[00:00:04]
WE'LL CALL THE SPECIAL BUDGET MEETING TO ORDER FOR SATURDAY AUGUST FIRST. WE'LL START WITH ROLL CALL.
>> COUNCIL MEMBER REYNOLDS? >> HERE.>> COUNCIL MEMBER
>> HERE. >> COUNCIL MEMBER KING?
>> COUNCIL MEMBER PORTERFIELD? >> HERE.
>> COUNCIL MEMBER SNYDER? >> HERE.
. NO PUBLIC COMMENT? OKAY. APOLOGIZE TO STAFF.
THAT WENT A LONGER. WE WERE EXPECTING JUST A FEW MINUTES BUT I HOPE STAFF IS APPRECIATIVE LATER ON FOR THAT
[4.1. Discussion and possible action on 5-year CIP. (Kate Moriarty)]
MEETING. WE'LL START WITH ITEM 41 POSSIBLE ACTION ON A FIVE YEAR CIP?>> WELL MAYOR AND COUNCIL. WE ARE PRETTY EXCITED TO BE WHERE WE'RE AT RIGHT NOW IN THE STAGE OF THE BUDGET.
THIS IS THE FIRST YEAR THAT I THINK THAT YA'LL HAVE PREDOMINANTLY DONE THE BULK OF THE CIP WORK BEFORE WE EVER GOT HERE, SO WE'LL BE PRESENTED ON THAT.
KATE RAN OUT SO I'M GOING TO PAUSE AND NOT PAUSE BUT I'M GOING TO, YOU KNOW, LET TIME GO BY A LITTLE BIT.
SO SHE CAN GET BACK HERE AND GET PREPARED TO PRESENT BUT GENERALLY SPEAKING WHAT YOU SHOULD HAVE BEFORE YOU IN THE CIP IS WHAT COUNCIL HAS DISCUSSED THE LAST TWO OR THREE MEETINGS. HERE SHE COMES NOW.
THE FUNDING ITEMS HAVE BEEN HIGHLIGHTED FOR THE YEAR AND ALL THE CHANGES THAT COUNCIL HAS MADE UP TO THIS POINT ARE NOW IN THE DOCUMENT WITH I THINK ONE EXCEPTION AND THEN THAT'S WHERE I'LL PASS IT OFF TO KATE SO SHE CAN ACTUALLY PRESENT.
>> GOOD MORNING. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES.
I THINK THE PRIMARY POINT OF CONVERSATION UNTIL COUNCIL SPECIFIC TO CIP AT THE PRIOR POINT OF DISCUSSION THE CIP HAD A MOTION TO THE PROJECTS MOVING UP.
I DID SOUND OF SEND OUT VERIFICATION THIS WEEK THAT THE TIMELINES OF THOSE HAVE SHIFTED SIGNIFICANTLY BECAUSE OF THAT SO THAT BEING SAID, I WANTED TO MAKE THE OPTION TO COUNCIL IN LIEU IF YOU WANTED TO MOVE ANYTHING ELSE UP UNDER TRANSPORTATION TO START CONSTRUCTION NEXT YEAR.
I CAN QUICKLY IDENTIFY WHAT THOSE PROJECTS ARE.
SO SPECIFICALLY I THINK THE THREE OF THE FOUR JOINT PROJECTS BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE EBC THAT ARE NOT IN CONSTRUCTION YET THAT'S WHEN WE ARRIVED ABOUT AND THEN THE EXTENSION AND INTERSECTION, SO THE EXCHANGE INTERSECTION IS EFFECTIVELY FINISHED WITH DESIGN. WE'RE JUST WAITING ON DRIVEWAY ACQUISITION. THERE'S CURRENTLY NOT CONSTRUCTION FUNDING INCLUDED IN THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR SO THAT'S AN OPTION IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MOVE THAT UP.
WE ALSO HAVE T-18 AND THE-19. 18 IS CR 163.
T-19 IS CR 199. THEN THE LAST ONE IS T-21.
THOSE THREE THAT I JUST LISTED, YOU ALL PREVIOUSLY ELECTED TO DESIGN AND THEN SHELF. SO I FULLY RECOGNIZE THAT, SORRY. THERE MAY NOT HAVE BEEN INTENTION TO CONSTRUCTION BUT I WANTED TO ILLUSTRATE THOSE FOR YOU IN CASE YOU WANTED TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION AND I'LL LEAVE
IT THERE. >> WELL I'D BE LIVING IN THAT AREA. I'M NOT GOING TO SAY I KNOW EVERYTHING ABOUT TRAFFIC FLOWS BUT I WOULD BE INTERESTED IF WE CAN GO AHEAD AND DO THE EXCHANGE ROUNDABOUT.
WE CAN DO THE LIVE OAK EXTENSION WITH THE SIGNAL AND WE CAN DO A PORTION OF ALLIANCE, I THINK THAT WOULD SUIT A LOT OF PEOPLE BETTER THIS YEAR THAN LEMMER LOOP BEING IMPROVEED IS MY
PERSONAL THING. >> I AGREE WITH THAT.
>> IT'S JUST THAT IF WE MOVE THAT, MY ONLY REQUIREMENT FOR ME IS THAT THOSE ARE ACTUALLY GOING TO BE BID AND GOING INTO CONSTRUCTION VERY QUICKLY BECAUSE WE'RE IF WE'RE SITTING HERE THIS TIME NEXT YEAR WE HAD A RIGHT-OF-WAY OR HOPED TO GET
[00:05:01]
STARTED AND SOMETHING CAME UP. I WOULD BE DISAPPOINTED BECAUSE IT WOULD BE ANOTHER YEAR WITH NO ROAD AND THREE MAJOR ROAD PROJECTS THAT PEOPLE SEE AND ALL THEY REALLY WANT IS PROGRESS.LEMMER LOOP. ONCE WE PUT THE NORTHBOUND RIGHT TURN IN, TRAFFIC KIND OF WENT AWAY UP THERE.
IT'S STILL BUDDY BUT THE COMPLAINTS ALL WENT AWAY AND OBVIOUSLY THAT'S GOING TO BE NEEDED THE FUTURE AND MAYBE A YEAR OR TWO AWAY SO I'M NOT SAYING WE'RE KICKING IT DOWN THE ROAD BUT LIVE OKAY EXTENSION WOULD DRAMATICALLY TAKE TRAFFIC OFF 79 IN MY OPINION AND IF YOU ARE GOING TO DO THAT YOU MIGHT AS WELL DO THE EXCHANGE ROUNDABOUT ALSO BECAUSE OTHERWISE, YOU ARE PUMPING THROUGH A LOT OF TRAFFIC IN AN INTERSECTION THAT'S NOT BUILT FOR IT.
>> AS FAR AS LIVE OAK GOES WE'RE EXPECTING A SUPPLEMENTAL AT THE AUGUST 20TH MEETING AND THAT DESIGN IS EXPECTED TO COMPLETED BY THE START OF THE NEW YEAR.
>> TWO OF US SPOKE. ZEPEDA? COUNCIL MEMBER THORNTON? DON'T WANT TO DRAG THE MEETING ON. SOUNDS LIKE EVERYONE IS OKAY.
SEEMS TO ME THE MAJORITY OF THE TRAFFIC IS WHATEVER THE ROAD THAT IRON WOOD BUILT, PARKER I THINK IT'S CALLED FROM PARKER SOUTH, SEEMS TO BE THE TRAFFIC. PEOPLE ARE USING IT TO GO TO HOOKY AND AN ACADEMY AND NORTH OF THAT AT LEAST TODAY THERE'S NOT A LOT IN IT AND IT APPEARS THAT WOULD BE THE MAJOR COST WILL BE THE NORTHERN PART OF THAT ROAD WIDENING BECAUSE NOW WE'RE GETTING TO RETENTION POND ANSWER DRAINAGE DITCHES AND BIG-TIME ELEVATION. BEFORE THAT AND I'M NOT TRYING TO OVERSIMPLIFY BY DRAINAGE SYSTEMS THAT HAVE TO BE PUT IN.
THE RIGHT-OF-WAY LOOKS APPROPRIATE AND EXCEPT WE RUN INTO RIGHT AWAY ISSUES. I WAS TELLING THE CITY MANAGER IF THE PLAN IS DONE I DON'T THINK ANYTHING STOPS YOU FROM BUILDING HALF OF SOMETHING BUT YOU KNOW AT SOME POINT WE HAVE TO COME BACK AND BUILD THE OTHER HALF THAT WAY WE GET THE BULK DONE. I KEEP FIGURING OUT HOW WE TAKE A FIVE MILLION AND MAKE IT THREE? ARE WE SPENDING 10 MILLION WHEN WE COULD FIX THE FIRST FEW YEARS? ARE WE SPENDING TEN ON A 2,000,000 ISSUE AND IS CAN WE DO A 2,000,000 FIX TODAY AND KNOW KNOWING COSTS WILL GO UP BUT THAT FREEZE UP $7 MILLION FOR LEMMER LOOP. WE CAN KNOCK OUT THREE PROJECTS YOU ARE SAYING NEXT YEAR IN EXCHANGE FOR ONE THAT REALLY MAY NOT BE WARRANTED TODAY. IT WOULD BE NICE TO HAVE IT CAUGHT UP AND BE DONE AHEAD OF TIME BUT I DON'T THINK WE CAN GET AT OUT POINT UNTIL WE FIRST GET THE STUFF WE ALREADY SHOULD
HAVE HAD DONE. >> DO WE NEED A MOTION ON THAT?
>> YEAH. WE ARE GOING TO NEED A MOTION ON
THAT? >> IS THAT YOUR MOTION THEN?
>> YEAH. SO YOU WOULD BE MOVING THE T-15 FROM FISCAL YEAR 27-28 TO FISCAL YEAR 2027 AND THEN YOU WOULD BE MOVING LIVE OAK RECONSTRUCTION THAT'S T-09.
>> OKAY. >> T-79 COMBINED? INTERSECTION AT EDGE SCHMIDT TO THE END OF LIVE OAK.
THAT'S THE EXTENSION OVER THERE. I WAS LOOKING AT THE ONE THAT WAS FOR DOWNTOWN SO T-46, T 79 NOW YOU'D BE MOVING 7 MILLION OUT OF FISCAL YEAR 27-28 INTO 26-27.
AND THEN - >> LOOP WOULD BE MOVED OUT.
>> NUMBER OF LOOPS YOU WOULD BE MOVING OUT, CORRECT.
SO YOU WOULD MOVE BOTH OF THOSE AND THAT'S T-47 AND THE-48 AND THOSE WOULD MOVE TO FISCAL YEAR 28-29
>> FROM BUDGET YEAR TWO TO BUDGET YEAR THREE ON THE
>> AND THEN YES? >> YOU WANT TO MAKE THOSE ONE MORE YEAR? I MOVED OUT ONE YEAR FROM OUR LAST SESSION SO THEY WERE SITTING IN HERE ONE 26-27 BASED
[00:10:03]
ON OUR LAST COUNCIL MEETING WE MOVED IT TO YEAR TWO 27-28.NOW ASSUMING THE DESIGN IS THROUGH -
>> SO YOU MOVED THOSE OUT BUT YOU DID NOT MOVE THINGS IN?
>> CORRECT >> THOSE ARE ALREADY MOVED OUT
THEN >> WE JUST, SO THEN THAT MOTION WOULD BE TO MOVE T-15, T 46 AND 79?
>> THE ALLIANCE EXPANSION THE YOU WANT TO DO THAT ONE YOU NEED TO MOVE THAT FROM YEAR THREE TO YEAR ONE.
>> 21? >> T 15, T 16, 79 AND 21?
>> THAT'S CORRECT. >> THAT WOULD BE MY MOTION.
>> SECOND. >> SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER PORTE PORTE
PORTERFIELD. >> CITY MANAGER YOU ARE CONFIDENT EACH PROJECT WILL BE IN CONSTRUCTION THIS TIME NEXT
SEARCH OR YOU WILL HAVE FROM ROADS UNDER CONSTRUCTION.
>> HE HAS IT TATTOOED ON HIS SHOULDER SO I GET TO CONTROL WHAT THE DEFINITION OF STARTING MEANS.
>> I LIKE THAT. I LIKE THE WAY IT IS.
>> PLEASE CALL THE VOTE. >> THEY'VE A QUESTION OF CLARIFICATION PLEASE? ALBERTA MENTIONED $7 FOR 46 AND 79, IS THAT THE TOTAL AMOUNT, OR ARE YOU JUST MOVING 7 MILLION?
>> THEY ARE MOVING 7 MILLION INTO BUDGET YEAR ONE.
SO THERE'S CURRENTLY $900 THOUSAND THERE ALREADY SO A
TOTAL OF $7.9 MILLION TOTAL. >> OKAY.
SO THAT WILL REFLECT IN THE MOTION IN THE MINUTES.
JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT. >> OKAY THAT WAS FOR WHICH ONE?
>> READY. >> CAN I MAKE A CLARIFICATION? BASED ON THIS MOTION YOU ARE FIXING TO MAKE-UP HERE WHEN WE PUSH THE LEMMER LOOP OUT WE DID NOT WOULD NOT HAVE PLANNED AN ISSUING BUT BASED ON THE AMOUNT AND THE PROJECTS TOTAL ABOUT 14 MILLION LESS ABOUT 4,000,000 THAT WE HAVE CASH ON HAND FROM OLD OR PRIOR ISSUING MEANS WE NOW NEED TO ISSUE THIS.
>> COUNCIL MEMBER SNYDER? >> AYE.
>> AYE. >> COUNCIL MEMBER REYNOLDS?
>> AYE.>> COUNCIL MEMBER KING? >> AYE.
>> COUNCIL MEMBER THORNTON? >> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD? >> AYE..
>> MOTION PASSES 7-0. NEXT THAT BRINGS 42.
>> MAYOR BEFORE YOU MOVE DO WE WANT THEM TO ADOPT THE CIP NOW
OR IS THAT COMING AGAIN LATER? >> WE CAN DO IT ALL AT ONCE.
>> I PREFER THEY ADOPT IT NOW. >> CAN YOU ADOPT THE CIP AS
PRESENTED NOW WITH THOSE EDIT? >> ARE WE GOING TO DO ANY OTHER?
>> ARE WE LOOKING AT OTHER? >> I'LL WAIT UNTIL WE SEE THE
BECAUSE IF THE BUDGET IS LIKE REALLY TIGHT AND WE CAN'T FIGURE OUT HOW TO COME UP WITH TEN MILLION.
>> YOU ARE NOT GOING TO FIND TEN MILLION.
>> WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BORROW IT.
>> YOU MIGHT FIND 20 OR 30 GRAND.
YOU WON'T FIND 7 MILLION. I GUARANTEE THAT.
[4.2. Discussion on possible action on proposed FY27 budget. (Alberta Barrett) ]
SAVINGS AND LOAN. >> ALRIGHT. SO ITEM 42 DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON THE FISCAL YEAR 27-28 BUDGET.
>> LET'S GET THE PRESENTATION SHIFTED BACK OVER
>> STARTING WITH COMMENTS OR DISCUSSIONS THAT WERE MADE AT THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING AS TO WHAT THE SPENDING CAPACITY WAS.
LOOKING AT LAST YEAR'S BUDGET PRESENTATION WE MADE THE STATEMENT THAT THE NO NEW REVENUE DEBT LIMIT WOULD BE $29.5 MILLION ASSUMING A 10% TAXABLE GROWTH RATE.
OKAY? SO THIS NEXT SLIDESHOWS WHAT OUR HISTORICAL TAXABLE GROWTH RATE HAS BEEN SO YOU CAN SEE IN 22 WE HAD A HUGE INCREASE THAT WAS ABOUT LOWER 46 PERCENT IN 23
[00:15:06]
THAT DROPPED DOWN TO ALMOST 18, LESS THAN 18%.IN 24 AND 25 YOU CAN SEE THERE AT 12.9 AND 11.5 SO IN 25 AND THEN 26 WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 10% THAT'S SEEMING REASONABLE BASED ON WHERE WE WERE FOR THE LAST PRIOR TWO-YEAR BUT YOU CAN SEE THERE AT 26 WHEN WE GOT OUR CERTIFIED VALUE THAT 5 .8 BILLION IS A 1.4 PERCENT INCREASE NOT A TEN.
SO THAT DROPS OUR SPENDING CAPACITY BY A BIT.
>> WE DODGED A BULLET ON THAT. >> WE DODGED A BULLET NOT BORROWING THAT. HAD WE DONE THAT AND PROJECTIONS
HAD COME IN. >> IF YOU HAD DONE THAT EVEN WITH THE DECREASE YOUR INS BECOMES NECESSARY SO IF WE WOULD HAVE BEEN AT, IF WE WERE TO ADOPT NO NEW REVENUE THE M AND O WOULD HAVE HAD TO PLUM TOTAL KEEP IT EQUAL.
SO YEAH. >> WOULD HAVE BEEN A MAJOR
ISSUE. >> OR WE WOULD HAVE NOT DONE NEW REVENUE. ONE OF THE TWO.
>> JUST A QUICK ANSWER. IS THERE ANY REASON WHY, THE PROJECTION WOULD HAVE BEEN POSSIBLY HIGHER THAT WE ONLY GOT
1.4 PERCENT? >> YES. THE MAIN REASON IS THAT OUR CURRENT OR EXISTING PROPERTY VALUES DID NOT INCREASE.
>> JUST ASSESSMENTS. >> THEY DECREASE
>> NOT LIKE WE LOST SOMETHING OR SOMETHING WE WERE ANTICIPATE
>> IN THIS SLIDE WE'RE TRYING TO SHOW THE FUNDING CAPACITY IN 26 WHO STARTED WITH A CERTIFIED VALUE AT THE 5.7 BILLION.
HERE WE ASSUMED A 10 MILLION INCREASE WOULD HAVE BEEN 6.3 BILLION. THE REVENUE FROM INS WOULD BE ABOUT 9.4 LESS OUR DEBT PAYMENT WE WOULD HAVE HAD CAPACITY OF TO A LITTLE OVER 2,000,000 BORROWING 29 AND A HALF MILLION WITHOUT RAISING THE RATE IN THE PRIOR YEAR.
LOOKING WHERE WE'RE AT NOW OUR CERTIFIED VALUE IS 56.
THE REVENUE FROM IT IS A LITTLE OVER 8 MILLION LESS OUR DEBT PAYMENTS. WE HAVE A DEBT CAPACITY OF ABOUT 1.2 MILLION OR ABOUT 14 MILLION WITHOUT RAISING THE RATE
>> WE CAN ISSUE 10 MILLION WITHOUT RAISING RATE?
>> NO. NOT WITH THE PROPOSED BUDGET YOU
>> IF WE HAVE TO INCREASE OUR DEBT SERVICE THIS YEAR OUR CURRENT M N O IS NOT BUILT OFF THAT.
>> BUT IT'S GOING TO BE 10 TO 11 MILLION THAT WOULD BE UNDER THE 14 MILLION WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO RAISE THE RATE.
>> SOUNDS LIKE THERE IS A CHANCE.
>> BUT YOU PROJECTED YOUR M N O REVENUES THAT YOU FUNDED THE GENERAL FUND AGAINST USING LOWER DEBT SERVICE FOR THE YEAR SO IF YOUR DEBT SERVICE GOES UP THEN THE AMOUNT OF MONEY YOU HAVE ON
THE GENERAL FUND SIDE GOES DOWN? >> THAT'S CORRECT BUT AGAIN THAT
WON'T HAPPEN UNTIL 2028 >> YOU ARE SAYING YOU WOULDN'T ISSUE THE DEBT TO MAKE THE DEBT SERVICE PAYMENTS THIS YEAR?
>> CORRECT. NO DEBT PAYMENTS WOULD OCCUR IN
27. >> THE REASON THAT MATTERS IS BECAUSE IF WE DO ISSUE THE DEBT AND THE DEBT SERVICE GOES UP NEXT YEAR, AND WE HAVE TO REDUCE THE M N O BY 1.2 MILLION NEXT YEAR IN ORDER TO HAVE NO NEW REVENUE, THEN WE HAVE EFFECTIVELY RIGHT AROUND HOW MUCH IN FIXED ASSETS, ONE TIME
PURCHASES THIS YEAR? >> OVER A HALF A MILLION.
>> I THINK IT IS A LITTLE MORE THAN THAT.
>> THE INTERIM DOLLARS FOR ONE TIME EXPENDITURES THIS YEAR.
IF WE WERE TO DO THIS AND WE DID NO NEW REVENUE NEXT YEAR WE WOULD LIKELY BE NEEDING TO REDUCE THE M N O SIDE OF THE GENERAL FUND NOT ONE TIME EXPENSES BUT ACTUAL OPERATION EXPENSES BY ROUGHLY TWO OR $300,000.00.
OKAY. >> IT'S JUST A CONVERSATION.
>> I HEAR YOU BUT I WANT PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE
CONVERSATION IS >> HERE'S COMPARING OUR CERTIFIED VALUES FOR THIS YEAR TO PRIOR YEAR SO OUR CERTIFIED VALUES CAME IN AT 6.3 MILLION UNDER PROTEST THE 102,000,000 ALMOST WHICH PUT OUR TAXABLE VALUE AT THAT WHAT WE RECEIVED
[00:20:03]
THAT WE BASED OUR REVENUES ON. THIS BUDGET IS WORKED AROUND THE NO NEW REVENUE TAX RATE WHICH IS THE 397011.CALL IT 40 CENTS. THE VOTER APPROVAL RATE WOULD BE THE 428517 OR 43 CENTS. THE REVENUE FROM THE CERTIFIED VALUE OR THE TAXABLE VALUE IS 16348414 WHICH GIVES US $583 $583,000.
SO HERE IS SHOWING ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT CAME UP A FEW MINUTES AGO. SHOWING ON THIS FIRST LINE 26 T THAT, THAT GRAPH, THAT BAR IN THE RED IS OUR EXISTING PROPERTIES SO YOU CAN SEE THERE THE VALUE OF THOSE HAVE GONE TO THE NEGATIVE VERSES INCREASING.
THAT'S THE BIGGER OR THE MAJOR CHANGE FOR THIS YEAR'S VALUES.
>> 0E7B8 REASON WE ENDED UP 1.4 PERCENT IS NEW GROWTH FOR THE MOST PART. THE EXISTING PROPERTIES ALL
DECLINED IN VALUATION. >> I THINK THIS IS THE FIRST YEAR, I ALWAYS ARGUE THE ELECTED BODIES WHO EFFECTIVELY RAISE TAX BILL BUT THEN ALWAYS SAY, WE DIDN'T RAISE YOUR TAX BILL THE VALUE OF YOUR HOUSE WENT UP CAUSED IT AND THAT'S WHY YOUR RATE WENT DOWN BUT YOUR BILL WENT UP THIS MAY BE THE FIRST YEAR THEY HAVE TO EXPLAIN TO PEOPLE HOW THEY ARE RAISING THE RATE JUST SO THEY CAN GET THE SAME REVENUE AS LAST YEAR SO THE PEOPLE WHO USUALLY DO THE VOTER APPROVAL RATE, THAT COULD BE GOING UP DRAMATICALLY AND THEY HAVE TO EXPLAIN TO PEOPLE, WHY DID YOU WANT THE RATE TO GO UP. WE'VE TOLD YOU THE RATE, DON'T PAY ATTENTION TO THE RATE BUT THE BILL BUT IT WILL BE AN INTERESTING YEAR FOR LOT OF ELECTED BODIES AS THEY GET
THROUGH THIS, THIS SUMMER. >> BRINGS UP THE POINT I DIDN'T MENTION THE REVENUE TAX RATE IS THE RATE THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO SET TO GENERATE THE SAME AMOUNT OF REVENUE CURRENTLY.
SO MOVING TO SALES TAX. NO CHANGE FROM WHAT WE PRESENTED BACK IN JUNE. WE'RE STILL PROPOSING A 3 PERCENT. AND WE DO NOT HAVE ANY UPDATES ON MAYBE JUST A FEW CHANGES HERE. WE HAVE CURRENTLY 211 POSITIONS AND WE HAVE ABOUT 17 VACANCIES CURRENTLY, IN THE 27 WE PROPOSED STILL JUST THE THREE NEW POSITIONS.
WE HAVE 14 RECLASSIFICATION AND ONE POSITION WAS ELIMINATED.
OUR TOTAL FTE'S FOR 27 WOULD BE 213.
>> I HAVE A QUESTION IF YOU CAN GO BACK A SLIDE.
I HAVE A QUESTION REGARDING ONE ELIMINATION BECAUSE NOBODY
FILLED THAT POSITION? >> IT'S MORE OF -
>> NO YOU GO AHEAD. >> THIS IS ONE OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR POSITIONS AND IT IS VACANT BUT BECAUSE THE WORKLOAD HAS DECLINED, WE DON'T NEED TO REFILL IT.
SO, WE'RE NOT LAYING ANYBODY OFF.
WE'RE SIMPLY USING ATTRITION TO SAVE BUDGET.
>> I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT FOR EVERYBODY WHO IS WATCHING THIS
>> BECAUSE YOU KNOW LAST YEAR I REM REMEMBER, THE HOT BUTTON WAS, YOU GUYS ARE LAYING PEOPLE OFF WHEN THAT WAS NOT NECESSARILY THE CASE.
SO LITTLE BIT OF EDUCATION HERE GOES A LONG WAY.
>> YES, SIR >> HERE ARE THE THREE NEW POSITIONS. NO CHANGE FROM THE JUNE PRESENTATION. THE ONE IN PARKS MAINTENANCE AND ONE IN POLICE AND ONE IN STRATEGIC.
THE RECLASSIFICATIONS ARE THESE HERE.
THE MAIN REASON FOR THESE RECLASSIFICATIONS IS TO ADDRESS EMPLOYEE TURNOVER AND INCORPORATE SOME CAREER PROGRESSION WITH THE DEPARTMENTS OVERALL.
HERE ARE TWO, WE DID INCLUDE IN JUNE WAS THE DECLASSIFICATION
[00:25:04]
WHERE'S AN HR, WE HAD A POSITION AS AN HR MANAGER AND WE'RE PROPOSING IT BE AN HR COORDINATOR AND STRATEGIC OPERATIONS OF COURSE DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS THE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER SO THAT POSITION THAT HE'S VACATING WOULD BECOME A STRATEGIC STRATEGY AND MANAGER. TALK IN THE GENERAL FUND IN SUMMARY OVERALL. ORGANIZATIONAL WIDE, AGAIN IT IS BASED ON NEW REVENUE TAX RATE. WE DID INCLUDE STAFF INCREASE SO 2% FOR EMPLOYEES AFFECTED JANUARY FIRST.WE DID INCLUDE AN OPTION WHICH IS A BUY BACK OF SERVICE CREDITS. INCLUDED HEALTH INSURANCE SAME AS BEFORE AT 9.9 PERCENT. THAT'S IN OUR CONTRACT.
WE STANDARDIZE THE CLOTHING, TRAINING AND TRAVEL.
WE INCREASED FUEL COSTS BASED ON THE CURRENT ECONOMY AND CONDITION NOW. WE CONSOLIDATED SOFTWARE USING OVER 5,000 IS NOW HOUSED UNDER THE I.T. DEPARTMENT INSTEAD OF BEING IN EACH INDIVIDUAL DEPARTMENT.
WE HAVE ADDED CERTIFICATION PAY FOR EMPLOYEES AND REPLACING NINE VEHICLES AND WE ADDED THE SPECIAL RESPONSE TEAM VAN THAT WAS A DISCUSSION IN JUNE. SO HERE IS A LIST OF THE CURRENT GENERAL FUND VACANCIES. IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS? THIS IS THE LIST OF VEHICLES THAT ARE BEING REPLACED.
NO CHANGE FROM WHAT WAS PRESENTED EARLIER.
A MAJORITY OF THE POLICE INTERCEPTORS.
RUNNING THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENTAL CHANGES, CITY COUNCIL, NO CHANGES AS FAR AS PERSONNEL.
FIXED ASSETS. OPERATIONALLY, WE INCREASED THE OUTSIDE AGENCY FUNDING BASED ON THE ONE PERCENT OF GENERAL FUND REVENUES IS 373011 AND 23 OF THAT IS HOME ALLIANCE.
29355 IS A RESERVE FOR THE COUNTY ADVOCACY CENTER.
$1 MILLION 18213 IS FOR THE COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT, IS THAT RIGHT? AM I SAYING THAT RIGHT? AND $210443 IS AVAILABLE FOR THE GRANT WHICH YOU'LL HAVE A DISCUSSION ON AT WORKSHOP NEXT WEEK.
CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE, THERE WAS NO CHANGES IN PERSONNEL OR OPERATIONAL FIXED ASSETS. WE DID INCLUDE ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR ELECTIONS. COMMUNICATIONS, WE HAVE A COUPLE OF RECLASSES AND NO CHANGES OPERATIONALLY.
COMMUNITY SERVICES, NO CHANGES TO PERSONAL, FIXED ASSETS.
WE DID ADD OPERATIONALLY HIPPOS HELPING HIP POS AND THE VOLUNTEER HUB SOFTWARE. CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION THERE WAS THE REQUEST TO PERSONNEL AND THOSE WERE NOT PENDING AND OPERATIONALLY THERE IS NO CHANGE.
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. HERE WE DID REORGANIZATION AND RECLASSIFICATION FROM DEAUTHORIZING THE VACANT BUILDING INSPECTOR AND RECLASS BUILDING INSPECTOR TO HAVING A BUILDING INSPECTOR ONE, TWO AND SENIOR INSPECTOR AGAIN WHICH ALLOWS FOR PRO GRATIFICATION IN RETENTION WITHIN THAT DEPARTMENT. WITH ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT NO CHANGES EITHER PERSONAL OR ASSETS.
OPERATIONAL, SAME WITH EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT.
NO CHANGE THERE. ENGINEERING, NO CHANGES.
FACILITY MAINTENANCE HAD A REQUEST FOR A NEW TECHNIQUE AND THAT WAS NOT FUNDED. WE DID INCLUDE AN EXPENSE FOR THE HVAC HERE AT CITY HALL, MAKES THOSE IMPROVEMENTS AND WE'RE REPLACING A VEHICLE IN THAT DEPARTMENT.
FINANCE, PERSONNEL, FIXED ASSETS.
WE HAVE ARE RECLASS TO A DOWN ABOUT THE AND COMPLIANCE MANAGER AND WE'RE ASKING FOR SOFTWARE FOR ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL REPORT. NO CHANGES OPERATIONALLY.
FLEET MAINTENANCE, NO CHANGES THERE.
HR, NO CHANGES TO PERSONNEL OR FIXED ASSETS.
OPERATIONALLY WE INCREASED EMPLOYEE TUITION REIMBURSEMENT AND THAT PROGRAM HOW IT OPERATES AND EXPANDED THE SUPERVISOR.
[00:30:07]
I.T. IN PERSONNEL AND FIXED ASSETS WE'VE INCLUDED COMPUTER REPLACEMENTS THERE.WE DID NOT FUND THE KORNET WORK REFRESH.
THAT'S SOMETHING WE FELT COULD BE HANDLED PROBABLY NEXT YEAR.
SO YOU'LL SEE THAT PROBABLY COMING FORTH AGAIN.
AND THEN RECLASS OF THE I.T. SECURITY ADMINISTRATOR TO ENTERPRISE ADMINISTRATOR. OPERATIONICALLY AGAIN WE CONSOLIDATED THE SOFTWARE WITHIN I.T. AND WE INCREASED OUR DATA PROTECTION. LIBRARY, OPERATIONALLY NO CHANGES AND NO CHANGES TO PERSONNEL OR FIXED ASSETS.
SAME WITH MUNICIPAL COURT NO CHANGES THERE EITHER.
PARKS AND REC AND PERSONNEL AND FIXED ASSETS WE ADDED A NEW PARKS MAINTENANCE TECHNICIAN. WE RECLASSED TWO MAINTENANCE TECH ONES TO MAINTENANCE TECH TWOS.
WE CONTINUE WITH MARKER AND WITH THAT LEASE THIS THE LAST YEAR THAT WE DID ADD A UTV CARRY ALL AND TENNIS COURTS AND WE DID NOT IN 27 INCLUDE THE PRESSURE WASHER AND TRAILER HOWEVER WITH POTENTIAL SAVINGS FROM 26 WE'LL BRING IT TO COUNCIL TO PURCHASE THAT IN THIS YEAR'S BUDGET SO THAT WILL BE COMING FORTH IN AUGUST.
>> THEY'VE A QUICK QUESTION AND THIS IS GENERAL.
ON ANYTHING THAT WE HAVE A LEASED APPARATUS OR SERVICE WITH, HOW OFTEN DO WE GO BACK AND LOOKING AT THE PAY BACK AND RETURN ON INVESTMENT OF LEASING VERSES PURCHASING? AND THEN ALSO THE LONGEVITY OF THE MAINTENANCE OF THOSE SO IS THAT SOMETHING, WELL I'M SURE IT'S SOMETHING YOU DO EVERY
YEAR, SO - >> YES THAT'S SOMETHING WE LOOK AT EVERY YEAR. WITH THESE THEY ARE IN A CONTRACT WITH THE LEASE AND THEY'LL EXPIRE AND AS NEW ONES
COME UP WE DO EVALUATE THOSE. >> THANK YOU.
>> THIS, IF YOU COULD SHARE THAT WITH US BECAUSE WE'RE REPLACING A 20-YEAR-OLD TRUCK IN ONE OF THE DEPARTMENTS AND WE'RE A FAIRLY SMALL CITY SO I DO WONDER SOMETIMES IF IT'S LIKE A POLICE CAR, I COULD SEE TO WEAR AND TEAR ON THOSE VEHICLES PROBABLY WOULDN'T MAKE IT PAST WHAT WE'RE LEASING THEM FOR BUT THEN IF YOU HAVE ONE THEY ARE PUTTING 10,000 MILE AS YEAR ON AND WE'RE LEASING THAT, MAYBE THAT'S ONE WE SAY, MAYBE IT'S BETTER TO PURCHASE IT BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO GET TEN TO 15-YEARS BECAUSE IT'S NOT BEING USED ALL THE TIME OR SOME OF THIS LIKE THIS, I DON'T KNOW WHAT A SKITS IS BUT IF YOU LEASE IT AND IT'S A 200,000 PIECE OF EQUIPMENT I GET IT.
BOBCAT. >> BUT IF IT'S SOMETHING TO WHERE AND THEN I'D ALSO LIKE TO LOOK AT DO WE ALWAYS NEED TO BE BUYING THE BRAND NEW EQUIPMENT? BECAUSE SOME OF THIS I REMEMBER YEARS AGO WE HAD A DEBATE ON DUMP TRUCKS.
BEFORE ALL OF YOU WERE HERE WE WERE LOOKING AT MAKE YOUR OWN ROAD DEPARTMENT AND START TO BID JOBS, AND IF YOU CAN IMAGINE IT WOULD BID JOBS OUTSIDE OF HUTTO BECAUSE WE WERE GOING TO BE THAT EFFICIENT AT BUILDING ROADS TO COUNCIL AT THAT TIME BOUGHT MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF EQUIPMENT.
DUMP TRUCKS AND STUFF TO BUILD ALL OVER THE PLACE ONLY TO RUN OUT OF MONEY AND HAVE TO SELL IT ALL.
THEN NEXT YEAR WE WANTED TO BUY A DUMP TRUCK AND WE ARE LIKE WE JUST SOLD THEM. IT WAS ONE DEPARTMENT NOT WORKING WITH ANOTHER AND WE WERE LIKE CAN WE BUY A USED DUMP TRUCK. HOW MUCH USE GETS OUT OF THESE THINGS? DO WE ALWAYS HAVE TO BUY BRAND NEW? SOME THINGS I THINK DO NEED TO BE NEW BUT YOU DON'T WANT TO GIVE THE EMPLOYEE AND SAY YOU ARE NOW IN A 220,000 MILES CAR THAT'S 20 YEARS OLD BUT IF YOU ARE USING AN ITEM, IT'S THE HOURS USED. I DON'T WANT TO SAY STREET SWEEPER BUT IF YOU HAVE SOMETHING THAT MAYBE THAT COULD BE USED A LITTLE BIT, BUT THAT'S A GOOD POINT YOU BROUGHT UP.
THAT WILL INCREASE RAISING THEIR RATES THAT WE CHARGE FOR THOSE PARTICIPANTS BUT THAT WILL BE BROUGHT FORTH AND WE'LL DISCUSS THAT IN A LITTLE MORE DETAIL. WE'RE DOING MAINTENANCE.
AND WE'RE REPLACING TWO VEHICLES OR ONE, EXCUSE ME.
WITHIN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT UNDER NEW OR PERSONAL AND FIXED
[00:35:05]
ASSETS WE HAVE ONE NEW POSITION AND ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT.WE'RE RECLASSING A POLICE OFFICER TO CORPORAL.
WE HAVE REPLACEMENT OF SIX VEHICLES WITH A COST.
WE DID ADD A SPECIAL RESPONSE TEAM VAN AND CELL PHONE EXTRACTION SOFTWARE. WE INCLUDEDI-PRO IN CAR CAMERA SYSTEM AND ADDED SINCE JUNE THE REPLACEMENT OF THAT.
>> FOR THE COUNTY AND STATE PUBLIC YOU MAY NOT BE AWARE OF THIS BUT ROCKET ENCOUNTERED AN INJURY.
A TENDON TEAR AND WE'RE GOING TO BE OR RANGING FOR HIM TO HAVE SURGERY BUT THAT WILL EFFECTIVELY RETIRE HIM FROM SERVING IN HIS ROLE SO WE, THIS JUST HAPPENED SO WE MOVED MONEY AROUND TO BE ABLE TO ALLOW FOR HIS ROLE TO BE ABLE TO BE REPLACED WITH ANOTHER CANINE UNIT.
SO OPERATIONALLY WE HAVE ADDED THE EASE CITATION DEVICE.
INCREASES FOR THE DISPATCH AND AGAIN WE'RE REPLACING SIX INTERCEPTORS WITH TAHOES. STRATEGIC OPERATIONS, PERSONNEL AND FIXED ASSETS WE'VE ADDED A NEW POSITION.
STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE ANALYST. OPERATIONALLY NO CHANGES.
PERSONNEL FIXED ASSETS WE HAVE RECLASSED CREW LEADER TO STREET DRAINAGE SUPERVISOR. ASKED FOR A NEW POSITION OF COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST WHICH WAS NOT FUNDED.
WE HAVE A CONTINUED LEASE ON THE DRUM ROLLER AND SEAL EQUIPMENT WHICH WILL CONTINUE. THEY DID ASK FOR A DIGITAL MESSAGE BOARD WHICH WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE 27 BUDGET, BUT SPEAKING PRIOR ON THE PARK SIDE ON THIS ONE WE WILL AUDIBLE] AND THAT WILL BE BROUGHT BACK AS A BUDGET
AMENDMENT FOR 26. >> IS THAT THE REASON FOR THE
ASTERISK? >> YES. I WOULDN'T FORGET TO BRING THAT UP. OPERATIONALLY WE'VE INCREASED THREE MAINTENANCE AND WE INCREASED THE STREET LIGHT COST.
>> I'D LOVE TO SEE THE STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE ANALYST JUST MOVE OVER TO CITY MANAGER'S DEPARTMENT.
I DON'T KNOW WHY IT BOTHERS ME THAT THERE IS A DEPARTMENT WITH ONE PERSON BUT HOW DO WE COLLAPSE EVERYTHING BECAUSE THAT PERSON IS GOING TO BE A MANAGER OR DIRECTOR AGAIN AND TO ME, IF THEY ARE DOING STUFF FOR YOU THEY OUGHT TO JUST, BUT I DON'T
KNOW WHAT THAT IS. >> WE CAN LOOK AT THAT
>> RUNNING THROUGH ALL THE DEPARTMENTS IN TOTAL, YOU CAN SEE YOUR TOTAL REVENUES THERE. LITTLE OVER $3.7, $37.3.
EXPENDITURES AT $37 AND INCREASING YOUR FUND BALANCE BY 14320. THAT LEAVES YOUR FUND BALANCE AT $10.9 AND YOU EXCEED YOUR RESERVE REQUIREMENT OF 9.188 MILLION AND YOU HAVE A CERTAIN OF ABOUT 30 PERCENT.
>> OKAY. >> MOVING TO THE UTILITY FUND.
>> ALBERTA, THE STATUTORY REQUIREMENT IS 10%?
AND THE - >> OUR CHARTER IS 10%.
STANDARD PRACTICE IS 25%. >> COUNCIL TARGETED 30?
>> YOU ARE TARGETING US AT 30 PERCENT SO THE BUDGET AS
PRESENTED IS AT THE 30 PERCENT. >> AND I THINK OUR FINANCE
WE STARTED AT 20 AND YOU CHANGED IT LAST YEAR OR THE YEAR BEFORE
TO 25. >> ARGUABLY POLICIES AS YOU KNOW CAN BE AMENDED OR CHANGED. THE CHARTER CANNOT UNLESS YOU GO TO THE VOTERS TO 10% IS THE HARD NUMBER AND THE 25% IS THE NUMBER YOU ELECTED IN POLICY AND YOU TARGETED 30 SO NOW WE'VE BEEN
ABLE TO REACH 30. >> IF I REMEMBER I WANT TO SAY THAT RESERVES HAVE SOMEWHAT OF AN AFFECT ON YOUR BORROWING
RATES. >> 100 PERCENT THEY DO.
YOUR ABILITY TO HAVE CASH AVAILABLE TO MAKE PAYMENT?
>> YES. >> YOU CAN GET IT TOO HIGH AND LOSE BENEFIT BUT YOU CAN HAVE IT TOO LOW.
>> TOO HIGH AND THEY ASK WHY YOU ARE BORROWING MONEY.
>> WE'VE BEEN THERE BEFORE. COMING OUT OF COVID WE HAD THE
[00:40:02]
SAME PROBLEM. YOU HAVE 100 PERCENT SOMETHING IN RESERVES, WHY ARE YOU ASKING US FOR MONEY?>> UTILITY FUND. PRETTY MUCH THE SAME SCENARIO AS THE GENERAL FUND. I GUESS THE BIG DIFFERENCE HERE IS THIS BUDGET IS BASED ON NO INCREASE TO UTILITY RATES.
WE GOT ALL THE SAME BENEFITS AND INCREASED OUR FUEL COSTS AND CERTIFICATION PAY. HERE WE'RE REPLACING TWO VEHICLES AND WE'RE FUNDING A FULL YEAR OF RECHARGE EXPENSE IN THE 27 BUDGET. THE CURRENT VACANCIES WITHIN THE UTILITY FUND ARE THESE POSITIONS HERE.
THE TWO VEHICLES THAT WE'RE REPLACING, ONE IS IN UTILITY BILLING AND ONE IS IN UTILITY OPERATIONS.
SAME AS THE PRESENTATION. FOR THE REGULAR ADMINISTRATION THERE WAS A REQUEST FOR AN ADA COMPLIANCE OFFICE TRAILER AND THAT WAS NOT FUNDED. OPERATIONALLY WE DID INCREASE POSTAGE FOR CONSUMER CONFIDENCE REPORT AND WE ADDED A DEMOGRAPHIC STUDY. UTILITY BILLING, THERE WAS NO CHANGES TO PERSONNEL AND FIXED ASSETS.
OPERATIONALLY WE INCREASES THE METER END POINT REPLACEMENTS.
WE'RE COMPLETING THE METER CHANGE OUT PROGRAM AND WE'LL HAVE THAT 70 PERCENT COMPLETED THIS YEAR BY THE END OF SEPTEMBER, WE'LL FINISH THE REST THE FIRST QUARTER OR SO OF NEXT YEAR, AND WE'RE REPLACING ONE VEHICLE WITHIN THE UTILITY
BILLING. >> WHEN YOU GUYS REPLACE VEHICLES THAT'S LOOKING AT LEASING, RIGHT?
>> UTILITY OPERATIONS FOR PERSONNEL AND FIXED ASSETS, HERE'S REPLACEMENT, I'M SORRY WE HAVE A CONTINUED LEASE WITH THE 550 IN CRANE LEASE, WE HAVE SEWER CAMERA INSPECTION LEASE THAT'S CONTINUING AND WE DID RECLASS TWO UTILITY TECHS TO TWO
UTILITY TECH TWOS. >> THANK YOU.
>> YOU ARE WELCOME. >> OPERATIONICALLY WE INCREASES THE RIVER AUTHORITY TO INCLUDE AUGER WHICH IS PART OF THE CAPITAL OUT LAY SO THAT AFFECTS THE O AND M.
INCREASE RECHARGE HOLD AND C I PI ADJUSTMENT.
REDUCED WATER LEASE PAYMENTS AND REPLACE A LEASE VEHICLE.
SO IN SUMMARY FOR THE UTILITY FUND, AGAIN, YOUR REVENUES OVER EXPENDITURES ARE SHY OF $12 THOUSAND.
OUR ESTIMATED FUND BALANCE AT $930027 IS $15.4 MILLION.
OUR 25% RESERVE REQUIREMENT IS 11.6 MILLION AND YOU HAVE A PERCENTAGE OF THAT 33 PERCENT IN THE UTILITY FUND.
>> ALBERTA IS IT NEXT YEAR THAT YOU PROJECT THE BALANCE OF THE UTILITY FUND HITTING IT'S LOW BEFORE IT STARTS THE RECOVERY?
>> YES. >> SO EVEN THOUGH IT'S AT 33 PERCENT RIGHT NOW WE'RE ANTICIPATING NEXT YEAR THE RESERVE BEING, DROPPING? BECAUSE WE'RE STILL IN THAT PHASE OF IF WE'RE NOT GOING TO INCREASE RATES, NOW WE'RE DRAWING DOWN THE RESERVE UNTIL THE GROWTH ALLOW THAT CURVE TO START BACK UP? HOPEFULLY SO IF WE DO CONTINUE TO HAVE DECREASED DEVELOPMENT IN THE COMMUNITY, WE'RE GOING TO
HAVE TO REVISIT THAT. >> THAT'S WHY I SAID AT THE LAST
>> WHATEVER THE CITY COUNCIL HAS TO DO.
THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, PLANNING DEPARTMENT, CHAIRING DEPARTMENT, I'M NOT SAYING WE LOWER STANDARDS AND HAVE PEOPLE DO WILLY NILLY BUT WE HAVE TO FOCUS BECAUSE IF I HEAR ABOUT ALL THIS DEVELOPMENT THAT'S BACKLOGGED TRYING TO GET THROUGH OUR SYSTEM AND THEN I'M BEING ASKED TO RAISE TAXES TO GIVE PEOPLE RAISES THE FIRST THING I WOULD SAY IS I'VE GONE WITHOUT GETTING A RAISE BEFORE AND SO I'M NOT GOING TO RAISE PEOPLE'S TAXES WHEN WE HAVE NEW TAXPAYERS TRYING TO GET INTO THE SYSTEM.
WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO GET THEM THROUGH THE SYSTEM FASTER AND MAKE SURE THEY BUILD GREAT THINGS THAT ARE BEING DONE ON THEIR DIME AND DO THAT FASTER, AND NOT TRYING TO BE TOUGH WITH PEOPLE BUT I DON'T KNOW ANYBODY UP HERE THAT HAS GOT THE WILL POWER TO POP PEOPLE'S TAXES WHEN GLASS IS $4 AND THEY ARE STILL MAD THAT THE TAX BILLS ARE HIGH EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE NOT RAISED TAXES IN FIVE YEARSER FOUR YEARS BUT I STILL THINK WE'RE DOING
IT. >> JUST AS A REFRESHER, FROM A PRIOR DISCUSSION WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THE LONG RANGE BUDGET FOR
[00:45:02]
THE UTILITY FUND I JUST WANT TO REMIND COUNCIL THAT YOU DID APPROVE THE TRANSFER A LITTLE OVER $6.3 MILLION FROM EDC TO THE UTILITY FUND SO THAT IS WHAT HAS PROLONGED THE FUND BALANCE THAT WAS REFERRED TO OUT FOR YEAR OR TWO.>> YOU GUYS ARE DOING GOOD STAFF.
IF YOU THINK ABOUT IT. WE'RE DELAYED FOR AN HOUR WITH THEE SD AND EXPRESSING TO THEM LIKE LOOK, WE SEE THE FUTURE, THERE IS A LOT OF THINGS WE HAVE TO GET DONE AND ECHL DEVELOPED AND HOW THAT'S HAMSTRINGING US AND THEN WE GOT TO GO THROUGH AND HAVE THE GOVERNOR'S STUFF COMING THROUGH POTENTIALLY AND WE'RE NOVEMBER GATING ALL OF THIS IN AN EFFORT TO AT LEAST BE STABLE BECAUSE I THINK I'M THE LAST PERSON UP HERE.
JEFF WAS HERE FOR THE LAYOUT BUT I DON'T THINK ANYBODY ELSE WAS HERE AND I'M AFRAID OTHER CITIES WILL HAVE AN ISSUE IF THE GOVERNOR PASS AS DEAL LIKE HE'S PROPOSING AND I DON'T KNOW HOW CITIES OPERATE AND HERE WE'RE RUNNING LEAN AND WE'RE GOING TO RUN STANDARD AND THEY HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO ALL OF THE SUDDEN NOT HAVE ALL THE THINGS THEY HAD BECAUSE THEY ARE ABOUT
SO THE NEXT AND FINAL SLIDE IS OUR UPDATE OR CALENDAR, SOME KEY DATES, AUGUST 13TH. COUNCIL MEETING.
THAT'S WHERE WE'LL NEED TO DISCUSS OUR TAX RATE TAKE A KROERD VOTE AND SCHEDULE OUR PUBLIC HEARINGS.
TENTATIVELY LOOKING AT WHAT THAT WOULD BE YOUR FIRST PUBLIC HEARING WOULD BE HELD ON SEPTEMBER 3RD.
AND THEN ON SEPTEMBER 10TH WOULD BE YOUR SECOND MEETING WITH THE MEETING TO ADOPT THE BUDGET AND THE TAX RATE.
AND AS A REMINDER, TIRED OF ME SAYING IT.
THE BUDGET HAS TO BE AN ADOPTED BEFORE YOUR TAX RATE.
I KNOW IT SEEMS IT SHOULD BE THE OTHER WAY BUT BUDGET HAS TO BE
FIRST. >> I CAN REMEMBER IN THE NEW PEOPLE THAT ARE ON THE COUNCIL, THE AUGUST 13TH VOTE, THAT IS
NOT TO EXCEED TAX RATE. >> CORRECT
>> YOU CAN DO THE MAX AND THEN ALWAYS COME DOWN LOWER.
>> BUT YOU CAN'T GO HIGHER. >> THE SEPTEMBER THIRD ONE, IF YOU ARE ADOPTING A BUDGET THAT IS NON-REVENUE YOU DON'T HAVE TO
DO PUBLIC HEARINGS AFTER THAT. >> YOU ONLY HAVE TO DO THE ONE.
>> WHICH NEGATES THE SEPTEMBER TENTH.
>> WHICH WE WOULD NOT HAVE TO DO WHICH IS KIND OF THAT NO IF IT'S NOT ADOPTED IT IS SEPTEMBER 3RD AND THEN YOU HAVE YOUR SECOND
MEETING ON THE TENTH. >> ANY INCREASE TO THE TAX RATE ABOVE NO NEW REVENUE REQUIRES THE TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS TO TWO READINGS AND THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE THE THIRD AND THE TENTH SO IF WE ADOPT NO NEW REVENUE ON THE THIRD THEN WE DON'T HAVE THE
TENTH MEETING. >> I CAN GO ON VACATION THEN.
>> I DID MY JOB. NOW SHE'S LIKE THE NEXT QUESTION. ANY PRIORITIES NOT SEEN BUT IF YOU WANT ONE JUST KNOW THAT, WELL
ANY PARTIES ANYBODY DIDN'T SEE? >> I HAD AN OBSCURE QUESTION AS USUAL. IT WAS BACK ON THE TS TC I THINK IT WAS $125 K. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT'S A FIXED RATE FOR THEM? I'M IN SUPPORT OF THEM AND I JUST INTERESTED BUT IS THAT SOMETHING WE DO EVERY YEAR?
IS THAT ESCALATEING? >> IT'S A CONTRACTURAL COMMITMENT FOR $125,000. IT WAS HIGHER BECAUSE THERE WAS SOME PERIOD OF NON-PAYMENT AND WE AMORTIZED IT TO BE THE RIGHT WAY TO SAY THAT WE SPREAD IT OUT OVER A NUMBER OF YEARS.
WE COMPLETED THAT ONE LAST YEAR SO WE'RE DOWN TO $125 FOR THE
REMINDER OF THE CONTRACT. >> THAT'S IT.
THANK YOU. >> THAT'S NOT JUST THE CITY.
THE CITY, EDC AND ISD ALL PAY THAT YEARLY.
THEY DO IN ADDITION TO THE 125? >> RIGHT.
I THINK EDC IS 125 TOO? I THINK WE ALL PAY.
IT'S HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS.
>> MY ONLY THING I HAVE IS IS JUST A QUESTION IF YOU CAN GIVE US, NOT TODAY, BUT IF YOU CAN GIVE US SOME ANTICIPATED PROJECTIONS ON THE SKY BOX? BECAUSE WITH THEM, WE'RE NOT SEEING, IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE WE'RE BUDGETING A LOT AND I DON'T WANT US TO GET CRAZY WERE THE FORECAST BUT IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE WE'RE BUDGETING A LOT OF GROWTH VALUE BUT THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO BE MOVING EQUIPMENT AND I KNOW THEY ARE BEHIND BUT I
[00:50:02]
WANT TO SAY BUILDING ONE IS IN THE PROCESS OF BEING EQUIPPED WITH TWO ABOUT TO BE EQUIPPED SO ANY KIND OF, AND MAYBE WE NEED TO REACH OUT TO THOSE GUYS AND VERIFY WHERE THEY ARE AT>> THAT WOULD BE IMPACTING NEXT YEAR'S TAX RATE NOT THIS ONE BECAUSE THIS ONE IS LOCK IN AND CERTIFIED.
>> I GOT YOU. IT'S WHAT YOU HAD ON JANUARY FIRST OF THIS YEAR IS FOR NEXT YEAR'S MONEY
>> WE WOULD BE, ANYTHING WE DO IN THAT REGARD WOULD BE US THINKING ABOUT WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO BUDGET-WISE IN 2027 AND
28. >> IT HELPS ME TO LOOK AT EMPLOYEES AND SAY THIS PARTICULAR ITEM YOU WANT, IF YOU CAN WAIT ONE MORE YEAR THIS IS WHERE WE'RE SEEING GROWTH COME IN, IN PROPERTY VALUE, WHEREAS IF WE HAVE 2% EVERY YEAR, THAT'S
NOTHING. >> I CAN MAYBE HIT SOME OF THE HIGH POINTS ON THAT, THAT WE LOOKED AT.
THE VALUES FOR THE REAL PROPERTY ARE RIGHT AROUND $255 MILLION FOR 2026 WHICH IS WHAT'S CERTIFIED.
THIS YEAR FOR THE FIRST TIME, WE HIT ALMOST $11 MILLION FOR COMPUTERS THEY PUT IN. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THEY'VE GOT BUILDING ONE AND TWO, AND I THINK THEY ARE STARTING ON THREE. DAN CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M SAYING THAT WRONG. SO THIS IS THE FIRST YEAR COMING UP THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE ANYTHING FROM THE $11 MILLION FOR COMPUTERS BUT THEY HAVEN'T ACTUALLY FILED FOR THEIR WAIVER, PROBABLY NOT USING RIGHT WORD FOR THAT, BUT I'M SURE THEY DON'T WANT TO DO IT YET BECAUSE NOT ALL OF THEIR BUSINESS AND PERSONAL PROPERTY IS IN PLACE. ONCE IT BECOMES MORE VALUABLE THEY WILL PUT THAT WAIVER ON. SO WHAT WE PROPOSED IN THE TERTIARY BUDGET THAT YOU'LL SEE IN THERE, FOR THREE WE'RE USING ABOUT $225,000 TO GO TO THE UTILITY FUND TO HELP OFFSET PRINCIPLE INTEREST ON THIS. FOR THE SKY BOX FOR THE BUSINESS/PERSONAL PROPERTY, THIS YEAR AGAIN LIKE WAS SAID, YOU ARE NOT GOING TO SEE IT BECAUSE IT'S ONLY $11 MILLION AND GENERATING ABOUT $42,000. WE DO ANTICIPATE THAT TO INCREASE IN 2028, SO THEN WE'LL START SEEING THAT THE REVENUES FROM THOSE VALUES AND WE GOT THAT KIND OF EARMARKED FOR TWO THINGS. ONE, HELPING REIMBURSE FOR THE MEGA SIDE TO THE UTILITY FUND TO HELP REDUCE OR MAINTAIN OUR UTILITY RATE, I SHOULD SAY NOT REDUCE IT BUT AT LEAST MAINTAIN THEM. AND THEN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS. INSTEAD OF BORROWING LIKE IN THIS CASE WHERE WE BORROW FOR STREETS THE IDEA IS IT WILL GENERATE ENOUGH REVENUES WE'LL NOT HAVE TO BORROW FOR THOSE
IS THERE ANY ABILITY TO ALLOW OR HAVE OR REQUEST SKY BOX TO PROVIDE SOME PROJECTIONS ON THEIR POTENTIAL? I KNOW THERE MAY BE CONFIDENTIALITIES AND IF THEY SAY, NO, I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT HAVE WE REACHED OUT THE SEE WHAT
MAYBE THEIR PLANS ARE? >> I THINK THAT'S A CHAINING
FINANCIAL OFFICER CHENEY OF THE NEC.
>> THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. DIRECTOR AS WELL BUT WE HAVE RECEIVED SOME UPDATED ESTIMATES AND YOU ARE RIGHT.
THERE ARE CONFIDENTIALITY THINGS RELATED TO COMMITTING TO CERTAIN DOLLAR AMOUNTS BUT WE DO HAVE THOSE ESTIMATES AND SO WE SHARE THOSE AS WE GET THEM. THE LAST UPDATE I HAD WAS THAT THERE WAS NO UPDATE TO THE PREVIOUS NUMBERS I HAVE BEEN
PROVIDED. >> HOW OFTEN DO YOU QUERY THEM? QUARTERLY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT?
ONCE A YEAR? >> NO SINCE THERE HAS NOT BEEN EQUIPMENT ACTUALLY ROLL IN AS OF YET THAT WOULD BE OF INTEREST TO US TO BETTER ESTIMATE, I THINK THE LAST TIME THAT WE GOT UPDATED NUMBERS WAS IN THE SPRING OF THIS YEAR.
I ASK ALL THE TIME. WHEN THOSE, WHEN THAT INVENTORY WILL BE GOING INTO THOSE BUILDINGS, BUT AS FAR AS UPDATING NUMBERS I THINK THE LAST SET WAS EFFECTIVELY THE SAME SET WE HAD BEFORE, BUT THAT WAS IN THE SPRING.
I ANTICIPATE THEY'LL HAVE MORE REALISTIC NUMBERS THEY MIGHT BE ABLE TO SHARE. MORE ESTIMATES LATER THIS FALL OR TOWARDS THE END OF THE YEAR ONCE BUILDING ONE AND TWO START
TO RECEIVE INVENTORIES. >> ALL THE TIME IS BETTER THAN
QUARTERLY SO THANK YOU. >> I WILL BRING UP QUESTION IF WE CAN LOOK AT WHAT IT WILL COST TO HAVE SOMEONE, I DON'T KNOW
[00:55:04]
WHAT TO CALL IT, VERIFIES THE INFORMATION THEY GIVE US FROM A TAXING STANDPOINT TO WHATEVER THAT COST IS BUDGETED TO WHERE WE CAN LOOK AT IT TO COME IN SE FEBRUARY OF NEXT YEAR AND HOWEVER THEY DO IT WHERE THEY VERIFY.WE AGREE WITH THE NUMBER. IF THEY SHAVE OFF HALF A BILLION IN VALUE THAT CAN BE AN ACCIDENT ON THEIR PART AND WE MAY BE ABLE
TO CATCH THAT. >> TYPICALLY SO FAR WHAT WE'VE DONE WHEN ASKING FOR THE NUMBERS WE DO RUN THAT THROUGH THE COUNTY, AS WELL SINCE THEY ARE THE ONES ASSESSING IT AND THE COUNTY DOES HAVE SYSTEMS TO COMPARE AGAINST SO IF YOU LIKE SOMEBODY ADDITIONAL, WE CAN LOOK INTO THAT, BUT SO FAR IT'S BEEN TO JUST ENSURE THE COUNTY IS LOOPED INTO THE NUMBERS WHEN WE
RECEIVE THEM TO VERIFY. >> AT LEAST TO KNOW WHAT IT WOULD COST THE HAVE AN INDEPENDENT PERSON.
THE COUNTY IS NOT THE MOST TRUSTING OF EVERYTHING THEY ARE DOING OVER THERE BECAUSE IF THEY DID ALL THAT CORRECTLY WE WOULD NOT HAVE ALL THESE PROTESTS HAPPENING BUT YEAH, YOU MAY COME BACK AND SAY IT'S 100,000 DOLLARS TO VERIFY OR 15 GRAND AND WE CAN HAVE AN INDEPENDENT AND IT MAY BE WORTH VERIFYING
>> CHRISTINA NOTES WE USE CAPITAL APPRAISAL GROUP FOR EVALUATION OF COMPLEX PROPERTY LIKE DATA CENTERS.
AND THEY ARE BASICALLY USED BY APPRAISAL DISTRICTS TOO SO WE BASICALLY HAVE A CONSULTANT SO WE CAN HAVE A SPECIFIC REPORT ON
THIS PROJECT PREPARED. >> I DON'T WANT TO SAY I DON'T TRUST THEM BUT I DON'T TRUST THEM.
>> I'M SORRY. I DIDN'T READ THE REST OF THE
>> FROM ALVIN LANGFORD. >> THEY COORDINATED THE
APPRAISAL. >> THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT IS USING THIRD PARTY FOR THE DATA CENTER.
>> LOOK AND SEE BECAUSE AGAIN I DON'T KNOW HOW GOOD THEY ARE DOING AND WHEN WE START RELYING ON OTHER PEOPLE THAT ARE RELYING ON OTHER PEOPLE, COME BACK AND GO, OH THEY GOT FOR US A BILLION DOLLARS AND WE DIDN'T EVEN KNOW IT.
>> SURE. WE WERE WARNED ABOUT THAT EARLY ON. REMEMBER?
>> OH, YEAH AND THAT'S WHAT DAN AND I WERE TALKED ABOUT BEFORE.
WE'RE SO INTEREST IN THE VALUE WHEN IT'S COMING BECAUSE YOU ARE PROMISED A BUNCH AND YOU DO THE AGREEMENTS AND MEANWHILE THESE PEOPLE ARE GETTING PAID MILLIONS OF DOLLARS A YEAR TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO CIRCUMVENT THE RULES THEY JUST AGREED TO DO AND WE NEED PEOPLE TO FIND OUT HOW THEY ARE GOING TO DO IT AND CATCH THEM AND REDO THE AGREEMENT THEY WANT IN THE FUTURE, CLOSE ALL THE LOOP LOOPHOLES
>> ARE YOU GOING TO BE SATISFIED WITH IF WE HAVE CAPITAL APPRAISAL GROUP PROVIDE US SAME INFORMATION THEY ARE GIVING TO THE COUNTY? OR DO YOU WANT YET ANOTHER THIRD
PARTY ON TOP OF THAT? >> TO ME I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOMEONE THAT SPECIALIZES, NOT JUST DO COMPLEX THING BUT I KNOW DATA CENTERS AND THESE PEOPLE WERE LYING TOS YOU BECAUSE THEY HAVE SO MANY RACK IFS YOU TALK TO A DEVELOPER THEY CAN TELL YOU BY THE SIZE OF THE BUILDING HOW MANY PARKING SPOT AND LAND THEY NEED BECAUSE THAT'S THE ONE THING THEY DO BUT IF YOU ASK THEM ABOUT APARTMENTS, IT BLOWS THEIR MIND AND THEY WOULDN'T KNOW SO MAYBE SOMEONE SPECIALIZES AGAIN.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE COST IS OR IF IT EXISTS YET.
>> OKAY. >> WHAT DO YOU HAVE TO SAY?
>> JUST TO SEE WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE.
>> GO AHEAD, DAN. >> I WAS GOING TO SAY I THINK SEEING WHAT THESE GUYS HAVE IS A GOOD STARTING POINT.
I MEAN, I AGREE. WE MAY NEED SOMEBODY ELSE BUT WE SHOULD PROBABLY LOOK AT WHAT THEY HAVE FIRST.
>> YEAH. I MEAN WE'RE MAKINGEST MAKESES AND PROJECTIONS WHICH IS NOT REALLY A DATA POINT BUT A CLOUD.
WINDOW OF RANGE OF THIS AND THAT.
THEY ARE GOING TO BE ESTIMATING. WE CAN'T MAKE BIG POLICY CHANGES EXCEPT ON FLOOR AND NOT GO TO THE CEILING, MORE IMPORTANT TO THAT IS THE INTEGRITY AND I DON'T MEAN ILLEGAL INTEGRITY BUT MEAN TO HAVE THE INTEGRITY OF THE SOURCES.
WE'RE GOING TO MAKEST MAKESES OF THIS AND WE'RE LOOKING AT A SINGLE DATA POINT BUT WE CAN'T MAKE DECISIONS ON THAT SO I THINK IT'S EXTREMELY IMPORTANT TO HAVE INTEGRITY AND UNDERSTANDING AND LONG-STANDING PRODUCTION OF GIVING ACCURATE, VALID REPORT AND ALSO, REFERENCING HOW THEY DO THAT AND WHAT THEIR SOURCES ARE, SO I THINK IT'S AN EXTREMELY VALID POINT AND I THINK GOOD INTEGRITY AND WHO IS GIVING US DATA
>> COULD HELP WITH NEGOTIATIONS FOR FUTURE DATA CENTERS AND WHEN
[01:00:04]
WE THINK OF IT. ONE COMPANY HAS THE POTENTIAL TO BE 2/3 OF OUR CITY'S VALUE WHICH TO ME IS EXTREMELY SCARY BUT IF THEY DO WELL, THAT'S EXTREMELY BENEFICIAL ASSUMING THEY DON'TFIND A WAY. >> I WANT TO POINT OUT.
I MEAN IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE CAPTURE THE FULL VALUE OF WHAT THEY HAVE IN THERE AND DON'T LET THEM GET AWAY WITH ANYTHING.
THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT BUT AS FAR AS BUDGETING AND PLANNING GOES, WE REALLY NEED TO LOOK AT THIS THE WAY WE LOOKING AT THE HOT FUND WHERE'S WE WAIT UNTIL WE HAVE THE MONEY AND THEN DECIDE WHAT WE CAN SPEND BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO DIFFER EACH YEAR BECAUSE OF DEPRECIATION AND A CONTRACT IS GOING TO CHANGE.
SOMEBODY IS GOING TO MOVE OUT. SOMEBODY IS GOING TO MOVE IN.
THOSE EVALUATIONS ARE GOING TO GO UP AND DOWN DRAMATICALLY SOMETIMES AND WE CAN'T PLAN FUTURE STEPS BASED ON THAT.
WE HAVE TO SPEND THAT MONEY AFTER IT COMES IN LIKE IT WAS
WHEN WE DUCTED PREVIOUS COUNCILS, WE RECYCLING THIS CASH TO DO PRODUCTS IN CASH. I HOPE FUTURE COUNCILS TAKE WHAT WE DID, DO NOT GO OUT AND BORROW THIRTY-YEAR DATA BASED ON IT ONE YEARS WORTH OF MONEY. BECAUSE LET'S SAY WE HAVE A THREE YEAR DEPRECIATION ON THE EQUIPMENT.
>> THAT CAN DIFFER TOO. DIFFERENT COMPANIES MAY HAVE
DIFFERENT SCHEDULES TOO. >> SO YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THE DATA VALUE TODAY. NEXT YEAR YOU HAVE SEVEN AND A HALF MILLION. SO HE LOST TWO AND A HALF MILLION IN EVALUATION. IF WE START HIRING PEOPLE AND BORROWING DEBT BASED ON VALUATIONS, THEN WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO MAKE-- IF WE HAD A DROP THIS YEAR, SHE HAD TO TAKE 2.5 MILLION UP THE ROLL FOR NEXT YEAR.
AND WE DON'T KNOW IF THAT WILL BE IN OUR BUDGET YET.
IT WILL BE CRAZY NEXT YEAR. >> I WOULD NOT DO ANYTHING IN THE BUDGET FOR NEW REVENUE. IT WOULD JUST SUCK FOR EVERYBODY. THE.
>> WE ARE NOT SEEING 11 MILLION-- WE ARE SEEING 11 MILLION IN VALUE. SO...
>> TO COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON'S POINT, THAT IS EFFECTIVELY WHAT WE'RE DOING RIGHT RIGHT NOW. BUT THERE IS NOTHING TO THE MAYOR'S POINT THAT PROHIBITS FUTURE COUNCILS FROM DOING THAT DIFFERENTLY. SO WE ARE TAKING THE CASH THAT WE KNOW WE WILL RECEIVE BASED ON THE CERTIFIED VALUES AND WE ARE USING THAT TO PUT TOWARDS DEBT SERVICE PAYMENTS, TO PUT TOWARDS DEBT SERVICE PAYMENTS SO THE UTILITY FUND HAS THE RELIEF.
BUT IF THAT MONEY WAS NOT THERE, THEN THE UTILITY FUND WOULD HAVE
TO MAKE THAT UP. >> I HAVE A QUESTION.
I APPRECIATE THE COMMENT ABOUT HOW WE ANTICIPATE THE MONEY AND WHEN WE PLAN TO SPEND IT. I THINK THAT IS SMART, ESPECIALLY AS WE ENTER THIS NEW ERA OF THE POSSIBILITY OF REVENUE COMING IN FROM DATA CENTERS.
BUT MOVING BACK A BIT, I WAS INTERESTED IN WHAT THE MAYOR WAS SAYING ABOUT WHAT TYPE OF PROTECTIONS, OR SHOULD WE BE LOOKING AT ADDITIONAL TYPES OF CHECKS AND BALANCES THAT WE SHOULD HAVE FOR THIS TYPE OF BUSINESS THAT COMES IN TO OUR CITY? BECAUSE THIS IS NEW INFORMATION FOR ME, AS I LEARN THIS PROCESS, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE WE DO NOT HAVE A FULLY VETTED BOUGHT OUT SYSTEM FOR MAKING SURE THAT THE INFORMATION THAT WE ARE RECEIVING IS VALID AND TRUE.
I JUST WANT TO SPEND A LITTLE MORE TIME IF WE CAN, DISCUSSING THIS. HOW DO WE MAKE SURE THAT THE INFORMATION THAT WE ARE GETTING FROM THESE TYPES OF DEVELOPMENTS AND OPERATIONS ARE TRUE AND VALID, AND WHAT IS THE CHECKS AND BALANCES SYSTEM LOOKING LIKE TO MAKE SURE THOSE NUMBERS ARE REAL, IN THAT WE CAN HAVE THAT TYPE OF INTEGRITY AS THE
INFORMATION COMES IN? >> REALLY, IT IS THE COUNTY THAT DOES ALL OF THAT TODAY. SO WE ARE RELYING ON THEM.
THE WAY THAT IT IS WORKING RIGHT NOW, WE ARE RELYING ON THEM TO DO ALL THAT. AND MAKE SURE THAT WHOEVER THEY HIRE TO HELP THEM IS DOING IT CORRECTLY.
AND WE ARE BASICALLY SAYING, WE ARE NOT 100% COMFORTABLE WITH THAT. AND WE WANT TO GET IN THERE AND POTENTIALLY HELP TO IMPROVE THAT, IF IT NEEDS IMPROVEMENT.
BUT WE DEFINITELY WANT TO UNDERSTAND IT.
AND WE DO NOT YET. SO THAT IS WHERE WE ARE RIGHT
AND IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE ARE INITIATING? THAT WE START DOING OR LOOKING INTO?
>> I THINK THAT IS KIND OF THE QUESTION, OF HOW DO WE DO THAT.
[01:05:02]
>> THAT IS WHAT I AM HOPING, COUNCILMEMBER, FOR US TO UNDERSTAND, WHAT ARE THE COSTS TO DO THAT AND HOW-- HAVE THAT SECOND LOOK, AND IS IT WORTH PURSUING AND HAVING THAT?
>> AND MAYBE, BECAUSE I REMEMBER WHEN WE ASKED THE STATE.
THIS WAS WHEN KELLY CAME AND VISITED OUR CITY CHAMBERS MEETING. I ASKED WHAT THE STATE HAD IN PLACE TO GUARANTEE THAT THIS DATA CENTER DEVELOPMENT WAS PRODUCING A TRUE NET POSITIVE FOR COMMUNITIES LIKE OURS.
AND AT THE STATE LEVEL, THEY DID NOT HAVE ANYTHING IN PLACE.
SO IT COMES DOWN, IT SOUNDS LIKE, TO THE COUNTY LEVEL.
AND THEN THERE IS A GAP THERE BETWEEN THE COUNTY LEVEL AND WHAT HAPPENS AT THE CITY, AND WHAT TYPES OF CHECKS AND BALANCES OR MODELS WE HAVE IN PLACE, OR SAFETY NETS WE HAVE IN PLACE. SO IT IS SOMETHING TO CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION AROUND AND PURSUE.
I DO NOT KNOW WHERE THAT FALLS IN RESPONSIBILITY AND ROLES, BUT I THINK IT IS A WORTHWHILE INITIATIVE THAT WE LOOKED AT AS A CITY. BECAUSE THEY ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TO TRY TO COME IN TO OUR COMMUNITY.
AND WE SHOULD HAVE MORE CONFIDENCE THAT THIS WILL BE A TRUE NET POSITIVE FOR US. WEATHER BECAUSE WE HAVE OUR OWN SYSTEM OF CHECKING IN, OR BECAUSE WE ORGANIZE THE REQUIREMENTS AND MAYBE THE COATING ON CONTRACTS AROUND
THESE TYPES OF DEVELOPMENTS. >> ARE THERE ANY OTHER BUDGET RELATED ITEMS THAT YOU WOULD LIKE THEM TO LOOK AT?
ALL RIGHT, CAN I SUSPEND-- >> SORRY, WE HAVE MOVED ON.
>> MAYBE THIS IS MORE FOR CITY MANAGER.
WE HAD THAT ADA COMPLIANCE PERSON COME IN.
AND WE WERE LOOKING AT $7 MILLION OVER TWO OR THREE OR FOUR YEAR PERIODS. WE HAVE THIS IN OUR BUDGET.
WAS AT SUBTOPICS? >> I THINK IT'S A CIP.
WE HAVE HALF A MILLION DOLLARS. >> SO IT'S EFFECTIVELY THE MONEY WE WERE IDENTIFYING FOR SIDEWALK STRUCTURES?
>> I REMEMBER THAT. >> WE ARE PUTTING THAT TOWARDS
THANK YOU. >> IS THAT IT FOR US? WE CAN GO FOR THE NEXT HOUR IF YOU WANT US TO.
>> WE DID GET THE BUDGET BOOK PRODUCED.
AND LIKE EVERY YEAR THERE WILL BE ERRORS AND THE THINGS WE FIND IN IT. SO WE WILL CLEAN THAT UP AND AS WE DO WE WILL DO VERSION CONTROL.
SO YOU WILL ALL BE NEEDING TO PAY ATTENTION TO MAKE SURE WE ARE UPLOADING A NEW VERSION THAT YOU ARE USING THE MOST UP TO DATA VERSION. AND THAT WILL NOT BE CHANGING ANYTHING THAT WE PROPOSE. BUT IT WILL BE CLEANING UP THE FORMATTING ERRORS AND THAT SORT OF STUFF.
>> THAT MAY SOUND LIKE A LOT OF WORK.
BUT I'M GLAD YOU BROUGHT THAT UP.
AND YEARS PASSED, IT SEEMS LIKE I WILL PRINT A BUDGET-- WHEN YOU PRINTED, IT COMES OUT DIFFERENTLY THAN ONLINE.
SO I PRINT IT AND A COUPLE OF US WILL MEET, AND THEN YOU GUYS DO AN UPDATE AND THINGS CHANGE. AND I'M LIKE HOW DO I KNOW THE DIFFERENCE? WHEN YOU DO AN UPDATE, AND YOU MAKE IT A PDF AND PUT IT ON THE WEBSITE WITH VERSION ONE, AND WE HAVE 40 VERSIONS THAT WE CAN LOOK AND SEE.
I GET REALLY CONFUSED BY THE END.
>> I WOULD NOT PRINT THIS ONE BECAUSE WE WILL BE CLEANING IT UP NEXT WEEK. I WOULD WAIT TO PRINTED.
>> AND ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS, THERE IS NO MORE PRESENTATION.
IT'S JUST TIME FOR US TO DISCUSS ISSUES AND THINGS WE HAVE.
DO YOU HAVE MORE? >> THAT IS IT.
>> THERE WAS SOMETHING THAT CAME UP TO US REGARDING-- AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND EXACTLY, BUT IT'S SOMETHING TO DO WITH RETIREMENT.
SOMETHING CHANGED WITH RETIREMENT THAT AFFECTS A COUPLE PEOPLE. AND I DO NOT KNOW THE SPECIFICS.
BUT I THINK THAT YOU GUYS KNOW IN HR OR FINANCE.
BUT SOMETHING CHANGED. IT'S SOME LITTLE NUMBER IN A BUDGET LINE A YEAR OR TWO AGO. WE PASSED IT.
IF YOU GUYS COULD... >> I THINK I KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. IT IS NOT RETIREMENT.
IT IS THE AMOUNT THAT THE CITY HAS THE RETIREES PAY FOR INSURANCE COVERAGE, IF THEY ELECT TO STAY ON THE CITY'S
[01:10:06]
INSURANCE BEFORE THEY BECOME ELIGIBLE FOR MEDICARE.IF HE RETIREMENT 16 YEARS OLD AND YOU CANNOT GET MEDICARE UNTIL 16-- 65, THEN YOU COULD ELECT TO STAY ON THE CITY'S HEALTH INSURANCE, BUT PAY A PREMIUM TO CONTINUE TO BE COVERED. THAT IS THE ONLY THING THAT I AM AWARE OF THAT HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH RETIREMENT.
AND I HAVE ALREADY DIRECTED STAFF FOR US TO GO OUT AND PRICE WHAT THE INSURANCE WOULD COST. BASICALLY IF YOU WERE JUST DOING IT ON YOUR OWN. OR IF WE WERE GOING TO BUY INSURANCE AND ALLOW THAT TO STILL BE A BENEFIT, TO DETERMINE IF WHAT WE ARE CHARGING IS MORE THAN THAT NUMBER OR LESS THAN THAT NUMBER. AND THAT WAY THE COUNCIL CAN DECIDE IF THEY WANT TO CONTINUE TO OFFER THAT BENEFIT OR THEY WANT TO UNDERWRITE IT MORE ORSAY, HEY,, WE WILL GIVE SOME MONEY TOWARDS IT, BUT YOU GUYS WILL HAVE TO PICK UP THE BULK OF THE PRICE. FROM NOT HAVING IT TO IT'S 150% RIGHT NOW WHAT THE EMPLOYEE WOULD PAY FOR COVERAGE WITH-- WHAT THE CITY PAYS FOR THE EMPLOYEE TO COVER.
IF YOU ARE GOING TO ELECT TO HAVE-- IT'S BASICALLY LIKE A DISCOUNTING CODE. IT'S BASICALLY WHAT IT IS.
>> AS A RECENT RETIREE, I HAVE TO-- IF I'M GOING TO STAY ON IT, MY RATE, I PAY WHATEVER IT CO COSTS, WHICH SHOULD BE BECAUSE YOU HAVE 40,000 EMPLOYEES, YOU ARE GETTING IT CHEAPER THAN IF I WENT OUT ON MY OWN. SO LET'S SAY THE COST IS $1000 PER MONTH, AND WE ARE SAYING YOU HAVE TO PAY MORE THAN 1000.
FIRST OFF I WOULD NOT BE IN FAVOR OF THAT.
>> WE CHARGE THEM MORE. >> WE CHARGE THEM MORE.
I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF THAT. BUT I ALSO WOULD NOT BE IN FAVOR OF IT WITH US SAYING WE APPRECIATE EVERYTHING YOU DID FOR US, WE ARE GOING TO CHARGE YOU 500.
BECAUSE THEN YOU HAVE TO PAY FOR RETIREMENT TOO.
SO THERE IS PROBABLY SOMETHING TO PAY EXCESS.
BECAUSE I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW HOW MUCH THAT IS.
IT MAY SOUND LIKE A LOT AND YOU'RE LIKE IT'S ONLY $100 PER MONTH, BUT IF IT'S LIKE 1500, FOR WHATEVER REASON, DSP IS
$1000 FOR MONTH. >> $1000 PER MONTH FOR
SO THE RETIREES THEY'LL ON THAT INSURANCE, BECAUSE FOR WHATEVER REASON IT IS HEAVILY SUBSIDIZED. SO WE ARE JUST GOING TO STICK WITH OUR PLAN. BUT AS SOON AS I HEARD THAT I THOUGHT THAT IS AN INTERESTING THING.
>> SO WHAT IS THE INCENTIVE FOR THE EMPLOYEE TO WANT TO STAY FOR
25 YEARS AND RETIRED. >> THEY CAN STAY AND RETIRE AT 65. AND GO STRAIGHT IN TO MEDICARE.
IT IS ONLY THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN RETIRING BEFORE MEDICARE ELIGIBILITY THAT ARE GOING TO WANT TO HAVE SOME SORT OF
INSURANCE COVERAGE. >> WE ARE PROBABLY TALKING A FEW
EMPLOYEES. >> IT'S A SMALL NUMBER.
>> I HAD A CONVERSATION WITH DAVID ON THIS ABOUT LAST WEEK AS WELL. HE SAID HE WOULD LOOK INTO IT.
>> THAT IS THE ONLY THING RETIREMENT RELATED I CAN THINK OF. ACTUAL RETIREMENT, THAT HAS NOT CHANGED EXCEPT FOR THE BETTER. BECAUSE WE ARE PUTTING IN THE ABILITY FOR PEOPLE THAT HAVE PREVIOUS SERVICE FROM ANOTHER CITY THAT THEY CASHED OUT, TO PUT THAT MONEY BACK IN.
OTHER THAN THAT, IT IS EXACTLY THE SAME.
STILL 7%. >> I KNOW EMPLOYEES, I KNOW EVERYBODY HERE HAS EMPLOYEES. IT SEEMS LIKE THE PAST FIGURES HAVE BEEN TIGHT. I REALLY HOPE THAT WITH THE DATACENTRE, THE OTHER THINGS COMING IN, AND THE BIG PROJECTS, THAT WE WILL SEE A LOT OF THESE INVESTMENTS THAT WERE MADE.
WE WILL SEE THAT COME BACK TO WHERE NOW IT WILL BE-- WE ARE STILL GOING TO SCRUTINIZE EVERY PENNY, BUT IT WILL NOT BE LIKE, INSTEAD OF ARE YOU GETTING A 2027 F-150, WHY NOT GET 2025, BECAUSE YOU GUYS HAVE BEEN VERY REASONABLE IN A BUDGET YEAR.
YOUR ASKS OUR MORE LIKE NEEDS AND WANTS.
SO WE TALKED BEFORE THE MEETING ABOUT THE LIBRARY FOR INSTANCE.
TALKING ABOUT THE THINGS WE CANNOT DO IF WE DON'T GET THESE AGREEMENTS DONE. SO WE ARE FIGHTING ABOUT THINGS
[01:15:03]
TODAY, LITERALLY FIGHTING ABOUT THINGS TOMORROW KNOWING THESE ARE THE NEEDS THAT WE SEE COMING.SO WE ARE NOT TRYING TO BE TOUGH APPEAR.
LIKE A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS I HAVE AT THE CITY MANAGER, IT'S HOW DO WE MAKE SURE THAT IF YOU GUYS ARE GOING TO BE HERE AND SPEND 20 YEARS HERE, HOW DO WE MAKE SURE YOU DON'T CHEAT THE SYSTEM FOR AND EASY WIN. AND FIVE YEARS FROM NOW WE DO WHAT THEY DO IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND DEPLOY THE NEXT GROUP OF PEOPLE. WE WANT THE NEXT GROUP OF PEOPLE TO BE LIKE THEY LEFT US IN A GOOD POSITION.
I KNOW IT'S BEEN TOUGH AND I HOPE THAT THIS IS LAST YEAR WHERE-- THE LAST YEAR WHERE WE ARE REALLY SCRUTINIZING THAT.
IT'S A LOT BETTER THAN IT WAS IN 2020.
>> COUNCIL I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY, AND I KNOW THAT IT IS THEIR JOB, BUT THAT IS NOT THE POINT, TO THANK THE BUDGET TEAM, ALL THE STAFF WHO PUT IN HOURS AND HOURS.
EVEN THOUGH IT'S THEIR JOB ALL YEAR LONG, THIS IS A BIG LIFT AT THIS TIME OF YEAR. BRAEDEN SPECIFICALLY, OUR BUDGET ANALYST, IS THAT YOUR TITLE? COORDINATOR.
HE AND HIS SIGNIFICANT OTHER ARE MOVING UP TO CHICAGO.
SO HE WILL BE LEAVING US AND WE ARE SAD TO SEE HIM GO.
HE HAS BECOME EXCEPTIONALLY PROFICIENT.
HE HAS BEEN A HUGE ADDITION TO THE TEAM.
A LOT OF THE SIMPLICITY HAS BEEN BECAUSE OF ALBERTA.
THE SIMPLICITY OF BUDGET HAS BEEN BECAUSE OF ALBERTA AND BRAEDEN AND IT'S CHRIS-- CHRISTINA DIRECTLY.
LOTS OF OTHERS HAVE PUT IN TIME. SO, THANK YOU.
>> I SECOND THAT MOTION. ROUND OF APPLAUSE FOR EVERYONE.
[APPLAUSE] >> AND I WILL ASSIST STAFF AND EVERYTHING. EVEN PARTS OVER THERE.
LIBRARY, THIS TAKES A BIG UNION OF THE COORDINATORS, AND FINANCE AND EBC. BUT EVERYBODY HAS AN INPUT IN THIS, EVEN I.T. LAW ENFORCEMENT.
IT IS A TEAM EFFORT. AND I APPLAUD THE CITY MANAGER FOR CREATING THIS TEAM AND LETTING THIS TEAM DO WHAT IT DOES BEST AND LETTING US GET OUT OF THE WAY WITH THE-- AND LET THE EXPERTS RUN THE SHOW. THANK YOU.
>> I JUST WANTED TO THANK EVERYBODY, THE EXECUTIVE TEAM, STAFF, CHRISTINA, BRAEDEN. HE HAS DONE SUCH A WONDERFUL JOB WITH HELPING ALL THE DEPARTMENTS WITH HOW IT WORKS AND HELPING WITH THE BUDGET. WE ARE TRULY GOING TO MISS HIM.
AND BRAEDEN HAS BEEN A GREAT ADDITION TO US HELPING US WITH THE BUDGETS. I WANT TO THANK EVERYBODY.
ME PERSONALLY, I WANT TO THANK JANE AND JAMES, BECAUSE WITHOUT THEM, WE MIGHT NOT HAVE BEEN WHERE WE ARE TODAY.
WE THANK EVERYBODY. >> ARE YOU TEARING UP?
>> NO. >> I WAS LIKE MAN, WE ALMOST
CAPTURED THOSE ALBERTA TEARS. >> DO YOU GUYS WANT TO ADJOURN? WE WILL
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.