Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[1. Call To Order]

[00:00:04]

>>> GOOD EVENING, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.

IT'S WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 27, P2021.

5:30 P.M. WE DO HAVE A QUORUM. THIS MEETING MAY BE CONVENED IN CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR THE PURPOSE OF SEEKING CONFIDENTIAL LEGAL ADVICE FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY ON ANY AGENDA ITEM HEREIN. DUE TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY AND TO CONFORM WITH SOCIAL DISTANCING REQUIREMENTS, THE CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS WILL BE HELD VIA TELECONFERENCING.

TO LISTEN TO THE MEETING LIVE YOU CAN CALL 833-568-8864 AND ENTER MEETING NUMBER 1603087037. IF YOU'D LIKE TO PROVIDE COMMENT ACCEPTED AN EMAIL BY 3:30 P.M. THE DAY OF THE MEETING AND STATE WHETHER YOUR COMMENT IS RELATED TO A SPECIFIC AGENDA ITEM OR A GENERAL COMMENT TO COUNCIL AND YOUR COMMENT WILL BE WRITE INTO THE RECORD WITH A THREE MINUTE LIMIT.

[2. Discuss budget priorities and financial strategies resulting from ending reserve levels in FY2020, additional funds in FY2021, remaining funds from the CARES Act, and consider options to reallocate the FY2021 Adopted Budget.]

DID WE HAVE ANY CITIZEN COMMENTS?

>> WE DID NOT. >> WE'RE GOING TO MOVE RIGHT TO ITEM TWO WHICH IS DISCUSS BUDGET PR PRIORITIES AND FINANCIAL STRATEGIES FROM FISCAL YEAR 2020, ADDITIONAL FUNDS IN FISCAL YEAR 2021, REMAINING FUNDS FROM THE CARES ACT, AND CONSIDER OPTIONS TO REALLOCATE THE FISCAL YEAR 2021 ADOPTED BUDGET. I ASSUME THAT'S BRIAN AND WENDY

TONIGHT. >> YES, MAYOR.

I'M GOING TO KICK IT OFF AND THEN TURN IT OVER TO WENDY TO LEAD US THROUGH THE POWERPOINT. SO COUNCIL, WE HAVE GOOD NEWS TONIGHT. YOU'LL REMEMBER THAT 2020 WAS A PRETTY ROUGH YEAR FOR US. FINANCIALLY IT CREATED A LOT OF UNCERTAINTY PARTICULARLY IN THE AREA OF REVENUE.

THERE WERE A LOT OF CITIES THAT STRUGGLED MORE THAN ROWLETT DO BECAUSE THEY RELY PARTICULARLY ON TOURISM AND THOSE KIND OF THINGS WHICH WE DON'T. SO THERE WERE SOME THINGS THAT HAPPENED LAST YEAR THAT ACTUALLY INCREASED OUR RESOURCE BY QUITE A BIT. AND YOU'LL REMEMBER THE BUDGET UNCERTAINTY WE HAD LAST SUMMER PARTICULARLY AROUND AUGUST WHEN THERE WAS NEARLY $1 BILLION WORTH OF PROTEST VALUES WHEN WE GOT OUR FINAL CERTIFIED VALUE ON JULY 25TH.

AND BECAUSE OF THAT UNCERTAINTY, THERE WAS A LOT OF THINGS WE HAD TO LET THE DUST SETTLE THIS FALL AND NOW WE KIND OF KNOW THE REAL NUMBERS. SO WE'RE BRINGING BACK INFORMATION TO YOU SO THAT WE COULD CONSIDER ALLOCATING OR REALLOCATING THE BUDGET. WHAT WE'D LIKE TO DO TONIGHT, THERE'S ABOUT 3 OR 4 SLIDES THAT ARE JUST KIND OF INTRODUCTION INFORMATION. SOME OF THOSE YOU'LL REMEMBER FROM THE DISCUSSION, BUT WE ONLY HAVE ABOUT 12 SLIDES I THINK.

THE GOAL REALLY IS TO HAVE DISCUSSION AS WE GO.

SO WHEN WE ACTUALLY TALK ABOUT ONE BUCKET OF MONEY AND ONE SOURCE OF FUNDING, WE CAN ACTUALLY HAVE A CONVERSATION AROUND THAT. SO DON'T THINK YOU HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL THE END OF THE PRESENTATION TO HAVE DIALOGUE.

WE CAN ACTUALLY ASK YOU QUESTIONS, LET'S HAVE DIALOGUE ALONG THE WAY. AND THEN WHEN WE GET TO THE END, WE'LL KIND OF SUMMARIZE AND START TO RECAP AND BUILD CONSENSUS ON A FINAL SET OF DECISIONS.

AND WENDY IS GOING TO BE USING EXCEL TO KEEP UP WITH THOSE DECISIONS. SO AT THIS POINT I WOULD TURN IT OVER TO WENDY AND SHE'LL LEAD YOU THROUGH THE PRESENTATION.

>> GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL. TONIGHT'S PRESENTATION IS TO LEAD US OFF FOR THE DISCUSSIONS ON A FOLLOW UP WORK SESSION AS BRIAN MENTIONED ON THE FISCAL YEAR 2021 BUDGET TO DISCUSS ADDITIONAL SOURCES OF FUNDING THAT MAY BE ALLOCATED OR REALLOCATED WITHIN THE FISCAL YEAR 2021 BUDGET.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THIS PRESENTATION WILL GIVE BACKGROUND ON THE FISCAL YEAR 21 ADOPTED BUDGET, DISCUSS WHERE WE ARE NOW AND HOW WE GOT HERE. AND PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE CITY MANAGER AND STAFF. AT THE COMPLETION OF THE PRESENTATION, STAFF IS AVAILABLE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS AND I WILL PUT UP AND SHARE A SPREADSHEET TO ACCOMMODATE COUNCIL DISCUSSIONS AND DECISION MAKING. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

TO PROVIDE A BIT OF BACKGROUND ON AUGUST 24TH AND AUGUST 27TH OF LAST YEAR, COUNCIL HELD TWO WORK SESSIONS TO DISCUSS AND FINALIZE BUDGET PRIORITIES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR '21 BUDGET THAT WAS ADOPTED. AT THE ADOPTION OF THE FISCAL YEAR 21 BUDGET, FUTURE RESPONSES TO THE COVID PANDEMIC WAS UNCERTAIN, OPERATIONAL COSTS OF FISCAL YEAR 20 WERE STILL

[00:05:02]

ONGOING, AND THE APPRAISAL DISTRICTS WERE UNABLE BY LAW TO CERTIFY 388 MILLION IN FISCAL YEAR 21 AD VALOREM PROPERTY TAX PROTESTS. GIVEN THESE VARIABLES, COUNCIL MADE THE DECISION TO FUND PRIORITIES IN THE FISCAL YEAR 21 BUDGET WITH THE INFORMATION WE HAD AT THAT TIME AND THEN REVISIT THE OPPORTUNITIES AND OPTIONS PROVIDED BY THE CLOSURE OF THESE ISSUES AFTER THE 1ST QUARTER OF THE FISCAL YEAR WHICH WE HAVE NOW REACHED. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

SO WHERE ARE WE NOW? SINCE THE ADOPTION OF THE BUDGET, WE'VE HAD FIVE MORE MONTHS OF PANDEMIC ANSWERS.

WE HAVE CLOSED OUT FISCAL YEAR 20 AND THE APPRAISAL DISTRICTS HAVE NOW SETTLED ALL OF THEIR PROTEST VALUE CASES.

FIRST WE NOW KNOW THE TOTAL VALUE OF THE ADDITIONAL PROPERTY TAX VALUES AFTER ALL ADJUSTMENTS WILL PROVIDE 993,000 IN ADDITIONAL GENERAL FUND REVENUES.

IN ADDITION WE HAVE NOW CLOSED OUT THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2020, AND ARE PREPARING THE AUDITED COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL REPORT FOR PRESENTATION TO COUNCIL IN FEBRUARY. THE GOOD NEWS IS THAT WE EXCEEDED OUR POLICY RESERVE IN THE UTILITY FUND BY ABOUT $3 MILLION. AND ALTHOUGH WE DON'T HAVE A POLICY LIMIT FOR RESERVES IN THE EMPLOYEE HEALTH BENEFITS FUND, WE HAVE EXCEEDED OUR WORKING STRATEGY OF 90 DAYS BY 350,000.

FINALLY THE STRATEGY WE DEPLOYED FROM OUR CARES ACT DOLLARS TO APPLY THE COST OF PUBLIC SAFETY, FREED UP DOLLARS.

WE HAVE JUST OVER 1.5 MILLION WE CAN REDISTRIBUTE.

IN SUMMARY, THE GOOD NEWS IS WE HAVE 5.4 MILLION TO DISCUSS FOR ALLOCATION OR REALLOCATION PURPOSES TONIGHT I SHOW IN THE SLIDE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

NOW HOW DID WE GET HERE. LET'S START WITH THE GENERAL FUND. WE HAD TWO VARIABLES THAT AFFECTED THIS FUND. FIRST AS OF DECEMBER 1, 2020, THE ROCKWALL AND DALLAS APPRAISAL DISTRICT REPORT THAT ALL TAX YEAR 2020 PROTEST CASES HAVE BEEN SETTLED AND 362 MILLION OF TAXABLE ASSESSED VALUE HAS BEEN ADDED TO THE CITY'S FISCAL YEAR 21 AD VALOREM TAX ROLL.

THIS ADDS APPROXIMATELY 1.4 MILLION ADDITIONAL GENERAL FUND REVENUE AFTER ALLOCATING OUT THE DEBT SERVICE AND TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE PORTIONS.

SECOND, FOR THE FIRST TIME SINCE THE FINANCIAL POLICIES WERE UPDATED IN 2017, THE RESERVES IN THE GENERAL FUND EXCEEDED OUR 25% POLICY COMING IN AT 27.5%. THIS IS GREAT NEWS AND WILL HELP OUR DISCUSSION WITH THE BOND RATING AGENCIES LATER THIS SUMMER. THERE WERE TWO REASONS WHY OUR RESERVES INCREASED SO MUCH. FIRST REVENUES WERE NOT AS IMPACTED BY COVID-19 AS FIRST BELIEVED.

SECOND, WE CUT SPENDING IN APRIL AND EVEN THOUGH MOST OF IT WAS RESTORED BY AUGUST, WE STILL DID NOT SPEND AS MUCH AS ORIGINALLY BUDGETED. WE WILL NEED THESE RESERVES AND A PORTION OF INCREASED PROPERTY TAXES TO MAINTAIN THE 25% RESERVE POLICY. FOR EXAMPLE FOR EVERY $1 MILLION THAT WE SPEND IN THE GENERAL FUND, WE HAVE TO SET ASIDE $250,000 TO MAINTAIN THAT 25% RESERVE LEVEL.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THE GOOD NEWS IS THAT 993,000 OF THE ADDITIONAL PROPERTY TAX REVENUE IS AVAILABLE AND WILL STILL ALLOW US TO MAINTAIN THE CITY'S 25% GENERAL FUND RESERVE POLICY. FROM THERE, WE NEED TO ACCOUNT FOR OUR COMMITMENT OF THREE ALLOCATIONS TOTALLING 292,000 FOR OUR SHARE OF THE SAFER GRANT AWARDED IN OCTOBER AND TO FIX THE EMPLOYEE PAY FOR OUR MAINTENANCE WORKERS AND CUSTODIANS TO MEET MARKET CONDITIONS.

THESE THREE COMMITMENTS THAT WILL BE INCLUDED IN THE UPCOMING FEBRUARY 16 1ST QUARTER BUDGET AMENDMENT WILL LEAVE A BALANCE TO FUND ONGOING FISCAL YEAR 21 PRIORITIES.

BECAUSE THESE ARE PROPERTY TAX DOLLARS THAT REOCCUR EACH YEAR, THEY CAN BE TREATED AN ONGOING REVENUE RATHER THAN JUST A ONE TIME RESOURCE. POSSIBLE USES INCLUDE BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO EMPLOYEE RAISES AND/OR LUMP SUM ADJUSTMENT, NEW POSITIONS, EQUIPMENT AND TECHNOLOGY, ADDITIONAL CAPITAL MAINTENANCE PROJECT FUNDING. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

WE HIT ANOTHER FINANCIAL MILESTONE IN FISCAL YEAR 20.

FOR THE FIRST TIME THE EMPLOYEE HEALTH BENEFITS FUND ENDED WITH RESERVES IN EXCESS OF 90 DAYS OF BENEFIT CLAIMS. ALTHOUGH IT IS NOT A POLICY AT THIS TIME, HAVING AT LEAST 90 DAYS OF BENEFIT CLAIMS IN RESERVES IS VERY IMPORTANT TO FINANCIALLY SUPPORT THOSE YEARS IN WHICH THERE ARE SUBSTANTIALLY HIGH UNANTICIPATED EMPLOYEE MEDICAL CLAIMS WITHOUT HAVING TO

[00:10:01]

CUT OPERATIONAL COSTS IN THE GENERAL FUND AND UTILITY FUND.

THE AVAILABLE RESERVE BALANCE IN EXCESS OF THE 90 DAYS OF BENEFIT CLAIMS IS 360,000, OF WHICH 320,400 IS ALLOCATED TO THE GENERAL FUND AND 39,600 IS ALLOCATED TO THE UTILITY FUND.

AND THIS IS BASED ON A REIMBURSEMENT OF THE CITY'S PORTION OF MEDICAL PREMIUMS DEPOSITED INTO THE EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND DURING FISCAL YEAR 20.

BECAUSE THIS IS NOT AN ONGOING REVENUE SOURCE, THIS AMOUNT IS AVAILABLE FOR ONE TIME FUNDING OPTIONS.

POSSIBLE USES FOR THESE FUNDS INCLUDE BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO EMPLOYEE LUMP SUM ADJUSTMENTS, EQUIPMENT AND TECHNOLOGY, AND ADDITIONAL CAPITAL MAINTENANCE PROJECT FUNDING.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. FISCAL YEAR 20 YEAR END MARKED THE SECOND YEAR IN A ROW, BACK ONE, THERE YOU GO.

FISCAL YEAR 20 YEAR END MARKED THE SECOND YEAR IN A ROW THAT THE UTILITY FUND OPERATING RESERVE CASH BALANCE HAS BEEN IN EXCESS OF THE CITY'S POLICY OF 90 DAYS OF NET OPERATING EXPENSE. TO MAINTAIN THE CITY'S 90 DAY POLICY AND S&P'S BOND RATING CALCULATION OF 90 DAYS OPERATING CASH ON HAND, THE UTILITY FUND HAS AN AVAILABLE BALANCE OF $3 MILLION. FROM THERE, WE NEED TO ACCOUNT FOR ONE ACTION IN THE AMOUNT OF 210,000 THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED AND WILL BE INCLUDED IN THE UPCOMING FEBRUARY 16TH 1ST QUARTER BUDGET AMENDMENT. THIS LEAVES AN AVAILABLE BALANCE OF $2,789,653 TO FUND ONE TIME FISCAL YEAR 21.

THIS AMOUNT IS AVAILABLE FOR ONE TIME FUNDING OPTIONS.

POSSIBLE USES FOR THESE FUNDS INCLUDE BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO EMPLOYEE RAISES AND/OR LUMP SUM ADJUSTMENT, EQUIPMENT AND TECHNOLOGY, ADDITIONAL CAPITAL MAINTENANCE PROJECT FUNDING, RATE RELIEF FOR ONE TIME, RATE RELIEF WHICH INCLUDES A RESERVE FOR ONGOING RATE CONSISTENCY, AND EMERGENCY PROJECT OR ECONOMIC RESERVES. WE'VE GIVEN THE EXAMPLE THAT TEN DAYS WORTH OF RESERVE WOULD BE ABOUT $943,000.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. IN FISCAL YEAR 20 THE CITY RECEIVED REIMBURSEMENTS FOR COVID-19 PANDEMIC COSTS TOTALLING $3,879,000. BECAUSE THE SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF THESE COSTS WERE BUDGETED IN FISCAL YEAR 20, THE CITY IS ANTICIPATING AN AVAILABLE SOURCE OF FUNDING FOR ONE TIME FISCAL YEAR 21 BUDGET PRIORITIES OF $1,540,280.

THIS BALANCE TAKES INTO CONSIDERATION ACTUAL YEAR FISCAL PYEAR 20 RESPONSE EXPENSES, ESTIMATED FISCAL YEAR 21 RESPONSE EXPENSES. SINCE THE FULL REIMBURSEMENT AWARDS WERE SUBSTANTIATED WITH AUTHORIZED FISCAL YEAR 20 PANDEMIC RESPONSE COSTS, THE AVAILABLE BALANCE IS NOT REQUIRED TO BE USED FOR COVID-RELATED EXPENSE, HOWEVER SOME OR ALL OF THIS BALANCE MAY BE NEEDED FOR VACCINE DISTRIBUTION. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

I WANTED TO ALSO GIVE SOME POSSIBLE, IF WE CAN GO BACK ONE MORE SLIDE, SOME POSSIBLE ONE TIME USES FOR THESE FUNDS INCLUDE BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO VACCINE DISTRIBUTION, ADDITIONAL HOUSEHOLD RENTAL ASSISTANCE, ROBUST ROUND FOUR BUSINESS ASSISTANCE, REINSTATING THE SALVATION ARMY FUNDING THAT WAS CUT FROM THE FISCAL YEAR 21 ADOPTED BUDGET WHICH WAS $50,000, REINSTATEMENT OF THE HABITAT FUNDING THAT WAS CUT FROM THE FISCAL YEAR 21 ADOPTED BUDGET WHICH WAS ALSO $50,000, AND PRESERVING A PERCENTAGE OF THE AWARD FOR CLAWBACK.

FOR EXAMPLE 10% WOULD BE ABOUT 387,000, $388,000.

>> I'LL GO BACK AND COMMENT LATER IF YOU PREFER.

BUT I DO NOT AGREE THAT WE CUT THE BUDGET FROM SALVATION ARMY.

WE FOUND THOSE FUNDS FROM ANOTHER SOURCE.

I DON'T WANT THAT TO BE MISNDERSTOOD BY THE PUBLIC, WE INCREASED THE FUNDS TO THE SALVATION ARMY THIS YEAR, WE JUST DIDN'T DO IT THROUGH THE GENERAL FUND, WE DID IT THROUGH

CARES, COVID FUNDS. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR.

I WAS WANTING TO MAKE THE SAME POINT.

>> NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. LAST WEEK STAFF DISCUSSED PRIORITIES AND DEPARTMENT NEEDS. THIS RECOMMENDATION ON THIS SLIDE REPRESENTS THE CONSENSUS OF THE CITY MANAGER AND EXECUTIVE TEAM FOR USE OF THE AVAILABLE GENERAL FUND AND EMPLOYEE HEALTH BENEFIT FUND SOURCE OF FUNDS.

THERE'S APPROXIMATELY 1.1 MILLION AVAILABLE BETWEEN THE GENERAL AND EMPLOYEE HEALTH BENEFITS FUNDS OF WHICH 700,000 IS CONSIDERED ONGOING AND 400,000 CONSIDERED ONE TIME.

[00:15:02]

GIVEN THE FACT THAT NO RAISES WERE PROVIDED THIS YEAR AND TAKING INTO ACCOUNT OTHER NEEDS, CITY STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT COUNCIL CONSIDER PROVIDING A 2% RAISE EFFECTIVE MARCH 1, 2021, OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND DOLLARS. OTHER FUNDS SUCH AS THE UTILITY FUND WOULD PAY FOR THEIR PORTION OF THIS 2% RAISE.

THE 2% RAISE WOULD COST THE GENERAL FUND APPROXIMATELY $372,000 AND THE 1% LUMP SUM ADJUSTMENT WOULD COST THE EMPLOYEE HEALTH BENEFITS FUND APPROXIMATELY 325,000.

THAT WOULD LEAVE ABOUT 34,500 IN THE EMPLOYEE HEALTH BENEFITS FUND THAT CAN BE TRANSFERRED TO THE GENERAL AND UTILITY FUNDS TO REALLOCATE FOR OTHER PURPOSES. THE EXECUTIVE TEAM SUBMITTED PROJECTS BASED ON FISCAL YEAR 21 BUDGET REQUESTS AND CURRENT NEEDS TO DEVELOP A COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF ONE TIME AND ONGOING PROJECTS AND NEEDS. THE TEAM THEN MET TO DISCUSS PRIORITIES AND RANK NEEDS FOR FUNDING.

THE LIST TOTALLING $130,067 IS MOSTLY ONE TIME ITEMS FOR BUILDING RENOVATIONS, EQUIPMENT, AND TECHNOLOGY.

ITEMS IN YELLOW TOTALLING 224,691 INCLUDE A COMBINATION OF ONGOING AND ONE TIME EXPENSES FOR BUILDING RENOVATIONS, EQUIPMENT, NEW PERSONNEL, AND TECHNOLOGY.

THE LIST FROM THE GREEN AND YELLOW ITEMS WOULD ESSENTIALLY WIPE OUT THE REMAINING FUNDS IN THE GENERAL FUND.

ANOTHER LIST OF PRIORITIES IN ORANGE ARE FOR NEW PERSONNEL AND REMAINING EQUIPMENT. CITY STAFF FELT STRONGLY THEY SHOULD BE IDENTIFIED FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS DISCUSSION.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THE 2% RAISE IS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF WOULD COST ABOUT $35,000 TO THE GENERAL FUND.

SINCE THIS AMOUNT EXCEEDS OUR REQUIRED 90 DAY RESERVE LEVEL, WE CAN BE STRATEGIC IN HOW WE ALLOCATE THESE FUNDS.

ONE POSSIBILITY IS TO SET ASIDE AN EMERGENCY RESERVE.

CURRENTLY EVERY TIME WE HAVE AN EMERGENCY WE HAVE TO FIX IT USING DESIGNATED CAPITAL MAINTENANCE FUNDS ALREADY PROGRAMMED FOR OTHER PROJECTS. THE RECENT COLLAPSE OF A SECTION OF SEWER PIPE JUST IN FRONT OF MCDONALDS ON HIGHWAY 66 ADJACENT TO ROWLETT ROAD IS AN EXAMPLE. THIS PROJECT WILL COST ABOUT $173,000 AND WOULD HAVE HAD TO COME FROM THE CAPITAL MAINTENANCE REPLACEMENT BUDGET IF IT WERE NOT A PROJECT ALREADY ALLOCATED FOR REPLACEMENT FROM THE UTILITY REVENUE BONDS ISSUED LAST AUGUST AND THIS COMING AUGUST.

IN ADDITION WE DO NOT WANT TO DROP BELOW THE 90 DAY LEVEL IF WE HAVE A BAD WEATHER YEAR. CITY STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND SETTING ASIDE TEN DAYS OF OPERATING CASH OR APPROXIMATELY 943,000 FOR SUCH PURPOSES. THE REMAINING AMOUNT OF 1.8 MILLION COULD BE USED FOR ADDITIONAL CAPITAL MAINTENANCE PROJECTS, ONE TIME RATE RELIEF OR A RESERVE FOR ONGOING RATE RELIEF. IF WE USE THE FUNDS FOR ONE TIME RATE RELIEF, WE COULD REDUCE THE UTILITY RATES BY A CERTAIN DOLLAR AMOUNT PER MONTH THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30TH OF THIS YEAR OR DESIGNATE ONE MONTH DURING THE YEAR TO SUSPEND ALL BASE RATE CHARGES. THE COST OF THESE OPTIONS ARE PROVIDED AT THE BOTTOM OF THE SCREEN.

IF WE CHOOSE A PORTION OF THE FUNDS FOR RATE RELIEF, STAFF RECOMMENDS ANY ADDITIONAL FUNDS ABOVE THESE AMOUNTS SHOULD BE DISTRIBUTED TO THE UTILITY CAPITAL MAINTENANCE FUND.

FOR THE COVID CARES ACT PANDEMIC, IN 2020 THE CITY RECEIVED $2,348,000 FROM DALLAS COUNTY.

AND 191,965 FROM THE CORONAVIRUS EMERGENCY SUPPORT FUND WHICH WE CALL CESF. FOR A TOTAL OF 3,879,990 ESSENTIALLY FROM THE CARES ACT. THE CESF WAS DESIGNATED FOR PPE AND OTHER COVID-19 EXPENSES. THE REMAINING 3,668,025 WAS INITIALLY DISTRIBUTED TO INDIVIDUAL AND HOUSEHOLD ASSISTANCE, BUSINESS ASSISTANCE WHICH WE CALL THE ROBUST GRANTS, AND OTHER COVID-19 RELATED EXPENSES SUCH AS PERSONNEL, PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT, AND SUPPLIES.

DURING THE FALL OF 2020, STAFF LEARNED THAT THE U.S. TREASURY AMENDED THE ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA TO ALLOW FOR REIMBUSEMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY SALARIES AND DETERMINED TO APPLY THOSE COSTS AGAINST THE 3,668,025. AS A RESULT ALL REMAINING FUNDS ARE ELIGIBLE FOR ANY LEGAL PURPOSE AND ARE NO LONGER TIED TO THE ORIGINAL ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS.

TO DATE, WE HAVE RECEIVED ALL BUT 80% OF THE FUNDS WHICH ARE CURRENTLY IN THE STATE'S TREASURY FUNCTION FOR DISTRIBUTION. STAFF EXPECTS TO RECEIVE THOSE FINAL FUNDS THIS WEEK. OF THE TOTAL 3.9 MILLION

[00:20:03]

DISTRIBUTED THE CITY HAS SPENT 2 MILLION.

STAFF ALSO EXPECTS TO SPEND APPROXIMATELY 366,000 IN THE REMAINING MONTHS OF FISCAL YEAR 21 FOR EMERGENCY SUPPLIES AND PERSONNEL COSTS LEAVING A BALANCE OF $1,540,280 AVAILABLE FOR ADDITIONAL DISTRIBUTION. POSSIBLE USES FOR THOSE FUNDS ARE ROBUST GRANT FUNDING TO ASSIST LOCAL BUSINESSES WITH THE ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF COVID-1. THE CITY HAS DISTRIBUTED 853,551 THROUGH 3 ROUNDS AND HAS SET ASIDE 50,000 FOR ADMINISTRATIVE OVERHEAD FOR THE ROWLETT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE WHO IS MANAGING THE PROGRAM LEAVING A REMAINING ALLOCATION OF $168,606.

CURRENTLY THE ROWLETT CHAMBER HAS DISPERSED $611,300 TO LOCAL BUSINESSES AND HAS 242,252 REMAINING THAT CAN EITHER BE REIMBURSED BACK TO THE CITY FOR OTHER PURPOSES OR REALLOCATED TO ADDITIONAL ROUNDS OF ROBUST GRANT FUNDING.

IF THE CITY WANTS TO CONTINUE WITH ITS ORIGINAL TARGET OF THE 1,072,157 IT WOULD NEED TO DISPERSE AN ADDITIONAL $174,955 TO COMBINE WITH THE 242,252 BEING HELD BY THE ROWLETT CHAMBER WHICH WOULD PROVIDE A TOTAL OF $417,207 FOR FUTURE ROUNDS. WE COULD DISTRIBUTE TO VACCINE DISTRIBUTION. THE COST OF THE VACCINE DISTRIBUTION IS THE HARDEST ISSUE TO SUCCESSFULLY PREDICT.

IT IS POSSIBLE THAT ANY DOLLARS SPENT FOR VACCINE DISTRIBUTION WILL BE COVERED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OR THE CITY MAY HAVE TO COVER UP TO 25% AS A MATCH. IF WE PARTICIPATE WITH THE GARLAND HEALTH AUTHORITY, WE COULD SPEND 1.6 MILLION THROUGH THE REST OF THE YEAR. THIS IS BECAUSE EACH DAY COSTS ROWLETT $10,185, EMPLOYEES, FIRE, AND STAFF OVERTIME.

CURRENTLY THE PROGRAM IS PLANNED FOR TWO DAYS A WEEK THOUGH IT COULD BE INCREASED IF ADDITIONAL VACCINES ARE PROVIDED.

IF THE CITY ONLY MATCHES THAT AMOUNT, IT COULD COST AROUND 407,000. IF THE CITY RAN ITS OWN VACCINE DISTRIBUTION PROGRAM, THE COST WOULD BE MUCH HIGHER AT AN ESTIMATED $2.1 MILLION DUE TO ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL AND EQUIPMENT NEEDED TO PRESERVE AND TRACK THE DISTRIBUTIONS.

CITY STAFF STRONGLY URGES THE CITY TO PARTICIPATE WITH THE GARLAND HEALTH AUTHORITY AS IT IS THE LEAST EXPENSIVE AND MOST EFFICIENT MEANS TO MASS VACCINATE ROWLETT CITIZENS.

WE COULD PARTICIPATE IN ADDITIONAL HOUSEHOLD RENTAL ASSISTANCE. THE CITY HAS CURRENTLY SPENT APPROXIMATELY $301,267 TOWARDS INDIVIDUAL AND HOUSEHOLD ASSISTANCE PROGRAM. LAST FALL THE CITY ALLOCATED $552,323 LEAVING A BALANCE OF $251,056 IF WE WANT TO CONTINUE THAT PROGRAM. OTHER POSSIBLE USES, THE CITY COULD ALSO REINSTATE FUNDS FOR THE SALVATION ARMY AND CAN ALSO REINSTATE FUNDS FOR HABITAT OR UTILIZE MORE DOLLARS TO ASSIST OUR FOOD PANTRY AND NON-PROFITS. ONE FINAL THOUGHT IS TO SET ASIDE A PORTION, PERHAPS 10%, WHICH WOULD BE $387,999 FOR A CLAW BACK RESERVE IF ANY EXPENSES ARE LATER DISALLOWED.

IN CONCLUSION, THE CITY IS FORTUNATE IT HAS $5.4 MILLION IN ADDITIONAL RESOURCES AND THE FLEXIBILITY TO USE THOSE FUNDS TO HELP OUR BUSINESSES AND RESIDENTS PROVIDE RAISES TO EMPLOYEES, PURCHASE EQUIPMENT AND TECHNOLOGY, AND/OR FUND ADDITIONAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS. WE'RE AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS NOW SHOULD YOU HAVE ANY AND THEN I WILL SWITCH OVER TO AN EXCEL SPREADSHEET TO VISUALLY SHOW ALL OPTIONS AND KEEP A TALLY OF COUNCIL'S DECISIONS TONIGHT.

>> I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU'RE GOING TO DO IT, BUT I REALLY WANT TO SEE, THIS IS A DISCUSSION WE NEED TO HAVE SO I REALLY NEED THE WHOLE SCREEN UP. SO WE MAY HAVE TO TOGGLE BACK AND FORTH TO THE PRESENTATION. THANK YOU, THAT VERY GOOD LUMINOUS INFORMATION AND BRIAN AND THE WHOLE STAFF.

I APPRECIATE THAT. THAT'S A LOT OF INFORMATION AND A LOT OF NUMBERS THROWN AT US. I KNOW THAT WE GOT THIS MEMO A FEW DAYS AGO SO WE'VE HAD TIME TO ABSORB IT HOPEFULLY.

I DID NOTICE SOME OF THE NUMBERS CHANGED, BRIAN, FROM WHEN YOU AND I TALKED YESTERDAY A LITTLE BIT BUT NOT MUCH.

SO I'M GOING TO SUGGEST WE BREAK THIS DOWN AND HAVE DISCUSSIONS AND IF ANYBODY WANTS TO GO A DIFFERENT DIRECTION, JUST

[00:25:01]

HOLLER. BUT I THINK I'D LIKE TO START WITH THE GENERAL FUND ONGOING EXCESS FUNDS WE HAVE AND TALK ABOUT THAT FOR US. IS EVERYBODY OKAY WITH THAT? ANYBODY HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS TO THAT? OKAY. I KNOW THAT BROWNIE ASKED A QUESTION IN AN EMAIL AND I WAS ON THE SAME PATH, BROWNIE, AND I'M SURE OTHERS WERE TOO IN REGARDS TO THE STEP PROGRAMS FOR THE POLICE AND FIRE. SO WHETHER IT'S BRIAN OR WENDY OR I DON'T KNOW, RICHARD, I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE NUMBERS ON THE EMAIL THAT WE GOT SENT. SO IF IT'S OKAY WITH Y'ALL, I'D LIKE TO START THERE TO UNDERSTAND THOSE.

AND I DON'T KNOW HOW THEY RELATE TO THE PREVIOUS NUMBERS THAT YOU PROVIDED IN REGARDS TO A 2% ACROSS THE BOARD RAISE AND WHAT

HAPPENS WITH THOSE NUMBERS. >> MAYOR, LET ME DO THAT, OBVIOUSLY RICHARD AND I COLLABORATED ON THAT.

BUT THERE WAS A LOT OF OTHER COLUMNS THAT CALCULATE TO THE TWO NUMBERS THAT WE PROVIDED. BUT FIRST OFF THE FIRST COLUMN SHOWS, THIS IS IN THE EMAIL WE SENT EARLIER TODAY, THAT IF WE PROVIDED THE STEP INCREASE AS OF OCTOBER 1, SO RETROACTIVE FOR THE ENTIRE YEAR WHAT IT WOULD COST.

AND THEN WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF WE IMPLEMENTED IT ON MARCH 1.

SO IF WE CHOOSE THAT OPTION FOR EXAMPLE WE WOULD IMPLEMENT IT ON MARCH 1 THAT ANYBODY THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN SCHEDULED TO RECEIVE THEIR STEP INCREASE BETWEEN OCTOBER 1ST AND THE END OF FEBRUARY, THEN THEY WOULD GET THEIR RAISE AND THEN ANYBODY SCHEDULED THE REST OF THE YEAR WOULD GET IT WHEN THEIR ANNIVERSARY DATE CAME UP. SO JUST FOR EXAMPLE IF WE DID THAT, THEN FOR POLICE AND FIRE THAT STEP INCREASE WOULD COST ABOUT 124,000 IF WE DID IT RETROACTIVE TO OCTOBER 1.

AND IF WE STARTED AS OF MARCH 1 IT WOULD BE ABOUT $72,602.

>> CAN I ASK YOU TO STOP TALKING ABOUT OCTOBER 1 BECAUSE THAT'S GONE. WE'RE NOT GOING TO GO BACK TO OCTOBER 1. SO I UNDERSTAND WHY YOU HAVE THOSE NUMBERS, BUT IF WE COULD JUST TALK ABOUT MARCH 1ST AND FORWARD. THAT WAY WE DON'T GET CONFUSED.

>> THAT'S NOT AN OPTION. >> LET ME EXPLAIN THE EMAIL JUST SO EVERYBODY UNDERSTOOD WHERE WE WERE GETTING THE NUMBERS FROM.

AND THEN ON THE OPEN RANGE WHAT WE DID, WE CALCULATED ASSUMING THAT WE WOULD DO THE STEP INCREASE, WHAT A 1%, 2%, OR 3% RAISE WOULD BE FOR OPEN RANGE EMPLOYEES.

THOSE ARE NOT SWORN POLICE OR FIREFIGHTERS.

>> OKAY, SO THE PREVIOUS NUMBER WHEN YOU SAID A 2% RAISE ON

MARCH 1ST WOULD COST 372. >> THAT IS TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THAT WE WERE NOT GOING TO DO STEPS.

>> I KNOW. LET ME ASK MY QUESTION.

THAT 372 IS NOW 154,395 BECAUSE THE POLICE AND FIRE WERE

INCLUDED IN THE STEP NUMBERS. >> THAT'S CORRECT, MAYOR.

SO IF WE STICK TO WHAT THE STAFF ORIGINALLY DISCUSSED IN PREPARATION FOR THIS MEETING AND WE DO IT ACROSS THE BOARD, THAT'S ONE SET OF KNURLS. BUT IF WE DID -- SET OF NUMBERS.

BUT IF WE DID THE STEP PLAN INSTEAD AND DO ACROSS THE BOARD FOR THE OPEN RANGE, THEN YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT NUMBERS BECAUSE YOU'RE DOING IT DIFFERENTLY.

THAT'S ALL. >> YEAH, THANK YOU.

SO I'LL OPEN IT UP FOR DISCUSSION.

WE HAVE A STEP PLAN FOR A REASON AND LAST YEAR AND THE YEAR BEFORE WE WERE LIKE WE'RE GOING TO FUND THIS STEP PLAN AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO FUND OPEN RANGE. SO I'M CONFUSED BY THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION GOING AWAY FROM THAT RECOMMENDATION TO FUND THE STEP PLAN. THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME.

OTHER COMMENTS, COUNCIL? >> YEAH, I AGREE WITH YOU ON

THAT, MAYOR. >> RICHARD, YOU WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT? I DON'T UNDERSTAND, I MEAN WE'VE HAD A PLAN IN PLACE FOR SEVERAL YEARS NOW.

>> BECAUSE OF THE PANDEMIC AND US NOT THINKING WE WOULD HAVE THE AVAILABLE FUNDS THROUGH FISCAL YEAR 21 TO GIVE ANYONE AN ADJUSTMENT WHETHER IT WAS ACROSS THE BOARD AT THE BEGINNING OR THROUGH STEPS AND/OR MERIT ADJUSTMENTS ON YOUR JOB DATE OR YOUR POSITION DATE, THE FIRST OPTION OR THE OPTION THAT WE RECOMMENDED IS TO AFFECT EVERYBODY, IN OTHER WORDS EVERY SINGLE EMPLOYEE IN THAT SCENARIO GETS AN ADJUSTMENT.

[00:30:03]

IF WE JUST GIVE POLICE AND FIRE STEPS, THERE ARE FIRE EMPLOYEES WHO ARE AT THE MAX STEP. SO THEY WOULD NOT GET AN ADJUSTMENT BASED ON JUST MOVING THE EMPLOYEES THROUGH THEIR STEP. AND THERE ARE 32 POLICE OFFICERS WHO ARE AT THE TOP OF THEIR STEP.

THEY WOULD NOT GET AN ADJUSTMENT EITHER UNLESS WE MADE SOME OTHER

ACCOMMODATION FOR THAT GROUP. >> THAT'S WHY WE HAVE A STEP PLAN AND THAT'S WHY WE'VE BEEN MANAGING, NOT TO PREVENT PEOPLE FROM GETTING A RAISE, BUT TO PUT PEOPLE IN THE RIGHT STEP PROGRAM. I DON'T UNDERSTAND JUST BECAUSE OF A PANDEMIC AND NOT BEING ABLE TO GIVE RAISES FROM OCTOBER 1ST WHY WE'D BE MOVING AWAY FROM THAT PLAN, I DON'T UNDERSTAND

HOW THOSE TWO CORRELATE. >> SO MAYOR, I UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION. AND WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS IS THAT WHEN WE DISCUSSED HOW WE WOULD DISTRIBUTE THE FUNDS AND WHAT WE WOULD RECOMMEND TO COUNCIL, QUITE FRANKLY WE RECOGNIZE THIS WAS AN EXTRAORDINARY YEAR AND WE'RE STARTING WITH NO RAISES AT ALL AND WE HAVE THE CAPACITY TO DO SOMETHING.

SO WHAT WE THOUGHT INITIALLY AT LEAST IS THAT IF WE DID IT ACROSS THE BOARD EVERYBODY WOULD GET SOMETHING AND I UNDERSTAND THE COMMENT ABOUT THE STEP PLAN AND I'M NOT GOING TO OBJECT DOING THAT. ALL I'M SAYING IS THAT WAS THE LOGIC OF WHY WE DECIDED TO TRY TO DO IT ACROSS THE BOARD SO THAT IN THIS KIND OF A CRAZY YEAR AT LEAST EVERYBODY WOULD GET SOMETHING. AND WHAT IT WOULD DO IS IT WOULD ADJUST THE PAY GRADE, SO IT WOULD ALSO AFFECT FUTURE HIRES AS WELL. SO IF WE WANT TO DO THE STEP PLAN INSTEAD AND TREAT THEM AS ACROSS THE BOARD, FINE WITH THAT. LET'S JUST HAVE THAT DISCUSSION

BUT THAT'S WHERE OUR LOGIC WAS. >> I'LL ASK ONE MORE QUESTION AND THEN I'LL OPEN IT UP. SO THERE'S GOING TO BE PEOPLE IN THE STEP PLAN THAT WOULD GET A DIFFERENT HIGHER AMOUNT THAN ACROSS THE BOARD RAISE BY WORKING THE STEP PLAN TOO?

>> THAT'S CORRECT, MAYOR. AND DEPENDING ON WHERE THEY'RE AT LIKE WITH FIRE AND POLICE AND DEPENDING ON WHAT LEVEL, SOME WILL GET 3 OR 3.5 OR EVERYONE JUMP UP TO 4.5 OR 5 TO MOVE TO

THEIR STEP. >> CAN YOU ANSWER THEN WHAT'S THE TOTAL COST TO DO THE STEP ADJUSTMENT FROM MARCH 1ST TO THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR FOR OPEN RANGE AND PUBLIC SAFETY?

>> 226. >> 226.

>> WITH A 2%. >> NO, WITH THE STEP PLAN.

>> RIGHT. IT'S 44 FOR POLICE IN THE EMAIL.

>> YEAH. >> PLUS THE 28 FOR FIRE IN THE EMAIL. PLUS THE 154 FOR OPEN RANGE IN

THE EMAIL. >> OKAY.

GOT IT. >> I MEAN THAT'S A STARTING POINT I WOULD THINK, RIGHT. I'M SORRY, I FEEL VERY STRONGLY ABOUT THIS OBVIOUSLY. QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, COUNCIL?

>> I HAD A QUESTION. SO THAT MEANS THE ONES THAT ARE ALREADY AT THE TOP, RICHARD, THEY WOULDN'T GET ANYTHING ON

THE STEP PLAN? >> IF WE JUST DO THE STEP PLAN AND THEN AN ACROSS THE BOARD FOR OPEN RANGE, THAT IS CORRECT.

>> OKAY. I HAVEN'T FINISHED.

I'M IN FAVOR OF EVERYONE GETTING A RAISE.

I'M GOING TO JUST SAY IT JUST LIKE THAT.

>> MY QUESTION IS WHAT HAVE WE DONE IN THE PAST FOR THE STEP PLAN? I MEAN WE'VE MADE ADJUSTMENTS TO

THE STEP PLAN. >> LET ME EXPLAIN THAT JUST SO EVERYBODY IS ON THE SAME PAGE BECAUSE EVERY YEAR HAS BEEN A LITTLE DIFFERENT. WHAT WE'VE BEEN FORTUNATE TO DO THE LAST FEW YEARS IS WE'VE MADE A SIGNIFICANT ADJUSTMENT FOR MARKET AND WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO MOVE PEOPLE THROUGH THEIR RANGE THROUGH THE STEPS. AND SO WHAT THAT MEANS IS IS THAT WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO ADJUST BY WHATEVER PERCENTAGE THE MARKET RECOMMENDED AND IF YOU WERE WITHIN THAT GRADE AND YOU WEREN'T TOPPED OUT YOU WOULD ALSO MOVE YOUR STEP.

THIS IS FOR POLICE AND FIRE. SO THAT WAY THOSE THAT WOULD HAVE OTHERWISE BEEN TOPPED OUT, THEY ENDED UP RECEIVING A RAISE TOO BECAUSE WE ADJUSTED THE ENTIRE GRADE BASED ON THAT MARKET. WHAT WE'RE SEEING HERE AND WE CAN DO IT A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT WAYS, BUT IF WE DON'T ADJUST FOR

[00:35:01]

MARKET, THEN ONLY THOSE PEOPLE WITHIN THEIR STEPS WOULD SHIFT AND YOU COULD ALSO CONSIDER ADJUSTING FOR MARKET OR THERE'S SEVERAL OTHER SOLUTIONS AVAILABLE.

ON THE OPEN RANGE WE DON'T HAVE STEPS SO A SORT OF ACROSS THE BOARD MIGHT MAKE A LITTLE MORE SENSE.

BUT FOR THE STEP INCREASE JUST FOR THOSE THAT ARE IN THERE WOULD BE ABOUT $73,000 FOR POLICE AND FIRE BECAUSE YOU HAVE ABOUT I THINK RICHARD TOLD ME ABOUT 69, PEOPLE WHO ARE TOPPED OUT. I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR ABOUT IT THAT HAD WE NOT ADJUSTED FOR MARKET IN THE PAST FEW YEARS THEN ONLY THE PEOPLE THAT WERE ELIGIBLE WOULD HAVE MOVED THEIR

STEP INCREASE TO BEGIN WITH. >> I UNDERSTAND, BUT AGAIN I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE NOT DOING IT THE SAME WAY.

WHY ARE WE NOT ADJUSTING FOR MARKET IN CALCULATING THE STEP PLAN THAT WAY? THAT'S WHAT WE'VE DONE IN THE

PAST. >> OKAY, BUT WE'VE HAD MARKET ADJUSTMENTS AS MUCH AS 8% TO 10%.

WE DON'T HAVE THE MONEY TO DO THAT THIS YEAR.

THE $700,000, WE DIDN'T EVEN TRY TO CALCULATE WHAT THAT EFFECT WOULD BE BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE WHAT WE'VE DONE IN THE PAST COUPLE OF YEARS HAS BEEN I THINK OVER A MILLION DOLLARS IF I

REMEMBER RIGHT, RICHARD. >> THAT'S CORRECT.

SO IT WOULD BE DEPENDING ON WHICH PERCENTAGE AMOUNT IT IS, IT COULD BE AS HIGH AS 1.2 MILLION OR 1.3 MILLION, IT JUST DEPENDS ON WHICH PERCENTAGE WE DECIDE TO USE AND DO WE STILL MOVE OPEN RANGE, DO THEY GET A MERIT ADJUSTMENT AND MOVE THROUGH THE RANGE, DO POLICE GET STEPS AND MOVE THROUGH THE RANGE. IF YOU DO ALL OF THAT, THE NUMBER REALLY EXPONENTIALLY GROWS.

>> BUT IT'S A MARKET ADJUSTMENT, AND YOU HAVEN'T DONE WHAT IS THE MARKET. SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT.

>> ALL I'M SAYING, MAYOR, AND I'LL JUST PUT IT EVEN MORE BLUNTLY. WE'RE WORKING WITHIN THE BUCKET THAT WE THINK WE HAVE WHICH WAS ABOUT $700,000 IN ONGOING MONEY.

AND ALL I'M SAYING IS THAT WE DIDN'T FEEL THAT THERE WAS ENOUGH MONEY TO CONSIDER TRYING TO DO WHAT WE'VE DONE BEFORE WHICH COULD BE A LOT MORE THAN THAT AMOUNT.

>> BUT YOU HAVEN'T DONE THE MARKET ANALYSIS, SO YOU DON'T

KNOW WHAT THAT IS. >> WE DID.

RICHARD, WE DID THAT LAST -- >> EVERY FEBRUARY WE DO THE MARKET ANALYSIS AND BECAUSE OF THE PANDEMIC, IT DIDN'T BECOME PART OF THE BUDGET DISCUSSION, HOWEVER THE NUMBERS BEARED OUT THAT WE DIDN'T NECESSARILY MAKE A LOT OF HEADWAY AGAINST OUR PEERS BUT WE DIDN'T NECESSARILY FALL BEHIND EITHER.

THE RECOMMENDATION IF THE PANDEMIC HADN'T HAPPENED WOULD HAVE BEEN AT LEAST A 2%, MAYBE A 3% ADJUSTMENT TO THE SCALE.

AND THAT WOULD HAVE MOVED ALL THE OF THE STEPS AND ALL OF THE RANGES TO KEEP US COMPETITIVE AGAINST THE 18 CITIES WE CURRENTLY COMPARE AGAINST. BUT BECAUSE OF THE PANDEMIC, WE DID NOT, BECAUSE OF THE CHANGE IN THE SITUATION, WE DID NOT BRING THAT FORWARD AND EVEN HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT ARE WE GOING TO HAVE THOSE RESOURCES AVAILABLE BECAUSE WE DIDN'T NECESSARILY THINK THEY WERE. STARTING NEXT WEEK, WE'LL BE DOING THE NEXT SALARY STUDY FOR THIS TIME AGAIN, SO WE'LL BE DOING THE FIFTH ONE SINCE WE TRANSITIONED OVER TO THE PROCESS WE DO NOW AND IT WILL GIVE US SOME IDEA OF WHAT HAS HAPPENED AGAINST OUR PEERS. BUT WE WON'T KNOW THAT UNTIL THE

LATE PART OF MARCH OR SO. >> LET ME SAY TOO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS. I TALKED TO TWO HIGH RANKING OFFICERS WITH THE POLICE. AND WE WERE TAWLKING ABOUT THIS.

THESE TWO I TALKED TO WERE ABOVE THE STEP.

THEY DON'T GET ANYTHING ON THE STEP, BUT THEY SAID THEY WERE MORE INTERESTED IN THE STEP THAN THEY WERE THE RAISE, BECAUSE HE SAID I DON'T NEED THE RAISE, BUT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE OUR LOWER OFFICERS GET THE STEP SO THEY DON'T SNEAK OFF SOMEWHERE ELSE AND GO TO WORK SOMEWHERE ELSE. SO THAT WAS THEIR TONE AND THEIR THOUGHTS ON THE THING. NOT MINE, IT WAS THEIRS.

>> AND THAT'S INTERESTING, BROWNIE.

AND I JUST HEARD YOU SAY THAT YOU WERE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE A 2% ADJUSTMENT TO STEP TO GET STEP WITHIN MARKET AND 2% FOR EVERYBODY IS 372. SO I DON'T KNOW THIS MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO ADJUST THE STEPS AND DO WHAT BROWNIE IS SAYING, GET THOSE OTHER PEOPLE THAT ARE WITHIN THOSE STEPS UP WHERE THEY

NEED TO BE. >> SO LET ME SEE IF I CAN EXPLAIN BECAUSE I WILL TRY. SO IF YOU MOVE EVERY STEP BY 2%, EVERY POLICE OFFICER WILL GET A 2% ADJUSTMENT.

IN ADDITION ON THEIR ANNIVERSARY DATE OR THEIR JOB DATE, THEY'LL

[00:40:01]

GET A STEP INCREASE. SO NOW THAT INCREASE FOR APPROXIMATELY 80 FIRE AND POLICE WHO ARE MOVING THROUGH THE STEPS, NOW IT'S 6% OR 7% RAISE PER PERSON AND THAT EXPONENTIALLY STARTS TO GET YOU TO A MUCH GREATER NUMBER.

SO IF I GET 2% AT THE BEGINNING WHEN WE MOVE THE STEP, THEN I GET MY 4% OR 5% MOVING THROUGH THE STEP, NOW WE HAVE AROUND 80 PEOPLE GETTING A 5% OR 6% OR 7% ADJUSTMENT SO THE AVERAGE GOES UP. SO IF YOU TAKE THAT AVERAGE AND YOU APPLY IT ACROSS ALL OF THE DOLLARS YOU COME UP WITH A NUMBER THAT'S MUCH GREATER THAN JUST DOING AN ADJUSTMENT FOR THE STEP BUT NOT MOVING SOMEBODY THROUGH THE STEPS OR VICE VERSA.

>> SO PEOPLE STEPPING UP WOULD BE DOUBLE DIPPING A LITTLE BIT.

>> AND THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE HOPEFUL FOR ALWAYS IS YOU CAN ADJUST THE STEPS TO BE COMPETITIVE AGAINST YOUR PEERS AND MOVE PEOPLE THROUGH THE STEPS TO GET THEM TO THAT WAGE AT THE TOP. SAME GOES FOR OPEN RANGE.

YOU ADJUST THE RANGE AND PEOPLE COME IN AT THE LOWER END AND AS THEY WORK THROUGH THEIR CAREER, THEY MOVE THROUGH THE STEPS TO GET TO A HIGHER RATE OF PAY. SO IT'S TWO ADJUSTMENTS GENERALLY IN A YEAR WHICH MAKES THAT AVERAGE CLOSER TO 5% OR 6% GENERALLY SPEAKING. 5% OR 6% OF OUR PAYROLL IS OVER

$1 MILLION. >> SO YOU'RE SUGGESTING A MORATORIUM ON THE STEPS PERIOD FOR THIS YEAR AND JUST DOING AN

ACROSS THE BOARD 2%? >> NOT ME NECESSARILY, BUT THE GROUP DID AGREE WE WANTED TO HELP ALL OF THE EMPLOYEES IF IT WAS AT ALL POSSIBLE, BUT WE'RE CERTAINLY NOT OPPOSED TO THE STEPS UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES. WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY ENDS UP HOPEFULLY GETTING SOME MEANINGFUL AMOUNT OF ADJUSTMENT TO THEIR PAY IF IT'S POSSIBLE.

>> AND WE ALL AGREE WITH THAT. WE'RE JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO BE FAIR TO THOSE PEOPLE THAT ARE IN THEIR STEP THAT HAVE MORE COMING TO THEM THAN 2% TO STAY IN THE STEP PLAN IS MY

OPINION. >> SO LET ME SHED JUST A LITTLE BIT OF LIGHT. SO AS YOU POINTED OUT, MAYOR, A 2% RAISE FOR EVERYBODY ACROSS THE BOARD STARTING ON MARCH 1 WOULD BE $372,000, RIGHT. THEN IF WE ADDED IN THAT THE STEP INCREASE FOR POLICE AND FIRE FOR THOSE WHO QUALIFY, IT WOULD BE ANOTHER $73,000 ON IT. SO A TOTAL OF $444,000 FOR SEVEN MONTHS. THAT MEANS WE HAVE TO PICK UP ANOTHER FIVE MONTHS NEXT YEAR IF WE DO RAISES.

SO PART OF THAT ANSWER IS THAT WE LOOK AT THIS AND THINK IT'S ONLY A FEW HUNDRED THOUSAND THIS YEAR, BUT YOU ALSO HAVE FOR NEXT YEAR. SO WHEN WE'RE THINKING IN OUR MIND THE MARKET ADJUSTMENT AND WHEN YOU START ALSO BRINGING IN THE MARKET ADJUSTMENT FOR OPEN RANGE, THAT'S WHY IT'S BEEN CLOSER TO $1 MILLION EACH OF THE LAST FEW YEARS BECAUSE WE'VE SHIFTED FOR MARKET PLUS WE'VE PUSHED PEOPLE THROUGH THE RANGE.

SO ALL WE'RE SAYING IS THAT IF THIS WAS OR CHOICE THIS YEAR AND WE WANTED TO DO A 2% ACROSS THE BOARD WHICH WOULD RAISE THE GRADES OF THE STEPS PLUS OPEN RANGE AND MOVE PEOPLE THROUGH THE STEP THEN YEAH, FOR SEVEN MONTHS, IT'S $450,000.

BUT THEN IT WOULD BE ANOTHER COUPLE HUNDRED THOUSAND NEXT

YEAR AS WELL. >> YEAH, BUT THAT WASN'T YOUR

RECOMMENDATION. >> IT WAS NOT.

>> YOUR RECOMMENDATION WAS AN ACROSS THE BOARD.

>> I'M JUST SAYING THAT COULD BE A PATH FORWARD IF WE WERE GOING

TO CONSIDER THAT. >> AND ACCORDING TO THE EMAIL HERE FOR POLICE AND FIRE THE STEP OF THE 73,000, YEAH, 73,000 FOR THE SEVEN MONTH, THAT'S THE 1% LUMP SUM?

>> NO, THE 73,000 YOU'RE REFERRING TO IS JUST FOR THOSE WHO QUALIFY FOR STEP INCREASE WITH NO LUMP SUM FOR THOSE TOPPED OUT. THE ADDITIONAL 43,000 WAS TO SAY IF YOU DID A 1% LUMP SUM FOR EXAMPLE FOR THE TOPPED OUT

PEOPLE. >> OKAY.

>> IS THAT ONLY FOR THE TOPPED OUT PEOPLE OR IS THAT FOR

EVERYBODY? >> NO, ONLY POLICE AND FIRE CAN BE TOPPED OUT BECAUSE THEY'RE THE ONLY ONES IN THE STEP PLAN.

>> OKAY. THAT'S A DIFFERENT LUMP SUM.

I WAS JUST GOING TO TALK A MINUTE ABOUT LUMP SUM, AND I KNOW YOU HAD A LITTLE BIT OF A PROPOSAL ABOUT LUMP SUM ACROSS THE BOARD. I WANT TO PUT MONEY INTO SALARY,

[00:45:02]

NOT INTO LUMP SUMS THAT DON'T CARRY FORWARD FOR OUR EMPLOYEES.

THAT'S MY OPINION, I'D BE INTERESTED, AND THAT MAY BE DIFFERENT FOR THIS MAXING OUT FOR POLICE AND FIRE.

I'M JUST TALKING ABOUT THE REST OF IT.

BUT I'D BE INTERESTED IN HEARING ON OTHER PEOPLES.

I THINK SALARY INCREASES HELP RETAIN EMPLOYEES AND IT HELPS THEM BUILD WEALTH BECAUSE THEIR BASE GOES UP.

LUMP SUM PAYMENTS DON'T HAVE THAT BENEFICIAL EFFECT FOR THE

EMPLOYEES. >> THERE'S A TAX IMPACT AS WELL.

>> MHM. >> IT COULD PUT YOU INTO THE NEXT TAX BRACKET. .

>> I WISH WE ALL COULD HAVE THAT PROBLEM.

>> WE DIDN'T CALCULATE HOW MUCH IT WOULD COST TO PROVIDE MERIT ADJUSTMENTS FOR OPEN RANGE TO CONTINUE TO MOVE THEM THROUGH THE RANGE WHICH OULD ACTUALLY HAVE INCREASED THAT NUMBER WE JUST TALKED ABOUT THE 400,000. JUST BEAR THAT IN MIND AS WE WERE CALCULATING THIS, THAT WAS ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT DIDN'T EXACTLY COME UP IN THE DISCUSSION.

>> IT DID IN MY DISCUSSION, RICHARD.

>> SO MAYOR, IF WE WEREN'T FOR THE LUMP SUM PAYMENT, THAT WOULD FREE UP 301,000 FROM THE EMPLOYEE HEALTH FUND TO BE USED

FOR ONE TIME? >> THAT IS HOW WE PROPOSED IT, BLAKE. SO IF WE DID 2% RAISE AND A 1% LUMP SUM, THAT'S HOW YOU WOULD GO ABOUT IT.

IF YOU DON'T DO THE LUMP SUM THEN THAT FREES THAT AMOUNT FOR

OTHER PURPOSES. >> WHICH COULD GO TO THE STEP?

>> NO. SO 700,000 FOR ONGOING.

>> RIGHT. >> THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF A MIX HERE. LET ME TRY THIS, SEE IF THIS MAKES SENSE. SO ON ONGOING MONEY, GET EVERYBODY TO THEIR STEP SO THAT THOSE PEOPLE THAT SHOULD BE MORE THAN A 2% RAISE BECAUSE THEY'RE MOVING TO THEIR STEP COULD GET THAT, RIGHT. THAT'S THE MONEY IN THE EMAIL.

DO A 2% ACROSS THE BOARD FOR THE OPEN RANGE SO IT'S IN THEIR BASE SALARY, NOT THE ONE TIME PAYMENT.

WHETHER IT'S 1% OR 2% OR 2.5%, WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT NUMBER.

BUT THEN FOR THOSE PEOPLE THAT ARE AT THE TOP OF THEIR RANGE IN POLICE AND FIRE, DO A ONE TIME OUT OF THE HEALTH BENEFIT FUND OF THAT 2%, SO THEY ALSO GET A RAISE THIS YEAR, BUT IT ISN'T A LUMP SUM PAYMENT OUT OF THE BENEFIT FUND.

AND THEN GIVE RICHARD SOME TIME FOR HIM AND HIS PEOPLE TO FIGURE OUT WHERE WE'RE AT ON THE RANGES FOR THE FUTURE.

DOES THAT MAKE ANY SENSE? >> I LIKE THAT COMBINATION

ACTUALLY. >> YEAH.

>> BECAUSE IT GIVES EVERYBODY SOMETHING AND IT INCENTIVIZES THE GUYS THAT ARE NEW THAT ARE WORKING THROUGH THOSE STEPS TO CONTINUE THOSE EFFORTS AND IT GIVES EVERYONE A MINIMUM OF 2%

IF THAT'S WHERE WE LAND. >> SO ALSO IF YOU WERE TO TAKE THE MONEY FOR THE 301,000 FROM THE EMPLOYEE HEALTH BENEFIT FUND, YOU COULD USE THAT TO PAY DOWN ALL OF THE ONE TIME EXPENSES SO YOU'RE NOT HAVING REOCCURRING DOLLARS PAYING FOR ONE TIME EXPENSES. THAT WILL FREE UP THE REOCCURRING DOLLARS TO PAY FOR PROBABLY EVEN SOME OF THE ORANGE TIER, THE THIRD TIER REOCCURRING EXPENSE POSITIONS.

>> I THINK THAT IS POSSIBLE BECAUSE YOU COULD DO OUT OF THE EMPLOYEE HEALTH BENEFITS MONEY, YOU CAN DO THE LUMP SUM FOR THE TOPPED OUT POLICE AND FIRE AND THEN YOU CAN DO OTHER ONE TIME PURPOSES, EQUIPMENT, TECHNOLOGY, WHATEVER.

AND THEN YOUR 700,000 WOULD GO TO THIS IS HOW I UNDERSTAND THE MAYOR PROPOSED IT, SO IT'S A 2% ACROSS THE BOARD FOR OPEN RANGE EMPLOYEES, IT'S THE STEP INCREASE FOR SEVEN MONTHS FOR THOSE THAT DO QUALIFY AND THEN IT'S A 2% LUMP SUM FOR THE

[00:50:04]

TOPPED OUT EMPLOYEES. AND WE DO NOT HAVE THAT NUMBER, BUT WE WILL BE ABLE TO BACK INTO THAT.

>> I THINK IT'S THE 18 TIMES TWO PLUS THE 24 TIMES TWO IN YOUR

EMAIL. >> I DON'T KNOW WHERE YOU GOT

18. >> THE 18.362.

>> I'M SORRY, IT'S RIGHT THERE IN FRONT OF ME.

IT COULD HAVE BIT ME. YOU'RE RIGHT, MAYOR, WE DO HAVE

THAT. >> SO YOU WOULD DOUBLE THAT.

>> SO WHAT'S THAT TOTAL NUMBER? >> 84,000.

>> PLUS THE 2%. >> SO THE 44,431 WOULD COME OUT OF ONGOING FUNDS. THE 28,171 FOR FIRE STEP WOULD

COME OUT OF THE ONGOING FUNDS. >> RIGHT.

>> THE 18,362 TIMES TWO COULD COME OUT OF THE HEALTH CARE FOR THE 2% FOR THOSE THAT ARE TOPPED OUT.

AND THE 24,211 TIMES TWO COULD COME OUT OF THE HEALTH CARE FOR THOSE THAT ARE TOPPED OUT. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? AND THEN WHATEVER WE DECIDE TO GIVE OPEN RANGE WHICH I THINK WE SHOULD PROBABLY BE CONSISTENT BETWEEN OPEN RANGE AND THOSE TOPPED OUT WOULD COME OUT OF THE ONGOING.

YES? NO?

>> IF IT'S A RAISE, IT SHOULD. >> IT MAKES SENSE TO ME AND THAT'S WHERE MY HEAD WAS GOING. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE KEEP THOSE STEPS IN THERE AND KEEP IT MOVING FORWARD.

BUT THAT'S JUST REMIND ME THE STEPS THAT YOU'VE CALCULATED HERE THAT'S NOT OVER THE MARKET RATE ADJUSTMENT OR IT IS BASED

ON LAST FEBRUARY? >> THAT'S CORRECT.

IT WOULD BE BASED ON THE GRADE AND SCALE AS IT IS NOW AND WE WOULD JUST SHIFT EVERYBODY THAT OTHERWISE QUALIFIES AND THEN THE ONES THAT ARE TOPPED OUT WE WILL GIVE THEM A 2% LUMP SUM.

>> SO IF YOU HAD TO DO AN INCREASE IN THE STEP BECAUSE YOU SAID THAT IT WOULD HAVE BEEN RECOMMENDED AT ABOUT 2% OR 3%, A

2% INCREASE ON THE STEP? >> WHAT I WAS SUGGESTING, MATT, IS GIVE THEM TIME TO LOOK AT IT THIS YEAR AND IF WE WENT DOWN THIS ROAD, WE WOULDN'T BE OVERCOMMITTING FROM A STANDPOINT OF OUR ONGOING FUNDS. BUT WE'D BE TREATING THE EMPLOYEES VERY FAIRLY FOR THIS YEAR AND GIVE RICHARD TIME FOR HIS FOLKS TO FIGURE OUT WHERE THE STEPS NEED TO BE AND WHAT THE POTENTIAL IMPACT OF THAT IS ON NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET.

>> YEAH, I'M COMFORTABLE WITH THAT I JUST WANTED TO CLEAR THAT UP. I WILL BE REALLY CURIOUS TO SEE WHAT THE MARKET ANALYSIS DOES FOR THIS YEAR BECAUSE I'VE TALKED TO OTHER DEPARTMENTS AND THERE'S A MIX OUT THERE OF PEOPLE THAT HAVE INCREASED AND PEOPLE THAT HAVEN'T AND IT'S ALL OVER THE BOARD. IF IT WAS A NORMAL YEAR I WOULD WORRY THAT WE WOULD THEN BE BEHIND BUT I DON'T THINK WE'LL BE THAT FAR BEHIND HONESTLY ONCE THE DUST SETTLES WITH EVERYBODY

ELSE. >> I DON'T WANT TO USE LAST FEBRUARY'S ANALYSIS BECAUSE THAT'S PRE-COVID AND THAT'S A

WHOLE DIFFERENT STORY. >> RIGHT.

SO THE ONLY ARGUMENT FOR IT WOULD BE IF WE HAD THE MONEY TO BE ABLE TO DO IT. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THOSE NUMBERS ARE, IT MIGHT ACTUALLY LET US GAIN SOME GROUND.

>> SO GIVEN THOSE CHANGES THAT WE'VE COME TO, WHAT IS THE LEFT OVER, WHAT ARE THE ONE TIME? HOW MUCH IS IN THAT ONE TIME

COLUMN AFTER ALL OF THAT? >> THERE'S STILL QUITE A BIT.

LET ME JUST WAIT FOR A MINUTE, BLAKE.

I JUST PUT A PROPOSAL OUT THERE. WHO WANTS TO DO THAT, WHO HAS A COUNTER PROPOSAL? MARTHA?

>> I DON'T HAVE A COUNTER PROPOSAL.

I LIKE THIS PROPOSAL A LOT. AND I THINK THAT USING LAST FEBRUARY'S STUDY THAT WE DID IS REALLY A PRUDENT WAY TO DO IT BECAUSE TO MATT'S POINT I THINK ONCE YOU DO IT THIS FEBRUARY AND YOU TAKE INTO ACCOUNT COVID, IT'S GOING TO BE KIND OF A WASH.

SO I'M VERY MUCH IN FAVOR OF WHAT YOU PROPOSED, MAYOR.

I THINK THAT IT GIVES EVERYBODY AN INCREASE, EVEN THE GUYS THAT ARE TOPPED OUT ON THEIR STEPS AND I AM 100% IN FAVOR OF YOUR

PROPOSAL. >> ANYBODY ELSE, COUNTER

[00:55:01]

PROPOSALS, OTHER SUGGESTIONS? >> NO COUNTER PROPOSAL, I JUST WANT TO SAY I'M IN FAVOR OF IT. I WOULD HATE FOR THESE GUYS TO MISS THEIR STEP BECAUSE IF YOU MISS A STEP YOU PROBABLY CAN NEVER CATCH UP TO THAT STEP. AND ONE OTHER THING, THANKS, RICHARD, FOR PUTTING THIS TOGETHER.

>> WELL I DIDN'T DO ALL OF IT, I PROMISE.

SO YOU'RE WELCOME. >> WHITNEY, PAM, BLAKE, MATT?

>> I'M GOOD WITH IT. >> I'M GOOD WITH IT.

I WAS ALREADY GOOD WITH IT. I WANT EVERYBODY TO GET A RAISE.

>> I THINK IT'S A VERY EQUITABLE AND FAIR PROPOSAL FOR EVERYONE.

>> BRIAN, RICHARD, WENDY, YOU GOT ANY OBJECTIONS?

>> I WILL TELL YOU THAT I DID TALK TO CHIEF HOWARD AND CHIEF GODFREY TODAY AND COLLECTIVELY HERE'S WHAT WE WOULD SAY IS THAT IF WE CAN MOVE PEOPLE THROUGH THEIR STEP AND STILL ADJUST EVERYBODY ELSE IN SOME FASHION, I THINK THAT'S A HUGE WIN FOR US THIS YEAR. WHAT WE WERE MOSTLY CONCERNED ABOUT WAS A METHODOLOGY THAT WOULD NOT GIVE EVERYBODY A RAISE OF SOME KIND THIS YEAR GIVEN PARTICULARLY THIS YEAR.

SO WE WILL BE HAPPY WITH THAT AND I LIKE THE PROPOSAL BECAUSE AGAIN IF YOU'RE ALREADY TOPPED OUT UNLESS WE TRULY MOVE THE MARKET THEN HAVING A LUMP SUM ADJUSTMENT IS REALLY A HUGE THING FOR THOSE FOLKS. IT'S LIKE I SAID ABOUT 70

PEOPLE. >> YEAH.

>> GOING, GOING, GONE? WE WERE TALKING ABOUT ONGOING FUNDS, IS IT OKAY IF I CONTINUE THERE?

>> YEAH, GO AHEAD. >> OKAY.

SO WE HAD 700, YES. >> YES.

>> AND WHAT DID WE JUST USE? >> THERE'S 473,000 LEFT.

AND I THINK I'M OFF 1,000. 474 LEFT.

>> DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT, WENDY?

>> DO I HAVE THIS CORRECT ON MY SCREEN?

>> I HAD 154 ON THE OPEN RANGE AND I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT ON POLICE AND FIRE. I'M LOOKING.

>> YEAH, I PULLED THE WRONG NUMBER THERE.

>> I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE SAID. YES, EVERYBODY?

>> YEAH. >> YES.

>> OKAY. >> SO THAT LEAVES 470.

BRIAN, LOOK AT YOU. YOU LITTLE FINANCIAL PERSON.

>> YEAH. >> SO LET'S GO BACK TO YOUR RECOMMENDATION THAT YOU WANTED TO USE FOR ONGOING, IS THAT ALL

RIGHT TO GO THERE NOW? >> AND MAYOR, IF YOU DON'T MIND, I KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO GET AT BUT JUST SO PEOPLE KNOW TOO AS WELL THAT THE REMAINING AMOUNT FOR THE ONE TIME OUT OF THE EMPLOYEE HEALTH BENEFITS FUND WHEN WE DO THE LUMP SUM WOULD STILL BE ABOUT 216,000 AS WELL SO JUST KIND OF KEEP THAT

IN MIND. >> SAY THAT AGAIN.

>> WE HAVE ONE TIME MONEY ALL OVER THE PLACE.

>> I KNOW, BUT THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO DO.

>> SO CAN YOU GO TO YOUR RECOMENDATION PAGE OF HOW YOU WANTED TO USE THESE ONGOING FUNDS AND SEE WHAT COMMENTS WE HAVE. SO I THINK THE FIRST ONE IS A

BUDGET ANALYSIS FOR FINANCE. >> SO NO.

THE FIRST SESSION IS, OH, FOR THE ONGOING, I'M SORRY, MAYOR.

THANK YOU. I'M KEEPING UP, JUST FOLLOWING BEHIND YOU AS YOU LEAD US THROUGH THIS PERILOUS PATH.

>> HE MISSED HIS STEP. >> THAT WAS FUNNY.

>> SO THE FIRST ACTUAL ONGOING WOULD BE THE SCBA BATTLES FOR FIRE. THE GOAL FOR THAT, IT'S THE EXTRA PACKS WE HAVE FOR AIR BREATHING.

A COUPLE YEARS AGO WE HAD TO BUY A WHOLE BUNCH AT ONE TIME.

WE WANT TO HAVE AN ONGOING SOURCE OF FUNDS TO REPLACE SO MANY PER YEAR. MOST EFFICIENT WAY TO DO IT.

WE DO THAT WITH DESKTOPS AND LAPTOPS, WE DO THAT WITH SO MANY OTHER THINGS. THAT'S ABOUT 34,000 A YEAR.

WE'RE ALSO ASKING FOR ADDITIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANCE TO HAVE WITH INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

THIS IS BASICALLY ACCOUNTS PAYABLE, PAYING THE BILLS.

WE HAVE PARTICULARLY I.T. HAS SOME VERY INTENSIVE STUFF THEY HAVE TO DO. BUT WE'D REALLY RATHER FREE OUR DESK TOP PEOPLE UP TO DO WORK ON DESKTOPS AND NOT HAVE TO DO ADMINISTRATIVE WORK. BUT IT'S NOT ENOUGH TO JUSTIFY A FULL-TIME JOB BY ITSELF. SO WE HAVE A COUPLE OF

[01:00:04]

DEPARTMENTS AND ACTUALLY WENDY I THINK, THE MAYOR ACTUALLY ASKED ME THIS YESTERDAY. WE ARE PUTTING IN THERE ABOUT 77,000. BUT I THINK WENDY YOU CAME UP WITH THE BASED ON THE ACTUAL PAY AND BENEFITS WHAT WOULD THAT

AMOUNT BE? >> FOR THE ADMIN THE PAY WITH BENEFITS FOR FULL-TIME PERSONNEL WOULD BE 50,994.

>> SO YOU TOOK TWO PIECES AND PUT THEM TOGETHER.

>> I JUST KNEW THE NUMBER WAS OFF.

GO AHEAD. >> AND WE INTEND TO MAKE PBV A REAL THING FOR DECISION MAKING AND ANALYSIS.

THE IT'S HARD TO DO THAT WITH ONE PERSON WHEN THEY HAVE TO DO ALL OF THE OTHER BUDGET STUFF. STAFF ASKED FOR THAT LAST YEAR WHEN WE KNEW WE WERE ABOUT TO GO DOWN THAT ROAD.

WE WOULDN'T BE THE ONLY CITY THAT BY ITSELF IT'S JUST ENORMOUS. AND THEN THERE WAS AN ADDITIONAL MODULE TO HELP WITH ONBOARDING WHICH IS ABOUT $12,000.

AND MAYOR THOSE WOULD BE AT LEAST OUR THE ONGOING THAT WE CONSIDER TO BE THE HIGHER PRIORITIES THAN SOME OF THE OTHER ONGOING AT LEAST IN THE DISCUSSION WITH THE EXEC TEAM.

>> SO COUNCIL, COMMENTS, QUESTIONS ON ANY OF THAT?

>> I THINK THAT IT'S IMPORTANT THIS YEAR THAT WE AT LEAST ADD THE LOGISTICS CAPTAIN WITHOUT THE VEHICLE.

I DON'T KNOW WHERE THE ENTERPRISE THING IS AT.

IF THAT'S STILL GOING TO HAPPEN I HOPE IT DOES.

>> FEBRUARY 1ST. >> SO THE LOGISTICS CAPTAIN I WOULD LIKE TO ADD AT THE VERY LEAST.

IF YOU'RE OKAY WITH IT, CHIEF HOWARD WANTS TO EXPLAIN WHY THAT POSITION IS CRITICAL FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT AND HOW YOU'RE CURRENTLY FILLING THAT POSITION THAT'S UNFUNDED.

>> WE WILL DO THAT. BUT BRIAN JUST WENT THROUGH A BUNCH OF EXAMPLES. SO I WAS ASKING COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS OR TEARS OR JEERS ON THAT?

>> IT WASN'T ON THERE, THAT'S WHY I WAS BRINGING IT UP.

>> RIGHT, BUT THEN WE'LL GO TO ORANGE.

I'M JUST TRYING TO DO THIS REAL METHODICALLY IF WE CAN.

MAYBE NOBODY HAS ANY COMMENTS ON THE OTHER STUFF.

>> I HAD A QUESTION. ARE ALL OF THOSE TRULY REOCCURRING COSTS OR ARE THERE SOME ONE TIME COSTS BUILT INTO

THE NEW POSITIONS? >> THERE MIGHT BE A LITTLE BIT ON THE HR SOFTWARE. IS THAT THE ONGOING COST OR SOME

OF THE UP FRONT PURCHASE PRICE? >> SO THERE'S A $3,000 IMPLEMENTATION FEE AND AFTER THAT IT'S ABOUT $8,700 A YEAR.

>> OKAY. >> SO MODERATE AMOUNT.

>> KIND OF ON THAT SAME VEIN, WHITNEY, ARE THESE THE ANALYZED AMOUNTS OR THE SEVEN MONTH AMOUNTS?

>> THESE ARE ANALYZED AMOUNTS AND I WILL SAY THAT THE 41,000 INCLUDES ABOUT $3,500 OF EQUIPMENT FOR THE TELEPHONE, COMPUTER, DESK. BUT THE ADMIN IS JUST STRAIGHT

SALARY. >> WE DON'T WANT TO OVERCOMMIT

TO OUR FUTURE, RIGHT? >> YEAH, FOR SURE.

SO WITH THAT ADJUSTMENT ON THE ADMIN SALARY AND A LITTLE BIT OF ADJUSTMENT FOR ONE TIME COST BUILT INTO SOME OF THESE OTHERS, LOOKS LIKE WE'RE PROBABLY AROUND 200,000 IN THAT YELLOW CATEGORY.

IS THAT RIGHT? I HEAR CALCULATORS GOING, MARTHA. SHE'S ASKING HOW MUCH WOULD BE ALLOCATED IN ONGOING FUNDS FOR THESE FOUR THINGS.

>> FOR THE YELLOW. >> THE FOUR ITEMS IS ABOUT

[01:05:04]

141,000 BUT AS RICHARD AND WENDY SAID THERE WAS ABOUT 6,000 OR 7,000 IN THERE THAT WOULD NOT BE RECURRING.

>> OKAY. >> CAN SOMEBODY GIVE ME A

NUMBER? >> WE'RE AT 473, RIGHT?

>> YES. >> WHAT ARE WE TAKING FROM THAT? IF WE AGREE WITH THESE FOUR THINGS.

>> IT WOULD BE 135,000 RECURRING.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. ALL RIGHT, OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, SUPPORT OR LACK OF SUPPORT FOR STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION ON THESE FOUR ITEMS?

>> I'M IN FAVOR. >> I'M GOOD.

>> YEAH. >> SO I GUESS WE WOULD GO DOWN TO THE ORANGE PRIORITIES. ARE YOU OKAY, BRIAN, WITH GOING

TO CHIEF ON THAT. >> GO AHEAD, MAYOR, IF YOU DON'T

MIND. >> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, AND COUNCIL. I'D BE HAPPY TO TALK ABOUT THIS.

THIS POSITION HAS BECOME IMPORTANT BECAUSE FOR SOME YEARS WHEN WE WERE DEFRAGMENTED IF YOU WILL AND WE HAD SEVERAL PEOPLE DOING SEVERAL DIFFERENT THINGS. WE HAD ONE GUY OVER FLEET, WE HAD ONE GUY OVER PPE, WE HAD ONE GUY OVER HOSE.

AND IT'S HARD TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WAS GOING ON.

LAST YEAR WE MADE THE DECISION, JUST IN THE FLEET ALONE HE HANDLED 231 FLEET TICKETS LAST YEAR.

SO IT'S PROVIDED MORE EFFICIENCIES FOR THE DEPARTMENT.

WE KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON DAY-TO-DAY.

IN THE PAST IT WAS THE CAPTAIN HAD IT ONE DAY AND WAS GONE TWO DAYS. IT WAS 3 OR 4 DAYS BEFORE SOMEBODY GOT IT BACK OR WHATEVER.

AND THE GUY THAT'S IN RIGHT NOW, HE'S TAKING CARE OF THE NEEDS OF THE GUYS AND THE GUYS ARE REALLY HAPPY WITH THE WAY IT'S SET UP.

SO IT'S A VERY IMPORTANT POSITION FOR US AND LIKE I SAY IT'S PROBABLY, IT PROBABLY SAVES US ABOUT 20 TO 60 HOURS OF OVERTIME A MONTH. IT'S KIND OF HARD TO GIVE YOU A REALLY GOOD FIGURE RIGHT NOW BECAUSE THE CODE STUFF.

BUT THAT'S THE BEST WE CAN ESTIMATE TO SAVE ON OVERTIME.

IT'S PROVEN TO BE A GREAT ASSET FOR THE ORGANIZATION.

AND THEN WE KNOW WHERE OUR MONEY IS GOING.

>> SO MY RANDOM THOUGHTS TODAY THAT I WROTE DOWN TO TALK TO BRIAN ABOUT, WAS HOW IN THE HECK ARE YOU TRACKING OVERTIME BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT TO KNOW WHAT'S COVID AND WHAT'S NOT

COVID? >> IT'S KIND OF CRAZY BECAUSE YOU DO THE TIME AND WE HAVE TO BACKFILL IT AND TRACK THAT, AND TRACK PEOPLE GETTING OUT ON COVID.

IT'S KIND OF CRAZY, BUT WE'RE TRYING TO GET OUR ARMS AROUND IT. WE'RE WATCHING IT VERY CLOSELY.

>> CHIEF HOWARD, THANK YOU FOR THAT EXPLANATION.

CAN YOU EXPLAIN ARE THERE ANY ONE TIME COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH

THAT TOTAL? >> THERE'S 39,000 THAT'S ONE TIME COST. AND REOCCURRING COSTS IS ABOUT

135. >> OKAY.

>> SO IF WE DECIDE TO ADD THAT IN, WE'VE GOT TWO NUMBERS TO BREAKDOWN THERE. ONE IS ONGOING AND ONE IS ONE

TIME. >> RIGHT.

>> OKAY. >> WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE LOGISTIC THE VEHICLE, HOW MUCH DID YOU SAY WAS ONE TIME?

>> 39. >> YEAH 135 ONGOING, 34 ONE

[01:10:07]

TIME. I'M SORRY MY CAT IS SNORING AND IT'S REALLY LOUD, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GUYS CAN HEAR IT.

IT IS NOT ME. IT'S MY CAT SNORING.

>> THAT WOULD LEAVE -- >> WE DON'T HAVE TO SEND ALL OF THE ONGOING. IT CAN STAY IN THE GENERAL FUND

BALANCE. >> SO WE WOULD TECHNICALLY HAVE LIKE AROUND $200,000 LEFT IN RECURRING AFTER WE ALLOCATED THAT POSITION OF JUST THE RECURRING COSTS OF THAT.

SO THAT WOULD BE LIKE 135 MINUS THE 333.

>> YEAH. >> ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM

COUNCIL, STAFF? >> IF YOU DON'T MIND, I WOULD REALLY LIKE US TO LOOK AT THE OTHER POSITIONS.

>> YEP. >> AND JUST MAKE SURE WE'RE ALL

ON THE SAME PAGE. >> YEAH, I REALLY WANT AN

EMERGENCY MANAGER SPECIALIST. >> I KNOW.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T MISS AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION IF WE NEED TO.

>> THAT'S WHERE I WAS GOING. >> BEFORE YOU GO ON, CAN I MAKE ONE COMMENT? SO BEAR IN MIND THAT THE COST THAT WAS CALCULATED FOR PEOPLE TO GET A STEP FOR THIS YEAR OR TO GET A LUMP SUM, LUMP SUM IS ONE TIME BUT A STEP OR THE 2%, THE ONGOING COST IN THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR WOULD HAVE TO BE ANNUALIZED. THAT NUMBER IS LARGER THAN WHAT WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO PAY OUT FOR THE ONGOING FUNDS AVAILABLE

THIS YEAR. >> WHICH IS WHY WE NEED TO BRING

SOME OF THIS BACK. >> EXACTLY.

>> GOOD POINT. >> I HAVE A QUESTION ON THAT SENIOR PLANNER THOUGH, WHY IS IT ONLY AT 21,000?

>> SO THEY DID A REORGANIZATION. AS A PART OF THAT PLAN THEY WOULD LIKE TO ADD A SENIOR PLANNER.

DO YOU WANT TO TOUCH ON THAT, I CAN'T REMEMBER THE EXACT OVERALL

REDUCTION IN COST? >> ABSOLUTELY.

WHAT WE WERE ABLE TO END UP DOING WAS GAIN A POSITION WITH $21,000. SO WITH THE READJUSTMENT AND THE REALIGNMENT OF THE PLANNING AND URBAN DESIGN DIVISION, WE WERE ABLE TO UTILIZE EXISTING FUNDING AND MITIGATE IT IN THAT MANNER.

SO IT WAS ONLY A, IT WAS A SAVING OF ABOUT $40,000.

>> OH MY GOSH, THAT'S A NO-BRAINER.

>> IF IT IS, I WON'T ASK HER TO EXPLAIN WHY WE NEED IT SO BAD.

>> I KNOW WHY YOU NEED IT. YOU NEED IT AS BAD AS YOU NEED A LOGISTICS CAPTAIN. SHE WAS ABLE TO COME UP WITH THE SAVINGS TO GET A NEW POSITION FOR ONLY THAT, THAT IS TO ME,

THAT'S A MUST. >> I AGREE, MATT.

>> YEP, I THINK WE'RE ALL WITH YOU.

>> WHAT'S THE PART TIME EM SPECIALIST? ARE THEY PART TIME, ARE THEY FUNDED THROUGH CARES?

>> FOR A LOT OF REASONS WE SEEM TO HAVE THE NEED TO GET THAT SECOND POSITION ONGOING. THIS YEAR, I WILL SAY IT THIS WAY, I KNOW COUNCIL REALIZED THIS, I'M SAYING THIS AS MUCH FOR THE PUBLIC BUT THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS THE AMOUNT OF WORK THAT STAFF PUT IN AND REALLY THE MAYOR AND EVEN COUNCIL DURING THIS PAST YEAR, PARTICULARLY THOSE FIRST 2 TO 3 MONTHS AFTER COVID, WE LOCKED IT DOWN WAS JUST ABSOLUTELY EXTRAORDINARY.

AND I WILL TELL YOU THAT IT REALLY HAS WEIGHED HEAVILY ON MYSELF AND ON CHIEF HOWARD AND REALLY THE MAYOR.

WE'VE HAD MULTIPLE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT IT ABOUT TRYING TO GET SOME HELP. YOU THINK ABOUT IN A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME WE'VE HAD A MAJOR TORNADO WHICH TOOK A COUPLE OF

[01:15:02]

YEARS TO WORK THROUGH ALL OF THE ISSUES AND THEN WE HAD THIS WHICH IS GOING TO TAKE A COUPLE, I DON'T KNOW WHEN WE GET A BREAK. MAYBE WE SKIP A YEAR, THEN THERE'S ANOTHER ONE. SO I REALLY THINK WE HAVE A STRONG NEED FOR A SECOND EMS SPECIALIST TO HELP OUR

COORDINATOR. >> YEAH.

I'M ALL FOR THAT. I THINK THAT SHOULD BE FUNDED

HERE. >> I CAN TELL YOU THAT A NEW STAT CAME OUT FROM FEMA YESTERDAY THAT THEY REDID THEIR HAZARD INDEXES ACROSS THE COUNTRY FOR ALL OF THE COUNTIES AND DALLAS COUNTY CAME OUT NINTH ACROSS THE COUNTRY FOR THE HIGHEST DISASTER THREAT. SO HAVING A BACK UP FOR IT IS A GOOD BACK UP ON A NORMAL DAY. BUT I THINK EVEN LOOKING INTO THE FUTURE WITH THE AMOUNT OF WORK THAT I WOULD EXPECT COMING OUT OF THAT OFFICE FOR SAPPHIRE BAY WHICH REALLY IS A CITY WITHIN A CITY, THAT IS GOING TO BE AN ESSENTIAL POSITION FOR US

GOING FORWARD. >> AND WE ALL KNOW THIS, BUT AGAIN FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC, I MEAN ED IS PROBABLY A YEAR BEHIND. HE'S ON THIS CALL.

HE TOLD ME THIS THE OTHER DAY. AND NOT GETTING CAUGHT UP BECAUSE WE KEEP HAVING EMERGENCIES.

SO EVEN THE DAY-TO-DAY JOB IS A TWO PERSON JOB LET ALONE

EVERYTHING WE'RE DEALING WITH. >> YES, MA'AM.

AND RIGHT NOW WE NEED TO BE STARTING ON REDOING OUR

EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN. >> ALL RIGHT SO WHAT IF WE FUNDED LOGISTICS CAPTAIN AND SPECIALIST AND SENIOR PLANNER? I STILL THINK WE'RE OKAY AND HAVE ENOUGH FUNDS RESERVED FOR

NEXT YEAR. >> GOT ABOUT 107,000.

>> ALL RIGHT. THAT'S A HOME RUN.

>> THAT IS A HOME RUN. >> MHM.

>> I MEAN, YOU KNOW, BEING ABLE TO PROVIDE RAISES AND ADD STAFF IN SOME KEY POSITIONS IN THIS YEAR IS UNBELIEVABLE IF WE CAN

DO THAT. >> YES.

>> AND WE ARE SO THIN ON STAFF EVERYWHERE.

DO WE HAVE A WRAP ON THAT? >> YEAH, THAT'S EXCITING.

>> YEAH. >> I'M SEEING A LOT OF THUMB'S UP, BRIAN. BRIAN, RICHARD, AND WENDY, ARE

YOU THUMBS UP? >> ALL RIGHT, WHERE'S THE CAKE?

>> ED, ARE YOU DANCING? >> HE'S PROBABLY SLEEPING.

>> SHOW YOUR FACE. SEE IF HE'S LISTENING.

>> UH-OH. >> THERE HE IS.

>> I'LL BE ABLE TO SLEEP IN 2022 NOW.

>> YOU WERE LISTENING. ARE WE GOOD WITH ONGOING FUNDS?

CAN WE MOVE ON? >> I HAVE A QUESTION.

THE 21,000 FOR THE SENIOR PLANNER, DID THAT INCLUDE BENEFITS OR DO I NEED TO ADD ANNUAL BENEFITS ON THAT?

>> IT DOES NOT INCLUDE BENEFITS. >> OKAY SO BENEFITS PER PERSON ARE ABOUT 20,000, BRIAN, SO THAT BROUGHT ME DOWN TO 87.

>> OKAY. >> YOU USED 135 FOR THE CAPTAIN?

>> YES. I USED 135 FOR THE CAPTAIN FOR THE ONGOING AND THEN I PUT THE ONE TIME OVER THE EMPLOYEE

HEALTH BENEFITS FUND. >> IS THAT 21,000 THE FULL YEAR

TOO THOUGH? >> YES.

THEN I'VE GOT ALL OF THESE NUMBERS ARE ON A FULL YEAR.

>> AND ONE THING I WOULD SAY TOO ON THAT AND I'M SORRY IT JUST POPPED OUT AT ME, WE'RE FUNDING THE EM SPECIALIST THIS YEAR OUT OF THE CARES MONEY. I FORGOT TO SAY THAT.

>> NO, WE SAID IT. >> YEAH, YOU DID.

>> WE'VE GOT IT. THAT WAS THE QUESTION I ASKED

YOU. >> BUT WE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE IT

PERMANENT. >> RIGHT, AND THIS ALLOWS YOU TO WITHOUT SPENDING SOME OF THESE GENERAL FUND BALANCE.

SO ACTUALLY YOU'RE GOING TO STILL HAVE THAT 74,000, BUT WE DON'T WANT TO ALLOCATE ANYMORE ONGOING FUNDS BECAUSE THEN WE WON'T BE COMMITTING TO A FUTURE BUDGET.

>> GOOD DEAL. SO THAT ACTUALLY PUTS US IN AN

EVEN BETTER POSITION. >> EVERYBODY SAFE? EVERYBODY FEEL SAFE? THAT WAS KIND OF A WEIRD QUESTION? ALL RIGHT SO LET'S GO TO THE ONE TIME STUFF. SO JUST TO KIND OF SO WE CAN ALL BE ON THE SAME KIND OF NOMENCLATURE, THE CARES FUNDS WERE USED FOR PUBLIC SAFETY. SO THOSE FUNDS CAN BE

[01:20:01]

REALLOCATED TO THE GENERAL FUND OR COULD BE RETAINED FOR COVID AND VACCINE RELATED EXPENSES. SO IT'S NOT THAT WE'RE USING CARE FUNDS FOR ONE TIME PURCHASES BECAUSE WE'VE ALREADY USED THESE CARE FUNDS FOR PUBLIC SAFETY.

SO I JUST KIND OF WANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A FINE LINE, BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE TALKING THAT WAY IF WE CAN BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT IT IS. SO WHERE DO YOU WANT TO GO, BRIAN? DO YOU WANT TO GO PIECE BY PIECE

OR JUST IN TOTALITY? >> SO MAYOR, FIRST OFF I DO WANT TO SAY YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. IT'S TECHNICALLY COMING OUT OF CARES MONEY BUT WE KNOW WHERE THE BUCKET ORIGINALLY CAME FROM.

SO IT CAN BE USED FOR ANY LEGAL PURPOSE THAT WE DECIDE.

I DID WANT TO ADD THIS THAT AT THE TIME THAT WE SENT THE EMAIL OR MEMO LATE MONDAY, AFTER THAT I SAW THAT ED HAD GOTTEN CONFIRMATION FROM FEMA THAT STARTING ON JANUARY 21ST THE VACCINE DISTRIBUTION WAS SUPPOSED TO BE 100% FUNDED.

YOU DO KNOW FROM YOUR STAFF THAT WE'RE ALWAYS GOING TO BE CONSERVATIVE AND SO THERE'S ALWAYS THE CONCERN ABOUT WHAT MIGHT BE ALLOWED IN THE FUTURE WITH ALL OF THESE THINGS.

SO I JUST WANT TO PUT THAT OUT THERE THAT JUST LIKE WHAT HAPPENED WITH THE CBG FUNDS LAST YEAR, IT TOOK ALMOST THREE MONTHS EVEN ON THE CARES PORTION OF THE CORONAVIRUS PORTION OF THE FUNDS IT TOOK THREE MONTHS TO GET DEFINITIVE REGULATIONS THAT WAS ACTIONABLE TO USE. ASIDE FROM THAT.

>> HOWEVER THESE ARE FEMA FUNDS AND FEMA HAS BEEN DOING THIS FOR A LONG TIME. AND THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS WE DON'T HAVE A 75% 25% SPLIT, WE NOW HAVE A 100% REIMBURSEMENT

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. >> RIGHT.

AND I WOULD JUST SAY, MAYOR, I GUESS MY REAL CONCERN WOULD BE IF WE TRIED TO DISTRIBUTE ALL $1.5 MILLION TO SOMETHING ELSE.

I STILL THINK WE WANT TO CONSERVE WHAT WE CAN.

BUT I WANT TO BE REALISTIC ABOUT IT AND OBVIOUSLY THIS IS ONE OF THOSE TIMES WHERE WE CAN BE EXTREMELY CONSERVATIVE OR REASONABLY CONSERVATIVE. AND THAT'S WHAT I WOULD ASK US TO BE IS REASONABLY CONSERVATIVE.

>> SO I GUESS I WOULD START WITH I KNOW THE COED IS MEETING FEBRUARY 2ND. 3RD.

DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY FEELING WHAT WE SHOULD PRESERVE FOR A NONPROFIT PROGRAM, AN INDIVIDUAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM, DOES ANYBODY WANT TO THROW OUT A RECOMMENDATION OF HOW MUCH WE

SHOULD HOLD BACK FOR THAT? >> I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT THE FIGURES WERE, BUT BLAKE AND I AND MICHAEL MET THE OTHER DAY TO COME UP WITH A PRELIMINARY SCOPE OF WHAT THE ROBUST ROUND FOUR WOULD LOOK LIKE, AND I BELIEVE IT WAS USING THE EXISTING FUNDS THAT WERE ALREADY DEDICATED TO AN EFFORT THAT HAD NOT BEEN DISTRIBUTED. AND I THINK THAT CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BLAKE OR JIM, I THINK THAT WOULD ALLOW US TO HIT ANOTHER 20 TO 25 BUSINESSES WITHOUT ANY ADDITIONAL FUNDS.

>> THAT IS CORRECT. A LITTLE OVER 400,000 AND I THINK THE MAX RECOMMENDATION WAS UP TO 20,000 PER BUSINESS.

SO DEPENDING ON KIND OF THE HISTORIC AVERAGE OF WHAT WE'VE SEEN AND HELPING 116 BUSINESSES TO DATE, IT WOULD BE BETWEEN 20 AND 25 IS WHAT WE EXPECT IT TO POTENTIALLY HELP WITH THAT

ALLOCATION. >> SO JIM, AT LEAST FROM WHAT I'M LOOKING AT HERE, THERE'S 242 REMAINING FROM UNEXPENDED UNDS FROM THE ROBUST GRANT PROGRAM FOR THE FIRST THREE ROUNDS AND THEN THE WAY YOU GET TO THAT 417,20ING AN ADDITIONAL 174,955 TO THAT 242,252.

IS THAT HOW YOU'RE GETTING THERE?

>> THAT IS CORRECT, MARTHA. >> OKAY.

>> AND THAT'S JUST SMALL BUSINESS, THAT'S NOT INDIVIDUAL ASSISTANCE. NUMBER ONE THAT'S AN ESTIMATE, BECAUSE YOU HAVEN'T FIGURED IT OUT YET.

>> RIGHT. >> NUMBER TWO, IT'S JUST SMALL

BUSINESS. >> YEAH.

>> IF WE WANT TO EXTEND ADDITIONAL BENEFITS FOR

[01:25:03]

INDIVIDUAL ASSISTANCE, AND WE KEEP TALKING ABOUT HELPING

NON-PROFITS. >> RIGHT.

WOULD NON-PROFITS BE INCLUDED IN THAT ROUND FOUR?

>> I DON'T THINK THAT THEY WERE. >> NO.

>> THE WAY THE PROGRAM WAS STRUCTURED NOW THEY WERE NOT INCLUDED. IT DOESN'T MEAN THEY COULDN'T BE, BUT THEY WERE NOT BASED ON THE PREVIOUS ROUNDS AND THE

CRITERIA. >> WHAT I'D LIKE TO SEE FOR NON-PROFITS IS TO THE EXTENT THAT THEY HAD MAJOR FUNDRAISERS THAT THEY WERE NOT ABLE TO HOLD BECAUSE OF COVID, THAT COULD BE INELIGIBILITY, LOST REVENUE UP TO A CERTAIN AMOUNT.

BUT YOU CAN'T PUT THE SAME CRITERIA FOR NON-PROFITS THAT

YOU HAVE FOR SMALL BUSINESSES. >> THAT'S WHY I DIDN'T DOE THAT IS BECAUSE THOSE TWO DON'T GO TOGETHER.

THE ROBUST GRANT AND FUNDING NON-PROFITS, THEY'RE VERY

DIFFERENT KINDS OF OPERATIONS. >> THEY'RE REALLY DIFFERENT REQUIREMENTS, DIFFERENT DOCUMENTATION THAT YOU'D HAVE TO

GET TO STAY AT THAT AMOUNT. >> DEFINITELY.

>> SO I HEAR WHAT I THINK YOU'RE SAYING IS KEEP 400 BACK FOR

ROBUST ROUND FOUR? >> CORRECT.

>> AND THEN DO WE WANT TO HOLD SOME BACK FOR NON-PROFITS AND

INDIVIDUAL ASSISTANCE? >> I'M FOR LEAVING AS MUCH, I KNOW WE'VE ALREADY SPENT IT, BUT IF WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO HAVE MONEY THAT WE CAN DEDICATE TO HELPING HOMEOWNERS, NON-PROFITS, MORE ROBUST MONEY BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW HOW LONG IT'S GOING TO TAKE TO ROLL THIS THING OUT WOULD BE MY SUGGESTION.

>> I AGREE. >> I DON'T HAVE A NUMBER OF WHAT IT SHOULD BE BUT I WAS GOING TO KIND OF SEE WHERE WE WENT WHEN WE HIT ALL OF THE OTHER ONE TIME MONEY AND WHAT WAS LEFT AND KIND OF START FEELING IT UP THERE. BUT I THINK STRONGLY THAT WE

SHOULD KEEP SOME OF IT BACK. >> SO IS CATHOLIC CHARITIES STILL DOING THE INDIVIDUAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM? DO WE EVEN HAVE THE MECHANISM TO DO THIS?

>> NO. >> ANYBODY KNOW?

>> I DON'T KNOW. >> I DON'T KNOW.

>> MAYOR, CATHOLIC CHARITIES STOPPED THAT PROGRAM IN NOVEMBER. THEY'RE ACTUALLY TRYING TO GIVE US THE REMAINING BALANCE BACK TO THE CITY AT THIS POINT.

>> OKAY. SO DO WE HAVE ANY FEEL FOR HOW THE SALVATION ARMY IS DOING WITH THE MONEY WE GAVE THEM FOR INDIVIDUAL ASSISTANCE? DOES ANYBODY HAVE A FEEL?

>> YES, COUNCIL, I DO. THE SALVATION ARMY WITH THE ADDITIONAL MONEYS ARE VERY EXCITED AND WE'VE COMPLETED THE CONTRACT AND THEY BELIEVE THAT THEY WILL GO THROUGH THAT RATHER QUICKLY. IN ADDITION DEPENDING NOW THAT THE MORATORIUM HAS BEEN EXTENDED ON EVICTIONS, THAT IS WHAT THEY WERE HOPING TO COVER. BUT REGARDLESS WE'VE SEEN STEADY

ACTIVITY ON THEIR PART. >> CAN WE REDIRECT THAT INDIVIDUAL ASSISTANCE SINCE WE CAN'T GIVE IT TO CATHOLIC CHARITY'S SALVATION, MAYBE WE GO THE SALVATION ARMY DIRECTION

BECAUSE THEY CAN HANDLE THAT? >> OR REFUND HABITAT FOR HUMANITY. THERE'S GOING TO BE PEOPLE THAT HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO DO HOUSING REHAB BECAUSE THEY'VE HAD LOST WAGES, THEY'VE JUST BEEN PAYING THEIR RENT.

AND THEY MAY NEED SOME ASSISTANCE AND HAVE A BIG NEED GOING ON. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT NEED IS YET. THAT'S WHY WE MIGHT WANT TO HOLD IT BACK AND DO SOME MORE ANALYSIS ON IT UNTIL WE FIND OUT

WHAT THAT NEED IS. >> WAS IT ED THAT SAID CATHOLIC CHARITIES WAS TRYING TO GIVE US THAT MONEY BACK?

>> YES. >> DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH THAT

MONEY IS? >> I DON'T KNOW, I THINK IT'S A

LITTLE OVER $200,000. >> OH WOW.

THAT'S GOOD. >> WOW.

>> THAT WILL GO A LONG WAY. >> SURE WILL.

>> THAT MONEY WILL END UP BEING EARMARKED BECAUSE THAT WAS ACTUAL CARES DOLLARS, RIGHT? SO THAT WILL BE MONEY THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE DEDICATED TO CARES FUNDING?

>> THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. >> WAS IT CITY MONEY OR CARES?

>> NO, CATHOLIC CHARITIES MONEY, IT'S CARES MONEY.

>> IT'S CARES MONEY, YEAH. BUT IT WAS USED FOR PUBLIC SAFETY, SO IT COULD BE USED FOR SOMETHING ELSE.

I'D LIKE TO KEEP IT IN AN INDIVIDUAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.

>> I AGREE. >> AGREE.

>> AND SALVATION ARMY HAS BEEN A GOOD VEHICLE FOR THAT AND SO HAS HABITAT AND LIFE MESSAGE, OUR FOOD PANTRIES, FIRST CHRISTIAN

[01:30:02]

CHURCH TOO. SO I AGREE, THAT WOULD GO A LONG

WAY FOR INDIVIDUAL ASSISTANCE. >> WHAT IF WE ASK IN THE FEBRUARY 3RD MEETING TO FIGURE OUT THE ALLOCATION OF THAT MONEY COMING BACK FROM CATHOLIC CHARITIES?

>> WE CAN DO THAT. >> WE CAN PUT IT ON THE AGENDA.

OUR AGENDA IS NOT FINAL UNTIL FRIDAY.

>> YEAH. >> I THINK YOU'RE THE ONE THAT HAD A SUGGESTION AT ONE OF OUR LAST MEETINGS AND I WOULD LOVE TO SEE IF THERE'S A WAY TO DO IT, IS THERE A WAY TO HAVE SOME OF THAT MONEY GO TO HELPING BUSINESSES START UP THAT MAY BE DO A BUSINESS START UP PROGRAM AS WE KIND OF COME OFF THE BACK END OF THIS. I WOULD BE CURIOUS TO KNOW WHAT A PROGRAM LIKE THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE.

>> THAT WASN'T ME. >> I HEARD IT SOMEWHERE AND I

THOUGHT IT WAS A GREAT IDEA. >> IT MUST HAVE BEEN ME, NO.

I THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE CARE OF WHAT WE'VE GOT NOW TOO, BUT HOLDING SOME BACK FOR A

POTENTIAL OF THAT. >> YEAH.

>> SO I'M CONFUSED BY ALL OF THE NUMBERS.

IF THERE'S 400 FOR AN INDIVIDUAL BUSINESS ROBUST FOUR AND WE USE THE 200 COMING BACK FROM CATHOLIC CHARITIES FOR INDIVIDUAL OR LIFE MESSAGE OR HABITAT OR WHATEVER WHAT DOES THAT LEAVE US IN THE GENERAL FUND EXCESS RESERVES THAT CAN BE

USED FOR ONE TIME? >> YOU MEAN FROM THE CARES

MONEY? >> THAT IS GENERAL FUND MONEY.

>> YES, I'M SORRY. JUST CLARIFYING.

SO MAYOR, IF WE DID THIS, WE WOULD PRESERVE THE ROBUST AND WE WERE ABLE TO PRESERVE THE CATHOLIC CHARITIES, ONE QUESTION BEFORE I ANSWER THAT, WENDY, SO THE 200,000 FROM CATHOLIC CHARITIES PROBABLY BEING YOUR EXPENSES TREATED AS A

DISBURSEMENT ALREADY, RIGHT? >> RIGHT, SO I'M JUST TREATING IT AS IF WE'RE GETTING THAT MONEY BACK AND REALLOCATING IT OVER TO A DIFFERENT AGENCY FOR INDIVIDUAL ASSISTANCE.

>> SO IT WOULD NOT AFFECT OUR 1.5 MILLION, SO SO FAR IN THIS DISCUSSION THE ONLY THING THAT WE'RE GOING TO PULL FROM THE BALANCE THAT WE HAVE IS THE 417 OF WHICH SOME OF THAT IS ALREADY TREATED AS A DISBURSEMENT. SO HOW MUCH IS LEFT IF WE DO

THAT? >> 1,123,073.

>> OKAY, SO OF THAT AMOUNT, WHAT DO WE HAVE SET BACK FOR COVID COSTS THAT'S ALREADY RESERVED FOR COVID COSTS?

>> THE AMOUNT THAT WE ALREADY HAVE SET BACK FOR FY21 ESTIMATED FUTURE EXPENSES IS 366,362. THAT IS ALREADY TAKEN OUT OF

THAT BEGINNING BALANCE. >> RIGHT.

AND ED, YOU WANT TO SAY WHAT THAT'S SUPPOSED TO COVER FOR THE REST OF THE YEAR AND WHAT YOU'RE WORRIED ABOUT?

>> I BELIEVE THE AMOUNT THAT WENDY IS REFERRING TO IS THOSE EXPENSES UNRELATED TO VACCINE DISTRIBUTION THROUGH THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR. WE HAVE SOME QUESTION REGARDING THE ELIGIBILITY OF SOME OF THE WORK THROUGH FEMA AND THE PRESIDENT ISSUED A MEMORANDUM ON THE 21ST ABOUT THE CHANGE AND THE COST SHARE RATE, WE STILL DON'T HAVE FULL GUIDANCE ON IT.

AND THERE'S STILL SOME QUESTION REGARDING WORK ELIGIBILITY, LOCATION ELIGIBILITY, AND A LOT OF OTHER QUESTIONS.

IF YOU RECALL WORKING WITH FEMA, IT'S KIND OF LIKE A TROJAN HORSE. THERE ARE A LOT OF STIPULATIONS, A LOT OF RULES THAT NEED TO BE FOLLOWED AND WHILE THEY HAVE STATED THAT THERE'S A 100% COST FEDERAL SHARE RATE, THERE'S STILL A LOT OF CONCERN REGARDING WHAT'S ELIGIBLE.

>> SO THAT'S TAKING OUT SOME OF THAT 1.5, IS THAT WE'RE SOMEWHAT

TAKING A CHANCE? >> THAT'S WHY THE RECOMMENDATION IS FOR A 10% CLAWBACK TO HELP MITIGATE THAT, RIGHT?

>> A CLAWBACK OF WHAT, WHITNEY? HELP ME WHAT YOU'RE TALKING

ABOUT. >> SO ON PAGE 8 OF BRIAN'S MEMO THE ALMOST LAST SENTENCE, IT SAYS THAT THERE'S A THOUGHT TO SET ASIDE A PORTION OF PERHAPS 10% OR 387,995 FOR A CLAWBACK RESERVE IN CASE OF ANY EXPENSES THAT ARE LATER DISALLOWED.

[01:35:04]

>> I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THAT IS, 10% OF WHAT?

>> MAYOR, IT'S 10% OF THE $3.8 MILLION THAT WE RECEIVED BOTH BETWEEN THE STATE PORTION AND THE FEDERAL TREASURY PORTION

OR DALLAS COUNTY PORTION. >> OKAY, THANK YOU.

>> OF THE TOTAL. >> THANK YOU.

>> SO OUR THOUGHT IS IF WE CAN PRESERVE AT LEAST SOME BALANCE LIKE 10%, THAT WOULD GO A LONG WAY TO PROVIDE US SOME CONFIDENCE THAT IF THERE IS SOME DISALLO DISALLOWED EXPENSES IN THE FUTURE, WE HAVE A SOURCE OF

FUNDING FOR IT. >> ARE WE SURE 10% IS ENOUGH?

>> WELL, HERE'S THE DEAL, I THINK MOST OF WHAT WE DID WITH THE PUBLIC SAFETY SALARIES, I FEEL REALLY GOOD ABOUT.

BUT GUYS, WE BOUGHT A LOT OF STUFF.

WE BOUGHT PPE, WE BOUGHT PLEXIGLASS FOR THE LIBRARY TO PROVIDE A SHIELD FOR OUR EMPLOYEES AND PATRONS.

I MEAN THERE'S A LOT OF EXPENSES THAT WE SPENT THAT IS NON-PUBLIC SAFETY SALARY COSTS THAT YOU JUST NEVER KNOW.

FEMA MAY SAY WELL YOU SHOULD HAVE ASKED FOR INSURANCE REIMBURSEMENT FOR THAT OR YOU SHOULD HAVE DONE THIS OR THAT.

SO I'M JUST SAYING THAT OUR PERSPECTIVE JUST BECAUSE WE'RE CONSERVATIVE, REASONABLY CONSERVATIVE IS WE SET ASIDE SOME PORTION. EXTREME CONSERVATIVE IS LET'S

SET ASIDE THE WHOLE 1.5 MILLION. >> YEAH.

>> WHICH IS NOT PRACTICAL. BUT WE STILL HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE VACCINE STRATEGY, AND I JUST WANT TO SAY THIS ONE LAST THING, IF YOU REMEMBER, WE GOT OUR DALLAS COUNTY MONEY REAL QUICK AND IT HELPED FLOAT ALL OF THE COSTS THAT WE HAVE SPENT TO DATE. THERE ARE SOME CITIES WHO ONLY GOT THE STATE PORTION AND ONLY THIS WEEK FINALLY GOT THEIR REIMBURSEMENT FOR 80% OF THAT. AND THERE WERE SMALLER CITIES

WHO WERE DESPERATE FOR THE CASH. >> AND I THINK THEY FILED OVER

TEN TIMES. >> THEY DID, MAYOR.

AND SO HERE'S OUR CONCERN, WE MAY GET 100% REIMBURSEMENT FROM FEMA, BUT IT MAY TAKE A WHILE. SO IF NOTHING ELSE, WE COULD PRESERVE SOME CASH ALSO TO HELP US WITH THE NEXT COUPLE OF FEW MONTHS OF THE VACCINE COSTS, DISTRIBUTION COSTS THAT WE'RE SPENDING, THE OVERTIME AND ALL OF THAT OR WE EAT THAT AND WE HOLD ONTO IT AND WAIT TO BE REIMBURSED.

>> I THINK I'D FEEL A LOT MORE COMFORTABLE RATHER THAN DOING THE 10% WE DO A 20% CLAWBACK WHICH WOULD HOLD BACK LIKE

$760,000 IN CASH. >> WELL IF WE DID THAT, LET ME JUST DO 750 FOR EASE OF DISCUSSION, THAT WOULD GIVE US 373,000 IN ONE TIME FUNDS PLUS WHATEVER WE HAVE IN THE HEALTH

FUND WHICH WOULD BE WHAT, WENDY? >> THE AMOUNT IN THE HEALTH FUND WE CAN STILL ALLOCATE FOR ONE TIME EXPENSES FOR GENERAL FUND.

>> SO WHAT IF WE JUST SEE WHERE WE GET AND SEE IF THAT ALL MAKES SENSE AT THE END. IS IT OKAY TO GO THERE NOW?

>> WE CAN ALWAYS REALLOCATE IT LATER.

>> I MEAN JUST FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES, IS IT OKAY TO LIKE --

>> I LIKE THAT PLAN. >> YEAH.

>> ALL RIGHT, YOU WANT TO GO OVER YOUR ONE TIME OR DID WE

ALREADY DO THAT? >> WE DIDN'T DO THAT, MAYOR.

>> I DON'T EVEN THINK YOU'RE CLOSE TO THAT KIND OF MONEY.

>> SO IF YOU REMEMBER WE HAVE 375 NOW FROM THE CARES.

I WAS LOOKING FOR WENDY TO CLARIFY.

>> JUST FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES. >> I KNOW.

>> WE HAVE TO MOVE ON. >> AND WE STILL HAVE 216 FROM THE EMPLOYEE HEALTH BENEFITS FUND.

>> 195. GO AHEAD.

>> SO GOING THROUGH THE LIST, AND I'M NOT GOING TO EXPLAIN EVERY ONE IN DETAIL UNLESS YOU ASK, BUT I JUST WANT TO MENTION THIS ONE THING. MOVING THE DATA CENTER OUT OF CITY HALL TO FIRE STATION NUMBER TWO BECAUSE WE BUILT THAT REINFORCED ROOM NOW FOR OUR DATA CENTER IN CASE WE EVER GET HIT WITH ANOTHER TORNADO. THIS IS ONLY THE COST TO MOVE IT. WE ALREADY KNOW IT WILL HAVE THE SPACE AND IT WILL BE BETTER SPACE THAN WE HAVE NOW.

SO WE'RE PRETTY EXCITED ABOUT DOING THAT.

AND THEN YOU MAY REMEMBER LAST SUMMER BECAUSE WE TALKED ABOUT

[01:40:07]

DISPATCH AREA DOWN IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

AND SO OF COURSE THAT CAME BACK TO THE TOP OF OUR PRIORITIES ABOUT 59,000. AND THEN SOME LAPTOPS FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. WOULD YOU KIND OF EXPLAIN THE ANIMAL SHELTER ROOF REPLACEMENT BECAUSE I'M DRAWING A BLANK ON WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO THERE AGAIN.

>> THE ANIMAL SHELTER BUILDING IS OLD, IT WAS BUILT IN 1996 AND THEY HAVE HAD A CONSISTENT LEAK ISSUE DESPITE CONTINUOUS REPAIRS SINCE '96 AND WE'VE HAD SEVERAL SEVERE RAIN EVENTS AND FLOODING.

WE ALSO HAVE SOME MONEY SET ASIDE FOR A REMODEL THAT THE COUNCIL APPROVED FOR THESE BUDGETS AND SO OUR GOAL IS IF WE CAN GET THE ROOF COST ADJUSTED THROUGH THIS ONE TIME BUDGET AMENDMENT, IT ALLOWS US TO USE THAT LUMP SUM VERY EFFICIENTLY FOR THE INTERIOR REMODEL BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT WE HAVE TO REPLACE THE CEILING AND THOSE TYPES OF THINGS THAT WOULD BE AN ADDED COST. SO THAT WAS OUR GOAL IF WE COULD SECURE THIS ONE TIME FUND AND GET THIS DONE BY A SEPARATE PROGRAM, THEN WE'RE IN A POSITION TO VERY EFFECTIVELY UTILIZE THE OTHER ONE TIME COSTS THAT WE HAVE.

AND THE RFQ IS READY FOR PUBLISH WITHIN THE NEXT TWO WEEKS SO WE'RE READY TO MOVE FORWARD AND WE WERE HOPING WE COULD SECURE

THIS AS WELL. >> SO COUNCIL -- WENDY, GO AHEAD. YOU'RE MUTED, WENDY.

>> I JUST WANT TO NOTE THAT THAT $10,000 I GOT WITH GARY AND JIM AND THAT $10,000 FOR THE ROOF REPLACEMENT IS ALREADY ALLOCATED IN THE CURRENT YEAR FISCAL YEAR 21 BUDGET FOR THE FACILITIES IMPROVEMENT. SO WE CAN PUT SOMETHING ELSE IN THAT BUCKET BUT I JUST FOUND THAT OUT TODAY SO WE CAN TAKE THAT OFF THE LIST BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY FUNDED ACTUALLY.

>> YAY. >> MAKE SURE YOU CALL ON WENDY WHEN SHE RAISES HER HAND. SHE HAS GOOD NEWS FOR US.

>> THERE YOU GO. >> COUNCIL, IF YOU'LL REMEMBER ONE THING IN THE BUDGET THIS YEAR IS 150,000 FOR FACILITY RENOVATIONS AND IMPROVEMENTS SO THAT'S GOOD.

I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT. THANK YOU, WENDY.

>> BEFORE WE OPEN UP FOR OTHER SUGGESTIONS BECAUSE I KNOW WE ALL HAVE SOME OUT THERE, OF THE GREEN AND YELLOW PRIORITIES ONE TIME, IF WE TAKE OUT THE 10,000 I'M SEEING THAT'S 180,000.

DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY COMMENTS, TEARS OR JEERS FOR ANY OF THOSE ITEMS ON THE GREEN OR YELLOW PRIORITY LIST? SUPPORTIVE? ALL RIGHT, I'LL MOVE ON TO OTHER SUGGESTIONS? MARTHA RAISED HER HAND FIRST.

>> WAIT A MINUTE, MAYOR, REMEMBER IN THE LOGISTICS CAPTAIN WE HAD SOME ONE TIME EXPENSE OF ABOUT $34,000.

>> YOU'RE RIGHT. THANK YOU.

>> I ALSO ADDED THE ONE TIME COST THAT WE HAD FOR THE FINANCE AND THE HR OF ADDITIONAL 6,000 BETWEEN THOSE TWO.

>> THANK YOU. I MISSED THAT ONE.

>> OTHER DISCUSSIONS? I DON'T KNOW WHO SAID WHAT?

>> I SAID HOW MUCH MONEY HAVE WE GOT LEFT?

>> $20,923. >> WHAT?

>> HOW MUCH? >> 120?

>> 20,000. >> NO.

>> 171,000. >> I'VE GOT LIKE 350 ROUGHLY.

>> WE STARTED WITH 568, WENDY. >> WE STARTED FOR THE GENERAL FUND WE STARTED WITH, ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THE EMPLOYEE

HEALTH BENEFITS ONE TIME MONEY? >> WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ONE TIME MONEY COMING FROM THE GENERAL FUND AND COMING FROM THE HEALTH

BENEFITS. >> AND WENDY, I ADDED THOSE TWO UP AND I CAME UP WITH 591. SO IT'S THE 375 FROM THE CARES MONEY, EXCUSE ME THAT'S STILL GENERAL FUND, SORRY.

AND 216 LEFT OVER IN THE EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND AFTER DOING THOSE LUMP SUM ADJUSTMENTS.

>> 195, BRIAN. >> I HAD ALREADY TAKEN OUT THE

GREEN AND THE YELLOW ONE TIME. >> THAT STILL DOESN'T MAKE

SENSE. >> HERE, I'LL PULL IT UP FOR YOU

SO YOU CAN SEE. >> MAYOR, I HAD THOUGHT THAT WAS 216. YOU SAID IT WAS 195.

>> THAT'S WHAT WENDY SAID. >> AM I MISSING SOMETHING ON

[01:45:05]

HERE? >> OKAY.

IT'S THE 373 OR 375 PLUS 195 TOTALS 570,000.

AND ALL WE'VE TAKEN OUT OF THAT IS 180,000 FROM THE GREEN AND

THE YELLOW. >> DID WE CHOOSE ALL OF THE

GREEN ONE TIME? >> WENDY, WE DON'T SEE THE

SPREADSHEET. >> OH, OKAY.

>> YEAH, WE DON'T SEE. >> BUT YEAH, I THINK WE DID WITH

THE EXCEPTION OF THE ROOF. >> I'M TAKING 130 PLUS THE 10,000 PLUS THE 18358 PLUS THE 19,000 PLUS THE 34,000 FOR THE ONE TIME LOGISTICS CAPTAIN I'M UP TO 214 AND I THINK YOU HAD SOME MISCELLANEOUS ONE TIME FOR THE OTHER TWO POSITIONS.

>> IT LOOKS TO ME RIGHT AROUND 150,000 IS AVAILABLE.

>> I GOT 350. >> ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THE

EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND? >> YEP, THAT'S INCLUDED IN THAT.

>> WE STARTED WITH 320. AND THESE ARE THE ITEMS IF WE'RE DOING THE GREEN AND YELLOW ONE TIME, WE ARE DOWN TO 20,000.

>> NO, WE STARTED OUT WITH THREE WAS IT 375 YOU SAID IN THE

GENERAL FUND, MAYOR? >> LOOK AT THE CARES COLUMN, WENDY. 373 PLUS 21.

ARE WE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE NOW? >> 393.

>> 373 FOR CARES. >> PLUS THE 20.

>> 21. >> IT'S ALL GENERAL FUND MONEY.

AND THAT'S STILL PRESERVING 750,000 OF CARES FUNDS FOR

FUTURE COVID COSTS. >> YEP.

>> SO OTHER DISCUSSION POSSIBILITIES, FOLKS?

MARTHA. >> YEAH, SO I WOULD LIKE TO ALLOCATE $50,000 FOR COLE HOUSE. KEEP ROWLETT BEAUTIFUL HAS ADOPTED THAT FACILITY AND WE'VE DONE QUITE A BIT OF WORK ON IT ON THE EXTERIOR TRIMMING TREES. WE PLANTED A POLLINATOR GARDEN, WE DECORATED IT FOR CHRISTMAS. WE POWER WASHED.

BUT THERE ARE A LOT OF REPAIRS THAT NEED TO BE DONE.

FOR EXAMPLE THAT WRAP AROUND PORCH, THE FRONT PORTION OF IT IS PROBABLY IN BETTER SHAPE THAN ANY OF IT AND IT'S ROTTED THROUGH IN SEVERAL AREAS. IF YOU STEP ON IT, THE INTERIOR HAS A LOT OF WATER STAINS ON THE CEILING TILES.

THE CARPETING IS AWFUL. YOU CAN'T EVEN VACUUM IT.

IT NEEDS TO BE PAINTED. I FEEL LIKE IT HASN'T HAD THE CARE THAT IT NEEDS AND NOT THAT $50,000 WILL GET IT IN A CONDITION WHERE IT CAN BE MAXIMIZED FOR USE BY THE PUBLIC, BUT EVERY TIME WE'RE OVER THERE THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT WALK ON THAT TRAIL AND EVERYONE STOPS AND WANTS TO COME IN AND LOOK AT IT, BUT IT'S JUST NOT IN A CONDITION FOR PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT. AND SO WE'RE HOPING THAT WITH AN ALLOCATION TO GET SOME OF THAT WORK DONE THAT WE CAN GET SOME IN KIND DONATIONS FROM INTERESTED BUSINESSES IN OUR COMMUNITY AND REALLY MAKE THAT A USEABLE FACILITY FOR OUR COMMUNITY. IT'S A GREAT ASSET THAT IS FAR

UNDERUTILIZED. >> MARTHA, YOU WOULD PROPOSE THAT THAT WOULD BE DIRECT PAYMENTS TO VENDORS NOT MONEY TO

KEEP ROWLETT BEAUTIFUL? >> ABSOLUTELY.

>> I JUST WANTED TO ASK THAT QUESTION AND MAKE SURE THAT WAS

CLEAR. >> YES.

THAT WOULD BE THE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE PARKS DIRECTOR AND FROM STAFF FOR HOW TO PRIORITIZE ANY KINDS OF REPAIRS AND THEN ANY VENDORS WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE BID

PROCESS. >> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY UNDERSTOOD IT WOULDN'T BE MONEY TO KRB.

>> AND I THINK IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN THERE IS MAYBE PAINT

INCLUDED IN THE 2021 BUDGET. >> THE 2021 CIP BUDGET INCLUDES

[01:50:07]

REPAINTING THE INTERIOR FOR $15,000.

>> YEAH. AND I'M SURE ANGIE KNOWS AS WELL AS I DO SOME OF THE REPAIRS THAT NEED TO BE DONE INSIDE AND OUTSIDE TO THE FACILITY. BUT PARTICULARLY I KNOW ABOUT THE PORCH WHERE IT'S ROTTING OUT, THERE'S A LOT OF RAILINGS MISSING. THERE'S A LOT OF WORK TO BE DONE OVER THERE. SOME OF IT IS COSMETIC, BUT SOME OF IT IS DEFINITELY STRUCTURAL TO MAKE IT SAFER FOR THE

COMMUNITY TO ENJOY IT. >> YEAH, I'M ALL FOR THAT.

>> I THINK THAT'S A GREAT DISCUSSION, MARTHA.

>> ME TOO. >> WE HAD TALKED EARLIER ABOUT, I HAD, I SHOULDN'T SAY WE, IF WE COULD ALLOCATE SOME OF THIS GENERAL FUND MONEY BECAUSE WE HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO RESERVES FOR INVESTMENT ON A RECURRING BASIS TO THAT GOLF FUND.

>> I'M GLAD YOU BROUGHT THAT UP BECAUSE.

IT'S FUNNY YOU SHOULD MENTION THAT BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT THE LONG RANGE MAINTENANCE PLAN AND TREE PLAN IS GOING TO BE BEFORE THE GOLF ADVISORY BOARD NEXT WEEK.

AND THAT IS A LIST OF ITEMS THAT NEED TO BE IMPROVED.

AND SOME OF THOSE I THINK COULD EASILY BE FUNDED BY THIS BECAUSE IT'S OUTSIDE I THINK OF THE SCOPE OF THE ACTUAL GOLF COURSE.

LIKE THERE'S LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS AND STRIPING THAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN IN THE PARKING LOT.

THE ENTRY SIGN COULD BE GIVEN A REALLY NICE NEW UPGRADED LOOK WITH SOME LANDSCAPING. THERE'S SOME WORK ON THE PHYSICAL BUILDING ITSELF THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE LIKE SOME CARPENTRY WORK AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

I WOULD NOT WANT TO SPEND ANY OF THIS MONEY ON ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE GOLF COURSE ITSELF. BUT STARTING TO THROW A LITTLE BIT OF LOVE TOWARD SOME OF THOSE THINGS THAT WE SHOULD BE AS A CITY OWNED PROPERTY HELPING TO MAINTAIN I THINK WOULD BE A GOOD USE. AND I THINK IF WE HIT ROUGHLY 50 TO BE USED, THAT MIGHT BE HIGH. WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO DO THAT FOR 35 LOOKING AT SOME OF THESE BUDGET NUMBERS TO BE ABLE TO HIT SOME OF THOSE THINGS WOULD BE A REALLY GOOD USE OF SOME OF THESE

FUNDS. >> BUT I WOULD ALSO SAY ABOVE AND BEYOND THAT TO SET UP A RESERVE FOR THE GOLF FUND TOO.

>> COMPLETELY. YEAH, BECAUSE IT COULD KIND OF BE A STARTING POINT THAT THEY CAN CONTINUE TO ADD TO AS THEY START TO LOOK AT DOING TOURNAMENTS AGAIN AND OTHER FUND

RAISING OPPORTUNITIES. >> SO JUST A QUICK COMMENT, WE HAVE ABOUT 168,000 IN THERE NOW. OUR ANNUAL DEBT SERVICE IS ABOUT 250,000. SO 80,000 WOULD AT LEAST GET US TO A ONE YEAR'S DEBT SERVICE AND THEN WHATEVER ELSE BEYOND THAT CAN HELP WITH MAINTENANCE OR PROJECTS OR WHATEVER.

>> OKAY. >> WHERE IS THAT 80,000 FUNDED

TODAY? >> AS YOU KNOW WE PAY ABOUT 250 A YEAR IN DEBT SERVICE. AND YOU WILL REMEMBER BACK WHEN WE ENCLOSED THE PAVILION AT THAT TIME OUR GOAL WAS TO MAINTAIN ONE YEAR DEBT SERVICE BUT BECAUSE IT COST MORE THAN WHAT WE THOUGHT, WE DROPPED INTO THAT DEBT SERVICE AND I REMEMBER YOU ADAMANTLY VOTED AGAINST IT, BUT WE DID DROP BELOW THAT ONE YEAR DEBT SERVICE BY ABOUT $80,000. AND I'M JUST SAYING 80,000 COULD

GET US BACK TO FULL FUNDING. >> OKAY, IT'S NOT FUNDING THE DEBT, IT'S FUNDING A RESERVE EQUAL TO THE DEBT.

>> YES, MA'AM. >> OKAY.

I WAS LIKE CERTAINLY WE FUNDED THE DEBT.

>> ANOTHER THING TO CONSIDER JUST TO THROW OUT, I DON'T RECALL HOW MUCH IT WAS BUT FOR DOWNTOWN VITALITY THE SIGNAGE, WE DID A SIGN PLAN OR SOMETHING TO IMPROVE THE SIGNAGE BECAUSE IT'S PRETTY BAD DOWN THERE, FADED SIGNS, THERE'S KIND OF MOLD ON THE ROCKS OUT THERE AND THERE WAS SOME PLAN, I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH IT COST TO DO THAT.

BUT I'D LIKE TO SEE HOW MUCH THAT WAS JUST TO SEE IF THAT'S EVEN SOMETHING THAT WE COULD THINK ABOUT.

>> JIM, DO YOU REMEMBER? I KNOW YOU WERE INVOLVED AT ONE

POINT. >> YEAH, BRIAN, IT'S BEEN A WHILE. I'M FRANTICALLY TRYING TO FIND THAT OLD STUDY AND SEE WHAT THE NUMBERS WERE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT SO MAYBE IF YOU GIVE ME A COUPLE OF MINUTES, I'LL SEE IF I

CAN DIG THAT UP. >> I THINK CITY WIDE I WAS REMEMBERING A REALLY LARGE NUMBER.

>> YEAH I'M NOT THINKING CITY WIDE I'M THINKING DOWNTOWN

[01:55:07]

SPECIFIC. THERE'S NOTHING IN THERE THAT TELLS TO YOU WHERE YOU'RE AT OTHER THAN THAT MASSIVE VILLAGE SIGN ON THE APARTMENT BUILDING. SO IN TERMS OF BRANDING IT'S NOT

REALLY ALL THERE. >> ALL RIGHT, LET'S GIVE HIM A

MINUTE TO LOOK FOR IT. >> THANK YOU.

>> I HAVE ONE THAT I CAN GO WITH REAL QUICK.

ED AND I HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT GETTING FUNDS THERE TO ENSURE THAT IT'S SUSTAINABLE IN YEARS GOING FORWARD.

WITH THE CARES MONEY THAT HAS PROVIDED WITH A UNIQUE OPPORTUNITY TO BE ABLE TO FUND THAT.

SO I'D LIKE TO CONSIDER AT LEAST $25,000 IF NOT UP TO $50,000 TO BE ABLE TO PUT INTO THAT FUND AS A RESERVE FOR THE NEXT TIME THAT A DISASTER COMES BECAUSE IT WILL ALLOW US TO BE VERY NIMBLY AND QUICK IN HELPING THE PUBLIC IN -- NIMBLE AND QUICK IN HELPING THE PUBLIC IN RAMPING UP THE SYSTEMS THAT WE NEED TO DO.

>> I AM SO IN SUPPORT OF THAT, WHITNEY.

>> EXCELLENT. >> ANY OTHER SUGGESTIONS OUT

THERE? >> OH, DO YOU REMEMBER WHITNEY DISCUSSING THE RADAR THING FOR IN MESQUITE, THE WEATHER RADAR? BECAUSE I JUST REMEMBERED THIS TODAY BECAUSE THE WEATHER RADAR THAT NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE IS USING IS DONE FOR THE WHOLE WEEK. AND I REMEMBER THAT MESQUITE HAS ONE THAT THEY WOULD HAVE ALLOWED CITIES TO PARTNER WITH SO THAT WE HAVE OUR OWN ACCESS TO OUR OWN WEATHER RADAR.

I'M NOT SURE -- >> I DON'T REMEMBER HOW MUCH IT WAS. IT'S A MEMBERSHIP FEE I THINK THAT YOU PAY EVERY YEAR. ED MIGHT BE ABLE TO REMEMBER THAT OFFHAND. BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH IT IS.

>> IT'S NOT A ONE TIME COST. >> NO, IT'S EVERY YEAR.

>> I FORGOT, OKAY. MY BAD, THAT'S RIGHT.

IT'S NOT ONE TIME. >> ANYBODY ELSE WANT TO THROW

ANYTHING ELSE OUT? >> I'VE GOT A QUESTION ABOUT THE GOLF. MATT WAS THROWING UP ABOUT $35,000 AND BRIAN CAME BACK WITH 80,000.

WHAT WAS THE FINAL DISCUSSION ON THAT FINAL END? WAS THAT ADDING THOSE TWO TOGETHER OR JUST THE 80 OR WHAT?

>> WE'RE GOING TO GO BACK TO THAT, BROWNIE.

I JUST WANTED TO THROW SUGGESTIONS OUT BEFORE WE GO

BACK. >> WE NEVER MADE A DECISION

THERE. >> YEAH.

JUST LIKE EVERYTHING IS ON THE LIST WITH GREEN AND ORANGE, I WANTED TO GET EVERYTHING ON THE TABLE BEFORE WE TALKED DETAILS.

>> I WANTED TO ASK A QUESTION THEN SINCE YOU'RE DOING THAT, THIS IS MORE FOR I GUESS FOR CHIEF HOWARD, WHAT ABOUT THE LOGISTICS VEHICLE FOR THE LOGISTICS CAPTAIN?

>> BROWNIE, ONE THING WE COULD DO IS ADD THAT TO THE ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT IF WE APPROVE IT AND I KNOW WE STILL HAVE THAT YET TO DO. BUT IF WE DID THAT THEN THAT WOULD BE A WAY TO FINANCE THAT VEHICLE AND EASE THAT INTO THE PROGRAM INSTEAD OF TRYING TO COME UP WITH IT NOW.

WE COULD ALSO SET ASIDE THE MONEY NOW AND BUY IT OUT OF CASH. SO THOSE WILL BE A COUPLE OF

CHOICES WE COULD MAKE. >> OKAY.

>> WELL, IF WE'RE GOING TO DO THE ENTERPRISE PROGRAM IF IT'S A VEHICLE THAT'S ELIGIBLE FOR THAT, WE SHOULD USE THE

ENTERPRISE PROGRAM FOR THAT. >> I AGREE WITH THAT.

>> GOING, GOING, GONE. >> I LOOKED UP THAT COST OF MEMBERSHIP YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT IS $7,500 A YEAR.

>> YEAH. >> JIM, DID YOU GET ANYWHERE ON

THE DOWNTOWN STUFF? >> MAYOR, I FOUND A PLAN, BUT I DON'T SEE A COST BREAKDOWN OR AN ESTIMATE ON --

>> I THINK IF YOU GO BACK TO YOUR BUDGET MEMO FROM 2019, YOU'LL FIND IT. THAT'S WHERE I REMEMBER SEEING

IT. >> OKAY.

GIVE ME ANOTHER MINUTE TO LOOK. >> I THINK FOR DOWNTOWN IT WAS LIKE, I THOUGHT IT WAS 50,000 BUT I MIGHT BE CRAZY.

>> THAT SOUNDS LOW. THAT SOUNDS A LITTLE LOW.

>> SEEMS LOW NOW THAT I'M THINKING ABOUT ALL OF THE WORK.

>> ALL RIGHT. SO DID ANYBODY TAKE A LIST OF

WHAT WE CAME UP WITH? >> SO RIGHT NOW WE HAVE ALL THE OTHER POSSIBILITIES, COLE HOUSE, THE GOLF FUND, DOWNTOWN WAY

FINDING SIGNS. >> SO I HEARD 25,000 FOR COED IS

THAT WHAT I HEARD? >> YEAH THAT'S MINIMUM.

[02:00:01]

I SAID ANYWHERE TO 50. BUT I'M COMFORTABLE WITH 25 IF

YOU WANT TO GO WITH THAT. >> LET'S DO THAT FOR DISCUSSION

PURPOSES RIGHT NOW. >> OKAY.

>> AND THEN Y'ALL LIKE THE IDEA OF QUAIL HOUSE 50,000 IN

IMPROVEMENTS? >> YEAH, THAT'S FINE.

>> GOT TO KEEP UP WITH IT. >> YEAH.

>> AND THEN I FORGET ALREADY, BRIAN.

>> THE GOLF FUND. >> GOLF FUND.

SO WE HAD A PROPOSAL FROM MATT OF 35 FOR IMPROVEMENTS AND AN ADDITIONAL 80 TO GET OUR RESERVES UP TO EQUAL ANNUAL DEBT

SERVICE. >> YES.

>> ANY COUNTER PROPOSALS, ANY OTHER IDEAS?

>> I LIKE THE IDEA OF GETTING TO THE ONE YEAR FUNDING FOR DEBT, BUT WE HAD ALSO TALKED ABOUT PUTTING SOME ADDITIONAL MONEY IN THERE FOR ADDITIONAL NEEDS AND STARTING THAT NEST EGG.

SO THOSE ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.

>> WHAT WOULD YOU SUGGEST, MATT? >> I WOULD RATHER BUMP IT UP TO 50 FOR FUNDING FOR NOW AND THEN DO ANOTHER 50 FOR FUTURE THINGS AND WE'LL CATCH UP ON THE DEBT AT ANOTHER POINT.

OR THE RESERVE. WE'RE UP ON THE DEBT.

CATCH UP ON THE RESERVES FOR THE DEBT.

>> WELL THE 80 PLUS THE 35 WAS 115 AND YOU JUST TOOK AWAY 15.

>> YEAH BUT I ALLOCATED IT DIFFERENTLY.

I WOULD DEFINITELY ADD MORE TO EACH OF IT, BUT LET'S SEE WHERE

IT POPS OUT. >> YEAH.

SO LET'S PENCIL IN 100 FOR GOLF AND SEE WHERE WE ARE AT AND SEE IF WE COME BACK TO ANY OF THOSE. IS THAT OKAY?

>> WHAT'S THE TOTAL NOW? >> I THINK WE HAVE A FOURTH ITEM. WAS THERE A THIRD OR FOURTH OR

FIFTH ITEM? >> IT WAS THE DOWNTOWN WAYFINDING, WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THAT'S GOING TO

BE. >> BRIAN, I HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL

INFO ON THAT. >> OKAY.

>> SO WHAT WE DID BACK IN 2017 TIMEFRAME WAS THE MASTER PLAN AND CONCEPT DESIGN SO THAT WAS PHASE ONE.

WE HAD A PROPOSAL TO TAKE THE NEXT STEP WHICH WAS SCHEMATIC DESIGN AND DESIGN DEVELOPMENT AND THAT COST WAS GOING TO BE 45,000. BUT WE DID NOT GET TO A PRICING EXERCISE ON WHAT THE ACTUAL IMPROVEMENTS WOULD BE.

>> SO THAT WAS JUST FOR THE DESIGN?

>> CORRECT. SO WE HAVE A SIGNAGE MASTER PLAN AND CONCEPT DESIGN THAT THEY COMPLETED BACK AT THE END OF

2017, EARLY 2018. >> I'M NOT GOING TO BE SUPPORTIVE OF THAT IN THIS ENVIRONMENT RIGHT NOW.

>> YEAH, I AGREE. >> ON THIS LIST I KNOW THE ONE TIME STUFF THAT WAS ON THERE WAS LAPTOPS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

BUT I DON'T SEE ANY EQUIPMENT. DID YOU GUYS STOP SHORT OF THAT FOR A REASON BECAUSE YOU KNOW WHAT YOUR POT WAS.

BUT I KNOW THERE'S ALWAYS EQUIPMENT NEEDS OUT THERE.

>> WE WENT THROUGH THE EXERCISE, WE CONSIDERED EQUIPMENT, TECHNOLOGY, PEOPLE, THE WHOLE GAMUT.

NOW I WILL SAY THIS, WE FULLY FUNDED THE FLEET OF SERVICES PLANNED THIS YEAR, THE REPLACEMENT PLAN.

SO THAT WAS FULLY FUNDED. AND OF COURSE WITH ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT IT WILL FREE UP ADDITIONAL CASH TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT WITH WHICH WE'VE GOT TO PUT BACK INTO THE NONENTERPRISE EQUIPMENT. SO I THINK WE'RE GOING TO BE GOOD AND NOT RECOMMEND TAKING ANY OF THESE FUNDS FOR THAT YET.

>> OKAY. >> SO WOULD Y'ALL BE OKAY WITH 30,000 FOR COED, 50,000 FOR QUAIL, AND 125,000 FOR GOLF AND LEAVE THE REST IN THE GENERAL FUND FOR RESERVES FOR FUTURE CARE COSTS AND FUTURE ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS?

>> THAT WOULD LEAVE ABOUT 185,000 IN THE ONE TIME MONEY.

>> PLUS 750. >> YES.

>> SO WOULD THAT ADDITIONAL 25,000 FOR GOLF GO TO THE

RESERVE? >> I'D REALLY LIKE TO GET THAT RESERVE UP TO ANNUAL DEBT SERVICE, BUT I THINK WE NEED A

[02:05:04]

RESERVE FOR FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS TOO.

>> I DO TOO, TAMMY. >> YEAH.

>> I'M GOING TO WEIGH IN HERE, GUYS.

WE HAVE SOME FLEXIBILITY AND SOME REMAINING FLEXIBILITY AND I APPRECIATE WHAT MATT SAID, BUT I REALLY WOULD LIKE TO GET THE DEBT SERVICE TO ONE YEAR AT THE 81 AND THEN IF YOU WANTED TO STILL ADD ANOTHER 50, 75, OR 100,000 FOR A MAINTENANCE RESERVE I THINK YOU DO IT. THIS IS THE YEAR TO DO IT.

THE COMMENT THAT WE'LL WORRY ABOUT THAT IN THE FUTURE, WE'VE GONE NOW THREE YEARS I THINK, MAYBE FOUR, WITH THAT BEING BELOW OUR GOAL AND EACH YEAR IT'S ONLY A FEW THOUSAND DOLLARS BETWEEN THE LEASE PAYMENT AND THE DEBT PAYMENT.

THERE WILL NEVER REALLY BE ANY MONEY IN THE GOLF FUND TO HELP WITH MAINTENANCE COSTS IF WE DON'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT.

>> SO WHAT WOULD THAT TOTAL BE, 80 PLUS WHAT?

>> IT WOULD BE 180. THAT WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATION.

>> AND WE WOULD STILL HAVE 130,000 LEFT OVER.

>> LET'S DO IT. >> I'M FINE WITH THAT.

>> DO IT. >> PAM? I JUST READ HER LIPS, SHE SAID I'M FINE WITH THAT.

>> I'M FINE WITH IT. >> THIS WHOLE STRANGE WORLD.

THE THINGS WE DO NOW. ALL RIGHT.

COMMENTS? >>> GOOD PLAN.

>> SOUNDS GOOD TO ME. >> I THINK IT ALL SOUNDS GOOD.

>> MHM. >> THE WHOLE TOP TO BOTTOM.

>> AND WE'RE NOT DONE YET, BECAUSE WE STILL GET TO TALK

ABOUT THE UTILITY FUND. >> OH GREAT.

>> WELL OKAY. >> ONE MORE.

>> YOU'RE RIGHT. I'M VERY MUCH --

>> WENDY HAS HER HAND UP. >> WHO HAS HER HAND UP?

>> WENDY. >> GO AHEAD, WENDY.

>> IT CAME TO LIGHT TODAY SOMETHING THAT WASN'T ON THE LIST THAT I THINK IS VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE'LL PROBABLY NEED TO PUT AS A FIRST PRIORITY ON HERE IS WE ADDED THE COUNTRY AIR ESTATES TO THE GO BOND LIST OF PROJECTS AND THERE'S A WATER AND SEWER PORTION OF THAT THAT NEEDS TO BE ACCOUNTED FOR AND THAT'S $260,000. SO IF WE'RE GOING TO ADD THAT COUNTRY AIR TO THE GO WE PROBABLY NEED TO ADD THE WATER AND SEWER PORTION OF THE PROJECT ALSO.

>> I THOUGHT WE PUT WATER AND SEWER INTO THE GO BOND WHEN WE

DO A NEIGHBORHOOD? >> NO, WE'RE NOT PERMITTED TO SPEND THE GO BONDS ON THE WATER AND SEWER PORTION OF THE PROJECTS. AND THAT'S BEEN CONFIRMED WITH

CHRIS SETTLE OUR BOND COUNCIL. >> OKAY, THAT WAS THE TECHNICAL ANSWER. BUT WORKING WITH THE CIB THEY TOOK INTO ACCOUNT IN TERMS OF THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS HOW MUCH WOULD END UP BEING PROCESSED THROUGH BONDS FOR THE WATER AND SEWER PORTION. I THINK THAT WAS REALLY THE MAYOR'S QUESTION. BUT WHAT WENDY IS SAYING IS BY ADDING COUNTRY AIR THAT WASN'T IN THE $7 MILLION A YEAR IN

REVENUE BONDS, WENDY? >> NO.

>> OKAY. SO THAT COULD BE SOMETHING THAT COULD COME OUT OF THIS PROJECT OR WE COULD INCREASE OUR BOND

ISSUANCE THIS SUMMER. >> THAT MAKES SENSE.

THANK YOU. >> I THINK THE GUIDANCE THEY WERE GIVEN WAS A MILLION A YEAR FOR SEWER PROJECTS.

SOMETHING LIKE THAT. AND IN THAT SPREADSHEET THEY DID IT AUTOMATICALLY CALCULATED THAT AMOUNT.

BUT I DON'T REMEMBER WHEN WE WERE MESSING WITH IT, I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT THAT TOTAL AMOUNT WENT TO.

AND SO WENDY IS SAYING THAT THAT TOTAL AMOUNT WENT OVER WHATEVER BUDGET THEY WERE GIVEN BY 260,000.

>> RIGHT, BECAUSE OF THE CHOICES THAT WE MADE IN TERMS OF WHICH

PROJECTS TO DO. >> YES.

>> I'M GLAD SHE BROUGHT THAT UP BECAUSE WE WOULDN'T WANT TO GET CAUGHT BY SURPRISE AND HAVE TO FIND THAT NEXT YEAR.

>> WELL WE'VE MADE A DECISION LAST YEAR THAT TO THE EXTENT WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO ROLL IN RATE REDUCTIONS IN THE FUTURE, THAT WAS THE METHODOLOGY WE WERE GOING TO USE.

I'M ABSOLUTELY STILL IN SUPPORT OF THAT.

BUT I THINK WE HAVE ENOUGH FUNDS HERE WE COULD ALLOCATE SOME TO WHAT WENDY IS TALKING ABOUT AND TO AN EMERGENCY FUND FOR REPAIRS

THAT ARE NOT ON THE LIST. >> YEP.

>> MHM. >> SO I GUESS I WOULD ASK YOU ALL WHAT YOU WANT RESERVED BACK FOR THAT EMERGENCY FUND AND IT'S

[02:10:06]

NOT A UTILITY RESERVE IT IS A CIP FUNDING FOR THOSE

EMERGENCIES. >> WHAT HAVE OUR EMERGENCIES ADDED UP TO THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS THAT WERE UNFUNDED?

>> LET ME SAY THIS WHILE WENDY IS THINKING ABOUT THAT, EVERY YEAR WE HAD THIS ISSUE AND I'LL CHARACTERIZE IT THIS WAY, SINCE THE DROUGHT ENDED, WE HAVEN'T GONE A YEAR YET THAT WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO SPEND EVERYTHING ALLOCATED FOR WHAT WE'VE PLANNED FOR. SO THIS IS SCIENCE, IT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO BE ABLE TO PLAN FOR.

SO EVERY YEAR OUR PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR HAS TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO JUGGLE MONEY, HOW TO JUGGLE MONEY.

LAST YEAR IT WAS COVID SO WE HAVE PLANS FOR OUR PIPE BURSTING, WE HAVE PLANS FOR REPLACING SEWER PIPE, AND ALL OF THE DIFFERENT THINGS THAT WE DID.

AND THEN WE PULLED SOME OF THAT MONEY BACK IN CASE COVID WAS WORSE THAN WHAT WE THOUGHT. AND SO EVEN THOUGH WE'VE REALLOCATED THAT MONEY BACK OUT, EVERY YEAR IT'S BEEN SOMETHING LIKE THAT IN THE DROUGHT. SO I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE AN EXACT AMOUNT. BUT WHAT WENDY AND I TALK ABOUT FOR THIS RESERVE WOULD BE TO PROVIDE BOTH FOR EMERGENCY REPAIRS IF WE HAVE THEM SO THAT THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR, GARY, DOES NOT HAVE TO CHANGE HIS PLANS FOR THAT YEAR IF WE HAD AN EMERGENCY. AND IN CASE WE HAVE A REALLY WET YEAR OR WE HAVE DROUGHT RESTRICTIONS OR SOMETHING IN ANY GIVEN YEAR THAT MIGHT HELP US ECONOMICALLY IF WE DON'T SELL AS MUCH WATER AS WE PLAN FOR. SO TO ME I THINK THAT REALLY HELPS WITH THAT AND THERE MIGHT BE YEARS IT COMES DOWN AND IT GOES BACK UP AGAIN AND WE PLAN FOR IT.

MARTHA, YOUR QUESTION IS SPOT ON.

I JUST I DON'T KNOW THAT I CAN GIVE YOU AN ANSWER ON HOW MANY WATER BREAKS, HOW MANY WHATEVER EMERGENCIES THAT WE'VE HAD.

BUT I JUST KNOW EVERY YEAR IT'S BEEN SOMETHING AND WE'RE CONSTANTLY TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO COVER IT.

>> YEAH, AND IT'S ALWAYS BEEN A SCRAMBLE AND A JUGGLE TO TRY AND DO THAT AND TO ME IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S BEEN PRETTY CONSISTENT EVER SINCE I'VE BEEN ON COUNCIL THAT WE'VE HAD THOSE ISSUES COME UP AND YEAH, IT'S NOT FAIR TO GARY. WE JUST NEED TO ALLOCATE SOME FUNDS FOR THAT. WENDY, DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT

WOULD BE AN APPROPRIATE AMOUNT? >> WE HAD CALCULATED AND WERE THROWING OUT THERE TEN DAYS OF CASH.

THAT'S EQUIVALENT TO 943,000. >> YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I WOULD GO WITH IS WHAT THAT RECOMMENDATION IS.

>> YEAH. >> BECAUSE ONE SEWER LINE BREAKS, YOU DON'T KNOW HOW BAD THAT'S GOING TO BE.

IF IT WAS UNDER A ROADWAY, OH MY GOSH.

THAT COULD BE OVER A MILLION DOLLARS.

>> YEP. >> WE GOT LUCKY WITH THIS LAST ONE BECAUSE IT DIDN'T HAVE TO GO UNDER ROWLETT ROAD.

>> YES. >> SO IMAGINE HAVING TO SOLVE FOR A MILLION DOLLAR IMPACT ON THOSE BUDGET YEARS THAT WERE

ALREADY TIGHT. >> SO BLAKE, THAT DID HAPPEN BACK IN 2006 OR 7 WHEN OUR SEWER PIPE ALONG HIGHWAY 66 COLLAPSED.

>> YEAH, OUTSIDE OF WALGREENS. >> AND THAT WAS A PRETTY BIG DEAL. IT REALLY WAS.

AND WE HAD TO COME UP WITH THAT AT ONE TIME.

WE ENDED UP FINANCING IT BECAUSE WE COULD NOT COME UP WITH IT IN

CASH AT THE TIME. >> WOW.

>> SO WHAT IF WE SET ASIDE THE MILLION DOLLARS FOR CIP EMERGENCY FUND TO BE USED OPERATIONALLY.

>> YEAH. >> AND THEN THE REST WE PRESERVE AND WE GO THROUGH OUR RATE STUDY AND MAKE DECISIONS IN OUR NORMAL PERIOD OF TIME ON WHAT TO DO WITH FUTURE RATES?

>> I LIKE THAT. >> YEAH.

>> YES. >> DID WE HAVE A RATE STUDY

SCHEDULED FOR 2021? >> WE DIDN'T DO A RATE STUDY THIS LAST YEAR BECAUSE IT REALLY WAS EASY TO CARRY FORWARD.

BUT WE DO HAVE RATE STUDIES PLANNED FOR EVERY YEAR.

>> I KNEW WE DIDN'T DO ONE LAST YEAR.

>> WHAT WE'D LIKE TO DO IS EVERY THREE YEARS HAVE A FULL RATE STUDY AND JUST DO AN UPDATE IN THE INTERVENING YEARS.

LAST YEAR WE CHOSE JUST TO DO THE UPDATE.

[02:15:01]

SO WE'D PROBABLY LIKE TO DO ANOTHER FULL STUDY.

AND I CAN'T REMEMBER IF WE PUT IT IN THIS YEAR OR NEXT YEAR,

WENDY. >> WE PUT IT IN THIS YEAR, BUT THERE HAD BEEN DISCUSSIONS IS THREE YEARS TOO SOON, SHOULD WE GO FIVE YEARS AND JUST DO, THERE'S A LOT OF CITIES THAT GO WELL MORE THAN THREE YEARS TO DO THE FULL BLOWN RATE STUDY.

WE'RE PROBABLY A LITTLE AGGRESSIVE TO DO THREE YEARS BECAUSE WHENEVER WE DO HAVE THE CONSULTANT COME IN, HE DOES A VERY THOROUGH LOOK AND GIVES MULTIPLE SCENARIOS EACH YEAR JUST FOR THE ANNUAL UPDATE. BUT HE DOES RECOMMEND THAT WE DO DO THE FULL RATE STUDY, IT'S JUST EVERY THREE YEARS MIGHT BE

A LITTLE TOO AGGRESSIVE. >> AND I THINK MAYBE THIS IS JUST A NOMENCLATURE DISCUSSION BECAUSE HE'S STILL COMING IN AND ADVISING US BASED ON OUR RESERVE LEVELS AND OUR USAGE AND OUR COST WHAT OUR DIFFERENT OPTIONS ARE, WHAT WE COULD DO WITH FUTURE RATES TO HELP OUR RESIDENTS TO THE FULLEST EXTENT WE CAN EVEN IF IT'S NOT A FULL RATE STUDY.

>> RIGHT. >> MHM.

>> I'D GO FOR THAT. IF HE'S COMING IN AND DOING AN UPDATE ANYWAY. IF HE INCLUDED ALL OF THESE NEW FACTOR INS THAT STUDY, THEN THAT WOULD PROBABLY GIVE US A LOT OF GOOD INFORMATION TO MAKE DECISIONS ON FOR THIS NEXT

BUDGET YEAR. >> EVERYBODY OKAY WITH THAT

APPROACH? >> MHM.

>> SO MAYOR, JUST ONE CLARIFICATION.

SO WE HAVE ABOUT 2.8 MILLION TO WORK WITH.

WE'RE RECOMMENDING TO SET ASIDE TEN DAYS OF THE CASH, $943,000.

WE ALSO PROVIDED 31,000 IN RAISES JUST GOT THAT IN THERE.

AND THEN WE WOULD LIKE TO AT LEAST FUND THE COUNTRY ESTATES,

THE 260. >> THAT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA.

>> THAT'S GREAT. >> AND THAT WOULD LEAVE $1.5 MILLION FOR FUTURE RATE RELIEF OR WHATEVER COUNCIL WOULD

WANT TO DO WITH IT. >> YEP.

>> WE GOOD WITH THAT? >> YES.

>> YES. >> ARE THERE ANY OTHER

QUESTIONS, WENDY OR BRIAN? >> WE'VE COVERED A LOT TONIGHT AND YOU DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH THIS IS GOING TO BE A WEIGHT OFF OUR SHOULDERS BECAUSE THIS IS SOME GOOD NEWS THAT WE GET TO SHARE

WITH STAFF. >> THIS IS GREAT NEWS AND THIS IS NOT ONLY JUST GREAT NEWS FOR STAFF, IT'S GREAT NEWS FOR OUR

COMMUNITY. >> MHM.

>> YES. WITHOUT A DOUBT.

>> WENDY, IF WE MADE ANY MISTAKES, YOU'LL LET US KNOW?

>> I WILL. >> OR DON'T.

>> YEAH. >> UNLESS IT MEANS WE HAVE MORE

MONEY. >> OR JUST FIX IT.

IF WE MADE MISTAKES, JUST FIX IT.

ANYTHING ELSE, GUYS? ANYBODY?

>> THIS IS AN AWESOME THING. IT'S A GREAT PROBLEM TO HAVE.

I'LL PUT IT THAT WAY. >> YES, IT IS.

>> WE'RE JUST A LITTLE BIT SHORT OF WHAT WE WANT TO BE, AND THIS

TIME. >> AT LEAST WE'RE NOT LIKE THE STATE HAVING A HUGE DEFICIT TO CONTEND WITH.

>> UNTIL RICHARD BLOWS OUR BUBBLE AFTER HE DOES HIS

ANALYSIS. >> TRUE.

>> JUST TO SAY WE WILL LET EMPLOYEES KNOW TOMORROW, BUT WENDY AND RICHARD AND I AND STAFF WILL WORK ON THE DETAILS AND MAKE SURE WE CHECK EACH OTHER'S NOTES AND MAKE SURE WE'VE GOT THE RIGHT AMOUNTS. BUT I THINK WE DID PRETTY DARN WELL FOR AS FAST AS WE MOVED. AND WENDY IS PREPARING A BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR FEBRUARY 16TH. SO YOU MAY SEE MOST OF THIS STUFF BACK IN FRONT OF YOU THERE TO FORMALLY APPROVE BUDGET WISE.

BUT WE ARE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH LETTING EVERYBODY KNOW.

SO THANK YOU SO MUCH, COUNCIL. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU.

>> ONE MORE THING. FOR THE ROBUST ROUND FOUR, DO WE NEED TO PUT THAT ON A WORK SESSION SOON TO APPROVE THAT?

>> YES. >> CAN WE GO AHEAD AND SCHEDULE THAT BECAUSE WE'RE READY TO MOVE FORWARD ON IT.

>> ARE THEY GOING TO APPROVE THE RECOMMENDATION ON THE 3RD AND COME TO A WORK SESSION AFTER THE 3RD?

>> YES. >> OKAY.

>> AND YOU'RE GOING TO INCLUDE IN YOUR RECOMMENDATION SOMETHING

FOR THE NON-PROFITS? >> YEAH, WE'LL GET TOGETHER AND DO A ROUND FIVE FOR THE COED BEFORE THEY APPROVE THAT AND THAT WILL BE FOR THE NONPROFIT SPECIFIC.

>> GREAT. THANK YOU.

>> TAMMY, YOU LOOK CONFUSED? >> I WAS JUST THINKING.

HOW DID YOU KNOW? >> IT WAS ON YOUR FACE.

[02:20:02]

>> DON'T MAKE ME MOVE MY HEAD FAST.

I DIDN'T MEAN TO, I MADE A SUGGESTION ON LOST REVENUE FOR NON-PROFITS. BUT IF YOU GUYS FIND A BETTER

WAY TO DO THAT. >> THAT'S WHY WE JUST NEED TO TALK ABOUT IT. SO WE'LL TALK WITH COAD AS A GROUP AND GET TOGETHER WITH OUR SMALL COMMITTEE TOO AND FIGURE OUT IF THERE'S A PATHWAY THAT WE CAN DO THAT.

>> AND MAYBE IT'S X OR Y OR Z UP TO A MAX OF X DOLLARS SO THAT WE HAVE SOME FLEXIBILITY. I HATE TO BOX PEOPLE IN BECAUSE WE GOT THIS MONEY, WE NEED TO HELP OUR COMMUNITY.

>> MHM. >> IT'S NOT A TWO MINUTE SOLUTION SO WE NEED TO HAVE SOME WORK BEHIND THE SCENES AND FIGURE OUT WHAT THE BEST PATH IS.

>> YEAH. >> THAT WAS MY CONFUSION, BUT

THANK YOU. >> AND I HAVE ONE MORE THING JUST BEFORE WE CLOSE SO IT WON'T BE ON MY MIND ALL NIGHT WHILE I'M TRYING TO SLEEP. I HAD SOME THINGS LISTED FOR THE WATER AND SEWER FUND THAT WERE SOME PROJECTS THAT WERE FELT IF WE HAD EXTRA MONEY FOR CAPITAL WE COULD MOVE OUT OF THIS 1.5 MILLION THAT'S LEFT OVER OUR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS.

IF YOU JUST WANT TO KNOW THE LIST TO KNOW WHAT'S KIND OF ON THE MIND OF STAFF OF ADDITIONAL PROJECTS THAT ARE WANTING TO BE

FUNDED. >> WOULDN'T THAT BE OUT OF THE MILLION DOLLARS THAT WE JUST TALKED ABOUT.

>> YES, WELL NO THE EMERGENCY RESERVES WOULDN'T, BUT THIS IS LIKE ADDITIONAL ADDING TO THE CIP PROGRAM.

>> SO IT WOULD COME OUT OF THE 1.5?

>> YES. >> JUST SO WE'RE REALLY, REALLY CAREFUL ON OUR CONVERSATION HERE.

THIS MILLION DOLLARS DOESN'T NEED TO SIT IN RESERVES FOR YEARS AND YEARS, IT NEEDS TO BE USED FOR EMERGENCY PROJECTS OUT

OF CIP. >> IT WOULDN'T BE CONSIDERED EMERGENCY PROJECTS, THIS IS ADDITIONAL PROJECTS OUTSIDE OF AN EMERGENCY THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE ADDED TO THE CIP PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 21 AS AN OPTION. I DON'T BELIEVE IT WAS INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET, I JUST GOT THE FINAL LIST THIS MORNING.

>> I WAS WONDERING ABOUT THE MOVING SYSTEM AND WHERE DID THAT

FALL INTO THAT PROJECT NEED. >> THE WHAT, BLAKE?

>> THE WATER LINE MOVING SYSTEM WHERE YOU HAVE DEAD ENDS THAT CAUSES US TO HAVE TO FLUSH HYDRANTS ALL THE TIME AND SO BY CLOSING UP THOSE DEAD ENDS WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO DO THAT

ANYMORE. >> WHAT WAS THE LIST, WENDY?

>> I HAD SANITARY SEWER EVALUATION STUDY, IT'S MAKING IT A MORE ROBUST STUDY. AND THAT WAS 150,000.

LIFT STATION BACK UP POWER FOR 450,000 AND THEN A WISH LIST OF LIFT STATION REHABILITATIONS FOR $1 MILLION.

WE OBVIOUSLY COULDN'T FUND ALL OF THAT AND HELP THE RATES, BUT I'VE HEARD FROM TOM A LOT ABOUT THE SANITARY SEWER EVALUATION STUDY THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE MORE FUNDING FOR THAT.

AND I'M NOT SURE ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF THE LIFT STATION BACK UP POWER. I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT WORKS, BUT GARY IS ON HERE AND CAN EXPLAIN THAT IF YOU'RE INTERESTED.

>> WELL I KNOW IT'S BEEN A BIG ISSUE FOR MANY YEARS.

>> I CAN TELL YOU WHEN THEY DON'T HAVE POWER THEN WE GET REALLY NERVOUS AND WE CAN BE IN TROUBLE REALLY FAST.

>> THAT'S TRUE. >> TO ME THAT'S THE MOST IMPORTANT THING ON THAT WHOLE LIST.

>> YES. >> YES, WE HAVE 26 LIFT STATIONS AND ONLY FOUR HAVE BACK UP POWER.

SO NOT ALL OF THE LIFT STATIONS HAVE SPACE TO PUT A GENERATOR AND SOME ARE SMALL SO WE IDENTIFIED TEN OF THEM AND THEN WE GOT IT DOWN TO THE THREE MOST CRITICAL THAT WOULD FILL UP FAST. WHEN WE HAVE AN OUTAGE WE AUTOMATICALLY HAVE A PRIORITY LIST ARE WE GOING TO PUMP THIS ONE DOWN BECAUSE IT FILLS UP THE FASTEST, THE NEXT ONE PUMP IT DOWN. THEN WHEN WE GET TO THE THIRD WE'D HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE FIRST AND PUMP IT BACK DOWN.

SO THAT'S WHY THAT WAS ON THE LIST.

AND THEN WENDY MENTIONED THE SANITARY SEWER EVALUATION STUDY.

>> HANG ON, GARY, BEFORE YOU MOVE ON.

I APOLOGIZE IF YOU SAID, THAT WAS HOW MANY BACK UPS?

>> SO ON THE LIST SHOWN EARLIER. >> THREE?

>> YEAH. >> FOR $450,000.

>> SO THERE STILL WOULD BE A LOT THAT WOULD NOT HAVE BACK UP

POWER? >> THERE WOULD BE A LOT, BUT SOME OF THEM DON'T HAVE SPACE AND WILL NEVER HAVE ROOM FOR IT BECAUSE THEY'RE IN NEIGHBORHOODS.

THESE ARE MORE LIKE THE BIGGER WELLS THAT HAVE THE BIGGER PUMPS

[02:25:03]

WOULD BE MORE CONCERNED WITH AND BE A BIGGER LIABILITY.

BUT WE CAN'T REALLY KEEP UP WITH WHEN THE ELECTRICITY GOES OUT.

>> SO THESE ARE PERMANENT BACK UP?

>> CORRECT. >> OKAY.

>> AND THOSE LIFT STATIONS AT THOSE THREE LOCATIONS WILL NEVER

GO AWAY? >> THAT IS CORRECT.

>> AND THESE GENERATORS ARE THOSE REALLY LARGE CUMMINS

DIESEL POWERED GENERATORS? >> JUST LIKE THE ONE WE HAVE BUT

BIGGER. >> I AM IN FAVOR OF THIS BECAUSE I KNOW WHEN THESE START BACKING UP, IT'S A RACE BECAUSE IT'S USUALLY IN HORRIBLE WEATHER AND AND THEY'RE JUST FIGHTING THE ELEMENTS ALL OVER TOWN. SO I'M IN FAVOR.

>> YEP. >> I DON'T THINK IT'S EVEN A QUESTION OF IF WE SHOULD DO IT, I THINK WE NEED TO DO IT.

>> YEAH, I WAS GOING TO SAY I'M IN FAVOR OF THIS BUT I'D REALLY LIKE TO SEE A PLAN FROM PUBLIC WORKS FOR THE FUTURE OF HOW WE TAKE CARE OF AS MANY OF THOSE AS WE CAN EVEN IF WE DO ONE A YEAR WITH A GOAL OF HAVING A FULLY REDUNDANT SYSTEM WITHIN FIVE YEARS. BECAUSE FROM AN EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT STANDPOINT THIS IS ALMOST A MUST.

IT'S REALLY A PUBLIC HEALTH DANGER WHEN WE'RE NOT ABLE TO ADEQUATELY SERVICE THAT SYSTEM DURING A POWER OUTAGE.

>> GARY, HOW MANY OF THE TEN CANNOT HAVE ONE?

>> SO WE IDENTIFIED TEN THAT HAVE THE SPACE FOR ONE.

AS WENDY MENTIONED, IT IS A SAFETY, IF YOU HAVE ONE OVERFLOW FROM THESE ESPECIALLY IF IT GOES IN THE LAKE, IT'S A HEALTH AND

SAFETY ISSUE. >> SO BASICALLY IT'S $150,000 FOR A GENERATOR TO PUT ONE THERE AND SO OKAY.

>> I'M IN FAVOR OF IT. >> GARY, DID YOU SAY THAT ALL TEN THAT HAD THE ROOM FOR A GENERATOR NEED THEM OR -- OKAY.

>> THEY DO NEED THEM AND THE SMALLER UNITS WOULD BE MORE IN THE $50,000 RANGE BECAUSE THE WELLS ARE MUCH SMALLER AND THERE'S ONLY TWO PUMPS SO YOU DON'T NEED AS MUCH ELECTRICITY

TO GENERATE FOR THE PUMP. >> GOTCHA.

I AGREE WITH WHITNEY. IT WOULD BE NICE TO HAVE A PLAN AND SEE HOW WE CAN GET TO A REDUNDANCY LEVEL.

AND I'M IN FAVOR OF FUNDING THE ADDITIONAL SANITARY SEWER STUDY

AS WELL. >> I WAS GOING TO SAY DOES THAT PLAN, THAT WORK STUDY, INCLUDE THAT I GUESS YOU'D SAY PLAN ON THE NEED FOR INCREASING REDUNDANCIES IN OUR LIFT

STATIONS? >> THE SANITARY SEWER EVALUATION STUDY IS MORE FOR INFILTRATION AND INFLOW OF WATER IN YOUR SYSTEM. I'S THE EXITING OF THE SEWER GASES, CONDITION UNDER PIPES, SO THAT THE WASTEWATER MASTER PLAN THAT WOULD BE ADDRESSED IN THE LIFT STATIONS AND THE WELLS AND THE BACK UP POWER. ABOUT THAT, GARY, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT AT LEAST ONE OF THE REASONS FOR THE COLLAPSE THAT WE HAD MOST RECENTLY HAD TO DO WITH THAT SEWER GAS.

WOULD THAT GIVE US A WAY TO EVALUATE WHERE WE MIGHT BE AT RISK FOR THAT HAPPENING IN SOME OF OUR OTHER SEWER LINES?

>> EXACTLY. THE SANITARY SEWER SENDS THE CAMERA DOWN THE LINE, THEY DO SMOKE TESTING AND SMOKE TESTING SHOWS IF THERE'S A PERFORATED PIPE.

WE GOT SOME REPORTS AT MCDONALDS FOR SMELLS OF GAS AND THAT PIPE IS BEING REPAIRED RIGHT NOW. IT'S CAMERA LINES AND SMOKE TESTING. AND THEN ONCE WE GET THE REPORT WE IDENTIFY THE BIGGEST PRIORITIES.

>> IS IT LIKE CONDITION INDEX UNDERNEATH IN OUR PIPES?

>> THAT IS CORRECT. >> SO IT'S AN ASSESSMENT OF THE QUALITY AND WHERE THE REPAIRS ARE NEEDED?

>> IT'S AN ASSESSMENT AND THEN PRIORITIZING THE DOLLARS.

WE WANT TO KNOW THE CONDITION OF OUR ASSETS AND WE TALKED ABOUT REPAIRS, WE WANT TO DO THESE PREEMPTIVELY, SO WE CAN DO THEM ON OUR SCHEDULE AND BID THEM PROPERLY AND GET THEM DONE IN A

MORE TIMELY MANNER. >> HOW OFTEN IS A STUDY LIKE THAT DONE AND WHEN IS THE LAST ONE WE DID?

>> THE LAST ONE WAS DONE IN 2010.

TEN YEARS IN. YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO DO THEM EVERY

[02:30:01]

FIVE YEARS. >> THIS PLAN IS ALMOST I WOULD SAY MORE IMPORTANT THAN EVEN THE PCI STUDY BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO HAVE SEWER BUT YOU DON'T REALLY NEED A SMOOTH ROAD.

>> YOU'RE CORRECT. THE SEWER TO ME IS OUR BIGGEST

LIABILITY. >> WELL YOU'RE GETTING LOTS OF

LOVE RIGHT NOW, GARY. >> WELL THE SYSTEM NEEDS IT AND

SO DO I. >> I'M FOR THE 600 TO GO THAT

DIRECTION. >> ME TOO.

>> COUNCIL, IF WE DO THAT, WE'LL HAVE 939,000 LEFT SO RIGHT AT

STILL ALMOST $1 MILLION. >> YEAH.

>> WHAT DO Y'ALL THINK? >> PRETTY CLOSE TO IT.

>> YEAH. >> THIS TOOK CARE OF SOME NEEDS.

>> IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT. >> WENDY, YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE

THAT'S GOING TO KEEP YOU UP? >> I'M DONE.

>> YAY, WENDY CAN SLEEP TONIGHT. >> ANYONE ELSE WANT TO TALK

ABOUT WHY THEY CAN'T SLEEP? >> I'LL SLEEP JUST FINE TONIGHT.

>> I WILL. >> WE ALL DID SOME GOOD WORK TONIGHT. AND STAFF, YOU DID SOME GOOD WORK TO GET US READY. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. >> WE GOOD?

>> WE GOOD. >> WE GREAT.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.