from. So
[1:34:44] those who have a vested interest still
[1:34:46] we've had those conversations with some
[1:34:48] are wait and see. Um, but we have
[1:34:51] anticipated as such in our budget that
[1:34:53] we want to get these programs to show. A
[1:34:56] lot of the people in the county are
[1:34:57] like, "It's in scapos. Are you guys
[1:34:59] going to steal it at all? Are you
[1:34:59] actually going to help the county? Are
[1:35:00] you going to actually be able to deliver
[1:35:01] this stuff?" Luckily, the grants allow
[1:35:04] us that time before the time to actually
[1:35:06] show that we can do this at a place that
[1:35:09] helps both scapus and the county. And
[1:35:11] then as that trust grows, we'll gain
[1:35:14] back some of those who are not willing
[1:35:15] to contribute at this time. to to answer
[1:35:17] your question though is um we have made
[1:35:21] the pitch to councils to um to PUB to
[1:35:27] different agencies. They are taking it
[1:35:31] under advisement. They are putting it in
[1:35:33] their budgets and then once we find out
[1:35:36] what you know went into their budget
[1:35:38] then July in July we would invoice them
[1:35:42] for whatever their contribution is and
[1:35:44] then that money would come in. So, no,
[1:35:45] it has not been collected. Um, we are
[1:35:48] showing we are hoping for 120,000 in
[1:35:53] contributions, which was similar to what
[1:35:55] CCT was collecting. 12,000 of that is
[1:35:58] City of Scapoo's contribution, just like
[1:36:00] we did before. Um, but we won't know
[1:36:03] until until, you know, come July when
[1:36:07] they actually start cutting checks. And
[1:36:10] that's that that's that lever where if
[1:36:12] it doesn't come in, we don't spend it on
[1:36:14] the one-on-one business coaching, right?
[1:36:16] We can't spend it if it doesn't come in.
[1:36:18] >> Okay. So, we didn't have a budget for
[1:36:19] this year.
[1:36:20] >> Uh uh obviously this fiscal year because
[1:36:23] we didn't know this was happening. Next
[1:36:25] fiscal year, I'm I'm assuming 120 comes
[1:36:28] in. I don't know that we'll get that
[1:36:30] full amount.
[1:36:31] >> Um but if we don't, we don't spend it.
[1:36:34] If we do, we have more services to
[1:36:35] offer. Are you also um contributing the
[1:36:39] probably the uh revenue of charging for
[1:36:42] classes or partly or uh so the grants
[1:36:46] are covering the classes the cost of the
[1:36:49] classes and the food and the you know
[1:36:52] extras and all the stuff um we have
[1:36:56] toyed with and I think in the future
[1:36:58] there will be some nominal cost because
[1:37:00] it does show a value when you do that.
[1:37:02] Yeah. Yeah.
[1:37:03] >> So, um I think initially we just we want
[1:37:06] to be out there. We want to be in the
[1:37:08] communities. We want to show that we
[1:37:09] have um services. Um we know a lot of
[1:37:12] businesses are struggling right now. So,
[1:37:14] we feel like it's it's really worth it
[1:37:16] to especially the grants are covering
[1:37:18] it, right? So, in the future there will
[1:37:20] probably be more discussion around some
[1:37:22] charge for services.
[1:37:24] >> Yeah. And one point of additional
[1:37:25] clarification, this is still really new.
[1:37:28] Our official launch is tomorrow at at
[1:37:30] the John Gum building. Um so there's
[1:37:33] still a lot of discussions going on. Um
[1:37:35] we've met with a lot of the city
[1:37:37] managers, city administrators, the uh
[1:37:40] executive directors, met with some
[1:37:42] councils, but there's still more
[1:37:43] conversations that we're working through
[1:37:45] as we're trying to rope down what it's
[1:37:48] going to look like specifically. That's
[1:37:50] why we give ourselves enough leeway for
[1:37:52] what we plan with some room that if it
[1:37:54] doesn't happen, we're fine. um that
[1:37:57] there's there's a lot of unknowns from
[1:37:59] outside partners wanting to see what's
[1:38:01] going to happen and how it's going to
[1:38:02] work. So, it's it's still a work in
[1:38:03] progress, but um because we're able to
[1:38:07] rope those grants together, it gives us
[1:38:08] that room to to work through it to to
[1:38:11] make it happen. The other reason
[1:38:12] nothing's coming from until next year is
[1:38:14] everybody already contributed to C,
[1:38:15] right?
[1:38:16] >> So, they're waiting till their new
[1:38:17] fiscal year before they're willing to to
[1:38:19] contribute again to anything. So,
[1:38:21] >> and a lot a lot of the issue CT had was
[1:38:24] questions of how to charge people for
[1:38:27] one-on-one advising or this help and
[1:38:29] they couldn't it was really hard. We
[1:38:30] couldn't even come up with a plan a way
[1:38:32] to fund them for so many hours, you
[1:38:35] know, and different levels of
[1:38:36] sponsorship. It was tough. Um, but I do
[1:38:39] think like with the grow through CCT,
[1:38:41] grow is really St. Helen specific. So we
[1:38:44] have an economic development committee,
[1:38:46] you know, now if that we saw a grant
[1:38:47] that would really help us or a program
[1:38:49] would really help us specifically. I
[1:38:52] think I would hope they would have the
[1:38:53] ability to go after some other grants
[1:38:55] too and additional
[1:38:56] >> right and the grow program is really
[1:38:58] exciting for all of our businesses in
[1:38:59] the county and in in Scapus because they
[1:39:01] have grants that are under 3% uh or
[1:39:04] they're low sorry loans
[1:39:07] >> um for 3% for up to 50,000 and then we
[1:39:10] have a KA loan that's uh 0% for 15. So
[1:39:13] there's access to capital at a really
[1:39:15] inexpensive rate that we get for our
[1:39:17] businesses as well as a countywide that
[1:39:19] were not there before. That should help.
[1:39:22] Um and that that's what to me one of the
[1:39:23] biggest things I'm excited to get out
[1:39:25] there make sure businesses are aware of.
[1:39:26] So if they want to grow or start there's
[1:39:28] some access to capital at a really
[1:39:29] inexpensive way to and and support to
[1:39:31] make it happen.
[1:39:32] >> But if going forward too if you have a
[1:39:34] French aerospace company come in C is no
[1:39:37] longer there but now it's us. They can
[1:39:39] go through business Oregon and us and we
[1:39:40] still have that ability to go after
[1:39:42] those businesses.
[1:39:44] >> Yeah. Now, Business Oregon through their
[1:39:45] prospector worked with each individual
[1:39:47] city at this point and then we'll work
[1:39:49] with those where wherever those
[1:39:51] aerospace companies or whatever company
[1:39:53] may be would be interested in going to.
[1:39:55] So, they work with whatever area um with
[1:39:58] those businesses and and the city
[1:40:00] managers. I
[1:40:01] >> think that will help us.
[1:40:04] Um, did we take a break last year?
[1:40:08] I mean, is it's online and recorded, but
[1:40:11] can we take a break since we're about
[1:40:12] halfway done?
[1:40:14] >> Um, mayor needs a break.
[1:40:16] >> No, I'm good. But, um, try to see. Is
[1:40:18] there a good one to take a break after?
[1:40:20] We're about an hour and a half in. Um,
[1:40:26] » let's just go. Let's give me a couple
[1:40:27] more. Let's get to the SDC's. Let's get
[1:40:29] through these real quick. Street Fund
[1:40:31] 20, page 80.
[1:40:33] like to continue I guess.
[1:40:37] >> All right. Well, good evening everyone.
[1:40:38] Um bear with me because you'll have me
[1:40:40] for the next five. So maybe we can just
[1:40:41] run through that and then you take a
[1:40:42] break.
[1:40:43] >> Uh street fund. So always an interesting
[1:40:46] topic. Uh when I started here nine years
[1:40:48] ago, this fund was in dire straits and
[1:40:51] uh with some careful work and and
[1:40:54] strategy, we've turned it around and now
[1:40:56] it's actually a very healthy fund and
[1:40:57] we're excited because there's some big
[1:40:59] capital projects on the horizon for it.
[1:41:01] So I'll run through the revenues real
[1:41:02] quick. The street fund receives its
[1:41:04] revenues from multiple sources. We
[1:41:06] receive the state gas tax which is based
[1:41:08] on revenues collected distributed
[1:41:11] between cities, the state and the
[1:41:13] counties. And then per capita we get a
[1:41:15] certain percentage. We've been hovering
[1:41:16] around the 650,000 mark. This year was
[1:41:18] projected for 6547
[1:41:21] which is $7,900 higher than last year.
[1:41:24] Uh our local fuel tax brings in very
[1:41:26] consistently $250,000
[1:41:28] within a few bucks every year. Um, and
[1:41:31] then we also receive federal fuel tax
[1:41:33] that goes through the exchange program
[1:41:35] which has to be identified for capital
[1:41:38] projects. Uh, we're bringing in 103,000
[1:41:40] on that. It's been just slowly and
[1:41:42] incrementally going up every year a
[1:41:43] couple thousand. I think my first year
[1:41:45] here was like 72 or 78,000. So slow
[1:41:48] increases. Um, with the fund being
[1:41:50] healthy, interest is up. Uh, we're
[1:41:52] projecting that at 85,000 for the year,
[1:41:54] which is 25,000 more than last year. and
[1:41:57] credits back to those interest rates
[1:41:58] that Carol was referring to earlier.
[1:42:00] That's been very beneficial for the
[1:42:02] city. Um the working capital carryover
[1:42:05] was 3,367,5
[1:42:08] for the year given a total resources of
[1:42:10] 4,459152.
[1:42:14] Uh personal services for the year is
[1:42:16] projected at 27700 which is down 20
[1:42:19] almost $29,000.
[1:42:21] Uh over the years we've been learning
[1:42:23] what our staff is doing and adjusting
[1:42:24] our budgets accordingly to right size
[1:42:26] them to where the workforce is being
[1:42:29] used. Uh materials and services is at
[1:42:31] 275 586 which is up $46,000 this year
[1:42:36] mostly because material costs for us
[1:42:37] that covers the striping materials
[1:42:39] crosswalk things signs etc. Um we're
[1:42:43] going to be doing a lot of that work
[1:42:44] this year uh as soon as the temperatures
[1:42:47] warm up. And then capital projects for
[1:42:49] the year. We've got a paving project out
[1:42:51] to bid right now which is going to do
[1:42:54] four blocks of this region of town.
[1:42:56] We're going to be doing part of Elm
[1:42:57] Street, third from Columbia down to uh
[1:43:01] Elm and then uh Oak and Myrtle will be
[1:43:04] getting paved as well. So we're excited
[1:43:05] for that. We're estimating that project
[1:43:08] to be somewhere between 5 and 700,000.
[1:43:10] With oil prices up, that does impact
[1:43:13] asphalt costs. So we're going to wait
[1:43:14] and see what the numbers look like
[1:43:15] there. You know, we're also excited to
[1:43:17] kick off the design um of the Vine
[1:43:20] Street project, which is all of the
[1:43:21] sidewalks that we promoted when we've
[1:43:24] moved forward with the local fuel tax
[1:43:26] that we wanted to accomplish and we're
[1:43:27] finally in a position to do that. Um
[1:43:30] once that project is complete, if the
[1:43:32] funding is still there, then we'll
[1:43:33] probably move over to JP West and work
[1:43:35] from first up to the park and to get
[1:43:38] that widen some sidewalks because that's
[1:43:40] another priority route for us. Um with
[1:43:43] that, I'll take any questions.
[1:43:49] I have a couple. Um, so when does the
[1:43:52] local uh fuel tax expire? Is that in
[1:43:55] 2029?
[1:43:56] >> Yes, I believe so.
[1:43:57] >> Okay. Do are we foreseeing needing to
[1:44:00] renew that?
[1:44:00] >> I would highly encourage that when that
[1:44:02] time starts nearing that we start
[1:44:04] working on that. Yes.
[1:44:05] >> Okay. So, one thing I would I mean I
[1:44:06] think these budgets are great not only
[1:44:08] for financial accountability but for
[1:44:09] some storytelling and building a
[1:44:11] narrative. Um, I would maybe suggest
[1:44:13] either in this version for the final
[1:44:15] version or in next year's budget, we
[1:44:17] list those projects that the community's
[1:44:20] really benefited from. So, um, it can
[1:44:23] quickly be ref.
[1:44:23] >> Yeah. When that time draws near, my
[1:44:25] anticipation would be is that would be
[1:44:27] our ATM topic, and we would have a
[1:44:29] slideshow with all of the projects, the
[1:44:31] dollars, each one, it costs, what we've
[1:44:33] accomplished, and tell a very, very
[1:44:36] thorough tale. That's that's how we
[1:44:37] promoted the local fuel attacks is we
[1:44:40] were at the ATM and several other things
[1:44:42] telling the whole story so that the
[1:44:44] community could understand the need and
[1:44:46] so yes we will be working on it when the
[1:44:48] time
[1:44:48] >> so that might be one we want to start
[1:44:49] building in 2027
[1:44:52] that story
[1:44:54] >> and going on this fiveyear CIP all the
[1:44:57] funding is based on this current
[1:45:01] gas tax like you have some funding out
[1:45:03] there in 2029 2030, but that would be
[1:45:08] based on
[1:45:09] >> the the CIP is based on that and that
[1:45:11] federal exchange because we we know
[1:45:14] we're going to be getting at least that
[1:45:15] $100,000 in every year. The state fuel
[1:45:18] tax basically covers our personnel and
[1:45:20] operational costs. And then those other
[1:45:22] two, the local fuel tax and this the
[1:45:24] federal, that's our capital. That's what
[1:45:26] we save up every few years. We'll do an
[1:45:28] overlay project when we have enough to
[1:45:30] justify doing that.
[1:45:32] If the project's too small, the costs
[1:45:34] for the project go up. Contractors like
[1:45:37] to buy into big projects that lower
[1:45:39] their price and do it by volume. So, if
[1:45:41] we do that at the half a million dollar
[1:45:43] mark, we get a better deal.
[1:45:48] Any other questions?
[1:45:50] >> I noticed we we got a grant a couple
[1:45:52] years ago for safe route to school. They
[1:45:55] came out and did a study basically found
[1:45:58] that we weren't qualified for any
[1:46:01] >> additional.
[1:46:02] >> We don't score well for safe routes.
[1:46:05] This community is just too wealthy for that. Um we actually score very
[1:46:10] poorly on that because of that
[1:46:12] typically. So that at this time until
[1:46:15] the state changes that and we've had a
[1:46:16] lot of discussions with them about
[1:46:17] changing that criteria. I think they do
[1:46:20] it on um free lunch type program or
[1:46:24] something. I can't remember the criteria
[1:46:25] that that's aligned with, but it it's
[1:46:27] very challenging for communities like us
[1:46:29] that are are small and don't bring in
[1:46:31] the streets revenue regardless of the
[1:46:33] health of the the schools that that
[1:46:36] aligns it because it in the reality it
[1:46:38] doesn't. So, we've we've had lots of
[1:46:39] talks with them trying to improve that
[1:46:41] program.
[1:46:43] However, the county did do a safe route
[1:46:45] one and studied the corridors around the
[1:46:47] schools and we do have that data. They
[1:46:49] shared all that with us. So,
[1:46:53] great.
[1:46:54] Move on then.
[1:46:55] >> All right.
[1:46:55] >> Number 21,
[1:46:57] >> foot paths. So, footpaths is based on 1%
[1:46:59] of that state gas tax. Um, historically,
[1:47:02] we've been using this money towards the
[1:47:04] sidewalk repair program, which we offer
[1:47:07] to anybody in the community who has
[1:47:09] sidewalks that are in dire need of
[1:47:11] replacement or repair. Uh, we will
[1:47:13] contribute up to $2,000 or 50% of their
[1:47:16] project, whichever is greater. Um, we
[1:47:19] have not had a lot of interest in this
[1:47:20] program in the last couple of years, but
[1:47:23] we are planning on pitching that one
[1:47:24] more year. What I highly recommend is if
[1:47:27] this doesn't move forward over this next
[1:47:28] year, that we take these funds and go
[1:47:31] start doing wheelchair replacement ramp replacements throughout the city in
[1:47:37] advance of pavement overlay projects
[1:47:38] because the law won't allow us to do an
[1:47:40] overlay project without being ADA
[1:47:42] compliant on the sidewalks. So, if this
[1:47:45] fund continues to grow without
[1:47:46] expenditures, we need to come up with
[1:47:48] plan B, and that would be my
[1:47:49] recommendation. So, we're going to hold
[1:47:51] status quo. Uh, we do have our new
[1:47:54] contract administrator who is very good
[1:47:55] on social media and things, and she's
[1:47:57] already been building a program that
[1:47:58] we're going to get out there and try to
[1:48:00] help encourage people to do that. We've
[1:48:02] also talked about raising the limits.
[1:48:03] Maybe we're going to have to give more
[1:48:05] with the way things cost nowadays just
[1:48:07] to help them out.
[1:48:08] >> I thought I saw increasing the amount.
[1:48:11] >> We did double it. It used to be a
[1:48:12] thousand. and it's at two now and maybe
[1:48:15] that's just not enough yet. So,
[1:48:19] um I can run through the numbers real
[1:48:20] quick. So, the beginning capital is
[1:48:22] 26615
[1:48:25] interest is projected at 5,000 which is
[1:48:27] the same as previous year. Um the
[1:48:30] revenue is like as I said the 1% so it's
[1:48:32] at 6 6,600
[1:48:35] given total resources for the fund of
[1:48:37] 278415
[1:48:38] materials and services we only plug in
[1:48:40] 3,000 that's if we do something with our
[1:48:43] crews on one of those sidewalks. Um
[1:48:46] capital outlay for the year is 40,000
[1:48:48] which is money allocated towards the
[1:48:50] program leaving a contingency of 235415
[1:48:53] balancing the budget at 278415.
[1:48:57] Any questions?
[1:49:01] Good. Moving on.
[1:49:03] >> Storm water drainage fund. So, a couple
[1:49:05] of years ago, we did the master plan
[1:49:07] update. Um, got our CIPs up to date and
[1:49:11] work through the revenues that should be
[1:49:13] brought in. We adjusted the storm water
[1:49:15] fees accordingly. That has now put this
[1:49:18] uh fund into a position where it's
[1:49:20] functioning. For several years, we were
[1:49:23] only paying a small portion of costs out
[1:49:25] of this to build the fund. It's now
[1:49:27] there fully developed. So, we're we're
[1:49:29] pulling for FTEEs out of it now
[1:49:31] officially. We're paying equipment costs
[1:49:32] out of it. Uh we're using our vector
[1:49:35] truck extensively through this. So,
[1:49:36] there's costs there. All of the debris
[1:49:38] that we hauled away from the cleaning
[1:49:40] the catch basin, so on so forth, street
[1:49:42] sweeping, that all comes out of this
[1:49:44] fund. Um so, with that, I'll start
[1:49:46] running through the numbers. The
[1:49:47] beginning cash for this fund right now
[1:49:49] is 2,74684,
[1:49:52] which is up 479,000 from the previous
[1:49:55] year. That is due to the fact that we
[1:49:57] have not been doing capital projects as
[1:49:58] of yet. That is currently in the works.
[1:50:01] I'll get on that in just a second. Uh
[1:50:03] interest income because of that fund is
[1:50:05] $80,000 which is up 45,000 from last
[1:50:07] year. And charges for service for the
[1:50:10] fund or will be projected at 1,110,000
[1:50:13] which is up 141955 from the previous
[1:50:16] year.
[1:50:17] Um giving total resources of 3,936184.
[1:50:22] Personal services for this one is 369
[1:50:25] which is now up 400 or 48,727.
[1:50:29] As I mentioned earlier, we're adjusting
[1:50:30] these personnel costs to what our crews
[1:50:33] are actually doing. They're doing much
[1:50:35] more storm work now than they used to.
[1:50:36] So, there is an increase in that. Uh
[1:50:39] materials and services are up as well um
[1:50:41] at 317836
[1:50:43] which is up 61,000 from the previous
[1:50:45] year once again as we're doing more work
[1:50:48] in the storm water department. uh
[1:50:50] capital outlay which is primarily we're
[1:50:53] partnering with the Scapus Bay wershed
[1:50:55] on some more layback projects this
[1:50:57] summer we're going to be doing a layback
[1:50:59] if all you are familiar with Veterans
[1:51:01] Park we've been working on the referian
[1:51:03] boundary of the creek we're going to be
[1:51:04] doing that on the conley side along the
[1:51:07] park there that'll be our big project
[1:51:09] for this year we're also in talks with
[1:51:11] an engineer to design three storm water
[1:51:14] projects over on the east side of town
[1:51:16] as many of you who travel through town
[1:51:18] realize over here most of these streets
[1:51:20] flood during the rain events. We're
[1:51:22] working to improve that um with this
[1:51:24] funds as well.
[1:51:25] >> I have a question there. Yeah. When you
[1:51:26] redo the sidewalks from Vine and all
[1:51:28] these projects, is some of that storm
[1:51:30] water?
[1:51:31] >> Yes.
[1:51:33] >> Y
[1:51:35] um the one of the big areas. Well, we
[1:51:37] have two things is we have a DEEQ UIC
[1:51:39] retrofit project. DEEQ mandated a
[1:51:42] several year to make some improvements
[1:51:43] to our storm water system. We haven't
[1:51:45] had the funds until now. So, we're going
[1:51:47] to be working on that as one of them.
[1:51:49] the other, like I said, over um two
[1:51:51] blocks over here on second floods
[1:51:54] extensively. If you go down second here,
[1:51:56] you'll see it flood extensively down
[1:51:57] towards and so we're going to that those
[1:51:59] are our primary kickoff projects and
[1:52:01] then we'll move on from there. Um the
[1:52:04] contingency will still be left at
[1:52:05] 1,93868
[1:52:08] balancing the budget at 3,936,184.
[1:52:13] questions on
[1:52:20] we need a line item for a confidential
[1:52:22] waterhed.
[1:52:23] >> We would
[1:52:25] >> that that would be my advice that it
[1:52:28] relates to so many different
[1:52:32] new developments talking about flooded
[1:52:34] area without that water stud.
[1:52:42] Okay.
[1:52:44] Um, I can look and see. We could look at
[1:52:47] doing that through the capital. We'll
[1:52:48] have to see if that aligns and what that
[1:52:50] scope looks like. We also do uh budget
[1:52:53] engineering money for this fund. So, I
[1:52:56] can talk with Ben about what that might
[1:52:58] look like.
[1:53:01] >> And that that's good. I mean, this would
[1:53:03] make more sense in the storm water. I
[1:53:05] mean, could we have um the same the
[1:53:09] transportation study coming up too? I
[1:53:11] mean, is that could have anything to do
[1:53:14] with?
[1:53:15] >> No, I I would I would want to learn more
[1:53:17] about what Joel's talking about because
[1:53:18] some of that data may be represented in
[1:53:20] our stormwater master plan. So, what we
[1:53:23] would need to do is see what that scope
[1:53:24] would look like over and above and see
[1:53:26] what additional storm water work would
[1:53:28] need to be done.
[1:53:29] >> Council President Miller,
[1:53:32] >> thank you. Uh Dave, um you mentioned
[1:53:34] that there's a lot more storm drainage
[1:53:36] work going on. Can you uh touch on that
[1:53:39] just a little bit?
[1:53:41] Uh is are you talking about the
[1:53:43] maintenance side of it that I mentioned
[1:53:44] or just on the capital?
[1:53:46] >> Well, when you're going through the the
[1:53:48] line items here, you mentioned that um
[1:53:49] there's a lot more storm drainage work
[1:53:51] going on, which I believe was
[1:53:53] articulating why.
[1:53:54] >> Yeah. Well, it's both. So, maintenance-
[1:53:57] wise, now that we have a true storm
[1:53:59] water fund and and can staff it, we're
[1:54:01] doing more catch basin cleaning, drywall
[1:54:04] cleaning, pipe cleaning. We now
[1:54:06] purchased a TV truck. um the TV truck is
[1:54:09] going to start doing anal analyzing of
[1:54:11] CCTV of all the pipes. So that's the
[1:54:14] kind of thing that we're going to be
[1:54:15] doing there. And then these capital
[1:54:16] projects are new as well. So does that
[1:54:20] help?
[1:54:21] >> Yes. Thank you.
[1:54:23] >> So Dave is the uh contractual and
[1:54:26] professional you said last in another
[1:54:29] somebody said it was attorneys. So are
[1:54:30] we paying that much more for attorneys
[1:54:33] or what what covers under line item 230?
[1:54:39] Um that is attorneys.
[1:54:42] See here
[1:54:45] more detail
[1:54:52] » and that also includes those other costs
[1:54:54] like a lot of times you know software
[1:54:56] and stuff like that that have gone back
[1:54:57] to the departments.
[1:54:58] >> Yeah, we used to have
[1:55:01] we don't anymore. So let me look here
[1:55:02] real quick.
[1:55:03] >> Pretty hard to compare. So because it
[1:55:05] did go up a lot but so did so did
[1:55:07] straight so did all of them went up.
[1:55:10] >> So 13,000 of that is partnership with
[1:55:13] the RIGA with Scapus Bay wershed.
[1:55:16] There's 6,000 for the attorney. Um and
[1:55:20] then there's 30,000 identified for storm
[1:55:22] water contracts and the big one is
[1:55:24] 50,000 for contract engineering because
[1:55:26] the CDC's want to do a public works
[1:55:29] design standard update. That's the big
[1:55:31] ticket item that jumped this one up is
[1:55:32] for that work. Oh, so that's why you
[1:55:35] wanted to do a different line, excuse
[1:55:36] me, line item for engineering. Is that
[1:55:38] why you were saying
[1:55:40] >> we don't have an engineering line item?
[1:55:42] So, it falls under this category and
[1:55:44] that's where this is allocated. So,
[1:55:46] 50,000 of that 230 is just to do design
[1:55:50] standard up update.
[1:55:53] >> Well, I like your idea that it probably
[1:55:55] should be a different line item. I don't
[1:55:57] know. Just
[1:55:59] because it's I don't know, just a lot. I
[1:56:01] mean there's a lot in that just one line
[1:56:03] item that we can see.
[1:56:06] >> Yeah. But it fluctuates. There's not
[1:56:07] always a dedicated engineering cost. So,
[1:56:11] >> right.
[1:56:11] >> It's all just contractual professional
[1:56:13] based on the year.
[1:56:14] >> Yeah. I was going to say typically with
[1:56:15] accounting you just group similar type
[1:56:16] of things together and then we have
[1:56:18] breakdown for I mean a lot of these line
[1:56:20] items will have quite a few things in
[1:56:22] like publications. We don't we don't
[1:56:24] make a separate line item per like
[1:56:26] computer software unnecessarily. We can,
[1:56:29] but it's usually um
[1:56:33] >> Yeah. Right.
[1:56:35] >> There's 20 items identified in there
[1:56:37] that even are very generic of that. So,
[1:56:39] >> well, thank you for identifying them.
[1:56:41] >> Yeah.
[1:56:45] » Good there. I was just going to say in
[1:56:47] response to Joel's questions about the
[1:56:49] uh the study though, that would be
[1:56:50] something I would recommend. Yeah, you
[1:56:52] could probably look in one of your other
[1:56:53] line items. It's not currently a council
[1:56:55] priority, but to be discussed obviously
[1:56:56] with the the council if that's something
[1:56:57] to designate staff time towards this
[1:57:00] year or if that's going to be next year
[1:57:01] as a future line item. Um, but that's
[1:57:04] something we can continue to work on as
[1:57:05] we identify if that is going to be a
[1:57:08] project,
[1:57:09] >> right? It replaces so many things we're
[1:57:12] doing. Um, and and the reality is what
[1:57:15] we're dealing with is old data from old
[1:57:18] studies and they didn't it was nothing
[1:57:20] comprehensive had ever been done.
[1:57:22] Capital Bay Wershed Council really wants
[1:57:24] to have this done having instrumentation
[1:57:26] in the creek so we can we can judge temp
[1:57:29] thermal thermal gradients for examining
[1:57:31] the habitat. There's so many elements of
[1:57:33] this that we need to address if we don't
[1:57:35] get started thinking about that keep on
[1:57:39] kicking the can down the road.
[1:57:40] >> Well, I agree I agree with that. It was
[1:57:42] just we have limited staff time, limited
[1:57:43] resources with council priorities and
[1:57:45] other projects that we try to designate
[1:57:47] which one, you know, we put the budget
[1:57:48] together with what the council and staff
[1:57:50] current projects are. That could be a
[1:57:52] future project. It could still be this a
[1:57:54] year. It's just that would be a for
[1:57:56] future discussion that was not current
[1:57:57] in this because it has not been
[1:57:59] identified as something that we need to
[1:58:00] put over other projects at this time.
[1:58:03] >> But anyway, like you said, I've in there
[1:58:05] at least at least we have a basis for
[1:58:08] >> is that something we could partner with
[1:58:10] county and water vet and I mean is there
[1:58:14] any group? They're probably not because
[1:58:16] this is this is this is community
[1:58:18] specific
[1:58:20] >> that and that's what what needs to
[1:58:22] that's what we need to address. We
[1:58:23] should have done it years ago but we
[1:58:25] have
[1:58:27] >> Joel what was the what was the dollar
[1:58:29] amountish
[1:58:31] >> well it was the last bit was
[1:58:35] but it would be desirable
[1:58:38] as well.
[1:58:39] So I I I would I would kind of phase it
[1:58:41] in. So first get the get the pictures of
[1:58:44] what we're facing and larger companies
[1:58:47] really like to have the instrumentation
[1:58:49] on the judge thermal gradients when
[1:58:53] they're habitat expiration and so forth
[1:58:56] but there's just a lot of elements to
[1:58:57] that that need to be
[1:59:02] » and that that study would probably fall
[1:59:03] under the contractual professional be
[1:59:05] contracting that out. So if once again
[1:59:07] if that did become a priority project we
[1:59:11] could pull it out of our contingency.
[1:59:12] There's 1.9 million in the contingency
[1:59:15] that we could
[1:59:18] >> Yeah,
[1:59:19] >> I think I think we're trying to gather
[1:59:21] thermmo data and stuff though. It would
[1:59:23] be it would be beneficial to bring in
[1:59:25] Scapus Bay wershed and Columbia soil and
[1:59:27] water because Colombian soil water
[1:59:29] already has access to some of that
[1:59:30] equipment and is doing some of that work
[1:59:32] because I've sat in presentations on
[1:59:34] ecoli studies and things where they do
[1:59:36] have water temperature data. So I it's
[1:59:38] collective. I just think we need to work
[1:59:40] with the other agencies to to partner
[1:59:42] and pull something together, maybe a
[1:59:44] bigger picture.
[1:59:47] >> Yeah.
[1:59:48] >> Excuse me, Ben. Would that be something
[1:59:50] that we can look into getting partially
[1:59:52] like a grant for?
[1:59:55] >> Yeah, I mean, if there are grants out
[1:59:56] there for we'd have to look into it. I
[1:59:58] 100% sure, but there probably is a grant
[2:00:01] out there for something similar to that.
[2:00:06] Okay, continuing on to storm water
[2:00:08] drainage SD SDC.
[2:00:11] >> Yep. So, uh SDC's as you all know are
[2:00:14] the contribution by homes that are being
[2:00:17] built towards future development for
[2:00:18] growth. So, any of these funds can only
[2:00:20] be used for capacity adding projects. Um
[2:00:23] working capital carryover for the
[2:00:25] stormwater SDC fund is 488,29
[2:00:28] which is up 67,759
[2:00:31] from the previous year. Interest is
[2:00:33] projected at 15,000. SDC's are projected
[2:00:36] to come in at 44,167
[2:00:39] which is down 42,000 from the previous
[2:00:41] year. Um current year resources then are
[2:00:44] at 59,167
[2:00:47] giving a total resources of 547376.
[2:00:51] Capital outlay is budgeted at 500 uh
[2:00:54] which is 300 more than last year. We
[2:00:56] don't have anything specifically
[2:00:57] identified for that yet until we get the
[2:01:00] design work done on these projects and
[2:01:01] then we'll be able to use some of those
[2:01:03] funds. That's why it's there just
[2:01:04] earmarked for projects, but we don't
[2:01:06] have it set to a contract yet. Um
[2:01:09] transfers are at two or 220 which is a
[2:01:14] admin fee transferred over from the
[2:01:16] money that comes in. There's a portion
[2:01:17] kicked back to the general fund to help
[2:01:19] cover admin costs. Um contingency is
[2:01:23] 45,168 balancing the budget at 547376
[2:01:30] questions.
[2:01:34] All right, moving on.
[2:01:35] >> Continue on street SDC. Same concept
[2:01:39] contributions from development working
[2:01:42] capital carryover of 1,233,125
[2:01:45] which is up 295594.
[2:01:48] Development charges projected for the
[2:01:50] year at 277608.
[2:01:52] Interest is projected at 30,000 giving a
[2:01:55] total resources of 1,540,733.
[2:02:00] Um capital outlay for the year is 1.2
[2:02:03] million. This fund is eligible to be
[2:02:06] spent towards the Bind Street project
[2:02:08] 50% of it. So um we're allocating money
[2:02:11] towards that project for that. uh
[2:02:13] transfers to the general fund of 13,880
[2:02:17] and a contingency of 326853
[2:02:20] balance the budget at 1.54733.
[2:02:23] So once again big expenses are going to
[2:02:26] the Vine Street project when that goes
[2:02:27] to construction which won't be until
[2:02:29] spring summer of next year. We'll be in
[2:02:32] the design stage effective now till
[2:02:34] probably January. So
[2:02:37] >> this budget pays for the completion of
[2:02:39] that project.
[2:02:40] >> Pays for a portion of it. Pays for up to
[2:02:42] 50%.
[2:02:43] >> Um but it will all I mean the whole
[2:02:45] budget though it will be done by the end
[2:02:47] of this budget.
[2:02:49] >> No, more than likely we're going to be
[2:02:52] doing the work through next summer
[2:02:54] because of the impact of the schools. So
[2:02:56] we'll be doing utility work and things
[2:02:58] while the kids are in school, but the
[2:03:00] major sidewalks, paving work, we're
[2:03:02] going to try to align with next summer.
[2:03:04] So I would imagine there's going to be a
[2:03:05] small amount that's going to trickle
[2:03:07] into the next fiscal year just to wrap
[2:03:09] up the project into the fall. So it'll
[2:03:11] be a split season. Most of the expenses
[2:03:14] will be in this fiscal year, but
[2:03:15] there'll be some trickle over.
[2:03:17] >> And do when do these housing
[2:03:19] developments pay the street SDC? Like
[2:03:21] have they already all three of them?
[2:03:23] >> At the time they pull their permits to
[2:03:24] build.
[2:03:25] >> Yeah.
[2:03:26] >> So this this is money we have. It's not,
[2:03:29] you know, expected. I mean the 277,000
[2:03:32] is expected for out of new houses. So
[2:03:37] >> you said this uh this was eligible to be
[2:03:39] used for that that sidewalk project is
[2:03:44] >> 50% of it is.
[2:03:46] >> Yeah.
[2:03:47] >> Um could it could it be used for any
[2:03:48] sidewalk project or is there something
[2:03:50] >> capacity adding? Yes, it can. and we
[2:03:52] have so when we did the sidewalk
[2:03:55] improvements on Old Portland Road a
[2:03:56] handful of years ago and things same
[2:03:58] thing we applied 50% of the SDC's
[2:04:01] the the SDC's are a little bit
[2:04:02] challenging to use or a curse and a
[2:04:04] blessing because if you don't have the
[2:04:05] capacity adding then you can't apply
[2:04:07] them well we're not really building a
[2:04:09] lot of new streets because when the new
[2:04:10] streets come in they're built by a
[2:04:12] developer and we're not contributing to
[2:04:14] those costs anyway so that's why it's
[2:04:15] good that these sidewalk projects are
[2:04:17] eligible because that's how we can best
[2:04:18] align them to use them
[2:04:21] questions on that.
[2:04:28] » Let's continue on. Um, park SDC.
[2:04:32] >> Park SDC's. All right.
[2:04:34] >> Page 94.
[2:04:36] >> All right. Parks SDC's. Total resources
[2:04:39] for parks SDC's $416,875.
[2:04:44] That includes the working capital
[2:04:46] carryover of $277,749
[2:04:50] with $7,000 of interest and for the SDC
[2:04:54] charges for the two subdivisions coming
[2:04:56] in is $132,126.
[2:05:01] Expenditures for this fund is uh through
[2:05:04] capital out capital outlay is 400,000
[2:05:07] which is marked for the uh Smith Road uh
[2:05:12] veterans extension
[2:05:14] project
[2:05:17] with 6 $6,66
[2:05:20] in interest per contingency of $10,269.
[2:05:30] Um,
[2:05:32] so do you anticipate then spending
[2:05:35] $400,000
[2:05:37] on the park in this budget?
[2:05:41] Will we have stuff ground dug? And
[2:05:45] or
[2:05:46] >> once again, just like the sidewalk
[2:05:47] project, I think it's going to be a
[2:05:48] split year. We're going to allocate for
[2:05:51] it. Um, but we're going to be through
[2:05:53] the duration of next summer. By the time
[2:05:55] we get the design done, we're going to
[2:05:57] be bidding late winter, spring, going to
[2:06:00] construction, doing the dirt work during
[2:06:03] the dry months, probably paving and
[2:06:06] things into the fall. So, it's it's
[2:06:07] going to be a carryover
[2:06:10] right in the middle of it.
[2:06:11] >> Next June, July, there could be some
[2:06:13] >> there'll be construction activities
[2:06:14] hopefully going on at that point, but it
[2:06:16] won't be done by any means by the end of
[2:06:18] this fiscal year.
[2:06:28] Page 26.
[2:06:32] Fool fun.
[2:06:33] >> The the pool fun. We always joke about
[2:06:36] page 96. So, this is when you only have
[2:06:39] to see this now for a couple more years
[2:06:41] because I got the the last little bit
[2:06:44] of, you know, um ending dollars uh out
[2:06:49] this last year or this year. So the the
[2:06:53] remaining money, you know, of course we
[2:06:55] talked a little bit about the 48,000 for
[2:06:58] it that we cannot spend, but the n the
[2:07:01] other funds that were in there, 9844,
[2:07:04] uh we um could we transferred it over to
[2:07:09] the general fund to parks basically. So
[2:07:12] it's going to the park projects. So
[2:07:14] that's that's pretty much done. So
[2:07:17] nothing is going to acrue. This is going
[2:07:19] to be kind of like that peg fee fund
[2:07:20] that's gonna kind of just eventually
[2:07:22] roll off. So, did it off our books? So, you still have to look at it for a
[2:07:29] couple more years.
[2:07:31] Potentially a new hotel coming in. You
[2:07:34] use that to rent it for the city couple
[2:07:37] times summer pool.
[2:07:40] >> Yeah.
[2:07:41] >> Rent their pool.
[2:07:44] >> Okay. And I also do unemployment
[2:07:46] insurance fund. This is fund 87. We are
[2:07:48] self-insured for unemployment. We don't
[2:07:50] pay the state anything for it. So if
[2:07:53] there is if we do lay somebody off or um
[2:07:56] shortly after I came, there was somebody
[2:07:58] that we didn't lay them off but they
[2:08:00] quit but then they got laid off their
[2:08:02] job their next job. So we ended up
[2:08:04] coming back and hitting us for it. So So
[2:08:07] you know we do have this it's got it's
[2:08:09] very healthy. It's got good reserves.
[2:08:11] Um, and so, you know, we have $100,000,
[2:08:16] you know, reserved for this. Uh, we
[2:08:18] haven't paid anything for a couple of
[2:08:20] years out on the unemployment fund, but
[2:08:22] we pay basically all the unemployment
[2:08:24] costs if we lay somebody off, you know,
[2:08:27] so so we don't pay the state their uh uh
[2:08:30] amount. So, you know, the fund has we
[2:08:32] always budget $50,000, you know, we
[2:08:35] haven't spent that much, you know, since
[2:08:38] I've been here. We just spent a few
[2:08:40] thousand dollars since I've been here.
[2:08:42] Uh, and you know, a dozen interest every
[2:08:45] year and we just are rolling it over.
[2:08:48] And because the fund is in such such is
[2:08:50] so healthy, we aren't having to take
[2:08:53] money from payroll out of all the other
[2:08:56] funds for the payroll cost to add to
[2:08:58] this fund. So basically this this fund
[2:09:02] being healthy is keeping it's keeping
[2:09:05] our costs down, you know, for all of the
[2:09:08] other payroll, you know, funds,
[2:09:11] everybody else's payroll because we're
[2:09:12] not putting we haven't put any money in
[2:09:14] here from the other departments since
[2:09:18] I've been here. So it's it's healthy and
[2:09:20] just rolling along. The interest is
[2:09:22] keeping it going. So So that's the
[2:09:25] unemployment interest. How does that
[2:09:27] like show that you hire good people
[2:09:30] >> or we don't hire too many people we have
[2:09:32] to lay off or
[2:09:33] >> that's that's a lot of it is we just
[2:09:35] have
[2:09:36] >> management and so we haven't had to use
[2:09:38] >> it's good management right I think I
[2:09:40] think we want to think that whether it's
[2:09:42] true or not we're a good place to work
[2:09:44] >> a lot we are a good place
[2:09:46] >> a long time and a lot of locals that
[2:09:48] have grown up here
[2:09:49] >> yeah so
[2:09:52] >> okay back to utility water fund I want
[2:09:55] to try to get done with the regular. We
[2:09:57] have to turn off the recording for the
[2:09:59] urban renewal. We'll take a few minute
[2:10:01] break there. That's okay.
[2:10:03] >> Uh but up to tab number 28, page 100.
[2:10:10] » I do.
[2:10:10] >> And I
[2:10:11] >> All right. Thank you everybody for being
[2:10:12] here and part of the community and
[2:10:16] spending your time with us. Uh working
[2:10:18] capital carryover for water is almost
[2:10:21] 2.7 million interest 108,000
[2:10:24] charges for services 2.7 million
[2:10:28] our governmental is 350,000 long-term
[2:10:31] debt crew proceeds is 2.5 million for
[2:10:34] total resource of 5.6 6 million
[2:10:39] total resources sorry 8.3 million
[2:10:42] uh personnel services 1.3 million
[2:10:46] materials services just over 1 million
[2:10:49] capital outlay 4.2 million a couple
[2:10:53] loans down there
[2:10:56] uh less contingency of 1.2 total
[2:10:59] expenditures 8.3.
[2:11:03] Uh most of the material service items
[2:11:05] are pretty much the same thing. We've
[2:11:07] talked about these fees and
[2:11:09] subscriptions that shifting of funds has
[2:11:12] happened
[2:11:14] capital outlay projects most everything
[2:11:17] is tied to ongoing projects the
[2:11:19] reservoir and the well
[2:11:23] at Miller
[2:11:27] » typically charges for services is is the
[2:11:30] water bill
[2:11:32] >> from there's there's a meter fee and
[2:11:34] then there's commodity fee
[2:11:36] >> and inner governmental. Um, does some of
[2:11:40] this come from No, this urban renewal to
[2:11:44] pay for the reservoir.
[2:11:49] Urban urban renewal is kicking in 21%
[2:11:52] towards the reservoir, but you won't see
[2:11:53] that money anywhere in this budget. It's tied directly to the paying the
[2:11:58] contractor out of that fund. So, it's
[2:12:00] not carrying through here. Um, anything
[2:12:03] intergovernmental is pretty much all the
[2:12:05] ARPA. And then there's long-term debt
[2:12:07] proceeds which are self-explanatory.
[2:12:09] That's the loans that we've taken out
[2:12:11] through the special public works fund to
[2:12:13] fund these. So we we have one loan on
[2:12:16] the reservoir and we just took out a
[2:12:17] loan on the basalt well which we're
[2:12:20] getting ready to sign contracts on soon.
[2:12:24] >> And speaking of ARPA, all the deadlines,
[2:12:26] all the reporting, we've done good on
[2:12:28] all of them.
[2:12:30] The only one that's still lingering,
[2:12:31] which has almost been exhausted, is for
[2:12:33] the bass well.
[2:12:35] >> I think we're down to about 400,000 left
[2:12:37] to spend on that. I anticipate with the
[2:12:39] new well driller that we'll be cutting
[2:12:41] that one here real soon and closing that
[2:12:43] out.
[2:12:49] The one thing that I want to mention on
[2:12:51] the water fund though is this is the
[2:12:52] fund that we're watching the closest. um
[2:12:57] the revenues are actually down and
[2:12:59] they've been trending down or flat with people conserving water and things
[2:13:04] and the rates not going up as drastic.
[2:13:06] So it's indexed right now at a a 2.5 or
[2:13:09] the construction cost and the
[2:13:11] construction cost index have been down
[2:13:13] so we're only coming up at two and a
[2:13:15] half. Well the cost of living I mean
[2:13:17] just our personnel costs have been going
[2:13:19] up at over 3%. Health insurance has been
[2:13:21] going up 7 to 10%. So, we're trending in
[2:13:24] a downward negative pattern right now
[2:13:27] and so we will probably be coming to
[2:13:29] council within the next year to talk
[2:13:31] about this and come up with a strategy
[2:13:33] of how we want to address it. So, stay
[2:13:36] tuned on that one.
[2:13:37] >> And your budget is down a little on
[2:13:38] charges even with the new houses coming
[2:13:40] online. Kind of forecast for that.
[2:13:43] >> Yeah, we forecast for that. Yep.
[2:13:47] » But we I mean we've asked people to
[2:13:48] conserve all along and they are.
[2:13:50] >> It just it's going to impact your bottom
[2:13:52] dollar too. So
[2:13:53] >> when were the rates changed to remind
[2:13:55] me?
[2:13:56] >> When do they
[2:13:57] >> when when did they change? We have
[2:13:59] >> Well, they change every year,
[2:14:00] >> right?
[2:14:01] >> So we follow the index every year,
[2:14:03] >> which is how much
[2:14:05] >> from one from one year to the next?
[2:14:07] >> Two and a half%.
[2:14:08] Okay.
[2:14:09] >> There was a year because of the
[2:14:11] construction cost index where it went up
[2:14:12] 7.2. That was our big spike, but then
[2:14:15] the very next year it reversed. It went
[2:14:17] to 2.7. So it hovers at that three range
[2:14:21] give or take but the last few years it's
[2:14:24] been down to half of I think I think
[2:14:27] last year the index was 1.6 six if
[2:14:30] memory serves me correct. So we
[2:14:32] defaulted to the 2.5 which the current
[2:14:34] resolution has as the minimum
[2:14:38] but once again two and a half isn't
[2:14:40] covering when your costs are three plus
[2:14:42] and and the chemicals and things that
[2:14:45] we're paying to operate the plant are increasing like 10% every year. So
[2:14:50] if
[2:14:50] >> everything goes right, what's your best
[2:14:52] guess on when we would take water out of
[2:14:54] the salt well? When?
[2:14:56] >> Fall of this year. Yeah.
[2:15:02] » Yeah. I anticipate with the new driller
[2:15:04] that's on site that they'll bottom out
[2:15:06] within the next month or two and start
[2:15:08] to test it and make sure and then we'll
[2:15:10] have to go to bid for a contractor to
[2:15:12] install the pumps and tie it into the
[2:15:14] plant. So, probably fall, winter, or
[2:15:17] latest.
[2:15:19] Great.
[2:15:22] Okay.
[2:15:24] Water SEC fund
[2:15:27] >> water SEC is carryover 210,000
[2:15:31] interest 6,000 system development
[2:15:34] charges 552,000
[2:15:37] our transfer and utility fund 100,000
[2:15:41] total resources 868,000
[2:15:47] uh capital improvements 141,000 that's
[2:15:51] the basalt well and loans Contingency
[2:15:55] 423,000
[2:16:00] questions on SC.
[2:16:01] >> Can you just remind us like the loans
[2:16:02] that we have? What what are we have
[2:16:04] loans on?
[2:16:08] » We're still paying on the line that goes
[2:16:10] up the canyon.
[2:16:12] Um and the capital outlay is actually
[2:16:16] huh Miller.
[2:16:17] >> There might be still some of that too.
[2:16:18] Yeah. Um, in the capital outlay, the
[2:16:21] $149.99 though is actually development
[2:16:24] fees. So when the Charles T. Parker
[2:16:26] properties annexed in, the city received
[2:16:29] money through land use decisions that
[2:16:31] contributed towards the reservoir and
[2:16:33] towards the well, that 140 is their
[2:16:36] contribution towards the well. They've
[2:16:38] already paid out the money to the
[2:16:40] reservoir as we're completing that. So,
[2:16:44] um, pretty much the SDC fund is just
[2:16:47] paying back debt through the revenues
[2:16:49] it's receiving other than that one
[2:16:51] 49.92.
[2:17:06] Are the SDC charges are those just like
[2:17:09] per unit that's coming online or that's
[2:17:12] all it is? Doesn't matter how big the
[2:17:14] thing is or
[2:17:15] >> it's it's per meter size that they're
[2:17:19] >> buying into. The bigger the meter, the
[2:17:21] higher the SDC.
[2:17:22] >> So like an apartment up at a meter that
[2:17:25] one meter
[2:17:26] >> can be. Yeah. depending on the complex
[2:17:30] of how many different buildings. If it's
[2:17:31] a complex with more, then usually
[2:17:33] there's one meter per building. But it's
[2:17:35] typically what we see.
[2:17:37] >> Standard 3/4 one inch of water is about
[2:17:40] 10,000 wast.
[2:17:46] It's just per unit like for the parks
[2:17:49] SEC about $1,500 or
[2:17:52] >> Yeah, I believe it's broken out to by
[2:17:54] single family versus like multifamily
[2:17:57] unit. It's a little less I
[2:18:04] » Okay. Utility wastewater fund path 30
[2:18:07] page 107.
[2:18:09] >> Wastewater fund has a carryover of 4.2 2
[2:18:13] million 144,000 in interest
[2:18:17] 3.1 million in charges for services
[2:18:22] intergovernmental revenue of 100,000
[2:18:25] long-term debt proceeds of 3 million
[2:18:28] total resources of 10.6 million
[2:18:33] personnel is 1.3 material service
[2:18:36] 972,000
[2:18:37] capital outlay 3.4 million there's
[2:18:43] the old loan in there from 2010 and the
[2:18:46] new new payment coming online. Total
[2:18:49] expenditures 10.6 million.
[2:18:53] And the same story here within the
[2:18:56] service
[2:18:57] contract professionals allocation and
[2:19:00] news fees subscriptions are electrical.
[2:19:03] It's going to be a shift electrical and
[2:19:05] chemicals uh with the new additions
[2:19:08] phase one project.
[2:19:14] Yeah. Any questions on that one?
[2:19:17] >> So phase one, I mean it it did a lot and
[2:19:20] you're able to operate and then phase
[2:19:23] two will be
[2:19:25] >> phase two is a new clarifier, a new
[2:19:27] digest, aerobic digesttor and new
[2:19:30] offices and effluent line to the new one
[2:19:33] channel. We're using all the that now
[2:19:35] but old and then we'll up phase two
[2:19:37] would be the upgrade and
[2:19:40] >> we are the next couple months we'll be
[2:19:44] online. This week is a big week. There's
[2:19:46] lots of equipment that's being tested
[2:19:48] and coming online. Electrical transfers
[2:19:51] and
[2:19:52] computer upgrades.
[2:19:55] Couple things I'd like to point out on
[2:19:57] this fund is the beginning cash. Yes,
[2:19:59] it's extremely large, but over the past
[2:20:02] five years, we've been raising the rate
[2:20:03] 7% per year. This will be the last year
[2:20:06] of that. That's anticipation of making
[2:20:08] payments on the $20 million loan that's
[2:20:11] going to begin next year. So, that big
[2:20:14] balance is going to start to dwindle
[2:20:16] relatively quickly moving forward. So,
[2:20:19] um this fund is is right now healthy,
[2:20:21] but it won't be as healthy as we move
[2:20:23] forward, as we start to pay back the
[2:20:25] debt because we've been planning to pay
[2:20:26] that debt. And that's that's why you'll
[2:20:28] see some money in there. So,
[2:20:30] um, and we will be coming to you next
[2:20:32] Monday to talk about a new wastewater
[2:20:35] rate structure. If you remember back in
[2:20:38] November, we came to you council and
[2:20:41] talked about this new commercial rates
[2:20:43] and things. We heard what you said about
[2:20:45] the multif family. And so, now we've got
[2:20:47] a plan to come forward and present to
[2:20:49] you um, next week. So, stay tuned on
[2:20:53] that.
[2:20:58] We've been I've been signing some big
[2:21:00] checks over the last year for the WWTP
[2:21:03] like those we pay along the as we go on
[2:21:07] some of that. Is that coming from ARPA
[2:21:09] dollar or that's not part of the loan?
[2:21:13] It's it's pretty much all loan. So that
[2:21:15] project was only eligible for ARPA in
[2:21:17] the amount of 2.2 million of the nearly
[2:21:20] $20 million that we spent well I take
[2:21:22] that back 16.8 8 million towards the
[2:21:25] plant itself and then we had the close
[2:21:27] to $2 million that did have ARPA money
[2:21:29] half of it for the bioer but that
[2:21:31] project's been complete for over a year
[2:21:33] this past year has just been on the
[2:21:34] wastewater plant which has been all been
[2:21:39] other than the 2.2 been going to the the
[2:21:41] lawn.
[2:21:44] >> Okay. And then urban renewal, when we
[2:21:46] get to that, Carol will touch on that it
[2:21:48] has a percentage allocated towards it
[2:21:51] and it's urban renewal will make the
[2:21:53] first few payments of that loan until
[2:21:55] its eligibility is gone or the funds
[2:21:57] were available depending on how the
[2:21:58] taxes come in and then after that then
[2:22:01] rateayers will be paying those loans
[2:22:03] moving forward. Hope that makes sense.
[2:22:07] >> I do have a question. Um what what does
[2:22:09] it mean when it something is like more
[2:22:11] than 100% paid like 140? Is that I've
[2:22:15] seen that a couple of times
[2:22:19] » where you
[2:22:20] >> when the let's see when you guys
[2:22:24] percentage of allocated time
[2:22:26] >> is it two people
[2:22:27] >> yes two people yes
[2:22:30] >> okay 70 okay
[2:22:32] you said worker
[2:22:35] 140 so yeah two people it's 70%
[2:22:38] >> okay
[2:22:39] >> yeah4
[2:22:41] point4 whatever of one person you know
[2:22:43] half person
[2:22:45] >> and some of these are like even it's the
[2:22:47] same utility and different fund it's
[2:22:49] still the same amount on both funds. See
[2:22:52] how that you guys break it down the
[2:22:54] percentages.
[2:22:56] >> Okay.
[2:22:57] >> And there too on page 107 you have 2526
[2:23:00] twice.
[2:23:04] » Okay, you're right. Okay. But again it's
[2:23:06] 7.5 FP no
[2:23:10] >> equals out but all the percentages might
[2:23:13] be different
[2:23:15] >> right
[2:23:17] um
[2:23:24] we do 30 waste waterc
[2:23:28] E
[2:23:30] 31
[2:23:32] F
[2:23:35] » we have about 230,000 in carryover
[2:23:39] 20,000 in interest and uh on this one
[2:23:43] you can see how the SDC's are actually
[2:23:45] split
[2:23:47] 60,000 reimbursement 228,000 extra
[2:23:50] capacity and 15% for admin fees
[2:23:54] the total there of 324,000 total
[2:23:57] resources is 554,000
[2:24:00] capital outlays 500,000 transfers of
[2:24:03] 15,230
[2:24:06] leaves a contingency of 39,336.
[2:24:15] Those are all uh headed towards phase
[2:24:18] one project.
[2:24:26] » Okay.
[2:24:28] question.
[2:24:30] >> So, tab 32, page 113,
[2:24:34] excuse me, are the the loans that we
[2:24:36] have out.
[2:24:37] >> Yeah, I decided to put those back in
[2:24:39] this year so you could see what loans
[2:24:41] were in there. We used to have a debt
[2:24:43] service fund, but I thought it would be
[2:24:45] beneficial. And I pulled these numbers
[2:24:47] out pretty quickly, you know, took them
[2:24:49] off the audit, last year's audit, and
[2:24:50] calculated what was in this year. So, so
[2:24:53] it just kind of tells you where we are
[2:24:55] and what the rates are. um on for debt.
[2:25:01] >> So
[2:25:02] >> that that first one then for a point of
[2:25:04] clarity is the one that we amended to
[2:25:06] the 20 million. So that's no longer 6.4.
[2:25:09] It's now 20
[2:25:11] >> at the 1.88. So that is a phenomenal
[2:25:13] interest rate that we do still have on
[2:25:15] that. So
[2:25:16] >> that's why we raised it, right?
[2:25:20] >> So yeah, that's good good point because
[2:25:23] like I say off last year's audit. So, so
[2:25:26] should the zero be 20 million? Is that
[2:25:27] what you're saying? I I didn't catch
[2:25:29] you.
[2:25:30] >> The balance hasn't been finalized is why
[2:25:32] I mean this is the first I've seen this
[2:25:33] table too, but we we haven't closed it.
[2:25:36] It's still an open account that we're
[2:25:37] drawing against.
[2:25:38] >> So once once we've said that's it, then
[2:25:41] that will be able to give you a hard
[2:25:42] number.
[2:25:43] >> Okay.
[2:25:43] >> But it does have a total amount
[2:25:45] available of 20 million. Wait a minute.
[2:25:48] >> Do these have a date of when they paid
[2:25:51] off
[2:25:53] or they
[2:25:56] Yeah, she could she could add some
[2:25:58] wrote.
[2:25:59] >> Yeah, they're advertised out. So, yeah.
[2:26:02] >> Yeah, we can't get obviously the first
[2:26:04] one, but yeah.
[2:26:06] >> Yeah, bear with me. This was my first
[2:26:08] shot at this. So,
[2:26:10] >> nice to see when some are expiring or
[2:26:16] » and the, you know, the page 114 section
[2:26:19] 33 is just the listing of your transfers
[2:26:22] in and out of each fund.
[2:26:25] And, you know, they do go in. I always
[2:26:28] put little asterisks by the SDC funds.
[2:26:31] In the past, they used to transfer
[2:26:34] whatever money it said they were going
[2:26:35] to transfer and we don't do that
[2:26:37] anymore. If we don't get the money, we
[2:26:39] don't transfer it. So, nothing gets
[2:26:41] transferred to the general fund unless
[2:26:44] it unless we receive the money for admin
[2:26:46] fees.
[2:26:48] You found
[2:26:49] >> budgeted transfers from SDC change.
[2:26:52] >> Yeah, she is. I just spell check this
[2:26:56] document, too. I'm surprised I didn't
[2:26:58] catch that. work.
[2:27:02] » Okay,
[2:27:03] >> still works.
[2:27:05] >> I'll go through the glossery one at a
[2:27:07] time. Um,
[2:27:09] >> that's it.
[2:27:09] >> We're good there. Uh,
[2:27:13] >> Council President Miller.
[2:27:15] >> Yeah. Uh, some of the dialogue uh
[2:27:17] related to debt services there, I
[2:27:19] couldn't understand. What was the error?
[2:27:21] Um, did I hear that there was an error
[2:27:23] on the debt services page 113?
[2:27:26] >> There was a spelling error on the
[2:27:28] bottom. said budgeted transfers pro
[2:27:30] instead of from.
[2:27:32] >> Okay. Thank you.
[2:27:33] >> And then
[2:27:37] oh that was on the transfer debt
[2:27:39] service. She'll add a column maybe to
[2:27:41] say we would expire.
[2:27:42] >> Yeah. I don't know if we'll get that in
[2:27:43] this year but but we'll add it next year
[2:27:45] for sure.
[2:27:47] >> Okay. So we are um
[2:27:52] done going through everything. if
[2:27:54] anybody wants to have any more
[2:27:56] questions.
[2:27:58] Um, and if not, if we can look for an
[2:28:02] approval, a recommendation approval of
[2:28:04] this budget to provide to the council
[2:28:06] with any updates or changes that we had
[2:28:08] talked about.
[2:28:10] Um,
[2:28:13] Tyler, do you have any of them down that
[2:28:15] you remember?
[2:28:16] >> Yeah, I just emailed them to you and
[2:28:19] Susan.
[2:28:30] Okay, we'll get Susan will have these,
[2:28:32] but taking notes. Page 43, we're
[2:28:35] correcting position count error for
[2:28:37] public works positions as flagged by the
[2:28:39] public works director. Page 44, footnote
[2:28:42] about restricted funds came up when
[2:28:44] discussing the pool funds that councelor
[2:28:46] Hen. Page 56, approval of drug D drug
[2:28:49] Doug drug drug detention dog pennies
[2:28:51] further conversations and approvals
[2:28:53] about the program prior to any
[2:28:55] expenditure.
[2:28:57] I I feel fine putting it in the budget
[2:28:59] but like Mr. Miller would like to talk
[2:29:01] about it moving forward.
[2:29:04] Uh page 64 incorrect wages for community
[2:29:07] development director. Does that mean
[2:29:09] also department salaries on page 65 will
[2:29:12] be needed is updated as well?
[2:29:16] believe so. Uh they come from a totally
[2:29:20] different spot by the way.
[2:29:22] >> Okay.
[2:29:23] Confirm all.
[2:29:24] >> It was just a table amendment.
[2:29:26] >> Just a table.
[2:29:27] >> Um correct me the negative numbers on
[2:29:30] page 76.
[2:29:34] Page 78. Potential
[2:29:36] typo.
[2:29:38] >> Got that?
[2:29:39] >> There's a few. Uh page 107 believe uh
[2:29:46] was fun.
[2:29:53] I wish I could blame it on my
[2:29:55] handwriting, but uh I don't think I can.
[2:29:57] There.
[2:30:02] » Does everything make sense in those
[2:30:03] notes, Joe?
[2:30:04] >> Yeah. Yeah. I don't think I had an error
[2:30:06] there. Just question about I had folded
[2:30:09] a page
[2:30:11] uh that services spelling error on page
[2:30:14] 113
[2:30:17] buyers uh
[2:30:23] and then just somewhere is there a way
[2:30:26] to qualify?
[2:30:28] Um, some of the numbers look a lot
[2:30:30] different this year versus next, but
[2:30:32] because of intergovernmental transfer
[2:30:34] transfers, you know, Sam, is there a way
[2:30:36] to put that somewhere that
[2:30:40] transfers? Um, some of the big changes
[2:30:42] aren't they're not really changes.
[2:30:44] They're just because the way we're
[2:30:46] standard operating procedure.
[2:30:50] >> I figure out how I would do that.
[2:30:53] >> It will disappear pretty quick.
[2:30:55] >> Yeah, just as long as we keep bringing
[2:30:56] it up here.
[2:30:59] become there. The other thing that was
[2:31:01] not listed on here was the $400,000
[2:31:03] adjustment for the police department
[2:31:05] >> and the 400 399,814.
[2:31:08] Did you say
[2:31:09] >> um
[2:31:10] >> I'm going to put it as 400
[2:31:12] >> grant for the radio.
[2:31:14] Um and maybe at some time you could have
[2:31:17] a page where it like changes or
[2:31:19] something changes from last year, you
[2:31:21] know, big
[2:31:22] >> and we like potential purchase property
[2:31:24] or this way we transferred money might
[2:31:27] have changed something.
[2:31:31] » Yeah, I was gonna
[2:31:33] sorry I'll raise my hand and wait my
[2:31:35] turn.
[2:31:36] >> Okay.
[2:31:38] Yeah. Yeah. I was going to bring up um
[2:31:40] somewhere in the very beginning. I think
[2:31:42] it would be helpful just to have a
[2:31:43] summary of uh um additional expenses for
[2:31:47] the proposed budget. Um just related to
[2:31:51] uh I wrote out notes and now I lost my
[2:31:53] notes, but something just like uh
[2:31:55] additional FTEEs, um additional
[2:31:57] equipment, just large items. If we had a
[2:31:59] summary right up front of what those
[2:32:01] major changes are in the budget, um that
[2:32:03] would be helpful, I think. Interesting.
[2:32:10] » And then obviously
[2:32:10] >> see if I can figure out how to do that.
[2:32:12] Okay.
[2:32:17] » To me this year.
[2:32:19] >> Yeah, we didn't have we didn't have very
[2:32:21] many um this year, so I don't think
[2:32:23] it'll be a heavy lift, but just having
[2:32:25] that, you know, right up front.
[2:32:28] Um it may be even something that Ben can
[2:32:30] just include in his um opening letter
[2:32:35] >> when I do open my regulation book every
[2:32:37] year up front. Yeah. Here in red are the
[2:32:39] changes or something different just so
[2:32:41] you
[2:32:42] made aware. And then on page four the
[2:32:44] LLC where we were one of the first
[2:32:46] founding members of LLC in 1925.
[2:32:50] » Anybody else have any other changes or
[2:32:52] things they'd like to potentially vote
[2:32:55] on?
[2:32:57] I I would just go and make sure that the
[2:32:59] some of the charts were wrong like the
[2:33:01] years
[2:33:02] >> the all the clerical adjustments
[2:33:05] >> dropped.
[2:33:07] >> Okay. So
[2:33:10] noting that, I'm looking for an approval
[2:33:12] of tonight's
[2:33:14] budget.
[2:33:28] » I'll offer a motion to approve the
[2:33:30] budget with the changes discussed.
[2:33:33] Councelor Holmes, budget committee
[2:33:35] member makes the motion to accept the
[2:33:38] 2026 2027 budget with amendments or
[2:33:42] changes noted. Any second?
[2:33:45] >> I'll second.
[2:33:46] >> I will second that. And um Mr. Mayor, if
[2:33:50] we can just clarify the process now uh
[2:33:52] just to get on the record so um the
[2:33:55] public understands if they watch this
[2:33:56] video.
[2:33:58] >> Yes. Um the discussion we have a first
[2:34:01] and a second to accept this budget. Now
[2:34:03] this budget will be recommended to
[2:34:05] council um with the changes and they'll
[2:34:07] bring it back within the next month or
[2:34:09] so
[2:34:10] >> in June. Yes.
[2:34:10] >> In June and then we'll revisit it was
[2:34:12] our public hearing. Um they'll be open
[2:34:15] to the public which will discuss any
[2:34:18] changes and then the council will vote
[2:34:20] on approval of the budget.
[2:34:24] So this is approving the recommendation
[2:34:26] proving uh to the council
[2:34:29] >> and the final numbers are always
[2:34:31] published in the paper also will be
[2:34:34] published for the budget.
[2:34:35] >> Any more discussion? Anything else
[2:34:37] council president?
[2:34:40] >> I'm good. Thank you. A a job well done
[2:34:42] again to city staff. Thank you very much
[2:34:43] for your work on this. I know it's a
[2:34:46] large endeavor and I'm always impressed
[2:34:48] with the way that we run our budget
[2:34:49] process every year.
[2:34:52] Yes, I echo that. I've seen a couple
[2:34:54] other cities and it's been very
[2:34:56] fortunate. You guys have done a really
[2:34:58] good job making this understandable and
[2:35:01] thorough and um we've been very
[2:35:03] fortunate to be in a good position where
[2:35:05] we are. Um so appreciate it and that's
[2:35:08] thanks to all of you guys for sure. You
[2:35:09] guys have all been here a lot longer
[2:35:10] than I have. So thank you. Thank
[2:35:12] >> Thank you to the budget committee
[2:35:14] members too. Uh your guys' work and your
[2:35:16] time
[2:35:17] >> um should be uh noted as well.
[2:35:21] Appreciate it very much. Thank you.
[2:35:23] Okay. All those in favor state by saying
[2:35:25] I.
[2:35:26] >> I.
[2:35:27] >> Oppos.
[2:35:28] >> Motion carries. Okay. We will adjourn
[2:35:31] this uh budget committee meeting. Um and
[2:35:35] in 5 minutes at 8:10 we'll start up real
[2:35:38] quick the uh urban renewal budget
[2:35:41] committee meeting. And that should