[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

5-11-2026 Budget Committee meeting

Transcript