[0:00] 
[1:24] So workshop session
council member Lutz Cole
[1:29] is not with us this
evening, so I'll be running
[1:31] the meeting for everybody.
[1:33] So bear with me as I
stammer through this.
[1:36] We have council member
Ballard virtual tonight,
[1:40] and I believe Laura might
be joining us at some point
[1:45] virtually, but we'll see
if she's able to make it.
[1:47] I get started on our first item.
[1:50] That's the housing action
plan revised draft.
[1:53] I believe Mike has an
introduction on that one.
[1:56] All right.
[1:57] Thank you, Mayor Pro tem
and members of council.
[2:00] And tonight we are
revisiting a revised draft
[2:03] or revisiting reviewing
a revised draft
[2:07] of our housing action plan.
[2:10] Couple workshops ago, council
had a presentation on a draft
[2:15] and we have Molly
Fitzpatrick with route policy
[2:18] online with us.
[2:19] Who's put the work into
this as our consultant
[2:23] and worked on previous
policies plans as well.
[2:28] We provided a redlined
version and a clean version
[2:33] in the council packet, which
was posted on GJ city.org
[2:37] for the public to review.
[2:39] We got that posted last
Wednesday, I believe,
[2:42] and tonight the purpose is
really to get council's thoughts
[2:48] on those changes, see if
the changes were based
[2:51] on the feedback from
your last workshop
[2:53] on the housing action plan we
would like to get this to meet
[2:59] the deadlines with the state
requirements and everything,
[3:02] to get this through
the regular council
[3:05] meetings and the public hearing
that the state requires for us
[3:10] to get to final approval.
[3:12] Looking to do that later
in September or October
[3:16] if necessary.
[3:17] And so, I think to
start off if and I
[3:22] also have Paul Starkey here
from our housing team as well.
[3:28] I can help answer
some questions,
[3:30] but I think Molly
will be our presenter.
[3:33] Molly, if are you able to just
pull up something that where
[3:38] we can just walk through a
quick overview of those changes
[3:42] and then see if council has any
questions or discussion related
[3:45] to those and if there's anything
you'd like us to change or add.
[3:49] Can you hear us.
[3:50] Well Molly, we can.
[3:52] Can you guys hear me.
[3:53] The tech check to make
sure we're all set.
[3:56] So perfect.
[3:59] Thanks so much for the intro.
[4:00] Appreciate the time.
[4:01] I know you guys have other
agenda items as well,
[4:04] and so I'm primarily
here to answer questions.
[4:06] I'm going to do a quick run
through on the key changes.
[4:09] I don't have that in
a slide deck format
[4:11] just because they're
pretty quick.
[4:13] And I think the easiest way for
you all to look at obviously,
[4:16] is checking the red
line, which I know
[4:17] you've all reviewed already.
[4:18] So let me just walk through at
a high level, the key things
[4:24] that you should expect
to see as you're looking
[4:25] through those red lines.
[4:26] And I'll take any questions
that you all have.
[4:29] First of all, this
new draft is intended
[4:33] to reflect the feedback both
from our council discussion,
[4:37] your council discussion.
[4:39] Last time I was there,
as well as some feedback
[4:43] that we received from
stakeholders, primarily
[4:46] the housing authority.
[4:47] And I think I saw Scott
there as well tonight.
[4:50] So he's around to help
support that as well.
[4:53] In terms of feedback from
the last council session,
[4:56] certainly there's a
couple tweaks throughout,
[4:58] but the two primary
changes that you'll
[5:00] see based on our conversation
was, number one, removing
[5:04] the recommendation
that formalized
[5:07] a Housing Advisory board
as part of our discussion.
[5:09] Your discussion.
[5:11] It really felt like, look,
we can do that really just
[5:13] through targeted engagement.
[5:14] We're already having
those conversations.
[5:16] We don't need to
formalize that in a board.
[5:18] So you'll see the removal
of that recommendation
[5:20] based on that feedback.
[5:22] The other thing which
I think is more minor.
[5:24] We did talk a good bit about
just your current budget
[5:27] priorities and acknowledging
that any consideration
[5:31] for potential funding
of housing that would be
[5:35] separate from the general fund.
[5:36] So you can still have
those conversations
[5:38] with the general fund,
but the strategy,
[5:41] which was strategy 7 is now
or was strategy 8 is now.
[5:45] Strategy seven said
explore revenue
[5:46] options and financing tools.
[5:48] We pushed that further out
into the planning period.
[5:52] So as you all this housing
action plan is a six year plan.
[5:56] We initially had that
financing and funding strategy
[5:59] in a to two year period, and
we've pushed that out further
[6:05] into more of 4 to
six years in terms
[6:07] of looking for opportunities
for new funding sources.
[6:10] So that's one of the
action items under what's
[6:12] currently strategy seven.
[6:13] Those are the two
main topics that
[6:16] came out of your conversation.
[6:18] As I mentioned, another
source of updates
[6:21] was feedback that we
received from the Grand
[6:23] Junction housing authority.
[6:24] Really thorough and great
review from that group.
[6:27] Obviously, they're a key
partner and a key implementer.
[6:31] Those changes were
primarily focused
[6:33] around making sure we're
emphasizing in the right places
[6:37] engagement with stakeholders.
[6:39] So particularly as we're taking
out that Housing Advisory board
[6:42] as a formalized response,
making sure that we're really
[6:45] clear within recommendations
where it's really important
[6:49] to make sure you're engaging
with those partners,
[6:51] getting feedback and
input from those partners,
[6:53] and having them as really
kind of a leadership partner,
[6:56] not just a reflection partner.
[6:58] So you'll see some
of those changes
[6:59] throughout a couple other
kind of technical adjustments
[7:02] and making sure that we're
characterizing their programs
[7:04] correctly, that
we're looking at,
[7:07] some of the incentives in a
way that makes sense as well.
[7:10] So a little bit of
feedback from them
[7:12] that emphasizes that
partnership role.
[7:15] And then two other things I
want to touch on for in terms
[7:19] of the edits, one is real minor
update for flow, but you'll see,
[7:24] we kind of moved the progress
update from your last strategy
[7:28] just into an appendix to
help the actual housing
[7:30] action plan read a
little more clearly
[7:32] focused on current priorities.
[7:34] So you'll see that
big section moved.
[7:36] We didn't lose it.
[7:37] We just moved it to an appendix.
[7:38] And then finally, the only real
content addition to this one
[7:45] is looking at the framework
for annual prioritization,
[7:49] I will maybe share my
screen briefly just
[7:53] to show you what that looks
like, which I know you can see
[7:56] it in yours as well, but
let me just pull that up
[7:59] real briefly because we
have this nice infographic
[8:03] that was designed by staff.
[8:04] Actually, I think Paul
was helpful on this front.
[8:07] That just gives you a sense of
really how to think about this
[8:10] in an annual version.
[8:11] So as I mentioned,
this is a six year
[8:14] housing strategy that you also
are submitting to the state.
[8:18] But really when you
think about priorities,
[8:19] and we talked about priorities
a good bit last time
[8:21] and really acknowledged those
things change year to year,
[8:25] depending on what grants are
available, what your staff
[8:27] capacity looks like
at any point in time,
[8:30] as well as what your funding
priorities are for that year.
[8:32] And so we want to be
really sensitive to that.
[8:35] Make sure we're not
giving you priorities that
[8:36] don't fit over a long term.
[8:39] And so we really
felt like, look,
[8:40] instead of really
prioritizing in a way that
[8:43] may become we are unrealistic.
[8:46] Your strategies.
[8:46] We just wanted to give you
some framework and thoughts
[8:49] around how do we think about
this annually when we're going
[8:52] through the housing budget, when
we're looking at general funds,
[8:56] how do we think
about those things.
[8:57] And so you'll see that
as a new content item.
[9:00] It's not intended to
lock you into anything
[9:02] or say, oh, this is what
you have to do each year.
[9:05] It really is.
[9:06] Hey, these are the
things to think about
[9:08] as you're making those
priority decisions
[9:10] on a year to year basis.
[9:12] So I'll pull that up briefly.
[9:13] And then we can pivot into any
questions that you might have.
[9:18] So give me just a
second on the screen
[9:19] shares giving me a pinwheel.
[9:21] So let me see if we
can get it up here.
[9:23] 
[9:29] There it comes.
[9:31] So hopefully you'll
see this again.
[9:33] This is just the infographic.
[9:35] There's a lot on here.
[9:35] We're not going to
walk through it.
[9:37] But I just wanted to acknowledge
there's a wide range of criteria
[9:41] that you all already
think about when
[9:43] you're thinking about
priorities for other components.
[9:46] This just highlights what those
are within the housing space,
[9:50] what questions you may want to
consider as you're doing that
[9:53] and how to apply it.
[9:54] Now, there are still
obviously within each priority
[9:57] that we talked about last
time or within each strategy.
[9:59] There's timelines,
there's actions.
[10:01] This just gives
you additional help
[10:03] as you're thinking
about how do we allocate
[10:04] funds or not allocate funds.
[10:06] And what are we really focusing
on with the staff capacity
[10:10] that you have.
[10:11] So that's all I
have for the update,
[10:12] but I'm happy to answer
questions on any of the redlines
[10:16] specifically or just in general.
[10:18] Next steps are, as
you all probably
[10:21] it is currently available
for public comment,
[10:23] so we are still
taking public comments
[10:25] as they come in on the
draft housing action plan.
[10:30] Once at the end of that
public comment period,
[10:33] there will also be a public
hearing and then approval by you
[10:36] guys and submission to dola.
[10:38] In the meantime, dola is giving
a preliminary kind of courtesy
[10:42] review to make sure everything's
looking like the T's are crossed
[10:45] and I's are dotted and
that sort of thing.
[10:47] So with that, I'll open it
back up for any questions
[10:49] or kick back to I
don't know Paul,
[10:53] if you want to if
you had anything
[10:54] to add that I may have missed.
[10:56] I know you've worked really
closely on this as well.
[10:58] Thank you so much for that.
[11:00] Molly, did you have
something else.
[11:02] City manager.
[11:04] I think we don't
have much to add.
[11:05] I did just want to note that
the point at which extending
[11:10] the time for looking at other
types of financial models
[11:14] is not in reference only to.
[11:18] I know we had a robust
discussion last time,
[11:20] but there's many different
ways of finding funding.
[11:23] And it doesn't just
it's not solely focused
[11:26] on any kind of tax or increase.
[11:29] It's looking at currently when
we've added funding outside
[11:33] of grants or other
programs, it's been
[11:36] a general fund contribution.
[11:39] And knowing that
we can't sustain
[11:41] general fund contributions
on an annual basis.
[11:46] This is an opportunity to
extend the period of time.
[11:50] So not one to two years,
but the period of time
[11:52] where we are seeking all
the different creative.
[11:55] Some of those funding sources
may not even be available now
[11:58] to go after, but working
with our partners in a way
[12:01] that we're able to seek out
other types of opportunities
[12:04] for funding affordable
housing in the community,
[12:08] whether that's through the
city or through our partners,
[12:11] but making sure that we have
that ability without locking it
[12:15] into one way.
[12:17] Council Kennedy Yeah, and
actually, Molly and Mike,
[12:20] I really appreciate the fact
that literally what each of you
[12:23] said were kind of my
first two questions
[12:25] that I'd been working
on this topic.
[12:28] So, Molly, thank you for that.
[12:31] Talking about that
annual look at funding
[12:33] and that it's not
locking us into anything
[12:37] and obviously we can't commit
future councils to action.
[12:41] Year by year that.
[12:43] But it's just where we take
the doubt out of the way
[12:46] that it's written that, well,
this council passed this
[12:49] and it's a mandate for them
to the next council to take
[12:52] this action to fund this thing.
[12:54] I think that we just have
to be careful in how we
[12:57] word that which I think
your first comment certainly
[13:00] addressed that.
[13:01] So thank you for
that clarification.
[13:03] And then Mike, that next point
that explore dedicated revenue
[13:09] was a concern because that can
certainly come across as hey,
[13:11] let's pass a tax or a fee that
is also potentially a tax.
[13:17] So that was something I
appreciate just that the options
[13:23] and again, since we're
not requiring anything
[13:26] of a future council, but
these are basically these
[13:29] are guidelines right.
[13:30] So we're not saying that,
hey, we are going to do this.
[13:32] We are this isn't council
giving direction to staff.
[13:36] And I just want to make sure
I'm understanding that clearly.
[13:38] I see Molly, I see you
adding your nodding.
[13:40] Your head is am, I am, I am, I
tracking on that with that way.
[13:43] I'm saying that on number two
that dedicated funding, revenue
[13:46] exploring that is basically
just a matter of saying, hey,
[13:49] let's keep our eyes
open for opportunities
[13:51] to bring in additional
funding sources.
[13:54] Yes, that is I mean, that
word explore at the beginning
[13:58] is very intentional.
[14:00] We are not suggesting a specific
action other than keep your eyes
[14:05] open to the extent that
it becomes a council
[14:08] priority to say, hey, we want to
understand what our options are.
[14:11] Then you direct.
[14:12] At that time, you would direct
staff to explore that and say,
[14:15] hey, what are those options.
[14:16] What do those look like.
[14:18] All of.
[14:18] There's lots of pre-work
before anything jumps to oh,
[14:21] do a ballot initiative for tax.
[14:23] There's lots of other
things as Mike mentioned
[14:27] and that is really intended to
be in there so that if you want
[14:32] to prioritize that
in the future,
[14:34] you have some language
and some structure
[14:35] so that you're not reinventing
the wheel from ground 0.
[14:38] We're really trying to get
you off on the right foot
[14:41] if and when you're
ready to look at that,
[14:43] and we don't expect you to
even start looking at that
[14:46] within the next several years.
[14:47] That's why that one
specifically is on that 4 to six
[14:49] year timeline, because that's
far enough out, but still
[14:52] within the planning period.
[14:54] Great and then just one last
thing, that regulatory cost
[15:00] test.
[15:01] I really like that
idea to where we're
[15:02] looking at cost
impacts on housing
[15:04] production and affordability
before adoption.
[15:07] And we're looking at specific
cost drivers around housing.
[15:11] Is there a way that we
can strengthen that.
[15:13] Is there something
else we can do
[15:15] to make sure that
this is something
[15:17] that is a policy consideration.
[15:21] I know it's hard to say.
[15:22] We're going to put
anything going forward
[15:24] on any future council decision.
[15:27] But as these things
go, I think this
[15:29] is it's just so important
that we consider
[15:32] impacts on the cost of housing.
[15:35] Yep and I think to
be honest, that one's
[15:38] really hard to get to a
middle ground of detail on,
[15:41] if that makes sense.
[15:42] So you say, hey, you need
to be thinking about this.
[15:44] Like understand costs
of regulatory impact,
[15:46] understand the benefit.
[15:48] And then you've got to
weigh those as trade offs.
[15:50] And then beyond that
level of detail,
[15:53] it's really, really hard without
something specific to say,
[15:56] this is what you weigh or
this is how you calculate it.
[15:59] It really kind of jumps
from the conceptual you
[16:02] have to really be looking
at a specific thing
[16:03] to understand how that is.
[16:05] So I mean, I appreciate your
request to strengthen it.
[16:08] I don't know that we can give
it a lot more meat on the bones
[16:11] just because it
gets real nuanced
[16:13] real fast, if that makes sense.
[16:15] Depending on what
that component is.
[16:18] I'm certainly the
extent to which
[16:20] you have additional thoughts on
that and want to share those.
[16:22] I'm open to certainly
open to hearing those.
[16:24] I just know that from the
economist perspective,
[16:27] I jump to OK, how are we doing
this and how are we doing that
[16:30] and what are the details.
[16:31] So it gets pretty
tricky pretty quick.
[16:33] So it councils comfortable with
the conceptual understanding
[16:38] of hey let's make
sure we're evaluating
[16:41] costs and benefits of
policy considerations
[16:43] through this lens.
[16:44] That was our intent.
[16:46] But I'm certainly open to
other thoughts on that.
[16:49] So what comes to
mind specifically
[16:51] in this is a conversation we had
in this room a couple of years
[16:55] ago about
undergrounding utilities
[16:57] and say, well, yeah, sure.
[16:59] It's pretty.
[16:59] Yeah it looks great.
[17:00] It honestly does it.
[17:02] Wouldn't it be great if all
utilities just were underground.
[17:04] However, there's significant
costs associated with that.
[17:07] Who's like what is that cost.
[17:09] So if staff is going to
bring us that say staff,
[17:12] we want you to also
bring cost associated.
[17:15] If you have an idea such
as underground utilities.
[17:18] Just as an example, we
need to say more than hey
[17:21] that looks great.
[17:22] Wouldn't that be great
for our whole community
[17:23] to have more
underground utilities.
[17:25] But to say what are
the actual costs
[17:27] that are impacting housing.
[17:29] I guess that would
be the example.
[17:31] But the crux of it
would be if we're
[17:34] going to take into consideration
something like that,
[17:36] we would need to look at costs.
[17:38] 
[17:41] I guess my only
reaction to that is,
[17:43] wouldn't that be the
policy discussion
[17:46] of that council at that time.
[17:47] So it really I think
presumably come up.
[17:51] But it really needs to be
since we're not binding
[17:54] a future council, it needs to be
that council's policy discussion
[17:59] and what weight they
put on that, because we
[18:01] can't force that on them.
[18:02] We can put it as kind
of our general priority
[18:04] as it's written,
but we can't force
[18:06] a future council to require
staff to do anything.
[18:11] And of course, we can't force a
future council to do anything.
[18:14] That's, that's a given.
[18:15] But what I'm saying is that
when staff brings us something,
[18:18] brings us, for instance,
undergrounding utilities,
[18:20] that they may bring a
anticipated cost per unit
[18:24] for something like that.
[18:25] And I know every utility.
[18:29] Utility theory
that's on the area
[18:31] depends upon what an easement
might cost, things like that,
[18:33] but just that it's a
consideration on staff side,
[18:36] not necessarily from the
council's perspective.
[18:40] Any other comments or
questions from council.
[18:44] Sure council member.
[18:48] Molly I work on some
of the homeless stuff
[18:51] and there were several
mentions of needing and working
[18:58] on emergency and transitional
housing, which when we work
[19:02] with the many, many
providers in town,
[19:05] is the number one need
because they can get people
[19:08] in wraparound services and they
can work with their providers
[19:14] and all that stuff,
but they can't
[19:15] get them from a tent to a
transitional housing phase.
[19:19] And we've talked a lot about
what our role is on it,
[19:23] but it wasn't really clear
to me which direction
[19:28] we were going from this report.
[19:30] As far as our concerns
about transitional housing,
[19:34] there was some mention about
deferring stuff to the County,
[19:39] but I've never heard
that the County was
[19:41] excited about working on that.
[19:43] And there was some mention
about working with MCC on that,
[19:49] but I've been in their
meetings for years
[19:51] and they really haven't come up
with any solutions or anything.
[19:55] So in your opinion,
where does that leave us.
[20:01] Great question.
[20:02] And I think you're astute to
acknowledge we're not overly
[20:06] directive in this document
about how to address that
[20:11] and exactly where
those priorities are.
[20:13] Priorities are I would say
the housing action plan is
[20:16] intentionally deferential
to the community
[20:22] wide on how strategy
and implementation plan.
[20:25] So because that plan is
currently part of your approach
[20:30] to homelessness as a region,
we wanted to be deferential
[20:34] to that, particularly
knowing that plan
[20:36] could get updated during the
lifespan of this six year plan.
[20:39] And so where we
have left, it really
[20:41] is under strategy number 5,
which is to stabilize households
[20:46] through different housing
models and homeless response
[20:48] and prevention systems
within that strategy.
[20:51] We're saying continue to
support implementation
[20:54] of that unhoused strategy
and implementation plan
[20:58] because that is really the
guidance around exactly
[21:03] how to look at that
component, that segment
[21:06] of the housing market.
[21:08] We did different than in
previous strategies for the city
[21:12] that that's kind of
been a missing piece.
[21:14] We said, hey, here's
your housing strategy.
[21:15] Don't forget you have a
homeless strategy over here.
[21:18] This time we really try to tie
those together a little bit more
[21:21] by intentionally calling out
that strategy five of hey,
[21:24] you've got a whole strategy.
[21:26] Make sure you're
integrating that.
[21:28] That is part of your
entire housing spectrum.
[21:30] And so I would say to
answer that more concisely,
[21:36] we are deferential
to your existing plan
[21:38] with an acknowledgment
that existing
[21:40] plan could get
updated and revised
[21:43] during this six year plan.
[21:44] 
[21:48] Any other questions or
comments from council.
[21:51] Councilman Ballard,
do you have anything
[21:53] you would like to add to this.
[21:55] No, I think most of
my talking points
[21:58] have already been discussed.
[21:59] Thank you.
[22:01] Great Well, thank
you so much, Molly.
[22:02] I really appreciate you on this.
[22:04] I think you did a fantastic
job at listening to council
[22:07] and our individual meetings as
well as in our group sessions,
[22:10] and really implementing
that into the plan.
[22:13] Before we go, city manager
Bennett, do you have anything
[22:16] else you'd like to say on this.
[22:17] Yeah, I definitely want to echo.
[22:19] Thank you Molly.
[22:20] And she's been incredibly
helpful through this process
[22:23] and the engagement and
interviews that she did,
[22:26] and putting it into action
and working with our team
[22:28] has it's been great.
[22:30] So I did want to just
verify with the council
[22:33] with these changes
that we presented
[22:35] tonight, questions you asked.
[22:37] We make these, we
accept these changes
[22:40] or as in the clean
version, are you ready.
[22:43] Make sure you're ready for us.
[22:44] So we'd be bringing
this for formal adoption
[22:47] in the near future.
[22:49] We have to as Molly mentioned,
make sure all is good with it.
[22:52] They're finishing that review.
[22:54] And then we would bring
that with a public hearing
[22:56] and recommendation for
adoption to council.
[23:00] Great how does the process work.
[23:05] We have to it's a requirement.
[23:07] So we have to submit it to them.
[23:08] So they have it to review.
[23:10] And I don't know if there's
anything to add to that.
[23:12] They'll get back to us and
make sure that it meets.
[23:15] They don't get into how of what
we're necessarily trying to do,
[23:19] but they want to make sure that
we've met the criteria that's
[23:23] required within an action plan.
[23:27] I'll just echo that they do a
courtesy review so that they
[23:29] give us a little bit
of feedback, at least
[23:30] on ones we've done
prior to this one.
[23:32] They've given us, hey, can you
make sure you clarify this,
[23:35] or we want to make sure you're
doing this in the couple
[23:39] that they've reviewed
of ours already,
[23:40] they've been really,
really minor,
[23:42] just tweaked adjustments,
that kind of thing.
[23:45] In preparation for that
can see that in Appendix
[23:50] A of your housing action plan.
[23:53] We outline exactly what
the state is looking for.
[23:57] And then we tell them
what pages to look at
[24:00] to make sure that we've
answered that question.
[24:02] So we are trying to tee you up
to make this as easy as possible
[24:04] for dola to review.
[24:06] And so it's pretty
straightforward.
[24:09] And it's relatively informal
and that they're really free
[24:13] communicators or have been so
far with housing action plans
[24:16] to tell us to make sure
we're hitting criteria
[24:19] or if there's anywhere where we
would have that conversation,
[24:23] but we haven't had any issues
with other plans so far.
[24:26] So from our perspective, yours
is certainly looks like it's
[24:32] likely to be compliant.
[24:33] Then the next step is just to
actually submit it to the state.
[24:36] Once we get that feedback from
them, once you all approve it,
[24:39] we would submit it.
[24:40] They have it on File
and then it just
[24:42] becomes part of that
requirement makes
[24:46] you more eligible
for dollar grants
[24:47] and all those sorts of things.
[24:50] Great Thank you so much.
[24:51] Looking around the room, are
we comfortable with moving
[24:54] this to the next phase.
[24:56] Great yeah, I'm seeing
lots of nods everywhere.
[24:58] So thank you so much Molly.
[25:00] I really appreciate all
your effort time on this.
[25:03] Thank you all for your time.
[25:04] Appreciate it.
[25:04] Bye So our next item
on tonight's agenda
[25:09] is budget process
and focus overview.
[25:12] And I believe we'll be
turning that over to you write
[25:15] have an introduction on that.
[25:17] I do, yeah.
[25:18] Thank you.
[25:18] 
[25:21] Thanks for the time
tonight on this subject.
[25:24] This is something that we
obviously see a lot of support.
[25:28] We have a big team
that works on budget
[25:31] throughout our organization.
[25:32] And I appreciate the work of
all of our department directors
[25:35] and their teams and budget team.
[25:38] It's a lot of expertise and
a lot of great perspectives
[25:41] to consider.
[25:43] As a recap for the
council and also
[25:47] for information
for the public when
[25:49] we go through our
annual budget process
[25:52] before finally, the final act of
adopting a budget before the end
[25:57] of the year for
the following year,
[25:59] there's a lot of work
that goes into that.
[26:01] And typically that's
on average about eight
[26:03] months of work the year before
that, next that, next year.
[26:07] And so what we have
been doing internally
[26:11] is we just completed what we
call our line item reviews.
[26:15] That's when we sit down with
our extended budget team,
[26:18] with each department
individually,
[26:20] and we comb through
thousands of line items.
[26:23] So we are in essence, looking
at no matter what the amount.
[26:28] So if it's small
amounts, large amounts,
[26:31] we're looking at trends,
what we spend in those,
[26:34] if we need to spend in
those line items we look at,
[26:37] we come through our
contracts with for example,
[26:41] it contracts where you have
softwares or different things
[26:44] that we use for
different services.
[26:47] Make sure that it's
still the most optimal.
[26:50] We're finding those that we
actually work with our IT
[26:54] department that they're
awesome and they're
[26:56] coming up with sometimes
we can do that in-house.
[27:00] We can create a
dashboard for that
[27:02] or create a program for that.
[27:04] Or yes, we need that
outside proprietary software
[27:08] to accomplish that.
[27:10] So we go through those
kinds of reviews.
[27:13] We go through one
time requests, we go
[27:14] through our personnel requests.
[27:17] So it's very in depth.
[27:19] 
[27:23] Excuse me.
[27:24] Prior to that, the
first step we did
[27:27] is we had to Director to
Director presentations,
[27:30] and we really focused
on high level.
[27:33] What are the operational
pressures that each service
[27:36] area is facing.
[27:37] What are the
headwinds tailwinds.
[27:39] This was a new step that
we added into our process,
[27:42] and it was incredibly
beneficial to take
[27:45] the time over multiple weeks
for departments to take
[27:48] a significant amount of time
to walk through a presentation
[27:50] that they had put together
after working with their teams,
[27:53] and really explain where
those pinch points are,
[27:55] where the opportunities are,
where some of the challenges
[27:58] are, and that helped shape,
then going into departments,
[28:02] submitting their recommended
budgets to our budget team,
[28:07] myself.
[28:08] And then we did those
line item reviews.
[28:10] So the next steps for us is some
really heavy lifting and work
[28:16] where we try to get to
that balance recommendation
[28:19] that we bring to the
city council in October.
[28:23] So we will have our October
workshops where we devote
[28:26] to presenting our
recommended budget,
[28:29] having discussion
with the council,
[28:31] we have, we have room
for a further discussion
[28:33] on the first
workshop in November,
[28:36] and then bringing through
the formal adoption
[28:38] process of first reading
and second reading
[28:40] starting in November.
[28:42] And so that's the overview
of the full piece.
[28:45] We'll touch on that a bit
as we go through this.
[28:48] Today our CFO, our
Chief Financial Officer,
[28:52] Jay Valentine, and
I wanted to present,
[28:56] we've referred in
recent meetings
[28:58] and fairly recently multiple
times to a structural deficit
[29:04] that we are facing and different
than a cyclical deficit
[29:09] where something might
just be down for a moment
[29:11] and we have to bridge a gap and
then we're back ready to go.
[29:16] We continue to run into
being short on revenues
[29:21] for the expenses that
we have to deliver,
[29:24] the services that we are
committed to provide.
[29:27] And we have I want
to be clear, this
[29:31] is in no way trying to
point backwards at decisions
[29:34] or anything like that.
[29:35] We have the luxury of hindsight
and we have the luxury
[29:38] of trends, and we're using
those to look forward
[29:41] at how do we fix this structural
deficit tonight is we're not
[29:47] seeking any discussion on
trying to find solutions
[29:51] or anything like that.
[29:52] We're heavily involved
in that internally.
[29:53] And we'll bring those
recommendations in October,
[29:55] as I mentioned earlier.
[29:57] But we want to just be
very transparent and public
[30:00] about what the structural what
the structural deficit is,
[30:06] why we are there and how we have
to address it and addressing it.
[30:10] It's more than just
what we do in 2027.
[30:14] You'll see some trends
as we walk through,
[30:16] and I'll chime in as
Jay is presenting this
[30:18] and we're going to tag team it.
[30:20] But he'll do the bulk
of the presenting
[30:22] and we'll point out
some key factors.
[30:26] The only portion of
a solution that we'll
[30:28] be talking about tonight is the
potential, the potential use
[30:32] of fund balance for some
portion of this deficit
[30:36] that we're talking about.
[30:37] So we'll get more
in detail there.
[30:40] And then we have
a couple other we
[30:41] have a presentation after
this on financial policies
[30:45] and a new financial report.
[30:46] But first we're going to walk
through this structural deficit
[30:49] and the painting, the picture
of what we are working through
[30:53] before we get back
to you all in October
[30:56] with recommended budgets.
[31:00] Excellent I think with
that, we'll be turning it
[31:09] over to our CFO, Jay Valentine.
[31:11] 
[31:14] Thank you all.
[31:15] 
[31:22] So as Mike laid the
groundwork, I just
[31:25] want to go through the
challenge and we're going to be
[31:29] very transparent about this.
[31:31] And the slides will
speak for themselves,
[31:33] but I'll go through them.
[31:34] The currently the 2027
balancing gap is $6 million.
[31:42] So if we didn't add any
new staff or any of the one
[31:45] time requests this status quo.
[31:49] We need to track the
$6 million deficit.
[31:56] When we add to that,
there are $7 million
[31:58] of additional one time
requests and 7.9 9 million
[32:04] of new positions
are salary requests.
[32:08] 5.5 million of that
is public safety,
[32:11] and the rest is
for the remaining
[32:15] pieces of the government.
[32:17] As you'll see in
some other slides.
[32:19] This is our sixth straight
year of declining.
[32:24] We had $11.3 million
surplus in 2021.
[32:28] And it's declined from there
to where we've faced a deficit
[32:34] these prior two years.
[32:37] So as Mike mentioned, when
the expenses are outpacing
[32:46] our ongoing expenses are
outpacing our revenues,
[32:49] that creates that
structural gap.
[32:51] This isn't a one year
sales tax is lagging.
[32:55] So we're having a
tough budget year,
[32:57] but we expect it to rebound.
[32:59] That would be a cyclical
type of deficit.
[33:03] Again, this is structural
that we look back.
[33:06] As Mike said, hindsight is 2020.
[33:09] The things we have
done that compound
[33:13] in terms of some
of the encumbrances
[33:15] that we've taken on.
[33:17] 
[33:20] The $6 million
gap, as you'll see,
[33:22] is largely it is
salary and benefits.
[33:28] One other thing, and we'll talk
about all this here a little
[33:31] more in depth.
[33:32] But the first responder fund,
where we have the 0.05% 7.5%
[33:40] sales tax.
[33:43] That's going to need a subsidy
now from the general fund
[33:45] that growth in public safety.
[33:48] The tax is not enough to cover
the expansion of those funds.
[33:54] So this will be
the issue will be
[33:56] the first year that the 27
that will be subsidizing
[33:59] hear that going forward.
[34:03] 
[34:06] I'm just pointing out
you can probably see that
[34:08] from the top bullet, but
that this specific piece
[34:12] of our expenses outpacing
revenues is only 23% since 2021.
[34:19] So that compounding effect
is pretty significant
[34:23] as we get to this point.
[34:24] So while revenues have
continued to grow,
[34:28] they've just grown 23%
less than expenses.
[34:34] This slide here is I did an
online seminar by Cliff Clifton
[34:40] Larson, a national
accounting firm,
[34:42] and they did a state and
local government, the state
[34:45] of the industry presentation.
[34:47] And this slide actually
came from them,
[34:49] where it talks about
the reality that's
[34:51] happening across the nation.
[34:55] Focusing on the city's
general fund growth
[34:57] is down from 7.5 fiscal year
24 to less than 1% growth.
[35:04] Currently, about 45% of CFOs
are confident meeting 26 needs.
[35:11] That means 55% aren't.
[35:14] Obviously, 60% of general
fund goes to public safety.
[35:18] And really the ARPA
ARPA cliff is here.
[35:22] The all that money that was
sloshing around in the economy
[35:28] has dried up.
[35:29] And along with that
went a lot of grants
[35:31] that were used to either create
programs or prop up programs
[35:35] or used for very
specific purposes.
[35:38] So we mirror this
national squeeze
[35:43] of slower revenue, flat
spending and the end
[35:46] of the federal relief.
[35:48] 
[35:54] As I mentioned, the recurring
operating margin has
[35:57] declined every year since 2021.
[35:59] And this is graphically
how that's depicted.
[36:03] As you can see,
starting in 2025,
[36:06] we went into the fund balance
at 600,003 million last year.
[36:12] And now without doing anything
so far we're down to six.
[36:16] I want to point out that the
600,000 and the three million,
[36:20] that was a lot of council
directed uses of fund balance.
[36:27] So we did a lot of things to
get that deficit, not deficit
[36:37] to have a flat spending at 0.
[36:39] And then we added the council.
[36:41] But to do that stuff, there's
a lot of one time levers
[36:44] that have been used
to balance the budgets
[36:48] over the last few years.
[36:49] And those one time
levers, I'll just say it.
[36:52] It shields you from
reality, for lack
[36:55] of a better word
for that one year,
[36:57] but it hits you the next year.
[37:00] So that's also.
[37:02] 
[37:05] Compounded over this time.
[37:08] And one thing that
we want to point out
[37:09] is the compounding nature
began heavily in 2021.
[37:14] So while this is a trend,
what's compounded each year
[37:19] are from things
that have occurred
[37:22] or ways we balance the
budget or things we've added,
[37:26] or new expenses and
the expenses outgrowing
[37:29] the revenues along the way.
[37:32] And now we are filling those
in a much more significant way
[37:37] than we had in the past.
[37:38] 
[37:45] This is another way
of showing where
[37:49] our recurring
costs have outgrown
[37:51] our unrestricted
recurring revenues.
[37:55] It's just the same
way of showing
[37:57] a different thing that it's
a structural, not a cyclical.
[38:01] You can see it.
[38:03] You could look
back and see that.
[38:04] And like Mike said, we've
had the benefit of hindsight.
[38:09] The one time items I spoke of
would further widen that gap.
[38:14] And we not pulled those
certain one time levers again,
[38:19] that gap would be widened.
[38:23] And again, it's just a mix of
a mismatch between revenues
[38:28] and expenditures.
[38:29] 
[38:36] Just to talk some about
our revenue sources here,
[38:39] property tax has grown
unevenly since 2021.
[38:44] But we also haven't
changed our property
[38:46] tax structure in over 30 years.
[38:49] It's been eight Mills for over,
like I said, over 30 years.
[38:55] Add to that the state assessment
rate cuts under House Bill 24B,
[39:01] you can see in 2024 the
assessed value of properties
[39:06] was rising very quickly.
[39:09] And the state legislature
imposed these assessment
[39:17] rate cuts starting in 2025.
[39:21] And so you can see as the
result of that has hit us.
[39:28] Had the race not been there,
we got our assessment,
[39:31] our mid-year assessment, which
is an estimate from the County
[39:34] that didn't have that.
[39:35] We faced about $800,000
hit to our funds.
[39:40] I'll also add on top of
that some other things out
[39:46] of our control is the cannabis
tax that we receive 10% share
[39:51] of the state tax collected.
[39:54] That got pulled back
to 3.5% last year.
[39:58] And this year as
of July, they took
[40:00] the state took the rest of it.
[40:03] So we received we don't
receive any property tax.
[40:06] That's a 200 plus
$1,000 hit there.
[40:11] I guess how to say that.
[40:13] So fund balance.
[40:25] The fund balance I've
charted back from 2016
[40:29] from a low of 2017 to 20.4.
[40:33] That's grown to a fund balance
of 48.5 million in 2025.
[40:41] So while we're facing
a structural deficit,
[40:45] we have found ways ace
to add to fund balance.
[40:50] 
[40:53] So good work to add
to the fund balance.
[40:59] But if it has come at
somewhat of a cost.
[41:02] Now that's funny to
have that picture.
[41:06] The gross surplus a lot of it
came from one time sources.
[41:12] I mentioned the
ARPA public safety.
[41:16] We'll talk about a lot.
[41:18] I know PD has had trouble.
[41:21] We would budget for
positions, and they
[41:24] were unable to fill
those positions
[41:25] because it's hard to recruit
and retain police officers.
[41:29] So when that money didn't get
spent on hiring police officers,
[41:34] it drops to the fund balance.
[41:35] 
[41:45] I just want to point out the
2% sales and use tax is the.
[41:51] About $56 million is what
we receive from the 2%
[41:56] and that's what needs to fund
general government operations,
[42:01] finance, HR,
community development,
[42:05] transportation, engineering,
most of Parks and Recreation.
[42:11] And now part of
that's is to fund.
[42:18] PD so this doesn't count
the public safety tax.
[42:23] So we do get some
help from that.
[42:26] But 56 million to put that
perspective, when we're looking
[42:30] at a $316 million total budget,
52 million sales tax, sales,
[42:36] and use tax isn't
it's not a whole lot
[42:41] to fund what we do from a
general fund perspective.
[42:44] We do also include the
eight month property tax.
[42:47] But as we've discussed now,
that is either leveling out
[42:51] or declining from what it was.
[42:55] The voter approved
taxes are restricted.
[42:58] And I think that
goes without saying.
[43:00] We can't utilize
those for anything
[43:04] other than what those
are restricted for.
[43:06] So the first responders,
expansion capital, community rec
[43:12] center and certain
parks fees are not
[43:17] available for
general operations.
[43:21] So we have predicting about
$4 million of tax growth.
[43:26] But by the time we add in
some of the deterioration
[43:31] of the revenues that
I've spoke about,
[43:33] we're looking at about a 1.9
increase in our revenues.
[43:38] So that's a 1.6%
which kind of falls
[43:42] in line with that kind of
national industry slide
[43:46] that I showed you earlier.
[43:49] Some other things
that complicate
[43:52] is the stalled development
at o'clock Rios.
[43:58] We're going to pay a debt
service of $1.3 million
[44:02] and 27, when the
debt service for that
[44:07] was modeled to come
from the sales tax
[44:12] and the property tax increment
that was generated by the growth
[44:17] of businesses there at that.
[44:21] And we've talked about
this as well, that we'll
[44:24] find the rural fire
contract to get 3.3 million
[44:28] revenue, that the service
costs are at least $2 million
[44:32] higher than that.
[44:33] 
[44:44] Mentioned that labor and
benefits are driving the cost
[44:48] of what we're seeing in 27.
[44:52] In fact, the operating
we're actually seeing so far
[44:56] a little bit of decline
in non-personnel operating
[44:59] expenditures.
[45:02] Compensation, as you can
see, is up 7.3 million.
[45:07] This does include a
$1.3 million placeholder
[45:11] for the compensation,
classification
[45:14] and compensation study
that's being conducted
[45:17] right now as we speak.
[45:18] 
[45:21] Health insurance.
[45:24] We're going to get a
lot more into that here
[45:26] in the next couple of slides.
[45:28] But right now, we're looking at
a major 50% type major increase
[45:33] in health premiums for 2027.
[45:43] I mentioned the fund transfer,
expanding staffing and stations.
[45:47] A new $1.3 million first
responder fund transfer
[45:51] is going to be made in 27.
[45:53] I mentioned that
it's more like three,
[45:56] but we're utilizing the
remainder 2.6 million.
[46:00] I think of the remaining
fund balance in that fund.
[46:03] The first responder fund,
so that an additional amount
[46:07] is the deficit of that fund.
[46:10] 
[46:13] A lot of the drivers.
[46:17] Station 6 and 8 community
rec center housing
[46:21] and other added programs.
[46:24] So just created
permanent obligations.
[46:26] 
[46:34] Compensation plan.
[46:35] 
[46:38] From the 2021 through to
2026 general government.
[46:43] Our annualized rate of increase.
[46:45] You can see there
what those have been.
[46:49] These are all based on
step one of our pay plan.
[46:55] There are people that come
in higher than step one.
[46:59] So that's why it's not equal.
[47:01] Each step is 3% in our
general compensation plan.
[47:07] So some are a little
bit more than that
[47:09] and some are less than that.
[47:11] But it's for that reason.
[47:14] I would add here that this isn't
because in previous budget years
[47:21] there was an over budgeting
of salaries or benefits.
[47:26] We are still not keeping up with
our market based comparisons
[47:33] and with comparisons with other
cities and in some situations,
[47:38] we don't just base
with other cities.
[47:41] We may look at other
utilities in the area
[47:44] for utilities positions and
different things like that.
[47:48] And so while that can
be looked at as well,
[47:51] that's quite the
increase is over time.
[47:55] We're also chasing what has just
happened industry wide and not
[48:00] necessarily not just chasing it
but trying to so that we're not.
[48:04] It's a significant cost as
people leave for higher pay
[48:08] with the skill sets they have.
[48:09] And then we go through the
recruitment and all the expense
[48:13] of each recruitment
and the time we lose
[48:15] and then the time for training,
all that compounds as well.
[48:20] And so for instance,
as an example,
[48:22] just taking the police
department as an example,
[48:24] there were a number
of years where
[48:26] it was very difficult to get
lateral hires recruitments.
[48:31] We've finally gotten to what we
would call more of a sweet spot
[48:35] and I would say a better
comparable in the market.
[48:40] But that is changing every year.
[48:42] So don't just get there
and then you've made it.
[48:47] If you don't keep up with
where that market is, which
[48:51] is increasing each year, you get
back right to the same situation
[48:56] we were in.
[48:57] And that can take
that can be one year
[48:59] and you're back
into that situation.
[49:01] And so that's not just for
police departments for many
[49:04] of our departments,
but just as an example
[49:07] where we actually have
seen once we get into that,
[49:10] it's not paying the
most across the state.
[49:12] It's not even it's being very
comparable considering where
[49:18] our location, considering
our size, levels of services
[49:21] and things like that,
where all of a sudden,
[49:24] we are competitive enough to
bring lateral recruitments in.
[49:29] And so that's why when Jay says
it's not always a step one,
[49:32] whether no matter what
department it's in,
[49:35] we're seeking a certain
amount of experience,
[49:37] and you have a number of
those years of experience
[49:39] in exactly that role.
[49:41] You're not going to
start at that step one.
[49:44] But if we are not
competitive in that market,
[49:49] we struggle and we're not able
to make those recruitments.
[49:52] And we've seen
that recently as we
[49:55] recruit for some of our
higher level positions,
[49:58] where we've had to
where we've gotten
[50:01] some incredible
feedback from finalists
[50:03] that were very well qualified.
[50:05] They were excited
about the area,
[50:07] excited about the organization.
[50:09] Everything seemed to look right
until they start calculating
[50:12] the move, selling a home
wherever they may be
[50:15] in the state or in the country.
[50:18] Purchasing a home here, all
those things that everybody's
[50:21] running into.
[50:22] And then with the salary
not being as competitive,
[50:25] we've had to increase those.
[50:27] And so with the Comp class
study that we're doing,
[50:29] we don't anticipate it won't be.
[50:32] Every position is
going up, but we do.
[50:34] We anticipate that some of
those market adjustments
[50:38] will show where we
might be lagging
[50:41] in some of those positions.
[50:44] As Mike discussed.
[50:48] We had to make market
adjustments and in PD and fire
[50:53] in order to help recruit
and retain those.
[50:57] So as you can see
that the annualized
[51:00] increases are different
from the general government.
[51:05] And I think we've
explained why that is.
[51:07] And it's actually worked our
police chief and fire chief.
[51:14] So that's just for
comparison's sake.
[51:17] 
[51:26] OK health care costs.
[51:29] And I have.
[51:30] I have Shelly
Carrasquilla behind me,
[51:32] and Brandon has finance director
and Matt Martinez, our budget
[51:38] manager, who are all very
well versed in this problem
[51:42] because they've been
working on it all year long.
[51:45] We do have a.
[51:46] 
[51:49] Consultant Brown
and Brown, that what
[51:54] helps us to navigate
this and help this
[51:58] to the self-funding model
from the previous fully
[52:01] insured model.
[52:03] And we made that move
to self-funded when
[52:08] our Cigna rates were I think.
[52:13] What says 41% That was what
our renewal was going to be.
[52:18] So we went to a
self-funding model.
[52:21] And I think the
only thing that we
[52:27] probably are not the only
thing that we didn't do.
[52:30] We should have done is put
more seed in that fund more
[52:35] to have a larger
fund balance, to be
[52:37] able to ride the tide with the.
[52:42] Sometimes fluctuation in high
claim costs to ride that wave.
[52:48] But you can see the.
[52:49] 
[52:52] Rising costs here.
[52:53] 
[52:56] Now for 26.
[52:58] We need $1.2 million to restore
the insurance fund to 0.
[53:05] That's 25% Our costs are
25% above what was projected
[53:11] for 2026 to where
it's $2,528 per
[53:17] employee per month,
compared to the $2,028
[53:23] per employee per month.
[53:24] 
[53:29] That red dot, that red
line is what's needed
[53:32] to restore the fund to 0.
[53:35] So one thing that we did
ask Brown and Brown to do
[53:39] was what would have happened
if we would have stayed
[53:43] in a fully insured model.
[53:46] And so they went back
and made that decision.
[53:50] And we've self-funding
still saved us $5.8 million
[53:56] over that time.
[53:58] So we have it was
the right choice.
[54:05] Health care is are the health
costs have been rising sharply,
[54:10] but we still save
that 85 $8 million.
[54:15] So one of the proposals
that we're seeking
[54:18] is to take that some of
that $5.8 million that got
[54:23] added to the fund balance
because of that decision
[54:27] to go to self-insured
and reinvest that
[54:32] back into that insurance fund.
[54:35] 
[54:40] A 50% reinvestment
of those funds.
[54:43] That's what that
graph is telling you,
[54:44] would give us a $1.94
million and a 75%
[54:50] reinvestment, 3.4 million,
and I'll let that slide.
[54:54] Am I missing anything there.
[54:56] That's a good summary.
[54:57] Jay, could you go to the
slide before real quick.
[54:59] I just want to reiterate
a couple things here.
[55:03] When it comes to this.
[55:05] So just to make
sure everybody's on
[55:08] and anybody watching go
into self-funded means
[55:11] that when we may have a
contract with Cigna for example.
[55:17] So an employee goes
to a health provider,
[55:21] they provide their
insurance card,
[55:23] but Cigna is not
paying the claims.
[55:26] We pay those claims.
[55:28] And so when you make
that transition,
[55:30] you have to fund a fund
balance with enough
[55:34] to pay for those claims that may
come before all the fees you're
[55:38] collecting each month,
where each employee is
[55:40] paying what their fee
is, where the city's
[55:42] paying another portion.
[55:44] And so when we did that shift
with the 2020 of hindsight,
[55:51] even at that time,
my understanding
[55:54] is Brown and Brown.
[55:55] And there were recommendations
that we fund that fund balance
[55:58] more than we chose to do.
[56:01] So we went a little
more aggressive.
[56:03] And then those claims were more.
[56:06] But during that time we
had savings throughout that
[56:11] went into fund balance.
[56:13] So we're not saying we need
to take fund balance to make
[56:16] those annual one time expenses.
[56:19] Because it's two part.
[56:21] We didn't put enough
in to start with.
[56:24] And have we done that we
would be at a better spot.
[56:28] And then there's the portion
of increased costs and claims.
[56:32] So we want to replenish that
fund so that we're in a better
[56:37] position for where that
fund where the health
[56:40] insurance fund should be.
[56:42] And then of course,
there's then we
[56:45] have to address those
ongoing increases
[56:47] in claims as they were.
[56:49] But we didn't fund it
enough at the start.
[56:52] And we can clearly see that.
[56:53] We also can see, as
the slide before said,
[56:57] is that we know that if
that we saved 5.8 million.
[57:05] So yes, expenses,
claims have gone up.
[57:08] But we also but we
also save 5.8 million.
[57:11] And if we stayed
fully insured, we also
[57:14] know that some of the other
things that we've added,
[57:18] such as some fixed cost for
benefits like a health clinic
[57:25] that every employer we spend.
[57:28] I think it's 43% less on
each employee that visits.
[57:34] Is it.
[57:34] We saved $4,000.
[57:36] Sorry yeah, we save
4,000 per employee.
[57:39] So we see these very
specific savings.
[57:42] When we use these fixed costs
versus making these full claims.
[57:46] And so we have the right model
and we have the right focus
[57:52] on where we can add
minor expenses to reduce
[57:56] much larger claim expenses.
[57:59] But part of that takes some
investment in those fixed areas.
[58:04] But it also means rightsizing
this fund balance that
[58:09] was created during times
where we were also increasing
[58:13] our overall fund balance.
[58:15] So we don't see this as being
something we want to come back
[58:18] to year over year and say we
need to take more fund balance
[58:21] and put towards this.
[58:22] We're looking at it as a fixing
what added to getting us there
[58:29] outside of the piece
of increased claims
[58:33] so that we're in a much
better spot moving forward.
[58:37] Outside of seeking
out competitive pay
[58:41] are by far our
strongest component
[58:45] of retaining employees
as our health insurance
[58:49] and benefits that
come along with that.
[58:51] So drastic changes
there could cause
[58:53] even bigger swings than
minor than where the pay
[59:00] moves as we move forward.
[59:03] So it's a pretty
significant component.
[59:05] We just want to reiterate
over and over that this is not
[59:09] to say we want to
use fund balance
[59:11] for continuous ongoing
costs, but it's to say,
[59:14] hey, we increased our
fund balance during a time
[59:17] where we had in the
one year we started,
[59:21] we chose to save and try
and reduce by not putting
[59:25] enough in fund to start with.
[59:28] Which caught up to us
within those three years.
[59:30] 
[59:36] Yeah that's right.
[59:37] I did it on my own.
[59:40] I just want to reiterate
to what you said
[59:42] about when we were fully insured
and we had the clinic operating.
[59:47] We didn't have access
to all the data.
[59:51] That was sickness on that data.
[59:54] Now we're self-insured.
[59:55] We own that data.
[59:56] So we could very succinctly
tell somebody that utilizes
[1:00:03] the clinic compared to somebody
that doesn't utilize the clinic.
[1:00:06] And what a difference
that makes.
[1:00:08] So we're obviously making
efforts regardless of budget.
[1:00:14] We're just start
getting these more
[1:00:18] people engaged in that
clinic and ways to do that.
[1:00:21] 
[1:00:26] And I would say that it's
working because now we're
[1:00:29] running into the challenge of
it's hard to get into the clinic
[1:00:33] because we went from
people getting used to
[1:00:35] and starting to use it to now
heavily using it to where if we
[1:00:39] want to see more
of that savings,
[1:00:40] we have to expand that
opportunity for more
[1:00:42] of our employees to be able to
get in and utilize that as well.
[1:00:47] So early in the presentation,
when Mike mentioned the director
[1:00:51] to Director presentations
and he talked about that
[1:00:55] the headwinds and the
operating pressures,
[1:00:58] these six kind of stood out.
[1:01:01] The workforce costs are
rising across every fund.
[1:01:07] It's the largest driver
recruiting and retention.
[1:01:14] Turnover near 12% It's
102 to fill vacancies.
[1:01:21] It's just harder and harder
to recruit growth ads
[1:01:27] like we mentioned growth
ads, permanent obligations.
[1:01:30] We talked about Lane
miles and 53 park acres,
[1:01:36] with roads and medians and
those needed maintained.
[1:01:40] 15 subdivisions.
[1:01:42] Police calls are up 20% So
public safety commitments
[1:01:49] exceed dedicated revenues.
[1:01:51] I've mentioned that.
[1:01:53] And then our aging assets and
rising technology costs fleet.
[1:01:58] Our fleet average 14.2 years
versus 7 and 1/2 to eight
[1:02:04] year target on replacing that.
[1:02:07] And that's one of those
that we need to get
[1:02:11] back to when funding was.
[1:02:14] Budgeting was tough.
[1:02:16] I think fleet was and facilities
was a good way to say, wow,
[1:02:22] those cars will last
a little longer.
[1:02:25] So we won't fund that
to a certain point.
[1:02:30] And then also mandates at
work without the funding.
[1:02:34] As you can see, there's
40 law enforcement
[1:02:36] Bills, state housing laws.
[1:02:40] Water rules, all of that.
[1:02:42] We did also talk about
delivering efficiencies
[1:02:46] as one of the pillars.
[1:02:48] And so it's great to see
those are already taken hold
[1:02:55] with almost every department.
[1:02:58] It's just not enough right
now to close a $6 million
[1:03:02] operating deficit.
[1:03:05] I just want to highlight that
there's been an heavy effort
[1:03:08] across the
organization, and we've
[1:03:11] been thrilled with
the creativity
[1:03:14] and the recommendations
the departments have found,
[1:03:18] and finding savings
and efficiencies
[1:03:21] and taking things on our own
that we've been able to create,
[1:03:25] whether it's help from
it or efficiencies
[1:03:28] in reporting and finding
ways with sometimes
[1:03:32] with other software
or whatever it may be.
[1:03:36] I also want to reiterate that
there's been a number of years
[1:03:40] where each of the
departments have
[1:03:43] made small cuts to try and make
each of those years efforts.
[1:03:48] And so where services
maybe will reduce,
[1:03:52] there were two different time
frames where police services
[1:03:56] were reduced to just
to keep up with calls
[1:03:59] and all that continues
to that to this point.
[1:04:06] It's not.
[1:04:07] When you look back at
this, it's not surprising
[1:04:09] that where we are right now, if
we take those one time requests
[1:04:13] and/or the personnel
requests and then just the
[1:04:20] carry over with
keeping everything
[1:04:22] flat that we're pushing,
18 million last year
[1:04:26] it was 14 million.
[1:04:27] And it was a little bit
less the year before.
[1:04:29] And it's because these
things have compounded.
[1:04:32] There's been years where when
we purchase our vehicles,
[1:04:35] we know that we have to pay
ourselves a certain amount
[1:04:38] every year so that when you
have to replace that vehicle,
[1:04:41] you have that in the fund.
[1:04:43] And that doesn't mean that we
replace exactly the same amount
[1:04:46] evenly divided every year
of all of our vehicles
[1:04:49] or all of our equipment.
[1:04:50] So those fund balances grow.
[1:04:52] And in the past,
those fund balances
[1:04:56] were the funds from
those were used
[1:04:58] to help balance
that year's budget
[1:05:02] and then never replenished.
[1:05:03] And so there's some of
those types of things where.
[1:05:06] And it's not to say
I'm not trying to say
[1:05:09] that was a poor decision.
[1:05:10] It's when yours are
tight and trying to make
[1:05:13] those kinds of balancing.
[1:05:15] Sometimes that's what
goes, oh, we don't have
[1:05:17] to spend that much this year.
[1:05:19] Can we make this work.
[1:05:20] Can we squeeze
one more, one more
[1:05:21] year without adding
that position,
[1:05:23] even though we're clearly beyond
we can see it in the overtime.
[1:05:28] We can see it in the hours
worked and the shifts
[1:05:31] and not being able to cover
it depending on whatever area.
[1:05:34] But we make it work.
[1:05:35] And we make it work.
[1:05:36] And then we make it work.
[1:05:38] And all that continues
to come compound
[1:05:41] into where we're at today.
[1:05:44] Also, some of the
director, the director
[1:05:47] figures that were reported
in the presentations
[1:05:50] to one another.
[1:05:52] Again subdivision growth.
[1:05:53] There's 15 new subdivisions
plotted since January
[1:05:57] one of 25 annexations.
[1:06:02] City limit.
[1:06:02] It totals 41 3 square miles.
[1:06:08] You can see the fire response
area is 80.4mi and EMS responses
[1:06:13] 649mi for every 100 new homes
adds about 31% and annexation
[1:06:22] continues in multiple
areas in town
[1:06:25] that just adds more pressure
to fire the call volume.
[1:06:29] I won't read them all
to you, but number 4,
[1:06:31] you can see the call volume
up, police calls for service.
[1:06:36] 
[1:06:39] Everything is rising
and the infrastructure
[1:06:44] based on annexation and growth.
[1:06:46] And that also has
street lights, all that.
[1:06:53] So growth adds those reoccurring
costs as well that this
[1:07:05] is where we are right now.
[1:07:07] 
[1:07:12] We get the director
presentations.
[1:07:15] We get the Department
submissions
[1:07:17] and line item reviews.
[1:07:19] We're going to go
back in September
[1:07:21] and start to do
some prioritizing
[1:07:24] and get some balancing done.
[1:07:28] And then we'll be
back in October.
[1:07:30] The first part of November
sit with you all kind of.
[1:07:37] See what we've done
during that time
[1:07:39] and then come up with
a solution, which
[1:07:41] we will to fix all of this.
[1:07:44] 
[1:07:46] I would just add
that and Jay touched
[1:07:50] on this at the very beginning.
[1:07:52] People hear a 300 million
plus budget as a whole
[1:07:58] and think, well, OK with $360
million budget this year,
[1:08:04] whatever that may
be this next year.
[1:08:07] And you think so.
[1:08:09] Out of that much, it's not
hard to find 18 million.
[1:08:13] If you're thinking 300.
[1:08:15] But when you break
it down and we're
[1:08:16] talking the structural deficit
within the general fund,
[1:08:19] within the core
areas of government
[1:08:22] that aren't, and you take
out each enterprise fund.
[1:08:26] So all the utilities
that separate
[1:08:28] take out all of the water
and sewer you take out,
[1:08:32] of course, our solid
waste and recycling,
[1:08:35] the community recreation
center that's separate.
[1:08:38] You take all these out and you
get to these core functions
[1:08:41] where it's limited and you're
in the 50s and a million,
[1:08:46] not in 300 million.
[1:08:48] And you start trying to
figure out, where this deficit
[1:08:52] continues to amplify.
[1:08:54] Each year that I talked about
that becomes how much more slim
[1:09:01] it gets in trying to
make those minor tweaks.
[1:09:04] And then you think
about let's just
[1:09:07] say the million if everything
it'll probably be less
[1:09:11] because we don't always
have every one time
[1:09:14] ask in there or every
personnel request.
[1:09:17] But I will say these
personnel requests
[1:09:19] aren't just the wish list.
[1:09:21] This is a fire department
that knows we need x amount,
[1:09:25] but we're only asking for
this amount for this year.
[1:09:28] This is a police department
doing the same thing,
[1:09:30] knowing that if
at any given time
[1:09:33] we have 15 sworn officers
or so that are deployable,
[1:09:37] we know we need to be
about 165 deployable.
[1:09:40] So you really need to
be around 180 or so.
[1:09:43] And we're in the 1 1
30 seconds and then
[1:09:46] we have, at any given
time, not that amount
[1:09:50] to be deployable at that time.
[1:09:53] Still just asking for a
certain amount for each.
[1:09:56] For the next year.
[1:09:57] Not that whole gap.
[1:09:59] When we choose.
[1:10:00] Even though we.
[1:10:02] It might not be realistic.
[1:10:04] Even if the money were
there not to go after
[1:10:07] or not to try and budget for
more than a certain amount
[1:10:12] that we know we wouldn't be
able to recruit in a given year.
[1:10:15] But we use that money
for something else,
[1:10:17] or something new means
it's not there when
[1:10:20] we get to that future year.
[1:10:22] And so all those things
are kind of multiplied.
[1:10:24] And when you get to
that 18 or so million
[1:10:27] and you start thinking, we have
a debt payment of a million,
[1:10:29] we have 3.3 million to the
rural we can go down the line.
[1:10:36] And even though we've
added X amount for revenue,
[1:10:39] we've added X amount
for efficiencies,
[1:10:41] we're still not catching up.
[1:10:43] And so I know this
sounds more like it
[1:10:47] sounds very doom and gloom.
[1:10:48] It's meant to just show how
this has happened over time
[1:10:53] and why it's important that as
we go into our 2027 budget, one,
[1:10:58] we want to be very mindful
of what we recommend
[1:11:00] when it comes to fund balance.
[1:11:02] We've talked about that.
[1:11:03] I won't reiterate that and
don't want you to be surprised
[1:11:06] as that's a portion of it.
[1:11:08] It obviously doesn't
address at all.
[1:11:10] It also means that some of
those bigger discussions
[1:11:12] we've been having as we relook
at our economic development
[1:11:17] efforts along the riverfront
and the agreements we have,
[1:11:20] we have to relook at those.
[1:11:21] We don't want to
just continue as is
[1:11:24] without making a different steps
to seek out different solutions.
[1:11:30] It also means that we have
to look more regionally
[1:11:34] and how we work
with our partners
[1:11:35] when it comes to where we
are providing a service,
[1:11:38] not just within the city
limits, but in a very large area
[1:11:43] outside of those limits.
[1:11:45] We've talked about that with
the rural fire district.
[1:11:48] We have that agreement.
[1:11:52] We do need to provide
them the two year notice.
[1:11:55] If you remember, that
is a staff notice.
[1:11:59] Whether it doesn't necessarily
come from the council.
[1:12:02] It comes from the fire chief.
[1:12:04] And I just want to
give you a heads
[1:12:05] up that we want that we
are going to plan to give
[1:12:08] them that letter of notice.
[1:12:10] And just to clarify,
it's not a notice
[1:12:12] of we don't want to contract
with the rural fire.
[1:12:16] It's just over the
next two years,
[1:12:18] we have to get to an arrangement
that works for covering
[1:12:22] and renewing that agreement.
[1:12:25] But without giving that notice,
it makes it very difficult
[1:12:29] to take steps, actionable
steps to actually change
[1:12:34] that and work towards it.
[1:12:35] So again, our letter coming from
our chief of the fire department
[1:12:40] to the rural district
would simply cover the fact
[1:12:43] that we are completely open
to continuing to contract
[1:12:48] for the rural district.
[1:12:49] But we need to renegotiate this
agreement within the next two
[1:12:52] years to be able to continue
to do that where it's not
[1:12:55] at a loss to citizens of Grand
Junction and the services
[1:13:01] that we are providing
out of the jail.
[1:13:04] So there are multiple components
we are coming through.
[1:13:08] Also looking at dissecting what
parts of the increase expenses
[1:13:15] that we talked about that
are outpacing revenues
[1:13:17] are tied to growth.
[1:13:19] And then which parts are things
that we've added that might not
[1:13:22] be tied to growth, where we
might have to have discussions
[1:13:25] about whether or not those are
things we continue or we adjust
[1:13:29] or things like that.
[1:13:30] So again, we'll be
coming in October
[1:13:32] with all those
recommendations, and
[1:13:34] we're working heavily on that.
[1:13:36] Now we don't have
all those outlined.
[1:13:38] Usually by the time we would
do this, we would do that,
[1:13:41] but it wouldn't
be until October.
[1:13:42] We just chose to
come earlier to talk
[1:13:45] about why we're running
into this on an annual basis
[1:13:49] and be open.
[1:13:51] Because sometimes
in times like this,
[1:13:53] it's where we have to
say no to some good ideas
[1:13:55] to make sure we get
everything structurally
[1:13:58] sound to be able to
continue to provide
[1:14:00] the services at a high level.
[1:14:03] So happy to take any questions.
[1:14:06] We've got a lot of people
here that we can call upon.
[1:14:10] But again, we're not at
the point of the line
[1:14:12] item recommendations.
[1:14:14] Just really just big picture.
[1:14:18] Council Member Stan,
did you have something.
[1:14:19] Yeah I think that we really need
to start having conversations
[1:14:23] in earnest about funding
some kind of study
[1:14:25] about what it would look
like to form a fire district
[1:14:28] and remove that from the city.
[1:14:30] It's one of our biggest.
[1:14:32] I mean, it's not that
we don't want to.
[1:14:34] It's not that we don't want you,
but it would give the district
[1:14:38] the ability to go to taxpayers
and to ask for the taxes
[1:14:43] that they need to be
able to fund this.
[1:14:45] It would give much
more flexibility
[1:14:47] when it comes to
setting pay and not
[1:14:50] having to have it
compete with or inflate
[1:14:54] other departments here.
[1:14:56] I mean, it would also
potentially create
[1:14:58] some solutions for how
much we're doing elsewhere,
[1:15:01] but the city's not getting
paid for everything
[1:15:03] that was presented here.
[1:15:05] Really, the biggest
potential impact
[1:15:10] would be not having
the city continue
[1:15:13] to saddle the entirety of the
metro areas, not the entirety.
[1:15:18] That's unfair, but to saddle
so much of the entire region's
[1:15:23] fire and EMS needs.
[1:15:25] And I don't see I imagine that
what you're going to bring
[1:15:28] to us for 2027 is going
to be a short term
[1:15:31] solution for this
budget, but we are not
[1:15:34] going to be able to continue
to short term solution
[1:15:36] our way through this kind of
a structural deficit, when
[1:15:39] so much of that
deficit is coming
[1:15:40] from our fire department
and our fire assistance
[1:15:46] that we're providing.
[1:15:47] I don't know why we're not
having this conversation very
[1:15:49] in earnest and very soon, and
why we're not looking at using
[1:15:53] some of our reserve to authorize
some study to start looking
[1:15:58] at what that would look like.
[1:15:59] So that will be part of our
recommendation coming in.
[1:16:03] We're definitely having those
conversations with our partners
[1:16:06] a little more
informally before we
[1:16:09] look at a more formal process.
[1:16:11] But you're 100%
right, Councilman,
[1:16:14] that when I talk
about the fire service
[1:16:17] and how we work with our
partners in the long run.
[1:16:22] That's not a fix in
just the 27 budget.
[1:16:24] That's a bigger
picture, multi-year fix
[1:16:27] that takes multiple years
to get from here to there.
[1:16:31] And we have to get going
on that and our chief's
[1:16:37] done a great job of beginning
to reach out with our partners,
[1:16:42] gather some support because it's
not something we can do alone.
[1:16:46] It definitely has to be
with some of those partners.
[1:16:49] And we're getting
there's a reception
[1:16:51] to taking those next steps.
[1:16:52] I don't want to speak for
any of those partners yet,
[1:16:54] but there's reception
and taking that.
[1:16:56] But it would include
bringing an outside group in
[1:16:59] to work with not just the city,
but the other entities that are
[1:17:03] involved in that transition.
[1:17:05] Because you've got
to comb through what
[1:17:07] the adequate funding is in the
long term, how to merge assets,
[1:17:13] how to actually go
to the multiple areas
[1:17:17] that would be involved,
how other districts
[1:17:19] could come in the future.
[1:17:21] There's a lot of layers to
that, but you're 100% right.
[1:17:24] Without getting started
on that, we perpetuate
[1:17:27] what we're facing right now.
[1:17:29] Yeah the other piece
of this, though,
[1:17:30] is that I think it's the
best solution for our region.
[1:17:37] I think it's the best
solution for the city
[1:17:38] and for the city's
budget situation.
[1:17:40] But if it doesn't work.
[1:17:43] We also need to be looking right
now at a parallel question,
[1:17:47] which is how do we go to
the voters for an increase
[1:17:51] to our public safety tax
because of all the issues
[1:17:54] that we see with the budget.
[1:17:56] One of the most
significant is the fact
[1:18:00] that our public safety
tax is not meeting
[1:18:03] our public safety needs.
[1:18:05] And so we can do
a bunch of things
[1:18:07] to fix the rest of the budget.
[1:18:10] But that's the place where
there's the most opportunity
[1:18:12] and I can't see going to
the public and saying,
[1:18:15] hey, we need a general tax
increase for general city
[1:18:18] services because that
does not move voters,
[1:18:22] does not convince voters.
[1:18:23] The public safety sure does.
[1:18:24] And I don't want us to
wait until we conduct
[1:18:28] a very prolonged process,
looking at the potential
[1:18:32] for a fire district
and not simultaneously
[1:18:34] look at what would we need.
[1:18:36] If that proves to not be a
viable option, what would
[1:18:39] we need to be
going to the voters
[1:18:41] for from a public
safety tax standpoint.
[1:18:44] And we know that when we did the
last, when we did twoby in 2019,
[1:18:48] we didn't ask for
what we needed.
[1:18:49] We asked for less than what
we projected we would need
[1:18:52] for public safety, knowing
that we would have a future ask
[1:18:55] if all things continued
equal and they
[1:18:58] haven't just continued equal,
they've been exacerbated.
[1:19:02] So I would urge that we don't
put one on the back burner
[1:19:08] while we pursue the other, but
rather we're examining both
[1:19:10] of them as potential
options for as soon
[1:19:15] as we can get it
in front of voters.
[1:19:19] And I would just add, one of the
things we want to do in a very
[1:19:26] transparent way is
show everything that's
[1:19:31] added to the show, how we're
spending those funds show where
[1:19:34] we're short, show where our
efficiencies have been made,
[1:19:37] show where the growth and
revenue has been made so
[1:19:40] that when we do get to some
point where we have to do well,
[1:19:44] when we do potentially have
to put an ask out there,
[1:19:48] there's a lot of understanding
of all the things we've done.
[1:19:52] First to be able to then ask for
that trust and that commitment
[1:19:57] of the public that we've
made these efficiencies we've
[1:20:01] utilized new
revenue in this way.
[1:20:03] We've sought out other
opportunities and partnership
[1:20:07] to lessen the load.
[1:20:10] But this is what
it takes to provide
[1:20:12] that level of service
and the expectation
[1:20:14] that our residents have.
[1:20:16] Council Member Kennedy.
[1:20:17] Yes, we've been talking about
this for several years now.
[1:20:20] I remember when we
were talking to Cliff,
[1:20:22] looking at Clifton
fire for a while,
[1:20:24] and some of the
challenges there.
[1:20:25] We were talking about what a
district might look like then,
[1:20:28] and certainly over
the years, we've
[1:20:29] talked with the local
about that in conjunction
[1:20:33] with potential other,
things that they're
[1:20:36] looking at employee collective
bargaining incentive.
[1:20:38] So I think that the
appetite is there.
[1:20:41] I think it certainly
is a good opportunity.
[1:20:44] And I think that the
situation that we're looking
[1:20:46] at with this budget gives
us a great motivation
[1:20:50] to actually have
that discussion,
[1:20:52] as council member
stout pointed out.
[1:20:54] It's a good time to do that.
[1:20:56] And also a great point
on that to be from 2019.
[1:21:00] That was as that public
safety tax came out.
[1:21:04] So much of that.
[1:21:06] Well, first we asked
for less than what
[1:21:09] the need was because it was just
about well, what do we think
[1:21:13] will pass.
[1:21:13] Because that's always
that challenge.
[1:21:16] It was just like when we tried
to build the police department
[1:21:19] the first time, and we
were asked by the public
[1:21:23] to not build it at that scale.
[1:21:25] It was greatly brought
down to a smaller level.
[1:21:28] And now we're looking
at an enormous expense
[1:21:30] for a police annex just so
we can continue services.
[1:21:33] So when we don't ask
for what we need.
[1:21:36] That puts us, I
think in a position
[1:21:38] where we have to come back again
later with our hat in our hands.
[1:21:41] So if there's an
opportunity this time
[1:21:43] to say to really rightsize
this, not that it I mean,
[1:21:46] it's going to be
uncomfortable for all of us,
[1:21:48] but I think that's important to
look at that and to say, let's
[1:21:52] not just think about
OK, what will pass.
[1:21:54] Let's think about just doing
a really, really good job
[1:21:57] of explaining what the real
need is, because so much
[1:22:00] of that to be went
to our building,
[1:22:04] a new fire stations to
dispatch that type of thing.
[1:22:08] Really, the amount that went
to the police department
[1:22:10] in particular was
relatively small.
[1:22:13] And I don't think that
the public totally
[1:22:15] understands the way those funds
got distributed or distributed.
[1:22:19] So that's a challenge as well.
[1:22:23] So yes, I agree with council
member on those two issues.
[1:22:25] The one thing I would ask Mike
on this, when we come back,
[1:22:29] we talk about this again on that
breakdown on that $6 million
[1:22:34] structural deficit.
[1:22:35] If there's a way you
can give us a breakdown
[1:22:37] on what that's made up of as
far as and you talked about some
[1:22:43] but what we can't avoid as
far as contractual obligations
[1:22:47] debt service benefits
and things like that.
[1:22:50] If just a better
understanding of what that is.
[1:22:54] I mean, even though I mean,
we have to take it on,
[1:22:57] it's not like we can't
do that, but just so
[1:22:59] we understand what we're looking
at and use that for framework
[1:23:02] as we go forward.
[1:23:03] Any other future decisions.
[1:23:05] 
[1:23:09] Any other council
comments or questions.
[1:23:12] Council Member belfus.
[1:23:14] Thank you.
[1:23:17] Well, I gotta say that the
numbers and the turnover
[1:23:22] and the wage increases
that we're looking at
[1:23:25] are not unique to City
of Grand Junction.
[1:23:30] I mean, when I talk we
have a lot of meetings.
[1:23:33] We go to the house,
talk to what's going on
[1:23:36] and their companies
and that sort of thing.
[1:23:39] And it's kind of
in line with what
[1:23:41] I'm hearing in the community.
[1:23:43] I have it's kind of hard
to imagine that the average
[1:23:48] business that's paying insurance
benefits to their employees is
[1:23:54] paying $30,000 per employee
per year, but we are in a very
[1:23:59] high health cost area.
[1:24:03] I worked in an area
for a long time.
[1:24:06] So it's an ongoing problem.
[1:24:08] Nobody's figured it out yet.
[1:24:09] So it's very difficult.
But if at all possible,
[1:24:14] it would like to have more
detailed breakdowns of costs
[1:24:20] as far as benefits.
[1:24:21] Where we're at.
[1:24:25] Do we have I would
ask you I mean,
[1:24:28] we have an aging population
in Grand Junction.
[1:24:30] Do we have an aging
workforce at the city.
[1:24:34] Are we going to
see, a lot of people
[1:24:36] retiring in the future that
would bring younger people in.
[1:24:41] That would be a lower
end of the scales
[1:24:46] as far as salaries and wages go.
[1:24:49] What are the trends that we're
looking at in the near future.
[1:24:53] I mean, we're in an area
that we're at a crossroads
[1:24:57] where we gotta look pretty
close at a lot of this stuff
[1:25:01] and ask a lot of questions.
[1:25:03] But we have to have really
good data to do that.
[1:25:06] So just putting that out there.
[1:25:09] 
[1:25:12] One thing during engineering
and transportation director
[1:25:16] Paul's presentation to I
think it was 25% of your staff
[1:25:22] is within a couple of
years of retirement age.
[1:25:26] So to your point and also
to your point of we're not.
[1:25:31] And I had it on my second
slide about national trend.
[1:25:34] I was on a call today, a rating
call to get those cops rated
[1:25:38] by S&P and talking about
this structural deficit
[1:25:45] and what we're doing, trying
to proactively address it.
[1:25:49] And they confirm that, yeah,
we're not alone in this boat.
[1:25:55] That's what they talked to.
[1:25:56] That's what they do all day
is talk to municipalities
[1:25:59] and governments.
[1:26:01] And they said, yeah, we're not
alone in this to your point.
[1:26:04] Not unique for sure.
[1:26:06] 
[1:26:08] Any other questions.
[1:26:09] Comments yeah.
[1:26:11] One quick one.
[1:26:12] I like what Catherine was
getting at there as far
[1:26:18] as the trend, Mike and
I know it's a lot to ask
[1:26:20] and I know nobody
has a crystal ball.
[1:26:23] That's one of the things as
we look at our trajectory,
[1:26:26] it's like, OK, if we
structurally fix this step
[1:26:30] and say here.
[1:26:32] From what we know
and what we can
[1:26:35] look at going
forward to whatever
[1:26:37] extent is reasonable, right.
[1:26:39] It'd be fantastic if
there was like a five
[1:26:42] year projection understanding
with the understanding.
[1:26:45] Obviously, nobody knows
what those future revenues
[1:26:48] and expenses will be,
but with what we can know
[1:26:51] and what we can project based
on where we're at, what can we
[1:26:55] do to course adjust
to make sure if we
[1:26:58] do have deficits, that we can
shrink them as we move forward.
[1:27:02] Yeah and we're happy to share
what makes sense to get there.
[1:27:06] I just reiterate that we
have 900 professionals
[1:27:10] and departments
of finance and HR
[1:27:15] and working with
Brown and Brown.
[1:27:18] So we're diving into all that
level of detail on a full time,
[1:27:21] daily basis to get to
do the recommendations
[1:27:25] that we bring to you all.
[1:27:26] So it's not being looked at
or not being gone through,
[1:27:30] but it would take I mean,
to go through it would take,
[1:27:37] more workshops than we could
schedule in one year and hours
[1:27:40] to go through the
level of that detail.
[1:27:43] So I hope there's trust in US
that we have the right teams
[1:27:47] going through all that and then
bringing those summaries of why.
[1:27:51] Here's what we have
to recommend and
[1:27:53] here's what is leading to it.
[1:27:56] Today was not bringing
you that level of detail
[1:27:59] because it was just framing
the overall picture.
[1:28:01] But as we get into
those recommendations,
[1:28:03] we'll definitely take
these notes so that we
[1:28:05] can bring some level of detail.
[1:28:08] So you have more understanding
approving or considering
[1:28:13] those recommendations for sure.
[1:28:16] So yeah, Jake, if you
go back to the slide,
[1:28:19] that shows the kind of
surplus and deficit over time.
[1:28:24] 
[1:28:37] One four.
[1:28:39] Yeah So I guess my question is
obviously this looks really bad,
[1:28:46] but you kind of alluded to these
one time levers and deferrals
[1:28:52] that we made perhaps in some of
those like years that look good.
[1:28:55] And I'm just trying to
add context or understand
[1:28:58] the context of how much is
that maybe juicing those 2021
[1:29:03] through 2024 numbers and
maybe making that curve
[1:29:09] sharper than it is in reality.
[1:29:11] Like, do we have
a handle on that.
[1:29:15] Yeah, I'll just say speaking
for when I guess Mike and I
[1:29:19] last year jumping in.
[1:29:23] We were at a $10 million deficit
and the budget process started.
[1:29:30] And by mostly doing
one time of levers,
[1:29:36] we got that and brought
council balanced budget.
[1:29:39] Not every year is
going to be that much.
[1:29:43] But for instance,
funding of facilities
[1:29:50] was pulled multiple
years in a row.
[1:29:53] We're funding it to the point
of $1.2 million per year.
[1:29:57] Now, many years.
[1:29:59] We have $0 for facility kind of
preventative maintenance fleet.
[1:30:06] We mentioned fleet
we were having.
[1:30:11] Some enterprise funds pick
up some general fund costs
[1:30:14] because the enterprise
funds operated at a surplus
[1:30:18] and there's some tie to maybe
what the service was things
[1:30:26] like that add up in a big way.
[1:30:32] You won't miss anything.
[1:30:34] It's also accurate, though,
that we had really healthy
[1:30:37] sales tax collections in 2021.
[1:30:41] Correct I mean, the economy was
much better back then as well.
[1:30:46] Yeah double digit
growth at a time
[1:30:50] before the expenses
significantly grew.
[1:30:53] So not only inflation but prior
to there was mention of 2B
[1:31:03] and yes, that I
think we knew that we
[1:31:08] probably needed more
at that point in time
[1:31:10] from what it sounds like.
[1:31:11] What we didn't know is what
happened, a year later, and not
[1:31:16] only with following the pandemic
and inflation and construction
[1:31:20] costs growing dramatically.
[1:31:22] When we're building fire
stations but a massive increase
[1:31:27] in public safety salaries
across the country,
[1:31:31] across the state that weren't
factored into those projections
[1:31:35] and took a lot of
that extra money
[1:31:37] that would have went
to New employees,
[1:31:39] but it went to keeping
up with those salaries
[1:31:42] and then construction costs and
then all that kind of amplified
[1:31:45] at once.
[1:31:46] So yeah, you're right.
[1:31:48] 2021, some of those
years, 2020 was
[1:31:51] a great revenue year, even
though it was a tough year
[1:31:53] for a lot of people.
[1:31:54] But revenue wise it was great.
[1:31:57] And from about
2017 to that point,
[1:32:01] we were having in
this whole area,
[1:32:03] we were having the highest
year over year increases
[1:32:06] we had seen ever.
[1:32:07] And that was significant.
[1:32:10] And that was during
a time where revenues
[1:32:13] were outpacing to some degree
increase in fund balance.
[1:32:17] And then that took a big
shift where expenses obviously
[1:32:21] went to outpacing those revenues
even though they're growing,
[1:32:24] just not growing at those
rapid at the same rates.
[1:32:27] Another thing that wasn't
factored into the 2019 question
[1:32:30] was the number of public state,
reactionary public safety bills
[1:32:36] that were going to be coming out
of the legislature in ensuing
[1:32:39] years, and those made it lost a
lot of officers or professionals
[1:32:43] who left our not just our
department, but left the state.
[1:32:47] And then we had a number
of unfunded mandates
[1:32:49] that were passed down from
the state legislature to us
[1:32:52] and things that
made our jobs more
[1:32:54] difficult from a
municipal standpoint.
[1:32:56] So 20 the 2019 tax
was helpful, but it
[1:33:02] didn't contemplate the full
need in the first place.
[1:33:04] And then the need
burgeoned after that.
[1:33:07] That's a great point.
[1:33:08] And as you all probably good
from a public perspective too
[1:33:12] is part of the reason
those salaries shot up
[1:33:15] across the board is because
there were a large amount
[1:33:18] of vacancies being
created, and then it
[1:33:20] becomes very difficult to find
enough people who are qualified
[1:33:24] to do those jobs and willing to
do those jobs with those added
[1:33:28] changes that came
through state legislature
[1:33:32] and that compounded
in a big way.
[1:33:35] And so none of that was foreseen
or would have been in people's
[1:33:38] projections and
really, really snuck
[1:33:41] up at a perfect storm of really
added up to where we're at.
[1:33:49] I do want to address
the thing that you said.
[1:33:52] Just before council member
Nguyen spoke about you.
[1:33:54] Hopefully, trust us or
you hope we trust you.
[1:33:59] And not only should you
hope that we trust you,
[1:34:02] but it is built into the
structure of our government
[1:34:04] that we should be relying on
you as the experts and not.
[1:34:07] And I'd like to caution my
colleagues that we not we
[1:34:10] not request so much
detail level information
[1:34:13] that we're stepping
into your territory
[1:34:17] and to operational matters.
[1:34:19] We need to maintain
we stay in our lane
[1:34:25] and maintain our
role as policymakers
[1:34:28] and take the information
that you bring to us,
[1:34:30] ask clarifying
questions, of course.
[1:34:31] And some level of additional
detail is appropriate.
[1:34:35] But I would strongly
caution us against delving
[1:34:38] so deep into this that
we are interfering
[1:34:42] with the operational
side of things
[1:34:44] and not behaving the policy
role that we belong in.
[1:34:47] 
[1:34:50] Any other questions or
comments on this from council.
[1:34:54] Well, with that
being said, thank
[1:34:56] you so much to staff on this.
[1:34:57] We know the lift
is extremely heavy.
[1:35:00] Upper management
budget team all the way
[1:35:03] down into the
individual departments.
[1:35:05] We know this is a lot
from top to bottom
[1:35:07] and there's a lot of
sacrifices that are made.
[1:35:10] But we're extremely fortunate
to have incredible people doing
[1:35:15] this and running
these numbers to make
[1:35:16] sure that our city is in a
great position moving forward.
[1:35:21] I think we'll wrap
up that topic.
[1:35:22] With that being said, is anybody
in need of a break at the moment
[1:35:26] About an hour and a half.
[1:35:27] Yeah so let's go ahead and
take a 10 minute break,
[1:35:29] and we'll be back at 14 after.
[1:35:32] 
[1:35:35] That sounds.
[1:35:38] Good I didn't say.
[1:35:49] 
[1:46:19] We'll go over to financial
policies and reporting overview.
[1:46:23] And city manager Bennett
has an introduction.
[1:46:26] All right.
[1:46:26] Thank you.
[1:46:28] This item is really to give
council a preview and a heads
[1:46:32] up on two things.
[1:46:34] The first is we've created a
new financial dashboard that we
[1:46:39] plan to update every quarter.
[1:46:42] As you may recall, in our
strategic plan planning process
[1:46:46] and some of our objectives, we
had a goal to create something
[1:46:50] beyond just our revenue report.
[1:46:52] Beyond our budget overview.
[1:46:55] And so our Jay and the team have
worked hard on creating this.
[1:47:01] And Jay is going to give
you a preview of that.
[1:47:04] We plan to go live
with it tomorrow.
[1:47:06] And so he's just
pulled up actually
[1:47:10] what we would turn on
live on our website,
[1:47:13] like all of our
other dashboards.
[1:47:15] They're living.
[1:47:17] And as we get feedback along
the way, as we use it more
[1:47:24] because these aren't while
these are very public
[1:47:26] and for people to
gather information,
[1:47:29] we're creating them in a way
that's twofold, where it's very
[1:47:31] useful for us as
staff to utilize
[1:47:34] for you as counsel to utilize.
[1:47:35] And so as we do
that, just like we've
[1:47:38] done with the revenue dashboard,
we've added components.
[1:47:41] Our partners have received
lodging tax like the airlines.
[1:47:44] And the Sports Commission
had some good feedback.
[1:47:47] So we added some
components where
[1:47:50] you can break it down
in our lodging tax that
[1:47:54] goes to them on that report.
[1:47:56] So just like those with
this revenue report,
[1:47:58] we anticipate that we'll
probably have some additions
[1:48:02] and improvements along the way.
[1:48:05] But just going to walk you
through a preview of that.
[1:48:07] And then second to that we have
internal financial policies.
[1:48:12] These are things that get
reviewed in our annual audits.
[1:48:16] The auditors look for very
specific things and policies
[1:48:20] and ensure that we are actually
following those policies.
[1:48:24] And we had some discussion
in the last year
[1:48:29] during council
meetings about creating
[1:48:32] a adding a little more structure
or adding to a debt policy.
[1:48:38] And so that's one of the
additions we've made.
[1:48:42] We wanted to give you
a preview of as well.
[1:48:44] And again, those are
internal policies
[1:48:46] that get double checked
by our auditors each year
[1:48:49] and continually adjusted.
[1:48:53] But that was a little bit
more of a public discussion.
[1:48:56] We'll go over that with you.
[1:48:56] So Jason going to walk
through both of those
[1:48:58] and then get any feedback
that council may have.
[1:49:03] OK thank you.
[1:49:06] So in the vein of
again of transparency
[1:49:10] and fiscal responsibility,
we've created this.
[1:49:14] This is a mid-year
financial report.
[1:49:15] But we will report
this quarterly.
[1:49:18] So it'll be the quarterly
financial report.
[1:49:21] There's a lot of ways
that we can present.
[1:49:26] You've seen the comprehensive
annual financial report.
[1:49:30] That's probably the most
transparent document we have,
[1:49:34] but the most hard,
difficult to comprehend
[1:49:39] finance report from a public
standpoint, there's a lot to it.
[1:49:43] There's pages and
pages and pages.
[1:49:45] So we've created this.
[1:49:47] And trying to get
feedback just to see
[1:49:50] if this hits home for a very
high overview of where we're at.
[1:49:56] It consists of multiple tabs
across the top and overview.
[1:50:03] Just real quick here.
[1:50:04] You can see that what our
general fund adopted budget is,
[1:50:09] how much we've spent
so far and mid-year,
[1:50:14] how much of that
appropriation have we spent,
[1:50:17] and what's that look like
from the same period of 2025?
[1:50:21] So once again, a
very high level.
[1:50:23] But it does tell a story.
[1:50:27] It would tell a
lot different story
[1:50:28] if it said that we're
75% spent mid-year
[1:50:32] and we're 22% over the
prior year, for example.
[1:50:38] Just a little narrative on where
the six months landed and then
[1:50:44] we really as you
keep going into it,
[1:50:47] it'll just now we're talking
about the different types
[1:50:52] of funds the general
fund, the first responder
[1:50:54] fund, enterprise funds.
[1:50:56] 
[1:51:02] Different ways of
looking at this.
[1:51:03] Again, here's just a
different kind of chart.
[1:51:06] We've included all these
because with the Mike said,
[1:51:09] with the revenue report,
things are going to resonate
[1:51:11] even as we use this ourselves.
[1:51:13] We're like what.
[1:51:14] Be more helpful if
we could break out
[1:51:18] what enterprise funds
and this overview
[1:51:22] and see we do that over here.
[1:51:23] But on the next tab we
talked about all funds,
[1:51:30] how much revenue
we've seen to date,
[1:51:32] what percentage of that
and the tax revenue
[1:51:36] that we received to date.
[1:51:38] And again, it goes through
the different types
[1:51:42] of funds the general
fund, internal service
[1:51:44] fund funds, just different
ways of looking at this.
[1:51:49] Again, we have data associated
with these dropdowns,
[1:51:55] and those are a lot of things
that we've been asked to enhance
[1:51:57] on the revenue report.
[1:52:00] 
[1:52:05] As categories of revenue.
[1:52:07] So you can go to what
makes up those revenues.
[1:52:09] And you can go down and see
what the different categories
[1:52:14] on all of this is.
[1:52:16] And then we'll go
through it all.
[1:52:17] But just to give
you a good idea.
[1:52:19] So tomorrow you could
go through it if you
[1:52:21] think we're on the right track.
[1:52:23] 
[1:52:25] The general fund
we did an overview.
[1:52:27] This is going to
go more in depth
[1:52:29] to it on the general fund
tab, now we're breaking it
[1:52:32] out by different departments.
[1:52:36] Based on the largest spend.
[1:52:39] So the police budget compared
to what they spent this year
[1:52:43] and on down the line,
different ways to look at that.
[1:52:48] Your budget versus expenditures
numerically percent spent
[1:52:53] and how much is remaining.
[1:52:55] 
[1:52:58] Categories, labor and benefits
interfund charges capital.
[1:53:03] Again, it's looking
for that feedback.
[1:53:07] Then we'll drive down
into the public safety tax
[1:53:11] fund, the first responder fund.
[1:53:14] And same kind of data
I could go through it
[1:53:20] all but it's the
same stuff but just
[1:53:23] a different way, just different
segment that we're looking at.
[1:53:28] But we are showing the spend
between police and fire.
[1:53:33] 
[1:53:37] A little the
narrative enterprise
[1:53:39] funds is the same way.
[1:53:41] Now we break down
from the overview.
[1:53:43] We just had enterprise funds.
[1:53:44] Now we're going
to break those out
[1:53:46] so you can see them separately.
[1:53:48] But it's the see where we're at
revenues versus expenditures.
[1:53:55] Keep in mind if you're
looking at it tomorrow the.
[1:54:00] Supplementals that we've
done have not been posted.
[1:54:02] So that's why it looks like
there's a lot more not enough
[1:54:06] revenue spent appropriated.
[1:54:09] 
[1:54:12] Again going down the funds
internal service funds.
[1:54:17] 
[1:54:20] And our insurance funds.
[1:54:22] 
[1:54:25] So that's how we have it set up.
[1:54:27] And just looking for feedback
if that's the right track.
[1:54:31] Like I said, we're going
to post this tomorrow
[1:54:33] and we will keep
enhancing that and maybe
[1:54:37] there's some repetitive stuff
that will tease out of there,
[1:54:42] maybe how to dig a little
deeper into some of that stuff.
[1:54:45] But this is how we plan to
present the financial report.
[1:54:48] We also have it in pamphlet
form that we could distribute.
[1:54:55] And we realize this is
a quick glance tonight,
[1:54:59] but all of our dashboards,
as we've said a few times,
[1:55:02] we'll continue to update them.
[1:55:04] So I think as you have
more time to spend with it,
[1:55:07] or as you hear from
members of the public,
[1:55:10] you get any at the end
of any given workshop,
[1:55:12] bring it up if you have.
[1:55:14] Hey, could we break it down
this way or any questions
[1:55:16] or suggestions that we can talk
about as a group in the future.
[1:55:19] We don't expect you to
have a bunch of feedback
[1:55:22] in a quick glimpse glance at
the moment, but if you do,
[1:55:26] I'm happy to take any.
[1:55:27] It was more of a heads up that
we've got that first draft,
[1:55:31] and we'll be releasing
that tomorrow
[1:55:33] and obviously we can build
upon that as we move forward.
[1:55:39] Councilman Davis.
[1:55:41] Yeah can I just
ask, is this modeled
[1:55:43] after a particular template
that a lot of other cities use
[1:55:47] or a particular city.
[1:55:50] Do we.
[1:55:50] 
[1:55:53] Know what this is.
[1:55:56] We tried to model it off
of our revenue report
[1:55:59] for consistency,
the revenue report,
[1:56:01] meaning the sales tax report
that we've also put online
[1:56:04] now where it's modeled
after that when
[1:56:09] we talked about
efficiencies and we
[1:56:11] could do some things in-house.
[1:56:15] There used to be and the
city had purchased it
[1:56:18] back in the day, as
they say, a software,
[1:56:23] very expensive software that
would do the same thing.
[1:56:27] You can keep drilling in and
get to what kind of information
[1:56:32] you're looking for.
[1:56:33] This is set up in a way
that just categorizes things
[1:56:36] by the way that we look
at life structures,
[1:56:41] types of funds
like general fund,
[1:56:42] enterprise funds,
internal service funds.
[1:56:47] Let's take Scott
Hawkins, IT director.
[1:56:53] They've been doing these.
[1:56:56] We meet with them and
tell them what we want
[1:56:58] and what we're looking at.
[1:56:59] And Brandon, our deputy finance
director, he had a ton of input
[1:57:07] in this about the kind of
questions that he hears
[1:57:10] and what's important from
what he hears from the public
[1:57:13] and what auditors
and the say so.
[1:57:18] And then I would say, going
back to strategic planning,
[1:57:21] some of the questions were
we report on our revenues,
[1:57:25] but we're not necessarily
except for once a year
[1:57:28] reporting on what the
total expenses are.
[1:57:31] And so being able to see
revenues and expenses together
[1:57:34] on a quarterly basis
throughout the year creates,
[1:57:37] creates a lot of
additional transparency,
[1:57:40] but also ability to
measure where we're at.
[1:57:45] And then we'll have the
ability to add some narrative,
[1:57:48] because sometimes
there's certain larger
[1:57:51] expenses that we have that only
happen in the fourth quarter.
[1:57:54] So it might look, or there's
some large expenses that happen
[1:57:58] at the beginning of the year.
[1:57:59] So it might look
like, oh, we're out.
[1:58:01] So we can add those
types of notes
[1:58:02] just like we do in
some of our dashboards
[1:58:05] or the dashboard for
the strategic planning
[1:58:07] update, revenue report,
all those things.
[1:58:12] So yeah, my compliments Jay.
[1:58:16] Really and what you just
said, that last piece
[1:58:18] about the questions that were
being asked and paying attention
[1:58:23] to that from both staff and
auditors, that shows that
[1:58:27] is clear.
[1:58:27] So sincerely my
compliments to staff.
[1:58:31] My sincere appreciation
when we talk
[1:58:32] about government transparency.
[1:58:34] This is speaking
directly to that.
[1:58:37] And I sincerely appreciate it,
especially that example just
[1:58:40] looking up there at that
the police and fire funding
[1:58:44] and being able to drill down
the fact that this is updated
[1:58:48] quarterly, I think
what this will probably
[1:58:50] lead to is a lot better
questions from those
[1:58:52] that are really
interested in, hey,
[1:58:54] what's going on with the city.
[1:58:55] How are tax dollars being spent.
[1:58:58] And that type of
transparency where they're
[1:59:01] like, OK, that's where it's at.
[1:59:02] And then they may ask some
questions that they might not
[1:59:05] have ever thought of otherwise.
[1:59:06] So I think this is a great tool.
[1:59:08] I really, really
appreciate this.
[1:59:09] And obviously a lot of work
went into this and it shows.
[1:59:13] So thank you.
[1:59:14] Thank you Mary.
[1:59:15] Yeah can you scroll to I
guess maybe public safety.
[1:59:20] 
[1:59:23] Downtown yeah.
[1:59:24] Just to the bar comments
I'm wondering like.
[1:59:28] If there would be a way to
add a kind of dashed line,
[1:59:33] just showing where I know spend
is not linear across the year,
[1:59:40] but show where this report
is kind of reporting
[1:59:43] to in terms take our adopted
budget divided by 12,
[1:59:48] this is end of May show
where that line would
[1:59:52] be I guess in the budget just
to get a sense for OK fires
[1:59:56] slightly ahead in this quarter
which maybe means there's going
[2:00:01] to be less cost in the last
quarter or something like what
[2:00:05] I'm going to get instead of just
saying, yeah, 50% your target.
[2:00:11] Yeah, visually depict
that instead of only
[2:00:14] have it kind of in the tables.
[2:00:16] That was kind of
my thought as well.
[2:00:17] I think this is incredible.
[2:00:19] I think seeing possibly a line
graph that has projected spend
[2:00:23] throughout the year
with an actual spin
[2:00:26] kind of aligned to see
where we're dipping ahead,
[2:00:29] where we're dipping below.
[2:00:31] I think from a public
perspective they could see,
[2:00:35] oh, they've only spent 48%
So there's so much more room
[2:00:38] for these other services,
these other things,
[2:00:41] when in all reality
we might have
[2:00:43] a big spend around the corner.
[2:00:44] So a little better narrative
around that could be helpful.
[2:00:48] But otherwise, I think this
is fantastic between this
[2:00:51] and the sales tax reports
we get and that are going
[2:00:54] on the website, I think it's
just such a great picture
[2:00:57] to paint for our community.
[2:00:59] Yeah, thanks.
[2:01:00] And that's a good suggestions.
[2:01:02] And we could do that.
[2:01:04] And those trend lines
where are you at
[2:01:06] compared to where you should
be at this time of year.
[2:01:10] Yes, we can definitely
work on that.
[2:01:14] Any other questions or
comments from council.
[2:01:16] 
[2:01:20] All right, we'll move on then
to city council communications.
[2:01:24] 
[2:01:27] We did have one more on just a
brief overview of it's still.
[2:01:33] Oh yeah.
[2:01:34] Yeah I'm sorry.
[2:01:35] I should have thrown
that back to you.
[2:01:37] City manager Bennett.
[2:01:39] Yeah that's OK.
[2:01:40] This will be quick.
[2:01:43] We have gone through and updated
all of our financial policies
[2:01:49] into one document.
[2:01:50] We've added the debt
policy that was questioned
[2:01:55] at a city council meeting.
[2:01:57] I think that was questioned
about the state of New York and
[2:02:01] the parameters that they used.
[2:02:04] I'll say that our policy and the
recommendations on a jet policy
[2:02:11] is not quite as prescriptive as.
[2:02:16] You can't go over a certain
percentage of your revenues
[2:02:20] because they feel that every
organization is different
[2:02:25] with different revenue streams.
[2:02:28] And so the policy that we have
is kind of that talks a lot
[2:02:34] about what we do internally.
[2:02:37] It talks about the
role of council
[2:02:39] and when we bring that to
you, and what kind of debt
[2:02:46] can we even bring.
[2:02:47] It's long term financing
for capital projects.
[2:02:50] I think I mentioned that
I'm going to ask a sales
[2:02:53] tax for general government.
[2:02:55] We don't just go get
a debt because we're
[2:02:57] facing a structural
those kind of things.
[2:02:59] And what type of
debt would it be.
[2:03:04] Would it be a CLP and why.
[2:03:05] But all of this stuff is
a framework that we then
[2:03:09] bring to council to decide.
[2:03:11] But one of the things
that the policy, the more
[2:03:15] prescriptive part is where they
talk about what percentage,
[2:03:20] but how much debt is too much.
[2:03:22] And is it based on how much
revenue that your government's
[2:03:26] receiving.
[2:03:27] And even S&P stopped
doing it that way.
[2:03:32] Measuring it that way
because there's so
[2:03:34] many variables that go into it.
[2:03:38] But a rule of thumb that
will start that I think
[2:03:42] would be important
that we should
[2:03:44] it's bringing this to you
as part of the policy,
[2:03:47] not just where we're at.
[2:03:49] Like, what would
this debt do compared
[2:03:51] to where we're at from revenue.
[2:03:53] And for example, below
10% is commonly viewed.
[2:03:57] This is from the
GFOA commonly viewed
[2:04:00] as conservative debt burden.
[2:04:03] A 10 to 15 suggests debt
should receive closer scrutiny,
[2:04:07] and above 15% to 20% often
raises concerns about reduced
[2:04:12] budget flexibility.
[2:04:14] The cities right now are.
[2:04:16] Our debt burden is
7.96% of revenues.
[2:04:22] However, if we had two
Rios we're paying it.
[2:04:28] So if I include that it goes
to 8.59% even though that's a.
[2:04:36] Not considered necessarily
city of Grand Junction debt.
[2:04:39] But we're paying it.
[2:04:41] So from that standpoint,
we do have a policy.
[2:04:45] It's several pages long.
[2:04:47] 
[2:04:51] And this is I'll just
go just show you the.
[2:04:54] 
[2:04:56] That didn't change right.
[2:04:59] 
[2:05:06] Probably so can you adopt that
policy one that you saw in there
[2:05:10] are the financial policies.
[2:05:12] Is that able to be
shared or was it
[2:05:17] financial policies
is on the same page.
[2:05:23] When you set up the
quarterly financial report,
[2:05:27] it was on that same.
[2:05:29] You said, oh, that's not it.
[2:05:31] And then you went to the
next tab that I'm sharing.
[2:05:35] OK OK.
[2:05:37] 
[2:05:40] I'll talk to it.
[2:05:41] It's really we talk about
the purpose of debt.
[2:05:45] And again, this is a lot of
internal stuff for our staff.
[2:05:50] Amen OK.
[2:05:55] So I did Mike did it.
[2:05:58] Mike, it's on your computer.
[2:05:59] 
[2:06:02] Again, we don't have to
go through this, but.
[2:06:05] No, this is staff.
[2:06:06] What are we using debt for.
[2:06:10] The scope of this policy.
[2:06:14] The responsibilities.
[2:06:15] 
[2:06:23] Most of this is
really common sense
[2:06:25] that any prudent
municipality is going to use.
[2:06:32] I think ultimately we
can't go issue debt
[2:06:35] without coming to council
and explaining why
[2:06:39] we're doing the debt issuance.
[2:06:41] Our recommendation a lot of
this is framed around just that.
[2:06:47] What do we bring.
[2:06:49] Have we done have we
evaluated financing
[2:06:52] alternatives, for instance.
[2:06:54] The financial analysis
that supports the debt.
[2:06:58] Those kind of things
are in the policy
[2:07:00] that we're doing as staff to
bring to the city council.
[2:07:05] That makes you better
decision makers
[2:07:07] when it comes to that, including
the kind of that percentage
[2:07:11] of our total revenues.
[2:07:16] We talk about there's
an internal controls,
[2:07:21] as I mentioned financing methods
general obligation bonds.
[2:07:28] Refunding of debt
credit ratings.
[2:07:33] How we handle the bond proceeds.
[2:07:35] That's in the policy.
[2:07:37] And continuing disclosure.
[2:07:40] What we have to do from
a reporting standpoint
[2:07:42] to the MSB, who's the regulatory
agency or bond issuances
[2:07:52] and then reporting on that debt.
[2:07:55] And that's pretty
much it for the desk.
[2:07:57] But we do have one.
[2:07:58] It's in writing.
[2:08:01] That's how it's
framed for us to use.
[2:08:06] Any questions on that.
[2:08:09] Council Kennedy.
[2:08:10] Yeah, just one quick one.
[2:08:11] I just one of the things that
and I know it's not currently
[2:08:14] in place, but one
of the things I just
[2:08:15] wanted to be careful of because
there's some conversation
[2:08:18] around when this policy was
first being talked about,
[2:08:21] is it just going to
limit the city's ability
[2:08:25] to utilize every financing
option that's available to us
[2:08:29] out there, like certificates
of participation and things
[2:08:32] like that.
[2:08:32] So I just if there is a time
that we consider that that's
[2:08:36] just something I think that
we need to be careful of
[2:08:38] is to make sure
that we're keeping
[2:08:39] all options on the
table to keep ourselves
[2:08:41] as agile as we can financially.
[2:08:44] That's why we didn't
make this prescriptive,
[2:08:47] so to speak, to where
you must do it this way.
[2:08:51] We're keeping all
those this is what
[2:08:55] this does is keeps everything,
all those options open.
[2:08:59] It's very, very high level.
[2:09:05] Any other council
comments or questions.
[2:09:08] Did you have anything
to add to that.
[2:09:10] City manager Bennett.
[2:09:12] I would just say
that in addition
[2:09:13] to keeping the flexibility, it
does provide some structure so
[2:09:17] that when we are bringing
a recommendation for taking
[2:09:21] on debt, that there are
very specific things
[2:09:22] we cover as a whole.
[2:09:24] We look at the total debt,
not just that visually
[2:09:29] and how we look at are we
staying with under that
[2:09:32] 10% It's not keeping us there.
[2:09:36] But we at least should
be making a decision,
[2:09:38] knowingly understanding if
we were to go beyond that.
[2:09:42] Also what the schedules
are I mean, just
[2:09:45] making sure that we are
covering the full aspect of how
[2:09:50] that particular any new debt
affects the total budget
[2:09:54] or any other debt that we have.
[2:09:56] Everything's on a
different schedule.
[2:09:58] Sometimes new debt
as well is totally
[2:10:00] tied to a fully funded,
approved, voter approved revenue
[2:10:04] that's going to cover
that versus something
[2:10:06] like a certificate
of participation,
[2:10:08] where we're saying we're
going to take existing revenue
[2:10:11] and dedicate it to a new payment
without a new source of revenue.
[2:10:15] So being able to
dissect all that
[2:10:17] and make sure we're considering
before we make those decisions
[2:10:21] is really the basis of this and
following those best practices,
[2:10:25] so that we're making sure we're
analyzing the whole and not
[2:10:29] just one of any particular.
[2:10:32] 
[2:10:35] Well, thank you so
much for listening.
[2:10:36] I think that's great for both
council and the public to hear,
[2:10:40] considering some of the
questions we have had recently.
[2:10:43] With that being said, we will
now move on to council, our city
[2:10:47] council communications.
[2:10:48] It's an unstructured
time for council members
[2:10:51] to discuss current
matters, share ideas
[2:10:53] for possible future
consideration by council,
[2:10:56] and provide
information from board
[2:10:58] and commission participation.
[2:11:01] Council Member staff I just.
[2:11:02] This isn't about Gordon
or community liaison,
[2:11:07] communication, anything.
[2:11:08] But I was.
[2:11:10] I have to go to the East
Coast for work on the week
[2:11:14] of September 13 13th of Sunday,
so the week of September
[2:11:20] 14 and was supposed to be back.
[2:11:25] I had a flight
back for Wednesday
[2:11:26] that would have gotten me
in at Wednesday at noon.
[2:11:28] And instead I have another
thing that I have to do for work
[2:11:31] that's going to keep me there.
[2:11:32] And it involves an
evening component.
[2:11:34] So I'm not going to be here for
the I'm not going to be here
[2:11:38] nor be able to call in for
the September 16 meeting.
[2:11:42] I did my did everything I could
to try to be here for that,
[2:11:45] but work obligations won't
allow it this time around.
[2:11:49] Does that include the 14th
workshop as well that I
[2:11:52] haven't figured out
yet that we're still
[2:11:54] building the schedule
for my time there,
[2:11:57] and I'm not entirely sure.
[2:11:59] We're obviously a two
hour time difference,
[2:12:00] so I'm going to do what I
can to be here on the 14th.
[2:12:03] But the 16th is definitely
fully completed the whole day.
[2:12:09] Council Member Kennedy.
[2:12:10] Yeah, just a few things.
[2:12:11] I just wanted to let council
know that the Mesa County
[2:12:16] commissioners appointed me as
their Colorado Basin roundtable,
[2:12:20] Mesa County municipal rep.
[2:12:22] So I've been going to
Glenwood and/or remoting
[2:12:26] into the Colorado Basin
roundtable meetings.
[2:12:28] It's a lot of water
policy discussion.
[2:12:32] State engineer is involved.
[2:12:34] We have conversations around
Shoshone and some other things.
[2:12:37] So it's a great thing
to be involved with.
[2:12:40] So I'll certainly be sharing
some additional information
[2:12:43] from that.
[2:12:44] And along those lines
of water as well.
[2:12:47] I just want to mention that
the annual water seminar is
[2:12:52] coming up on September
18 for the Colorado
[2:12:57] River district puts on.
[2:12:58] So if any of you are interested
in available on September 18,
[2:13:02] tink.
[2:13:03] I think Scott's been there with
me the last couple of years.
[2:13:06] But if more, if some of
us are going to be there,
[2:13:09] we might as well put that on
our just agendize it so public
[2:13:14] knows that we're there.
[2:13:15] And then last thing
I wanted to mention
[2:13:18] is I went on a ride along
last week with Sergeant Ansell
[2:13:22] and one of his crew
teams got Dearborn,
[2:13:25] and we were in the side by side
and did the riverfront area.
[2:13:31] I'm going to share a
few pictures via email
[2:13:34] with everybody, just so they
get an idea of some of the stuff
[2:13:37] that's happening on.
[2:13:38] We're kind of on from
Watson all the way down
[2:13:40] to the area behind the skating
rink, kind of behind bananas.
[2:13:44] So just an update for
where we're at there.
[2:13:47] I thought it was very helpful,
but I have to pay my compliments
[2:13:51] to Stan and his team.
[2:13:53] Super respectful.
[2:13:55] So professional.
[2:13:57] Treat, treat people
with dignity.
[2:13:59] But also for some
of the situations
[2:14:02] that with a bunch of
pitbulls off leash, where
[2:14:05] he was just safe.
[2:14:07] But communicated effectively and
was just he was professional.
[2:14:12] I think he represented
us very well.
[2:14:13] But I just wanted to
share that with council.
[2:14:16] So you kind of know
what's going on there.
[2:14:18] Great thank you.
[2:14:19] Anything council member Nguyen.
[2:14:22] Council Member balthus.
[2:14:24] It's probably under
the workshop topics,
[2:14:27] but there continues to be
conversation and concern
[2:14:32] about flock cameras.
[2:14:35] So I think we had requested it.
[2:14:39] Come on up.
[2:14:40] Yeah all right.
[2:14:42] I've got a couple
different things.
[2:14:44] I had a DDA meeting
this last week,
[2:14:50] and some issues have come
up with the terminal project
[2:14:55] as they've been running
their vibratory roller
[2:14:57] across the site.
[2:14:59] Some of the
neighboring businesses
[2:15:01] had started to
complain about the wall
[2:15:02] shaking and plaster falling from
the ceilings, which really gave
[2:15:07] them some concern going
into the next phase
[2:15:10] where they were
going to be hammering
[2:15:13] the pillars, pile pillars.
[2:15:15] I think they're
called into the ground
[2:15:17] where it could cause substantial
vibration throughout that site.
[2:15:21] Because of that, they've
decided that's probably
[2:15:23] not the best route forward.
[2:15:26] So they are going to be
moving to a helical pier,
[2:15:28] is what they call it,
essentially drilling
[2:15:31] the pier down into the
ground, which should create
[2:15:34] far less vibration on the site.
[2:15:37] With that being said,
it's going to be
[2:15:38] about an additional $500,000,
it sounds like, to the project.
[2:15:42] So that should be coming through
to council relatively soon,
[2:15:46] I think, as a supplemental
appropriation.
[2:15:50] Then on the business
incubator side, as many
[2:15:54] of the Department of Energy is
moving out to horizon drive.
[2:15:58] It sounds like they plan
on completing that move
[2:16:00] by the end of next year.
[2:16:03] With that happening,
that kind of
[2:16:05] creates a situation for
the business incubator
[2:16:07] where they're no
longer going to be
[2:16:09] feasible to care for
that site and financially
[2:16:12] be able to handle that site.
[2:16:14] So they are looking at some
options to move currently.
[2:16:18] But they have asked the RTC
about the possibility of RTC
[2:16:25] signing over the land, deeding
over the land to the business
[2:16:28] incubator so that they
can use that as leverage,
[2:16:32] looking forward to
their next projects.
[2:16:36] So I think that's going to
be coming to council here
[2:16:38] before too long as they iron out
some of the details with that
[2:16:41] as well.
[2:16:41] But I'm hugely supportive
of that project.
[2:16:44] I think the business incubator
is paid for that property
[2:16:47] time and time again in equity
to our community and impact
[2:16:51] in our community.
[2:16:52] So I look forward to the future
of the business incubator
[2:16:55] in a more visible location, and
hopefully something on that side
[2:17:00] as well.
[2:17:02] Beyond that, that's all I've
got on council communications.
[2:17:06] Did you have anything,
council member
[2:17:07] Ballard I don't thank you.
[2:17:11] All right.
[2:17:12] With that, we will move
into next workshop topics
[2:17:15] and we'll turn it back over
to City manager Bennett.
[2:17:18] All right.
[2:17:19] At the September
14 meeting, we have
[2:17:22] an update on the
water supply element
[2:17:25] of our comprehensive plan.
[2:17:26] It's a requirement
from the state.
[2:17:28] We've been working on it
actually doesn't ironically
[2:17:33] doesn't take council action.
[2:17:34] But we want to just
give council an overview
[2:17:37] of that before we finish
the process with the state.
[2:17:41] And that added piece.
[2:17:43] So the city manager's office,
working with the utility
[2:17:46] department and
community development
[2:17:48] have been working on that.
[2:17:50] So we'll do an overview of that.
[2:17:52] We have our discussion
on local preference
[2:17:54] with procurement that night.
[2:17:57] And we also will bring
a discussion related
[2:18:00] to a recommendation we
want to bring to council
[2:18:02] for a possible policy
related to data
[2:18:05] centers and potential moratorium
on that type of development.
[2:18:10] So we have those for sure.
[2:18:12] There's a couple other items
that have been mentioned earlier
[2:18:14] that we're trying to line up if
able on that night to squeeze
[2:18:19] in there because
we're going to we'll
[2:18:22] definitely be fully focused
on budget during October
[2:18:26] and possibly that first
meeting in November,
[2:18:30] we did have a request based on
what we talked about tonight
[2:18:34] and with the first
workshop on October 5,
[2:18:38] we anticipate that there's
going to be quite a bit
[2:18:42] to walk through in
that proposed budget
[2:18:44] and likely some added
discussion and added work
[2:18:48] that we'll need to
put in before we come
[2:18:50] back to that next workshop.
[2:18:52] And so Jay and his
team have asked
[2:18:55] that if it works for council, we
would love to bump the October
[2:19:00] 19, which is the third
Monday in October
[2:19:06] workshop to the following week.
[2:19:08] So it would be the
26, Monday the 26th.
[2:19:11] So just rescheduling
our October 19 budget
[2:19:16] workshop to October
26, but we didn't
[2:19:19] want to move forward with that.
[2:19:21] If that causes if
for some reason
[2:19:23] we've got a number
of council not able
[2:19:25] to attend because we definitely
want the group there.
[2:19:28] But knowing we're probably
going to need more time
[2:19:30] in between those two with
the level of discussion
[2:19:34] we're going to be having.
[2:19:36] Anybody have a concern
over that at the moment.
[2:19:40] Looking there's a
very, very small chance
[2:19:42] of going to a conference.
[2:19:43] But at this point
it's not confirmed.
[2:19:45] And I'm not feeling confident
that it will happen.
[2:19:49] The other reminder is that
assuming we move that to the 26,
[2:19:55] but the October 5 and October
26, as we've done in the past,
[2:19:59] we would start those earlier at
4:04 PM and to have more hours
[2:20:04] in that evening to really comb
through the detail that will
[2:20:07] be presenting and discussing.
[2:20:09] So four o'clock PM,
October 5 and ninth and 26.
[2:20:14] We'll keep the second open
for any kind of last minute,
[2:20:19] last minute or of after
those two workshops,
[2:20:23] if we have to revisit anything.
[2:20:25] For the time being.
[2:20:27] Otherwise, we'll start adding in
some of those to be determined
[2:20:31] or to be scheduled items
that we have on the list.
[2:20:34] So that's all I
have for tonight.
[2:20:36] That's going to be fun.
[2:20:37] All right.
[2:20:38] With that, let's move
into other business.
[2:20:41] Request for proclamations.
[2:20:43] The first one being
the International
[2:20:45] Overdose Awareness day.
[2:20:47] And that's a social
proclamation.
[2:20:48] Nation do we have a staff
presentation on that
[2:20:54] or is that just conversation
amongst council.
[2:20:57] Is everybody comfortable with
that as a social proclamation
[2:21:02] motion.
[2:21:04] Seeing lots of head nods.
[2:21:05] So with that, we will
move to another request
[2:21:09] for proclamation.
[2:21:10] And that is white Cane Day,
another social proclamation.
[2:21:13] We've done this one for years,
seeing lots of nods on that
[2:21:17] as well.
[2:21:18] So I think we're
good on that front.
[2:21:20] And then to wrap things up, we
will be with the Grand Junction
[2:21:23] housing authority
interview team discussion
[2:21:26] on recommended appointment.
[2:21:30] That was me, Laurel.
[2:21:31] Yes, we did the
interviews last Tuesday.
[2:21:34] We only had two
applicants for one spot,
[2:21:39] and we ultimately decided
to appoint Randall based
[2:21:45] on the input from the chair.
[2:21:49] He basically they were both
super qualified, but kind of
[2:21:55] leans towards Randall because
of the social work aspect,
[2:22:00] because they're the
other candidate had
[2:22:04] more of a financial background.
[2:22:06] And there's I guess based on the
makeup of the board right now,
[2:22:09] there is a lot of that.
[2:22:11] So both Laurel and
the board chair
[2:22:14] were most comfortable
with appointing Randall.
[2:22:17] So that's what.
[2:22:20] And just to make sure
that everything's clear,
[2:22:22] we're talking Randall.
[2:22:22] Yeah Yeah that's great.
[2:22:26] Any other questions or
comments about that.
[2:22:29] All right.
[2:22:30] Check back in with
city manager Bennett.
[2:22:32] Did you have anything to add on.
[2:22:34] All right.
[2:22:35] With that, we are adjourned.
[2:22:38]