[00:00:04]
THEN, UH, WE HAVE, UH, CORE, WE HAVE EVERYBODY, UH, HERE, I'M GOING TO CALL TO ORDER.
TODAY'S A BUDGET WORK SESSION.
WE'RE HANDLING THIS MEETING HYBRID BOAT.
SOME OF THE COUNCIL HERE, SOME VIRTUAL, UH, IT IS, UM, UH, NINE 18.
UH, AND WE'LL, WE'LL BEGIN THIS MEETING COLLEAGUES TODAY IN FRONT OF US.
UH, WE HAVE A EXECUTIVE SESSION.
WE ALSO HAVE THE, UH, THE, THE BUDGET ITEMS. WE DON'T HAVE A HARD STOP MANDATED TO US TODAY, BUT I THINK WE SHOULD TRY REAL HARD TO PUT WHAT AT OUR OWN HEADS AND SEE IF WE COULD HIT IT AND SEE IF WE CAN STOP AT FIVE.
THAT GIVES US A FULL DAY TO BE ABLE TO BE HERE, BUT WE CAN ADJUST THAT AGAIN.
IT'S NOT A HARD STOP, BUT LET'S THINK ABOUT THE DAY.
I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE START THIS MORNING JUST WITH THE PRESENTATION AND WORK THROUGH THOSE, UH, ITEMS. UH, MAYBE, UH, LET'S SEE HOW FAR WE GET ARE THOSE.
SEE IF WE COULD WORK OUR WAY THROUGH THE BUDGET STUFF THAT WOULD CLEAR US THAT TO HAVE LUNCH AND COME BACK AT EXECUTIVE SESSION.
UH, WE'RE ABLE TO DO THAT, BUT LET'S GET STARTED AND, AND SEE HOW WE MOVE.
ALL RIGHT, MANAGER, I THINK WE'RE GOING TO START THEN WITH THE, UH, UH, WITH THE, WITH THE EXECUTIVE SESSION, I'M GOING TO NEED TO STEP OFF, UH, THE DIOCESE AT, UH, 10 30 FOR A HALF AN HOUR.
UH, MAYBE A TAD MORE, BUT I THINK ABOUT A HALF AN HOUR.
UM, BUT YOU ALL CAN PROCEED IN A BUNCH OF DISCUSSIONS HERE WITH, WITHOUT ME.
ALL RIGHT, MANAGER, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO YOU.
THANK YOU, MARILYN CONSOLE AND
[1. Discussion about the fiscal year 2021-2022 proposed budget and tax rate.]
GOOD MORNING.UH, THIS IS A CONTINUATION OF OUR BUDGET WORK SESSION FROM TUESDAY.
UH, WE HAVE UPDATED THE PRESENTATION AND SENT THAT TO YOU YESTERDAY.
UM, BUT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE OUR INTERIM BUDGET OFFICER JUST WALKED THROUGH, UH, THE AGENDA THAT IS BEEN POSTED AND WE'LL GET STARTED.
CITY MANAGER, CARRIE LANG, INTERIM BUDGET OFFICER.
UM, AND AS WE GET THE PRESENTATION PULLED UP, CAN YOU ALL HEAR HER? OKAY.
SO, UM, GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE PLEASE, CHAIR WHILE I CAN HEAR.
SO WE'RE GOING TO START TODAY'S DISCUSSION WITH THE UPDATE OF THE REVENUE FOR FISCAL YEAR 22.
UM, AND THEN WE'LL MOVE FORWARD WITH A PRESENTATION BY THE AUSTIN PARKS, UH, PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT BASED ON THE PARKS FOUNDATIONS, UM, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND THEN HOMELESS STRATEGY OFFICER WILL COME AND SPEAK ABOUT THE HOMELESS STRATEGY OFFICE, UM, HOUSING AND PLANNING, WE'LL DISCUSS DISPLACEMENT PREVENTION, DIVISION, UM, AND ACTIVITIES ACROSS THE CITY.
AND THEN, UM, APD WILL COME AND TALK ABOUT POLICE STAFFING AND FUNDING OVERVIEW.
FINALLY, WE HAVE A, UM, UPDATE ON THE FINANCIAL POLICIES, POLICY CHANGES THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED BY THE AUDIT FINANCE COMMITTEE.
UM, AND SO WE'LL GET STARTED RIGHT NOW WITH THE BUDGET OFFICE, UM, PRESENTING THE UPDATE AND OUR INTERIM BUDGET, OFFICER ERIC, UH, INTERIM DEPUTY BUDGET OFFICER ERIC NELSON WILL BE GIVEN THAT PRESENTATION MAYOR.
SO ON OUR AGENDA FROM TUESDAY, WE HAD SCHEDULED TO GET A BRIEFING ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OR FROM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.
AND, UM, I APOLOGIZE FOR NOT INCLUDING THAT IN MY EMAIL LAST NIGHT, THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, UM, PROVIDED A DETAILED, UM, UM, RESPONSE TO A BUDGET QUESTION ABOUT THEIR BUDGET OVERALL.
AND WHEN WE WERE LOOKING AT THE TIMELINE FOR, FOR TODAY AND, AND TUESDAY, WE DECIDED TO REMOVE THAT EDD, UM, OVERVIEW TO, UM, MAKE SURE WE HAD ENOUGH TIME TO COVER THE OTHER ITEMS. THANK YOU, ERIC.
I'M ERIC NELSON, INTERIM DEPUTY BUDGET OFFICER.
UH, IF WE CAN GO UP A SLIDE OR TWO, I JUST WANT TO PROVIDE A RELATIVELY BRIEF UPDATE ABOUT THE GENERAL FUND REVENUE SITUATION AFTER RECEIPT OF THE CERTIFIED TAX ROLLS AND DOING THE OFFICIAL TAX RATE CALCULATIONS.
UM, ALSO, UH, DO A LITTLE UPDATE ON SALES TAX TOWARDS THE END AS WELL.
UH, I BEGAN AS I USUALLY DO WITH THE GLOOM AND DOOM, BUT I PROMISE THAT IT WILL GET A LITTLE MORE OPTIMISTIC AS WE MOVE FORWARD.
[00:05:02]
NOW, THIS IS A CHART THAT WE JUST CALLED THE CHART AND THE BUDGET OFFICE.NOW THAT YOU'RE PROBABLY ALL PRETTY FAMILIAR WITH, AND IT JUST SHOWS THE FIVE-YEAR FORECAST SITUATION FOR THE GENERAL FUND AS OF THE PROPOSED BUDGET, AS YOU'RE ALL VERY WELL AWARE, WE'RE GETTING SQUEEZED BY THE CHANGES TO THE STATE REVENUE CAP.
UM, THESE FIGURES ARE, UH, MUCH BETTER THAN THEY WERE AT FORECASTS, BUT WE'RE STILL PROJECTING BUDGET DEFICITS BEGINNING WITH NEXT YEAR AND, AND EXPANDING, UM, ON, INTO THE FUTURE.
AGAIN, PRIMARILY AS A RESULT OF, OF BEING SQUEEZED ON THE PROPERTY TAX SIDE.
IF WE GO, CAN WE GO TO THAT NEXT SLIDE? I'M TO DO I CONTROL THAT? OKAY.
UH, THIS SLIDE SUMMARIZES THE RESULTS AND THE CHANGES, UM, FROM THE RECEIPT OF CERTIFICATION FROM THE APPRAISAL DISTRICTS, I WAS THE FIRST COUPLE OF LINES SHOW.
WE WERE ACTUALLY VERY CLOSE WITH OUR PROJECTIONS ABOUT OVERALL TAXABLE VALUE AND, AND NEW CONSTRUCTION VALUE.
UH, THE NET EFFECT OF THOSE CHANGES TO DRIVE OUR PROJECTED TAX RATE DOWN A LITTLE BIT, WHICH HAD SOME POSITIVE EFFECTS FOR OUR TYPICAL TAXPAYERS, AS WE'LL SEE IN THE SUBSEQUENT SLIDE.
UM, WE DID COME UP A LITTLE BIT SHORT RELATIVE TO OUR PROJECTIONS FOR TOTAL GENERAL FUND PROPERTY TAX REVENUE, ALTHOUGH THAT'S PRIMARY FUNCTION OF, UH, WHAT I, WHAT I'VE BEEN CALLING THE MYSTERY ADJUSTMENT THAT THE STATE ADDED DURING LAST YEAR CERTIFICATION PROCESS AND WHICH CARRIE ADDRESSED IN THE COVER MEMO TO THE FIVE-YEAR FORECAST REPORT.
AND, UH, THIS ADJUSTMENT, UM, IS, UH, A FORECASTING NIGHTMARE, FRANKLY, BUT IT'S ALSO JUST DELETERIOUS TO OUR REVENUE.
AND, UM, IT'S DIFFICULT FOR THE CAZ TO CALCULATE IT AS WELL.
AND WE WOULD HAVE BEEN VERY CLOSE TO OUR ORIGINAL PROJECTION, BUT TEAK HAD MADE A LAST MINUTE CHANGE TO HOW THEY'RE HANDLING THAT ADJUSTMENT THIS YEAR.
AND, UM, SO THAT ERODED SOME OF, SOME OF OUR EXPECTED REVENUE.
AS I SAID, THE, THE TAX RATE, HE DID GO DOWN A BIT FROM THE PROJECTIONS.
WE HAD VERY MARGINAL CHANGES TO THE, THE UNDERLYING, UM, TYPICAL HOME VALUES THEMSELVES.
SO THESE UPDATES ARE MAINLY JUST A REFLECTION OF THE TAX RATE, BUT WE HAVE BEEN PROJECTING, UM, THAT THE TYPICAL HOMEOWNER WOULD SAVE ABOUT $9 IN COMPARISON WITH THE PRIOR YEAR.
AND NOW WE'RE EXPECTING THAT TO BE OVER $33.
UH, THIS IS PRIMARILY A RESULT OF COUNCIL'S EFFORTS TO, TO GO TO THE FULL 20% GENERAL HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION BACK IN JUNE FOR OUR SENIOR AND DISABLED HOMEOWNERS.
IT'S ALSO GOOD NEWS, UH, CAUSE OF THIS LOWER TAX RATE.
UM, THERE ARE GOING TO EXPERIENCE SIGNIFICANT SAVINGS AND NOW THAT SAVINGS IS APPROACHING ALMOST $200 A YEAR.
THESE CHANGES ALSO HAVE FAVORABLE IMPACT ON THE OVERALL SITUATION FOR OUR TYPICAL RATE PAYER.
UM, YOU KNOW, THE ONLY LINE ON HERE THAT'S CHANGED SINCE THE PROPOSED BUDGET IS THE PROPERTY TAX BILL, WHICH SHOULD TIE BACK TO THE PRIOR SLIDE, UM, THAT $33 OR SO YEARS, ABOUT $2 AND 79 CENTS A MONTH.
AND THE NET EFFECT HERE IS THAT THE WHOLE BASKET OF GOODS THAT OUR TYPICAL RESIDENT IS PAYING EACH MONTH IS, IS ONLY AN INCREASED BY A LITTLE OVER A DOLLAR THAT'S 0.3%.
UM, THAT'S SINCE WE STARTED TRACKING THIS ABOUT 10 YEARS AGO, THAT'S THE SECOND BEST, THE SECOND LOWEST IT'S EVER BEEN.
AND THE, UH, COMPARABLE THE ONLY LOWER YEAR WAS THE FIRST YEAR THAT, UH, COUNCIL INSTITUTED THE GENERAL HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION BACK IN FY 16.
COULD YOU SPEAK UP A LITTLE BIT? SORRY.
I AM RESPONSE TO COUNCIL MEMBER KOSSAR'S REQUESTS.
WE, WE TOOK A LOOK AT, UM, UH, WHAT THE TAX RATE INCREASE WOULD BE WHERE THERE'D BE NO IMPACT TO THE TYPICAL HOMEOWNER.
AND THAT WORKS OUT TO EXACTLY A 6% EFFECTIVE INCREASE.
AND AT THAT RATE, IT WOULD GENERATE AN ADDITIONAL $14.4 MILLION IN PROPERTY TAX REVENUE.
UM, AS I THINK WE'VE ADDRESSED IN OTHER CONTEXTS BECAUSE OF RECENT CHANGES TO STATE LEGISLATION, ANY REVENUE IN EXCESS OF THE THREE AND A HALF PERCENT INCREASE WOULD GET BACKED OUT IN A FUTURE YEAR.
SO WE'D STRONGLY RECOMMEND THAT THAT ANY REVENUE GENERATED AND ACCESS OF THAT BE DEVOTED TO ONE TIME PURPOSES.
SO AT THAT $0 IMPACT LEVEL, IF YOU COULD GENERATE $14.4 MILLION AND, UH, UH, THE COUNCIL MEMBER ALSO ASKED FOR A NOMINAL INCREASE AND ACTUALLY AT THE FULL 8%, IT ONLY WORKS OUT TO ABOUT A $2 AND 9 CENT PER MONTH INCREASE FOR THE TYPICAL HOMEOWNER.
AND THAT WOULD GENERATE $25.4 MILLION
[00:10:03]
AGAIN, UH, FOR ONE TIME PURPOSES.UH, IN ADDITION TO LOOKING AT THE PROPERTY TAX, WE'VE ALSO BEEN TRACKING SALES TAX CLOSELY AND, UH, SO WE'VE REVISED OUR SALES TAX PROJECTIONS AS WELL SINCE WE FINALIZED THE NUMBERS FOR THE PROPOSED BUDGET, WE'VE HAD TWO PAYMENTS COME IN AND THOSE HAVE BEEN, UM, VERY STRONG.
I THINK A LOT OF THAT IS REFLECTING PENT UP DEMAND, UM, BECAUSE THEY REFLECT, UH, APRIL AND MAY SALES, WHICH IS WHEN THINGS ARE JUST FULLY REOPENING.
AND YOU ALSO HAVE THE EFFECT OF, I THINK, FEDERAL STIMULUS PAYMENTS.
SO I'M A LITTLE BIT HESITANT ABOUT THAT BEING A SUSTAINABLE TREND FOR THE LONGTERM, ESPECIALLY AT THE LEVELS WE'VE BEEN SEEING.
UM, WE'RE ALSO NOW FACING THE PROSPECT OF, UH, STAGE FIVE RESTRICTIONS RETURNING AND, AND, UM, THAT COULD HAVE, UM, THAT COULD TAMPER A SALES TAX GROWTH AS WELL.
SO IN LIGHT OF THAT, WE'VE, UM, RECOGNIZED THE EFFECT FROM THOSE TWO PAYMENTS.
AND WE'VE ALSO BUMPED UP OUR EXPECTATIONS FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE YEAR, SLIGHTLY, THE NET EFFECT OF THOSE CHANGES THAT THERE'D BE AN ADDITIONAL $5.8 MILLION IN SALES TAX REVENUE EXPECTED FOR FY 21 THAT WOULD FLOW TO RESERVES AND THEREFORE BECOME AVAILABLE FOR ONE-TIME USE IN FY 22.
AND THEN LOOKING AT FYA 22 ITSELF, WE HAVE THE NEGATIVE TWO AND A HALF MILLION DOLLARS AS A RESULT OF PROPERTY TAX CERTIFICATION.
UH, REVISE THAT ESTIMATE FOR THE SALES TAX WOULD BE $5.6 MILLION IN REVENUE FOR A NET $3.1 MILLION IN REVENUE FOR FY 22.
NOW, TECHNICALLY THAT WOULD BE AN ONGOING REVENUE SOURCE, BUT IN LIGHT OF THE FIRST SLIDE, THE CHART SHOWING OUR ONGOING DEFICITS, WE'D URGE YOU TO, UH, DEVOTE THOSE FUNDS TO ONE TIME AS WELL.
SO IT NOT TO WORSE THAN THAT DEFICIT.
AND WE COULD GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, WHICH I BELIEVE IS JUST A DISCUSSION SIDE.
AND, UM, I'M HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS.
SO JUST TO SUMMARIZE IT AND MAKE SURE THAT I UNDERSTAND THIS, UH, BECAUSE OF THE CHANGES THAT CERTIFIED VALUE, YOU'RE SAYING THAT IF THE COUNCIL WERE TO, UH, ADOPT A TAX RATE THAT WOULD HAVE, THAT WOULD BE NEUTRAL TO THE TYPICAL HOMEOWNER OR WAS NOT RAISED TAXES AT ALL, THAT THERE'S A, UH, POTENTIAL AT THAT POINT FOR AN ADDITIONAL ONE TIME SPENDING RECOMMENDED BEYOND WHAT YOU INDICATED IN THE MANAGER'S BUDGET FOR THE COMBINATION OF THOSE THREE ELEMENTS, THE FIVE POINT DATE, THE 3.1 AND THE 14.4.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.
AND WHAT DOES THAT COMBINATION TOTAL TOO? I DIDN'T KNOW WHETHER SHE SUBTRACTED THE PROPERTY TAX OR ADD, BUT DOES THAT COME OUT TO LIKE 17, JUST OVER 17 MILLION? YEAH.
YOU COULD JUST ADD ALL THOSE FIGURES TOGETHER, BUT WHEN YOU ADD THEM TOGETHER, IT'S HIGHER THAN THAT THOUGH.
ISN'T IT? IT'S 14 FOUR PLUS THE 5.8 PLUS THE 3.1.
IS THAT CORRECT? I THINK IT WOULD BE, IS IT 23.3? SO WHAT I'M GETTING 23.3.
COUNCIL MEMBER, UH, MAYOR PRO TAM AND THE COUNCIL MEMBER ALTER THAN COUNCIL MEMBER KITCHEN.
UM, I THINK WHAT I HEARD, EXCUSE ME, YOU SAID TREMENDOUS RESULTS FROM A PROJECTIONS PERSPECTIVE.
UH, I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT TO MAKE OF THAT.
AND I THINK SOME OF OUR COLLEAGUES, UM, AND CONSTITUENTS ALSO DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT MEANT.
WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY THAT? I'M SORRY.
COULD YOU REMIND ME WHAT I WAS REFERRING TO? IT WAS EARLY ON, IT WAS LIKE THE THIRD SLIDE.
YOU SAID TREMENDOUS RESULTS TO OUR PROJECTIONS MOVING FORWARD SALES TAX REVENUE.
I JUST MEAN THE, UH, THE, THE PAYMENTS WE'VE SEEN HAVE BEEN JUST INCREDIBLY STRONG AS WE SEE THE REBOUND FROM, UM, FROM, FROM THE RESTRICTIONS.
AND SO WE'VE SEEN SOME INCREDIBLY STRONG PAYMENTS AND THAT'S WHY WE WOULD BE INCREASING THE PAYMENT FOR FY 21 TO ABOUT
[00:15:01]
THE YEAR END ESTIMATE BY $5.8 MILLION.I'M STILL NOT QUITE TRACKING WELL DURING THE, DURING THE PANDEMIC, OBVIOUSLY WE'VE HAD MONTHS WHERE WE'VE HAD YEAR OVER YEAR DECLINES IN SALES TAX, OR THESE, WE WE'VE STARTED TO EMERGE FROM THAT EARLIER IN THE YEAR.
BUT WITH THESE PAYMENTS, UM, THE YEAR OVER YEAR NUMBERS HAVE BEEN AN ACCESS OF 20%, SOMETIMES 30% BECAUSE THEY'RE IN COMPARISON WITH A MUCH LOWER BASE FROM LAST YEAR WHEN WE WERE AT THE VERY BOTTOM OF THE SORT OF IMPACTS FROM THE PANDEMIC, IF THAT'S HELPFUL.
SO, UM, I HAVE THREE QUESTIONS.
ONE IS, CAN YOU OBVIOUSLY NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO DO IT RIGHT NOW, BUT CAN YOU GIVE US A CALCULATION FOR, UM, THE ONE TIME WOULD MEAN I'M NOT SURE THAT KEEPING IT AT A ZERO IMPACT IS THE RIGHT COMPARISON BECAUSE WE DID HAVE OUR PROPOSED BUDGET FROM OUR CITY MANAGER THAT WAS SAVING FOLKS $9 AND 6 CENTS.
UM, I'M NOT SURE THAT I WOULD BE COMFORTABLE GOING IN A DIRECTION THAT INCREASED THAT.
UM, BUT I WOULD BE CURIOUS TO SEE, UM, HOW MUCH REVENUE THAT WOULD GENERATE AND WHETHER THERE WERE, UM, SOME WAYS TO INVEST THAT THAT WOULD MAKE SENSE OVER THE LONG RUN FOR ADDRESSING OUR CHALLENGES.
WE COULD PROVIDE A BREAKDOWN FOR AN ENTIRE RANGE OF TAXPAYER SAVINGS AND IMPACTS ALL THE WAY FROM THE THREE AND A HALF UP TO THE FULL EIGHT, IF THAT'D BE OKAY.
I MEAN, I'M PARTICULARLY INTERESTED AT WHAT, WHAT IF WE WERE TO KEEP THE TAX BILL IMPACT AT THE NEGATIVE 9 0 6, RIGHT.
WHAT THAT WOULD GENERATE? AND I THINK THAT'S STILL LEAVES SOME ROOM TO CONSIDER WHAT WE MIGHT WANT TO DO THERE.
AND AGAIN, THIS IS NEW TO ME, SO I'M NOT SURE, BUT I WOULD LIKE THAT DATA POINT.
UM, AND THEN HOW IS IT THAT, UH, WE HAVE A FORMULA THAT WE HAVE INCREASED TAXABLE VALUATION, INCREASED NEW CONSTRUCTION VALUE.
UM, AND THEN WE END UP WITH A NEGATIVE ON OUR REVENUE.
LIKE I JUST DON'T UNDER, IS THAT JUST THAT THING YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT? THAT PECULIAR THING? IT JUST, IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE.
YEAH, IT IS COUNTERINTUITIVE A LOT ABOUT THE TAX CALCULATION ENDS UP BEING COUNTERINTUITIVE.
SO YOU DON'T ALWAYS GET MORE REVENUE JUST BECAUSE USUALLY YOU SHOULD, IF NEW CONSTRUCTION IS INCREASING, BUT YOU DON'T ALWAYS, IF THE BASE VALUES ARE INCREASING BECAUSE WE REALLY HAVE A REVENUE CAP, SO OUR RATE WILL RATCHET DOWN IN RESPONSE TO HIGHER PROPERTY TAX GROWTH.
BUT, UM, IT STILL IS COUNTERINTUITIVE BECAUSE WE DID SEE THE INCREASE IN NEW CONSTRUCTION.
THERE'S A NUMBER OF ADJUSTMENTS THAT ALSO FLOW INTO THAT CALCULATION, BUT THE PRIMARY ONE THAT'S HARMING US IS THAT, THAT NEW STATE ADJUSTMENT AND, AND ALSO THE DIFFERENT WAY THAT TEAK HAD CHOSE TO TREAT IT VERSUS THE WAY THEY TREATED IT LAST YEAR.
CAN WE GET SOME INFORMATION ON THAT I DON'T EXPECT YOU TO, I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE ELSE IS INTERESTED, BUT I CAN GO INTO THE GORY DETAILS.
I DON'T, I DON'T THINK EVERYONE NEEDS THE GORY DETAILS RIGHT NOW, BUT I AM INTERESTED TO UNDERSTAND SURE.
UM, THE DIFFERENCES THERE, UM, MYSELF, CAUSE I, I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW YOU CAN INCREASE BY 400 MILLION, YOUR, UM, NEW CONSTRUCTION AND END UP WITH LESS REVENUE THAT JUST DOESN'T, DOESN'T MAKE A LOT OF SENSE TO ME.
UM, AND THEN FINALLY, UM, SOME OF THIS HAS TO DO WITH, I THINK WITH THE NEW CONSTRUCTION.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT ALSO MEANS THAT WE HAVE DIFFERENT ESTIMATES ON THE NUMBERS THAT WOULD THEN AFFECT THE REVENUE FOR OTHER OF OUR ENTERPRISE FUNDS THAT HAVE DIFFERENT KINDS, NON TAXABLE, NINE TAX REVENUE THAT THEY'RE GETTING.
UM, YOU KNOW, AS WE CONTEMPLATE, FOR INSTANCE, THE PROPOSAL THAT, UM, MR. COSAR PUT UP, UM, THAT ASKED ME SUPPORTING FOR A STIPEND, WE WOULD HAVE TO BE ABLE TO FUND THAT ACROSS THE ORGANIZATION.
SO I'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND IF WE HAVE A CORRESPONDING AMOUNT OF FEES FOR OUR ENTERPRISE UNITS IN ANY WAY THAT ARE, ARE, ARE GOING UP AS WELL.
GIVEN WE HAVE SO MUCH MORE YOU CONSTRUCTION, OR IF THERE ARE ANY OF THOSE ESTIMATES THAT ALSO GOT REFLECTED SOMEWHERE JUST HAND, YOU KNOW, THAT'S REFLECTING VALUES AS OF JANUARY 1ST, SO THAT CONSTRUCTION WOULD HAVE ALREADY BEEN BUILT.
AND SO THE MOST LIKELY PLACE TO SEE IT WOULD PROBABLY BE IN DSD, BUT I THINK THAT REVENUE WOULD ACTUALLY HAVE ALREADY BEEN BOOKED IN LARGE PART.
AND I CAN CONTINUE TO THINK ABOUT IT, BUT OFFHAND, I CAN'T THINK OF OTHER ENTERPRISE DEPARTMENTS THAT WOULD, WOULD
[00:20:01]
SEE A DIRECT REVENUE BENEFIT, UM, AS A RESULT OF THAT NUMBER BEING SLIGHTLY HIGHER AT CERTIFICATION IN COMPARISON WITH THE NOTICE VALUES, BUT DON'T, YOU HAVE USERS.I MEAN, AREN'T THAT DOESN'T THAT REPRESENT INCREASED NUMBERS OF USERS.
SO LIKE WOULDN'T YOUR TOUGH GO UP OR YOUR BASIC ENERGY.
I KNOW YOU HAVE TO HAVE SOFT COST TO SERVE THEM, BUT I DON'T THINK THERE'S A ONE-TO-ONE TIE, UM, BECAUSE THIS IS REALLY JUST FOCUSED ON VALUE AS OPPOSED TO NUMBER OF UNITS.
AND, YOU KNOW, IT COULD BE LARGELY COMMERCIAL, BUT THAT'S SOMETHING I CAN LOOK MORE DEEPLY INTO AND TALK WITH ATD OR PUBLIC WORKS AND SEE IF THEY'VE THOUGHT ABOUT THAT.
I CERTAINLY HOPE THAT OUR COMMERCIAL UNITS ARE PAYING THOSE FEES AS WELL.
SO I JUST WOULD LIKE TO UNDERSTAND THAT IF THAT CREATES SOME FLEXIBILITY, IF WE WERE TO TRY TO PROVIDE A STIPENDS, ADDITIONAL STIPENDS TO DO WHAT, THANK YOU.
UH, THE FIRST ONE, IF, IF YOU COULD PUT UP AGAIN, THE, THE SLIDE THAT SHOWS THE RATES AND FEES, UM, THIS IS VERY HELPFUL INFORMATION AND I APPRECIATE YOU GOING THROUGH IT.
IT MAY BE A LITTLE FAST FOR THE PUBLIC, AND I WANT TO GO OVER A FEW THINGS WITH YOU.
SO, UM, CAUSE WE HAVE, WE'VE GOTTEN SOME, UH, QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC, UH, TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT NUMBERS WE'RE PLAYING WITH.
NOT, NOT THAT ONE, THE, THE PAGE THAT SHOWS, UM, ONE MORE PLEASE EAT THAT ONE RIGHT THERE.
SO, UH, A COUPLE OF THINGS THERE FOR EXPLANATION PURPOSES.
SO, UM, I I'VE, I'VE GOTTEN, I'VE RECEIVED QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT IS THE REASONING BEHIND THE INCREASE IN FEES FOR THE, UM, FOR THE TRANSPORTATION USER FEE, UH, IN PARTICULAR, AND THEN CONFIRMATION THAT THE INCREASE, UH, AND THE, UH, AUSTIN RESOURCE RECOVERY, WHAT THAT'S FOR.
SO CAN YOU SPEAK TO THOSE TWO AGAIN, THIS IS, UM, QUESTIONS MY OFFICE HAS GOTTEN IN.
THE OTHER FEEDBACK MY OFFICE HAS GOTTEN IS THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, YOU GUYS DO A GREAT JOB IN PUTTING A LOT OF GOOD INFORMATION OUT FOR FOLKS, BUT SOMETIMES IT'S NOT AS EASILY TO, IT'S NOT AS EASY TO SOMETIMES THERE'S MORE DETAIL THEN IT'S NOT AS EASY TO GET THROUGH TO THE BOTTOM LINE.
SO CAN YOU JUST EXPLAIN, UM, UH, FOR THE PUBLIC, THE REASON FOR THE RAISE AND THE TRANSPORTATION USER FEE AND THE REASON FOR THE RAISE AND THE AUSTIN RESOURCE RECOVERY FEE.
AND IF I MISSPEAK, UH, PLEASE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGERS COME UP AND CORRECT ME, BUT OFFHAND, I BELIEVE AUSTIN RESOURCE RECOVERY IS JUST RESPONDING TO INCREASE COST DRIVERS.
AND SO THEY'RE INCREASING THEIR CART RATES.
UM, AS FAR AS THE TRANSPORTATION USER FEE ATD AND PUBLIC WORKS ALSO HAVE BEEN EXPERIENCING COST DRIVERS, PUBLIC WORKS IN PARTICULAR, HAS NOT INCREASED THAT FEE IN SOME TIME.
AND SO THEY NEED TO DO SO TO AVOID, UM, CONTINUING TO DIG INTO ENDING BALANCES AND KEEP UP WITH THEIR FEES.
ATD IS ALSO, UH, ADDING A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF STAFF TO HELP SPEED PROGRESS ON A NUMBER OF RECENT TRANSPORTATION-RELATED BOND INITIATIVES.
UM, AND SO ARR IS NOT FOR ANY PARTICULAR PROGRAM WHERE THEY EXPANSION OF A PARTICULAR PROGRAM? UH, NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE, I BELIEVE THAT'S MAINLY ADDRESSING JUST, UH, BASE COSTS.
AND THEN THE BOTTOM LINE FROM THIS SLIDE FOR PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND IS THAT THE C DOP 14 TIMES 12 IS, IS, IS WHAT THE ANTICIPATED, UM, NET INCREASE OR TOTAL INCREASE IS FOR SOMEONE WHO'S AT, UM, AT THE, UM, TYPICAL VALUE.
SO CAN YOU SPEAK TO THAT AGAIN, WHICH I THINK YOU HAVE IS 3 99 YEAR.
SO THAT $2 AND 79 CENTS, I THINK IT'S $33 AND 42 CENTS THAT'LL BE THEIR SAVINGS FOR, IT WOULD BE THE SAVINGS WHERE THE TYPICAL HOMEOWNER IN COMPARISON WITH THEIR ACTUAL PROPERTY TAX BILL THE PRIOR YEAR.
AND SO THAT'S MAINLY A FUNCTION OF THE WORK COUNCIL DID TO EXPAND THE GENERAL HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION TO THE FULL 20% BACK IN JUNE.
SO JUST, UH, YOU KNOW, THE, THE HEADLINE IS THAT THE TYPICAL AUSTIN HOMEOWNER WILL PAY LESS IN PROPERTY TAXES IN FY 22 THAN THEY DID IN FY 21.
AND THEN, SO THEN JUST PLEASE EXPLAIN THE TOTAL LINE AND THEN TOTALLY, WE JUST LOOK AT THIS WHOLE BASKET.
UM, IT BASICALLY AFFECTS YOUR PROPERTY TAX BILL PLUS THE, THE USUAL FEE LINES AND, UH, UTILITY SERVICE LINES YOU'D SEE, ON, ON YOUR MONTHLY ENERGY BILL.
AND WHEN WE ADD THEM UP, WE GET A SORT OF A, A TOTAL, UM, TAX AND RATE BURDEN EXPERIENCED BY THE TYPICAL HOMEOWNER IN TOTAL.
WE'RE EXPECTING THAT TO ONLY INCREASE BY ABOUT $1
[00:25:01]
AND 13 CENTS PER MONTH, WHICH IS ONLY A 0.3% INCREASE OVER THE PRIOR YEAR.WELL, I JUST WANTED TO EXPLAIN THAT.
SO THE, THE, UM, AS YOU SAID BEFORE, THE HEADLINE THAT THE BOTTOM LINE FOR THIS IS THE, THE, UH, SAVINGS, UH, THAT PEOPLE WILL SEE AND THAT'S THAT THIS IS NON-SENIOR RIGHT.
SO THIS DOESN'T ACCOUNT FOR, UH, THE SENIOR EXEMPTION, CORRECT.
THIS IS OUR TYPICAL HOMEOWNER, WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS, UH, THE MEDIAN VALUE OF A HOMESTEAD NOT RECEIVING THE SENIOR DISABLED EXEMPTION.
AND I THINK YOU HAD ANOTHER SLIDE THAT SHOWED THAT IF YOU DID HAVE A SENIOR EXEMPTION, YOU MIGHT EXPECT TO SEE MORE YEAH.
AND THAT'S BECAUSE IN ADDITION TO BENEFITING FROM THE INCREASE TO THE 20% GENERAL HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION COUNCIL ALSO PASSED A $25,000 INCREASE TO A TOTAL OF $113,000 IN THE SENIOR AND DISABLED PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION.
AND THEN DID YOU HAVE A SLIDE THAT ILLUSTRATED THAT I THOUGHT YOU DID? OKAY.
CAN WE GO BACK ONE MORE SLIDE PLEASE? SO THAT SECOND LINE WOULD BE THE, THE REVISED IMPACT TO SENIOR AND DISABLED HOME HOMESTEADERS OR THE TYPICAL SENIOR AND DISABLED HOMESTEAD.
UM, NOW, THEN I JUST HAVE ONE LAST QUESTION.
AND JUST BECAUSE WE, WE KIND OF WENT PAST THIS PRETTY QUICKLY AND JUST FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, AND ALSO FOR THE PUBLIC'S UNDERSTANDING, WE TALKED ABOUT, UH, ADDING THE 5.8 WITH THE 3.1 WITH THE 14.4, UH, UH, CAN YOU PLEASE EXPLAIN THE SOURCE FOR EACH ONE OF THOSE THREE, 5.8 3.1 AND 14.4? SO CAN BE CLEAR FOR PEOPLE? SURE.
THE $5.8 MILLION WOULD ALL BE IN ADDITIONAL ESTIMATED FISCAL YEAR, 21 YEAR END REVENUE ATTRIBUTABLE TO A, UH, RE UPWARDLY REVISED SALES TAX PROJECTION.
THE $3.1 MILLION WOULD BE THE NET EFFECT OF, UH, AN UPWARDLY REVISED
AND THE OTHER FIGURES ARE PERSPECTIVE INCREASES IN REVENUE, WHICH WOULD BE ASSOCIATED WITH COUNCIL TAKING ACTION TO INCREASE THE PROPERTY TAX RATE, UH, AND ACCESS OF A THREE-AND-A-HALF PERCENT EFFECTIVE INCREASE.
AND THAT'S WHERE THE 14.4 COMES FROM.
AND I BELIEVE YOU HAD A SLIDE FOR THAT.
YEAH, I THINK WE NEED TO GO FORWARD ABOUT THREE, MAYBE FOUR SLIDES.
AND THEN, CAN YOU EXPLAIN, UH, YOU ALSO TALKED ABOUT THIS BEING IF, IF COUNCIL WERE TO DO ANYTHING WITH REGARDS TO THIS THAT WE WILL BE THINKING IN TERMS OF ONE-TIME FUNDS AGAIN.
SO, UH, AS YOU ALL KNOW THAT THE GENERAL, UH, REVENUE CAP LIMIT NOW IS A THREE AND A HALF PERCENT PROPERTY TAX INCREASE, UH, IN THE ORIGINAL SB TWO IN THE 2019 SESSION, THE LEGISLATURE DID ALLOW FOR THE POSSIBILITY OF, UH, MUNICIPALITIES BEING ABLE TO GO TO 8% IN THE EVENT OF DISASTERS OR EMERGENCIES.
UM, WE DIDN'T TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT LAST YEAR, BUT, UM, WE, WE DO HAVE THAT FREEDOM THIS YEAR, HOWEVER, IN THE 2021 SESSION, UH, THE LEGISLATURE REVISED THE LAW.
AND THEY'VE NOW SAID, IF YOU DO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT PROVISION AND GO TO 8%, YOU ESSENTIALLY HAVE TO BACK IT OUT IN, IN THE SUBSEQUENT YEAR.
SO IT WILL NOT BECOME PART OF YOUR BASE.
AND SO FOR THAT REASON, UM, IT WOULD BE THE FISCALLY PRUDENT THING TO DO, TO TREAT ANY REVENUE ASSOCIATED WITH AN INCREASE ABOVE THREE AND A HALF PERCENT AS ONE-TIME REVENUE.
THAT, UM, THAT, UH, HELPS ANSWER MY QUESTIONS.
SO I THINK JUST TO CLOSE THE LOOP ON THE QUESTION THAT, UH, MY COLLEAGUE JUST ASKED ON PAGE SEVEN, IF YOU WERE TO TRY TO CALCULATE WHAT IT WOULD MEAN FOR SENIORS, I HAD DISABLED THAT $2 AND 79 CENT NUMBER REDUCTION.
WOULDN'T THAT BE THE 184.3, THREE DIVIDED BY 12.
YEAH, TH THAT WOULD ESSENTIALLY BE WHAT WE DO.
I, YOU KNOW, OFFHAND, I DON'T KNOW IF ANY OF THOSE OTHER LINES WOULD NEED TO BE ADJUSTED IF THERE ARE MEANINGFUL IN WHAT SENIORS PAY IN THEIR ENERGY OR WATER BILLS OR ANY OF THE OTHER FEES, BUT, BUT ESSENTIALLY THAT'S WHAT I WOULD DO.
JUST REPLACE THAT PROPERTY TAX LINE WITH THE SENIOR VALUE FROM THE PRIOR SLIDE, WHICH I THINK WOULD BE A NEGATIVE OF A $15 AND 36 CENTS, IF YOU JUST DO THAT MATH.
SO, UH, IT WOULD RESULT IN A NET,
[00:30:01]
UH, UH, REDUCTION FOR SENIORS AND DISABLED, UH, EVEN CONSIDERING ALL FEES PLUS PROPERTY TAXES.UH, COUNSELOR MEMBER POOL, THEN COUNCIL MEMBER TOVO THANKS.
I'M GOING TO, JUST TO CONFIRM ON TUESDAY WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE COMBINED FISCAL 22, UH, IMPACT THE INCREASE WAS 0.8%, BUT WITH THESE NEW NUMBERS COMING THROUGH AND THE UPDATES, WE'RE NOW LOOKING AT 0.3, THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT.
AND THAT'S, THAT IS THE SPECIFIC BASELINE FOR THE ADDITIONAL REDUCTIONS THAT YOU'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT HERE.
I THINK THAT'S REALLY PRETTY SIGNIFICANT WHEN TO HIGHLIGHT THAT.
AND THEN I JUST WANTED TO GO BACK TO SOME OF THE CONFUSING ELEMENTS ABOUT THE TAX RATE, THE TAX REVENUE INCREASE THAT WERE PERMITTED WITH THE CAP.
AND IT'S COMPLICATED BY THE TWO DISASTERS, LIKE YEAR TWO THAT WE THOUGHT WE WOULD BE IN FROM THE PANDEMIC DISASTER IS ACTUALLY NOW YEAR ONE BECAUSE OF THE WINTER STORM.
YOU'RE A DISASTER DECLARATION, I THINK THAT'S RIGHT.
I THINK WE'RE IN YEAR ONE FOR BOTH OF THEM BECAUSE, UM, YOU KNOW, YEAR OBVIOUSLY HAPPENED THIS YEAR, BUT THE GOVERNOR RENEWED THE DISASTER DECLARATION ASSOCIATED WITH THAT PANDEMIC EVERY MONTH, AT LEAST THROUGH MARCH, IF NOT LATER, BUT CERTAINLY INTO THIS CALENDAR YEAR.
SO WE'RE STILL IN YEAR ONE FROM PANDEMIC AND ALSO A NEW YEAR, ONE OR A YEAR, ONE FOR THE NEW DISASTER UNDERSTANDING.
THEN HOW, AND MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT AN INCREASE WITH, DOES THAT ONE HAVE TO GO TO THE VOTERS? IF WE GO ABOVE 3.5, IT DOES NOT.
UH, WE JUST HAVE TO BE CAREFUL TO REALIZE THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BACK IT OUT IN A PRIOR YEAR.
SO WE'D WANT IT TO BE ONE TIME, BUT NO, YOU CAN.
UM, BECAUSE OF, UH, ANOTHER ACTION YOU TOOK IN JUNE, YOU GAVE YOURSELF THE FREEDOM TO GO UP TO AN 8% INCREASE THIS YEAR.
UM, AND SO THAT WOULD NOT NEED TO BE APPROVED BY THE VOTERS.
AND, AND SO THE ADDITIONAL WRINKLE WAS, IT'S NOT A NEW BASELINE THAT'S RIGHT.
AND WITH THE NUMBERS THAT YOU ARE SHOWING US HERE ON PAGE, WE LOOKED AT IT EARLIER, THE 6%, THE ZERO EFFECTIVE PROPERTY TAX INCREASE OF 6% IS AS ZERO IMPACT ON THE TYPICAL HOMEOWNER PROPERTY TAX BILL COMPARED TO FISCAL 21, WHICH GIVES US AN ADDITIONAL ONE-TIME MONIES OF A LITTLE BIT OVER 14 MILLION, CORRECT.
THANKS SO MUCH AS OUR TOA, I THINK COUNCIL MEMBER ELLIS.
I'M BACK ON THE SIDE THAT COUNCIL MEMBER KITCHEN ASKED TO HAVE, UH, REPLAYED, THERE WAS ALSO A NOTE, A NOTATION THAT SHOWS, UM, THE CLEAN COMMUNITY FEE IS GOING UP BY 50 CENTS.
AND I'M TRYING TO DETERMINE WHERE THAT INCREASE IS GOING, WHERE I THINK IT'S GOING BASED ON THE PAGE 2 33 IN OUR BUDGET BOOK IS TWO ADDITIONAL FTES, BUT I'D LIKE TO GET SOME, I'D LIKE TO GET SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ABOUT IF WE HAVE ANY STAFF WHO CAN SPEAK TO WHERE THOSE, WHERE THOSE INCREASES ARE.
UM, I SEE SOME INCREASES IN TRANSFERS AND DEBT SERVICE THAT I'D LIKE TO BETTER UNDERSTAND.
AND I'D ALSO LIKE TO UNDERSTAND THE PURPOSE OF THOSE NEW OFFICERS.
AND LET ME JUST GIVE A HEADS UP.
I KNOW WE'VE BEEN ASKED TO GET OUR AMENDMENTS, UM, TOGETHER BY TOMORROW AND, AND YOU KNOW, MY UNPREPARED TO DO THAT ON SOME SCORES, BUT I'M GOING TO CONTINUE TO WORK OVER THE WEEKEND AND THERE MAY BE AMENDMENTS.
I WANT TO BRING FORWARD NEXT WEEK AS WELL.
AND IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT, YOU KNOW, LEGALLY WE CAN BRING AMENDMENTS UP UNTIL THE TIME WE HAVE VOTED.
SO, UM, A COUPLE OF THE AREAS, THIS IS ONE OF THE AREAS THAT I AM, I'M LOOKING AT MORE CLOSELY THE FEES.
I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY WHILE I WAS WAITING FOR THE, FOR Y'ALL TO COME BACK UP, UM, AS WE KNOW FEES, YOU KNOW, FEES HIT PEOPLE AS WELL, THOSE INCREASES.
AND SO WE NEED TO BE REALLY MINDFUL OF IT.
AND, AND, UM, ANYWAY, MS. SIM, UH, AS FAR AS THE QUEEN COMMUNITY, I'M NOT SURE IF WE HAVE ANYONE AVAILABLE IN THE CHAMBERS FROM, FROM CODE COMPLIANCE, BUT WE CAN WORK ON GETTING SOMEONE DOWN HERE TO ADDRESS THAT.
UM, AT SOME LATER POINT IN THIS SESSION, THAT WOULD BE SUPER, IT LOOKS LIKE THERE WERE SIX NEW FTES.
AND AGAIN, AS I MENTIONED, ABOUT A HALF MILLION DOLLAR INCREASE IN TRANSFERS AND DEBT SERVICE, AND THEN SOME DECREASES IN AREAS THAT I'D ALSO LIKE TO BETTER UNDERSTAND, INCLUDING, UM, A DECREASE IN INVOLUNTARY CODE ENFORCEMENT.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S THE, THAT'S THE UPSHOT.
I ALSO JUST WANT TO SAY, YOU KNOW, ALMOST YEAR AFTER YEAR, WE'VE ADDED
[00:35:01]
CODE CODE OFFICERS.UM, I REMEMBER NOT THAT TERRIBLY LONG AGO.
I MEAN, THERE WAS SOMETHING LIKE SIX FOR THE WHOLE CITY, AND NOW WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, MANY, MANY, OBVIOUSLY SIX IS TOO FEW, BUT I AM SEEING YEAR AFTER YEAR ARE ADDING, ARE ADDING OFFICERS.
AND YET I CONTINUE TO, TO HEAR THE SAME CONCERNS FROM SOME OF OUR CONSTITUENTS ABOUT, UM, YOU KNOW, ESPECIALLY IN THE AREA OF SHORT-TERM RENTAL ENFORCEMENT AND ARE OUR REAL CHALLENGES IN ENFORCING OUR CODES ON THE BOOKS, UM, IN SUBSTANDARD HOUSING AND SOME OTHER AREAS.
SO I REALLY, I REALLY NEED TO UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE ADDING ADDITIONAL CODE OFFICERS WHEN WE STILL SEEM TO HAVE CHALLENGES, UH, ENFORCING OUR CODE.
AND, AND I'M CONTINUING TO GET EMAILS FROM MY CONSTITUENTS AND SOME OF Y'ALL'S, UM, THAT WHEN THEY CALL CODE ON THE WEEKEND, UM, DURING SOME OF THOSE EVENING WEEKEND HOURS WHERE SOME OF THESE VIOLATIONS ARE TAKING PLACE, THERE AREN'T ANY OFFICERS ON STAFF.
SO THAT'S, UH, ANOTHER QUESTION I'D LIKE TO HEAR ADDRESS WHEN WE HAVE SOMEBODY FROM AUSTIN CODE, WHAT ARE THE HOURS, ESPECIALLY ON WEEKENDS AND EVENINGS, WHERE SOME OF THE VIOLATIONS ARE TAKING PLACE, AND WHAT'S, WHAT'S THE RATIONALE FOR ADDING ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL AT THIS POINT.
I WANT TO CONFIRM THAT YOU'RE RIGHT.
PEOPLE COULD OFFER A BEDROOMS RIGHT UP TO THE VERY END.
UM, UH, YOU KNOW, AS, AS JUST ALLOWED YOU COULD DO THAT.
WE'LL PROBABLY TRY TO KEEP WITH, UH, THE OLD PRACTICE THAT SAYS WE'LL CONSIDER FIRST THOSE THAT ARE THE EARLIEST THAT PEOPLE HAVE HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THAT I APPRECIATE IT.
YOU'LL BE WORKING OVER THE WEEKEND AS SOON AS YOU COULD POST ANYTHING THAT YOU HAVE SO PEOPLE CAN PREPARE FOR IT.
THAT WOULD BE REALLY, REALLY HELPFUL.
UH, I CERTAINLY INTEND TO DO THAT, BUT I THINK WE ALSO JUST NEED TO RECOGNIZE THAT WE'RE ALL ON THE JOB.
YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN ALL ON THE DAYAS FOR TWO FULL DAYS.
UM, AND WE'RE ALSO GETTING INFORMATION BACK FROM THE QUESTION AND ANSWER THROUGHOUT THIS WEEK, AND THEN THE ANSWERS TO MY QUESTIONS, THE ANSWERS TO, TO YOUR QUESTIONS, UM, SOMETIMES PROMPT ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.
SOMETIMES THEY PROMPT, UM, ADDITIONAL AREAS OF EXPLORATION.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, I CERTAINLY AM GOING TO SUPPORT MY, MY COLLEAGUES, UM, UM, NEED FOR MORE TIME AND SPACE TO THINK ABOUT AMENDMENTS THAT MIGHT COME FORWARD LATE, AND I'M GOING TO DO MY BEST TO GET THEM UP.
AND I'M GOING TO BE THAT MOST OF Y'ALL DO THE SAME THING TOO, BUT, UM, BUT THERE MAY BE, THERE MAY BE SOME, SOME THINGS WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO, TO THINK ABOUT AND DELIBERATE NEXT WEEK SOUNDS GOOD.
THE, UH, WHEN YOU HAVE THE, THE, THE SCREEN THAT'S FACING, I CAN'T SEE WHAT'S OUR EIGHT ATX ED, BUT WHEN YOU HAVE THAT EXTRA SIXTH BOX, THAT PROBABLY SHOULD BE THE ENTIRE DIOCESE.
IF YOU COULD DO THAT, RATHER THAN REPEATING THE INDIVIDUAL FRAMES OF THE PEOPLE THAT ARE, THAT ARE THERE.
IT'S A PARAGON ATX I CAN'T REMEMBER.
ALICE, I THINK WAS NEXT TO THE COUNCIL.
UM, I WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M UNDERSTANDING WHEN WE SAY, IF WE WERE TO GO OVER 3.5, WE HAVE TO BACK IT OUT NEXT YEAR.
WHAT WOULD THAT NUMBER LOOK LIKE? WOULD THAT MEAN TWO POINT SOMETHING? COULD WE KIND OF GET AN UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT, WHAT THAT EXACTLY IS FINANCIALLY? UH, SO I DON'T KNOW IF YOU RECALL.
WE WENT UP TO THE 8% AND WE DEVOTED SOME OF THE FUNDS TO ONE TIME, BUT, UM, ONE POSITIVE EFFECT OF DOING THAT IS ALL THAT MONEY SORT OF BECAME PART OF OUR BASE FOR THE NEXT YEAR THAT WE GOT TO ADD THREE AND A HALF PERCENT TO.
AND WHAT THIS WOULD DO IS IT WOULD, IT WOULD TAKE ANY REVENUE THAT WE'RE ADDING IN ACCESS OF THE THREE AND A HALF PERCENT AND THE NEXT YEAR IT WOULD BACK IT OUT OF YOUR BASE.
SO THAT YOU'RE ONLY CALCULATING NEXT YEAR'S, LET'S SAY THREE AND A HALF PERCENT INCREASE FROM THAT LOWER BASE.
SO THERE'S NO COMPOUNDING EFFECT.
THERE'S NO CARRY THROUGH EFFECT FROM ANY OF THE REVENUE RAISE ABOVE THE THREE AND A HALF PERCENT THIS YEAR.
UM, IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL FOR US TO HAVE SOME SORT OF REFERENCE OF WHAT THAT WOULD MEAN IN SUBSEQUENT YEARS TO BACK IT BACK DOWN, JUST IN CASE ANYONE'S THINKING ABOUT THAT, NOT AT THIS POINT, BUT I JUST THINK AS WE PROGRESS IN THIS CONVERSATION, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO HAVE SOME OF THOSE NUMBERS, UM, FOR REFERENCE THAT AS FAR AS ONE-TIME VERSUS ONGOING FUNDING, UM, YOU KNOW, IT SEEMS PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD.
OBVIOUSLY ONE TIME MEANS IT'S NOT GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT WE CAN DO IN A FOLLOWING YEAR, BUT ARE THERE ANY LEGAL STIPULATIONS AROUND WHAT YOU CAN AND CANNOT USE THOSE FOR? UM, YOU KNOW, LIKE FOR STAFFING, OBVIOUSLY YOU WOULD WANT US TO BE ONGOING COSTS THAT GOES OVER FOR, FROM YEAR TO YEAR.
SO THAT PERSON STILL HAS THAT POSITION THROUGHOUT THE NEXT FISCAL YEARS.
[00:40:01]
THINGS BESIDES JUST HARD FIXED COSTS OR MAINTENANCE PROJECTS VERSUS STAFFING OR OTHER TYPES OF PROJECTS, IS THERE ANY GRAY AREA BETWEEN WHAT IS ONE TIME AND WHAT IS ONGOING? I DON'T WANT TO STEP ON THE LOT DEPARTMENT'S TOES.I MEAN, THERE'S, THERE'S CERTAINLY GRAY AREAS.
I THINK IN THE PAST ONE THING THAT COMES TO MIND IS COUNCIL HAS FUNDED NEW PROGRAMS ON A, ON A PILOT OR, YOU KNOW, UM, ONE YEAR BASIS WITH NO COMMITMENT OF CONTINUING FUNDING.
AND THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING THAT IS FALLEN INTO A GRAY AREA.
UM, I ALSO WANT SOME CLARIFICATION ON WHEN, IF WE WERE TO X-RAY TO 6%, YOU'LL SEE A ZERO THERE, BUT ALL THAT SAYING IS THAT WE'RE NOT GIVING, THEY'RE NOT GETTING, THEY'RE NOT HAVING TO PAY LESS TAXES OTHERWISE, IT'S WE STILL, ONCE YOU KEY IN ALL THE FORMULA INTO IT AND TURN INTO FEED, THAT MEANS THE FEEDS ARE GOING TO GO UP THERE.
NO, MINUS TWO, YOUR FEED, IS THAT CORRECT? YEAH.
SO IF YOU WENT AT THAT 6% LEVEL, YOU'D LOSE THAT $2 AND 50 CENT 79 CENTS SAVINGS ON THAT COMBINED FEE CHART.
AND SO THAT DOLLAR AND $30 AND 13 CENTS WOULD INCREASE TO $3 AND 92 CENTS A MONTH.
AND THIS MIGHT BE A LEGAL QUESTION OBVIOUS THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S, SOME TIMES WE DO A ONE-TIME FEE THAT WE PUT THAT, UH, FOR THREE YEARS AND SET THAT MONEY, JUST KNOWING THAT THAT PROGRAM IS GOING TO LAST FOR THREE YEARS AFTER THAT, THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE THE FUNDING SOURCE FOR IT.
UH, CAN WE DO THOSE KINDS OF THINGS WITH, UH, DOODLE TIME, UH, UM, PROJECTS WHERE IT'S JUST ONE TIME MONEY AND WILL THERE BE A PENALTY IF WE TRY TO DO IT THAT WAY AGAIN, I'LL DEFER TO THE LAW DEPARTMENT.
ALL I CAN SAY IS THAT WE HAVE DONE SOMETHING LIKE THAT IN THE PAST, AND I DON'T THINK WE'D BE RUNNING A FOUL OF, UM, STATE LAW, BUT WE MAY BE STARTING TO RUN A FOUL OF SOME OF OUR, OF OUR OWN FINANCIAL POLICIES AND IN EXTREME CASES AGAINST THE CHARGERS REQUIREMENT THAT WE HAVE A STRUCTURALLY BALANCED BUDGET.
COULD I ASK MY COLLEAGUE TO REPEAT HIS QUESTION? I'M SORRY.
I HEARD THE RESPONSE, BUT I DIDN'T COMPLETELY, I DIDN'T COME TOO LATE HERE.
ALL OF THE QUESTION FROM COUNCIL MEMBER, ANDREA.
WELL, IN THE PAST THAT WE HAVE SET ASIDE ONE TIME MONEY FOR THREE YEARS, WE JUST ROLLED IT OVER.
AND NOW WE'RE JUST ASKING IF WE COULD DO THAT WITH THIS KIND OF MONEY.
IF WE DID GO OVER THE 3.5, KNOWING THAT WE'RE NOT, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE BASE OF 3.5, BUT IF WE SET ENOUGH MONEY FOR THIS PROGRAM TO FINANCE IT FOR THREE YEARS, CAN WE DO THAT? IF IT'S LEGAL.
THANKS FOR ASKING THAT QUESTION.
I WAS TALKING WITH ANOTHER COLLEAGUE ABOUT THAT THIS MORNING, AND I, I HAVE A FOLLOW-UP QUESTION ABOUT THAT WHEN IT'S MY TURN BACK.
AND HERE'S THE NICE TO COUNSEL.
I THINK ALL THOSE QUESTIONS ARE ABOUT ILLEGAL QUESTIONS.
THEY'RE POLICY QUESTIONS FOR, FOR US, UH, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER, UH, ALTER THE ACCOUNTS OF EVERY KITCHEN THAT BACK TO COUNCIL MEMBER.
UM, SO IF I'M UNDERSTANDING THIS SHEETS, RIGHT, THEN THERE'S ABOUT 8.9 MILLION OF ONE TIME MONEY, IS THAT CORRECT? SO WE'RE ADDING THE FISCAL YEAR 21 ESTIMATE AND THE FISCAL YEAR 22 BUDGET, RIGHT.
WITH NO, WITH NO CHANGE TO THE PROPERTY TAX RATE.
UM, SO I WANT TO ASK, I UNDERSTAND THERE ARE SOME QUESTIONS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN SUBMITTED, EXPLORING THE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL STIPEND TO STAFF.
UM, AND I BELIEVE THAT FOR THE MOST PART, THE, AT LEAST THE 500 THAT'S IN THE BASE BUDGET DOES NOT APPLY TO OUR FIRST RESPONDERS WHO HAVE CONTRACTS WITH US.
SO, UM, I WOULD LIKE TO ADD TO THE QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE, IF YOU COULD PROVIDE THE NUMBERS, IF WE WERE ABLE TO PROVIDE, UM, A $500 STIPEND FOR THOSE FIRST RESPONDERS WHO ARE ON CONTRACT, UM, WHETHER THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE COULD CONSIDER, UM, THAT MIGHT BE PART AND PARCEL OF A PROPOSAL THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WITH RESPECT TO, UM, INCREASING THE $500 TO A THOUSAND, BUT JUST SORT OF LOOKING AT WHAT THAT, IF WE DID THAT, I WOULD
[00:45:01]
WANT US TO CONSIDER DOING THAT FOR THE FIRST RESPONDERS AS WELL.SO I'D LIKE TO KNOW WHAT THAT COSTS THERE.
UM, I THINK, YOU KNOW, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, PART OF THE DESIGN OF THE STIPEND THAT'S IN THE BASE BUDGET IS TO RECOGNIZE THE, THE HARDSHIPS OF THE LAST YEAR AND THE EXTREME EFFORT AND ALL OF THE HARD WORK THAT OUR EMPLOYEES HAVE DELIVERED TO OUR COMMUNITY.
UM, AND I CERTAINLY THINK THAT CONTRACTOR NO CONTRACT, UM, IF WE HAVE THIS AMOUNT OF MONEY TO CONSIDER THAT WE SHOULD ALSO CONSIDER LOOKING AT INCREASES, UM, ERR ON THIS ONE TIME BASIS.
SO I'D LIKE TO KNOW WHAT THAT OKAY.
UM, YOU KNOW, I, I, WHEN I FIRST READ THIS, I WAS THINKING WE HAD 3.1 MILLION, UM, WITH 8.9 MILLION.
I'M NOT, I'M NOT SURE ABOUT THE VALUE OF, UM, GOING ABOVE THE 3.5%.
UM, YOU KNOW, I, I DO THINK THAT WE DID THE HOMESTEAD EXEMPTIONS, ET CETERA, FOR A REASON.
AND, AND WE NEGATE THE SUCCESS OF THAT IF WE GO TOO FAR BEYOND THAT, BUT CERTAINLY THAT'LL BE PART OF OUR DISCUSSIONS.
THAT WAS WHERE OUR KITCHEN WAS NEXT.
SORRY, I JUST HAVE, UH, CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? YES.
I WANT IT TO GO BACK TO THE PROCESS QUESTION JUST ABOUT, UH, HOW WE WILL PROCEED WITH OUR PROCEDURE, BECAUSE YOU STARTED TO TALK ABOUT THAT MAYOR.
SO, UM, I'D LIKE A LITTLE MORE CLARITY OR IF, OR IF IT'S, OR IF WE NEED TO DISCUSS IT, JUST TO KNOW WHAT BOTH DISCUSS IT TODAY.
SO YOU, BECAUSE YOU HAD MENTIONED THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GETTING OUR AMENDMENTS IN AND YOU HAD MENTIONED TAKING AMENDMENTS IN THE ORDER IN WHICH THEY WERE, UM, YOU KNOW, SUBMITTED, I THINK IN YEARS PAST ONE OF THE THINGS NOTED.
I WAS, I WAS TRYING TO REPEAT WHAT YOU SAID.
UM, SO MY, MY FURTHER QUESTION ON THAT IS THAT, UM, WHEN YOU'VE DONE IT IN THE PAST IS WE HAVE HAD A RUNNING TOTAL WHERE WE HAVE, UM, TAKEN UP, YOU KNOW, IN WHATEVER ORDER, UM, UH, AMENDMENTS TO AMENDMENTS THAT INVOLVED, UM, YOU KNOW, ADDITIONAL REVENUE AND WE'VE INCLUDED THEM ON A PAGE.
UM, AND THEN WE HAVE COME BACK SEPARATELY IN, I'M TRYING TO RECALL, I THINK THIS IS THE WAY WE'VE DONE IT.
WE'VE COME BACK SEPARATELY WITH AMENDMENTS RELATED TO, UM, AREAS THAT WE'VE IDENTIFIED, PERHAPS FOR SOME, SOME CHANGES THAT THAT ALLOW FOR ADDITIONAL REVENUE.
IN OTHER WORDS, WE'VE, WE'VE GONE THROUGH, WE'VE GONE THROUGH AND DONE.
HERE'S WHAT WE THINK MIGHT BE AN ADDITIONAL COST.
HERE'S WHAT WE THINK MIGHT BE REDUCTION.
WE'VE PUT THEM ALL ON THE SHEET AND THEN WE'VE WORKED TO BALANCE IT.
WOULD BE MY ATTEMPT TO DO IT THE WAY WE'VE KIND OF DONE IT IN THE PAST.
IT WILL POST SOMETHING TO THE MESSAGE BOARD AND PEOPLE CAN GET PROPOSE CHANGES TO IT, BUT IT'S TO GET ALL THE IDEAS OUT THAT PEOPLE HAVE HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT AT THE BEGINNING BEFORE WE START MAKING CHOICES SO THAT SOMEBODY COULD DEFEND THEIR IDEA, WHETHER IT'S THE FIRST ONE DISCUSSED OR THE 15TH DISCUSS BEFORE WE START MAKING CHOICES THAT PEOPLE CAN TALK ABOUT THEIR RELATIVE PRIORITIES, BUT TO HIT THAT GLOBALLY, AS YOU TALKED ABOUT, AND THEN TO GO BACK THEN TO THE BEGINNING AND KIND OF WORK OUR WAY THROUGH KIND OF IN AN ORDERLY WAY, WOULD THAT RUNNING NUMBER RECOGNIZING THAT ANY DECISION WE MAKE AT ANY POINT IN TIME IS SUBJECT TO BE CHANGED LATER ON IN, UH, IN THE CONVERSATION.
SO IN OTHER WORDS, WE'RE NOT BALANCING IT AS WE GO AND REQUIRING AND RUNNING OUT OF ABILITY TO BALANCE FUNDS.
THE REASON IN THIS DETAIL IS BECAUSE WE DO HAVE NEW MEMBERS ON OUR DIETS.
UM, AND WE DO, WE DO CHANGE OUR, YOU KNOW, WE DO CHANGE OUR PROCESS, UM, EVERY YEAR, BUT IT'S IMPORTANT, OR AT LEAST I WOULD LIKE TO, TO KNOW BEFORE WE GO INTO THIS PROCESS, HOW WE'RE GOING TO HANDLE IT.
UM, AND SO THAT'S WHY I'M JUST BRINGING THAT UP SO THAT WE CAN REFER IN TODAY'S OUR LAST DAY TO ACTUALLY TALK ABOUT, WELL, ACTUALLY, I'M NOT SURE.
WHEN IS OUR LAST DAY TO TALK AS A GROUP BEFORE WE ACTUALLY START VOTING? IS IT TODAY? TODAY'S OUR LAST CHANCE TO DO THAT.
AND THEN WE'LL START TALKING AS A GROUP.
UH, WE HAVE ONE TO THREE DAYS TO DO THAT.
WE ALSO HAVE THE MESSAGE BOARD, BUT WE'LL GO AHEAD.
I THINK HE'S REALLY GOOD POINT GOT TO OUR KITCHEN.
WE'LL GO AHEAD AND POST SOMETHING SO THAT PEOPLE HAVE SOMETHING THEY CAN, UH, LOOK AT OR, OR PROPOSE CHANGES TO OR WHATEVER,
[00:50:01]
TO THE BEST OF OUR ABILITY WITH JUST SOMEBODY THAT KIND OF TRACKS THE PROCESS WE'VE USED IN THE RECENT PAST.WELL, MAYOR THAT, I APPRECIATE THAT, THAT DOESN'T GIVE US THE CHANCE TO TALK ABOUT IT AS A GROUP BEFORE WE ACTUALLY GO INTO THE PROCESS.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, I SHOULD HAVE ASKED THIS ON TUESDAY.
UM, BECAUSE WE COULD HAVE USED THE TIME TODAY.
UM, MAYBE THE THING MAYBE THAT MAYBE MY ASS WOULD JUST, IF YOU'RE PLANNING ON POSTING ON THE MESSAGE BOARD, THE SAME KIND OF PROCESS THAT WE DID LAST TIME, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S POSSIBLE FOR YOUR STAFF TO GET THAT UP TODAY.
IT MAY NOT BE POSSIBLE, BUT IF IT IS, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
AND THEN IF PEOPLE HAD, UM, ANY, AS STUDENTS HAVE A CHANGE TO THAT PROCESS, WE COULD TALK ABOUT IT LATER THIS AFTERNOON.
SO IT MAY BE THAT EVERYONE'S COMFORTABLE WITH JUST PROCEEDING THE WAY WE HAVE IN THE PAST, BUT IT HASN'T BEEN SPELLED OUT FOR OUR NEW MEMBERS.
AND I WOULD ALSO LIKE IT SPELLED OUT FOR MYSELF SO THAT I CAN MAKE SURE WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE.
UH, COUNCIL MEMBER ALTER, I'M SORRY.
I THINK I HAD RECOGNIZED YOU NEXT.
YOU HAD, THANK YOU JUST VERY QUICKLY.
UM, COUNCIL MEMBER, ANDREA MENTIONED SOMETHING, UH, THAT, AS I SAID, I WAS TALKING ABOUT WITH ANOTHER COLLEAGUE THIS MORNING, AND THAT WAS THE YEAR THAT WE DID.
WE DID, UM, ONE TIME FUNDING INTO, INTO SOMETHING THAT WE CALLED.
I DON'T KNOW, THE COMMUNITY FUND TO ALLOW FOR THAT TO BE PAID OUT OVER A SERIES OF YEARS.
AND I THINK THE TIME PERIOD WAS, AS YOU SAID, UH, A BURNED AREA FOR THREE YEARS.
AND I, I AM THINKING THROUGH WAYS TO DO THAT AGAIN.
I KNOW THAT OUR STAFF, OUR FINANCIAL STAFF, WHEN I MET WITH THEM INDICATED THAT THAT FUND HAD JUST BEEN CLOSED.
AND I WANTED TO JUST ASK OUR FINANCIAL STAFF, WHETHER IT WAS CLOSED, JUST BECAUSE WE HAD USED ALL THE FUNDING OR WHETHER THERE WAS SOME REASON WHY, UM, WELL, IF YOU COULD JUST EXPLAIN WHY IT WAS CLOSED AND IF YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT, ARE RECREATING SUCH A THING.
I SEE THIS IN PARTICULAR AS A REAL GOOD STRATEGY FOR THOSE ORGANIZATIONS WHO MIGHT NEED MINI GRANTS TO SUPPORT RESILIENCE WORK, OR OTHER KINDS OF SMALL SCALE COMMUNITY PROJECTS THAT JUST AREN'T, AREN'T AT A LEVEL WHERE THEY'RE COMPETING IN OUR RFP PROCESSES OR OUR, UH, PUBLIC HEALTH RFP, OR SOME OF OUR OTHER, SOME OF OUR OTHER, UM, OTHER KINDS OF PROGRAMS. SO THAT QUESTION, I GUESS, IS FOR MR. NELSON.
UH, THE NAME IS ESCAPING ME AS WELL.
IT'S NOT LIKE THE NEW INITIATIVES FUND, BUT YEAH, EXACTLY.
WE DEPOSITED A BUNCH OF ONE-TIME REVENUE AND THE IDEA WAS TO EXPEND IT OVER A PERIOD OF TWO OR THREE YEARS ON SOME NEW INITIATIVES.
SO THERE'S CERTAINLY THE PRECEDENT FOR DOING THAT.
AND THE ONLY REASON WE'D BE CLOSING IT DOWN IS BECAUSE I BELIEVE IT WAS TWO OR THREE YEARS AGO THAT IT WAS ESTABLISHED.
SO THOSE FUNDS HAVE BEEN EXPENDED.
AND, YOU KNOW, WE DIDN'T WANT TO KEEP PUBLISHING A FUND THAT WAS SHOWING ALL ZEROS.
WELL, A COLLEAGUE SETS, UM, NOT AN AMENDMENT I'VE DISCUSSED BEFORE AND I HAVEN'T DRAFTED IT YET, BUT I'M GOING TO, I'M GOING TO BE BRINGING FORWARD AN AMENDMENT TO RE-ESTABLISH THAT WITH SOME SEED MONEY IN IT, PROBABLY FOR THE RESILIENCE WORK AND AS WELL, UM, LIKELY SOME OTHER, SOME OTHER, UM, POSSIBILITIES.
AND THEN YOU GO VISIT BEFORE WE GO TO THE NEXT HEADLIGHT, UH, CANCEL BIRTHER, UM, YOU KNOW, WHETHER IT'S THE 8.9 OR IF FOLKS WANT TO CONSIDER THE OTHER TAXES, I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW FROM OUR CITY STAFF OR CITY MANAGER, IF THEIR, UM, INVESTMENTS THAT WERE CHOICES THAT WERE NOT FUNDED AT THE LEVEL, THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN IDEAL TO GET THOSE PROJECTS DONE, THAT WILL HAVE A BIG IMPACT ON OUR CITY.
UM, IF THERE'S A POT OF MONEY THAT WOULD BE NEEDED THAT COULD ROUND THOSE PROJECTS OUT SO THAT THEY COULD SPEED UP THEIR TIMELINE, BUT BE REALLY IMPACTFUL FOR OUR COMMUNITY.
I'M THINKING OF THINGS LIKE ELECTRONIC PAY SHEETS OR THE HUMAN CAPITAL MANAGEMENT OR THE WEBSITE, OR SOME OF OUR INVESTMENTS IN, UM, CYBER SECURITY OR OTHER THINGS WHERE IF WE COULD ACCELERATE SOME OF THAT FUNDING, WE COULD HAVE AN IMPORTANT IMPACT ON THE ENTERPRISE AND FREE UP FUNDING AND FUTURE YEARS, UM, FOR GREATER FLEXIBILITY, I WOULD WELCOME UNDERSTANDING IF THERE IS A LIST OF WHAT THOSE THINGS MIGHT BE, RATHER THAN CREATING A WHOLE LAUNDRY LIST OF NEW PROGRAMS THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TROUBLE FUNDING, UM, IN THE FUTURE.
UM, I THINK THAT WOULD ALLOW US TO SMOOTH THINGS OUT A LITTLE BIT OVER TIME.
AND I THINK WE OUGHT TO KNOW THAT INFORMATION AS WE MAKE OUR DECISIONS.
I'LL GIVE THAT SOME THOUGHT AND COME BACK, COUNCIL MEMBER, CASAR MAYOR.
I, I'M JUST SEEING THE NUMBER JUST NOW I'M TRYING TO PUT A SPREADSHEET
[00:55:01]
TOGETHER OF DIFFERENT FOLKS ASKS.I THINK THAT FRANKLY, LOOKING AT WHAT WE ALREADY HAVE ON THE, ON THE MESSAGE BOARD, UM, AND WHAT IT IS THAT'S PRESENTED TODAY, THERE IS I THINK THE REAL POTENTIAL FOR US TO FIND MANY OF THESE COMMUNITY PRIORITIES WITHOUT WHILE STILL HAVING A PROPERTY TAX REDUCTION.
I AM INTERESTED IN THE BUDGET OFFICES ANSWER TO COUNCIL MEMBER ULTRA'S QUESTION AROUND, UM, UH, TO HER QUESTION AROUND HOW WE COULD KEEP TO A SIMILAR REDUCTION IN WHAT THAT LEVEL WOULD BE.
BUT JUST LOOKING AT THE MESSAGE BOARD AND SITTING HERE.
NOW, I WANTED TO TYPE SOMETHING UP SORT OF FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES, SINCE BUDGET IS COMING UP ON WEDNESDAY.
SO AGAIN, THIS IS NOT A PROPOSAL FOR WHAT WE SHOULD DO WITH THE DOLLARS, BUT I THINK JUST REALLY LOOKING AT, I THINK EVERYBODY'S PRIORITIES THIS YEAR HAVE LINED UP SO WELL AND ARE REALLY STRONG.
AND SO I JUST WANTED TO TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT'S $20 MILLION WOULD LOOK LIKE, AND I POSTED THIS ON THE MESSAGE BOARD, BUT, UH, WHILE STILL REDUCING PROPERTY TAXES FOR THE AVERAGE HOMEOWNER, WE COULD DO $3 MILLION FOR PARKS FOR BOTH THE CHILDCARE PROGRAMS LISTED BY COUNCIL MEMBER POOL AND THE GROUNDS KEEPING AND MAINTENANCE PROGRAMS LISTED BY COUNCIL MEMBER ELLIS, WE WOULD HAVE, COULD EASILY HAVE $3 MILLION FOR SOME OF THE FIRE AND EMS AND MENTAL HEALTH NEEDS LISTED THE HOMELESS STRATEGY OFFICE.
I KNOW WE HAVE THEM COMING UP AT ABOUT A MILLION DOLLARS NEED, BUT WE COULD FUND THEM FOR ALL THREE YEARS FOR THE, DURING THE SUMMIT PLAN.
UM, IF WE JUST SET ASIDE $3 MILLION, $1 MILLION FOR EACH YEAR WORTH OF NEED, UM, I THINK OUR NCD WE'RE GOING TO HAVE AN ANTI-DISPLACEMENT DISCUSSION TODAY.
I THINK FINDING FUNDING FOR RIGHT TO STAY IN RIGHT TO RETURN IS REALLY IMPORTANT.
WE'VE HAD SOME DISCUSSION TODAY ABOUT THE REAL IMPORTANT NEED TO RECOGNIZE AND RETAIN OUR STAFF.
I APPRECIATE WHAT THE MANAGER HAS LISTED IN THE BUDGET WITH THE 2% AND THE STIPEND, BUT GETTING STIPENDS FOR A TEMPER EMPLOYEES WHO ARE GETTING A ZERO RIGHT NOW AND INCREASING THAT STIPEND FOR THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN, YOU KNOW, ON THE FRONT LINE, YOU KNOW, SCRUBBING TOILETS AND PICKING UP TRASH AND FIXING POWER LINES, DOING SOMETHING FOR THEM, UM, ARE VITAL.
YOU KNOW, WE KNOW THAT VIOLENCE HAS INCREASED IN THE CITY AND WE HAD PRESENTATION ON OVP.
WE COULD ADD A MILLION DOLLARS THERE.
WE COULD DO A MILLION DOLLARS FOR COMMUNITY HEALTH WORKERS.
IN ADDITION TO THE 500,000 IN THE BUDGET, UM, AS COUNCIL MEMBER, TOVO JUST MENTIONED, COMMUNITY RESILIENCY IS, IS SO IMPORTANT.
AND WE COULD DO MULTI-YEAR FUNDING.
WE COULD PUT A MILLION DOLLARS TOWARDS THAT AND NOT HAVE IT SPREAD OUT OVER MULTIPLE YEARS.
THAT'S ONLY 17 MILLION THAT WOULD STILL LEAVE 3 MILLION.
IF I'VE HEARD FOLKS TALK ABOUT LIVE MUSIC AND ICONIC VENUES OR FOOD INSECURITY OR WORKFORCE FIRST.
SO THAT, THAT WOULD PUT US AT 20 MILLION STILL REDUCING THE TAX BILL FOR THE AVERAGE HOMEOWNER THERE'S 23.3 MILLION, WHERE THERE WOULD BE NO IMPACT.
SO, YOU KNOW, WHERE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT 17 OR 18 OR $20 MILLION, YOU'D STILL BE REDUCING THAT BILL WHILE POTENTIALLY NOT ONLY MEETING SOME OF THE NEEDS LISTED ON THE MESSAGE BOARD FOR THIS YEAR, BUT ALSO POTENTIALLY MEETING THOSE NEEDS OVER THE COURSE OF THE NEXT FEW.
SO AGAIN, THIS ISN'T A PROPOSAL, IT'S SOMETHING I JUST, BETWEEN THE TIME THAT HE ANSWERED THE QUESTION EARLIER THIS MORNING, AND ME REVIEWING MY NOTES FROM THE LAST FEW SESSIONS, I JUST THINK FOR ILLUSTRATION PURPOSES, I THINK THAT MANY OF THE NEEDS THAT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP BY THE COMMUNITY AND THAT COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE RAISED, WE COULD, WE COULD GET THAT DONE NEXT WEEK.
AND SO I JUST WANTED TO HAND THIS OUT.
AGAIN, MANY OF THESE ARE NOT THINGS THAT I PUT AT THE, THAT I SUPPORT, BUT WE'RE WERE RAISED BY COLLEAGUES HERE AND I'VE POSTED ON THE MESSAGE BOARD FOR THOSE OF YOU AT HOME.
BUT I THINK THERE IS A REAL ABILITY FOR US TO RECOGNIZE AND RETAIN OUR STAFF, DO SOMETHING MORE FOR OUR STAFF WHILE INVESTING IN PARKS, HOMELESSNESS, UH, EMS WORKFORCE, FIRST, ALL COMMUNITY HEALTH WORKERS, ALL THE THINGS THAT PEOPLE HAVE.
UM, ANYTHING ELSE I MISSED ISSUE? YES.
SO I DO BELIEVE WE HAVE SOMEONE FROM CODE AVAILABLE TO, UM, ANSWER COUNCIL MEMBER TEBOW'S QUESTIONS.
IF WE CAN JUST GET A MOMENT TO HAVE THEM MOVE OVER INTO THE MEETING.
IT MAY, RIGHT WHEN IT'S TIME, I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION.
I'LL JUST MARK AS A, AS A DECIDE, ONE THING THAT I'VE, THAT I'VE SUGGESTED THAT WE CONSIDER AS WE'RE IN THE PRETTY DIRE PLACE IN THE COMMUNITY RIGHT NOW, WITH RESPECT TO THE COVID VIRUS.
AND WE'RE ASKING EMPLOYERS, UH, THE CITY TO HELP, AND CERTAINLY EMPLOYERS HAVE THE ABILITY TO, UH, TO REQUIRE MASKING OF THEIR BUSINESSES.
EMPLOYERS HAVE THE ABILITY TO SAY, WE REALLY ONLY WANT PEOPLE WHO ARE VACCINATED TO COME IN.
WE'VE ALSO HAD CONVERSATIONS OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS ABOUT ADDITIONAL INCENTIVES OR INCENTIVES FOR PEOPLE THAT ARE GETTING VACCINATED.
UM, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT STIPEND FOR CITY EMPLOYEES,
[01:00:01]
MAYBE WE SHOULD ALSO CONSIDER ADDITIONAL STIPEND THAT SPEAKS TO, UH, GIVING EMPLOYEES THAT HAD SAID, IF, IF THEY GET VACCINATED, WE WERE GOING TO OFFER THAT TO EMPLOYEES THAT ARE TO BE VACCINATED.MAYBE WE ALSO GIVE IT TO THE EMPLOYEES THAT HAVE BEEN VACCINATED BECAUSE THEY'VE ALREADY STEPPED UP.
SO THAT'S SOMETHING, UH, GIVEN THIS SITUATION WITH AVAILABLE ONE TIME FUNDING THAT, THAT OUTAGE I'D LIKE YOU TO THINK ABOUT OR CONSIDER COLLEAGUES AS WELL.
WE READY WITH CODE, IF NOT, WE'LL GO TO ADD AND THEN COME BACK TO CODE.
SHOULD I GO AHEAD AND ADD? YEAH.
SO, UM, I'M GOING TO BRING THIS UP BECAUSE I PLAN TO RAISE THIS DURING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISCUSSION, BUT SINCE THAT'S NOT HAPPENING TODAY, I NEED TO RAISE IT FROM MY COLLEAGUES.
UM, I WILL BE PUTTING, UM, AN ITEM ON THE MESSAGE FORWARD, UM, RELATED TO, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, RELATED TO THE ICONIC VENUE FUND.
THE COUNCIL PASSED A RESOLUTION IN DECEMBER TO FUND, UH, THE DI WHICH PUT INITIAL DOLLARS INTO THE ICONIC VENUE FUND OF 2.4, BUT THEN COMMITTED, UH, ARE DIRECTED THE CITY MANAGER TO COME UP WITH A PLAN TO FUND ADDITIONAL AMOUNT OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS.
UM, THAT THERE'S NO ADDITIONAL AMOUNT IN OUR BUDGET THIS TIME.
I'M GOING TO PROPOSE THAT WE PUT SOME DOLLAR AMOUNT IN BECAUSE WE NEED TO, WE CAN, THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF SOMETHING THE COUNCIL PASSED.
SO, UM, I JUST WANT TO LET EVERYBODY KNOW THAT, UM, THAT I WAS GOING TO PUT THAT ON THE MESSAGE BOARD.
UM, I APPRECIATE COUNCIL MEMBER ULTRA'S QUESTION AND CITY MANAGER.
WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU BRING BACK YOUR RESPONSE TO THAT, I THINK IT