City Commission - Regular Meeting

We'll now call to order the, whoa, July 13th, 2026, City of Evelyn, Kansas City Commission meeting. Shayla, may we please have a roll call?

Mayor Rimes.

Here.

Commissioner Taylor.

Here.

Commissioner Lytle. Here. Commissioner Kohlhoff and Meisenberger absent. Roll call is complete.

Okay. We can please stand for the pledge.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you.

All right, and our next item is approval of today's agenda.

I make a motion to approve agenda as written.

Motion has been moved and seconded. Do we have any commission discussion? Seeing none, I'm going to roll call vote. Vice Mayor Taylor?

Yeah.

Commissioner Kohlhoff? Aye. Commissioner Lytle?

Yes.

Myself, yes. Motion carries. Our next item is the consent agenda, which consists of the meeting minutes for the June 22, 2026 meeting, appropriation ordinance A-071326-26, and the AP payment register.

I make a motion to approve the consent agenda as written.

I'll second.

Motion has been moved and seconded. Do we have any commission discussion? Seeing none, we'll do a roll call vote. Commissioner Kuloff? Aye. Commissioner Lytle?

Yes.

Vice Mayor Taylor?

Yes.

Myself, yes. Motion carries. Our next item under heading 6, public comments communications, is 6A, a public forum. If there's anyone that would like to address the commission on an item not on our current agenda, they may do so at this time. Do we have anyone that would like to address the Commission on an item not on our current agenda? Seeing none, we will move to 6B, Designation of July as Parks and Recreation Month Proclamation. Whereas parks and recreation is an integral part of communities throughout this country, including Abilene, and whereas parks and recreation promotes health and wellness, improving the physical and mental health of people who live near parks, and whereas parks and recreation promotes time spent in nature, which positively impacts mental health by increasing cognitive performance and well-being, and alleviating illnesses such as depression, attention deficit disorders, and Alzheimer's, And whereas Parks and Recreation encourages physical activities by providing space for popular sports, hiking trails, swimming pools, and many other activities designed to promote active lifestyles. And whereas Parks and Recreation is a leading provider of healthy meals, nutrition services, and education. And whereas Parks and Recreation programming and education activities such as out-of-school time programming Youth sports and environmental education are critical to childhood development, and whereas parks and recreation increases a community's economic prosperity through increased property values, expansion of the local tax base, increased tourism, the attraction and retention of businesses, and crime reduction, and whereas parks and recreation is fundamental to the environmental well-being of our community, and whereas parks and recreation is essential and adaptable infrastructure that makes our communities resilient in the face of natural disasters and climate change, And whereas our parks and natural recreation areas ensure the ecological beauty of our community and provide a place for children and adults to connect with nature and recreate outdoors. And whereas the U.S. House of Representatives has designated July as Parks and Recreation Month, and whereas Abilene recognizes the benefits derived from parks and recreation resources. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the Abilene City Commission that July is recognized as Parks and Recreation Month in Abilene. Anybody here for it would like to come up and for a picture?

Everybody's here.

All right.

Ready? One, two, three. One. two three good job thank you

All right, now we'll move on to heading seven, unfinished business. First up is 7A, consider approval of an amended agreement with MidAmerica Sports for the construction of the sports complex. Parks and Rec Director Timbrook.

Yeah, I got it on here too. Thank you. Thank you. That's no problem.

Okay, good afternoon.

So what you have before you is an amended agreement. If you remember back in December, you approved an agreement with Mid-America Sports Construction for our ball field project. That still remains in effect. This one is amendment that is talking about the price and the scope. So after the design committee has been meeting with them since January, we've finalized our scope. We've worked with some local contractors. and just other ways to get our price down. And so where we've ended is at that price that you've been given. The price that is in the agreement reflects the total price minus the design fee. So if you remember in the original amendment or agreement, it was $230. 230,000 for design and engineering. So that we've already paid. So the final cost is what is in that agreement. So where we've landed is at a total of $4,475,500. And again, minus the 230,500 is the sum that's in that agreement that you've been given. The other thing that was changed since the packet went out was the contingency allowance. And it's basically just saying that the wording in there now is saying that the city has the final say in that. So if we need to take anything out of that contingency, it won't be done until we say so.

That contingency is part of the budget here, though?

Yes. We were able to get the netted backstops in this plan, the lighting and concrete that we were, those were the three big things we were trying to get costs down so that we could get those in and also the black vinyl fence instead of just chain links, so.

Yeah, and that's what I was going to ask you about, because I knew that there were some minor changes there with the concrete instead of asphalt. Yes, asphalt, yes. Netted backstops. It'll be much better, yeah.

Then there's a black fence or something that's... So the backstop will be an integrated wall and then netting up to the top.

Okay. Can you, I think it was on page three, very last, it's like the last real line of substance there. Why do we have zero retainage after 50%? I mean, the first 50% is the easy part. It's the last 50% that you need the retainage for.

We discussed that, Commissioner Kohlhoff. I'd be happy to answer that. So the way that this is set up is that retainage will be withheld on the first 50% of the value of the project. And then once we reach the 50% milestone, we will simply stop withholding retainage. So at the end of the project, the retainage will be half of what it was when the project reached the 50% milestone. So we're withholding 5% retainage up until the 50% point, and then we will simply stop. That does not mean we will release the retainage at the 50% milestone. We just will not accumulate anymore. So it will effectively go down to 2.5% at the time of substantial completion of the overall project.

Is that

spell that more clearly somewhere in the contract that i'm missing we the the retainage concept was negotiated and i believe included in the uh overall design build agreement that was approved in december we can double check but i did i did in the course of looking at this amendment cross-reference it to what the commission previously approved and it's consistent with that i don't want to misspeak but i i'm confident we discussed that concept with the design builder and that's everyone's intent i think it may go into more detail in the december agreement and as you you probably know this simply uh supplements and if necessary amends the overarching design build agreement we've already entered into to fill in any gaps So I think that there's a blank in here to restate the retainage concept. But since we already agreed on that, I was comfortable with how it read. But we can look back. And if we feel a need to clarify it, we certainly can. But that's the intent.

Anybody else have any questions on there? I've got a couple more I wanted to.

You're good to go ahead. Yeah, no, go shoot.

It looks like it contemplates the city managing certain subcontractors. Can you talk about that?

So we reached out. We did bidding for the dirt work to try to keep that local. So we'll be using McAfee dirt work. The lighting, we got bids for that. We were able to get pricing down doing it that way. And then the sewer and water lines will be done through the city. So those were the three main things that we would be subcontracting, but they will be managing everything with it. So basically we will just be paying them. They'll still be managing those portions of the project. So that works with timeline and everything like that.

Okay. It also says electric service. Is that?

Yeah, that's going to be separate too. That's getting electric basically from the rec out to where like the new concession building would be.

Basically, acting as a subcontractor on specific ones where you could more easily choose somebody local or sewer, water, electrical that's already tied.

Right, we can do that in-house, yeah.

Remind me where all the money's coming from.

This is all Rex sales techs.

And I don't know if you want to help me explain, but we have... From the general obligation temporary notes and then the recreation sales tax that's been accumulating.

So just so I'm clear, the bond amount was $4 million even. Is that correct? Yes. Okay. Kelsey, have we accrued any interest on that?

Yes, we have accrued interest on that. Currently, the interest is being placed in a separate fund. It has not been divvied out to the respective projects as of yet, but it is separate. And we have accrued interest, yes.

And we have brought in more than we anticipated with that too, so with the sales techs.

And do you know, I guess as it moves forward and there's interest being accrued on those temp note funds and the sales tax dollars are bringing in additional funds, which we expected, but when you're setting these, you want to be conservative on them. Are there any other, I guess, are there pieces to it that wouldn't fit in that original budget that are... being added on, or is that what's kind of getting eaten up with the concrete, the netted backstops, all of that?

Yeah, some of that has put us over the $4 million, but I mean, what did we start at? $6 million? And we've whittled it down to get to our $4 million, and then we knew we were going to have to fundraise or do something to get, I mean, like the concession restroom building, we're going to have to fundraise to get that. But we were able to whittle things down and then with our extra coming in and the interest able to cover that. And that's not using all of that that's there either.

Based on the numbers that Kelsey's been tracking for us, the funds coming in have been anywhere from $51,000 to $56,000 a month, which is considerably more than the $4 million that are bonded.

Right.

So over the 10-year period, I think we're looking conservatively upwards of bringing in six to six and a half million dollars-ish. I might be somewhere in there. So it's considerably conservative on the bond.

I'm sorry to interrupt. What's the full depth?

That I don't know. Do you know off the top of your head? I don't either. Obviously it's not.

I'm sorry, I'm not hot here. It's not permanent, so we won't know, but do we have kind of a rough projection on that?

No, not off the top of my head. Since these are temporary obligation notes that the city also borrowed the interest, you really won't know what that debt service is until you issue those bonds in 2029.

And what have we accumulated in that fund so far? You said it's about $50,000 a month, and that's just under nine months?

Yes, about 50,000. I don't know if the nine month is correct because you're on a two month behind from when it actually goes into effect. So I'd have to double check and I don't have those numbers with me. Um, but yes.

And the city's financial advisor, uh, estimated the tax revenues to make sure that, okay, this is what we estimate you'll generate from this recreation sales tax. So this is what you're able to issue as temporary notes. That's where the 4 million came from is my understanding. And that sales tax revenue is exceeding those expectations.

With regards to the interest from both the collected sales tax and the bond interest, is there a requirement that those be applied to this project, or are those just going to the general fund?

They are currently going into our debt service fund, all of the interest. But I do have calculations for how they would be split up if that was the direction how we chose to do it.

So we've got the freedom to put that wherever we want, but currently the plan is to apply those to each respective project in that bond.

Right now they're going into debt service. One of the discussions that Kelsey and I've had is there's no formal direction from the city commission that we can find that designates where any interest is. is designated to. Over the years, it's been applied to various places. So one of the things we plan on bringing back to you is a policy for your consideration of where, for example, interest on EIDL funds, where should that go? So we have some direction based on commission direction as opposed to what we think is good for that month. So your answer right now is all going to debt service. Bond and interest, yeah. All going to bond and interest from those temporary notes.

So with those additional amounts that are coming in, if those were, I guess, if there were any cost overruns for the project, those would obviously be able to help cover those because we've only got the $4 million currently earmarked for it.

Mm-hmm.

shouldn't be any project over and with approval today the plan will be to get started moving dirt the middle to end of August and then with completion next June of 2027

Do you have the visual layout for what this plan entails?

I can email it out to you all. I think we'll put a post up once it's approved, given some timelines to the public and what it's going to look like and all of that.

Any further questions for Kelly or staff?

I guess my question is relative to what we had hoped for on, let's say, day one of this project, where are we at?

Meaning what?

Just the scope of the project, I guess, mostly.

Well, I think we've exceeded what we originally went in at. When we very first got initial numbers, just everything we wanted, We're not sure if we could get the four fields. We've got to where we can get the four fields. Being able to do the lighting, the backstop netting, the concrete, all of that is huge, I think, for where we're at money-wise and just getting the extra help we've got.

Any further questions for Hillier staff?

Is this something that we can approve today so we can get the contractors turning dirt? That would be my recommendation would be to approve today. I know that the committee has been through months of meetings. We've been waiting on permitting from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which is always known to be the long-term goal. And during that time, it's been giving us a lot of time to refine a lot of the decisions that go into building a project this size. And working with Mid-America, we've been able to find out what works in other communities and what doesn't. And I think... Working with local contractors, we've been able to do a good job of saving money there on the dirt work and specifically the city doing the utilities. I mean, that was a couple hundred thousand dollars saved right there. So I'm fully comfortable in approving this today. And I'll make a motion to consider the approval of the amended agreement with Mid-America Sports for the construction of the sports complex. I'll second.

Motion has been moved and seconded. Do we have any commission discussion? Seeing none, I'm going to roll call vote. Commissioner Lytle?

Yes.

Vice Mayor Taylor?

Yes.

Commissioner Koloff?

Aye.

Myself, yes. Motion carries. Our next item is 7B, consider the repeal of the City of Abilene industrial land funding policy. Interim City Manager Quinday? Aye.

As we've discussed previously at a work study session, I believe on two occasions, the commission directed staff to bring back this policy for your consideration to repeal it completely. And that's what we're asking.

I'd make a motion to repeal the City of Abilene industrial land funding policy. I will second.

Motion has been moved and seconded. Do we have any commission discussion? Seeing none, would a roll call vote? Vice Mayor Taylor? Yes. Commissioner Koloff? Aye. Commissioner Lytle?

Yes.

Myself, yes. Motion carries. Our next item is 7C, Downtown Lofts Development Agreement Status Update and Commission Direction.

Staff is requesting policy direction from the commission regarding the administration of the current Downtown Lofts Development Agreement that was executed in April of 2024. The contractual deadline for commencement of construction was passed, that was July 1 of 2024. Staff requested an update on the project. information identification of issues and a proposed path towards compliance. We received a letter from the developer explaining the circumstances affecting the project requesting an amendment to the development agreement and to vote proposing a revised milestone based project scheduled by the completion of their community development block grant. They received the project with the county as a sponsor. On May 11th, we acknowledged the developer's response and requested a meeting to discuss the proposal, some permitting and code compliance issues that were mentioned in verbal conversation, project sequencing, and the framework for a possible amendment that could be presented to the commission. On June 5th, after not receiving any response, staff set up follow-up correspondence requesting a response by June 19th. at the date of July 6 and even today we have not received a response to schedule a meeting and discuss the information bring a proposed amendment to the City Commission. The purpose of the correspondence was to determine whether a mutually acceptable path existed for bringing the project into compliance with the agreement. Well, the developer initially expressed a desire to pursue an amendment that we've not received a response request for a meeting or additional information. So we believe the matters reached a point where further administrative action should occur only with direction from the city commission. And the development agreement is a contract approved by the governing body. Decisions regarding the continued discussions or an amendment of the agreement or the pursuit of contract remedies are appropriately matters for the city commission. The consider and provide staff direction. So in determining how to proceed, the Commission may wish to consider whether additional time should be afforded to the developer to respond to the request for information and re-engage with the City, whether or not City staff's administrative efforts to facilitate discussion regarding a potential amendment to have been sufficient, whether to pursue contractual remedies that are in the City's best interest, or any other considerations the Commission deems relevant to the administration of the agreement. We're asking for his direction from the city commission. What would you like us to do next?

I'm the developer on this project. I'd like to say a few words, if I may. Good afternoon, Commission. I want to start by addressing the staff memo regarding communication. In my May 5th letter, I promised to make an open communication and establish firm dates once the grant timeline became clearer and I had relevant information to share. Currently, our architect is preparing the bid plans for Dickinson County, who is acting as the official applicant and sponsor of the CDBG application. Because that process is still ongoing, I simply do not have a concrete timeline update to provide yet, which is why I have not reached out to schedule a meeting. I want to assure you that my lack of recent updates, not a lack of commitment, but simply a lack of new information to report. My position on this project remains substantially the same as what I outlined in my detailed letter on May 5th. I think that was included in the packet. Hopefully you got a chance to read through that. I want to emphasize that this redevelopment, as it was when we applied, is still fundamentally reliant on a comprehensive tax incentive stack. Just to throw some acronyms at you here, we've got RHID, CDBG, HPTC, KHITC, and all those are absolutely vital to the success of this project. It's also important to note that the RHID never negatively affects the city. The city only ever wins from the RHID. I'm the only loser for this project because the timeline's already started and the incentives that I get start when that clock starts. The city will get its incentives at the end of that RHID period at the end of the 25 years. So I just want to make that perfectly clear. There's no detriment to the city for kind of the extended timeline for development on this. I am fully committed to this project. However, I'm not going to make a poor financial decision. I think I shared with this group at some point that the initial bids came back literally $1 million higher than what the architect estimated, and it was simply not feasible even with that incentive stacks. Uh, further we have the CDBG project. Um, again, I think the timeline's in your, your letter there. We're going off my script a little bit here, but that was applied for in, I believe March of last year and was supposed to be awarded in September. It was awarded in March. And then there's this ping pong of, um, back and forth between the County and the state. Um, totally new to me. I think Julie, you did some CDBG projects. I think you probably know what I'm getting into here, but, um, So now the project, as I understand, there's a bid process or a bid plans that the architect is developing, which will be presented to the county. And at that point, they'll be able to open up the bids and put that out. And again, once we have those, I think that starts the timeline. I don't think there is. I don't think there's any delay from when the county gets those to when they're able to just hear it at a county meeting and move forward. So that'll be able to open up the CDBG process. project with again timelines i believe there's a 30-day bid period on that but after that 30 days it can be awarded immediately in my understanding um I do agree that an amendment to the April 24 development agreement is necessary. At this point, I'm still not comfortable saying, hey, this is a timeline that I can commit to. Obviously, we haven't gotten the bids back or the timelines from the GC or any subs on that project, but I am willing to refer my commitment to moving forward on the project and finding a path forward once we have the pieces in place to do that. Thank you.

Yeah, my thoughts on it were, it's obviously a project that's very beneficial to downtown is something that I want to see happen. So I'm fine just still administratively working through it and, and I do really appreciate that other additional context to that. There's just so many moving pieces with all the different incentive programs. And when you're going from the county to the state back and forth 16 times, it takes up a lot of time. So I'm still supportive of the project and would like to just continue working administratively to, I guess, until we get to the point where we can have hard numbers to amend the contract. But I think it's still a worthwhile cause to pursue.

I'll second that there's a lot of moving parts and pieces and there's, uh, we know that. Working with state and local governments that have to agree with each other. Is going to take exponentially longer than, um. You know, just going straight to the source and getting an approval. So I'm definitely with. Brandon on this 1, and I'd like to just say the city just try to support this cause as much as possible. It's very beneficial to the community and I. No, it's no easy task to develop a project of. The size and scope with this many people and entities and bureaucracies involved.

I guess I don't need both of these.

Double mic.

Yeah. Staff supports the project as well. This is just an agreement that went beyond its time and the letter we received said that we're prepared to routinely update the city on the CDBG progress along with our coordinated timeline to the city commission for review and approval. I completely understand the working parts, but it The direction from the commission is just wait for Mr. Kolhoff to reach back out to us. We'll put this on the shelf until it does.

That's where I'm at. Yeah, just like. Perfect.

Anything further on that one? Okay. We'll move into heading eight, new business, 8A, consider approval of ordinance number 26-3484, an ordinance authorizing the consumption of alcoholic liquor in a specified portion of the public alley between North Broadway Street and North Spruce Street in Abilene, Kansas, and approving the temporary closure of the alley in connection with a special event hosted by Racket's Taphouse, Inc. on July 25th, 2026. City Clerk Moore, is this coming to you? Yep.

Mayor and Commissioners, this is an event that had to be rescheduled due to the weather. So it wasn't included in the original ordinance that you approved a few months back. Again, the state requires this ordinance because of the closure of the alley. So just need this so they can move on to get their extension from the state.

I'd make a motion to approve ordinance number 26-3484, an ordinance authorizing the consumption of alcoholic liquor in a specified portion of the public alley between North Broadway Street and North Spruce Street in Abilene, Kansas, and approving the temporary closure of the alley in connection with a special event hosted by Rackett's Tap House on July 25th, 2026.

I'll second.

Motion has been moved and seconded. Do we have any commission discussion? Seeing none, we'll do a roll call vote. Commissioner Kulhoff? Aye. Commissioner Lytle?

Yes.

Vice Mayor Taylor? Yes. Myself, yes. Motion carries. Our next item is 8B, consider approval of Resolution 071326-1, a resolution authorizing the submission of an application to the United States Department of Agriculture Rural Development for a Rural Business Development Grant to establish a Rural Business Accelerator Program. CVB Director for the week's.

Julie Roller Weeks, Tourism Director. We had the opportunity to work with Dickinson County Economic Development on a rural business development grant offered through USDA. We went through the entire process, partnered also with Dickinson County Economic Development, got ready to submit, and because of so much turnover in our community, Nobody had the correct login. The city had the login. And so we did submit this grant under the city of Abilene. You would have an opportunity to review everything. It does not commit the city of Abilene to any resources. We applied for almost $100,000 to help businesses in our region. But we do need a resolution of support if you're so willing to support the application.

Yeah, I think I saw this and I know with some of the stuff I mentioned earlier, I've been in a similar position. But I would say if you or any community members need that in the future, that's the perfect opportunity for an emergency meeting and be more than happy to convene for... We were on...

On Tuesday, when it was due, we were hoping to get some additional logins, but the city has maintained all of our information. And so as a good partner to economic development and the community in general that was submitted, we will go back and if you approve the this resolution, but given your favorable comments to supporting economic development and businesses in our community, and without allocating any resources from the city of Abilene, we did submit that, but would appreciate your support for this application. Natalie did an amazing job on the application. We had over a half dozen letters of support from area businesses. It would have been really just heartbreaking to say, oh, we can't apply because we don't have a login.

Can you tell us more about the program and kind of what it will do?

I'm going to let Natalie explain it.

I wasn't prepared to speak today. I just wanted to be supportive. For about the last three years at Economic Development, as I work with some of these rural businesses in the rural communities, a lot of times a business will come to me with some issues or some problems, and most times it's too late for me to do anything about it. We do a great job of providing startup or expansion resources, but there is a gap that we need to fill of small businesses and entrepreneurs who don't have the time to really work on their businesses. We need to provide them with what I want to call, we'll initially give them an assessment to find out their financial health, their marketing health, all of those kind of different things that apply to a business. And then we'll connect them with industry experts or consultants to give them the opportunity to fix what might be holding them back so that they can grow or they can expand or they can add workforce or jobs. taking the stress off of those small businesses. And not only that, but we'll meet them where they are. Instead of requiring them to go to some class for five nights a week, we'll meet them in their business. And this will also require part-time, what I'm calling a business liaison. And we'll also be working with other counties in the area. A lot of these projects require regional collaboration. And I feel like that's one of my assets is being able to collaborate regionally. So it will serve probably about three counties in general. And then our county alone will help with what we call implementation funds. So if they meet with a consultant and they find that they need a software, they need a tool, or they should probably have a POS system because they're doing it on an Excel spreadsheet or a calculator isn't really effective, then we can offer those implementation funds to help implement whatever the consultant recommends. Any other questions?

Thank you for doing this.

The requirement is you have to have 50 or less employees and make under $100 million gross revenue. Thank you.

Thank you. Any further questions on this item?

No. I make a motion to approve Resolution 071326-1. Resolution authorizing the submission of the application to the United States Department of Agriculture Rural Development for a Rural Business Development Grant to establish a Rural Business Accelerator Program.

I'll second. Motion has been moved and seconded. Do we have any commission discussion? Seeing none, we'll do a roll call vote. Commissioner Lytle?

Yes.

Vice Mayor Taylor?

Yes.

Commissioner Koloff? Aye. Myself, yes. Motion carries. Our next item is 8C, 2027 Budget Levying Funds.

As the mayor said tonight, we're presenting the proposed 2027 budget for property tax supported funds. But before we begin, I want to provide a little context for the budget you're about to see. The budget that we're presenting is the culmination of nearly two years of work. It didn't begin at the beginning of this year with the development of 2027 budget. It began in July of 2015. when the city implemented immediate cost control measures after recognizing that its financial challenges have developed over many years and will require a disciplined multi-year recovery strategy to resolve. Those initial actions, including a citywide hiring freeze, significant reductions in department operating expenses, and a deferral of capital projects and equipment replacement, were intended to stabilize the city's finances. slow the depletion of reserves and establish a foundation for long-term financial recovery. Since then, every department has continued to examine its operations, identify efficiencies, and make difficult trade-offs to reduce costs while maintaining essential public services. The proposed budget before you today reflects the common cumulative result of those efforts. It represents the second year of a long-term financial recovery strategy and continues the disciplined approach the Commission began during the development of last year's budget. Oh, she gave me a clicker. So the bottom line, I had a colonel tell me in the military, although he was a Marine and I was in the Army, just tell me the bottom line up front, and you can give me the details later. The proposed levy is 50.271 mils. You may think, well, we talked about 48.039 mils. What this includes is a 27th payroll. That occurs about every 11 years in entities that have biweekly payrolls. So that's something that when we presented the valuation and discussed that with the commission that I was unaware of is the 27th payroll. So that's the reason for a 2.232 increase from the 48 mils last year. The assessed valuation grew 3.2%. And then the 2026 municipal cost index, you may remember last year when we were developing the budget, municipalities may, but they shouldn't use CPI or the consumer price index, people often refer to as inflation, because that gauges household goods, things that homes or households or families purchase and services they purchase. What municipalities, counties, states should use to get a more accurate picture of municipal cost inflation is the employment cost index, the producer price index, which are goods and services that local government purchases and uses, and the construction cost index, which covers things like capital projects and for municipalities like abling infrastructure, those types of things. When you use all three of them, you have to weight those. Based on past budgets, I weighted those at 60% for personnel. I'm sorry, 60% to the employment cost index, basically personnel costs, 25% to the producer price index, and 15% to the construction cost index. And for the past 12 months, that is averaged 4.3%. So test valuation grew 3.2%, but the municipal cost pressure index rose 4.3%. But even with that, the general fund operating expenses in this proposal are $5,000 less. Didn't seem like a lot, but in my house, $5,000 is a lot less than 2026. What's included in this budget is a 3% cost of living adjustment that the commission said that that was something they wanted. A one-time 27th payroll, as I mentioned, occurs about every 11 years. And a projected 15% increase in employee health insurance costs. Operating expenditures decreased despite that COLA, the health insurance cost, at a one-time 25%. 15% health insurance estimate. I had somebody ask me if the operating expenditures decreased, then why would the levy increase? Because the budget includes a COLA, a 27th payroll, and a projected 15% increase in health insurance costs. Plus, personnel benefits are now shown in a separate fund for transparency, but department operating expenditures nevertheless decrease through continued cost management. If you take a look here, this is just a portion of what's in your packet. But this is the meat and potatoes of property taxes. You can see that in 2026, the general fund levied 34.544 mills. That included everything, including personnel benefits. We asked the commission to establish a personnel benefits fund to make it more transparent and easier to track over multiple years where those costs are going. The debt service decreased, which is a great thing. The library is proposed at 8.22 mills, which is the cap established by ordinance. The airport, which had no levy in 2026, is 0.75 mills. Fire apparatus dropped slightly from 2.4 to 2.41, and capital improvement for a second year has no levy for it. And then personnel benefits fund previously had no levy, and in 27 is 21.130 mills. You may also notice there on the bottom, which this is the bottom part of what's in your packet, that the net expenditures in 27, as proposed, have decreased by half a million dollars. You can see there on the bottom. From $18,758,000 to $18,259,000. Any questions so far? Simple question. Is that 4.3% of um inflation is that but they did on a yearly basis uh for as far as us yeah i'm not sure what they did before in 20 um for the 26 budget this one we used a number and i believe it was the high threes or the low fours that what we built in and that was the reason that we went to the 47 mils So some budget restraint measures that were undertaken by city staff. And it's another question that I'm often asked is whether staff look for reductions before recommending a levy that's above revenue neutral. And the answer is yes. In fact, that process began in July of 25 and has continued throughout development of both the 26 and 27 budget. This slide highlights some of those more significant projects and purchases that were deferred A complete list of deferred items is included in your budget packet and those are identified by a big red X that's wrong as in moving across. We defer to put another $210,000 in equipment replacement this is above and beyond 2026 is deferrals and $450,000 in capital improvement projects. This budget as proposed only funds one patrol vehicle and the lease purchase of the street sweeper which were obligated to. while postponing numerous other equipment needs and capital projects. These projects are not overlooked or forgotten. They were consciously deferred after considerable discussion amongst the department directors who concluded that maintaining essential services and continuing the city's financial recovery has to take precedence. Many of these projects would unquestionably improve city operations, but responsible financial stewardship sometimes requires delaying worthwhile investments until the organization is in a stronger financial positions. These are the kinds of decisions that your department directors make regularly that rarely receive public attention, but they represent the discipline financial management that has made it possible to present the proposed budget before you today. I wanted to give a special thanks to the work of the department directors, supervisors, and line workers for looking at every possible way to cut costs. This one is why financial recovery matters. This illustrates why a multi-year financial recovery strategy is necessary, which I mentioned, I believe, in August of 25. My six months has gone a little longer than anticipated. The graph on the left shows the city's total mill levy over the past several years. Although the proposed 27 levy is above revenue neutral, it remains below the city's average levy during the four years preceding implementation of revenue neutral. The graph on the right tells the more important story. As the city repeatedly maintained revenue neutral while the cost of providing services continued to increase, general fund reserves steadily declined and by the end of 2025 unencumbered reserved had fallen well below the minimum reserve level established by the city's adopted financial policies. Those declining reserves reduce the city's ability to respond to emergencies replace aging equipment maintain public facilities and invest in infrastructure. It also resulted in the continued deferral of maintenance and capital replacement projects, many which remain unfunded today. For example, the pool roof leaks, public works building leaks. Those were deferred because we just can't afford to do them. I didn't bring it up here, but everything that was pushed back is in your packet. Think of another one would be a planer for the street, for street maintenance, those types of things. So the city's adopted financial policies establish a target for the general fund reserve of at least 15%, but no more than 25% of annual revenues. So for 2027, that would be approximately $840,000 as a minimum, or $1.3 million as a maximum. As shown on the graph, the city has fallen well below the minimum in recent years. The lesson from the slide is straightforward. Maintaining the revenue neutral rate for several years and not cutting expenses did not maintain the city's financial condition. It eroded it. The proposed budget continues the second year of the city's financial recovery strategy by rebuilding reserves, restoring flexibility, and placing the organization on a long-term financial footing path while maintaining the spending discipline reflected throughout the presentation. But if you look, the blue shaded area, it's not showing up on the TV on the left. Those blue, on the left side, the blue box shows the years when the city adopted a revenue neutral. budget. The red line there on the left side, that is the average mill levy prior to the city starting to adopt revenue neutral. The average then was 50.869 mills with a high of 51.5 during that time frame and a low of 50.187. So what we're asking solely because of the 11th, 27th payroll, is 50.71. Otherwise, we would have come to you with 48.039 of what we said in June. But you can also see, and I say this as more than any of those graphs, the one on the right, at the same time that you went revenue neutral, your reserve dropped. The red line indicates what the minimum we should have as a reserve. the 2027 budget and the green is the maximum we should have. So the question is, well, those years were well above in those reserves. What did we do with them? The city's financial policy says that if we have more reserves than what we're supposed to, then here are certain things that you'll do with them. And I'd like to just go over those. says of the fund balance at the year exceeds the established target then the cons. City Commission may consider developing a plan of use for the unanticipated available funds in accordance with the following guidelines. One time expenditures which do not substantially increase recurring operating cost. Newly identified or previously unfunded capital improvement projects considered in light of the full program. shifting of capital projects from bond or lease financing to pay as you go, startup expenditures for a new program undertaken at mid-year, provided that such action is considered in the context of revenue expectation expenditures in future budget years, or transfers to capital improvement and equipment reserve funds. From what I can tell, looking at the budgets for those years, that was not done. What was done is we just lowered the levy and use those reserves until they're almost empty. So this one, where your property tax dollars go, I think I sent you an email, but I wanted to publicly thank Kelly Olson for creating this and another page. This will show anybody that goes to the URL, and once I'm done with my presentation, I think she has QR codes is what they're called, where they can take a picture. Do you want to?

Yeah, go ahead.

So this one here is where your property tax dollars go. So if you see there, and Kelly, I have to scroll down, but if you enter the appraised value of your property, then it's assessed at 11.5%. That's not set by the city. That's set by the state constitution, which means that your assessed rate would be $23,000. Your property taxes then would be $3,730. And I have to scoot up because I can't see them.

But of that $3,700, 1,100 of that is the city of Adelaide portion. So of that $3,700, if you had a $200,000 residential home, $1,100 of that is estimated for the city's portion.

Can you scroll up, keep on going? So where does that money go of that $3,000 I just said? Approximately $1,200 goes to the school district. Another $1,160 goes to Dickinson County. $914 goes to the city. $191 goes to the Abilene Public Library. $78 to the rec commission. $46 to the hospital. $40 to the Chisholm Trail. $35 to the state of Kansas and $37 to the Abilene Cemetery District No. 1. A lot of times you'll see people say, well, my tax bill is $3,700. The city's taking too much money. Well, out of that, we're seeing $900. Can you keep on scrolling? So out of that $900 that I just showed you, where does that go? Well, $266 goes to the police, $192 to fire, $106 to streets and alleys, $100 to administration, $64 to parks, $34 to court, $30 to community development, $22 to... Inspection. I'm sorry. Buying weed and flood maintenance. 19 to inspection. $6 goes to the senior center. $4 to the civic center. $3 to the land bank and $3 to the pool. Go ahead, Kelly. There you go. So when you look at your whole tax bill, you'll see there it says City of Abilene 39.732. and you have the public library. This is for your 2026 budget. But it shows you, it just lost it, or I lost it. Anyhow, you can go to that website. And there's a QR code for you. You put in the property. And it'll show you exactly how much goes to each tax entity. There's a bunch of them. It's not just the city. And then what goes to the city, how much goes to fund public safety or the library or the parks or those types of things. She also has another page, which we can send you an email to. And the QR codes will be up there. But it explains city finances, why we're why we do what we do, how we get our revenue, right there. This is a great resource for the public and a refresher for commissioners on, you know, why do we budget? What's the general fund? Where does that money come from? What does he mean when he says enterprise funds and money be transferred between them? Do we keep money in reserves? What is the policy? What are special purpose funds? How are decisions made? What's capital? So everything that we talk about through the year, people can go through and take a look and gives them an answer, and if they have any questions beyond that, they can call any of us and we'll be more than happy to explain it to them. Here's another example. This one's not as pretty. I made it, not Kelly. She does a good job at making things. But at a flat levy, what we talked about in June of 48039, if you had a $200,000 house, your property taxes for the city share would be $1,104. If the commission were to adopt a budget at 50.271, that would be $1,156, or a $51 increase for the year, or if people budget by the month, $4.28 additional a month. If you have a much nicer home, you can see there that it would be $60 a year, or if you have a home that's $100,000, which that's just as nice, $25 or $2 a month. So next, you have the proposed budget for the levying funds. What we're asking the commission to do now, first it's the next item you'll have will be a resolution of intent to exceed revenue neutral. Unless we stayed at revenue neutral, which that number is 46 mils, I believe, which would require us to cut an additional $300,000 or $400,000, you would have to pass this intent to exceed revenue neutral. It does not mean that by passing the intent does not mean that that's what you're going to levy. That is notifying the county clerk so she can notify every taxpayer that this is the city's intent to levy up to this amount. Now, between now and when you adopt the budget in September after public hearings, that number can go down. It just can't go up. So in effect, what you're doing by adopting a revenue intent to exceed R&R is you're setting a cap. You're saying, OK, you can't go any higher than this is where we're at. So the budget before you is a product of hundreds of individual decisions made over the past two years. Many of those involve postponing worthwhile projects delaying equipment replacement and finding savings within department operations before recommending any increase in property tax levy. It's important to note that the city employees also pay property taxes and while there is still work ahead this proposed budget continues to discipline financial recovery strategy. The commission began last year and positions the city to continue rebuilding its long-term financial stability. So what's next agenda item is we will ask you to adopt an intent, a resolution of intent to exceed revenue neutral with that 50 mils in there. We have to provide that to the county clerk by July 20th. And then between now and July 20th, we will finalize all funds, budgets, and bring those to you. You would have a revenue neutral hearing, I believe on September 14th at four o'clock, followed by a budget hearing And then that'd be the last time you can make changes to the budget. You cannot go any higher. You can always reduce. And then we would ask you to adopt the budget. Is there any questions?

So from the differences from the 48 to the 50.17 is a 15% projected increase of renewal for health. When are the renewals? When will we know? At the end of July.

That 50.271 is not the health insurance increase. It's just that 27th payroll, correct?

Yes, it's 0.32 mils going from the 48 to the 39.

Yeah, it's just the 27th payroll. That is only the 27th payroll.

And actually, if you do the math, it's less than that because we've reduced spending elsewhere.

Okay. And as far as the 15% renewal for health, is that figured in this capital? Yes. Okay. Do we know what proportion that is? No. Okay.

It looks like in this budget, you've broken out a lot of the labor costs from the departments. Can you maybe send us a memo for how that all breaks down?

I'm not sure what you're asking. It breaks down to how.

Well, so we've got the personnel benefits fund that is in the proposed budget for 2027, which is not in the budget for 2026.

Correct.

Correct. And then the general fund is going down. But if you look at the police and fire, those are, I think where it's the most obvious, um, those budgets are going down. It looks like $300,000 for police and maybe 250 something for fire. So it's, it looks to me like you're moving money from each individual administrative body to to that personnel benefits fund so i'm wanting to know what amount of that personnel benefits fund is being allocated to each division so how much of the that goes to police how much of that goes to correct right yeah that's uh that's easy to do okay And I guess I'm a little, I need a refresher on this one. We've got the expenditures for the rec commission, which has its own taxing authority, which I think is under the school district. Why does that show up on our expenditures and not on the school districts?

That I couldn't tell you. I am not familiar with why the school district graded the entity. Kelly's standing up in the back.

I think you got some reinforcements.

Well, again, we're the only rec commission in the state that operates this way. We are a city... department as far as parks side of it and the rec employees are part of the rec commission which the rec commission gets the funds yes from this USD tax again but we are payroll through not through the city I mean we are we're payroll through the city but our rec side pays the rec employees general fund for the city pays the parking employees

I'm going to ask you again next year. Thank you. I don't know if this is the best time here, but I did see a library budget here. And I know there's some deadlines from some emails. I didn't know if we wanted to have the library give us a couple of minutes update on what they were wanting.

Was that the end? I guess what was the intent for that?

We love the maximum out that they're allowed that should allows the library for that ask for any amount that they want and the city must fund that unless it's limited by law live in 2019 the city commission adopted an ordinance 21 one of those years that limits it to 8.2 2 mils that's what we included in this budget.

I guess I would like to hear from the library. My understanding is they've got a meeting and some deadlines that they're up against also, if you wouldn't mind. Wendy, I'm kind of putting you on the spot.

Wendy Moulton, library director. I'm not prepared to present the 2027 budget to you today. The library board will be looking at that tomorrow at our meeting. I asked if they needed it earlier, and I didn't hear back about that. So we kept it on our schedule for this is our first meeting since the evaluations came out is tomorrow. So that's when it's on the schedule for the library board to approve. So any numbers that are in your packet today or not approved by the library board. I don't know if any library board president is here or if they have any other comments on that, but that's just where we're at. So we will have that hopefully approved tomorrow unless there's some problem with that. And the library board will ask for the mill levy as they determine and also the associated motor vehicle taxes that go with that, like all the other funds. And if anybody in the meetings open to the public tomorrow as well, or if anybody has any questions after that submitted and we're happy to present it on the 27th as well and answer any other questions that you might have.

Because the city is required to levy whatever the library board asked for unless limited by law, which it is at 8.22 mills. Unless the library were to come and ask the commission to change the ordinance and increase that, whatever their budget is, that's their budget. We just levy the 8.22 mills, what the county distributes next year, based on the valuation, which is certified in November, and the 8.22 mills that gets distributed There's also motor vehicle taxes, recreational vehicle taxes, pilots, those types of revenues. They're called... Oh, there's a fancy name for them. But those are split among the funds, including the library, on their proportionate share of their levy for the budget. So that is all decided for those, how much goes to library. That comes to us, kind of like the alcohol tax. We don't get to decide what they get. That is... Here's how it's split out. The county clerk gives us those numbers.

I guess I think there's at least some people that I recognize as library board members here. So I just want to make sure that you guys are clear that the 8.22, and I'm fighting for it here, for 2026 would be the $656,837 for the mill levy. And the way that that changes is with an ordinance that changes the limit of 8.22. So again, that may be for the benefit of the rest of the commission here as well.

And what may have caused some consternation, I put up the library's new sheet from the workbook. In the one that was in your packet, there was approximately $60,000 listed as capital outlay. That was something I told Kelsey to do, not that it wasn't going to the library. Generally, when you're budgeting by funds, anything that is not specifically attributed to an expense, you list as capital outlay. It doesn't mean you're going to spend it. It just means that it has the budget authority. Since then, to serve... uh clear up any confusion or so people don't think well they're trying to sweep any any money from us it's all listed as library appropriation and that would be the amount that commissioner kolhoff just said 8.22 mils times seventy two thousand forty dollars per mil that's based on an estimated valuation we'll know what it is in november for example we built the 26 budget on a valuation of 70 million dollars but after it was certified in november that dropped to 69.

Is does the any of the library board have any follow up questions or anything else we should discuss while we're here.

Thank you.

Any further questions on that item. Seeing none, we will move to Item 8D, consider approval of Resolution 071326-2, a resolution of intent to exceed the revenue neutral rate for the purpose of the City of Abilene, Kansas, 2027 budget, and directing the City Manager to notify the County Clerk of such intent. Interim City Manager Quinday.

The staff is asking the City Commission to adopt the resolution of intent to exceed the revenue neutral rate... that we can provide that to the county clerk on or before July 20th, keeping in mind that by doing so, you're not approving that as the budget. You're saying that's the cap. That's the most we can do. But it provides notice to the taxpayers that the city's levy could be up as high as 50 point, whatever that number is.

I was trying to write down some numbers still. Do you have any, I guess, questions for staff?

No, I've asked and had them answered. I'm okay moving forward knowing that it's a cap and there's still some moving parts with the deadline. I don't see any reason why we can't move forward with it.

And we did reduce the operating expenditures. That additional is that 27th payroll, which happens every 11 years.

And there's some also with 15% renewal. We don't know if it's going to be that high and that don't come in until July. There might be some wiggle room in that too. So I'd be, I'm going to make a motion to consider the, or I will make a motion for the approval of resolution 071-326-2, a resolution of intent to exceed the revenue neutral rate for the purpose of the city of Abilene, Kansas, 2027 budget and directing the city manager to notify the county clerk of such intent.

And I'll second.

Motion has been moved and seconded. Do we have any commission discussion? I guess my... We previously had this discussion about the 48.039 flat mill levy, and that's where I'm still at, even on this R&R notice. I understand the 27th payroll. That was very unfortunate timing. But that's where I'm still at with it. I'm approving it at that 48.039, but I'm not in favor of going to the I can't, I don't have it written down here, but the 50 point some odd mills.

I feel like that's something that we don't have a choice in the matter of that. That's a 27th payroll is not our fault that that happens. It's every business, like he said, that gets paid twice a month is going to be in the same boat. So are we just not going to be able to pay our city employees the 27th paycheck?

We could switch to buy monthly payroll. That's how I pay my employees.

I see that point. I guess Adam on the 48.039 sticking in the flat with that.

I don't want my property taxes to go up either, but We have to pay our employees, too, and we have to keep that into consideration. And enough budget cuts have been, I mean, they're down to the bare bones already. They can't cut anymore. So, I mean, we're between a rock and a hard place here. I don't think that we have a choice. I feel like we have to approve this.

And we can still make the 48.039.

I'm not going to vote for it, so we're at 50-50 and it won't pass.

Then I move that we call a special meeting when all of our commissioners are present so that we can at least get the fifth person, whether she votes no or yes. Either way, we have the full commission voting on it.

I will point out that where I live, when I was manager, 10 of the 12 years, the levy went down every year. This year, they're below revenue neutral again. My property taxes have gone up $600, even with them being below revenue neutral. The valuation of my house went up 19%. That's only one factor of people's property taxes going up. You could drop your mill level to 30, but if your property valuation goes up drastically, like they have in a tight housing market, property taxes are going to go up. So you're locked in at the 8.22 mills, if that's what the library board asks, which we're assuming that's what they're going to ask for. We would have to make $156,000 in cuts. Then we would come back to you and say, do you want to fund economic development? $15,000. Sister City, $10,000. The band, $10,000. And your reserve, which should be $800,000, and the general fund is $200,000 and some thousand. Do you want to lower that? Because operationally, I can't find a way to cut anymore. And I definitely can't make revenue neutral plus 5% cut. It just can't happen.

And I feel like, this is my two cents, we need to look toward the future too. If we just cut, cut, cut, stay revenue neutral, how are we going to build our reserves back up? All the expenses are going up. It's across the board. I mean, that's my feeling in the matter. And I don't want my property taxes to go up either, but I understand. I can think I can handle $50 a year at $50.271. That's basically $1 a week for a $200,000 home.

I don't know what the average person has, but I know $200,000 is a pretty nice home in the town of Abilene. I would almost bet $100,000 to $150,000 is the most average home in Abilene. Do you know the answer to that?

Last year it was $139,000.

So it's less than $1 a week for the majority of the town of Abilene.

And the red doesn't work on this, but if you look at the right side, you're at $200,000 and some thousand dollars in reserves. If we're to cut down to 48.039, you'll be down to almost zero in reserves. So if something happens, you won't have any money to do that. Also keeping in mind, what this doesn't show is when you can see that number drop precipitously there during those revenue neutral years, whereas the amount of cuts that we made last year, I believe it was several hundred thousand dollars in capital improvement equipment purchases, We cut $800,000. If we would not have done that in 2025, you would have been in the negative. You would have had a cash violation. You would have been in the hole. I mean, it's a policy, it's a governance really decision for the commission. I mean, keep that path going down to where eventually you're in the hole and you're either going to have to drastically raise your mill levy or have the state come in and take you in receivership. It's kind of like the water rates. Nobody wanted a 46% increase in water rates. but I go back and I look at minutes and memos and numerous times it was recommended. We need to do something with water rates. We need to do something that was never done until 25. You were going to end in the hole. Same thing with sewer rates.

Mr. Quinton, I've been here for, this is my fifth year. And at no point in those five years, did anybody mention water or sewer rates to me?

Well, I don't know what to tell you. I can read what I can read and,

I'd be happy if you'd share it with me, but that might be in minutes or notes, but that was never in front of the full commission, I can assure you.

Well, okay. I mean, this will be kind of like my fabricated stormwater numbers. I'm not saying that just to say it. What I'm telling you is what I observed and what I read. So you can, I mean, the commission, that's your wheelhouse. If you want to adopt something that's at 48, you want to adopt revenue neutral. Staff will do it, whatever you tell us to do. But it'll have consequences. Kind of like the stormwater rates we didn't bring on, so it didn't overshadow this. Let's do it over three years. Mission co-ops said, no, let's pull the Band-Aid off and just do it all at once. But you got people who budget. So we're trying to do it slowly and not raise it all at once. So the options are to adopt the resolution at the 50 point, whatever that number is, direct us to, or adopt a resolution at a different mill levy rate or take no action and absence a special meeting and intent to exceed the revenue neutral rate is adopted, then the city is forced to be revenue neutral, which would be 46 mils. So approximately another $350,000 to cut.

I know that it's been said a couple times, and I think it's important to reiterate that while we set this R&R intent to exceed R&R at the 50.271, That is a cap, and we can come in lower. And what I find important is that that allows us the time to continue to work on this before the budget hearing in September, rather than making a rush decision right now to say, I don't want to be at the 50.271, or whatever the case may be. That allows us the time. That's the cap, the max that we can do, but we can work over the time with your suggestions and where you'd like to see different scenarios occur, how you'd like to see it play out, that gives us the time to do that. If you come to a decision where you can't agree, like Mr. Quinday said, absent a special meeting, you're kind of in a constraint right now. Whereas if you pass this at that highest possible level, that you're willing to then we have the time to reduce from there and i'll do the best i can and you guys have already done a great job

on all of the budget stuff. And I hear from people, I just heard two days ago from a gentleman that said, can you talk to them about putting lines on the streets on Buckeye? Because people come in from out of town, they don't realize it's a four lane street. He says, I've been about ran off the road twice. On my way here tonight, I had to pull into a M&M tire parking lot to avoid being sideswiped by a guy that pulled off in front of me. He was from Lincoln County. I didn't pay attention to what the lines look like. I don't know what they look like in front of Eminem Tire, but that's stuff that we're cutting because we don't have the money to fix. And by the looks of this chart that you've got here, 2023, we were at 50.162. That's four years ago, and we're wanting to go up to 50.271. I guarantee you, my household is... budget has gone up way more than that in the last four years.

The mill levy is not that important. It's really the underlying valuation. So unless the value of your house got cut in half, that mill levy went up with the valuation of your, or the amount collected by that mill levy went up with the valuation of your house.

I understand that.

Okay. So what I'm saying is there's already inflation built in. So if the mill levy stays steady, the inflation is built into that number. And it took a massive increase in 2020, 2021, 2022. Well, these R&R years, this big cliff that's on the screen right now, a lot of that was subsidized by ARPA money and COVID money. So it doesn't show the whole picture. That is the mill levy, but that doesn't at all show the spending that was done by the city during that period of time. And I think the spending is the problem, not the mill levy.

I guess my question would be then, why did the reserves drop so much in time?

Spending. Spending was the problem. Spending is still the problem. It's always been the problem. When we were spending ARPA money like it was candy, that was fantastic. That was great. We didn't have any consequences. How much money was that? It was probably more than we got from the latest bond. I mean, we could just write checks and there were no consequences. It was beautiful. That's what every kid dreams of. It's just not reality.

If I'm following, you said the mill levy doesn't really matter. It's the valuation.

The dollars are what matters. I don't know if what I said was precise, but if the value of the home is double, the same mill levy brings in twice as much money. That's the math, right?

If we decrease our operating expenses by... $5,000, and this increases because of additional payroll, what more can we do? I mean, I can make it 48.037 now. I just reduced the carryover.

I already solved that. Switch to buy monthly. Two checks a month. There's not an extra payroll. That solves your problem. I think Cy brought up the 15% increase in health care benefits. I want to get those out for bid. Those should go out for a bid every single year because every time that we don't put something out for bid, it goes up by double digits. And every time we put it out for bid, somehow they find a little bit of margin where they can decrease the expenditures for us. So, I mean, I want everybody to be happy. I want the city employees, all of the taxpayers, I want everybody to be happy. It's going to take work. And like I said, I don't think at all that the amount of money that we're raising is insufficient. I think the amount of money that we're spending is too much. And I think there's dozens and dozens of little ways, like maybe switching to biweekly payroll or maybe putting out our health care for bid every single year are ways to cut that. That's the reason why I'm not voting for it. I don't think our spending is efficient. I think we can be much more efficient as a city. And that's why I'm not going to vote for this intent to increase over the revenue neutral rate.

If I remember correctly, and maybe I'm wrong, you said you wouldn't vote on anything that's not revenue neutral. That's my intent.

Yeah.

I mean, if it is revenue neutral, I will vote for it. Yes. Yeah.

You won't vote for anything that's not revenue neutral.

I don't know. Maybe I could be convinced. I won't draw such a hard line in the sand. But what I see is a budget that doesn't have efficiencies. And this 27 payroll to me is kind of just a red herring. To me, that's not a real thing. I think that can be addressed administratively.

Well, I think staff has done an amazing job in 25 and 26 in working on this budget. So I guess it's another way of talking down to staff that there should be some more work put in this budget. You haven't done enough. I've watched them sit around the table and talk about ways to create efficiency. And when we did things like, well, let's put our health insurance or our property insurance out. Oh, we don't want to do that because local person. That's feedback I got from commissioners. We don't want to do that because that's a local person. We put out health insurance out every year. You're not going to get what you think you are because there is some comfort in, okay, I've got a contract with you for three years. Generally, there's a cap on that. There's nothing wrong with doing that every salary. But to just, I guess, blanket say that not enough work has gone on the budget and there's efficiencies is, I mean, it just, it's off-putting that a sitting commissioner saying, you guys haven't done it.

That's really disrespectful.

It is disrespectful.

Your characterization of this is disrespectful.

Well, Okay. I mean, I have never sat here and said that a commissioner has fabricated anything. But I have been told that I fabricated it. That's the motion. We'll do whatever you like. Absent a resolution, you'll have to be ready to neutral. Keeping in mind that, well, we'll just leave it at that. But your staff has done an amazing job.

And so there is a motion in a second. I knew you had mentioned you would like, I mean, we can do this outside, but you wanted a special meeting. And I think something like this and the budget, it's important to have all five of us here.

I think so too. My only problem is I'm leaving. I'm going to be in the Tetons from Thursday. I'm sorry. I've had this scheduled for a while. And I don't know if I'll be on grid or not. I don't know whether what the reception is from up there. So if we could get it either tomorrow or Wednesday, he has to have it in by the 20th. So I won't be back until the what's the 20th. No, I won't be back then. I'll be back that Friday after I'll be back the 24th.

Is there a time that you might have more reliable service on that?

Possibly while I'm driving on Thursday and Friday.

Do you want to look and see if there's a time that works for you if you want to propose that?

I mean, can we do Wednesday evening, right at 4 o'clock, something like that?

I'm good.

I'm not sure. Commissioner Meisenberg, I just asked her if she could take the call or a special meeting, but she's doing something that requires her

Well, you know what my vote's going to be, so do I have to be present? Yes.

Well, even if you don't have internet access with telephone, I mean, surely you'd have cell phone at least, maybe. I don't know.

You can ask him if we even have...

I do have a five o'clock Wednesday, but I have an hour at four.

I can do Tuesday or Wednesday.

Tuesday. I'm out. I guess I could be remote.

Yeah. I guess we just need to, are you good with Tuesday or Wednesday? We can figure it out. Yeah. And we can double check with Amy.

Wednesday's better.

Kelsey, would you look into the possibility of doing bimonthly payroll? That's not you. I think the benefits there are you're only doing 24 and you're doing 24 every year instead of 26 or 27, which is kind of I think operationally it might just make sense too. It doesn't fall on a Tuesday one day and a Thursday the next time and a Sunday the next time.

Yeah, every other Friday is our payday.

And I've never looked into bi-monthly payroll, but my mind's going we're still going to pay the same amount of hours to our employees regardless of whether it's bi-weekly or bi-monthly. Correct?

Apparently not. I mean, apparently there's a difference.

Yeah, just when the Just having an additional payroll period in that year, just the way it falls, but.

Essentially, that payroll would probably fall on the first of the year and then the 31st. So we're essentially paying for some of the previous years and some of our, I don't know, I guess it'd be depend on salary or hourly or how you do that, but yeah.

I think you have to look at the rules with the fire enlightenment. That's fire. It's pretty different.

It places too, so.

Kim just said that typically I do, they do have service up there for at least phone calls. So I'd be happy to do that.

Yeah, like I said, if you want to make a call for Aaron for a special meeting, I don't know if we can do that here.

It's not necessary to do it in this open public meeting, but we certainly can. And local procedures simply require that a majority of the commission support the special meeting. So you could accomplish that today unless you wish to confirm Commissioner Meisenberg's schedule first, which we can do outside of this meeting.

That'd probably be best, just to make sure. Okay. Regardless, we have a motion and a second on the table currently.

I say shoot for Wednesday, and if we can't, then we'll start there and then bounce, figure it out after that.

I think I will interpret your discussion here as support for a special meeting amongst a majority of you, if I'm interpreting this correctly. It's simply a matter of scheduling now. Am I correct that the four of you support the call for a special meeting subject to availability?

I'm fine with that.

Okay. We can dispense with confirming that via email like we normally do and just focus on scheduling.

Okay.

Thank you. So do we have any further commission discussion on item 8D? Okay, seeing none, we will move to roll call vote. Vice Mayor Taylor. Yes.

Commissioner Koloff.

Can you please repeat the motion on the floor? The motion on the floor is approval of Resolution 071326-2. Nay. Commissioner Lytle.

Yes.

Myself, no. Motion fails. Then our next item is 9A. Consider a motion to adjourn. So moved.

Seconded.

Motion has been moved and seconded. Do we have any commission discussion? Seeing none, we'll call vote. Commissioner Koloff? Aye. Commissioner Lytle?

Yes.

Vice Mayor Taylor?

Yes.

Myself, yes. Motion carried.